Based on Earth but beyond the ice wall.
Oh, that's a factor my model doesn't include. It's a good Plato's cave analogy, but I think the cave door is not the same as the perimeter portal. To me the refractive index causes any projected light from beyond the ice wall to have a different path so we'd be able to track it as a separate (searchlight) phenomenon and not just a single projection. Different models have different boundaries and sometimes they're isomorphic and sometimes not. I haven't had the speed and mass be issues for an excited plasma approach, but then my numbers are just spitballed. I'm still going with the wormhole.
I do think it's more mysterious What is beneath us. Hard to imagine infinite ground beneath us. Seems that there would be an end to the floor and perhaps that leads to another space with stars and then another level of another Earth. Maybe there are infinite levels of Earth stars and atmosphere Above us and below us. And maybe laterally land extends for infinity. There's too much speculation to ever draw conclusion.
Well, I was just able to run a calculation that the quantum nature of the universe means the earth cannot be more than 616,000 km deep. However that's only a first approximation and a better model would yield a smaller number: WIP. There is a quantum boundary beyond which action becomes meaningless; the boundary above us seems similar, and as I said the joining of these two manifests in refraction in the air.
However, the other universes would be reached not by drilling or rocketing but by connection in other dimensions, which is much more efficient. So even if they really are connected in Euclidean 3-space they would still be more rightly considered as connected in higher-D.
But why are we all here. Even if we are Just economic slaves or a livestock of some kind. Why would the overlords that control this world be here? Why does spirituality exist at all?
Every lord and slave is accountable each on his own level: lordship and slavery are merely different degrees on a spectrum of liberty, lords have slightly higher freedom. Freewill exists for the purpose that Good be done freely (not robotically), which requires that a certain amount of evil be permitted for a certain period, limited to that which the universe can bear. (Black hole theory actually informs this, because black holes contain bearable entropy, not unbearable.) The purpose of spirituality is then this:
For, brethren, ye have been called unto liberty; only use not liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another. For all the law is fulfilled in one word, even in this; Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself.
Anthropo (man) + sophy (knowledge) aka perceivable knowledge flowing through each mans formed perception.
Away from like vs dislike conflict
Framing questions away from conflict supports straight thinking aka movement towards aka between.
Yeah, your first paragraph describes the math and the warp.
Not sure what the second paragraph is about, objects usually do appear all 24 hours, it's the disappearance that's harder to explain (refraction). The sun does channel energy and direct it to the earth and the moon and there are several cold/hot phases of the transfer of this energy that I don't fully understand, so I'm open to a wormhole being behind it. But most days I call the sun an object, a light transmitter.
I would agree with a "field" of stars with some depth, seeing as the planets constitute a field with depth. Lower density for the planets also makes sense in this frame of reference, I'll need to calculate that in. However then the "fixed" (celestial-year) stars, having higher density, also have higher mass than their size would imply to those who believe in standard physics.
An important part of the model is: How far can you go into the earth before you hit something else? Presumably if the firmament has a limit (as indicated), there would also be a "deepest" hell beyond which one cannot go. Perhaps this is blocked by the Planck distance.
Once he realized we're not on a globe and we're not in space and all these galaxies are actually much smaller than we're told then you can get on the right track.
Did I deny any of this? Did I affirm we're on a globe or in space or that galaxies are as large as we're told? I'd be happy to correct myself. On the general point, Doppler coloration sounds very intriguing, just hard to measure.
I'll work on the model. For me it's easier to start with a separate model of a 1D Flatland earth in a 2D membrane, that should get the projection right for our actual dimensions.
'There is academic controversy about whether Catharism was an organized religion or whether the medieval Church imagined or exaggerated it. The lack of any central organisation among Cathars and regional differences in beliefs and practices has prompted some scholars to question whether the Church exaggerated its threat while others wonder whether it even existed.'
