Only I can judge God. I is you if you choose to be.

Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Only I can judge God. I is you if you choose to be.

Only I can judge God. I is you if you choose to be.

Using the term --- I am here means you. This applies to all of us. You are ( I ) to you as I am I to me. Only you then can judge the God construct that you see as you evaluate what you know of God.

Jesus said that at the end of days he would return. He meant in spirit only. Not a physical manifestation. He also said that the time of the end was at hand and that the temple of God was within each of us. The tern spirit represents, the spirit of the law, what is written in the hearts, ---- God in other words, ---- is defined as laws and rules and such as they are the only thing you can follow at all times, ---- and these are set by you and you are in effect ruling yourself in terms of following the God construct you have developed.

Jesus is telling you that you and your heart are the only things of importance in terms of leadership as it is the rules you have accepted as worthy of following. Jesus warned that at end times there would be a number of Jesus’ to choose from and morality is what you will have to choose from.

That is why I think it important to evaluate what Jesus said and determine if it is worthy and moral or not.

Jesus Christ. Madman or something worse.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4QXOgVfY9k&feature=player_embedded

Below, Bishop Spong speaks of basically redefining Christianity. Going from a church or religious thinking, to a more spiritual or heart felt thinking. I also urge Christianity to change because it is now too immoral to ignore with today’s mentality. It’s overall policies are immoral in my view. The God of war must die and Jesus declared the full and only God that is required and that the noble lie of politics should be revoked to let all know that the God you likely know was always a myth. This may be a good time for you to contemplate such a move as many Christians haves rejected the O.T. God and only focus on Jesus and loving policies.

Bishop Spong speaks well to this issue.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AfFcAmx-Ro&feature=relmfu

Apotheosis means just recognizing that you are on a journey of being your own God. Some few will have help from God on this through a real apotheosis but only the very few it seems. You cannot get away from that fact so you may as well forget about fantasy, miracles and magic. They were never real and you are the strongest force you will ever know. After all, who but you can make you want to do anything voluntarily? There is no other force that can do this and therefore you are God in the real sense of being master of yourself. If that does not compute with you then remember that A & E became as Gods, God’s own words, and yours is the same birth rite. Throw it away if you wish. You cannot reject the knowledge of good and evil so I cannot fathom why you would throw away the fact that you as well can become as Gods.

The moral of Jesus and his sacrifice is that we should accept being God, and ruling ourselves even against a government if needs be. Become archetypal Moses and face government and declare that it faces one as great as itself. That is what being a free man is all about.

The time of the end is when Jesus becomes your God on earth, ---- again this is you, --- who takes the place of the mythical heavenly God of war. Jesus/you, as the way, the man’s way of judging first, not some absentee God’s unknown standard. Your covenant with yourself is to be the new covenant. Man answering to man and himself. Not to some unknown God.

This clip from J. Haidt shows that we instinctively share God’s morals. In this we are truly Gods and children of God.

http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/

I am God because I am the only one who is capable of judging the God I know.
You are a God in your own rite as you are the only one who is capable of judging the God you know.

The Noble Lie is firmly in place and manipulating your thinking. Discard it. In this day and age we do not need it the way we may have in the past.

The Noble Lie.
In politics a noble lie is a myth or untruth, often, but not invariably, of a religious nature, knowingly told by an elite to maintain social harmony or to advance an agenda.

As a Gnostic Christian, this theology/philosophy is quite natural to me and can be for all people.

Try thinking as the God that you are. Stop being a sheep and rise to your true inheritance as a shepherd. That is the message Jesus wants you to recognize.

Regards
DL

P.S.
Listen to Jesus and hear for the first time in your life.
Ps 82:6 I said, "You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High.
Hosea 1:10 Ye are the sons of the living God.
Do you think that sons of God are destined to be sheep or shepherds?
Jesus was written to empower us. Not enslave us. Do not waste what he gave.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I've been trying to tell you all

Greatest I am wrote:
Only I can judge God. I is you if you choose to be. Using the term --- I am here means you. This applies to all of us. You are ( I ) to you as I am I to me. Only you then can judge the God construct that you see as you evaluate what you know of God. Jesus said that at the end of days he would return. He meant in spirit only. Not a physical manifestation. He also said that the time of the end was at hand and that the temple of God was within each of us. The tern spirit represents, the spirit of the law, what is written in the hearts, ---- God in other words, ---- is defined as laws and rules and such as they are the only thing you can follow at all times, ---- and these are set by you and you are in effect ruling yourself in terms of following the God construct you have developed. Jesus is telling you that you and your heart are the only things of importance in terms of leadership as it is the rules you have accepted as worthy of following. Jesus warned that at end times there would be a number of Jesus’ to choose from and morality is what you will have to choose from. That is why I think it important to evaluate what Jesus said and determine if it is worthy and moral or not. Jesus Christ. Madman or something worse. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4QXOgVfY9k&feature=player_embedded Below, Bishop Spong speaks of basically redefining Christianity. Going from a church or religious thinking, to a more spiritual or heart felt thinking. I also urge Christianity to change because it is now too immoral to ignore with today’s mentality. It’s overall policies are immoral in my view. The God of war must die and Jesus declared the full and only God that is required and that the noble lie of politics should be revoked to let all know that the God you likely know was always a myth. This may be a good time for you to contemplate such a move as many Christians haves rejected the O.T. God and only focus on Jesus and loving policies. Bishop Spong speaks well to this issue. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6AfFcAmx-Ro&feature=relmfu Apotheosis means just recognizing that you are on a journey of being your own God. Some few will have help from God on this through a real apotheosis but only the very few it seems. You cannot get away from that fact so you may as well forget about fantasy, miracles and magic. They were never real and you are the strongest force you will ever know. After all, who but you can make you want to do anything voluntarily? There is no other force that can do this and therefore you are God in the real sense of being master of yourself. If that does not compute with you then remember that A & E became as Gods, God’s own words, and yours is the same birth rite. Throw it away if you wish. You cannot reject the knowledge of good and evil so I cannot fathom why you would throw away the fact that you as well can become as Gods. The moral of Jesus and his sacrifice is that we should accept being God, and ruling ourselves even against a government if needs be. Become archetypal Moses and face government and declare that it faces one as great as itself. That is what being a free man is all about. The time of the end is when Jesus becomes your God on earth, ---- again this is you, --- who takes the place of the mythical heavenly God of war. Jesus/you, as the way, the man’s way of judging first, not some absentee God’s unknown standard. Your covenant with yourself is to be the new covenant. Man answering to man and himself. Not to some unknown God. This clip from J. Haidt shows that we instinctively share God’s morals. In this we are truly Gods and children of God. http://blog.ted.com/2008/09/17/the_real_differ/ I am God because I am the only one who is capable of judging the God I know. You are a God in your own rite as you are the only one who is capable of judging the God you know. The Noble Lie is firmly in place and manipulating your thinking. Discard it. In this day and age we do not need it the way we may have in the past. The Noble Lie. In politics a noble lie is a myth or untruth, often, but not invariably, of a religious nature, knowingly told by an elite to maintain social harmony or to advance an agenda. As a Gnostic Christian, this theology/philosophy is quite natural to me and can be for all people. Try thinking as the God that you are. Stop being a sheep and rise to your true inheritance as a shepherd. That is the message Jesus wants you to recognize. Regards DL P.S. Listen to Jesus and hear for the first time in your life. Ps 82:6 I said, "You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High. Hosea 1:10 Ye are the sons of the living God. Do you think that sons of God are destined to be sheep or shepherds? Jesus was written to empower us. Not enslave us. Do not waste what he gave.

