PDA

View Full Version : As an Illuminati, I cannot fathom why you fear us.



Greatest I am
11-07-2012, 08:14 AM
As an Illuminati, I cannot fathom why you fear us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kJ4SSvVbhLw

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ETxmCCsMoD0

I can tell you that George is correct at this point in time but it is a system that I and my Illuminati friends do not really want. You are forcing us into competing with each other as many of us are as insecure in this economy as you are.

It is true that our ultimate goal is full control of the economy but it is not so that we can control you so much as it is to bring stability and a longer term profit for all of mankind. You are more responsible for the instability of the economy than we are. You know the stability would instantly make us all wealthier in the long run yet you refuse to give us openly the power that we already hold secretly.

Carlin is wrong in saying that we do not care. We have to because we know that without you below us doing your duty to the economy and purchasing stupidly, the whole system would crash. But even if it would my friends, after it bounces back, nothing will have changed unless you give my Illuminati friends true political power and the opportunity to create the final evolutionary political regime that will rule indefinitely. A Timocracy.

I know that most of you think that you have no way of moving our regimes to this best and most profitable system. You are wrong. You are presently living under two main lies and these lies are the only thing holding all of societies everywhere from prosperity for all demographic pyramids and individuals. Two Noble Lies that most of you believe. The first is the Noble Lie of religion representing a God when they really represent what Governments have created them to represent. The second is the Noble Lie that George recognizes and speaks to. That you are ruled by an independent non-Illuminati controlled government.

If you can recognise those two Noble Lies and recognize that you live in an Illuminati controlled oligarchy, then and only then can you actually control your destiny by knowing honestly who controls you.

Are you ready for an honest open system of control instead of the one you now live under?

You can, by vote, actually participate in decisions about your future without subversive manipulation, --- or do nothing and continue living a lie?

It is your choice.

As an Illuminati I can tell you that the wish and duty that drives us is not wealth by numbers. It is wealth to be used to insure our demographic position while forming a benevolent Timocratic regime that is completely transparent to all.

You can have it if you want it and create it. Believe me if you can, -------

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMxX-QOV9tI

Regards
DL

Timmy
12-25-2012, 02:36 PM
From Xaocracy to Timocracy?

Could it be that it just might be that after all these y-eras through various modes of input into this zeitgeist it could be that it might be that those riding the shark of their desires are creating what they fear through the outward expression of those very fears...abchaoabordo STS.

What the norm of mundanes never understand is the ways in which they attempt to RE-construct a pseudo-historic effigy...a poppet that only seems to possess the face of maya, while actually the reality of what is really going on--though being reality in plain sight--remains hidden to them.

Timocracy?

We really like that notion; but is it even a notion at all???

Searingly,

Timmy

David M
12-26-2012, 08:10 AM
As an Illuminati, I cannot fathom why you fear us.


It is true that our ultimate goal is full control of the economy but it is not so that we can control you so much as it is to bring stability and a longer term profit for all of mankind. You are more responsible for the instability of the economy than we are. You know the stability would instantly make us all wealthier in the long run yet you refuse to give us openly the power that we already hold secretly.



This is a money-based ideal and as the Bible teaches; "the love of money that is the root of all evil".


Is it still the goal of the Illuminati to reduce the human population to around 500 million? The reduction in the human population will come about, but it will not be as a result of what the Illuminati does or would like to see happen. The Illuminati represents a small percentage of the human population. Those who are part of the Illuminati do not see that they will be amongst the larger portion of the human population that will be destroyed when God's judgment comes on this "world" which is enmity with God and which God will not let continue for ever but has determined the time when man's rule will come to an end. "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." This is applying to the world situation as it is before the condemnation of God comes on the whole world.


David

Timmy
12-26-2012, 12:17 PM
By the rejection of absolutes, as a whole, the human genome has to put a finger on something that represents some sort of security, and most assume this to be the power of DUCKIE$. In fact, it is typical of this kosmos to base any individuals stability on their solvency.

The most funny thing about the power attributed to governments is the consideration of where they stand on the economic spectrum ranging from red to black. . .yet beneath this facade there are secrets.

Participation in a vote is not for the purpose of changing things so much as finding out where the outspoken majority stands. It is a most effective means of herding the pack manimals.

Ever observable is the fact of decreasing honor and growing decadence in those trusting validation of existence to be experienced via possessions, be it property or whatever their respective culture signifies relative to the value of any entity...corporate or not.


:prophet: Selfishness is the root of every single persons 'problems' in life & godliness with contentment is great gain. They speak of honor and human dignity and compassion, yet how many of them spend their days lifting up the downtrodden, the destitute, and the derilict?

Better a totally autonomous anarchistic collective than adhering to a pack of lies promulgated by a pack of liars claiming everything is toward the common good of...really! Ask yourself who will ultimately gain by their agenda. Check their pockets. (All that pseudo-rhetoric masks that they do not give a damn who you are unless you are making or taking their 'money'.)

Oh,there is more where that came from but right now I spin adrift on memory bliss.


Not plane
Nor bird
Nor even Jimmy.
It's just lil' ole' me
Stipulatively Timmy

Richard Amiel McGough
12-26-2012, 12:45 PM
By the rejection of absolutes, as a whole, the human genome has to put a finger on something that represents some sort of security, and most assume this to be the power of DUCKIE$. In fact, it is typical of this kosmos to base any individuals stability on their solvency.

The rejection of "absolutes" is just plain stupid. Unfortunately, many simple-minded folks thought that the rejection of deity implied the rejection of absolutes and so they made fools of themselves. It became quite the intellectual fad known as "post-modernism." Ironically, the only thing they really managed to "deconstruct" was their own rationality.

There is no need to go looking for absolutes in the human genome or anywhere else. Absolutes are built into the structure our brains and the language it produces.



Ever observable is the fact of decreasing honor and growing decadence in those trusting validation of existence to be experienced via possessions, be it property or whatever their respective culture signifies relative to the value of any entity...corporate or not.

The idea of "decreasing honor and growing decadence" only reveals an ignorance of history. People in general are morally much better now then at any time in history. Think of the history of this great Christian nation that used to enslave, torture, and murder people because of the color of their skin. Women couldn't vote or have any equal role in society with men. Social morals advance because people are becoming free from the Bible.



:prophet: Selfishness is the root of every single persons 'problems' in life & godliness with contentment is great gain. They speak of honor and human dignity and compassion, yet how many of them spend their days lifting up the downtrodden, the destitute, and the derilict?

Selfishness is indeed a great moral problem. It is overcome only by authentic self-love which necessarily entails love of others because humans are social organisms, as explained in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality (http://www.biblewheel.com/content.php?37-The-Logic-of-Love-A-Natural-Theory-of-Morality).



Better a totally autonomous anarchistic collective than adhering to a pack of lies promulgated by a pack of liars claiming everything is toward the common good of...really! Ask yourself who will ultimately gain by their agenda. Check their pockets. (All that pseudo-rhetoric masks that they do not give a damn who you are unless you are making or taking their 'money'.)

Totally agree with that! Enforced "communism" is just a vehicle for Fascism and Dictatorships.

Timmy
12-26-2012, 11:30 PM
Howdy again Mr. McGough!

Seeing the responses on the synchronicity thread and needing to read through it all 'thinkingly' b4 responding to what you and now others have stated, it was determined to start here first.

Greetings and salutations and a toast to you oh Big Kahuna in these the best of the worst of the best of times! (or is it the worst of the best of the worst of times?)
Thank you for your thoughtful considerations on the above mentioned thread as even here. You make me feel as this Acropolis of the BW is truly my home sweet home in Cyberia.

Sorry for being away for the most part for sooo long now. With 6 weeks to install over 40 sets of granite/marble covered countertops w/cupboard cabinets, then a few fireplace faces before Christmas...and dealing with three specific people desiring to invest in the windgen project, there has been very little time available for much of anything else aside from sleep and catching a meal when possible.




By the rejection of absolutes, as a whole, the human genome has to put a finger on something that represents some sort of security, and most assume this to be the power of DUCKIE$. In fact, it is typical of this kosmos to base any individuals stability on their solvency.

The rejection of "absolutes" is just plain stupid. Unfortunately, many simple-minded folks thought that the rejection of deity implied the rejection of absolutes and so they made fools of themselves. It became quite the intellectual fad known as "post-modernism." Ironically, the only thing they really managed to "deconstruct" was their own rationality.

There is no need to go looking for absolutes in the human genome or anywhere else. Absolutes are built into the structure our brains and the language it produces.Granted, simple absolutes are built into the structure of all things existing, yet these temporal absolutes recognized are not really absolutely absolute...as in ageless, timeless, and eternally permanent and unchanging. Though you may not concur doctor, expletives regarding this will be gratefully received for pondering.

Here there is no searching after absolutes of a temporal nature. Rather it is a quest towards submitting to Yaweh through obedience to expectations unchanging: above and beyond any physical counterpoint or counterpart. In the sojourn towards that which lies beyond physical sensory stimuli there is a willing submission to bondage that possesses a freedom leading into wide open space. It is this paradox that is currently experienced in greater ways each day.

It is also unwise to identify and compare ourselves with any other human--all of us being one race. It is even less wise to compare ourselves or identify with any other part of physical existence.

Can we at least concur that there are higher standards than the human genome currently can conceive...even though coming together towards a congruency of exactly what The Absolute is may occur at another juncture in time?


Ever observable is the fact of decreasing honor and growing decadence in those trusting validation of existence to be experienced via possessions, be it property or whatever their respective culture signifies relative to the value of any entity...corporate or not.
The idea of "decreasing honor and growing decadence" only reveals an ignorance of history. People in general are morally much better now then at any time in history. Think of the history of this great Christian nation that used to enslave, torture, and murder people because of the color of their skin. Women couldn't vote or have any equal role in society with men. Social morals advance because people are becoming free from the Bible.Ignorance of history...or do you infer my own in relation to your statement? We can go with the second option and attempt to explain.

This place called America was never truly a great Christian nation. Granted, there seems there has always been more or less a lue of Christianity. Still, America has always been a melting pot integrating cultural norms some consider to be moral, yet without holding to a standard that is not open to re-interpretation, the cultured society itself becomes the absolute. If America was ever at all Christianity, this term must necessarily posess the noun Humanism adjunct with it.
(aka:I am my shepherd, and God was a primary voice to be learned from. The United States was borne on the wings of rebellion...so please take off the blinders.)

What is the absolute you adhere to as the ultimate standard of morality?

Just because folks can forego enslaving and torture and murder in the physical sense does not mean that at our core we cannot still adhere to these things iregardless of creed or color. Couldn't it possibly mean that people actually care that much less for one another rather than a new age of morality adrift on the ocean of pseudo-logical expletives?

Defining the meaning behind the mention of decadence and lack of honor need be spoken here. It was meant in terms of scriptural standards which most cannot even accept much less receive...at least without honing them to fit their own ideations of what should and should not be. Honoring the creature more than the creator is neither honorable nor morally astute...yet you say it is this freedom from Biblical standards that makes for greater morality? One of us needs to get a grip.

Historically, the further any people strays towards their own devices creates the means towards using their own weapons of self-destruction on themselves. A prime example of this is the rise and fall of Roman civilization. It appears that many a nation has since followed suit, if not in replicated in fact, at least in principle.

