Then your view of it is like my view of Clement of Alexandria and Origen, whom many Christians still revere. I can't name a single thing I respect about them. But according to my theory their work is mixed too rather than all bad.
True but doesn't apply since the contemporary video is the new offering and doesn't appear problematic prima facie.
A few photos of Netanyahu in Ashdod on the 10th were released. Do you think Reuters reporting a press conference and a separate set of new photos are all staged? It's not impossible, which is why I ask; but it seem Iran is doing the greater bobbing and weaving in this picture.
the talmud is a psyop
Lots of evidence is floating around but it doesn't point and I don't think that's the right take.
I suppose we could say those traditions Jesus rejected were psyops and thus the Talmud contains similar psyops.
My take is that the Talmud reflects the mixed testimony of Judaism and the worst in it is retained, not for it being valid, but for it reflecting concerns held by leaders esteemed by later generations.
I believe Jewish evangelism involves "unspoiling" the mixed testimony, which I define as claiming the good and removing the bad.
It's not to be about force. There are militant Jewish Zionists and militant Christian nationalists who make it about force, but that's not it.
Let's use a text like saying all who were appointed for eternal life believed. God appointing and humans believing happen together. In the same way, Jesus comes when humans are ready and humans ready themselves when Jesus comes. They relate and are coterminous so neither "causes" the other. I think that was Schneersohn's take on "Moshiach" as well, as I don't know him to be a militant.
Incidentally, Reuters has the video the AI is based on, released along with a public press conference with Bibi yesterday. I doubt the whole Israeli media is pretending to have a press conference with a man that isn't alive.
Incidentally, Reuters has the video the AI is based on, released along with a public press conference with Bibi yesterday. I doubt the whole Israeli media is pretending to have a press conference with a man that isn't alive.
Correct. But look it up. The words (Hebrew) were something like, Messiah may still come today, so do everything you can today to cause him to return.
How can Al-Aqsa get bombed without so many countries immediately declaring war on Israel as to make it a worthless step? It's a great theory but I don't see it this year without further supports. The Orthodox want to slay the red heifer, which means they want sufficient peace that no small group can interrupt and potentially invalidate the sacrifice.
Schneersohn literally told him to say that 30+ years ago. However, I just debunked a totally different Jewish hoax so we'll need to take the claims about AI on this clip too.
You seem to be speaking against Jews, Islam, and Christianity just fine here. I don't even call you out most of the time. Why don't you speak your peace every day and tell others they can do so here too? Are you a doomer, or do you believe in growing the fora where you can speak freely?
a) Unit implies apart from one another, hence DI-verse. b) Unity inside diversion implies
What of "unity implying diversity"?
Com (together) ple (to fill) ment (mind) represents the artificial putting together of real and fake within ones mind
What of unity of real with real? What if "the spiritual real and the natural real are" polar?
God isn't a container
Is One within All?
"Oneself as another" implies All is Other; "one to another" implies One to All.
What of "creatio ex Deo"?
Funny, the text says it was made to a group (not an imaginary "status quo Jew" that you've invented) consisting of
those Jews which believed on him
so you're changing the text again.
Welcome to the victory party. Those of us who have been here awhile have learned to stop quoting enemy propaganda about how old, rich, or powerful it is.
Great. So we agree that there are spiritual covenants that don't apply to races, and we agree that the land covenant from 1499 to 586 BC was a national covenant that applied to a race. So as I said there are two kinds of covenants, and the only question left is whether there are national covenants today, which can be postponed to eschatology. So you can stop arguing.
I am bound by logic. I tested both the Bible and the young earth by logic and found them the inference to the best explanation. I'd love you to start any logic-based post in c/Atheist, where such discussion is usually done, if you want to see who is most logical.
Where would you like me to demonstrate that I know how to use logic? What standards would prove to you that I know? You might be using illogic to say you don't have to propose standards and then when I propose standards you can just say they're illogical: the same trap you say Christians use on you. So your accepting the challenge gives you a duty to define what terms you'd accept.