What you have here is what we call an Adamite. An Adamite has no perception of "god". An Adamite is "the I Am", meaning I am Me---which is the same as "you" and all others. The three persons in god ----You, Me, and everyone else. The term "god" is strictly European. The is no such usage in the book as "God". The "god" of the Euros does not exist and never did. It's their term for "an unknown force" which they can't explain. One can apply the term "god" to anything or anyone. or even the self, one only needs to choose---or throw the term out altogether. An Adamite is one who understands the "self". AND, That's where the book's direction is coming from and going to. JC is an Adamite+, that's all. Then Biblical "Adam" is one who studird and found the "self". The biblical creatio0n has nothing to do with any material creation. The metaphors used relate to the contents of one's person. Those same metaphors are applied throughout the book. Everyone "is" a God in their own right---the problem is---everuyone is trying to be a God above everyone else which produces the social problems seen in the world. It's very simple---- If one wants to be a Godanimal it has it's result. If you wants to be a Godhuman it has it's result. There's no such possibility of "humananimal"<---that's the problem. I've been here for a year and still---no one understands. Being what people are, and how they see themselves---is the problem.

 Christianity is nothing more then choosing one-----human or animal. Choose one. If the people choose "human", the world as is collapses. The world doesn't operate on the human-it only uses it as a front to hide the animal. If one doesn't like the term "Christian" tuff shidski---you,re stuck with it. It's one's humanity---not animality. Take your pick.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
What do you

What do you believe?

 

Regards

DL


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:There's no

Old Seer wrote:

There's no such possibility of "humananimal"<---that's the problem. I've been here for a year and still---no one understands.

That's because you need to be A LOT clearer in defining what you mean by "human" and "animal". Your statements make ZERO SENSE from a biological standpoint, as humans are very clearly classified as a species of animal.

 

 


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1616
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
Misc. --

Misc. --

blacklight915 wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

There's no such possibility of "humananimal"<---that's the problem. I've been here for a year and still---no one understands.

That's because you (Old Seer) need to be A LOT clearer in 'defining' what you mean by "human" and "animal". Your statements make ZERO SENSE from a biological standpoint, as humans are very clearly classified as a species of animal.

 

  ______________________________________________________________________________________________________

http://www.rationalresponders.com/forum/30683?page=1#comment-395858

 ref #70

rationalresponders.com/forum/30683?page=1 #70

  _____

 


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
Danatemporary

Danatemporary wrote:

Quote:
the precise wording used by the Alchemist was to: turn 'animal-man into divine being'.

Direct..reply   

Old Seer wrote:
Alchemy: As best I can make of it he's right.

Huh, it seems like Old Seer is saying that people should behave in a more divine manner--meaning we should try to exhibit the character traits we imagine perfect beings would have.

To all: How correct does my analysis seem?

 


harleysportster
atheist
harleysportster's picture
Posts: 3312
Joined: 2010-10-17
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote: Huh,

blacklight915 wrote:

 

Huh, it seems like Old Seer is saying that people should behave in a more divine manner--meaning we should try to exhibit the character traits we imagine perfect beings would have.

To all: How correct does my analysis seem?

 

I am not really sure where Old Seer is coming from with that one. I DO remember one post about an animal side and spritual side, but then I remember another post about the two sides being indivisible. So, I am not really sure. I have read through a lot of his posts and that is one of the many aspects that confuse me.

I know that he talks often about the non-existence of any REAL christians and that there have not been any since the time of Christ, that all things after were more or less a distortion, but I don't know if I am actually getting that one right.

There is a great deal of ambiguity in his posts. I know that I read through his thread : "Old Seers Corner" but did not read all of the posts, so maybe I am missing something.

“It is proof of a base and low mind for one to wish to think with the masses or majority, merely because the majority is the majority. Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people.”
― Giordano Bruno


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3472
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
harleysportster wrote: I am

harleysportster wrote:

 

I am not really sure where Old Seer is coming from with that one.

that would be out of left field.

"I asked my father,
I said, 'Father change my name.'
The one I'm using now it's covered up
with fear and filth and cowardice and shame."
--Leonard Cohen


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Ok

blacklight915 wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

There's no such possibility of "humananimal"<---that's the problem. I've been here for a year and still---no one understands.

That's because you need to be A LOT clearer in defining what you mean by "human" and "animal". Your statements make ZERO SENSE from a biological standpoint, as humans are very clearly classified as a species of animal.

 

This is not an attempt to highjack this thread or set one in progress. But-that's very likely to happen.

There are 4 common uses for "Human". In the context of-

1- it's a mental/personal/spiritual condition.

2- "Intellect" is used to define human.

3- Physical-m as in "human body". Used at times to define what manner of body people have.

4-  "Imperfection", as in when one makes a mistake--such as the recent Petreaus deal. Application-He was only being human. This also denotes a mental condition. What it means is---one is less then God, as God is considered superhuman which is an impossibility according to the Smurfs, and can't be found anywhere in the book.