Is the ability to vote an expression of liberty or is it actually buying into a bondage beyond an individuals control? So now, women too can participate freely in attempting to define the terms of cultural/societal enslavement commonly understood to be government.

Maybe any government that caters to societal norms becomes the hope and dream through the actions of the people.
This is the essence of faith, is it not?
Maybe we could redefine God upon those lines as well?






Selfishness is the root of every single persons 'problems' in life & godliness with contentment is great gain. They speak of honor and human dignity and compassion, yet how many of them spend their days lifting up the downtrodden, the destitute, and the derelict?[
Selfishness is indeed a great moral problem. It is overcome only by authentic self-love which necessarily entails love of others because humans are social organisms, as explained in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality.[
...and where does Darwin fit into that picture? You know, survival of the fittest and all that rot. Life feeds on life so liber lex talionis, right? How morally sound is that notion?

YES! LOVE!
...however, even as one persons god is another persons devil, no two people will give you the same definition as to what love truly is.

If we do not love ourselves how can we love another, yet even the term love needs a singular unchanging definition that all can uphold.


Better a totally autonomous anarchistic collective than adhering to a pack of lies promulgated by a pack of liars claiming everything is toward the common good of...really! Ask yourself who will ultimately gain by their agenda. Check their pockets. (All that pseudo-rhetoric masks that they do not give a damn who you are unless you are making or taking their 'money'.)
Totally agree with that! Enforced "communism" is just a vehicle for Fascism and Dictatorships.

...so here at last we stand unflinchingly on common ground. Mayhaps we will do better starting from this point building an edifice of pragmatic philosophy together inextricably immutably absolute or something like that?

Do not think for one moment I even agree with myself about all the above. Thoughts have just been thrown out there for debate...and you mein freund are a pleasure to banter back and forth with. Maybe we soon can interact IRL. You can even bring your gun locked and loaded and I can play the role of martyr or moron...whichever you prefer.



GAME ON!


I am that I am non,

Timmy

Richard Amiel McGough
12-27-2012, 12:43 PM
Howdy again Mr. McGough!

Seeing the responses on the synchronicity thread and needing to read through it all 'thinkingly' b4 responding to what you and now others have stated, it was determined to start here first.

Greetings and salutations and a toast to you oh Big Kahuna in these the best of the worst of the best of times! (or is it the worst of the best of the worst of times?)
Thank you for your thoughtful considerations on the above mentioned thread as even here. You make me feel as this Acropolis of the BW is truly my home sweet home in Cyberia.

Sorry for being away for the most part for sooo long now. With 6 weeks to install over 40 sets of granite/marble covered countertops w/cupboard cabinets, then a few fireplace faces before Christmas...and dealing with three specific people desiring to invest in the windgen project, there has been very little time available for much of anything else aside from sleep and catching a meal when possible.

Howdy Ho (Ho Ho) Timmy OH! :yo:

Seasoned Greetings (pepper and salt) to you! I'm glad you found time for a visit. Times to me seem neither the best nor the worst - seems more like a standard mix of Yin and Yang.

It sounds like you've been busy. It's good to have work.



Granted, simple absolutes are built into the structure of all things existing, yet these temporal absolutes recognized are not really absolutely absolute...as in ageless, timeless, and eternally permanent and unchanging. Though you may not concur doctor, expletives regarding this will be gratefully received for pondering.

Absolute absolutes? Concepts like "ageless, timeless, and eternally permanent and unchanging" are applicable in some restricted areas like mathematics. I feel compelled to believe that mathematics is "timeless" in that any true statement does not change over time. But then again, the concept of "timeless" is not particularly meaningful to me since all mathematical expressions are stated within time. So I prefer the language of invariance. If something does not change it remains "invariant." This avoids confusing ourselves with language, which is the primary activity of the relatively autistic head game known as "philosophy."



Here there is no searching after absolutes of a temporal nature. Rather it is a quest towards submitting to Yaweh through obedience to expectations unchanging: above and beyond any physical counterpoint or counterpart. In the sojourn towards that which lies beyond physical sensory stimuli there is a willing submission to bondage that possesses a freedom leading into wide open space. It is this paradox that is currently experienced in greater ways each day.

Hummm ... submitting to my concept of Yahweh derived through my modern mind interpreting an ancient and ambiguous book written by primitive men with mythological world views? That doesn't sound like much fun nor much wisdom. If you are going to submit yourself to a concept, why not choose a better one?

I have no problem with seeking experience "beyond physical sensory stimuli" - indeed, I am quite motivated in that direction. But why shackle myself with preconceived religious ideas that look more like bondage than freedom? I know there is a paradox in consciousness - self vs. other - but why add to it artificially by projecting your spiritual intuitions into an old book. Why not take the straight path based directly on your own intuitions?



It is also unwise to identify and compare ourselves with any other human--all of us being one race. It is even less wise to compare ourselves or identify with any other part of physical existence.

Who's doing that?



Can we at least concur that there are higher standards than the human genome currently can conceive...even though coming together towards a congruency of exactly what The Absolute is may occur at another juncture in time?

I'd love to agree, but that is difficult because I'm not sure what you are getting at. I have never said that the human genome sets a "standard" for the "absolute." That was your idea. It never would have occurred to me.




The idea of "decreasing honor and growing decadence" only reveals an ignorance of history. People in general are morally much better now then at any time in history. Think of the history of this great Christian nation that used to enslave, torture, and murder people because of the color of their skin. Women couldn't vote or have any equal role in society with men. Social morals advance because people are becoming free from the Bible.
Ignorance of history...or do you infer my own in relation to your statement? We can go with the second option and attempt to explain.

This place called America was never truly a great Christian nation. Granted, there seems there has always been more or less a lue of Christianity. Still, America has always been a melting pot integrating cultural norms some consider to be moral, yet without holding to a standard that is not open to re-interpretation, the cultured society itself becomes the absolute. If America was ever at all Christianity, this term must necessarily posess the noun Humanism adjunct with it.
(aka:I am my shepherd, and God was a primary voice to be learned from. The United States was borne on the wings of rebellion...so please take off the blinders.)

There has never been any nation or person that was "truly Christian" because that term has no definition. Each "Christian" has their own definition.



What is the absolute you adhere to as the ultimate standard of morality?

What is the absolute I adhere to as the ultimate standard of morality? The absolute is LOVE - love for self and love for others modulated through the symmetric logic of the Golden Rule. I explained this in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality (http://www.biblewheel.com/content.php?37-The-Logic-of-Love-A-Natural-Theory-of-Morality).



Just because folks can forego enslaving and torture and murder in the physical sense does not mean that at our core we cannot still adhere to these things iregardless of creed or color. Couldn't it possibly mean that people actually care that much less for one another rather than a new age of morality adrift on the ocean of pseudo-logical expletives?

I'm not particularly clear about what you mean by "the ocean of pseudo-logical expletives." If something I have written is accurately criticized as "pseudo-logical" I would be in your debt if you could explain it to me.

I find it odd that you would minimize the dramatic drop in "enslaving and torture and murder" as if it did not demonstrate the great moral advancement brought about by the acceptance of secular values.



Defining the meaning behind the mention of decadence and lack of honor need be spoken here. It was meant in terms of scriptural standards which most cannot even accept much less receive...at least without honing them to fit their own ideations of what should and should not be. Honoring the creature more than the creator is neither honorable nor morally astute...yet you say it is this freedom from Biblical standards that makes for greater morality? One of us needs to get a grip.

Can you name a single "Biblical standard" of morality that is not found in other cultures?

Your appeal to "Biblical standards" is very problematic. Are you talking about the pattern of God endorsing the capture of virgins to be used as sex slaves coupled with the murder of everyone they ever loved? See Numbers 31 and Judges 19-21. They both show God participating in the capture of sexy virgins and the slaughter of everyone else. Folks are totally "selective" when it comes to "Biblical" values. The simply cherry pick the values in the Bible that fit their preexisting natural moral intuitions. So the real root of morality is the human heart, not a book that folks make conform to their moral intuitions. The Bible actually contains some fundamentally immoral teachings, as explained in my article The Inextricable Sexism of the Bible (http://www.biblewheel.com/content.php?32-The-Inextricable-Sexism-of-the-Bible). And the attempt to defend the Bible as "God's Word" tends to corrupt both the minds and the morals of believers, as explained in my article The Art of Rationalization: A Case Study of Christian Apologist Rich Deem (http://www.biblewheel.com/content.php?31-The-Art-of-Rationalization-A-Case-Study-of-Christian-Apologist-Rich-Deem).



Historically, the further any people strays towards their own devices creates the means towards using their own weapons of self-destruction on themselves. A prime example of this is the rise and fall of Roman civilization. It appears that many a nation has since followed suit, if not in replicated in fact, at least in principle.

Your assertion is not self-evident. On the contrary, there is much evidence that it is when people are ruled by religious dogma that they become moral monsters. Case in point: How did Hitler get his Christian army to kill six million Jews? There were two factors in play: 1) 2000 years of antisemitism taught both in Scripture and from the pulpit. 2) The fundamental Christian dogma that OBEDIENCE is MORALITY and the only way to save your soul from eternal torment in hell. It is this fundamentally fallacious Christian dogma that corrupts the believers. This has been well stated by Steven Weinberg who said "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

And did you know that some Romans blamed the fall of their empire on its conversion to Christianity?



Is the ability to vote an expression of liberty or is it actually buying into a bondage beyond an individuals control? So now, women too can participate freely in attempting to define the terms of cultural/societal enslavement commonly understood to be government.

If you think our freedom to vote is really bondage, you must mourn the loss of the great bastion of freedom - the USSR.

Government is necessary. Try living without it and see what happens.



Maybe any government that caters to societal norms becomes the hope and dream through the actions of the people.
This is the essence of faith, is it not?
Maybe we could redefine God upon those lines as well?

Religious norms are a kind of societal norm - the "society" being the "religious society."

It is not the "essence of faith." That is a confusion of words.

Before we "re"-define God, perhaps we should ask what the existing definition is.




Selfishness is indeed a great moral problem. It is overcome only by authentic self-love which necessarily entails love of others because humans are social organisms, as explained in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality.
...and where does Darwin fit into that picture? You know, survival of the fittest and all that rot. Life feeds on life so liber lex talionis, right? How morally sound is that notion?

YES! LOVE!
...however, even as one persons god is another persons devil, no two people will give you the same definition as to what love truly is.

If we do not love ourselves how can we love another, yet even the term love needs a singular unchanging definition that all can uphold.

Darwin fits perfectly in my theory. The precursor to self-love is the most primitive of all instincts - the instinct for self-preservation.

How is it possible that you could describe "survival of the fittest" as "rot"? It sounds like you know nothing of which you speak.

Your implication of liber lex talionis does not follow because humans are social organisms with a biological basis for empathy like mirror neurons and hormones such as oxytocin. And we have big brains, so we can see and understand that self-love necessarily entails love for others.

It is true that different people may give different definitions of love, but that's primarily because most people are inarticulate and probably haven't thought about the precise definition much. That's why I have a role to fill - folks need help articulating what they already know. And so we can make the world a better place.




Totally agree with that! Enforced "communism" is just a vehicle for Fascism and Dictatorships.
...so here at last we stand unflinchingly on common ground. Mayhaps we will do better starting from this point building an edifice of pragmatic philosophy together inextricably immutably absolute or something like that?

