teleology will stitch your eyelids shut.
Because looking for tele (conclusion) within logy (circular logic) makes one blind to ongoing delineation. Only within a line can a circle be shaped.
Why do we have atoms?
Atom/atomos/tomos/tem - "to cut" aka motion generating momentum to cut matter into pieces. Both pluralism (we) and possessionism (have) tempts one to ignore that.
One has to let go of one another to ATONE (atom) for ones SIN (syn). Atone implies "at one"; syn implies "together" aka splitting the atom.
more stable than
Only within fluidity (inception towards death) can stability (life) come into being...more vs less implies instability among being. That's a sin/syn.
the first war
THE (theos; God) implies first...each one within implies second/seco - "to divide". Ignoring the divide into each one (atone/atom) represents the sin/syn of coming together in conflict (war).
There were two ways
There can be only one way (inception towards death) for each one within (life)...two implies counting together what the way of life sets apart from one another.
everything that came next
Everything (cause) was before each thing (effect) can come into being...anything next (affect) tempts ones free will of choice into a nexus/ned - "to bind".
saturn emasculates his father to rebel against the old order
Aka momentum emasculating motion when bringing matter into being...matter (life) within momentum (inception towards death) implies rebellion (to rise up against) the old order of motion.
Saturn; the son of Caelus (the sky) and Terra (the earth) aka water (motion) > air (momentum) > land (matter) aka natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater) consuming its own children.
Museum Hosts
Museum/muse/me - "to think"...nature hosts the thought of each native within motion; museums distract thought with artifice from being moved.
A museum represents a deceptive host. Nature as the revealing host doesn't invite (summon together) but dismisses (send apart).
This is "crime" and not "conspiracy."
Vaccination represents the crime; avoidance thereof in first trimester represents the rhetorical conspiracy to sell the crime despite "side" effects.
new revelations
"The thing that hath been, it is that which shall be; and that which is done is that which shall be done: and there is NO NEW thing under the sun." ~Ecclesiastes 1:9
RE (to respond) VE (veil) AL (all)...all authenticates each ones response; responding to one another veils auto (self) hentēs (being).
Being implies within (perception) revelation (perceivable)...struggling with a veil (suggested).
Few suggest future to shape a consensus among many about imagination. Nature neither shows future nor past...only presence. Imagination distorts presence.
As for killing fields...compare alleged world population of 1975 (4.08 billion) to 2026 (8.3 billion). Death on the field seems to have a rejuvenating affect. It's as if dying causes the effect of living aka flow (inception towards death) generating form (life).
false memory syndrome
Syndrome implies "a number of symptoms occurring together"...so the dichotomy of true vs false; recollected within memory, represents a false memory syndrome.
The natural use of memory requires adaptation to perceivable inspiration within a line...not commemoration of suggested information within a circle.
false
True vs false implies fiction...God > fall (inception towards death) > rise (life) implies reality.
connecting the dots
If inception sentences life towards POINT of death; then connecting the dots con (together) nects (to bind) life to death.
Instead of connecting the dots...try regaining sentence/sentience. A being has to be sentinel; not punctual.
atlantic records
Aka respond by heart (re-cord) to bear heaven (atlantic/atlas)...instead of calling to mind enter-tain-ment.
a) Proxima Fusion... https://img.gvid.tv/i/28y5sUG3.jpg
b) Resisting con-cern grows dis-cern-ment.
sad reality
Sad/seto/sa - "to satisfy"...form (life) within flow (inception towards death) cannot become satiated aka nourished to the full.
Sleight of hand: "I can't get no satisfation...cause I tried and I tried and I tried and I tried". The continuous trying represents the seeking of happiness for satisfactory relief, which nature prevents yet which artifice tempts one to ignore.
Happy implies happenstance (taking a chance) which represents the inversion of being given choice.
