0
0

[–] zxcvbnasdf ago 

What is this? Necrophilia? As a "scientist" you should comprehend the basis of alchemy...dissolving into the base, transmutation, order out of chaos, the circle of life and all that. Decay is in no way, shape or form a negative. It is the pass-over into something new. What you call perfection is what the parasites are up to...trying to stagnate change so that they can exploit the present longer. You are in direct violation with the circle of life when you mess with the pass-over process. Oh wait; the parasites got that covered under burial rites. Emptying out the fluids, harvesting the organs, stuffing the corpse with formaldehyde and trash, mocking life itself by masquerading death as it, then putting a box around it to prevent the decaying process for as long as possible. It's beyond disgusting that this is allowed to happen. The rejection of nature in that act is almost incomprehensible.

The parasites are using science and sacrificing children to remain immortal. Jesus, Mary, and saints need no external inputs.

Your comparison is invalid, and demonstrates lack of understanding.

Another ladle of cognitive dissonance to the infighting within Christianity. How is judeo-Christianity and Christian zionism doing these days? Catholicism is just friends among friends these days...I wouldn't even go so hard at this doctrine if it would actually deliver what it promised, but it's self delusion towards self destruction.

A child sees a sandcastle and destroys it. Then the child wonders why the sandcastle doesn't exist.

Where is the balance in that? You acknowledge order and chaos but you don't comprehend that balance demands defense too. Between defense and offense; defense is the positive, so why don't you use it? Why don't you defend what you believe in against attacks? Defending doesn't mean going offensive; it just means defending at all costs. How can life reject survial?

I reject nothing you say. You lack understanding.

Loving your enemies does not mean not defending yourself against them. That is what parasites, and apparently you, want people to believe. It's false. It's a lie. It's mind control.

Loving your enemy means treating them with the respect they deserve. When they attack, you defend. But only to the degree necessary to ensure your safety. If that means killing them all? Then so be it. God will command that. If that means neutralizing them? Then so be it. If that means talking to them? Then so be it. If that means giving them charity? Then so be it.

Your strict adherence to your beliefs makes you blind to reality.

How many millions of the so called jews find the holocaust "evidence" extremely convincing after studying it?

None. Because they don't study it. They are indoctrinated into it.

You can't discern between intense study of all sides of an argument, and believing what you want to believe. That is a deadly lack of discernment.

Again; blind faith towards false authority to shirk your own responsibilities.

Repeating your belief that the authority is false does not come close to demonstrating what you're saying is anything more than what you believe. Especially when you refuse to demonstrate it. When your assurances do nothing to refute the point that the Church comes from God. And that God will not let His Church fall.

The fact that you keep talking about "blind faith" means you are not reading what I'm writing. That your beliefs are making it impossible for you to adapt.

You never apply any of this to reality.

Of course I do? How do you think I live my life? My beliefs make perfect sense of why I'm communicating with you. Why I'm giving you information you don't have.

You can adapt to new information, or you can not. The choice is yours.

You just hold it as a belief and hide behind it.

I've laid my beliefs here. To say I "hold it as a belief and hide behind it" ignores the fact that I've given reason and evidence for my beliefs. You've done nothing to refute the evidence, other than tell me your beliefs. I find your beliefs completely unconvincing. However I think you are striving for the truth, so I can understand you perfectly. It's unfortunate that you won't adapt to try to understand my beliefs to understand me perfectly. For if we understood each other perfectly, we would learn something. However I can't learn anything if you refuse to engage.

So everything is perfect then?

No, because creatures refuse to come to Him. As I've explained. Many times. Why do you keep asking the same question? Why are you not able to adapt to my answers?

Against what?

Earth is a battle ground between good and evil, as I said. So we are called to turn it wholly good by defending God. Not complicated.

Certainly not against blasphemy, because that ship sunk a long time ago.

Definitely against blasphemy.

If you could, would you be so nice to throw some scripture at me that deals with this whole self defense is bad dilemma? I need to get to the bottom of this. I need the line that managed to override human survial instinct. Why is the deity in any need of defense and why are believers encouraged to do so but not allowed to defend themselves?

Self defense isn't bad. Parasites who believe like you have hijacked the message of Christianity and have, through lies and deceit, convinced them that they are good and the Christians are evil. It is only possible because evil people who have no morals, and believe morals don't exist, and believe, as you, that truth doesn't exist that this can happen.

Your ideology is why this is happening.

Knowledge and experience towards life after death in heaven...I caste doubt.

It is available to you if you want it. But that choice is yours, not mine.

0
0

[–] Blood-is-Nature ago 

The parasites are using science and sacrificing children to remain immortal.