#1 is what the Smurfs use and is strictly the only proper application we use

#2 Intellect is neither (according to us) Human or Inhuman/animal but a compulatory process applied to gain an understanding of anything. To us it is not what makes one human. Human is given automatically by nature and one need not be highly intellectual to be human or to have a human side/entity---as even dogs have a human side, but have it without a higher intellect. There-fore it is not required to have a higher intellect to be a human entity..

#3 We say--there is no such thing as human material. The physical is material so there cannot be a human body, as to us, "human is a mental condition. IE- bones are primarily calcium, which means that calcium cannot be human. Bones cannot be evidence of a "Human presence as bones can only testify to the fact that there existed as a physical body. HOWEVER---one can deduce from evidence as to whether a Human was/is present within the brain. The brain is where the perso9n is---not the leg etc, there-fore the leg bone cannot be "human', as there is no difference in the calcium from a dogs leg bone as a people's leg bone. Now--I used the term "people"--not human. To us there is a difference. People denote (to us) that a person of higher intellect is present, but does not denote whether that person is human or animal.

  To us --our bodies/physical is nothing more then another monkey/primate. It has it's modifications for use as well as a cat is different from a dog, and each has a physical variation/evolutionary adaptation to succeed in it's environment. If our physical evolved and so also the dog---than how can we have a human body and the dog not.

 So then to the Smurfs---the term Human gets reserved only in use as regards to the mental. We had to do this so we could be understood by each other. But on the over-all we found it to be true (over time) that "Human" is strictly a mental direction, not a physical. Because it is the mental that is needed to understand the self (person).  If the person resides in the brain then the rest cannot be person.

  Person then---divides into 2 specific directions (social mental states) the Humane and the Inhumane. But--here is where things get tricky. You've noticed that I refer to the "Human/animal concept, which to us isn't exactly true, because "animal" is not a mental condition. but for the sake of expressing things we need to use your terms. If you look up the term "animal" in the dictionary you may very well find it relates to a mental condition also. To us there is no such thing as an animal mind (we merely have to use your terms). The word , animal, to us denotes something physical which means "animate" or, ability to move. So far as we know the entity in the brain has no physical movement, so we restrict animal to being something that is capable of moving, walking etc. That means that all beings are the same but have variances.

 The biology of the matter is---there are only two to consider. A bioform is that which is of genetic makeup. That being the plants (inanimates) and the animates. Our physical is of the animates because we can move about. But,  animates have a brain and there-fore a personage, but the degree of being Humane and Inhumane varies. IE- some reptiles are more humane then others, and can be seen from observation. So to us- animal is reserved for an explanation of the physical that we have.

  Now--to the humananimal. What this is saying to us is both are the same--which cannot be, because if the term is applied to the physical---there is no such thing as a physical human, as the physical is material and the person is either presently human or inhumane which are states of mind/person. What this is about is "social structure". One relates to others from these 2 directions, the humane or the inhumane. From the values that one places on another extends from these 2, and each has it's consequences. To us, humananimal is the same as humaninhumane. That's an impossibility as one can only be one of those at any given instant or time. Humananimal is equal to zero, that is if one uses "animal" in regards to mean inhumane. In leaving the term "animal" to denote an animate rather then anything mental then leaves the consideration to "humane and inhumane, from which all social values are derived from. The dog has an animate as well as we--but the question is--when is the dog being humane or inhumane to another dog, considering that the dog has the same inner/personal makeup as we.

  Human to us then, denotes "social ties or values" rather then something physical. When we apply the term "people" we mostly mean, a personage in conjunction with a higher order of intellect, but, it doesn't necessarily mean "human". In your world you combine the physical with human, while we reserve human strictly for the mental/person. The higher order of intellect allows for one to contemplate "the self" and arrive at a conclusion as to "what do I want to be". Once one understands then he/she can make up their own self as to what one prefers. One can then decide from evidence clearly seen as to whether one wants to be a part of a Buffalo herd or the human herd. Lording over each other extends from the inhumane and results in the social conflicts that the world is under. As it is---the world is trying to go both ways at the same time operating from the context of humananimal, which technically is the same as "huimaninhuman". It can never solve the social problems.

 So- when I say human I mean a mental condition of the humane, not something physical or material.    A body cannot be humane--it only follows the mind/person.    Smiling

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:What do

Greatest I am wrote:

What do you believe?

 

Regards

DL

We believe what Adam was, a person of the self. There's nothing devine going on there. They were ordinary floks with an understanding of what is good and what is evil. This idea of good and evil was an understanding of how one's actions can be of harm to another. They were the first (known) moral society. Morals are the values under which one relates to others. But, it's not absolute that they were the only moral one's. They are the only one's known on record as to their being. What they knew may have also been known by, or given to others. That would prospectively explain why there are so many creation stories alike. The Adamites may very well be the ancestors of more then just the middle easterners. The only ancestors biblically known are the middle easterners. Adam believed in the self and that of others. You could say that Adams religion (if appllicable) was a belief in the human entity which all of us have, no different today then-then. Samo samo. They knew the precepts of being at peace with others---of which was removed and replaced by Nimrod.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


blacklight915
blacklight915's picture
Posts: 544
Joined: 2011-12-23
User is offlineOffline
To Old Seer: Your

To Old Seer: Your explanation was very helpful, and I really appreciate you taking the time to write it. I think I have MUCH better understanding of your position now.

One comment: If you used the words "humane" and "inhumane" instead of "human" and "animal", I really think people on this board would understand a lot better.

Thank you again for explaining.   

 

 


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:Greatest I am

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

What do you believe?

 

Regards

DL

We believe what Adam was, a person of the self. There's nothing devine going on there. They were ordinary floks with an understanding of what is good and what is evil. This idea of good and evil was an understanding of how one's actions can be of harm to another. They were the first (known) moral society. Morals are the values under which one relates to others. But, it's not absolute that they were the only moral one's. They are the only one's known on record as to their being. What they knew may have also been known by, or given to others. That would prospectively explain why there are so many creation stories alike. The Adamites may very well be the ancestors of more then just the middle easterners. The only ancestors biblically known are the middle easterners. Adam believed in the self and that of others. You could say that Adams religion (if appllicable) was a belief in the human entity which all of us have, no different today then-then. Samo samo. They knew the precepts of being at peace with others---of which was removed and replaced by Nimrod.