- I can't get no satisfaction
- I can't get no girl reaction
That girl refers to shekhinah aka mother nature aka the balance ones choice penetrates unless ignored for chance. A chosen one doesn't take a chance...a chosen one chooses the cleave (dividing balance) of shekhinah.
You are hard (life)...she is wet (inception towards death) aka solid within fluid aka penis within vagina aka sexual passage.
national security minister
A nation is based on adaptation to change; a ministry is based on holding onto belief while ignoring change. Using a ministry to foster belief makes outsiders maladaptive, while securing natives.
hunger games
Hunger implies the ongoing process of dying for each temporary life within. Hunger is always there, but eating tempts those within it to ignore that.
A game tempts one to gamble given choice by taking a chance aka holding onto instead of adapting to change or in hunger terms...gambling tempts one to continue going for the next bite.
Can form (life) within flow (inception towards death) be melted by using a coil/coillir aka co (together) + legere (to gather)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/coil
Are few gathering many together? If so...why does anything many hold valuable keeps melting away into the (((rubbing))) hands of few?
Tesla aka tessela - "mosaic work"... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/tesselation
Energy isn't mosaic (uniting partials together to make whole) but the opposite (whole dividing each partial within) aka en (within) ergy (work).
A jew utilizes mosaic law to tempt gentiles to play puzzle within energy instead of discerning self as reactor within (en) generator (ergy).
Notice furthermore the etymology of tessela/tessera - "die; cube; mosaic tile"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/tessera
What's the masonic trade of die-casting about? What about the cube of allah (kabb alah)? What binds masonic/mosaic tiles together? What cues (cu) being (be)?
Have you ever seen an acrobatic or circus performer do an act where they balance
a) One cannot see action...because ones sight implies a reaction to all given to it.
b) Performing (by form) implies within flow. Few suggest performance to distract many from sustenance through flow aka adaptation to natural animation.
c) Acro (to rise up) bat (to go) aka nature going (inception towards death) allowing native to rise up (life). Living in-between inception/death implies as choice within balance.
A jew as director of performance tempts gentiles into circular (circus) confinement (tent) to misdirect from sustenance.
They balance by putting both feet out to the sides and adjusting as necessary to stay balanced.
a) Holding ones breath while balancing quickly shows that the so called "balance act" is optional, and that only the primary force of natural animation directs necessity through secondary adaptation by each native.
b) Nature (cause) implies singularity for each single native (effect) within..."both" represents an artificial measurement taken into possession by consenting to suggested dualism aka an AFFECT (suggestion) distracting EFFECT (perception) from CAUSE (perceivable).
Can you show me an example for BOTH (dual) without each ONE (singular) having a different position from one another?
Your idea of balanced is not engaging in either side, but hopping off entirely.
a) Idea implies mentally holding onto thereby imbalancing ones choice. Few suggest idealism and idolatry to tempt a consensus among many as imbalance for choice mentally and physically.
b) Not (nihilo; nothing) implies ones de-nial of everything perceivable for suggested nihil-ism. Another imbalance.
c) En (within) gage (pledge) ment (mind) implies ones consent to a suggestion of another, which artificially binds ones FREE will of choice. You may heard of engagement under the name of re (to respond) ligio (to bind) aka religion, which requires ones pledge (faith) to enter.
Being implies en-breach-ment, hence being given a break to think freely.
d) One cannot hop off entirely...only within entire (whole) can one (partial) hop aka spring forth. Few suggest an on vs off conflict to confine the minds of many into a circle while using the hope of getting out or the fear of not getting out as enticement to continue fighting each other.
You're not in the middle of a set of binary choices if you reject both sides
a) Binary implies ONES lack of self discernment within singularity. Another set a binary into your singular mind by tricking you with optional choices to ignore your secondary choice within natures primary balance.
Primary (perceivable balance) > secondary (perceiving choice) > optional (suggested choices)
b) One can only reject optional sides...primary (inception towards death) moving through secondary (life) implies INJECTION.
c) Life in-between inception/death isn't binary, but singular motion moving through each single unit of matter. Optional sides tempt one to incline away from ones natural position in the middle as choice within balance.
