HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
HomerWSmith at lightlink.com
Mon Aug 3 15:06:09 EDT 2015
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
From the proof's point of view the only sin is to preach separation
of God and Soul.
The proof says that two different objects can never be certain of
THE PROOF http://www.lightlink.com/theproof
Thus if God and Soul are two different objects, neither could ever
know for sure the other exists.
The problem with mocking up a God that created the soul, is it
places the soul at effect. This God is bigger and more powerful than
the Soul, so the Soul can no longer consider that it mocked up God, but
has to consider that God mocked up the Soul.
That's EVIL you see?
EVIL is something which exists which the soul did not mockup nor
agree to. This violates the sovereignty of the soul and hands it over
to something else. The soul is owned at that point.
Every time the soul thinks of this thing that created him, he gets
Further once the Soul imagines a God the creator, he then imagines
a Devil, which is ALSO BIGGER THAN THE SOUL IS.
Thus the only way the Soul can deal with the Devil is to appeal to
God to help or save him.
This places a double whammy of being an effect on the Soul.
The soul tries to pray to God for help, as if God doesn't already
know the soul's plight, and eventually the Soul goes into propitiation
towards God, "I'll do anything!", begging for salvation from troubles in
this life, and the afterlife.
But underlying this propitiation the soul is madder than hell that
God created him in the first place without his permission, and dumped
him into the Devil's play ground, again without his permission, as some
kind of test or gladiatorial spectacle.
This reduces all of creation and God itself to a matter of
behavior. The good and the strong are worthy, the Devilish and the weak
And we can understand perhaps the desire to test a being's 'free
will' by seeing how it will behave, but frankly if a soul has a truly
free will why would we expect it to be constrained by limiting concepts
of good and evil, sensitive and insensitive, compassionate and
Wouldn't we WANT the 'free will' to be not so free but constrained
instead by the desire to do what is best for those it loves?
And if we grant the soul the ability to choose between the desire
to do what is best or do what is worst, what desire then will guide the
soul's choice of which desire it chooses?
In the end nothing is free of its own nature, and thus a soul
either cares and gives a damn or it doesn't. A truly free will would be
undetermined by anything and its actions thus random. Such a will would
be considered evil anyhow as there are many more ways to hurt and harm
than there are to help.
Truly free undetermined randomness would be a nightmare.
A free will then is merely one that can turn left if it wants to.
The question is left open why a will wants to or wants anything at
The ultimate choice is between pleasure and pain, and no will of
any kind will ever choose pain for itself except as a way to pleasure,
the question remains then how this will relates to OTHER wills, with
sensitivity to their pain also, or with cold hard hearted ness.
One has to ask why any will would choose a life of hate when it
could have a life of love.
That question has an answer, you might want to look into your own
soul for the answer.
In any case, back to so called God testing souls and their use of
their 'free will', does it make sense to let those that fail the test,
those who rape, kill and suck blood, who take what other's produce and
produce nothing of their own, fail it by harming the good who are doing
well? If the good go bad from being beaten by the bad unjustly, do they
fail as well?
And what of the good who suffer the gauntlet of the bad,
what is their test? And is it fair?
And does God enjoy hearing the screams of those who opposed him
forever and ever?
Pretty sick eh? Not as sick as the people who believe this stuff
and teach it to little children as a CONTROL mechanism.
Creation is much more than behavior, and if there is a God, he
wouldn't be a God concerned with behavior.
And if a HUMAN made a universe and a Devil, and created beings and
dumped them in that universe to suffer the consequences without their
permission, and told them all, those of you who obey me will sit by me
in heaven forever, and those that disobey me will burn in hell forever,
and you had better turn the other cheek or else, well such a human would
be considered criminally insane.
So just so, that kind of God is criminally insane.
The truth is YOU ARE both God and the Devil, and every time you
pray to God to save you from the Devil, you are denying your own
responsibility and power for and over your own condition, committing
effort thought, emotion and irresponsibility for condition to separation
of God and Soul, and that seals your fate, BECAUSE IF YOU AND GOD AND
THE DEVIL ARE TWO DIFFERENT OBJECTS, NONE OF YOU CAN EVER KNOW THE OTHER
EXISTS WITH PERFECT CERTAINTY.
Thus you ARE God in carnation, and so who is testing who
how, for what reason, and to what final end?
======================= http://www.clearing.org ========================
Posted: Mon Aug 3 15:06:08 EDT 2015
Send mail to archive.com saying help
================== http://www.lightlink.com/theproof ===================
Learning implies Learning with Certainty or Learning without Certainty.
Learning across a Distance implies Learning by Being an Effect.
Learning by Being an Effect implies Learning without Certainty.
Therefore, Learning with Certainty implies Learning but
Not by Being an Effect, and not across a Distance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.5 (GNU/Linux)
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
More information about the HomerWSmith-L