Thanks for this.

Do you see humans and our bodies, please don't repeat what you said above, as evolving creatures and if so, you will know that in evolution we must do both compete and cooperate to survive and when we compete for any resources, like jobs in our world, we must do evil to the losers of that competition and thus must sin in the classic sense.

How, due to this evolutionary trap, can you help but do evil from the loser of the competition's POV?
You cannot. Correct?

As to alchemy and the Arcanum, they applied those notions to matter. Not soul and spirit. Apotheosis is the term you should be using and not alchemy. Right?

If not, expand on how matter is somehow locked to the invisible realms.

I have not sought you out for discourse because you are as hard as I probably am in expression of deeper thoughts but I did catch a small glimmer here possibly.

If you keep it as short as you can, it is better for all.

One brick at a time.

Regards
DL


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote:To Old

blacklight915 wrote:

To Old Seer: Your explanation was very helpful, and I really appreciate you taking the time to write it. I think I have MUCH better understanding of your position now.

One comment: If you used the words "humane" and "inhumane" instead of "human" and "animal", I really think people on this board would understand a lot better.

Thank you again for explaining.   

 

 

You are welcome blacklight. I know this kind of thing can be hard to understand. OK, I'll go the human and animal if easier for understanding.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


danatemporary
danatemporary's picture
Posts: 1616
Joined: 2011-01-12
User is offlineOffline
I know this thing can be hard to understand . . .

 Bonpo Religion  --  Animal minds do not have the capacity to become an enlightened-self, at all.  When our mind is intoxicated by ignorant attachment to sense(-ual) pleasures, we do whatever we need to do in order to get the pleasure or advantage we seek,  even if this entails piercing others with our tusks of flagrant harm.  Alternatively, in our right mind we have an aversion to wrong-doing.  

 

 


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I'll try.

Greatest I am wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

What do you believe?

 

Regards

DL

We believe what Adam was, a person of the self. There's nothing devine going on there. They were ordinary floks with an understanding of what is good and what is evil. This idea of good and evil was an understanding of how one's actions can be of harm to another. They were the first (known) moral society. Morals are the values under which one relates to others. But, it's not absolute that they were the only moral one's. They are the only one's known on record as to their being. What they knew may have also been known by, or given to others. That would prospectively explain why there are so many creation stories alike. The Adamites may very well be the ancestors of more then just the middle easterners. The only ancestors biblically known are the middle easterners. Adam believed in the self and that of others. You could say that Adams religion (if appllicable) was a belief in the human entity which all of us have, no different today then-then. Samo samo. They knew the precepts of being at peace with others---of which was removed and replaced by Nimrod.

Thanks for this. Do you see humans and our bodies, please don't repeat what you said above, as evolving creatures and if so, you will know that in evolution we must do both compete and cooperate to survive and when we compete for any resources, like jobs in our world, we must do evil to the losers of that competition and thus must sin in the classic sense. How, due to this evolutionary trap, can you help but do evil from the loser of the competition's POV? You cannot. Correct? As to alchemy and the Arcanum, they applied those notions to matter. Not soul and spirit. Apotheosis is the term you should be using and not alchemy. Right? If not, expand on how matter is somehow locked to the invisible realms. I have not sought you out for discourse because you are as hard as I probably am in expression of deeper thoughts but I did catch a small glimmer here possibly. If you keep it as short as you can, it is better for all. One brick at a time. Regards DL

We see human as a mental state or personal state, rather then a physical state.

We disagree that we have to compete. Competition is an animal trait and leads to social problems. While it facilitates great material endeavours it leads to wars and strifes. Predatorism is also an animal trait resulting in the same. Societies of the world rely on animal traits to proceed, and then in turn try to solve the problems created by force and punishment which are also animal triats. what's happening (for millenium) is to try to solve problems with what causes the problems, which can never work. The human entity remains of course but it isn't relied on for material processes but is used to facilitate the animal process. What is to understand is---the world we have looks normal because no one knows any other. We're only going in a direction thats been inherited, but it's never been a neccesity to go in the directions that we are in. IE-In a simpler system it wouldn't be necessary to have freeways. Freeways only facilitate the direction we going in, and so with many other things.

We are products of evolution-yes. but take also into account that from evolution we formed an aniaml mind---but we also evolved with a human mind/side. The emphasis of the world is placed on the animal mind---hence-troubles and strifes. Christianity is the using of our intellect to put aside the animal (it is a choice once understood) and go in the human direction. Our minds are also a product or result of evolution. The main this is---we also evolved with a higher adaptation of intellect. We've used this higher form of intellect to inhance the animal rather then the human. The animal and human are separable. I know because I do so frequently.  Evolution came about in both directions. One is only in an evolutionary trap if one is not aware of the  choices. 

Alchemy-- originally the intent (as I understand it) was to make gold out of something---I don't know what, but I do know it can't be made from sand, as far as I know. I don't know how Alchemy ties a spiritual concept except if someone thought they could make a better being through it. I agreed with Aussiescribbler on grounds that he encountered a source of that information. When one contemplates the dark ages one can see they were capable of trying anything.

Feel free to ask anything, just be aware I don't know it all.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote: To Old

blacklight915 wrote:

To Old Seer: Your explanation was very helpful, and I really appreciate you taking the time to write it. I think I have MUCH better understanding of your position now.

One comment: If you used the words "humane" and "inhumane" instead of "human" and "animal", I really think people on this board would understand a lot better.

Thank you again for explaining.   

 

 

You are welcome blacklight. I know this kind of thing can be hard to understand. OK, I'll go the human and animal if easier for understanding.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
blacklight915 wrote: To Old

blacklight915 wrote:

To Old Seer: Your explanation was very helpful, and I really appreciate you taking the time to write it. I think I have MUCH better understanding of your position now.

One comment: If you used the words "humane" and "inhumane" instead of "human" and "animal", I really think people on this board would understand a lot better.

Thank you again for explaining.   

 

 

You are welcome blacklight. I know this kind of thing can be hard to understand. OK, I'll go the human and animal if easier for understanding.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Old Seer wrote:Greatest I am

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

What do you believe?