Optional sides tempt ONES CHOICE to consent to the suggestion of a CHOSEN ONE. By choosing another one inverts ones choice.
d) Example: if another suggests food; then ones secondary choice faces the option of want or not want, while ignoring the primary need...HUNGER.
make up your own side and hold onto that
Free will of choice cannot hold onto any SIDE without establishing imbalance....it's balancing in-between as choice which sustains ones SIGHT.
Consider the artificial want to hold onto and the natural need to let go of through for example "inter-course for off-spring" aka be fruitful and multiply. And where does one plant the seed? In-between the soil!
Your rejection of the two choices isn't a balanced position.
What's TWO all; everything; entire; whole; motion; cause; action; origin; energy; God? From one to another one...what's the binary of singularity?
Can you offer two choices to me without aiming at ones free will of choice to choose in-between? How could one offer two to another one without contradicting singularity?
What if second isn't two, but seco - "to cut; divide" aka the internal division of each one from one another?
Sleight of hand for those with eyes to see... https://genius.com/Papa-roach-last-resort-lyrics
What if I don't reject two choices, but discern ones choice (matter) injected into balance (momentum) by motion?
You've gotta work on your presentation
EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "Internal or inherent power"... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/energy hence being within (en) work (ergy).
Therefore action (work) presenting reaction (employment) aka EMPLOY=IMPLY....that's why I freely choose to represent implication to those bound to reason.
You say things, but you're not engaging what I say.
Sound doesn't engage...it disengages each instrument within from one another. Few orchestrate many instruments together with spell-craft aka with the articulation of words within natural sound.
I adapt to everything (cause) dividing each thing (effect) from one another...you permitted another to affect you with nothing (not) which you willingly hold together by consenting to suggested nihilism, hence writing "you're not". How could anything within everything be nothing?
You don't come across like you understand some kind of deeper meaning to words.
a) Being implies coming (life) across (inception towards death)...coming across one another implies double-crossing (union jack aka jacking unity).
b) Understanding implies "standing under" hence the deepening (submission). Being implies in-between aka as above/so below, which is why one has the free will of choice to heighten or deepen ones situation.
c) Only within sound can a word be shaped...holding onto the meaning of the latter/letter drowns one within former.
learning how to have a conversation
Con (together) vers (to turn) implies war...which is good for absolutely nothing.
- Ooh, war
- Is an enemy to all mankind
- The thought of war blows my mind
Here's any example for converse from mathematic (math-a-magic)..." In mathematics, an opposite proposition; thus, after drawing a conclusion from something supposed, we invert the order, making the conclusion the supposition or premises, and draw from it what was first supposed. Thus, if two sides of a triangle are equal, the angles opposite the sides are equal: and the converse is true; if these angles are equal, the two sides are equal."
It's a trick to turn many against one another by inverting the natural order.
If conversation stops among natives; then does nature stop working? If you shape a circle (conversation) within a line (natural work); then could the shape shift your attention away from the one and only way of life?
You're not avoiding...
Void aka emptiness implies ones denial of perceivable (natural) for suggested (artificial). Nature implies fullness aka the ongoing fall (inception towards death) for each temporal rise (life).
by following an if > then sequence
Effect (life) needs to resist the wanted temptation to follow cause (inception towards death)...it's few who utilize suggestion to tempt a consensus of many to follow.
Implication (if > then) implies adaption to linear procession...not following along. For this to make sense requires ones self discernment as resistance within velocity...the latter tempting the former to ignore resisting.
A linear progression in nature wraps back around itself
Only within a line can a circle be shaped...try it. Pro (forwards) gress (to walk) ion (action)...action moving forwards allows reaction to walk for example in circles.
