Only flawless individuals
a) Individual (two) contradicts only (one).
b) Being implies flaw (life) within less (inception towards death) hence being given the opportunity to grow strength.
Internal net implies ones consent to any suggestion of another; world wide web implies consensus among many to suggestions by few.
Using free will of choice to enter the internet and world wide web requires one to use a node/ned - "to bind".
A net works by notes...nature sets free; artifice binds.
witnessed by primary references
a) A reference refers to something that came before aka a secondary referring to a primary.
b) Nature implies primary; being implies secondary...any references are made by secondary beings to one another.
c) Ignoring natural for artificial references makes ones a partaker...not a witness.
typology can be twisted to produce
a) Few suggest type (symbolism) to twist the minds of many into circular logic.
b) Only nature pro (forwards) duces (to lead)...a being needs to resist the wanted temptation of being lead forwards. Few puppeteer leaders to tempt many to willingly follow.
to record just enough
Aka using memory for adaption to perceivable inspiration...not to store suggested information.
to give us the general picture
General implies all (al) generating (gener) each one within...others suggest pluralism (us) and the capturing of momentum (pictures) to distract ones perception from discerning that.
Nature doesn't give pictures...it gives each being sight during a process of differentiation (analysis). Looking/locking at a picture implies an artificial synthesis.
In particular...Jesus
Jesus aka je suis aka I AM contradicts particularity by taking possession over self, while branding others as YOU ARE (judah).
to mark the beginning
a) BE (being) cannot mark GIN (generation) without ignoring...being (life) generated (inception towards death).
b) A being cannot perceive ones beginning (inception) or end (death), because sight can only work in-between aka as above/so below.
I don't argue
I vs you + don't vs do imply argumentation.
changed the definition of vaccine
Vacine/vacca - "cow" aka gentile herd mentality when ignoring perceivable change for suggested definition.
are properly running away with it
Nature runs the only way...each jew resists that, while tempting gentiles to burden self by holding onto definitions.
How about storage itself...age implies a process which cannot be stored. History tempts mind into circular remembrance, which corrupts straight thinking.
Switzerland is the real Israel
So a jew comes aus switz (auschwitz)...
FSM
Vice-president For Securing Minors: https://www.fsm.de/files/2025/06/sfrank.png
opposite to what God created
God implies transformation within everything, not creation out of nothing aka creatio ex nihilo... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatio_ex_nihilo
"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)."
God implies all that was for each one within...a jew suggests creationism to tempt gentiles to oppose each other within conflict about nothing aka nihilo aka suggested nihil-ism tempting consensus to de-nial perceivable.
Nothing implies ones denial of everything.
"CIRCLES AND 'CIRCULAR' ARE EVIL AND BAD AND I HATE AND AVOID THEM!!!!!"
a) Circle/kikel/kike...
b) What's the narrative given for the "kike" slur? Ellis Island... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kike So drawing a circle to rebel against the cross aka being (life) moved a-cross (inception towards death) aka circular rebellion against linear progression.
Now ask yourself why New York has an ELLIS (eliyahu; my god is yahweh) island, and why migrants would rebel entering the land of the free?
The letter O is circular too
Letter implies ones use of free will of choice to LET another shape LETTERS into artificial words, while ignoring that motion>momentum (balance)>matter (choice) implies linear progression...not circular logic about suggested logos (words).
in every reply I can find
a) Reply implies each...not every.
b) Reply implies a reaction; find (foundation) implies action. Whatever a being seeks to find...nature implies the foundation to find everything offered. The issue is that each being can be deceived with findings from one another, which implies a fief/feud - "possession, holding, domain; feudal duties, payment"
your very name
a) Name/nombre/number implies designation of a unit/unus - "one"...there can be only one, no matter how many names one attaches to oneself.
b) Notice that "free-will-of-choice" doesn't represent ones name, but ones free will of choice to name/label/brand. That's why going against someone called "free-will-of-choice" always backfires against oneself.
the word "choice"
Choosing the word (suggested), while ignoring sound (perceivable)...binds ones choice to a chosen one.