 

Regards

DL

We believe what Adam was, a person of the self. There's nothing devine going on there. They were ordinary floks with an understanding of what is good and what is evil. This idea of good and evil was an understanding of how one's actions can be of harm to another. They were the first (known) moral society. Morals are the values under which one relates to others. But, it's not absolute that they were the only moral one's. They are the only one's known on record as to their being. What they knew may have also been known by, or given to others. That would prospectively explain why there are so many creation stories alike. The Adamites may very well be the ancestors of more then just the middle easterners. The only ancestors biblically known are the middle easterners. Adam believed in the self and that of others. You could say that Adams religion (if appllicable) was a belief in the human entity which all of us have, no different today then-then. Samo samo. They knew the precepts of being at peace with others---of which was removed and replaced by Nimrod.

Thanks for this. Do you see humans and our bodies, please don't repeat what you said above, as evolving creatures and if so, you will know that in evolution we must do both compete and cooperate to survive and when we compete for any resources, like jobs in our world, we must do evil to the losers of that competition and thus must sin in the classic sense. How, due to this evolutionary trap, can you help but do evil from the loser of the competition's POV? You cannot. Correct? As to alchemy and the Arcanum, they applied those notions to matter. Not soul and spirit. Apotheosis is the term you should be using and not alchemy. Right? If not, expand on how matter is somehow locked to the invisible realms. I have not sought you out for discourse because you are as hard as I probably am in expression of deeper thoughts but I did catch a small glimmer here possibly. If you keep it as short as you can, it is better for all. One brick at a time. Regards DL

We see human as a mental state or personal state, rather then a physical state.

We disagree that we have to compete. Competition is an animal trait and leads to social problems. While it facilitates great material endeavours it leads to wars and strifes. Predatorism is also an animal trait resulting in the same. Societies of the world rely on animal traits to proceed, and then in turn try to solve the problems created by force and punishment which are also animal triats. what's happening (for millenium) is to try to solve problems with what causes the problems, which can never work. The human entity remains of course but it isn't relied on for material processes but is used to facilitate the animal process. What is to understand is---the world we have looks normal because no one knows any other. We're only going in a direction thats been inherited, but it's never been a neccesity to go in the directions that we are in. IE-In a simpler system it wouldn't be necessary to have freeways. Freeways only facilitate the direction we going in, and so with many other things.

We are products of evolution-yes. but take also into account that from evolution we formed an aniaml mind---but we also evolved with a human mind/side. The emphasis of the world is placed on the animal mind---hence-troubles and strifes. Christianity is the using of our intellect to put aside the animal (it is a choice once understood) and go in the human direction. Our minds are also a product or result of evolution. The main this is---we also evolved with a higher adaptation of intellect. We've used this higher form of intellect to inhance the animal rather then the human. The animal and human are separable. I know because I do so frequently.  Evolution came about in both directions. One is only in an evolutionary trap if one is not aware of the  choices. 

Alchemy-- originally the intent (as I understand it) was to make gold out of something---I don't know what, but I do know it can't be made from sand, as far as I know. I don't know how Alchemy ties a spiritual concept except if someone thought they could make a better being through it. I agreed with Aussiescribbler on grounds that he encountered a source of that information. When one contemplates the dark ages one can see they were capable of trying anything.

Feel free to ask anything, just be aware I don't know it all.

 

 

You say that you can somehow get through life without competing.

Yet that is not the life you led. The last time you competed for a job and won, you made losers out of the ones you won against. If that losing streak is not broken by them, they will die our over time.

You could not help trying to win and survival of the fittest says that you must or die out. If all did not compete, the whole species could go extinct.

How do you get around the fact that you did evil from the losers POV and will again the next time you compete?

How could you have done otherwise than do that past evil and the next to come?

 

Regards

DL

 


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3472
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
christ, this is like a

christ, this is like a fuckin' debate between yoda and the head mystic from the dark crystal.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
OK let's have a look at this.

Greatest I am wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

What do you believe?

 

Regards

DL

We believe what Adam was, a person of the self. There's nothing devine going on there. They were ordinary floks with an understanding of what is good and what is evil. This idea of good and evil was an understanding of how one's actions can be of harm to another. They were the first (known) moral society. Morals are the values under which one relates to others. But, it's not absolute that they were the only moral one's. They are the only one's known on record as to their being. What they knew may have also been known by, or given to others. That would prospectively explain why there are so many creation stories alike. The Adamites may very well be the ancestors of more then just the middle easterners. The only ancestors biblically known are the middle easterners. Adam believed in the self and that of others. You could say that Adams religion (if appllicable) was a belief in the human entity which all of us have, no different today then-then. Samo samo. They knew the precepts of being at peace with others---of which was removed and replaced by Nimrod.

Thanks for this. Do you see humans and our bodies, please don't repeat what you said above, as evolving creatures and if so, you will know that in evolution we must do both compete and cooperate to survive and when we compete for any resources, like jobs in our world, we must do evil to the losers of that competition and thus must sin in the classic sense. How, due to this evolutionary trap, can you help but do evil from the loser of the competition's POV? You cannot. Correct? As to alchemy and the Arcanum, they applied those notions to matter. Not soul and spirit. Apotheosis is the term you should be using and not alchemy. Right? If not, expand on how matter is somehow locked to the invisible realms. I have not sought you out for discourse because you are as hard as I probably am in expression of deeper thoughts but I did catch a small glimmer here possibly. If you keep it as short as you can, it is better for all. One brick at a time. Regards DL

We see human as a mental state or personal state, rather then a physical state.

We disagree that we have to compete. Competition is an animal trait and leads to social problems. While it facilitates great material endeavours it leads to wars and strifes. Predatorism is also an animal trait resulting in the same. Societies of the world rely on animal traits to proceed, and then in turn try to solve the problems created by force and punishment which are also animal triats. what's happening (for millenium) is to try to solve problems with what causes the problems, which can never work. The human entity remains of course but it isn't relied on for material processes but is used to facilitate the animal process. What is to understand is---the world we have looks normal because no one knows any other. We're only going in a direction thats been inherited, but it's never been a neccesity to go in the directions that we are in. IE-In a simpler system it wouldn't be necessary to have freeways. Freeways only facilitate the direction we going in, and so with many other things.