Yes, it is good that we found a point of agreement. I'm always amazed how dimwitted philosophers are on the subject of morality. They must invent situations like "it is wrong to torture babies for fun" before they can even begin discussing the topic. Atheists and theists mirror the ignorance of the other. Theists say there would be no morality at all if there were no God, and atheists agree and so say there is no morality. It's truly pathetic.



Do not think for one moment I even agree with myself about all the above. Thoughts have just been thrown out there for debate...and you mein freund are a pleasure to banter back and forth with. Maybe we soon can interact IRL. You can even bring your gun locked and loaded and I can play the role of martyr or moron...whichever you prefer.

GAME ON!

Don't worry - I wouldn't make that mistake! :lmbo:

It is always a pleasure to play conceptual badminton with you my friend! You bring plenty of spice to an often dull dish (to mix my metaphors).

Talk more soon,

Richard

Greatest I am
01-01-2013, 04:45 AM
This is a money-based ideal and as the Bible teaches; "the love of money that is the root of all evil".


Is it still the goal of the Illuminati to reduce the human population to around 500 million? The reduction in the human population will come about, but it will not be as a result of what the Illuminati does or would like to see happen. The Illuminati represents a small percentage of the human population. Those who are part of the Illuminati do not see that they will be amongst the larger portion of the human population that will be destroyed when God's judgment comes on this "world" which is enmity with God and which God will not let continue for ever but has determined the time when man's rule will come to an end. "And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened." This is applying to the world situation as it is before the condemnation of God comes on the whole world.


David

Thanks for the thoughtless dogma and usurping God's will to speak for himself.

Strange how you can fathom your unfathomable God.

500 million.

Quite good compared to what your genocidal son murdering God did.

So what exactly is your complaint?

Should we be as big of a prick as he is and just leave 8?

Regards
DL

Greatest I am
01-01-2013, 05:03 AM
By the rejection of absolutes, as a whole, the human genome has to put a finger on something that represents some sort of security, and most assume this to be the power of DUCKIE$. In fact, it is typical of this kosmos to base any individuals stability on their solvency.

The most funny thing about the power attributed to governments is the consideration of where they stand on the economic spectrum ranging from red to black. . .yet beneath this facade there are secrets.

Participation in a vote is not for the purpose of changing things so much as finding out where the outspoken majority stands. It is a most effective means of herding the pack manimals.

Ever observable is the fact of decreasing honor and growing decadence in those trusting validation of existence to be experienced via possessions, be it property or whatever their respective culture signifies relative to the value of any entity...corporate or not.


:prophet: Selfishness is the root of every single persons 'problems' in life & godliness with contentment is great gain. They speak of honor and human dignity and compassion, yet how many of them spend their days lifting up the downtrodden, the destitute, and the derilict?

Better a totally autonomous anarchistic collective than adhering to a pack of lies promulgated by a pack of liars claiming everything is toward the common good of...really! Ask yourself who will ultimately gain by their agenda. Check their pockets. (All that pseudo-rhetoric masks that they do not give a damn who you are unless you are making or taking their 'money'.)

Oh,there is more where that came from but right now I spin adrift on memory bliss.


Not plane
Nor bird
Nor even Jimmy.
It's just lil' ole' me
Stipulatively Timmy

You seem to think that we can somehow turn our selfish gene off.
That is what I discuss at this link.
Please have a look as you are making it sound like you might know how to take competition out of evolution.

http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?3285-Can-you-help-but-do-evil-I-do-not-see-how-Do-you


To your first post.

"What the norm of mundanes never understand"

Is that the lack of education that their masters insist upon is what causes their norm and mundaness.
----------------------------


"Timocracy?

We really like that notion; but is it even a notion at all???"

Yes it is but no government will likely never bring up that topic, as then, they would have to admit to why they rule for other not so honorable reasons.

-----------------------------------


Originally Posted by Timmy

Better a totally autonomous anarchistic collective than adhering to a pack of lies promulgated by a pack of liars claiming everything is toward the common good of...really! Ask yourself who will ultimately gain by their agenda. Check their pockets. (All that pseudo-rhetoric masks that they do not give a damn who you are unless you are making or taking their 'money'.)

Originally Posted by Richard

Totally agree with that! Enforced "communism" is just a vehicle for Fascism and Dictatorships.

My reply.
Tim. This clip shows quite nicely just who is getting the benefits of the present economic system.
Note that most of the wealth is in the core of our demography and not the top. Any who are in the club at the top know that money in the pocket is a waste. If it is not growing, it is shrinking.

The only reason that the Illuminati do not circulate all the wealth available and keep any of it stagnant is because of their insecurity that I speak of in the O P.

----------------------------


I read your last to Richard as well and offer this well written piece that speaks to some of it.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/102547288/Hyatt-ChristopherS-UndoingYourself-Ch13-PDF-Library

Regards
DL

Timmy
01-01-2013, 02:50 PM
Little time for internet brings this to you unedited.


Howdy Ho (Ho Ho) Timmy OH!

Seasoned Greetings (pepper and salt) to you! I'm glad you found time for a visit. Times to me seem neither the best nor the worst - seems more like a standard mix of Yin and Yang.

It sounds like you've been busy. It's good to have work.Seasoned Greetings (particularily cinnamon and sugar...and nutmeg oil) to you ami!:thumb:

It's good to have work yet better when everything is paid. Work was mostly in areas surrounding NOLA previously flooded from hurricane Issac...and many insurance pay backs are delayed. It's certainly hoped that the remaining majority of cash earned continues to arrive spaced out, not all at once...but you never know about these things. All the independent contractors have NTL already paid out what was earned and due.

Usually, i remain extremely busy in the pre-spring to post-fall...if not with work, with projects some call play, others call hobby, and a few think of as just plain insane in the membrane.





Granted, simple absolutes are built into the structure of all things existing, yet these temporal absolutes recognized are not really absolutely absolute...as in ageless, timeless, and eternally permanent and unchanging. Though you may not concur doctor, expletives regarding this will be gratefully received for pondering.

Absolute absolutes? Concepts like "ageless, timeless, and eternally permanent and unchanging" are applicable in some restricted areas like mathematics. I feel compelled to believe that mathematics is "timeless" in that any true statement does not change over time. But then again, the concept of "timeless" is not particularly meaningful to me since all mathematical expressions are stated within time. So I prefer the language of invariance. If something does not change it remains "invariant." This avoids confusing ourselves with language, which is the primary activity of the relatively autistic head game known as "philosophy."It never ceases to astound Timmy where and when the capacity to perceive and understand beyond the seen-and-be-seen stops by anyone talked with. Oft times Conversation is curbed or comes to a standstill altogether because of others experiences based on environs...not that i am not communicating in the self-same way; but, this is usually an issue of attempting to eliminate confusion rathe than creating more.

Yes, everything here on earth is basically understood in linear terms; yet, the stachochistic nature of temporal existence even implies time to be a result of quantum flux and not the creator of it. Again, time is not independent of mass, space, energy or motion...and any one of those things become undefinable without the interplay of all these associative factors (even just to understand and define time).
(From my own pespective: persons, places, and things are actually seeming to all interlink, spiraling endlessly through cycles after cycle. The beginning speaks answers concerning the end, though we may never fully understand this presently.)

Necessarily, there exists a singular "expression" behind all these interlaced things.

I may be misunderstanding, so lets ask: Do you consider invariance equal to truth? By what you said above, invariance stand within the time/space continuum and you appear to see truth (and: agless, eternal,unchanging, etc.) as something outside of it?

[Google the family of glycoproteins known as "Laminin" (if you are bored).]




Here there is no searching after absolutes of a temporal nature. Rather it is a quest towards submitting to Yaweh through obedience to expectations unchanging: above and beyond any physical counterpoint or counterpart. In the sojourn towards that which lies beyond physical sensory stimuli there is a willing submission to bondage that possesses a freedom leading into wide open space. It is this paradox that is currently experienced in greater ways each day.

Hummm ... submitting to my concept of Yahweh derived through my modern mind interpreting an ancient and ambiguous book written by primitive men with mythological world views? That doesn't sound like much fun nor much wisdom. If you are going to submit yourself to a concept, why not choose a better one?If it were indeed my concept of Yah, then it would be ignorant.

You say better?
Like what?
(Maybe our modern minds have so convoluted what actually is not and is illusory, currently pecieved limitations are actually a result of operating from mistaken idea sets in the first place? This speaks of self-deception in believing that only what we can see and physically "prove" is real, rather than accepting their seemingly "invisible" foundation to be more real.)

It was Yahoshuvah himself who said Torah is the Word of God...and it is only ancient and ambiguous to those who are not willing to do it without holding onto pre-established notions and judgements about what it all really means. (What justice is there in a preconcieved notion that elliminates a more comprehensive flow of infomation through personal experimentation?

You can call it some sort of existential leap of faith if you so choose...but your leap is not even experienced as such here. Rather, i do what i know to be true from scripture, then futher relative undestanding comes. . .repeat ad infintum.

Scripture? This is my Father's message of life immutable to me...
(When quite a bit younger, dad trained me to do and not to do certain things, i did not understand the whys and wherefores...and i really still do not comprehend the how (of Torah) and why it all works out so good like it does. This is moreso true about God, yet without an interactive relationship with Him (kinda' like dear ole dad), it becomes a futile exercise of keeping rules. . .for what???

In fact, i often have thought both my dad's, and moreso my Heavenly Father's actions and expectations to be sometimes cruel, heartless, malicious, or just plain mean...and not until walking in the ways they desire,
--(towards the best interest for others and myself (yet unrealized)--
did i begin to comprehend the reasons behind the instructions had very little, if not nothing at all, to do with what i misunderstood the purpose of both the instructions and examples provided really meant.


I have no problem with seeking experience "beyond physical sensory stimuli" - indeed, I am quite motivated in that direction. But why shackle myself with preconceived religious ideas that look more like bondage than freedom? I know there is a paradox in consciousness - self vs. other - but why add to it artificially by projecting your spiritual intuitions into an old book. Why not take the straight path based directly on your own intuitions? Belief in an institutionalized set of regulations neccesitates projection of intuition into the system and is nothing more than whateverreligion is adhered to.

If we take off the one-sided glasses for a moment, Biblical examples of more notable people of Yah clearly point out that these were just as, if not more flawed at times in the way they lived, than some of us.
(some basic examples are:)
Avraham...ignoble liar...
Yitsak...laughing mocker...
Yakav...swindler...
Moshe...rebel and murderer...
Dawid...adulterer, murderer, deciever
...and the listings can go on and on, all the way to me.

It really is not the do or do not that is the issue, contrary to what every religious institution teaches.

The issue is what we actually rely upon ...the failures and successes in following the rules are exemplified relative to growth in relationship with Him. This shows us trusting Him is key to walking in His ways and not vice versa. It is a process of growing dependence that marks maturity

G_d is my reward and the occurances (both good and bad) in this life are not. He took me from where I was and day by day changes me as i continue to relate with Him.

Funny thing is, whether we can recognize it or not, those things we may not be able to physically sense, the unseen invisible things are right here right now and there actually is no division between the seen and unseen. Metaphorically, it is all one stick, though the physical and the spiritual (only) 'appear' to be on opposing ends of this stick.