String theory
Aka utilizing oral (ory) theism (the) to string consensus together.
mirrored in the zohar and kaballah
Aka tricking a gentile to reflect (mirror) about suggested instead of absorbing light (zohar) through perceivable (kabbalah).
As a scholar
Scholar implies one who receives instruction... https://www.etymonline.com/word/Talmud
modern
Modern/modo/med - "to take appropriate measure"...aka the gentile mind taking jewish measures into possession; thereby becoming demonically (dai-mon; divider-provider) possessed.
astrophysic
Physic/bheue - "to be" + Star/ster - "to shine; give off reflected light"
sounds like
Sound/sanus - "entire; whole; all"...being implies one within all aka partial (difference) within whole (sameness). Ignoring perceivable sound for suggested words makes one alike one another.
A jew utilizes spell-craft (articulation of words within natural sound) to equalize differences among like-minded gentiles.
passionate about faith
Holding onto faith contradicts pass-ion (passing action).
there are a number of errors
Number implies the designation of a unit/unus (one)...so only if one counts one another does one error/err (wander off).
the whole of this church
Church/kyrios/keue (to swell) implies a partial within whole, enabled to swell and shrink.
The first and ultimate question
First and ultimate implies solution to any question or answer shaped within.
apostate
Apo (away) state (form) aka formed (life) away (inception towards death). Apo represents cause; state implies effect.
In the christian context: Apo represents God; state represents each Christ. The conflict of reason (apostate vs loyalist) represents a jewish deception to tempt gentiles to turn against one another, while confining self to circular logic.
unbroken line
Only within a line (inception towards death) can there be a break (life). Living implies being given a break from dying.
First, they state that they are the one...
God implies first...any state within implies second/seco (to divide).
free and personal
- Free implies each instruments free will of choice.
- Per-son-al implies by the sound of all.
Why...right and wrong?
Because choosing either side confines ones mind to circular logic (right or wrong), which turns outwardly into a conflict of reason (right vs wrong), while one ignores right/reg (to move in a straight line) and wrong/wer (to turn).
Nature only moves in a straight line (inception towards death), which gives each being (life) the free will of choice to turn against one another by ignoring natural for artificial.
Final Authority
Fin (end) al (all)...all doesn't end. Only within all can each one (life) have a beginning (inception) and end (death). All authorizes/aug (to increase) each one.
tautological
Tauto (same) logic (logic) al (all)...all implies same (cause) for each different one (effect) within. Others suggest logic (circle) to tempt one to ignore cause>effect (line).
Only within a line can a circle be drawn aka only within motion (inception towards death) can matter (life) be shaped.
we cannot both be right
Right/reg (to move in a straight line)... https://www.etymonline.com/word/right
Only within right can one shape pluralism (we), dualism (both) and denialism (wrong) to distract one another.
how is Orthodoxy right?
Ortho (straight) doxy (to take)...ortho implies right/reg (move in a straight line); doxy implies each ones free will of choice to take the wrong (circular) way.
- Sex/seco - "to divide"... https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/sex
Sex implies the division of living and dying aka an analysis...if the living blame the dead for sex, then that implies a synthesis. Doing that implies an inversion within the living...a jew shapes theses inversions by tempting living gentiles to scapegoat death.
"Things implies a summation of partials (one) within whole (all)."...Nope.
Can you show a plurality (things) without a singular (thing) part used to shape it?
not impressed. Yawn. Hot is the opposite of cold. So what.
Opposition aka ob (towards) + posit (to put) + ion (action) implies action putting reaction forwards aka impression (inception towards death) generating expression (life).
"not impressed" implies a beings denial of natures impression aka of being pressed into nature for outwards expression.
I said be. Not beING.
-ing denotes action. To be implies "towards being" aka nature acting towards each reacting being.
One cannot be (essence) without being moved into substance (divine part).
