aSHIFT. wrote: ↑Wed Dec 06, 2023 1:41 pm
that's so cool - unintentional serendicity - serendipity (you finding something important, without searching for it , the Aha Erlebnis, the Eureka moment ; all genius inventions stem from this principle) which is synchronous with the topic (synchroncity) but I did not at all intend to be there (enhancing the quality of it, only through your Eye AM Eyes), literally PROVING the power of mentalversity over the Fake Authoritarianism of the Church of Satanic Psience - Scientism
NICE
Mentalverse Muisca
vs
Big Bang Brother
=
Science - the philosophy of shared truth seeking
vs
Scientism - a Satanic ideology pushing Anti-Science - posing as Go(o)d, but doing Evil
smartists (not only mine I think) ; smart artists
can visualize / make a meme with the 2 S's as Ouroboros eating each other
as Satanic Horns coming out of Mickeys head or so -the Disneyworld - the Scientimist Narrative needs to be a fairytale, and full of occult symbology
Science = scenarios
Scientism = Psience Narratives concocted by Psyopaths
I know you and I are on completely different wavelengths and for that I am very grateful.
Last edited by Exit on Thu Dec 07, 2023 9:58 am, edited 1 time in total.
Science - the philosophy of shared truth seeking
vs
Scientism - a Satanic ideology pushing Anti-Science - posing as Go(o)d, but doing Evil
This inversion is very interesting.
Also that science indeed is shared truth seeking. The energy of it is explorative. Scenarios like you say. A joyful joint seeking. It's free. It's wise (we never will know the wonder of it all)
Scientism is definitive. Dogmatic. The decision by the elite. They call it "the science". "The science" says. It's oppressive. It's aggressive. It locks those up who deny "the science"
The evil shows itself in the energy. Is it free or is it obsessive?
Exit wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 7:06 am
You and your book do not get to tell me, and others, that unless we believe in a figure whom no one can prove ever existed, we do not get salvation. A being, claiming to be the son of God, no birthdate, no birthplace. And you do not get to feel superior and ‘saved’ because you choose to believe in this unproven being.
And because I, and others, sincerely question this story, question the lack of factual evidence we are met with the ‘gaslighting’ effect. It’s not my first rodeo and it won’t be my last, that’s a fact.
Up to you what you do. I don't know where your agressioj comes from.
Exit wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 7:06 am
You and your book do not get to tell me, and others, that unless we believe in a figure whom no one can prove ever existed, we do not get salvation. A being, claiming to be the son of God, no birthdate, no birthplace. And you do not get to feel superior and ‘saved’ because you choose to believe in this unproven being.
And because I, and others, sincerely question this story, question the lack of factual evidence we are met with the ‘gaslighting’ effect. It’s not my first rodeo and it won’t be my last, that’s a fact.
Up to you what you do. I don't know where your agressioj comes from.
‘aggressioj’?
That’s a strange spelling mistake.
No aggression here. Your belief is purely faith based. Your understanding of my response is entirely imagined/your take, none of it proven or factual. Maybe even allegorical.
Exit wrote: ↑Thu Dec 07, 2023 9:59 am
You and your book do not get to tell me, and others, that unless we believe in a figure whom no one can prove ever existed, we do not get salvation.
You can do whatever you want.
A being, claiming to be the son of God, no birthdate, no birthplace.
OK don't agree.
And you do not get to feel superior and ‘saved’ because you choose to believe in this unproven being.
Untrue allegation. I said that nowhere. That's in your mind.
And because I, and others, sincerely question this story, question the lack of factual evidence we are met with the ‘gaslighting’ effect.
You can question all you want.
I didn't do anything like that.
It’s not my first rodeo and it won’t be my last, that’s a fact.