Wrap/wer - "to turn; bend"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/wrap TO implies the natural delineation; TURN represents the artificial circle shaped within it.
in the shape of
Only within flow (inception towards death) can form (life) be shaped...mentally (ideal) and physically (idol) holding onto a shape like a circle tempts form to ignore flow.
spiral
Spir (to twist) al (all) aka few putting the spin on many aka inversion.
Your attempt at taking words apart
I resist the temptation of holding letters; words; meaning together in synthesis by analyzing each apart from one another.
- Meaning...a measure taken within mind while ignoring given.
- Words...articulation shaped within natural sound.
- Letters...ones consent "letting" another suggest "letters".
to dissolve a contradiction is an attempt at logical thinking
Dis (to divide) solve (to loosen) implies analytical thought...contra (against) dic (to speak) tion (action) implies synthetic thought.
Synthetic thought TURNS one away from analytical thought, hence shaping a mental (logic) and physical (reason) circle about spoken words (logos).
Back to dissolve...nature implies a solvent (inception towards death) generating each division (life) within aka the natural solution to each native problem.
You often appeal to the etymology of words
Appeal/appellere from ad (to) pel (to thrust)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/appeal
Only nature thrusts towards (inception towards death) which allows each native to re (respond) ject (to throw)...I try to break artificial etymology and words apart to dissolve the distortion.
Appeal vs rejection is only a conflict among natives if nature is being ignored and versus/verto (to turn) implies logy (circular thinking).
often link to the etymonline.com website to back up what you say
a) It's called a "link" to tempt those within the world wide web into artificially chaining together what nature divides from one another.
Notice also link/khlink - "to bend, turn"...once again shaping a circle.
b) Only nature fronts (inception) and backs (death) being (life)...few suggest "backup" to invert frontup and backdown.
You're not consistent with your use and appeal to that website
Con (together) sta (to stand)...being implies standing apart from one another. You seek consistency; I represent free will of choice aka variability aka adaptation to change.
You're creating
Creation implies out of nothing (creatio ex nihilo) which represents the jewish inversion of the transformation (transfer of form within action) of each within all.
"The Tree of Life, or Etz haChayim (עץ החיים) in Hebrew, is a mystical symbol used in the Kabbalah of esoteric Judaism to describe the path to HaShem and the manner in which he created the world ex nihilo (out of nothing)." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatio_ex_nihilo
All perceivable transforms each ones perception...few "create" suggestion to transform the consensus of many.
your own
FREE will of choice cannot own (take into possession) without ignoring being set free within given procession.
By avoiding taking a side and choosing not to take a side, you create another layer of agree vs disagree and is vs isn't.
How does one choose a side? By free will of choice. What generates choice? Balance. Where is choice situated in balance? IN-BETWEEN...not on either side, which represents the imbalance of choice.
Holding onto either SIDE distorts ones SIGHT in-between.
Try this...if you stand and lean to either side; then you fall. Why? Because balancing implies ones choice in-between...not ones choice holding onto either side.
You're saying your etymology for beast is, and mine isn't
I break etymology apart to show that nature WAS (need) before a native can argue about what IS (want) or ISN'T (not want) artificial.
I didn't utter any sound of those words to you
Sound/sanus (entire; whole; all) implies the foundation for each one within to articulate words...not just the noise one utters for another to hear.
Here's a sleight of hand... https://genius.com/Simon-and-garfunkel-the-sound-of-silence-lyrics
- People talking without speaking
- People hearing without listening
- No one dared...disturb the sound of silence
Did you read it out loud or something like that?
You holding a SUM OF THINGS (something) together establishes friction among things, hence making a noise, which distracts you from discerning self as an instrument within the sound of silence.
Sound moves, which divides each thing within apart from one another...summoning things together orchestrates noise to harm one (harmony) by putting ones together (symphony).
When I said The Great Vowel Shift, this is what I was referring to...history
a) Nature moves...few suggest history to tempt many to store matter (information) while ignoring motion (inspiration).
b) The manipulation of oral and written is based on jewish law aka phonetic for few; littera vocalis (vocal letter) as didactic instruction (talmud) for many. That's where The Great Vowel Shift chapter of history fits into just like changing Latin to Pig Latin (english).