Meanwhile, I can start by pointing out a couple basics. (1) Either nothing exists or something exists. Can we agree that something exists as an axiom? (2) We can name the sum of all that exists something like All-That-Exists (or maybe "Yahweh" for short). Can we agree on a name for all that exists that would be neutral enough for us to start attributing characteristics to it? (3) Obviously by observation we can define Thing as any subset of All-That-Exists; for instance you and I are Things. So logically all Things except the Thing called All-That-Exists are not All-That-Exists. Do you follow?
So maybe we really are both interested in speaking logically but we just distrust each other. It's something to work on, isn't it?
In short she suspected you of being u/Neo1, and for good reason, and she's now apologized for that.
The community has demonstrated over several months that it doesn't believe in obtaining consensus by voting. Therefore both admin and mods must judge via acting decisively and reading community feel. That is what TINAE is doing with you in this thread. She also has over 5 years' experience in this community and you don't seem to, which makes a difference.
An interesting point is that even if there were an apparent consensus it would need to be ratified by a current mod or admin anyway, so if none of them are willing to judge it as a consensus then it wouldn't matter. So far the community has been unwilling to take any consensus stand in my observation (even the discussion topics are decided by less than a quorum) and prefers to let things happen as the most active move forward with agendas. So I look forward to how your experiment concludes.
Meanwhile, your game of creating AI atheist memes and posting them where you've pretty well banned all people interested in discussing them continues. Funny, the atheists around here have a consistent habit of thinking themselves very logical but refusing to commit to shared standards of logic with others were agreement can be reached; that's pretty well the opposite of consensus-seeking.
I'm going to leave the sticky discussion between the two of you because unless something changes you get to face the same status the other discussions faced. Also, I should have pointed out that my record shows I don't believe in open-ended questions (here you have three options or implied "none of the above" or "write-in"). A community question should be binary, yes-no, such as current mod team versus changes, because otherwise results among three or more options can be gamed without indicating accurate consensus. The last question I posed had more votes in favor of new mod team (unnamed) than then-current inactive mod team, but was not heavily attended. So far yours is even less attended. This forum is rather like herding cats and resists changes to status quo. That's why admin took the steps it did.
When you learn to use logic the way others do instead of using it imbalancedly to direct results to what you already believe, then we can talk more about my supporting your bids.
abrahamic faiths have caused literally billions of deaths, many of innocents and particularly of gnostics
Thanks for admitting your own bias.
I'm being honest with you about my first take. Because of the host I'm interested in starting with inspecting the meat for poison and not wasting time in inspecting the table arrangements. If you see me actually thinking they say something they don't, call it out, but you haven't done so in your other comment and you too have a history IMHO of saying that I'm saying something I don't. If we agree Words Mean Things and know the difference between reading and inferring, that should suffice.
There is no scientific consensus on existence of Venusians. However, the scientific consensus for all history has been recent creation, with the exception of a blip caused by a few folks who wanted to be identical to apes. All creation stories speak of order arising from outside, none speak of order gradually arising without direction by billions of steps that we don't have time for even in the evolutionary timeframe. And that's all beside the point because it's only about similarity between your or my worldview proposed and your or my scientific origin story, which isn't a final criterion.
Looking at Jesus's results as compared to Barabbas's or Ra's or anyone else's seems to uphold his view of freewill over theirs. That is a pretty good criterion.
We have two metaphors about light. One, God is light and in him is no darkness at all (nonpolar). Two, God dwells in inapproachable light and God dwells in deep darkness (polar). Thus unity in diversity.
When you speak of matter made of light you ignore the suppression of light via its absence of light (i.e. we're back at black holes after all). There is no light phenomenon detectable beyond the event horizon. So the fact that matter allows structures that locally preclude light suggests that we cannot speak of all being one in the sense of light and black hole being the same. But the nonpolarity teaching entails that they are ultimately the same in all respects, instead of teaching that light is creative and a black hole is nihilist.