OHHHHH SCARY OHHH SO SCARY, HE IS CLAIMING A WORD WILL KILL ME!! THE WORLD IS ENDING!1!1!1!11!
a) Inception towards death implies a process (dying) transferring a potential (living)...being scared of the word "death" implies sacrificing growth for fear of loss.
b) Scary implies a claim made aka a measurement taken by a beholder to make it suggestible for others.
You claim that a bunch of words somehow mean death.
I analyze words others claim hold meaning. Only within sound can words be shaped...holding onto the meaning of words (synthesis) tempts one to ignore the process of sound (analysis).
Even if they (words) did (mean death), so what?
Nature implies even (dying); being implies odd (living)...only within even can an odd come into being. Words suggested to one another tempts beings at odds against one another over the meaning of words.
Mean/men - "to think" implies the same process (perceivable) moving through each different potential (perception)...holding onto any suggested meaning ignores process; destroys differences, and suppresses potential.
You're so scared of puny words.
A being has to choose to be scared aka TAKING words into possession...analyzing words allows one to discern self within sound GIVING.
Sound gives one the opportunity to take words into possession, which one needs to resist the wanted temptation thereof, just like the process of dying gives life the opportunity to take life.
Is this (nature inspiring being to resist) bad or good?
Bad (not want) and good (want) represent the temptation to ignore resisting (need).
"Your (possession) contradicts free (potential)"...False.
How does possession not restrict potential? Each apple represents the potential for more apples...holding onto an apple diminishes that potential exponentially aka spoiling potential by possession.
By you saying this quote
You chose to make into quoted information what I chose to write on the fly by adapting to inspiration.
you are implying your worldview implies FWOC has limits
- FREE implies within DOMinance.
- WILL (want) implies within need.
- OF implies out of; within and in response to.
- CHOICE implies within balance.
Being implies set free within the limitation of nature. Only within the limit of God given can each anointed one be free to take from one another.
The issue...the use of "you + your" applied by one to another ones view of the world. Only one can wield the potential of free will of choice...it cannot be possessed as mine or yours.
So your belief implies that FOWC is
a) "Your belief" implies believing another aka sacrificing ones free will of choice into bondage to another.
b) "Is" implies a suggestion shaped within what perceivable "was". Doing that binds ones free will of choice into a conflict (is vs isn't) against others.
NOT all that free
a) NOT implies ones de-nial (nihilo; nothing) of everything. Only within everything (cause) can each thing (effect) be free from one another.
b) FREE-DOM implies being free within dominance of nature aka free to live while dying. Process (inception towards death) dominates potential (life)...which frees potential within process.
c) ALL cannot be FREE...only one within all can be free from one another.
No one said anything about apples but you.
Apple of sin aka application (to join; combine) of syn (togetherness)...words shaped within sound tempts ones application to syn.
Notice that I didn't say apples (plural); but apple (singular)...it's the sin-ning sin-gular who brings the plural.
You possess plenty of things already. Nothing is destroyed.
a) Things like what...those artificially held together within the separating process of nature?
b) Things held together by a living being within the destructive process of dying?
c) What if taking plenty contradicts all giving God?
d) If one possesses a cat, then why does holding a cat within possession inspires the living cat to fight until death to get out of ones possessive grasp?
Even simpler...take a breath and hold it in possession until the natural process forces the potential being to let go.
How about food? Doesn't a fat guy holding food within possession destroys himself? When is plenty enough?
"Potential needs to resist wanted possession."...Because why?
Procession (inception towards death) forcing potential (life) to let go of any possession held onto.
Because implies "being caused" aka cause generating being within a process. That's why.
All of these are...things
Things implies a summation of partials (one) within whole (all). Things can never be all, because all separates things from one another.
Summation (synthesis) contradicts separation (analysis).
must be pursued
Being implies moved from inception towards death...pursue aka pro (forward) sequi (to follow) implies towards death.