Yes, the Bible is of the oldest of books, which causes wonder if all the varied belief systems, of what is similar in expression, did not come from it, or the Author as the source???
(you prolly balk at such an assertion (Author); so, rather than belaboring a mute point (here at least), it would do us well to focus on your reasons why you consider it invalid and why my thoughts are contrary to your own in respect to the question you initially posed.





It is also unwise to identify and compare ourselves with any other human--all of us being one race. It is even less wise to compare ourselves or identify with any other part of physical existence.
Who's doing that?EVERY SINGLE ONE OF US does this to a greater or lesser extent.



Can we at least concur that there are higher standards than the human genome currently can conceive...even though coming together towards a congruency of exactly what The Absolute is may occur at another juncture in time?
I'd love to agree, but that is difficult because I'm not sure what you are getting at. I have never said that the human genome sets a "standard" for the "absolute." That was your idea. It never would have occurred to me.Yes, it was my idea, yet the intention was more towards the concept of everybody wanting to be different, just like everyone else. Thus, the human genome has no true absolute. Rather each individual adheres to differing varied standards...and some day...perhaps time out of mind...STS One will be all and all will be One again.





The idea of "decreasing honor and growing decadence" only reveals an ignorance of history. People in general are morally much better now then at any time in history. Think of the history of this great Christian nation that used to enslave, torture, and murder people because of the color of their skin. Women couldn't vote or have any equal role in society with men. Social morals advance because people are becoming free from the Bible.
Ignorance of history...or do you infer my own in relation to your statement? We can go with the second option and attempt to explain.

This place called America was never truly a great Christian nation. Granted, there seems there has always been more or less a lue of Christianity. Still, America has always been a melting pot integrating cultural norms some consider to be moral, yet without holding to a standard that is not open to re-interpretation, the cultured society itself becomes the absolute. If America was ever at all Christianity, this term must necessarily posess the noun Humanism adjunct with it.
(aka:I am my shepherd, and God was a primary voice to be learned from. The United States was borne on the wings of rebellion...so please take off the blinders.)

There has never been any nation or person that was "truly Christian" because that term has no definition. Each "Christian" has their own definition.
"...their own definition" . . .and the blind continue to lead the blind, straining out gnats and swallowing gimels, then falling into ditches altogether now.

How about reiterating two quotes right here:

"Truth is beautiful without a doubt. . .but so are lies," wrote Ralph Waldo Emmerson,


and secondly

Adolph Hitler proved what he said in the words,"The great masses of people will more easily fall victims to a big lie than to a small one."




What is the absolute you adhere to as the ultimate standard of morality?

What is the absolute I adhere to as the ultimate standard of morality? The absolute is LOVE - love for self and love for others modulated through the symmetric logic of the Golden Rule. I explained this in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality.It's interesting to note G_d is not part of the picture when you speak of "loving neighbor as yourself."
So, did human alway just inherently have this in them...or what?

Ok, how's this for query towards the above question answered:
Yeshua ha' Nasri said the golden rule was the second greatest commandment and you speak of logical symetry. In a universe currently observably to be fractal, and humanities geatest scientists now recognize the currently accepted and taught model of the universe cannot account for approximately 75% of the gravity in it, can there truly be any logical symetry about anything without understanding what the source of LOVE is, or that there exists higher laws in play than a naturalistic mind can conceivably grasp?




Just because folks can forego enslaving and torture and murder in the physical sense does not mean that at our core we cannot still adhere to these things iregardless of creed or color. Couldn't it possibly mean that people actually care that much less for one another rather than a new age of morality adrift on the ocean of pseudo-logical expletives?

I'm not particularly clear about what you mean by "the ocean of pseudo-logical expletives." If something I have written is accurately criticized as "pseudo-logical" I would be in your debt if you could explain it to me.

I find it odd that you would minimize the dramatic drop in "enslaving and torture and murder" as if it did not demonstrate the great moral advancement brought about by the acceptance of secular values.

DRAMATIC DROP WHERE?
That statement need be qualified and not so encompassing.

It's like this. One of my political science teachers and myself debated this very point...myself standing once in the very ideas you currently hold. He changed my mind, not only statistically, but proving that the principles that define slavery are in effect worldwide, to a far greater degree now than any other point in recorded history.

i feel that your are not taking a comprehensive look at this sweeping problem. Just because these once held ideas MAY SEEM to be true for America, worldwide facts speak differently.

We can all perform mental tricks with statistics, but the facts are there if one takes the time to look and avoid sleight of mind.





Defining the meaning behind the mention of decadence and lack of honor need be spoken here. It was meant in terms of scriptural standards which most cannot even accept much less receive...at least without honing them to fit their own ideations of what should and should not be. Honoring the creature more than the creator is neither honorable nor morally astute...yet you say it is this freedom from Biblical standards that makes for greater morality? One of us needs to get a grip.

Can you name a single "Biblical standard" of morality that is not found in other cultures?No, but then again, what nation has not been influenced greatly through the diaspora of Israel??? This is not to say Semitic people are the source of this phenomena.
If that is not enough, from this understanding, no two humans are really that different at all when it comes down to the brass tacks. I say we were all first created in the image of God, and you seem to think it is some sort of "evolving absolute"...isn't that an oxymoron?

QUOTE=Richard]Your appeal to "Biblical standards" is very problematic. Are you talking about the pattern of God endorsing the capture of virgins to be used as sex slaves coupled with the murder of everyone they ever loved? See Numbers 31 and Judges 19-21. They both show God participating in the capture of sexy virgins and the slaughter of everyone else. Folks are totally "selective" when it comes to "Biblical" values. The simply cherry pick the values in the Bible that fit their preexisting natural moral intuitions. So the real root of morality is the human heart, not a book that folks make conform to their moral intuitions. The Bible actually contains some fundamentally immoral teachings, as explained in my article The Inextricable Sexism of the Bible. And the attempt to defend the Bible as "God's Word" tends to corrupt both the minds and the morals of believers, as explained in my article The Art of Rationalization: A Case Study of Christian Apologist Rich Deem.
Now who actually endorsed that? Who actually did that? Was it God or Israel under the leadership and warfare of Moshe and Yoshuvah, respectively? Was God implicit about all that or did Moshe just say that God said that or what?

Where does it say these were SEXY VIRGINS and where does it say they were anything other than slaves???
Is war murder???
Is a national objective the purpose of one man? Is this what you imply?
(Why is sexism only believed to be the blame of men and not women? Even as i have seen greater prejudice here in America among blacks (and not whites), even so, i have seen more sexism amongst females than males. All of these things seem founded on bias: seeing something other than what present plight exists, judging current situations, and the extremity of resulting prejudice dictates what is done towards change.


Gender blame games?
Is this what stops you from accounting for all the good things in the Bible?
I seriouslly doubt it.

A person who reads two or three pages of a book and discounts the rest of it because of what they pecieve to be a few mistakes might just be taking things out of context or promoting their own agenda or biased from the git-go...or whatever. This is not sound.

You have already previously mentioned Lot offering his daughters to the men of Sodom, so let me give you one more bullet to garner that ammo belt...from Judges no less: Jephthah's vow to sacrifice whatever came from his house after Yaweh gave him victory over the Ammonites: it was his only child, and a female at that. [ see chapter 11 ]

So lets say we take three (or four) instances out of the context of Judges and Deuteronomy (or Genesis) and we conclude that everything else from beginning to end is invalid?

In all instances, in all fairness, we must also do this with every other known source of information, too, right?
What remains?



Historically, the further any people strays towards their own devices creates the means towards using their own weapons of self-destruction on themselves. A prime example of this is the rise and fall of Roman civilization. It appears that many a nation has since followed suit, if not in replicated in fact, at least in principle.

Your assertion is not self-evident. On the contrary, there is much evidence that it is when people are ruled by religious dogma that they become moral monsters. Case in point: How did Hitler get his Christian army to kill six million Jews? There were two factors in play: 1) 2000 years of antisemitism taught both in Scripture and from the pulpit. 2) The fundamental Christian dogma that OBEDIENCE is MORALITY and the only way to save your soul from eternal torment in hell. It is this fundamentally fallacious Christian dogma that corrupts the believers. This has been well stated by Steven Weinberg who said "Religion is an insult to human dignity. With or without it, you'd have good people doing good things and evil people doing bad things, but for good people to do bad things, it takes religion."

And did you know that some Romans blamed the fall of their empire on its conversion to Christianity?I think that we humans are already moral monsters, and it takes selfishness and the greed it spawns to be exemplified through far more avenues than the faulty towers of religion. Resulting outward expressions of flawed human devisings are not the root of the problem.

Wasn't it Marx who said, "Religion is the opiate of the masses?"

Antisemitism was long before some Germans, even up to current Protestatism taking the ideas of Martin Luther to heart. You said 2000 years and have me thinking about the words from the Roman Catholic Church post 324 A.D.

Anyway, after agreeing that the word "Christianity" is a misgnomer, it should not be touted as trump card for those German military and national occupations.
Have you ever heard of Thule?...or the German preoccupation with the Elder gods and ice and more?




Is the ability to vote an expression of liberty or is it actually buying into a bondage beyond an individuals control? So now, women too can participate freely in attempting to define the terms of cultural/societal enslavement commonly understood to be government.
If you think our freedom to vote is really bondage, you must mourn the loss of the great bastion of freedom - the USSR.

Government is necessary. Try living without it and see what happens.So, we have to have government even though people can LOVE and get along in unity? Something is very wrong with this picture. The laws enforced through govenment do not neccesarily reflect individual understanding, view, or belief.

A deceased friend of mine who had escaped the Soviet Republick through a student foreign exchange program, cut me short once while talking as you, saying, "no matter what form of government exists to control people, people will find a way to do whatever they truly desire whether that government becomes involved or not. You might think of the USSR as oppressive, yet this serves good pupose. It makes people to become more resourceful. I would not be the carpenter i am today were it not for the lack and limitations i once lived under...so i thought about it alot:

There is no perfect system of government, as the very employment of it proves there really is no such thing as equality among peers.
It is not less partisanship that will help solve this, but rather, better partisanship.
However, it is not just society that is divided, but people ae divided within.

If i assume evolution to be true (and i am only accountable to natural law), there is no better way to fix it than to flush it all away.

Have you ever read "Towards Democracy" by Edward Carpenter?




Maybe any government that caters to societal norms becomes the hope and dream through the actions of the people.
This is the essence of faith, is it not?
Maybe we could redefine God upon those lines as well?

Religious norms are a kind of societal norm - the "society" being the "religious society."

It is not the "essence of faith." That is a confusion of words.
Sorry, " the essence of THE DEFINITION OF faith" is hopes and dreams becoming by acting accordingly.


Before we "re"-define God, perhaps we should ask what the existing definition is...then compare that with both the spermalogy of the word, as well as it's etymology?


Selfishness is indeed a great moral problem. It is overcome only by authentic self-love which necessarily entails love of others because humans are social organisms, as explained in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality.

...and where does Darwin fit into that picture? You know, survival of the fittest and all that rot. Life feeds on life so liber lex talionis, right? How morally sound is that notion?

YES! LOVE!
...however, even as one persons god is another persons devil, no two people will give you the same definition as to what love truly is.

If we do not love ourselves how can we love another, yet even the term love needs a singular unchanging definition that all can uphold.

Darwin fits perfectly in my theory. The precursor to self-love is the most primitive of all instincts - the instinct for self-preservation.