Both Christianity and channelers are simply lessons learned from other people. I put the lessons of Christianity here because it's clear the channelers wish to contradict them. Only one half of a binary can be true. The channelers aren't out there saying "the Bible is true but the opposite is also true in a different sense"; they're saying the Bible isn't true. So I've already taken the step back. So far the conclusion by comparing the two isn't working out well for the gnostic channelers.
I read the summaries I quoted. The "harvest" theory says clearly if you don't choose then you can stay in your "third density" reincarnating indefinitely. That means no final judgment confirming you in either good or evil. Thanks for making an assumption about my ability to describe the day of judgment though. But, again, the idea of "evolve or don't, it's all one" is set up to contradict the Christian teaching of judgment by appointment.
As we progress, I'll probably come to a point where I can list all the differences and criteria and indicate a more comprehensive conclusion. All this is just to scratch the surface of the material as I have time and inclination. While the rest of the community reviews it (or ignores it), it might be wise for both of us to keep working on that brotherhood paradigm we've discussed. The Origenist method of reviewing everything no matter how repugnantly Grecian might help us here, even though I generally deprecate the method otherwise.
It's older than Groening.
My point is that I'd rather partake whole meals than extricate what is negligible from a raft of poison that has killed others. See what you think of my initial statement.
Angels unawares indeed. These serve fugu.
Christianity teaches unity in diversity, not unity free from polarity.
Ultimately wrong may be an absence of right, but to ignore difference between absence and presence is to lose meaning.
Invention of "densities" and of billions of years is gnostic: irrational appeal to gnosis that may be true or false.
Claims of "trying" to speak in Egypt "with mixed results" also cast doubt, indicating the speaker's professed inabilities.
Also: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=The_Hidan_of_Maukbeiangjow&oldid=1339650755
Christianity also teaches eternal enmity with those who harbor wrongdoing, not "friendship".
It teaches that the spiritual real and the natural real are complementary, not that the natural is unreal.
It teaches infinite intelligence does recognize its potential, in its teaching that unity contains diversity.
If it could not, we could not, nor could we speak of the hypothetical, for we are less than it.
But, since "recognizing potential" is ambiguous and almost meaningless, it's possible to define it in some acceptable way.
-
To say a subcreator receives freewill is to acknowledge it as a gift of the One Infinite Creator who has it unlimited.
-
To say a law becomes Logos and cocreates an array where it can know itself is to blur Creator Logos from subcreator logos.
-
To say Logos creates law of light to manifest matter thereby leaves unstated whether Logos is infinite energy or subenergy.
To say the Creator "steps down" to become Logos is similarly ambiguous without specifying identities and polarities.
To imagine a hierarchy separately creating universes, galaxies, and stars as if each independently belies observed reality.
Namely, we observe one universe unconnected to any other but all galaxies and stars are interconnected.
Thus making subcreators one with a Creator but "independent" belies their dependence on and in the one Logos universe.
The theory's point is to mediate Creation to middlemen and demote Yahweh (Being) from being Being to being a sub-sub.
Yahweh as angel follows angels' rules, not as sub-sub but as the writer of the rules who can use them better than any other.
So if Lucifer and Elders pretend they are equals, they can be tested by confrontation with Yahweh.
For Lucifer to portray Adam as devoid of freewill rather than freely obeying is to attribute Yahweh's plan to himself.
For Lucifer to portray his "fall" as being "here to help" recalls Screwtape's similar spin on why Lucifer "so rapidly departed".
Incidentally, to cite a no-polarity teaching as supporting an absolute-polarity teaching is flatly contradictory.
Lucifer then portrays Yahweh as creating the desire to sin, attributing his own work of warping desire to Yahweh.