We are products of evolution-yes. but take also into account that from evolution we formed an aniaml mind---but we also evolved with a human mind/side. The emphasis of the world is placed on the animal mind---hence-troubles and strifes. Christianity is the using of our intellect to put aside the animal (it is a choice once understood) and go in the human direction. Our minds are also a product or result of evolution. The main this is---we also evolved with a higher adaptation of intellect. We've used this higher form of intellect to inhance the animal rather then the human. The animal and human are separable. I know because I do so frequently.  Evolution came about in both directions. One is only in an evolutionary trap if one is not aware of the  choices. 

Alchemy-- originally the intent (as I understand it) was to make gold out of something---I don't know what, but I do know it can't be made from sand, as far as I know. I don't know how Alchemy ties a spiritual concept except if someone thought they could make a better being through it. I agreed with Aussiescribbler on grounds that he encountered a source of that information. When one contemplates the dark ages one can see they were capable of trying anything.

Feel free to ask anything, just be aware I don't know it all.

 

 

You say that you can somehow get through life without competing.

Yet that is not the life you led. The last time you competed for a job and won, you made losers out of the ones you won against. If that losing streak is not broken by them, they will die our over time.

You could not help trying to win and survival of the fittest says that you must or die out. If all did not compete, the whole species could go extinct.

How do you get around the fact that you did evil from the losers POV and will again the next time you compete?

How could you have done otherwise than do that past evil and the next to come?

 

Regards

DL

 

1- Yes we can get through life without competing. Competition (an animal trait)is the world you have now, but there's no law saying one has to compete. What you have here is a world the way it is as decided by ignorant authorities who don't understand the difference between a human and an animal. We all evolved with both abilities, the humane and the inhumane. From the humane comes human, and from the inhumane comes the animal. Until now you had no choice, and you are what the system operators prefer you to be, but yet, they aren't aware that they have a choice. Their concept of "human" is skewed. If you are in a system that doesn't know the difference then what you have looks like the only one there is---but there has always been the other option, hidden because of the direction one is taught to be in. We are informing you that you have a choice that you didn't have before---that choice is to be "human", instead of the pseudo human one is now. Competition comes from the "inhumane" and that's one reason there are such social problems that you have today. You are mere;y following leaders who are highly animalistc, and without knowing, hold the masses in the concept. I was raised in the same world you are in now, but that's what the studies of the Smurfs found---there is another. You're fooled by thinking evolution created only one way to be---but from evolution also comes the other.

The world operates on the animal mentality, and being it was the only known makes it seem that it's the only one. One must realize that there is no such claim that the world operates on---the human animal---there is no such thing. Human is human and animal is animal and each is of it's own mentality and separable. In order to create a world of peace you have to choose one, And the only choice can be the human entity that all have. On the human side there is no competition. greaters and lessors, advantage seeking, profiteering, subjegation of others---as that all originates from the animal entity. The placing of material (materialism) over the individuality of others for gain originates from the animal.

  Being retired and not having to compete allows me to be in a different world (mental state) then before, and I can say---there is a difference. That's why i have a this sign on the back of my RV ----I'M RETIRED, I DON'T HAVE TO BE A PRICK ANYMORE.  The world your in looks normal to you, of course. it's the only one the leaders know about.

2-  Of course the only life I've lead is the same as everyone else,s. but at one time I didn't know there was another world. Now that I know I've made the choice. It's alot easier when one is retired and out of the fray. There is a difference. I still encounter problems with your world but I can deal with it. One has to live with it until a change is made, and that can only be when the masses know what the Smurfs know. If we can do it anyone can. One will have to put up with things as is for the duration. The first thing is to see the other, the second is to not believe it any further, third is to change the self. My family has to deal with this world on a daily basis, but the don't believe in it.

3- survival of the fittest isn't needed anymore, we have intellect to reason another way. The ideals that the world is under (survival of the fittest) coupled with intellect insures the extinction of people/masses. That's where it's all going presently. The Psycho Smurfs detected that, They were watching) and it's the reason I'm here---keep going this way and we're all goners for sure. The time of Noah shows that this direction of thinking leads to self destruction. There is no way out of the worlds present mess except self destruction---it's gone over the hump of no return. You have to change it now. We're trying to help. Not to worry---we seen it on time.

4- Evil, is a consequence of the living in the universe, it's automatic. Good and evil exist together. From doing an evil can bring about a good and vice versa. Good deeds can bring an evil upon someone. doing a evil can bring about a good also. good and evil are not wrong, they just are. It cannot be that good is right and evil is wrong. They both depend upon each other. If a good can bring about an evil and good is right then evil also has to be right---or they both have to be wrong, it can't be both-so they just are. We all have some control over good and evil but not absolute control. The system as it is does purposeful evil to bring about good. You are living under the tree fo the knowledge of good and evil (civilization) by which a few are deciding what is good and what is evil. There is no such thing as right and wrong. Right and wrong are inventions of the elites to control the masses. There is only good and evil. The operators create an evil or a good to be right and wrong in accordance to how they want to control you. In their ignorance they construct a society on animal principals and then must set limits on what manner of animal conduct is allowable and what isn't. This is accomplished by creating what is right and what is wrong. Capitalism is predatory, but under their idea it's predatory above a certain limit, so what they've done is make a predator not a predator by their definition. What part of predator is not a predator---but that's how they control you, and you've given them the right to decide. Being a predator is not wrong and it is naturally animal;-but with a bit of reasoning one can see the evil consequences, and to see those consequences and refrain from predatorism shows a human is present--as a human is concerned about how ones actions and mentality have an effect on others. Not to care is animal.

5- I could not have done otherwise as at one time I didn't know. Now that I do know I may not have the choice to do or not do as long as this system is here. Now that I know I've made the choice at least not to believe. If all others do the same the world as is goes away. The world you have here cannjot possibly work. There's so much purposeful evil making to keep it working it has entered into a self destruct area. It cannot be revered because more evil would be required to try to reverse it---and end up making things worse. You now have a world wide situation with no where to go. You now have to change it--it' cannot be fixed, and it never could be, and reaching the end of it's run.