How is it possible that you could describe "survival of the fittest" as "rot"? It sounds like you know nothing of which you speak.

Your implication of liber lex talionis does not follow because humans are social organisms with a biological basis for empathy like mirror neurons and hormones such as oxytocin. And we have big brains, so we can see and understand that self-love necessarily entails love for others.

It is true that different people may give different definitions of love, but that's primarily because most people are inarticulate and probably haven't thought about the precise definition much. That's why I have a role to fill - folks need help articulating what they already know. And so we can make the world a better place.Why then the seen need for referees such as governments and religions? Your approach sounds pre-transhumanistic.

i call "survival of the fittest" rot because evolution makes monkeys out of us.
Hitler called it "joy through strength" and we see what happened as the end result. One of the most educated nations at that point in time goes around eliminating anything that did not fit the parameters defined by the third reich. That was the big lie their masses fell prey to.

The race does not always go to the strongest and swiftest...but those things can help.



Inarticulation is not the problem because actions speak louder than words. Brainwashing is far more effective than articulation...and when transhumanism comes of its own perhaps that might wok better still. Yet, for now we will have suffice with various govenments clandestine operatives, spies, wars, and smoke filled rooms behind the scenes.

You may call me brainwashed. So mote it be.
Anyway, i know Who is washing my brains.



Totally agree with that! Enforced "communism" is just a vehicle for Fascism and Dictatorships.

...so here at last we stand unflinchingly on common ground. Mayhaps we will do better starting from this point building an edifice of pragmatic philosophy together inextricably immutably absolute or something like that?

Yes, it is good that we found a point of agreement. I'm always amazed how dimwitted philosophers are on the subject of morality. They must invent situations like "it is wrong to torture babies for fun" before they can even begin discussing the topic. Atheists and theists mirror the ignorance of the other. Theists say there would be no morality at all if there were no God, and atheists agree and so say there is no morality. It's truly pathetic.
Enforced anything is a vehicle towards subjegation and control. So, it seems everybody wants to rule the world.

Most cannot admit the real problem lies deeper than morality.
If society is the belief system, and societies change, there really is no moral absolute from that quarter.
Talk is cheap and actions speak louder than words.



Greatest I Am,

Hi. Back in the 90's, after visiting Arizona with 'Steve Flowers', we met Chris H.
He was very gracious and showed us immense hospitality.
He also provided us with the text for an upcoming book, then entitled "Toxic Magick."
(Do you bite yourself? jk-LMAOPMPROFL)

Your responses to lil' ole' Timmy will be thought through b4 words fly to you from here.
(Do you praxi the psychopaths bible?)

Seriously, no, I really do not think we can just turn off selfishness...but is self-absorbtion the answer?
Yes, it is agreed that God made man to sin.
It is only the why of these things that we may not agree on.

Infekshunly:
Just anon so special
spacial
graduate
ov
O. rdo
S. acri
V. erbi
&
F. eral
L. ight
U. niversity,

Timmy

jce
01-01-2013, 04:12 PM
Little time for internet brings this to you unedited.

A person who reads two or three pages of a book and discounts the rest of it because of what they pecieve to be a few mistakes might just be taking things out of context or promoting their own agenda or biased from the git-go...or whatever. This is not sound.

So lets say we take three (or four) instances out of the context of Judges and Deuteronomy (or Genesis) and we conclude that everything else from beginning to end is invalid?

In all instances, in all fairness, we must also do this with every other known source of information, too, right?
What remains?

Why Timmy, what an interesting conclusion bordering on brilliant. Of course, I acknowledge the source of your wisdom.


So, we have to have government even though people can LOVE and get along in unity? Something is very wrong with this picture. The laws enforced through govenment do not neccesarily reflect individual understanding, view, or belief.

A deceased friend of mine who had escaped the Soviet Republick through a student foreign exchange program, cut me short once while talking as you, saying, "no matter what form of government exists to control people, people will find a way to do whatever they truly desire whether that government becomes involved or not. You might think of the USSR as oppressive, yet this serves good pupose. It makes people to become more resourceful. I would not be the carpenter i am today were it not for the lack and limitations i once lived under...so i thought about it alot:

There is no perfect system of government, as the very employment of it proves there really is no such thing as equality among peers.
It is not less partisanship that will help solve this, but rather, better partisanship.
However, it is not just society that is divided, but people ae divided within.

If i assume evolution to be true (and i am only accountable to natural law), there is no better way to fix it than to flush it all away.

Richard's "love theory" somehow emerges from evolution. He presents it as a simplistic model, but in reality it lacks the two parameters of the "Faith, "Hope" and "Love" trinity. It is the other two essentials of faith and hope that enable the love of Christ to manifest itself through self sacrifice for the sole benefit of another.

The Evolution Model cares not for anything but it's own survival and there is no mechanism to produce this trinity. Love, without faith and hope seems to me as nothing more than a secular invention, patently worthless.

Happy New Year Timmy!

Just another believer in pursuit of Scriptural Truth.

John

Richard Amiel McGough
01-01-2013, 05:13 PM
Richard's "love theory" somehow emerges from evolution. He presents it as a simplistic model, but in reality it lacks the two parameters of the "Faith, "Hope" and "Love" trinity. It is the other two essentials of faith and hope that enable the love of Christ to manifest itself through self sacrifice for the sole benefit of another.

The Evolution Model cares not for anything but it's own survival and there is no mechanism to produce this trinity. Love, without faith and hope seems to me as nothing more than a secular invention, patently worthless.

Good afternoon John,

The theory of evolution accounts for morality with great simplicity and clarity. It begins with the most primitive of all instincts, self preservation. It matters not whether God or evolution originally gave animals the instinct to survive because evolution has been doing the work of maintaining that trait through natural selection ever since. Any animal that lacked a sufficiently strong instinct to survive would not pass on its genes. This is natural selection. It is one of the most fundamental aspects of evolution.

Likewise, it matters not if God or evolution originally gave primates our biological basis for empathy which his found in such things as mirror neurons and hormones like oxytocin. Consider this information from the Live Science article Love Hormone Improves Mother-Child Bond (http://www.livescience.com/1955-love-hormone-improves-mother-child-bond.html):
The hormone oxytocin is related to familial bonding in animals and is tied to love and friendship in humans. Species that have more of it tend to develop stronger bonds. Oxytocin is considered a key hormone for monogamy in the animal kingdom. One study of humans found that just sniffing a little oxytocin made people more trusting of others. Now scientists find that mothers with high levels of oxytocin during pregnancy bond better with their babies.

We know that empathy and love have a strong biological basis. People given MDMA (the so-called "Love Drug" or "Ecstasy") often experience an expansive sense of love for everyone they meet. I had a girlfriend back in the 90s who tried it and found it very disturbing that a drug could make her feel such deep, authentic love for everyone.

As with the instinct for self-preservation, it is evolution that selects for the traits that make us human. If a mother lacks oxytocin, she would not care as well for her child which then will have a diminished chance to survive. The origin of these traits, which can not be proven because it is beyond human knowledge, is irrelevant because it is evolution that does all the work of maintaining them. And in fact there is no serious challenge in seeing their origin in evolution too.

Evolution explains both the root and the flower of love. The root is self-love, the flower is love for others.

Do understand these ideas? Do you see why evolution is a fact whether or not it accounts for the origin of species?

Note the simplicity and clarity of the theory of evolution. It requires no "faith". It is based on the most elementary concepts that we all know are true, like the instinct to survive and heritable traits.

Now that we have established that evolution selects for and maintains the most primal instinct of self-preservation as well as the biological basis of love, we can see that it also accounts for morality which is based on two axioms (self love and reflective love) and two primitive concepts (self and love) as explained in my article The Logic of Love: A Natural Theory of Morality (http://www.biblewheel.com/content.php?37-The-Logic-of-Love-A-Natural-Theory-of-Morality):


Self Love: This is the axiom that a Self loves Self because Self is one by definition. A Self naturally desires its own well-being. For a Self to exist, it must be a unified integrated whole.
Reflective Love: Self views Other as Self in love. Love is the unity of Self and Other. Self Love is reconciled with Reflective Love through the logic of the Golden Rule. This is the principle of moral symmetry, fairness, justice. All moral statements must be symmetric under an interchange of person A and person B.

The two primitive concepts, Self and Love, are inseparable. It is axiomatic that Self loves Self. This is based on ontology - what it means for a self to be a whole, integrated, unified self. A self that hated itself would be a divided self and hence not a unity and not really a self at all. The most basic law of logic, the law of identity, implies self love. I explained this in my Logic of Love article, and expanded upon it quite a bit in my latest article On Integrity as the Highest Value (http://www.biblewheel.com/content.php?46-On-Integrity-as-the-Highest-Value).

Now I'm curious about your comments on the "trinity" of faith, hope, and love. You say that love would be "nothing more than a secular invention, patently worthless" without "faith" and "hope." I really don't understand what you think you mean. Could you please state what faith and hope have to do with love? Are you saying that atheists cannot really love their children unless they are Christian? I don't see any connection at all between the concepts in that trinity, so I would be in your debt if you could explain what you meant. Perhaps I am missing something.

Great chatting!

Richard

PS: It was good to hear about your fun times with the family, and your time to relax and watch the game. That's great.

Timmy
01-03-2013, 03:55 PM
You seem to think that we can somehow turn our selfish gene off.
That is what I discuss at this link.
Please have a look as you are making it sound like you might know how to take competition out of evolution.

http://www.biblewheel.com/forum/showthread.php?3285-Can-you-help-but-do-evil-I-do-not-see-how-Do-you

We'll just quote the onset of it, and then answer what creates wonder about how far you have thought that through:

"Can you help but do evil? I do not see how. Do you?
And if you cannot, why would God punish you?

Christians are always trying to absolve God of moral culpability in the fall by putting forward their free will argument and placing all the blame on mankind."
It's thought you misconstrue the full picture by taking tiny sound bytes here and there from a full bandwidth transmission, then re-construct a scenario you assume to sound as if it is face value, though in reality it is mere theory without its complete foundation IRL. (Don't feel bad, Darwin and the minions that religiously follow his pseudo-postulates do the very same thing.)

Are you responsible for your actions or not?
...ok, let's put it like this:
If from all of your past, you did not do what you previously did, would your life right now--as it is--be any different?

Either:
1) you cannot say (just like, "If I fall down in the city, and nobody hears or sees it, did it really happen?")

or

2.) You are culpable (kinda' like, "After that twinkle in your parents eyes became a squealing little brat named you fill in your name here, does that mean they are responsible for everything you ever do, have, or are becoming til the day you die?")

Tell me if this is wrong: You blame xians and you blame God for placing the onus on humanity? You better look in the mirror and see who is willingly participating, joining right in and playing that blame game all together now with them. You have made yourself into a willing participant no matter how intended subversive denials may appear to be...and I am now playing as well?

You are the one implying that I think we can just turn the selfishness off. At least it seems you are right about it being genetic. No, we cannot just turn that off, and it is seriously doubted any splicing is going to change this either. There is no claim here that I can take the competition out of anything...and things sure would get duller and duller without that motivation to thrive.


To your first post.


"What the norm of mundanes never understand"

Is that the lack of education that their masters insist upon is what causes their norm and mundaness.
---------------------------- No, it is the result of accepting and believing what whatever various earthbound sources have told them, reinterpreting them according to their own perceptions, instead of attempting (and/or surrendering to) other possibilities...and more.