He portrays Yahweh as unaware of the Tree's consequences rather than aware and actively limiting the amount of evil.
He portrays the offering of evil as the only direction and leadership, rather than an opportunity to obey as Christ did.
He portrays the only escape from pawn to promotion is via alliance with him, again attributing Yahweh's work to himself.
"Many of us do not mean you any harm" is a singular backhanded admission and revelation of method.
Referring "between lives" to antimatter is a singularly insidious inversion that would be a complete digression to debunk.
The three-way eschatological split is just guesswork in hopes of having something for future people to point to in the past.
Relatively comparing negative hell and lukewarm hell so as to make them look relatively good is the height of ignorance.
Declaring bare spirits as "greater" more "evolved" density than physicospiritual humans is another inversion of reality.
Glorification of the negative is mere Frankism and was long ago debunked in Romans 3.
Denial of a day of judgment, in favor of an infinite evolutionary probation, motivates lukewarmness and indecision, not action.
Ultimately, pursuing 95%+ negative polarity is not rewarded.
Continued:
More on Our Family
The world of my own Family is very different from that of the lower, Earth-based bloodlines. Whilst our training growing up was very strict and disciplined, we were never abused in any way. We grew up with the bigger picture and didn't need any other motivation. The Earth bloodlines are not aware of the bigger picture. They themselves are not of our Lucifer group soul. As far as they are aware, they are out to rule the world, to control and enslave, and to create as much suffering and negativity as is possible. What they get out of the deal is world domination. You'd have to say with that in mind, they're doing a great job.
The Earth lines know that democracy is an illusion created to uphold your slavery. Behind the scenes there is only one party – our party. Whichever side "wins" the Family wins. Yet one of the things they don't know is that our agenda is ultimately for the highest good of all concerned in providing you with the catalyst. If they were aware of this, there is a risk that they would not do their jobs properly, and thus would miss out on joining us in our 95% negative harvest. They are aware of the need for them to attain 95% negativity to get out of third density, and that is all the motivation they need to help us achieve our ultimate aims.
Regarding this current harvest, what we require is for us personally to attain at least 95% negative polarity for ourselves, not for you. We need this in order to graduate to fourth density negative and clear our karmic record of all the negativity we have created on this planet before returning to our rightful place as sixth density guardians of our galaxy. If we do not make it, we will remain trapped in the third density cycle with all those between 50% and 94% negative (what I termed the lukewarm) and have to continue to provide negative polarity there. Harsh as it is, our only way out is to be as negative as possible here to graduate.
The External Reflects the Internal
In this grand game, the world is your mirror. It reflects back to you what you are putting out. If you see doom and gloom, then that is what you are projecting. If you do not like the reflection life is showing you, then change that which is causing it. Monitor your thoughts and pay attention to their quality, as they are more powerful than you may imagine. This is the difference between conscious and subconscious creation. What you think about is directly related to what life will show you. You get back what you send out.
You only forget who you are during incarnation. The object of the game is to wake up within the dream, and in effect, become a "lucid gamer", to remember who you really are during the game, and to then begin working upon the things you came here for. Your main purpose in the game is to work upon yourself. It is to grow, develop, and transform yourself into a more positive and loving being.
Use your negative emotions when they arise as the tools that they truly are. Train yourself to notice when negativity arises in you. When you catch yourself projecting a negative thought, remember that all thought is creative, and ask yourself if that is really what you want to create. It takes a while to become proficient, but do not give up. Whilst incarnating in the third density, negativity is still an important tool in your learning process. It teaches you "other than". Do you respond to negativity with more negativity? Or do you choose to see the negativity as the tool that it is, and recognize that it is offering you an opportunity?
You are not doomed, and your soul does not require salvation. No one's soul does. There is nothing to save it from. At the very worst, you will have to repeat as many third density cycles as is necessary in order for you to learn the things you need to learn. And there is no such thing as coincidence. Nothing happens by chance. Life is in a constant process of communication with us. Only mostly, people are too busy to notice.