'Several times in history the term "Cathar" was used to different groups that were deemed as heretics rather than a specific one .... It is certain that these "Cathars" were not the same as the self-designated The Perfecti of the Albigenses, however reflects the historical usage of the term in orthodox circles as a term to designate "heretics".'
So, yeah, neither the Cathars nor the Catholics needed to accommodate the extremists among them who perceived an existential threat, it always comes from extremism (declaration of separation) as I said.
It sounds like you're lumping together the entire history of churches against heretics with a small subset of it composed of churches against gnostics, that's why I got confused.
I appreciate the Deschner link, which I read with interest as it's always important to know the sordid history of people you work with.
Well, Monad is not a person
You say it's a consciousness. Who is the first person then? Serious question. It would be more accurate to say the Monad is beyond personality, resolving everything we can positively postulate about personality and nonpersonality.
And the symptom of receiving this transmission, the sign that the signal is reaching you is a sound that seems to come from inside your own head.
Can you distinguish this signal from other signals that have similar characteristics? Serious question.
Anticipation is experience is memory. Don't ever let anyone tell you differently, not even in the past.
I've been downvoting you on a few tropes, but this one is getting closer to accurate so is upvoted. Just keep in mind that it's not the truth pursuers who are the problem, it's the infiltrators that wrest power in the institutions that the truth pursuers delegate some power to. Keeping it focused to infiltrators and liars and satanists is the way. Naming names like Pol Pot is instructive.
There is zero mention of Adam and Eve having daughters.
Guy got it, but it's instructive to compare the quote: "And the days of Adam after he had begotten Seth were eight hundred years: and he begat sons and daughters".
What idiot told you that when the Bible names certain people it excludes there being any other people? That's Ketanji logic.
Tradition suggests (which may or may not be true) that Adam and Eve had a boy and a girl every year for hundreds of years and their children were similarly fruitful. However, in any situation where we date the first murder late, e.g. 130 AM, there are opportunities for plenty of people to be available for Cain to be fearful of.
Cain's wife was named "Mrs. Cain". She could have been his sister, or a daughter of other incest, or a product of human parthenogenesis, and there are more complicated solutions.
It's entirely possible that Cain himself named the land of Nod by virtue of laying claim on it.
Yes, all humans are the Lord's by creation. Gen. 4:26 KJV: "Then began men to call upon the name of the LORD." Your translation is one minority possibility, namely that people started giving themselves collective names e.g. Yahwists as if those names didn't apply to all people. Another possibility is simply that the eventual disappearance of the cherubim from the gate of Eden would have led to people calling on God rather than going specifically to a gate of God.
Genesis 1:29. Then God formed
There's no "then" there, sorry. Perhaps you've never considered that ancient writers knew how to use the flashback device. It's well-known that Gen. 2 retraces particulars of the events of Gen. 1. This is indicated by the transition text that recapitulates in 2:4-5, "These are the generations of the heavens and of the earth when they were created, in the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens, and every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew." It's going back to Adam's point of view after having described God's point of view.
It doesn't say anywhere in the Bible that Adam was the first man.
You did it again! And Guy didn't spot this one. "And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam was made a quickening spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45). Also, Job 15:7 in Hebrew: "Art thou the first man [adam] that was born? or wast thou made before the hills?" He's named Adam because he was the first adam.
It is entirely consistent with Genesis for God to have created "men" who were basically human shaped animals with no concept of Good and evil, and then created Adam and Eve whose descendants (the Isrealites) carried the original sin and eventually produced Jesus Christ.
Not entirely consistent, just barely defensible with lots of special pleading, as many wackier theories are. We don't kick out Christians who come up with weird views via special pleading because these matters may be inessentials. But we do agree to go to the source and find things out by consulting the voice of truth.
Ketanji, meet 1 USC 8(a):
In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the words “person”, “human being”, “child”, and “individual”, shall include every infant member of the species homo sapiens who is born alive at any stage of development.
Don't make me tap the Klee diagrams.
"And I said unto her, Thou shalt abide for me many days." The reconciliation takes quite awhile.