"Timocracy?

We really like that notion; but is it even a notion at all???"


Yes it is but no government will likely never bring up that topic, as then, they would have to admit to why they rule for other not so honorable reasons. Ok, how's this? They rule as slaves to purposes beyond their own. Some realize this and others do not, but everyone, from seemingly highest to lowest is a pawn...the entertained are entrained.

Honor among liars?

Anyone who will steal or subvert fact--for any agenda of (assumed) vested interest--will do whatever it takes to achieve that goal. Put more simply, anyone who will steal the truth from another is not above stealing anything else to achieve their end.

Better a totally autonomous anarchistic collective than adhering to a pack of lies promulgated by a pack of liars claiming everything is toward the common good of...really! Ask yourself who will ultimately gain by their agenda. Check their pockets. (All that pseudo-rhetoric masks that they do not give a damn who you are unless you are making or taking their 'money'.)
Totally agree with that! Enforced "communism" is just a vehicle for Fascism and Dictatorships.
Tim. This clip shows quite nicely just who is getting the benefits of the present economic system.
Note that most of the wealth is in the core of our demography and not the top. Any who are in the club at the top know that money in the pocket is a waste. If it is not growing, it is shrinking.

The only reason that the Illuminati do not circulate all the wealth available and keep any of it stagnant is because of their insecurity that I speak of in the O P.Of course most of the wealth is in the hands of the many, yet because of the many (and their 'hoarding') it does not grow.

The dumbing down of the public has effectively made it so fear is the rule of the day, and what they fear shall come. Disinformation and resultant misinformation have no small role in this.


I read your last to Richard as well and offer this well written piece that speaks to some of it.

http://www.scribd.com/doc/102547288/Hyatt-ChristopherS-UndoingYourself-Ch13-PDF-LibraryI appreciate Christophers work, though having worked through it, it doesn't quite work like that...at least for me.


Sincerely,

Timmy
Regards
DL

Greatest I am
01-04-2013, 08:01 AM
"At least it seems you are right about it being genetic. No, we cannot just turn that off, and it is seriously doubted any splicing is going to change this either. There is no claim here that I can take the competition out of anything...and things sure would get duller and duller without that motivation to thrive."

I agree that things would be quite boring.

If we cannot take competition out of our lives then that means that we cannot help but do evil from the losers POV as he has lost something and if he continues to lose at competitions he will eventually die.

Regards
DL

Timmy
01-04-2013, 10:41 AM
"At least it seems you are right about it being genetic. No, we cannot just turn that off, and it is seriously doubted any splicing is going to change this either. There is no claim here that I can take the competition out of anything...and things sure would get duller and duller without that motivation to thrive."

I agree that things would be quite boring.

If we cannot take competition out of our lives then that means that we cannot help but do evil from the losers POV as he has lost something and if he continues to lose at competitions he will eventually die.

Regards
DL

Even as one mans god is another mans deva/devil,
reverting the phrase LaVey most notoriously turned on it's head,
from what illumines Timmy,
giving credit where credit is due,
I say, "Hail YHVH, Shemhamephorash!"

Greetings and salutations: grace and shalom shalom through me to you and yours from my Master,Yahoshua Ha'Nazarei W'Melech Ha'Olam.
:prayer:Barechu et Adonai hamevorach: Adonai Elohinu Yimloch L'olam Vaed, Baruch atah Adonai elohaynu melech ha'olam hamotzi lechem min ha'aretz... boray pri ha’gafen! Amin Amin!



It is understood that you are not just another thin skinned Amerikaan needing fascades of political correctness or indifference, truly only feigned unity, to uphold an illusory sense of peaceful coexistent reality. This is such a find and everything you have written on forum, whether we agree or not, is highly esteemed because of this. It's funny how many who think they are standing up for what they think they believe are silenced through your input...and yes, I can and do laugh at my selfs. You have been an inspiration in tossing what once were thought to be true beliefs into the furnace of the daylies just to see what stands.


What difference is necessarily made to us by our equipment of ideation and believing?
If these be powerless, they are false.

Whatever doctrine tends to shroud the fangs of reality: leaving humanity to leisure, complacent, content, unstung--whatever that teaching is, it is pure and unadulterated deceitful treachery not only against our selfs, but against all of mankind. It is not pleasantries, but rather power that sets the mark for Truth. None of any of us are truly being honest with our True Self if what some think to be real belief causes us to rest on our laurels and simultaneously become indolent altogether. Rather, it is the reality checks with Promises goading and spurring us that truly require faith(fullness) in thought, word, and deed.

What do you think of hell? YUou are already well aware the doctrine of hell made religion an all important matter. Getting your soul saved in not so distant past supposedly made the difference concerning empirical destiny, and the falsehoods of reliousity flourished. Yet, if that idealism wipes out the fear of potential hell, and with it all sense of infinite risk in the conduct of life, this Pied Piper of religious idealism has played you false.

Neccesarily, truth must be transforming, marked by the conservation of force, just so we have a more concrete definition of expression as an affirmative basis towards utility in pragmatic expression.

No religion then is a true religion that does not make us tingle, yes even to our very nerve endings, with a sense of infinite worth and hazard. Susinctly put, "If there is nothing to die for, there is no transforming motive to living. Reasoning reasonable people see that potential gain or loss stand at the forefront of selfishness, whether that be couched in terms of "upward mobility" or simply "competitiveness." Through the process of life in the living, the flesh and blood of historical contingencies cannot be sapped up in the eternal, ageless, timeless issues of any type of idealism without our own loss of "will to power" and right along with it, actual here-and-now truth flies out the window.

What do you really think about G_d? Both orthodox and pagan nitwits think their god is sooo much like man, they have recreated Him into their own image, with feelings and interests and powers that appeal to man as man is. Granted, there is a place for anthropomorphisms, yet failure to recognize these as mere word pictures, and symbolic at that, is to think that one can actually grasp ahold of G_d and put Him in a box...or more pragmatically, a church or cathedral....oh, and of course those who frequent such settings the most must have an inside line to Ain Soph Aur, so they go to them when trouble strikes or life becomes difficult.

What about....i'll stop ranting right here. Anyone who carries the above seminal thoughts to their conclusion can see selfishness does lead to the inane. . .even though we think we are so smart by whatever avenue we pursue our self interests.




Concerning Hyatt and undoing yourself, the above ideations finally led to the conclusion that to pursue an undoing of self is to focus on self, and in essence is the ultimate oxymoron.

From there, it was realized that it was not in formulating Hegelian Dialectics--thesis+antithesis=synthesis IAO--IRL--for all coagula et solve is worth--is neither the way or means towards actuating liberation. Granted, the person who can do merely a half dozen things is far more liberated than individuals chaining and confining themselves to one activity.

Yet, is focus on transmuting our lives, whether through seeming success or failure, the appropriate means to the end?
If i focus on myself i only get more of the same.

Don't look to me for answers.
In essence, i am no different than anyone else.
I await resurrection and ascension...but now the dance of this life is to the rhythm of a Different Drummer.

To make this speiling yada yada short, I sought paradox and for all my flaws and falleness of nature, I have not been disappointed by the Living Paradox, who never excused my inconsistencies through this nature to sin and do evil. Rather, through him, life abundant--(nose to the grindstone now more than ever before)--comes (with persecution), transcending self...not through idealistic escapisms of religion, but rather a continual life learning how to die to my (self=)life so that He does live through me...and I am far and away from perfect...though through identification into this mechon the Body and Blood of Yahoshua Ha'maschiach, I live by the faithfulness of the Son of God.


Never bored.
Iconoclastically and Paradoxically yours:
He makes me shake in my boots,
yet even moreso loving Yah.


93,

Barefooteded Timmy

My wife got me a trampoline for xmas. I think it is a hint to quit breaking and rebreaking the bed from jumping on it...and maybe also now fix the crack in the plaster on the ceiling directly above my jumping spot.

Greatest I am
01-04-2013, 01:13 PM
Thanks for the kudos. I blushed.

My view on the lie of hell and a few other side issues is well expressed by this Bishop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc

You asked what I think of God.
For the revealed Gods, not much. For the one I found, hard to put a word to. I had to set it aside, raise the bar of expectation and seek further. I guess I will not really have an adjective for it until I am unlucky enough to find the next rung up Jacob’s ladder.

I do not mind talking about it though.
The Godhead I know in a nutshell.
I was a skeptic till the age of 39.
I then had an apotheosis and later branded myself an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian. Gnostic Christian because I exemplify this quote from William Blake.

“Both read the Bible day and night, But thou read'st black where I read white.”

This refers to how Gnostics tend to reverse, for moral reasons, what Christians see in the Bible. We tend to recognize the evil ways of O T God where literal Christians will see God’s killing as good. Christians are sheep where Gnostic Christians are goats.
This is perhaps why we see the use of a Jesus scapegoat as immoral, while theists like to make Jesus their beast of burden. An immoral position.

During my apotheosis, something that only lasted 5 or 6 seconds, the only things of note to happen was that my paradigm of reality was confirmed and I was chastised to think more demographically. What I found was what I call a cosmic consciousness. Not a new term but one that is a close but not exact fit.

I recognize that I have no proof. That is always the way with apotheosis.
This is also why I prefer to stick to issues of morality because no one has yet been able to prove that God is real and I have no more proof than they for the cosmic consciousness.

The cosmic consciousness is not a miracle working God. He does not interfere with us save when one of us finds it. Not a common thing from what I can see. It is a part of nature and our next evolutionary step.

I tend to have more in common with atheists who ignore what they see as my delusion because our morals are basically identical. Theist tend not to like me much as I have no respect for literalists and fundamentals and think that most Christians have tribal mentalities and poor morals.

I am rather between a rock and a hard place but this I cannot help.

I am happy to be questioned on what I believe but whether or not God exists is basically irrelevant to this world for all that he does not do, and I prefer to thrash out moral issues that can actually find an end point. The search for God is never ending when you are of the Gnostic persuasion. My apotheosis basically says that I am to discard whatever God I found, God as a set of rules that is, not idol worship it but instead, raise my bar and seek further.

My apotheosis also showed me that God has no need for love, adoration or obedience. He has no needs. Man has dominion here on earth and is to be and is the supreme being.
=====================

“I am far and away from perfect”

How can you be sure of that?
You can only know that you are far from whatever ideal you can imagine and that is called seeking God.

I have no argument for the rest of you post but was rather disappointed in your ending and belief in Jesus.

No noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

Regards
DL

Greatest I am
01-04-2013, 01:18 PM
It is understood that you are not just another thin skinned Amerikaan needing fascades of political correctness or indifference, truly only feigned unity, to uphold an illusory sense of peaceful coexistent reality. This is such a find and everything you have written on forum, whether we agree or not, is highly esteemed because of this. It's funny how many who think they are standing up for what they think they believe are silenced through your input...and yes, I can and do laugh at my selfs. You have been an inspiration in tossing what once were thought to be true beliefs into the furnace of the daylies just to see what stands.

.

Oops. You all caught me keeping this as a souvenir.
Now I am really red faced.

Regards
DL

Timmy
01-04-2013, 04:25 PM
Thanks for the kudos. I blushed.