Nature inspires being to resist origin...others suggest artificial outcomes (carrot) to tempt a being to pursue natural outcome (stick).
your free will of choice
Your (possession) contradicts free (potential). It ain't yours...FREE implies within dominance; WILL (want) implies within need; OF implies out of; within; in response to, and CHOICE implies within balance.
these are good...those are great
If one takes a good/great apple into possession, then the apple becomes bad/worse faster.
Possession destroys potential (life) during procession (inception towards death). Potential needs to resist wanted possession.
Is it not possible for one to hold onto anything while also being aware that everything moves each different thing within apart from one another?
Possibility implies being potential (life) during procession (inception towards death)...taking into possession reduces the potential given. One has the free will of choice to take given, but doing so reduces ones awareness of given.
Whatever one holds onto...God continues to set apart.
What do you suggest
Resisting suggested (want) for perceivable (need).
true
Whenever tempted by true or false option...discern self as being free will of choice in-between until binding self to a side. Resisting SIDES grows ones SIGHT aka the requirement to resist temptation.
time
Life cannot perceive its inception or death, because it lives in-between aka separated from origin and outcome. Others suggest "time" to trick ones mind to consent to artificial origins and outcomes.
If one consents to past and future, then one permits another to shape PRESENT aka ones PRESENCE (forwarded essence).
Try expressing self within motion instead of repressing self by timing motion. Nature does, which allows each being within to re-do self only NOW.
managing the giving and taking
Manage/manus (hand). Giving and taking isn't manual, but auto... https://www.etymonline.com/word/auto- aka all moving through each one within. Resisting the temptation to take represents adaptation to given. Resistance is fertile.
giving and taking within ones mind
Compare the mental capacity of an infant and an elder...whatever mental capacity was grown in-between wasn't there before, and won't be there after. Growing implies shaping, not holding onto the shaped.
The more one chooses to let go, the freer ones choice, and the clearer ones awareness of others tempting one to hold onto.
gets people to consent to their overall notion of God
In nomine Patris et Filii et Spiritus Sancti...consent isn't given to father; son and holy ghost, but to those suggesting IN THE NAME OF (in nomine) which thereby contradicts the first commandment.
God doesn't require consent...God forces adaptation by free will of choice. Others tempt choice into submission by consent.
true
True vs false tempts one to ignore change. If one applies change to true, then it becomes false and vice versa.
can both be true at the same time and also different at the same time
Others suggest "true" and "time" for one to hold onto, while ignoring that only within motion can there be differentiation. If one holds onto anything, then one ignores that everything moves each different thing within apart from one another.
Both "true" and "time" represent measurement aka ones mind artificially TAKING measure of what nature was GIVING. Doing that establishes a contradiction between giving and taking within ones mind.
Yes vs no implies a conflict of reason against another, and circular logic within self based on ones consent to suggested logos (words). That's infiltration of perception.
Consenting to anything suggested permits infiltrators to set parameters for ones thoughts aka mind-control aka govern-ment.
Holding onto suggested establishes circular thinking, which in return prevents ones perception to think straight, hence from within (life) a line (inception towards death).
Don't know Sophia.
Sophia/sophy - "to know". Ones perception within all perceivable implies Sophia. A jew utilizes pistis (persuasion) to distract from sophia (knowledge) with intelligo (understanding).
He (God) is not the one degradating things
What if God giving (inception) and taking (death) allows each thing (life) within to elevate and degrade?
It is the devils and they use jews
God implies singularity; devils and jews implies plurality...only ones singular free will of choice can shape a plurality while ignoring singularity.
Devil aka dia (across) ballein (to throw) implies a separation, as does each chosen one establishing apartheid among gentiles.
The jews look for miracles to establish someone as credible in what they claim.
A jew shapes a suggestion to tempt gentiles to claim the suggested by giving creed/credit to it. Miracle implies the jewish sales-pitch for the suggested, which amazes the minds of gentiles into wanting to claim by giving credit.