The being you're think of as "demiurge" is actually stuck in Sagittarius A* as depicted in Star Trek V. However, I was shocked to find that God claims the title of "demiurge" for himself in Heb. 11:10 (demiourgos, maker), so I no longer give that other guy the right to use the title. Antarctica is for subluminaries like Anak Krakatau is. I'm confident Antarctica will be transformed in the new heaven-earth but I don't have that map yet as there are dimensional differences. Oh wait, I'm mentally downloading it as I type, yeah it's in the same polar location in the 4D/3D analogue as it is in the 3D/2D analogue, close to Bism, take the Great Divorce bus.
Yes, exotic wormhole manifold. Any questions?
Shower thought: How convenient and instructive that Chandrasekhar's number is overunity. Have you seen my blackhole mining IPO?
Guy, everything I say has truth in it and has been thought through. When I'm being sarcastic, which is rare, I'll tag it or make it exceptionally obvious in context. The "South Pole" is a portal perimeter, in ways left to be determined as an exercise to the reader. The statement about the ceremonial pole is accurate as per the WP article. I do believe the 6th through 8th dimensions are involved. When I comment on matters like this I don't always make the meaning plain because such matters aren't taken at their face value by most. People who want a translation of my comments into their own idiom are always free to ask.
It's a good question, same can be said about the Christian church. The famous question: Can a truly converted Christian ever lose his salvation? regardless how much sin he/she commits afterwards.
Touche! I should have said everyone needs to do good like everyone needs to breathe. Some people deny the need, and end up lacking; some recognize the need and engage it. Doing good includes ensuring full coverage for how one's past sins have harmed oneself and others, so the end result answers the question in each case.
IMO, doing good instead of evil negates archons influence on you and me and helps us with our struggle for spiritual liberation.
Okay ....
Because when you forget what you are, pure divine awareness, unbound by form, you fall asleep inside their dream.
How does the awoken live in this physical world then? Isn't it how Jesus lived, master of every situation, always down to earth remaining above it all?
Anyway, my point was eschatological so less important. If there is present motivation as you describe then there is always fruit and no doubt about whether any question will persist infinitely.
Why would life-and-death matters be based on manuscripts hidden from humanity for 1,500 years, how would that be fair to those who came before?
They aren't, they are based on matters accessible generally to all people and specially via echoes in all cultures. The recent phenomenon of a "complete Bible" is merely systematization of that eternal accessibility. Proof, the Bible never existed as one set of manuscripts in the same place at the same time, copies (even very poor ones) always work like the originals.
Among them were the Gnostics, communities that believed something revolutionary. You don't need priests, churches, or salvation from anyone else because the divine spark already lives within you. This wasn't just a theological disagreement. It was an existential threat to religious authority itself.
I don't understand. The divine spark makes anyone in very real senses a priest, church, and saviour. Therefore there should be no problem with letting anyone else be priest, church, or saviour too. Gnostics, or Orthodox, who would live and let live wouldn't have a problem with this. When a Gnostic, or an Orthodox, forgets the divine spark in another and declares separation that's when the war starts. So the aspect of gnosis you describe doesn't logically constitute an existential threat IMHO.
Entire libraries burned, communities scattered, teachers executed.
A little bit. This is a community that likes sources for sweeping claims like this. Gnostics executed, trying to recall any, nothing comes to mind. Libraries burned, doesn't sound like when the gnostics were alive. Yeah, a couple people were exiled as far as I know for "scattered communities". What physical facts did you have in mind?
For over 1500 years, we only knew Gnosticism through the writings of its enemies. Until 1945, when an Egyptian farmer discovered 13 buried co[d]ices near Nag Hammadi. Suddenly, we could hear the Gnostics speak for themselves. And what they revealed changes everything we thought we knew about early Christianity.
Thanks, James, but this doesn't sound like your own voice. When I discovered Nag Hammadi it didn't change anything I thought I knew.
I'm still not sure I understand your concern/question about Satan or Samael. Perhaps you could be more specific which tradition you are referring to.