My view on the lie of hell and a few other side issues is well expressed by this Bishop.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SF6I5VSZVqc

You asked what I think of God.
For the revealed Gods, not much. For the one I found, hard to put a word to. I had to set it aside, raise the bar of expectation and seek further. I guess I will not really have an adjective for it until I am unlucky enough to find the next rung up Jacob’s ladder.

I do not mind talking about it though.
The Godhead I know in a nutshell.
I was a skeptic till the age of 39.
I then had an apotheosis and later branded myself an esoteric ecumenist and Gnostic Christian. Gnostic Christian because I exemplify this quote from William Blake.

“Both read the Bible day and night, But thou read'st black where I read white.”

This refers to how Gnostics tend to reverse, for moral reasons, what Christians see in the Bible. We tend to recognize the evil ways of O T God where literal Christians will see God’s killing as good. Christians are sheep where Gnostic Christians are goats.
This is perhaps why we see the use of a Jesus scapegoat as immoral, while theists like to make Jesus their beast of burden. An immoral position.

During my apotheosis, something that only lasted 5 or 6 seconds, the only things of note to happen was that my paradigm of reality was confirmed and I was chastised to think more demographically. What I found was what I call a cosmic consciousness. Not a new term but one that is a close but not exact fit.

I recognize that I have no proof. That is always the way with apotheosis.
This is also why I prefer to stick to issues of morality because no one has yet been able to prove that God is real and I have no more proof than they for the cosmic consciousness.

The cosmic consciousness is not a miracle working God. He does not interfere with us save when one of us finds it. Not a common thing from what I can see. It is a part of nature and our next evolutionary step.

I tend to have more in common with atheists who ignore what they see as my delusion because our morals are basically identical. Theist tend not to like me much as I have no respect for literalists and fundamentals and think that most Christians have tribal mentalities and poor morals.

I am rather between a rock and a hard place but this I cannot help.

I am happy to be questioned on what I believe but whether or not God exists is basically irrelevant to this world for all that he does not do, and I prefer to thrash out moral issues that can actually find an end point. The search for God is never ending when you are of the Gnostic persuasion. My apotheosis basically says that I am to discard whatever God I found, God as a set of rules that is, not idol worship it but instead, raise my bar and seek further.

My apotheosis also showed me that God has no need for love, adoration or obedience. He has no needs. Man has dominion here on earth and is to be and is the supreme being.
=====================

“I am far and away from perfect”

How can you be sure of that?
You can only know that you are far from whatever ideal you can imagine and that is called seeking God.

I have no argument for the rest of you post but was rather disappointed in your ending and belief in Jesus.

No noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

Regards
DL

Thanks for being kind enough to share things often hidden behind the keyboard. It is very good we can share a bit of banter...and it was previously truly wondered what exactly you meant by Gnostic Christian.

THough a lot of what Bishop Spong says makes sense, FTMP, I tend to disagree concerning hell; however, religions have made a monopoly through their misconceptions and deceptions of what this really entails. You mention Blake, and on those terms of his quote, I hold somewhat similar, though contrary views.

Many fail to take the scripture at face value and instead reinterpret what is hidden in plain sight, never giving attention to details that just might altercate their views altogether. Myself, as a servant of Yeshua, and it seems like I always fall short, I need Him to pick me up again, clean me up, and tell me to "go get em' panther pardus" again and again.

It's thought that raising the bar beyond human possibilities is just what my Great Physician orders, and so the bar raised for me is following the example of Yeshua who: did not come for the religious, but rather conveyed that the sick are the ones who need a doctor. Those who fail to recognize this need will never know Him as He is, because only those who love Him hold fast and guard their hearts in what he says. In essence, I cannot agape (aka: live and breath for another) Him enough. Sorry to hear your disappointment in my reliance on Him.

Further, here there is no difference in the G_d of the OT and the (RE)new(ED), as He kept it all perfectly. No wonder he was chosen to become the completion of the sacrifice initiated through the obedience of Avraham Avinu. Though G_d cut him short from slaying his son, Yeshua's once and for all time sacrifice demanded by God, made it possible for whoever in Yah's will desiring to come into communion with him possible. (It's wondered how Yeshua's words, "...I give my life freely...I lay my life down and shall pick it up again..." fits into what seems implied from that perpetual rant about God murdering his own Son? How do you read/interpret Isaiah 53?)

As to the issue of apotheosis, no I cannot say how far along I am concerning perfection. By human standards, some idolize me...so I do a disappearing act. I just do not know about that, yet until I hurdle the unchanging standards of G_d which can never be achieved in and of myself, I am far from jumping so high I ascend.

Neither, as you, do I consider consciousness expansion, even to the point of cosmic to be God.

It's wished there were more time to chatter right now, however it is the 51st birthday of this carcass, and I would leave many well wishers, both Promethians and not, disappointed could they not "surprise" and "gift" Timmy.

It is hoped there is enough here presently to chew on. I shall attempt to respond more fully on the morrow.


So it's off for a ride:
two crocodiles astride.

Timmy

Greatest I am
01-07-2013, 12:16 PM
Isaiah 53; 10 Yet it pleased the Lord to bruise him; he hath put him to grief:

You asked what I thought of that passage.

Idiotic.

How can God be pleased to put himself to grief?
Monotheism = 1 God. A God would not hurt himself and God cannot lay down his life.

No noble and gracious God would demand the sacrifice of a so called son just to prove it's benevolence.

Are you fond of human sacrifice and punishing the innocent instead of the guilty?
Is that a good form of justice to you?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B-91mSkxaXs

You are correct that people do not know how to read scriptures. Most speak spiritually while most people read physically or from the carnal side of the brain.

This man has a great outlook on scriptures and is worth the hearing if you are not lost to fantasy, miracles and magic.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FdSVl_HOo8Y

Regards
DL

Timmy
01-09-2013, 12:40 PM
Why Timmy, what an interesting conclusion bordering on brilliant. Of course, I acknowledge the source of your wisdom.Hi John,:icon_hello:

I waited awhile before responding to your post wondering what should be said. You would have to arrive at knowing me better to understand what is meant in that. NTL, your comment is appreciated.

Knowledge and wisdom and understanding ultimately come to us from God through Jesus Christ, in whom these treasures are hidden. By His spirit we both realize He is our source.

We can still blow it conveying information unseasoned...and this is what i struggle with. Often are the times dead air or just waiting are better.

Now, knowledge makes my hat size too small. Wisdom helps me to perceive things from a more encompassing perspective. Understanding shrinks my head again so my hat can fit again perceiving i do not know things as well as i thought, and my own rambling is questionable at best. I struggle to put into suitable words what is appropriate at any given moment.

Even a ting of laughter helps to recognize i am only one on a planet where billions upon billions have been here and done trillions upon trillions of things before i ever poked this nose outside of my mother's womb.

It is fitting to best know that when we operate according to The Handbook of the Universe, the Bible, our own misinformation can more and more become recognized for what it might be at best: temporarily suitable.


Richard's "love theory" somehow emerges from evolution. He presents it as a simplistic model, but in reality it lacks the two parameters of the "Faith, "Hope" and "Love" trinity. It is the other two essentials of faith and hope that enable the love of Christ to manifest itself through self sacrifice for the sole benefit of another.

The Evolution Model cares not for anything but it's own survival and there is no mechanism to produce this trinity. Love, without faith and hope seems to me as nothing more than a secular invention, patently worthless.

Happy New Year Timmy!

Just another believer in pursuit of Scriptural Truth.

JohnHo. You said a mouthful there.

I am a believer in God and love humanity in civility.



Though there is seldom taking sides by me, evolutionary theory more and more appears to me as just another philosophy toward moving God (revealed and known through Jesus Christ)--and as well, His/our blood bought family--completely out of the equation.

From just my own life, there are far too many examples of a failure to recognize that there are consequences to everything i imagine and experience.

If death is not proof enough, the most profound example to me was reading Friedrich Nietzsche's biographies, most of them delineate that from childhhood he had been shown God has revealed Himself as the God of the Bible. He claimed to lose his faith to reason when twenty years old. Eventually he proclaimed to the whole world that God is dead. After this, bit by bit, he threw away all the last vestiges he thought constricting, and did whatever he thought was best. Towards the conclusion of his pitiful existence, he suffered day and night from a body paralysis, riddled through to the core by the ravages of Syphilis. He ended up completely insane. In his demise, the one who claimed God was dead died. Having assumed the role of god, serving himself. . .a day late and more than a dollar short, he never saw how his own proclamation became self-fulfilled prophecy.

Anybody can choose, but God only knows the resulting repetitive repercussions from the cycles we set in motion. Yaweh says, "I have declared the end since the beginning...There is no God besides me."



John?
There have been many who have come and left Biblewheel trying to get others to conform to their own mind set or belief system. I have read so many debates here and said nothing. You have been here longer than i, but we need to keep mindful that facts are not evidence. I don't know that i have ever really put much effort onto proving what is right and what is wrong because we all are. True evidence comes through application, and unless someone vaildates their facts and reasoning through practical experience, there remains a great disconnect.



Evolution?

Probability?
One with forty thousand zeros behind it is the number Sir Fredrick Hoyle has calculated to be the possibility of that single first cell forming in slime just to begin the supposed evolutionary process.

Relativity?
The multiple universe theory is neither scientific nor logical. If it were actually a fact, there would not be a true meaning or reason for anything.



Carnal people pick choose whatever they want to believe because of what they conceive to be pleasurable or painful. Those beliefs change as the drive for more sensate experiences replace what once did, but no longer satisfies. This 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' application plunges one into either destruction or desperation--through that drive to get more satisfation or failure to achieve it altogether, irrespectively.
(To a greater or lesser extent, whether we can recognize it or not, we all do this.)



Atheism?
Scripture reveals "The moron has said in his heart there is no God," and in this 21st century, this fact comes clear just looking around your world a little bit. Though they may not shout it from the roof tops like Nietzsche, they live life as if everything that is created is here only for me and my benefit.

I usually leave people alone who are defiantly in some way or another, keeping there backs turned away from God and i laugh at those shaking their fist at Him. Their time is going to come. Some will turn back to Him then and most will not.



Christians?
The saddest thing to me is knowing most claiming to believe in Jesus never come to realize Jesus does not believe in them.


It is hoped you can now see even just a tiny bit more clearly that everything written from here and on this site is directly related to past experiences and searching for a fuller life on one path leading to real Truth.

For all my chasing down rabbit trails, i never found God and i never recieved Jesus.
Yaweh was ever watching me and Yeshua receives me.


Contented and unpluckable,

Timmy

TheForgiven
09-07-2014, 08:35 PM
Thanks for the thoughtless dogma and usurping God's will to speak for himself.

Strange how you can fathom your unfathomable God.

500 million.

Quite good compared to what your genocidal son murdering God did.

So what exactly is your complaint?

Should we be as big of a prick as he is and just leave 8?

Regards
DL

Are you SERIOUSLY part of the Illuminati? :lol: No way bro! You guys (assuming you are one of them) are too secretive about yourselves. Now let's assume that you are part of their group, then please answer a few honest questions.

1. IF YOU WANT people to accept your marxist fascist form of tyranny and government, then why not expose yourselves to the world on the networks (television and radio) you've acquired through fractional reserve banking? You know, loaning money with absolutely ZERO value, yet charging interest from the borrowers, and also trying to plunge them into default so that your comrades can seize their assets?