So parasites are defined by their host, yet you want to fight them. Science curtails comprehension of reality, yet you participate in, give authority towards and believe in it. Sacrificing children manifests in the pro-life vs pro-choice abortion conflict, in which the majority of both sides have not a single clue of the sacrificial aspect celebrated by a (((3rd party))), and immortality just so happens to coincide with your faith in the afterlife, while the science you uphold cannot present evidence for immortality in the reality. That entire statement is a contradicting work of fiction. Prolonging life through blood consumption seems logical, but I need more than assumptions on that, so I stick with "lie until proven otherwise".

Jesus, Mary, and saints need no external inputs

Other than the unquestionable demand of belief that is.

A child sees a sandcastle and destroys it. Then the child wonders why the sandcastle doesn't exist.

For about three seconds then it adapts to whatever else more interesting happens around him. They don't hold on to the belief of the sandcastle's lost existence. It is us who educate them to do so, by instilling fear and shame. The child acted on natural instincts and the parents will shame him into compliance to their beliefs. The destroyed sandcastle just taught the child about change, and instead of directing it towards a positive (help rebuilding) it will most likely end with accusations and shame (a negative).

Loving your enemy means treating them with the respect they deserve. When they attack, you defend. But only to the degree necessary to ensure your safety. If that means killing them all? Then so be it. God will command that. If that means neutralizing them? Then so be it. If that means talking to them? Then so be it. If that means giving them charity? Then so be it.

Your strict adherence to your beliefs makes you blind to reality.

Where have those Christians you talk about been hiding for the last couple of thousands years? And if you blame corruption for it; tell me why they haven't defended themselves against the spread of it? The orthodoxy Christians I talk to this morning listened to the gospel and the only official recognition of reality was them wishing each other well in these troubling times. Then when the kids were finally allowed to participate in reality again; they ran out to catch up on life and it was me instigating discussions about positive and negate aspects of our surroundings; not the Presbyter standing next to me; making small talk. And those believers within my surroundings are influenced by me, so they are multiple levels elevated when it comes to comprehension and questioning their world. Their religious beliefs seldom come up, because I keep them busy in real life, in building communities, in maintaining order, in multiple forms of bartering, in generational exchange of knowledge, in all kinds of defenses etc. And I hold no authority position, because I don't accept any. I just make stuff work.

You are upholding a doctrine that is absent in reality. You either don't adapt to change or you ignore it on purpose.

None. Because they don't study it. They are indoctrinated into it.

You can't discern between intense study of all sides of an argument, and believing what you want to believe. That is a deadly lack of discernment.

Case and point; Owen Benjamin. A history major in WWII history, who spend a year or so living in the Czech Republic to study it, while interviewing "holocaust" survivor, visiting the places and who later hosted a science podcast at California Institute of Technology, where he interviewed all the big idols of science. That being said; thanks to him live-streaming daily for last couple of years, we learned that he believed every single thing he was involved in (including his successful Hollywood career) until he run into the moral contradiction of endorsing transsexual surgery for children. He rejected to do it; got kicked out of Hollywood, slandered, threatened, censored ever since, all his payment processors shut down, and he ever since shared with the world how he questioned each and every one of his beliefs to show the lie behind it. He had so many epiphanies on stream that's it's psychological case study by itself to watch his transformation into father of three, farm-steading, truth speaking, community building....devout Christian. He kicked the hornets nest of the holocaust hard and is mocking them ever since.

So there you go...cult of personality surrounding his persona aside, there is your studying towards self indoctrination to lies example, that only broke thanks to a traumatic trigger (the trans child abuse issue). And just to rub it in; he's still holding to Christianity like you. He tackled his indoctrinated lack of discernment; live on stream for all the world to see, and he faced up to being wrong over and over again. Then again; don't believe it; I don't.

Repeating your belief that the authority is false...

You are the only authority over your actions, which makes any other authority false by default including those you believe in. You are in contract to nature, which exchanges the liberty of freedom of choice for the judgments upon the consequences of your actions.

When your assurances do nothing to refute the point that the Church comes from God. And that God will not let His Church fall.

How many churches fell before because the deity was forgotten? "But that's different, because my deity is the only ONE..." says every believer ever until someone chops his heads of and proclaims yet again "there can only be ONE", and then the credits of Highlander roll and a so called jew makes bank yet again. How could I refute something that you base on an unquestionable belief you yourself are holding? I proved that holding a belief is a temptation leading towards death by pointing out that it's the opposite of adaptation, which is the demand for survial in a constantly changing system. A religion can be nothing but a lie on a foundation like that.

The fact that you keep talking about "blind faith" means you are not reading what I'm writing.

Blind faith is holding onto a belief. Blind faith against constant change in exchange for restriction of comprehension towards assumptions. I don't believe in anything; I adapt to everything.

That your beliefs are making it impossible for you to adapt.