I'm not referring to tradition but to actual beings. Is there not a single extant, conscious, sentient, communicative, spiritual being that currently answers to "Samael" and the title "satan"? Or do you not mean an entity at all but merely a cluster of abstract concepts like "Evil"?
he is often understood to represent the sinful impulse (in Hebrew, yetzer hara) or, more generally, the forces that prevents human beings from submitting to divine will.
Yeah, not what I'm talking about at all. Yetzer hara and forces are human or cosmic functions that can be instantiated, they're not abstract like evil. Similarly, spirit entities are personal beings like we are, and if they weren't then we should stop personifying them and just speak about them abstractly like evil.
the world is also full of people radiating hate, darkness, violence, and fear.
Or, these things are lack of radiation ....
And you can choose to call god: Yahweh, Jehovah, LORD, Elohim, Adonai, or Sabaoth. You can also choose to call evil: satan, samael, abaddon, or lucifer.
This sounds like you want to take the personality of both Monad and adversary out of the question. I'm focusing on persons.
I'm a person. I answer to the highest person that exists. If the Monad is a person, I answer to it; if not, I ask who is the highest person. Evil is not a person. There exists a most evil person (unless all humans and devils will be personally purified without exception). If there are no evil people, there is no point attributing personal titles to satan; if there is a most evil person, there is no point attributing him titles beyond what his evil deserves. HTH and thank you for the great counterpoint.
Oh, I apologize, I didn't realize you were using a recent redefinition that is attempting to keep Rudolf Steiner relevant. Flat earthers and globists might both accept a little projective geometry which would make the stellar core exotic in manifold. All the same this shouldn't be called a black hole, which has a set definition. I think the stellar core is capable of being a white hole (it isn't right now), but the concept you're describing doesn't require that either.
Ah yes, wormhole is accurate enough for warped or inverted (looking-glass) space. Yes, the sun might contain a significant wormhole, in its own structure and potentically connected to others.
Is the sun a gigantic star, 93 million miles away, or is it non tangible because it's a local projection?
Great question! The math depends on your frame of reference and I don't have accurate data worked out, but it's not that gigantic. Due to lightspeed decay it used to be a lot less than 8 minutes away. It's tangible enough but there is definitely projection involved. It is not a black hole (u/Dps1879), that's Sagittarius A*, which figures prominently in Enoch and Jude. (It's okay for flat earthers to believe in black holes, the big psyop is the dark matter and dark energy.)
No humans escaped except the Noachians from whom the modern Mayans came. The Tartarians weren't human so (with a few Atlanteans and a number of other races whose names I'm working out) they are still around as such. The original Atlas was a messianic wannabe but didn't have the self-sacrifice thing worked out so he never got to be a dying god like Nimrod. Now he's been repurposed by Ayn Rand so people forget the original. Atlas may have been Kek or one of his brothers.
Right, it's not a wall but a portal perimeter. The ceremonial pole is freely admitted to be misplaced so that the portal isn't easily found. I think dimensions up to the 8th are involved.
Jesus said that just as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness he would be lifted up. God created serpents, the devil warped the creation to make it his symbol. All demonic symbols are counterfeits of God's symbols, without exception. Jesus is as wise as serpents are said to be proverbially, and Jesus is the symbol of original sin from the Tree being dealt with in its place.
I like "Trump means Horn".
The correct view is that Christians are free to make a hierarchy of Candidates for Final Boss Antichrist every day. There are many antichrists. Move their pictures up and down the chart at will.
Trump is doing many good things, like Cyrus, and some things that will help the final boss. Christians can use the many good things, as covenant people have done at prior appointed times. People need to decide for themselves when or if they decide to turn against Trump.