A jew knows that all perceivable moves through each ones perception and cannot be claimed, nor does it require credit/creed to utilize ones "free" will of choice.
a) History tempts memory to artificially store what nature moves. Few narrate history to stagnate the memory of many within motion, hence distracting from adaptation.
b) Counting holds one accountable by an accountant...nature sets one free.
c) Chrono (time) logy (circular thinking) tempts one to ignore thinking straight during (life) linear progression (inception towards death).
Applying history to circular thinking permits others to regurgitate the same stories aka revisionism.
d) Being implies NOW...not before or after. Ones perception within all perceivable only works NOW....others suggest before (historicism) and after (futurism) to manipulate ones memory.
A being can only adapt to nature NOW. Choice can only adapt to balance NOW. Potential can only adapt to procession NOW. Effect can only adapt to cause NOW.
soul at conception
a) Soul (motion) was before inception and death (momentum) of being (matter).
b) The difference between inception and conception? Conception implies taking together; inception implies coming into being within that which gives and takes.
A jew suggests conceptualism to tempt gentiles to take a consenting part within a consensus.
like water
a) Being implies solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death), hence in-between natural L(and) A(ir) W(ater).
b) Being implies differentiated from one another...consenting to suggested conceptualism shapes a like-minded consensus.
increasing value
Only within value (perceivable) can evaluation (perception) increase and decrease.
From a christian perspective...increasing value implies increasing God. A contradiction. God cannot be increased or decreased, since God implies ALL...not more or less.
all other views
All implies singularity. Other implies internal separation of singularity from one another. Views implies plurality ignoring singularity.
too carnal in their manner of thinking to handle it.
Manual aka manus (hand) + al (all)...that's how all gives each one a hand to handle. Others suggests mannerism to distract from that.
Exoteric teachings are face-value ones that are external to a person
Person aka per (by) son/sonos (sound) implies each internal (eso) instrument within all external (exo) sound.
Esoteric teachings are deeper meaning ones that apply internally
It doesn't matter how deep one inhales...nature forces each being to exhale. Why? Because being within nature implies as a temporal potential during an ongoing process. Others suggest "meaning" to tempt potential to ignore procession by taking into possession aka by artificially applying (joining; combining) what nature sets apart.
Nature implies the moving process which allows each potential being within to learn to teach self by teaching self how to learn aka as above/so below. Others suggest one to submit as student to teacher aka as follower to leader aka as many to few aka as ones choice to a chosen one aka as slave to master...
a different and deeper story
God implies all giving...story (to store) implies taking into possession, while ignoring all giving procession. Differentiation implies equal procession (inception towards death) generating different potential (life) by internal separation from one another.
the places, names, numbers
a) Name/nombre/number - "designation of a unit", from unitas/unus - "one" aka the oneness of God for each unit of being within.
b) Position implies potential (posit) within action (ion) aka each ones place-ment (mind placed) within all.
Each of our Souls
Each implies one apart from one another, hence soul/sole - "one and only" implying the singularity of God...others suggest pluralism (souls) to tempt ones singular consent into a consensus (our) with one another.
There can be only one aka one for all and all for one aka alone...all(in)one.
created at the beginning of Creation
a) Begin implies being (be) generation (gin)...only within generation (inception towards death) can one come into being (life).
b) Being (life) implies in-between beginning (inception) and end (death)...God (motion) generates beginning/end (momentum) for being (matter). Only within God can there be a begging and end of being.
c) All was before one can come into being...coming into being within all implies a transformation aka the transfer of form (life) within flowing action (inception towards death).
Others suggest creationism aka creatio ex nihilo... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Creatio_ex_nihilo aka "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)."
Creation (out of nothing) represents the inversion of transformation (within everything). Furthermore...nothing implies suggested nihilo-ism tempting ones de-nial of perceivable for suggested.
The origin of nothing implies ones denial of everything. Creationism tempts denialism...a simple trick to distract from self discernment.
