“Pursue truth”? Is that what you think you’re doing with your gishgallops and doucheyness? Lmao. Instead of just upvoting from the shadows, you two should take some lessons from the only person in this thread actually engaging in discourse
Heh, a wizard is never late my friend
And again, hah, you say “nice job connecting the dots”, frankly that was all you! I was just trying to make a lame joke, but your insight connecting “the answer to life, the universe, and everything” to relationship is, I think, spot on and highly insightful. (Reminds me a bit of the final line in asimov’s ”The Last Question”.) The “answer” itself is dependent on all the surrounding context, and until all of that surrounding context is comprehended, the “answer”, in a vacuum, is almost meaningless, or atleast sterile. Or as you put so well:
Any answer that stands alone, detached from relationship, becomes ‘42’.
Jung understood that reality is relationships and patterns. and a True synchronicity will draw us into a communion of sorts
He and Nietzsche, I feel, don’t get the credit they deserve for their contributions to our mindscapes. Jung’s mysticism and Nietzsche’s pragmatism should be at the foundation of modern religious thought, yet they’ve been seemingly just swept under the rug. Forgive the tangent lol.
what it gets right is that reality is not purely material, there is a fundamental unity, consciousness participates in reality
But treating HH/LoO very seriously, I see the framework as: (pre-relational) unity -> polarity -> evolution -> back to unity... while I would say unity is already relational. I would set it up as a triune communion -> a broken relation -> distorted polarity -> restoration.
So would you say that a large part of your issue with this framework is that it kind of presents “two Gods”, one being “pre-relational” (i.e. “before” the One Infinite Creator decided to “know itself”, thus kicking off “the universe”), and the One Infinite Creator at “the end of time”, where the myriad have coalesced back into (relational, this time) unity?
I think "the One" is not just One... it is One-in-relation that it might understand itself. It is not a solitary unity... but a communion united.
but I see love is structural to reality itself.
Forgive the copy and paste but I think this does well enough to convey some points:
According to the Law of One, as channeled by Ra, the first distortion is Free Will. This is the foundational principle by which the One Infinite Creator chooses to know Itself, marking the first movement away from pure, unmanifested unity into potential experience.
Key Details on the First Distortion:
Definition: Free Will (often referred to as the Law of Confusion or the principle of awareness) is the initial distortion of the Law of One, which allows for individual perspective, or the "appearance of separation".
Purpose: It generates the universe by acting as the catalyst for the Creator to explore its own infinity.
The Sequence: The first distortion (Free Will) finds focus and creates the second (Love/Logos), which then produces the third (Light).
The Trinity: The first three major distortions—Free Will, Love, and Light—are considered the foundational "primordial" distortions from which all other distortions (like consciousness, perception, and polarity) emerge.
The Ra Material explains that all things are originally one (unity), and any "distortion"—meaning a variation in vibration or viewpoint—is a means for the Creator to experience and understand Itself through a "game" of seeming limitation.
So I would just point out a couple things: the unity “before” existence isn’t one that lacks relation, but one that is subsumed by relation. The relations are so solidly a part of the whole that the “distortion” of individuality is dissolved. That’s why the One Infinite Creator kicks things off by forgetting - such that it may remember those relationships anew. That might sound “pointless”, but I mean, what else makes sense for an omnipotent, omniscient being that ostensibly exists outside of time to do? The entire point of existence (in this framework) is relationship!
I think that HH/LoO focuses more on evolution than it does restoration. A focus on a progressive ascent through the densities and learning through a polarity with eventual integration... but it isnt our lack of development say, it is a ruptured communion. How do we fix a relationship that is broken? We can't do it ourselves as that would go against the reality of relationship
I think you put this well, but ultimately I think this is simply an issue of perspective (and i definitely see where you’re coming from). I understand why someone might hear “evolution through densities” and think something like “superheroes getting new superpowers”, but I think, actually, the story that is attempting to be conveyed through HH/LoO is actually fundamentally one of relation, and not some sterile “evolution of power” or something like that. I say that because, what does the whole story boil down to? Service-to-Others. Relationship is the catalyst for everything in existence. The One forgot, such that we may remember. It’s like the ultimate tale of sacrifice. A PERFECT stasis is broken, such that we may remember the Way to perfection.
Which is all to say, to me, relationship is the very central beating heart of this perspective, based on my understanding
Idk…I hope some of what I’m trying to say comes through, let me know if any parts seem unjustified
The ordinary scenario implied by "become" is that there is a scenario in which Creator does not know Itself and one in which it does, which contradicts it being Infinite
No contradiction there retard. The set of all numbers from zero to infinity (God) still starts at zero (not knowing itself) and ends at infinity (knowing itself), but to get from one to the other still requires counting to infinity (the grand theatrical production we call “SpaceTime”). You’re so disingenuous, because I know you know all this, and would readily make an identical argument in some other unrelated scenario of biblical apologia.