Why the effort? To shape DEAF PHONETICIANS (definitions) aka many deaf to sound while bound to words like an insane (in sanus; within sound) person (per sonos; by sound).
you've not presented anything worthwhile to interact with.
I re-present the internal re-action of all worthwhile action...using "not" (nihilo; nothing) implies ones de-nial of all for one another.
If you look at my profile you see Comment Score (16033) Post Score (0)...only nature offers; which allows each native to respond to what nature offers or not.
I didn't say stuffing, I said you're making stuff up
Nature moves which a verb (stuffing) denotes; making stuff up implies a made up noun aka an artifice shaped within nature. I try to describe the verb; while taking the nouns and adjectives apart.
what stuff means in the context I said it
Con (together) text (to weave)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/context that's the stuff you're stuffing together, which I unravel.
you expose your shortcomings
Ex (out) pose (position)...ones outwards position implies coming (inception towards death) short (life) within, hence the struggle to sustain length of duration.
So you agree with me that the etymology of beast isn't astute being?
You used etymology as a synthesis of etymo (actual) + logy (logic) which shaped circular conflicts within your mind (agree vs disagree + is vs isn't).
I analyzed etymo+logy in a linear sense (if > then), therefore without choosing a side within a conflict, which allows me to see that one has to be astute to be able to shape the word "beast".
Logos (word) > logic (circular thinking) > reason (turning against one another) tempts one to ignore foundation (sound) for surface (word).
Notice also logos/leg - "to collect; gather"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/*leg-#etymonline_v_52572 Sound moves and cannot be gathered...gathering words represents a distortion within sound.
you twist the topic through word etymology and what you imply from them
The twist is within your view of etymo (actual) + logy (logic) as a synthesis. Logic implies circular thinking, which contradicts the actual linear procession of nature and it's implication (if > then).
I take words apart to try to dissolve the circle (contradiction) within the minds of those who cannot think straight.
did you grasp what was said
Sound moves and cannot be grasped...few shaping artificial words within natural sound to tempt many to grasp; seize; take possession of implies spell-craft for spell-binding.
I resist the temptation of grasping, which allows me to see how what was said besmirches the surface of the sound foundation underneath.
The Great Vowel Shift, you twist it into vow + El
- The implies theos (God) as in theism (belief in a god).
- Only within God can each being grow (great).
- Vow/votum - "a promise to a god"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/vow
- El implies all, hence el-o-him (all of him)
- Shift/skipta - "to divide, change, separate" implies Gods divination.
Vowel/wekw - "to speak"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/vowel implies ones articulation within "the great vowel shift" of nature.
You're making stuff up through your implications.
Stuffing implies synthesis (together); implicating implies analysis (apart)...nature sets each native apart from one another; few artificially stuff many together.
Perceivable inspiration moves through ones mind...suggested information stuffs ones mind if held onto.
Stuffing drags one down with burden; implicating lifts one up by unburdening stuff.
you're going to need to go back to the word
Only within sound can a word be shaped, hence sound/sanus - "entire; whole; all". Shaping words implies the articulation of natural sound aka spell-craft.
Sound implies need; word tempts want vs not want.
if you want to dissect what...means
Meaning implies a measure taken by ones mind while ignoring all given. Sharing meaning tempts one to ignore dissection (analysis) for combination (synthesis) aka natural for artificial.
Nature dissects want (life) within need (inception towards death)...artifice tempts want vs not want into combined conflict.
personal interpretation
- Per (by) son (sound) al (all)
- Inter (internal) pret (pass over) ation (action)
Personal interpretation implies the status quo of each being "by all sound" and "internally passing over action"...not about information shared with one another.