 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
You are retired and that is

You are retired and that is why you need no longer compete and do evil but you can do so only because you did enough evil to the losers when you were competing that you now have enough resources to cooperate more fully.

 

Good for you.

 

That does nothing for those who must continue to compete and must do evil to the losers.

 

How do you get them away from the necessity to compete?

 

If they stop and do not accumulate enough resources to live, they will die.

 

No need  to keep differentiating us from the lower animals. All we are are more evolved animals. We all bleed and die physically even as I know that our consciousness lives on, so there is no need to get our heads all swollen about it.

 

Regards

DL


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Alrighty-

Greatest I am wrote:

You are retired and that is why you need no longer compete and do evil but you can do so only because you did enough evil to the losers when you were competing that you now have enough resources to cooperate more fully.

 

Good for you.

 

That does nothing for those who must continue to compete and must do evil to the losers.

 

How do you get them away from the necessity to compete?

 

If they stop and do not accumulate enough resources to live, they will die.

 

No need  to keep differentiating us from the lower animals. All we are are more evolved animals. We all bleed and die physically even as I know that our consciousness lives on, so there is no need to get our heads all swollen about it.

 

Regards

DL

Nope-you're not understanding.

No, it doesn't do anything for those who still have to deal with everyday doings. What we are giving is what we found that we all need to change to.

You're looking at things from a physical point of view, but we are referring to and pointing to a mental situation. Human and animal are two different directions of mental situations. The human and the animal are two different values that societies are constructed on. Each has the consequences of it's direction of thought-or being. The turmoil in the world is a consequence of the animal thought-line or mental direction. If the masses change to the other-"human" then you have a different world.

For the time being you are stuck with what you have. Things won't change until the masses know "what" to change to.

Everyone has the use of animal and human traits. At this time still societies relate to each other from the animal characteristics. Those characteristics are what I listed in the previous post.

In human relations there is no competition, but if any it would be minor. One can't get rid of the animal intents--one needs to over rule them. Competition is war, which means you exist in a world of warfare. In this case I'm not referring to a war with weapons such as on a battlefield. We are existing on a mentality of warfare. Competition leads to enmity which upsets the social cohesion. Domination is another animal trait that everyone tries to avoid becoming dominated and also creates enmity. So-what's the solution----becoming human. Your world (and mine previous) has a false notion of "human" by combining the two and expecting to have (eventually) a different outcome. There's only one outcome to "human animal" and that's what you have now in the world. If human and animal are combined into one entity (which is impossible) you get--animal, because it is impossible for both to be active at the same time. at any given time one can only be one or the other.

OK-lets have a look at it. A friend is on your right, and an enemy is on your left. You cannot be a friend and enemy at the same time. You can only be enemy to the enemy, and then friend to the friend. You cannot be friend and enemy at the same time. When you are dealing with your enemy, you "are" enemy and in no way can be in a mentality of friendship. To deal with your friend (in turn) on your right, you must cease being an enemy and change to-friend. BUT- you cannot be both at the same time.   There-fore then, you have entered into two different states of mind in dealing with each. It's the same as---one cannot think of two things at the same time. Samo samo, so then man, is a different state of mind then animal. Enmity comes from animal, friend comes from human. It cannot be any other way.

The same as --- when you are angry (anger is not an animal trait, it is a neutral) you are precisely that---you are anger itself, as when one is angry one isn't anything else because one can only be one thing at a time. If you love-you are love itself, and if you hate you became hate itself. At one moment if you love, you are love. If at another moment you hate, you've become hate, hate then is you-until you change to something else. To understand this is understanding yourself and then-you become in charge of yourself, not a system devised by others. You will be stuck with what is until all others understand and from that the masses make the change. No political system can stand against that. Political systems rely on belief. Political systems exist on the animal. As I pointed to previous, you may have to do for the duration of these things but one needn't believe.

Now-study hard and take charge of yourself by getting to know yourself, like the Smurfs and I. 

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
If you get the time

Greatest I am wrote:

You are retired and that is why you need no longer compete and do evil but you can do so only because you did enough evil to the losers when you were competing that you now have enough resources to cooperate more fully.

 

Good for you.

 

That does nothing for those who must continue to compete and must do evil to the losers.

 

How do you get them away from the necessity to compete?

 

If they stop and do not accumulate enough resources to live, they will die.

 

No need  to keep differentiating us from the lower animals. All we are are more evolved animals. We all bleed and die physically even as I know that our consciousness lives on, so there is no need to get our heads all swollen about it.

 

Regards

DL

take a look at public TV,s Animal odd couples, on the 'Nature' program.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
You did not deal with the

You did not deal with the real world scenario of competing for resources and that tells me that you have no clue as to what you are saying and have not completed your theory.

 

Find a way to deal with it or you will end where you are now with no one here understanding your half- baked theory.

 

Regards

DL

 

 


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
I came from your world.

Greatest I am wrote:

You did not deal with the real world scenario of competing for resources and that tells me that you have no clue as to what you are saying and have not completed your theory.

 

Find a way to deal with it or you will end where you are now with no one here understanding your half- baked theory.

 

Regards

DL

 

 

I know what competition is all about. I'm a US Marine ---been there, done that. I am extensively trained and adept in hand to hand, oriental swordsmanship, and extensive use of weapons and tactics, and sniper type. I was a competator and would still have to be to some degree if I wasn't retired. We don't need to have a world of animalism. I also can use my own intellect to see things as well as anyone.

We don't deal in theories. Your society lives on animal traits---it doesn't have to. That's what one can use intellect for, to see the other side.  Your world is a dream world--to create some fashion of materialistic heaven that can never be or lead to happiness. History is witness.  Smiling

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
So come up with a theory

So come up with a theory where human animals do not have to compete for resources and you will have something otherwise you have nothing to offer.

 

How do you end competition for jobs which is resources in today's world?

 

Regards

DL


iwbiek
atheistSuperfan
iwbiek's picture
Posts: 3472
Joined: 2008-03-23
User is offlineOffline
allow me to rephrase: this

allow me to rephrase: this is like an argument between the pot and the kettle.


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:So come

Greatest I am wrote:

So come up with a theory where human animals do not have to compete for resources and you will have something otherwise you have nothing to offer.

 

How do you end competition for jobs which is resources in today's world?