You also include a wondrous goalpost move
Not a goalpost shift in the slightest, retard, it was infact the entire conceit of the post. I’ll refer you to the OP:
The way I see things, these two sources explain existence, the state of our world, and the meaning of life far more accurately than any other.
By inventing those numbers, the proposed system incentivizes evil 45 times more than good
A straight up retarded position. If someone told you “yeah, there are two ways to reach the goal. In the first path, there is a 1* incline, a very gentle slope, straight up to the goal. There also exists a route where to pass, you must climb an 89* incline, ceaselessly for your entire life, in fact, the climb is beyond the capabilities of basically anyone not destined for the role. Oh, and even if you manage to climb up, you’ll need to then “make up for” all your prior climbing by assisting others on the other path during your descent. You’ll feel horrible and almost certainly fail on the way up.”
That’s not “incentivizing” anything you fucking retard, what a disingenuous take. That’s like saying the Bible “incentivizes” betraying Christ for your own personal 40 pieces of silver. You’d have to be legitimately fucking retarded to make that argument.
Would you like then to propose that one of those two systems is obviously more contradictory than the other?
Yeah lmao, it’s the one where the supposed god of the universe ignores the entire universe to instead invest all his time and energy in the jews while simultaneously telling them to genocide other groups of humans.
The Lord regretted that he had made human beings on the earth
Your timeless entity feels regret. Lmao.
Regarding 3)
Again, you seem to have trouble understanding that you, a temporally limited being, are reading a description of a temporally unlimited process. No fucking shit it’s tough to describe with words. But tell us more cope about how your story has no “contradictions” like this what-so-ever. No omnipotent omniscient being getting blindsided by events so hard that he wipes the slate clean and starts over, no being overcome with emotions, no logical mismatches between eternities and ages and New Heavens and New Earths and New Testaments and supposedly timeless beings.
but incentivizes the "self-serving" at a rate of 45 times the rate it incentivizes service to others (-45% versus +1%).
You’re gunna need to walk me through what it is you think you’re saying here lmao, because I assure you, it’s incorrect as fuck.
Regarding 2)
What are you, retarded?
But, if there is no polarity and no right (4:20), there is no true and no great, and nothing is "the true light-bringer" compared via polarity to anything else like the distortion Love being the true light-bringer, nor any magic "greater" than any other distortion.
Your issue is incomprehensible. Do you live in a “primitive tribe”? No? Then what is said is not directly applicable to you, but is instead said to illuminate your ignorance via exposure to an unimagined (by you) perspective.
Regarding 1)
If All is Infinite Creator, that must include all time because otherwise Creator would not be Infinite. But an Infinite Creator including all time cannot "become", or have "become", because that which becomes, like that which has become, cannot include all time.
What are you, retarded? This is pure semantics. Obviously you view yahweh as equivalent to the One Infinite Creator, yet your book is CHOCK FULL of this supposedly timeless entity “becoming” Wroth, or Jealous, or overcome with Regret, or Grief. Im not even going to bother getting verses because such things occur literally hundreds of times across the OT.
So either your god isn’t timeless, or you’re blind to your own double standards.
That seems oddly specific to use that books depiction
Yeah, it seems ai generated like most of the slop he posts. Furthermore, why would he replace an image of angelic soldiers in heaven with a demon?
Probably, yeah
Edit)
Wow…so, the original was posted Feb 4th, and it was available this morning when I saw it in the reddit post, but in the last couple hours it’s been removed.
https://x.com/nickadamsinusa/status/2019100728078348415?s=46
https://old.reddit.com/r/conspiracy/comments/1sk2s10/alright_wtf_is_this/
^This one has a screenshot of the feb 4th tweet
I often have felt a synchronicity with your replies, which is a rare feeling I get with others which I interpret as “pay attention!” lol. Have you ever read about that idea? Which is all to say, i too am grateful for your passion, and the perspectives you share, not to tear down in anyway but to reframe. Im really glad that it seems what im trying to say is coming across, which I can only tell by the clarity of your responses thereupon. Cheers on those notes
And regarding the fundament of existence as the triad, that’s seriously compelling and I struggle to push back, all I can come up with are things that support the interpretation. For example what comes to mind as I read
Further developing the triad monist thought... I think Evil, as a polarity, appears when communion is broken. In a triadic reality (God, Person, other) there is a correct relationship among the three and unity in distinction.
Is that the framing makes sense. Only for “satanists” is their “evil” aligned with “satan”… for the adulterer, their evil is aligned with “Lust”, for the userer, “Mammon”, and so on. So “other” is more appropriate, as each individual has a unique “tempter”/set of temptations that would lead them, in their unique life, astray from “the Way”. I suppose the richness of your proposed description could be dissolved into the narrative of “the hierarchy of Hell”, if I wanted to force it into a dualistic view, but I see no need for that heh
Further, I think of one verse which has stuck with me strongly, which I think supports your view, or atleast could be thought of in that way:
The Dao gives birth to unity, Unity gives birth to duality, Duality gives birth to trinity, Trinity gives birth to a myriad of things. The myriad things bear shadows and embrace radiance, Are infused with the breath of life to achieve the harmonized trinity of darkness, light and soul. (People hate to be uninvolved, irrelevant and undeserving, Yet true leaders associate themselves with these characters.) Therefore, things may be gained by losing, May be lost by gaining. What others profess, I will also proclaim: “Forced principles will not be viable”, Let this be the heart and soul of the message.
