9th

Shades of shaktipat... And this is actually quite relevant if you understand the mechanics behind all this phenomena. That is why the same reference of "intoxication" is used in these seemingly different contexts. It is an indication of the energetics involved. Language surrounding such teachings has always been encoded in this way by necessity - if you have the correct keys for understanding, you will grasp the message on a deeper level. It is not deliberately hidden because of an "elite" status or something of this nature. The knowledge itself only exists at this level of mind - and because it is only receivable by certain configurations of perception, it is only transmittable in the same way.

hogwash like wildfire and raging fears of demons devils and monsters

yeh thats a safe bet

and then upon the hour, when closed in by nights spent amongst the dusty towers, in highness of lofty clouds billowing incense rolls across cobbled stones while crystalline swirling sands, crested by visions of sphinxes hold the swiftness of a guardian's beckoning breath as it alights the windowsill shedding a wandering course through branches below and leading to gates of limitless expanse, across the fields of time as matters at hand shine through the moment of truth in the untold rhyme of reason where consequences are laid bare to become passionately seized by inspirations to move about writhing together like lovers, forever entwined in blissful embrace as the heart of creation pulsates with the beginning and ending of all alignments, in the name of heaven and earth truly resolved, of the unspeakable word

King's Head, Lion's Body, Eagle's Wings looking out over rising horizon towards supplication of beggaring multitude the endless whining sound demanding font of mountainous decree ultimate standard of highest morality dispensation your hate defines my love in starkly superior parameters of health take this tablet - don't call me in the morning i wont respect you but what would new age jesus do? installation of purification program code name: monde du angelique nouveau institution of crypto concentration camps to instill race for focused Mastery transduction and infinite capacity for charging ahead through blinding light of faithful intercourse with Heavenly Hostess Cake spread eyes wide open and dripping wet the Holiest of Holy Water flooding greatly over landlocked region inviting preservation of animal coupling plowing across waves in electric arc covenantal divide traverse conversion into solitary entrance of bridal chamber within repose of sanctioned coital embrace

back to the barracks make war for peace in our time strategize to win

and then returning to G:

There has been quite a bit of additional ideas and theory layered on Christianity over the centuries. Much can still be found in the older texts.

here is another perspective:

I would encourage all to be cognizant of the original topic and ask yourself whether future posts contribute to that discussion or not.

Imagination can be good, when used for the powers of good. Cant let it fall into the wrong hands, however - the powers of evil are bad

i think that guy is korean

Your above hypothesis is only correct if you decide that the number 1 no longer equals a quantity of 1 item, but that the number 1 is a variable like "x" or "y" and has fluctuating values according your whim. In regards to mathematics, the number 1 a certain quantification of absolute value, it is not a variable. Variables are represented by letters because the numerical value is not inherently present. Of course you can say "what if up was down"? and "what if black was white"? and "what if ignorance was wisdom"? And of course you can abstract actual objectivity into fictional subjectivity, and thereby soothe yourself in the bliss of superior self-satisfaction where you can convince yourself that your own mind alone determines reality and you are the master of all you survey. You can ride a unicorn named "what if"? straight into the heart of "bliss" itself. However, this is what is classically known as "illusion". Conceptual arguments can be used to prove to yourself that you are indeed a god, as well as all sorts of other important things about yourself that have no basis in actual reality. In fact, the maintenance and reinforcement of a fictional self-image is enacted by a peculiar vortex of conceptual abstraction and unconscious imagination. Without that unchecked inertia driving obsessive manipulations of subjective concepts, it is impossible to support such an idea of self-importance. It requires an effort akin to a dog constantly chasing their own tail. Stopping even for a moment causes massive problems for the little world it lives in. In reality, one human being is less than a speck of dust in regards to the workings of the cosmos. The physics of cosmic workings are available to everyone, but only if they are accepted as real and worked with on their own terms. You cannot start with conceptual abstraction and jump off from there as if you are a superhero just because you decide to call yourself one.

I used to get emails about "Psy Balls" from some Japanese guy back in the 90s. They were far out, man. I fed one into a text-to-speech program and made a really horrible electro song from it.

1 + 1 = 2 is objectively true, and is not affected by opinions one way or another. 1 + 1 = 3 is objectively false. True and false do exist objectively, but opinions can never be "true" or "false" because they are subjective classifications which may fluctuate according to any given number of various factors by way of the relativity inherent in the observer itself.

You are speaking of judgements and opinions - not pure subjectivity. For instance, hearing the sound of rain outside is a subjective experience. Your sensory perceptions are subjective without being "nice" or "awful". That classification comes later, according to what you find pleasurable or not in a given moment. Something you find "nice" today you may find "awful" tomorrow, even though the subjective experience which allowed you to perceive it in the first place has not changed. Perception and awareness are subjective to the extent that there is a "subject" which percieves an "object". In the case of sensory perception, there is a "hardware" component involved - your eyeballs receive light particles, which results in your perception of a visual image through the mediation of your nervous system interpreting the signals which are communicated through the optic nerve. The visual image is a subjective experience. Your opinion of the image is another matter. It may be possible to experience perception in which there is neither subject nor object, but that is also another matter.

im lovin it because thats all there is to do