Accepting a restriction (someone else's belief) is not adaptation. You proclaim your belief, which is why you create conflict. I just talk about it without any commitment to it. I claim nothing. I don't have to claim the laws of nature, because they define this ecosystem. They gave you the liberty of freedom of choice to even hold a belief. Before you could even comprehend anything; right at inception, you already fell under the laws of nature, because your beginning defined your end; defined your existence as the struggle in between. Years of your life spend without any belief in religious doctrines and once you fell under it's spell, you have the audacity to just slap it onto the years without your belief, and even onto the entire past in which you didn't existed. You slap it on every other lifeforms, which can't even comprehended the concept of it, you slap in on all of those who rejected, you slap it on those who believe in something entirely different, and you slap even on those who don't care at all. You justify all of this unfathomable selfishness with the belief you're holding within yourself. You even recognize that this world is run by liars, which by definition means that you agree that a lie requires a believer to work. And yet, here you are, blaming everyone else, but yourself. How is it me not using adaption, when refusing to believe what you believe; especially as I stated multiple times that I don't hold beliefs. And not just religious beliefs, but no -isms or any other beliefs, because that would be selfish to restrict myself to what I tell myself. That would be like watching a lion run towards me, while holding to the belief that everything is a-OK. It would be self destructive. Imagine I train with weapons and hold the unquestionable belief that I can do certain maneuvers and then I hit myself while doing it. What am I gonna do then? Ignore what happened, make a religion out of it to use the followers to justify my actions, contradict reality by telling myself it didn't happen?

Of course I do? How do you think I live my life? My beliefs make perfect sense of why I'm communicating with you.

Look at the state of the world around you and tell me how 99% of conscious humans could've been enslaved by 1% of liars? If you are in the 99% then your beliefs are nothing but the justification of ignorance to reality.

Why I'm giving you information you don't have.

Like what? Quoting scripture to me that you didn't wrote? Parroting the work of others, while using it to justify your assumptions against me? Don't you think I have scriptures here? Don't you realize that all I said comes directly from me (Minus the Owen Benjamin anecdote)? I don't quote anyone; I even state that you shouldn't believe me, but question yourself.

0
0

[–] Blood-is-Nature ago 

Earth is a battle ground between good and evil, as I said

Good and evil are not natural states. They only exist in your head. No other life form points a finger at something and proclaims it to be good or evil. Predator and prey are coexisting. Two humans can contradict the same object as good and evil. It's nothing but a false duality to keep your arguing the contradictions. Also, there is no battle going on, which would be a fight between opposing parties. Existence is a one way ticket towards an end. The conflict; the struggle is to maintain balance. All the conflicts that you're referring to are consequences of the former action of holding a belief, creating a contradiction and then opposing each other indefinitely.

So we are called to turn it wholly good by defending God.

Again throwing billions of lifeforms into the trash, because they neither can comprehend nor answer the "call". Anything non-human just happens to be here to accommodate us, because we are so worthy that a world was created for us. The defenders of god, the warriors of good against the evil corruption within ourselves. Master of all, in a fallen world that is nothing but a prop battleground that we let decay, while we uphold the honor of the unquestionable one, by putting faith towards the evil ones joining us so that we can all be happy after death in perfection without opposites. Mel Brooks could've wrote this.

Definitely against blasphemy.

The life of Mel Brooks; a life of blasphemy without any Christian resistance whatsoever. The talmud is legally protected now, while churches are not allowed to open their doors. Definitely not against blasphemy if you ask me. Also, "Thou shalt have no other gods before me" was told to you by someone you accepted the authority of, thereby contradicting the law. Have you noticed that the talmud has a commandment before that? It's called "I am the Lord thy God". Do you see the difference when a believer receives the commandment "I am the Lord thy God" and he answers: "I am the Lord thy God" and both smile, shake their hands and subvert in unison? How can you ignore this? They make the spell so obvious.

And since you are so strong against blasphemy you should check out the commandments page on (((wikipedia))) that has the talmud before all others. It's called historical revisionism goes chutzpah, and it's legal under the smith-mundt act.

Parasites who believe like you have hijacked the message of Christianity and have, through lies and deceit, convinced them that they are good and the Christians are evil. It is only possible because evil people who have no morals, and believe morals don't exist, and believe, as you, that truth doesn't exist that this can happen.

No, it's not my fault for pointing out reality and I also don't leech upon anyone. What you ignore with every fiber of your body and mind is accepting change, because it leads towards death, which is the point where all the contradictions piling up against your beliefs will be washed aside by the truth of nature...the end; your end. What does it say about Christianity that it could've been hijacked by "evil" people with no morals? I also work hard every day to follow "morality" under the laws of nature by steering my actions towards positive consequences.

Your ideology is why this is happening.

So me explaining how this ecosystem works, while telling you to not believe it, but question it for yourself through adaptation is the fault for mankind destroying itself based on the contradicting beliefs they're holding? Ideology is btw a term coming directly from Karl Marx and Friederich Engels, but who knows where they stole it from. You didn't do yourself any favors by using marxist terms to put blame on me.

It is available to you if you want it.

See "wants" are temptations, and wants attached to a contract of belief with terms and conditions, is something I'm not willing to pay for.