Chapter 42 btw… I wonder what Douglas Adams meant by that…
Just to kind of tie back into the OP, what would you say HH/LoO gets most wrong? Because honestly I see even this Triadic perspective fitting in to their story, forgive me lol but I do (at first glance anyway, im sure it will get a couple more atleast), but I find the overall story just makes so much sense that it’s easy to “fit things in” so-to-speak. Whether it’s a created dualism that eventually returns to its uncreated Monism, or a creation that evolves from one to two to three to many and back again. I dunno. It’s like you say in your first paragraph about conduits to truth.
:)
All the world’s a stage, And all the men and women merely players; They have their exits and their entrances; And one man in his time plays many parts
Or, in long form:
https://www.wanttoknow.info/secret_societies/hidden_hand_081018
Y’know Ive spent a while trying to think of where to go with the conversation but keep coming up dry… i keep coming back to “we’re in agreement but looking at things from different angles”…mostly at least… here, let’s try this:
Does real Evil (aka an “evil” entity, satan, existing in the role of tempter) exist anywhere? Further, if “alignment with God’s Will” maps to the “Good” polarity, surely there exists an opposite polarity, beyond simply “out of alignment”, which I would say describes better the people in the lukewarm middle of the poles, would you agree? Even without an entity representing that polarity, people could still imagine it and “aim for it” (see Epstain et Al)
I would say that there does seem to exist an entity playing that role, the so called “god of this world”, but it sounds like (correct me if I’m wrong) you come down more on the “it’s a metaphor” interpretation, or is that overly simplified by me?
Do you agree with the principle of “as above, so below”? Further/relatedly, can you name anything in existence that is “mono polar”? Because the fact that everything in the universe seems to operate with(in) polarity says to me that the same principle applies not just across scales but also across domains (i.e. in the spiritual domain of existence as well). You seem to be suggesting the “mono-polarity” of the spiritual realm (again please correct me if I’m wrong). If that’s correct, I’d ask why you think that? Taking account of the fact that until all the stuff that happens at the end of time/Revelations (e.g. satan being vanquished) actually occurs, we are operating in a dualistic environment.. and I just say that because (imagining you say something like) “it becomes totally mono-polar eventually, it just seems dualistic in our temporally limited sphere”, I would just say “yeah that’s what HH/LoO says too”, y’know, back to the “different words for the same thing” notion.
Honestly I just didn’t see a clearly productive direction to take things, despite knowing there must be atleast one if not multiple. If you’ve got any ideas beyond mine of polarity I’d love to hear em
No one cares what you think
All good, I appreciate the attempt to facilitate
Actually that was the second time, here’s the first time, 3 weeks ago, which he happily replied to:
https://communities.win/c/Conspiracies/p/1ASGEEvCuW/round-table-discussion-the-world/c/4eaV8BFbVaM
Ctrl+F “three” ITT and you’ll find it. Or rather, them, as I’ve asked you now 3 times ITT lol
Sounds like a buncha preconceived notions ya got there. Lamech wasn’t Godly despite his offspring being praised by God for the purity of his generations? That’s news to me lmao.
P.S. Hurry up and pick your three so I can shred them for you
What part of the Bible did hamurabi write? How was Lamech a Godly man if he exacted 7x or 77x his vengeance on people? Why does Jesus preach universal love while Yahweh’s priests preach his love for genocide?
Maybe answering my questions will help, it's worked before.
Have you noticed that "hate your enemy" is not the law?
FOH lmao, have you not noticed that “love your enemy” is a supercession of “love your neighbor”?
"Eye for eye" is a law of permission, not of demand
FOH lmao, just like “kill all the women and children” doesn’t actually mean that. Fuck off with that pilpulous bullshit
"Do not break your oath" is strengthened by "do not swear at all".
Again, FOH lmao
If I can get you to realize that Jesus never rejected one bit of the Old Testament but took it all literally, that'll be an advance and I'll be thankful.
And if I can get you to realize that Jesus never once said the word “yahweh” in the entire New Testament, that’ll be an advance and I’ll be thankful
Well well well, looks like the namecalling has started to work.
So listen up!
Based and Thomasine
But uhh, did you want to pick three? Most of your objections are semantic
Also, if you missed it, I said your attempts to paint Jesus’ words as “affirmation” were cope and pilpul. Don’t know if you were expecting me to copy and paste that out for each one or what.
I’d love it if you jumped back in. There are some loose threads left hanging from the last attempt, or just take off on a tangent based on something I or JR have said to eachother. Whatever works for you.