Words are utilized to hide how sound moves in-stru-ment (within structured mind). Sound moves through ones mind and cannot be held onto...words tempt ones mind to hold onto meaning, while ignoring sound.
The word changed
Sound implies change...only within natural change can a word be articulated. Holding onto the meaning of any word tempts one to ignore the change of all sound.
during the time
Time implies a measurement taken while ignoring all given. Notice how form (life) within flow (inception towards death) cannot perceive its beginning or end...yet suggested time can affix any date into ones mind if consented to.
Notice that during/durare/deru - "be firm, solid" implies being formed within a liquid flow.
Great Vowel Shift
VOW (to promise; pledge; wish; desire) EL (God)...it's God the greatest who pro (forwards) mise (to release) each shift (partition) within.
That's how sound works...releasing forwards each partitioned instrument. The suggested "great vowel shift" hides this within language/lingua (tongue) by forking the tongue within natural sound with the articulation of words.
That's also why there's an oral torah before the written torah.
Middle English
What's the middle of an engl/angle? A vertex from vertere/wer - "to turn"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/vertex
Nature delineates (inception towards death) being (life)...artifice turns beings against each other mentally (logic) and physically (reason).
animals (opposed to man)
Animal aka all (light) animating each hue (color) of man (ray) within...that's how animal delineates human aka OP (in the direction of) POSE (to place)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/oppose
Only within animal (animation) can there be human (appearance)...using the labels animal and human upon one another distracts from animation while distorting appearance.
The lie and deception is claiming the etymology of BEAST is BEing ASTute.
One cannot be astute (discerning) by claiming; lying or deceiving...each of which implies a synthesis aka artificially putting together what nature sets apart for analysis.
I didn't claim that beast means being astute...I used implication (if > then) to show how only after being astute can one brand another discernible being as a beast.
One cannot make the discernment between man and beast without BEING ASTUTE (discerning) before.
Start with self discernment...BEast aka BEING. What's a beast? A lowered animal aka the lowering animation (inception towards death) of each rising being (life).
Now what's astute? Being keen in discernment of one's self-interest. So before one can call one another "beast" one has to BE AST(ute).
You're making crap up.
Make/macian - "to give being to"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/make implies nature giving being to native aka low (inception towards death) making up (life).
Where's the contradiction in anything I'm saying? Where's the lie? Where's the hidden agenda? Where's the deception?
you're arguing
The circular mind (agree vs disagree) argues...the linear mind (if > then) doesn't have a side to hold onto and argue from.
about "almost"
Few (jew) tempting most (gentile) together to distract from all...that's what "almost" implies. It's abrahamism aka abh (father) raham (multitude) which represents the conspiracy by few against many.
How does it benefit free will of choice to ignore the implication of "almost"? Or to bring it back to the topic....MOST represents a surrogate (substitute) of ALL if one consents to it.
The problem is that you're too retarded to understand that you're retarded.
a) Solution (inception towards death) > problem (life)...retardation implies problem ignoring solution.
b) Understanding implies ones choice to "stand-under" the suggestion of another. Knowledge implies ones choice balancing on the edge of all known...not under or over one another, but in-between.
c) What if I'm fully aware of what I'm doing and how "most" react to it?
everything that you say is retarded.
Is there a lie in what I wrote? Also...nature cannot be retarded (delayed); it's the ignorance of nature which retards the perception of a native.
almost everything that you say
What about you holding a contradiction together like AL+MOST? Most can never be all. How am I retarded for seeing this?
Di (apart) latus (wide). To make wider.
TO implies "towards" aka nature moving towards native, which allows each departed native to lessen or widen the distance among one another.
Pro (professional) anti (against)
Pro implies "forwards"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/*per-#etymonline_v_52721 Only while being forwarded can one profess to another a pro vs anti stance.