From the satan's point of view, he has a disorganized confederation of thousands of candidates, all of which have Obama's dogged audacity that they will be the final boss when their turn comes, even though most of their lives is just spent serving evil and being abused thereby, with a small number of weekends that "feel" good because they are abusing others and getting high, but that deliver less than nothing net. They all think they're the final antichrist until a time comes when the illusion is shattered. For the final boss, he'll get his full appointed time (maybe 7 years) and then the final illusion will be shattered. Until then, identify the children of light and the children of darkness. Oh, look who just had a bloodstained eye.
A probable answer would be if you use the same narrow IP range and the spammer uses dynamic IP and spoofing so that an IP block or checkuser is ineffective.
However, I'm not confident that you are capable of quoting u/Kaarous accurately anyway, so my idea may be irrelevant. Maybe you're just a dead giveaway on your alts.
Eventually, you'll figure it out. We need to build our lives around what makes our divine spark glow and shine bright. When you're doing something and you feel alive, connected, purposeful, joyful, that's your spark glowing.
Playing devil's advocate, why is that a need if there are infinite chances? It doesn't seem to logically follow that there's ever any need to do good instead of evil in that system. But perhaps that's very incidental because it concerns the far future.
More important, you're defining "fun" better, as what shines and lives. I agree that gives purpose (and can be expanded on), it just appears inconsistent with the Hindu form of reincarnation (the gilgul form works a little differently).
Conclusion, the light that never dies. This is the story of Jesus. Not the story the church tells you, but the story based on evidence, based on texts that were hidden for centuries, based on the teachings of prophets and poets who understood the same eternal truths. Jesus was not and never claimed to be God.
Why would the church story contradict the new-evidence story? Why would life-and-death matters be based on manuscripts hidden from humanity for 1,500 years, how would that be fair to those who came before? Why is it necessary to deny divinity in Jesus, why not interact with those who see various unique aspects of divinity in him? Same for "matter being evil".
If you imply Monad is a force for good and Samael or Satan is the force for evil, to me that doesn't make sense.
Good, because I don't. I'm just counting entities: Monad, aeons, satan, lilith, archons; the two we're concerned about proper attributes for are Monad and satan, nothing more. What is satan the adversary of? If "Yahweh", that makes Yahweh a third entity doesn't it? But you said Samael was Yahweh IIRC. Which would you prefer?
We don't need to talk about this any longer, but we could even thou it doesn't make any difference. If you or I are not right, we'll have another chance, and another, until infinity. Eventually we'll get it right.
Well, logic seems to kick in here: If it doesn't make any difference, then it rapidly follows that no experience makes any difference and life is meaningless; but I don't think you conclude that. Second, if we have infinite chances, that doesn't logically prove that we'll get it right, we might get it wrong infinitely (again suggesting meaninglessness). Origen tried saying things like this after listening to gnostics, and neither he nor his followers ever finished working them out.
To the degree we believe in meaning, we converse to grow more adept at meaning.
It doesn't matter if we "determine which is better", it makes no difference. But, we could still argue about, and that could be fun, but that's it.
Logically, that implies that fun is a value but good (better) isn't.
No, we don't agree on this.
Thanks for disagreeing at point 1. Let's see:
John reveals "before anything existed, the Monad was."
So we agree on existence of the Monad.
Samael is an archangel in Talmudic and post-Talmudic lore; a figure who is the accuser or adversary, seducer, and destroyer.
So we agree on existence of Samael an adversary. I'm fine if you prefer the word "adversary" to the Hebrew translation "satan", as it appears "satan" has too much Christian baggage. Given those two, I'm not sure that we have any disagreement about existence of Monad and an adversary. As I said, we disagree on other attributes than those names.
What I'm saying there is no adversary.
Does that modify your statement Samael is an adversary? We could strip him of that title too, I suppose.
It's important that we live in a world of fear, suffering and pain .... archons are cut off from the eternal source of energy, the Pleroma.
Um, so you don't want us to believe in or fear these archons, or to give them any trust or reverence (or afraidness), which is what I thought I said. But if there's still some misunderstanding we can clear it up. If you find it meaningful.
Sounds like you're saying censorship and dehumanization is better?