 

Regards

DL

No theory--We're all stuck with what is. People need to understand first, and over time the masses move away from what is now. If you're still working or dealing with the world---well it's what you have to do. The animal world ends when people understand it, and realize this idea can't produce anything other then what it has been.  But- everyone has to understand first. It's as simple as redoing the concept of "human animal". Human is one thing---animal is another. They are both different directions of mind.  The understanding has to be first, and then from that floks make up their own mind. In stead of being owned by the state  one reclaims them self. One is simply trained to be what they are.  If the State is ignorant of what it is then so is everyo9ne else. Human is a mental condition opposite the animal condition. When understood it becomes a personal choice. If people mentally move away from the "human-animal" concept then the world changes. Then it's every one to their own house and land, and there is no competition or animal relations as a society. It's a simpler and easier way of life.

 It's either that or keep the war going with each other as required for the present ways to operate. There is no possible way the world can be at peace with the present way of thinking/being--it's an impossibility. Politicians will never fix the system as it is--it's non-fixable.  Animal mentality will always produce the same result. It's either keep trying to create a materialistic heaven on earth, (impossible because no matter what is dome people won't be happy with it) or get off the animalisms and live simpler. One thing that keeps the system going is the belief that it can be fixed or perfected---nada---the animal can't be fixed, it always will result in the same as it is now. But as said--- people will have to understand the problem first. But it won't be easy accepting the a new way. Or--keep the war going and complain about the system not working to satisfaction, it never will be satisfactory because it's always looking for more.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Greatest I am wrote:So come

Greatest I am wrote:

So come up with a theory where human animals do not have to compete for resources and you will have something otherwise you have nothing to offer.

 

How do you end competition for jobs which is resources in today's world?

 

Regards

DL

No theory--We're all stuck with what is. People need to understand first, and over time the masses move away from what is now. If you're still working or dealing with the world---well it's what you have to do. The animal world ends when people understand it, and realize this idea can't produce anything other then what it has been.  But- everyone has to understand first. It's as simple as redoing the concept of "human animal". Human is one thing---animal is another. They are both different directions of mind.  The understanding has to be first, and then from that floks make up their own mind. In stead of being owned by the state  one reclaims them self. One is simply trained to be what they are.  If the State is ignorant of what it is then so is everyo9ne else. Human is a mental condition opposite the animal condition. When understood it becomes a personal choice. If people mentally move away from the "human-animal" concept then the world changes. Then it's every one to their own house and land, and there is no competition or animal relations as a society. It's a simpler and easier way of life.

 It's either that or keep the war going with each other as required for the present ways to operate. There is no possible way the world can be at peace with the present way of thinking/being--it's an impossibility. Politicians will never fix the system as it is--it's non-fixable.  Animal mentality will always produce the same result. It's either keep trying to create a materialistic heaven on earth, (impossible because no matter what is dome people won't be happy with it) or get off the animalisms and live simpler. One thing that keeps the system going is the belief that it can be fixed or perfected---nada---the animal can't be fixed, it always will result in the same as it is now. But as said--- people will have to understand the problem first. But it won't be easy accepting the a new way. Or--keep the war going and complain about the system not working to satisfaction, it never will be satisfactory because it's always looking for more.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Old Seer
Theist
Posts: 855
Joined: 2011-11-12
User is offlineOffline
Ooops, sorry

Old Seer wrote:

Greatest I am wrote:

So come up with a theory where human animals do not have to compete for resources and you will have something otherwise you have nothing to offer.

 

How do you end competition for jobs which is resources in today's world?

 

Regards

DL

No theory--We're all stuck with what is. People need to understand first, and over time the masses move away from what is now. If you're still working or dealing with the world---well it's what you have to do. The animal world ends when people understand it, and realize this idea can't produce anything other then what it has been.  But- everyone has to understand first. It's as simple as redoing the concept of "human animal". Human is one thing---animal is another. They are both different directions of mind.  The understanding has to be first, and then from that floks make up their own mind. In stead of being owned by the state  one reclaims them self. One is simply trained to be what they are.  If the State is ignorant of what it is then so is every9NE else. Human is a mental condition opposite the animal condition. When understood it becomes a personal choice. If people mentally move away from the "human-animal" concept then the world changes. Then it's every one to their own house and land, and there is no competition or animal relations as a society. It's a simpler and easier way of life.

 It's either that or keep the war going with each other as required for the present ways to operate. There is no possible way the world can be at peace with the present way of thinking/being--it's an impossibility. Politicians will never fix the system as it is--it's non-fixable.  Animal mentality will always produce the same result. It's either keep trying to create a materialistic heaven on earth, (impossible because no matter what is dome people won't be happy with it) or get off the animal isms and live simpler. One thing that keeps the system going is the belief that it can be fixed or perfected---Nada---the animal can't be fixed, it always will result in the same as it is now. But as said--- people will have to understand the problem first. But it won't be easy accepting the a new way. Or--keep the war going and complain about the system not working to satisfaction, it never will be satisfactory because it's always looking for more.

 I just went to my note page to ask The Smurfs what the deuce you're getting at. I'm not understanding what you're asking, apparently. There already was a note from them a day ago  that you are concerned about material acquisitions from our world as compared to the one you have now. OK.

I'll have to go back to do some remembering. We do have alternate economy ideas/proposals. So, what you are asking is about material needs. OK--will post that tomorrow. That is a legitimate question, we had the same at one time.

The only possible thing the world needs saving from are those running it.

https://sites.google.com/site/oldseers


Greatest I am
Greatest I am's picture
Posts: 278
Joined: 2012-03-30
User is offlineOffline
Thank you. I think I

Thank you.

 

I think I understand what you are saying but we live in a world based on evolution which is cooperation and competition. You wish to eliminate competition and I am fine with that but to nature, it is a dead end for humanity. We would go extinct as the weakest would drag down the fittest.

Let me show you an example of  what the friendliest amount of competition looks like for lower animals.

 

To end the competition for them means that the ones on the outside would eventually freeze and thus they must push/compete, to enter towards the warmth.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F4XygDTA7kQ  

 

You have to find a way for them to have the same result without pushing in.

 

That is anologous to what you have to come up with for man.

A method for us to still produce the fittest of the species without competition.

 

Regards

DL