In reality against implies "a gain" aka nature moving forward (pro) each native gain (anti)...which aren't in conflict with one another but opposites of one another.
move (motion) ment (moment)
The MO in moment implies "motion"...hence nature moving (mo) the mind (ment) of each native.
surro (surround) gate (entrance)
Surrogate aka surrogare/subrogare aka sub (under) + reg (to move in a straight line) aka sub (life) reg (inception towards death).
A gate btw implies both entrance (inception) and exit (death) for each one (life) passing through...
Consent aka con (to deceive) sent (the act of going)
a) Con implies "together"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/com- aka ones consent and any suggestion of another coming together in contract.
Nature doesn't deceive...ignoring natural (perception) for artificial (suggestion) by consent establishes the deception.
b) Going isn't an act...it's a reaction (life) to being enacted upon (inception towards death). Nature acts; native reacts. Only while nature moves can each native within choose where to go.
deceiving someone
Some (plural) one (singular) implies a deception if held together.
Inverts aka in (within) verts (vertical structures at a skate park).
a) In (within) vert/vertere (to turn)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/invert
b) Only within horizontal (line) can vertical (circle) be shaped...a skate-park tries to deceive ones perception from discerning that with a suggested quarter or half-pipe instead of a full loop.
Implies aka imp (small mythical demon) lies (to lay down)
Im (within) plica (to fold) tion (action) aka action unfolding each reaction within. Your description of imp + lies ignores action aka that which allows imps and lies to be shaped.
Now look at the etymology of imp/impotus (implant) from im (within) + phyein (to bring forth)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/imp
Action bringing forth each implanted reaction...that's what the word "imp" implies.
a demon resting
Demon aka dai (to divide) mon (to provide)...natures provided division into each native cannot rest since it implies motion. A native can be tricked to ignore motion when holding onto matter mentally (ideal) or physically (idol). Taking hold of implies demonic possession...
Judgement aka judge (to give) ment (gift).
The issue is taking the gift into possession to become the judge, while ignoring "don't judge lest ye be judged".
When you pass the resting
Resting (cessation of motion) contradicts passing (moving forwards)...only within passing can one "rest" by ignoring the passage aka by wandering/wondering of.
The way you talk is so fucking annoying
You view the world as a circle (good vs evil); I view the world as a line (if > then)...the circular view is based on holding onto a side, which makes the linear view annoying because it moves and cannot be held onto.
A jew shapes the moving nature (line), while tempting gentiles to hold onto fiction (circle)...this is called transmogrification or in terms of letters; transliteration. The study of Torah through Zohar is based on that.
is never the less evil
That implies taking judgement upon self and passing it onto another while ignoring "judge not; lest ye be judged".
Evil implies the inversion of "live"...nature passes each native forwards, which is why taking hold of anything turns one around.
are just trying to incite them into giving it up
Before another can try to incite ones mind (incitement) to want or not want...there's each ones trial within given aka needing to resist wanted temptation.
Incite/incitare - "to put into rapid motion" implies wanting more out needed motion. Nature moves with the same speed...it's each native within whose perception of speed differs.
The merchant offering the incitement doesn't put one into rapid motion...it's taking the artificial offer over the natural offer which puts oneself into rapid perception of motion.
Notice that rape and rapid imply the same origin...suggestion represents the instigator of mind rape, while consent represents the rape of ones mind by another.
the act was evil
Nature acts; native reacts...evil represents ones reaction to one another, while ignoring nature.
The point is that it is the evil part and not the concept of a business contract.
As soon as one makes a contract with another one turns LIVE into EVIL. Why? Because turning against one another inverts being set apart from one another.
The opposite of contraction implies expansion aka the growth of life.
Ongoing loss represents the linear process giving humanity the potential to temporary grow...TPTB tempt humanity to turn against each other within a circular war (true vs false).
Being implies the center (life) of all (inception towards death)...cALLing one another tempts one to ignore all while off-centering oneself.
Applying (joining) a mass permits a chosen few to remain unattached.
The more many are bringing up; the deeper into debt to few they fall. Few suggests bonuses to tempt many into mutually exploiting one another.