There is a simple method to check upon your progress. Despite what appears to be going on in the world around you, how loving and harmonious are your personal relationships? How many arguments do you find yourself engaging in? The quality of your relationships is an excellent mirror from which to gauge the quality of your output, or in other words, that which you are creating. Remember that the world is your mirror. It casts back at you the reflection of that which you have projected into it.
There is a big difference between loving yourself and being selfish. When you truly understand what it is to know and love yourself, you cannot help but to love and serve others. If the One Infinite Creator is infinite and has created everything that is, then does not the Infinite Creator reside both within you and within all things? When you can see the divine spark of the Infinite Creator within yourself and within even those who would mean you harm, the strong grip of the illusion will begin to lose its power over you.
This Message as a Catalyst
No matter what ideologies separate us in this game, the message is all that matters. And the message is that in the love and the light of our Infinite Creator, we are all intimately interconnected in the One. We are brothers and sisters of the light. This message will reach all those it is meant to reach. It is yet another in a long line of catalysts that your Infinite Creator has provided you with down the course of history.
A catalyst is not meant to be believed. It is meant to present you with a challenge to that which you think you know about reality. Test these words deeply. Take them into your heart only if they feel right and truthful to you. And if they do, then arise and play the part for which you volunteered to be here now. We wish you all the very best in what remains of your journey here and sincerely hope you will use the catalyst we have offered to help you graduate with a glorious and positive great harvest.
Remember, always, that this is a beautiful game that we are playing here and co-creating together with our Infinite Creator. And that off stage (between lives), we are the very best of friends. No one really dies and no one really suffers, except in the game. The game is not reality. Reality is reality. And you have the power to express your reality within the game, once you have learnt how to do so.
Editorial Note: Consider the possibility that Hitler, Stalin, Cheney, and many other despotic world leaders may have been convinced that in order for them to successfully achieve their next level of soul evolution, they had to achieve 95% negativity in their personal lives here and over 50% negativity on the planet. This could explain both their negative behavior and a lot of destructive things happening in our world. Yet some of these numbers and ideas may have just been made up to make the game more interesting.
The harvest and parallel planet scenario may also be more metaphor than reality. Many living on Earth right now experience their lives as a living hell. Yet there are also those whose lives are like heaven on Earth. The harvest may happen naturally for each of us at the moment we die and leave this physical reality. Focusing on an impending harvest or day of judgment keeps us from opening ever more fully to all that is available to us here and now in this ever-unfolding sacred moment.
I'm troubled how to respond because this is complex but here's a simple thing.
Whatever you choose in the afterlife will be determined by the trajectory of your whole life and not little things along the way. Right now counts forever.
So I think it's in vain to concoct plans of how you will conduct yourself because you haven't experienced what it's like. It's like planning what dream you're going to have tonight, and if you can't do that then how much more this type of convo is counterproductive. What's productive is to practice the discernment right now with the people and spirits you face daily rather than to imagine the future disembodied without taking on the practice you face today.
If there is a trap in the afterlife (and there are a couple, but I don't think this is an accurate description of one), then your current life will direct whether you succumb to the trap out of free will or not. You won't be totally uninformed, you will receive revelation in line with what you practiced in life. If your life makes you easily manipulated and satisifed with contradiction, you'll be trapped and it won't matter what picture it takes to get you there. If you guard your life by putting it in God's hands and observing how he rewards your trust, you'll overcome every lie told to you in the afterlife because you will be given the words to say.
Remember, in the best model of reincarnation, you're talking about a collective soul in which you and other lives have both independent existence and collective direction in relation to a new life; so the "forgetting" aspect (I'll find a better word for it) is locally tied to the physical life and not to the oversoul. So I wouldn't put too much weight upon current views of reincarnation to help direct how to behave. Rather, practice judging all spirits now and you'll judge correctly in the examination.