God cannot create...God was all that can be, which internally transforms into each being. That's how origin (inception) and outcome (death) imply the same God for each Christ (anointed one) within.
We are like
One implies differentiated from one another. Others suggest "we" aka pluralism aka nosism... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_we to invert analysis with synthesis by alchemy.
a neuron in the Mind of our Soul, whereas our Soul is like a neuron in the Mind of God
a) God (motion) > mind (momentum) > body (matter)...a sole/soul process animating spiritual essence by division/divination/differentiation.
b) Neuron/neuro - "tendon, sinew" aka being drawn by strings, while ignoring that God sets each being free (will of choice).
Notice neu/new (there's nothing new under the sun) + tend (turn the mind aka circular logic) + sin/syn (together; jointly)...these are all tricks to invert the natural with artificial.
A person's
There's not "a" person; only one SON (sonos; sanus; sound; whole; entire; all) for each PER (by) within. Being an in-stru-ment (mind structured within) implies being a by-product of sound aka a per-son.
Others utilize spell-craft like "insane person" to distract one from discerning self as in sanus (within sound) per sonos (by sound). Consenting to the DEFINITION of words makes one a DEAF PHONETICIAN aka one deaf to phonics (sound).
our Souls, The One is God
If God implies one, then "our souls" contradicts God...possession of plural contradicts given singularity.
what is a level above
Level implies being in-between above/below aka odd choice within even balance, hence level/libella/libra - "balance".
Level aka levare (to raise) el (god).
To the animals
Animal implies all (al) animating (anim) each one within. Branding matter as motion (animal) tempts one to ignore that motion animates (inception towards death) matter (life).
Being implies re-anima-tion aka reacting to being animated by action, also implying re-in-carna-tion.
God emanated throughout its Creation on various levels, where it gains...
a) God cannot gain, which would imply more than God. Only within God can there be ongoing loss (inception towards death) for each temporary growth (life).
b) Emanate implies "flowing out". Only within God can animation flow in (inception) and out (death) of each formed being (life).
knowledge
Knowledge implies being (matter) at the edge (momentum) of known (motion) aka "livin on the edge"... https://genius.com/Aerosmith-livin-on-the-edge-lyrics
a) Retain aka re (to respond) tain/ten (to stretch) aka responding to being (life) stretched (inception towards death)...that's the struggle of yisra-el.
b) Upright aka up (towards) right/reg (to move in a straight line) aka life being moved from inception towards death in a straight line, which once again implies the struggle of yisra-el.
c) Gentiles are tricked to ignore analysis for synthesis, hence accepting "retain" (to keep in possession) and "upright" (erect; not bent or curved) as definitions/meaning/truth.
Being implies solid (life) within fluid (inception towards death)...a jew tempts gentiles to solidify their minds with artifice, while ignoring natural liquidity or as stated in your link..."to become rigid from the retention of liquidity"
Suggested information tempts one to ignore perceivable inspiration...the former tempts one to hold onto, while the latter moves through one, and cannot be held onto.
A jew (singular) thinks fluid; gentiles (plural) think solid...fluid destroys solid unless resisted.
tl;dr: Thanks for the link.
Only nature does so that each being within can re-do self...others suggest plurality (we) to distract one from the singular process of nature.
a) Only natural law passes (inception towards death) being (life)...few pass artificial laws to tempt many into passivity within natural law.
b) Being given choice implies within natural balance aka odd within even...few suggest "some kind" to summon likeness among many.
Right/reg (to move in a straight line) implies nature moving each being aka each person...few tempt each person into many people to distract from ones right of passage.
Only nature allows being aka all (al) lowering (low) each one within...few suggest allowances to many in return for willing compliance aka for bidding. That's how natural allowance gets artificially for-bidden.
Hope is neither only, but manifold, nor real (in response to origin giving), but fake (seeking outcome).
Others gain control (govern) over ones mind (ment) by ones free will of choice handing over the reigns, like for example by giving up solution for salvation (hope) , which in return shapes the fear of not getting saved.