2. Why do you hate God so much when you worship Satan using your Babylonian Talmud?

3. Why are you so obsessed with Israel if in fact you hate God?

4. Are you unaware that secular Israel has nothing to do with Biblical Prophesy? If so, then what is so valuable to your secret society in the middle east? Is it all about Oil? If so, then wouldn't you agree that the Illuminati are simply trying to gain control over the worlds oil supply. He who controls the oil and the printing of money, controls the world.

5. What gives your group (as small as it is compared to the rest of the world) the right to play God, and decide who lives and who dies in your Agenda 21 depopulation program? Why not start with some of your own family and friends; heck the world would be in a much better place.

6. Why would anyone want to accept your racist groups as though only rich white Khazarian's (that's what you all are) should rule the world?

I've got plenty of questions, but I'm interested in your responses.

Joe

Greatest I am
09-09-2014, 08:45 AM
So many miss-conceptions.

1. Do you know what Marxist fascist is. I do not.

2. I do not hate imaginary Gods.

3. I do not care about Israel.

4. I agree. Oil causes wars. Not the oil itself. We already own it all.

5. Depopulate. Don't be stupid. It might effect profits.

6. We already rule the world.

Why do you fear us?

Regards
DL

Snakeboy
09-09-2014, 11:40 AM
Hey OP, aren't you from the website " Godlikeproductions " ?

That place is filled full of self-proclaimed " illuminati " and " knights templar ", along with other assorted fruits-n-nuts :D

Greatest I am
09-09-2014, 11:42 AM
Hey OP, aren't you from the website " Godlikeproductions " ?

That place is filled full of self-proclaimed " illuminati " and " knights templar ", along with other assorted fruits-n-nuts :D

I am that Greatest I am.

Regards
DL

TheForgiven
09-09-2014, 07:48 PM
So many miss-conceptions.

1. Do you know what Marxist fascist is. I do not.

Yes, just another term for a capitalistic form of communism; the rich have the power over the poor people. Yet God teaches all men are created equal in His Image (likeness), and should be treated as such. This doesn't mean that others shouldn't have a higher degree of responsibility. But at no time should one human being lord himself/herself over another.

Marxism has been defined in different ways often times taken out of its original mindset. At any rate, Zionism seeks to gain control over the entire world through its satanic New World Order agenda where only a single race rules the entire world. Who wouldn't oppose that?


2. I do not hate imaginary Gods.

Imaginary Gods? Hmmm? So Jesus who definitely existed is an imaginary God to you? A fake God who managed to convert entire nations off the words of a few Apostles? Not so imaginary to me, especially in light of the vast amounts of testimony and witnesses. Even so, why do you worship an imaginary Satan if all gods are imaginary? You being an illuminati (self proclaimed anyways despite their requirement for secrecy) must worship satan since you folks rely on the Talmud for instruction. You know...how to control a nation by printing fake money (nothing to back it up), and charging interest, then plunging government and businesses into default so you can seize their assets for failing to payback fake money?


3. I do not care about Israel.

Zionists don't; they just use Israel to advance their hidden agenda of gaining control over the entire middle east. On a side note, the ONLY Israel that exists today is the Christian Church; the kingdom of Christ. The secular Israel created by Britain in 1948 is an impostor nation of Israel and has no Biblical validity or truth.


4. I agree. Oil causes wars. Not the oil itself. We already own it all.

Yes, but not the oil itself. It's the greedy bastards who want to control the worlds money and oil supply, and thereby gain control over all nations.


5. Depopulate. Don't be stupid. It might effect profits.

What? You mean your own lord David Rockefeller is stupid? Need I provide you a link to his video whereby he himself states that the elete's need to find a way to reduce the population within the next 50 years? Or was it 150 years?


6. We already rule the world.

No you do not. You FOOL the world; not rule it. We outnumber you by a billion to one. You have no chance against us. But the rest of the world (a great majority anyways) exists and lives in darkness because of the propaganda your kinds spews out over the main-stream media, TV progarms, and the entertainment industry. If everyone were awake, your so called rule would end just like that...Besides, it is God who is allowing your kind to exist, namely to test His children of their faith. So it is God whom we seek to be restored with in the hopes of Him eventually casting judgment on you. And trust me my dark friend...it's coming. Not the end of the world, as this world will never end. But the casting into outer darkness for you and your associates will happen. Maybe not now, nor tomorrow, but in the future...unless you repent and turn to God for enlightenment.


Why do you fear us?

Fear you? We fear no man. We only fear God who destroys both body and spirit. What can any of you do to us except kill our bodies; you cannot kill the spirit. You long for what is temporary; we long for what is eternal.

Even so, I do not believe you are Illuminati; you are violating secrecy and exposing what is unlawful to expose. But it's great at least pretending to debate someone from the Illuminati.

Joe

Greatest I am
09-10-2014, 04:40 AM
TheForgiven

“Yes, just another term for a capitalistic form of communism; the rich have the power over the poor people.”

So you are calling an oligarchy some other name. A good thing we are not talking politics.

-------------------------------

“But at no time should one human being lord himself/herself over another.”

You disagree with your God and place your ideas above his. He shall rule over you in Genesis says that God certainly believes that men should lord it over women.

---------------------------------

“Imaginary Gods? Hmmm? So Jesus who definitely existed is an imaginary God to you?”

Jesus said to seek God. He never said to seek him as God. He sold himself as the way to God, not God.

In fact, he tells us how to become as God the way he did.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=alRNbesfXXw&feature=player_embedded

---------------------------------

“why do you worship an imaginary Satan if all gods are imaginary?”

Show where I say such B.S. If you are just going to lie then I will insist on quotes or ignore your lying ass. Your choice. Please stop this stupidity.

-----------------------------------

You indicate you know the rules that the Illuminati work under. Where did you get that first-hand information? If you are to use it against me then I should know the source.

Regards
DL

TheForgiven
09-10-2014, 12:10 PM
TheForgiven

“Yes, just another term for a capitalistic form of communism; the rich have the power over the poor people.”

So you are calling an oligarchy some other name. A good thing we are not talking politics.


Oligarchy (rule by the wealthy) is a much better term.


“But at no time should one human being lord himself/herself over another.”

You disagree with your God and place your ideas above his. He shall rule over you in Genesis says that God certainly believes that men should lord it over women.

You misunderstand the scriptures. God charged man to bare responsibility for the care and protection of their wife, just as Jesus protects His Church. A man and a woman's relationship is 50/50. The woman does not serve the man; if it's viewed as service, then the woman doesn't love her husband. Instead she is his partner, and he is her partner and protector.


“Imaginary Gods? Hmmm? So Jesus who definitely existed is an imaginary God to you?”

Jesus said to seek God. He never said to seek him as God. He sold himself as the way to God, not God.

Careful how you interpret that. Jesus also said, "Anyone who sees me, sees the Father". While He existed on earth, He was a man. But after His passion on the cross, He returned to Heaven and presented Himself at a sacrificial lamb on the heavenly alter. His body could not be touched until He ascended, which is why he tells the woman who saw Him, "Do not touch me, for I have not yet ascended", meaning His Body had to remain undefiled. He later appeared to St. Thomas, who after seeing Jesus, exclaimed, "My Lord and my God..."

The resurrected Jesus is God who serves as the right hand of heaven.


In fact, he tells us how to become as God the way he did.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Luke 17:21 Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo there! for, behold, the kingdom of God is within you.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Very good! Interesting that you know scripture for someone claiming to be part of the Illuminati. Jesus is the way to heaven. But it is Him we serve and worship as He is God, and of God. There is no other God besides Him, and He was before the foundation of the world. I know some believe in the Trinity doctrine, but that is just a confusing way of trying to explain God's existence. Visit the Christianity thread and join in on the discussion entitled, "JESUS IS GOD".


“why do you worship an imaginary Satan if all gods are imaginary?”

Show where I say such B.S. If you are just going to lie then I will insist on quotes or ignore your lying ass. Your choice. Please stop this stupidity.

If you worship Satan, participate in the black and red robe cults/ceremonies involving staged human sacrificing (no actual human but an imitation of a human), then you are worshiping satan. If you do none of the above, then you are not Illuminati. I know you are not truly Illuminati as you would not be wasting time talking here. I engaged with you just to test you out, and I know you are not Illuminati.

But I do enjoy the work.

Joe

Greatest I am
09-11-2014, 09:20 AM
If you worship Satan, participate in the black and red robe cults/ceremonies involving staged human sacrificing (no actual human but an imitation of a human), then you are worshiping satan. If you do none of the above, then you are not Illuminati. I know you are not truly Illuminati as you would not be wasting time talking here. I engaged with you just to test you out, and I know you are not Illuminati.


Strange again how you know so much about the Illuminati.

"participate in the black and red robe cults/ceremonies involving staged human sacrificing (no actual human but an imitation of a human),"

Staged as in the host and the wine and symbolically cannibalize Jesus is a Catholic tradition. They also wear black and red.

Regards
DL

TheForgiven
09-11-2014, 05:46 PM
Strange again how you know so much about the Illuminati.

"participate in the black and red robe cults/ceremonies involving staged human sacrificing (no actual human but an imitation of a human),"

Staged as in the host and the wine and symbolically cannibalize Jesus is a Catholic tradition. They also wear black and red.

Regards
DL

:lol: That's not NEAR the same thing. Not that I agree with Roman Catholicism, but what Christians practice is symbolic of the body of Jesus PER HIS COMMANDS when He says, "Take and eat; this is My Body which is broken for you! Do this in remembrance of Me". It doesn't matter what you wear; it's the act of obedience in remember the Lord's sacrifice on the cross.

On the other hand, what the Illuminati practices is satanic, and NOT based on a command from the individual to be sacrificed. All of these satanic rituals being practiced in Hollywood, where stars are being murdered as blood sacrifices. Even so, to pretend you're sacrificing a human AGAINST HIS/HER will, is satanic and quite frankly, NUTS! It's sick, disgusting, and deserving of mental health treatment. People who engage in this kind of murderous ritual deserves full ridicule. And comparing them to communion as it was commanded of God absurd. :pray:

Joe

Greatest I am
09-12-2014, 05:52 AM
:lol: That's not NEAR the same thing. Not that I agree with Roman Catholicism, but what Christians practice is symbolic of the body of Jesus PER HIS COMMANDS when He says, "Take and eat; this is My Body which is broken for you! Do this in remembrance of Me". It doesn't matter what you wear; it's the act of obedience in remember the Lord's sacrifice on the cross.

On the other hand, what the Illuminati practices is satanic, and NOT based on a command from the individual to be sacrificed. All of these satanic rituals being practiced in Hollywood, where stars are being murdered as blood sacrifices. Even so, to pretend you're sacrificing a human AGAINST HIS/HER will, is satanic and quite frankly, NUTS! It's sick, disgusting, and deserving of mental health treatment. People who engage in this kind of murderous ritual deserves full ridicule. And comparing them to communion as it was commanded of God absurd. :pray:

Joe

You are right that human sacrifice is disgusting and immoral.

Strange that Christianity and the whole Christian theology is based on embracing the notion of human sacrifice.

You are correct in that Satan would likely be the one to ask for such barbarism. Guess who looks like they are the God of Christianity?

You have just been Illuminated.

No charge.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMxX-QOV9tI

Regards
DL