OMG
30th April 2013, 18:25
The following video shows the PTB attempts at making our world a Machine Kingdom. A “Machine Kingdom” is basically one where ALL natural/organic states are manipulated into a synthetic/technological one (physically, psychologically and possibly spiritually).
http://battleofearth.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/2045-a-new-era-for-humanity/
01hbkh4hXEk
After watching the video…would you say it’s bad, or good, or neutral?
This topic encompasses everything for US. It inevitably touches the root purpose and direction of ALL our lives…
First, let me preface by suggesting that ALL that IS….IS ALL, and therefore IS Reality…be it actual or conceptual, etc. As such, ALL is Natural in that nothing unreal can exist. So we must either accept ALL as valid, OR we will need to make distinctions.
Theoretically it’s easy to perceive that ALL is equal and therefore of equal value. However, when bad (or evil) things happen to us humans we start to hold preferences toward those things that prevent us from suffering or having “bad” experiences. (Note: Excluding those that that deliberately like suffering and bad things.)
As for me I tend to steer clear of bad things and treat others as I would myself. Even so, I still push the envelope of my comfort zone and what is familiar if I feel stagnant or a pull towards change. The irony is that by doing so I can be seen as someone’s discomfort and bad. We can’t please everyone all of the time. And I’m not into being indoctrinated into a beLIEf paradigm so I guess the answer I see is “live and let live”.
Anyway, in my studies of these two paths (what I call organic vs. synthetic) there are archetypes or various role models that represent the ramifications of either. For instance, the synthetic path (especially as it pertains to technology) has the politicians, bankers, scientist and captains of industry at its head. And they make it an EASY path and readily accessible to most people regardless of their personal development.
Then you have the more difficult path epitomized in many ways by the spiritually enlightened such as the Masters of the Far East who have attained many if not most of the capabilities that any technology could achieve except through a organic compatible process (such as these Masters http://18siddha.blogspot.com) .
Both paths are based in science. One is exclusively and consistently based in gnosis (direct experience) and the other may have aspects of gnosis but is mostly NOT.
In short, it seems the PTB wants us dependant on “them” (as an outside source). Whereas the organic path is more about cleaning your own backyard and letting others clean theirs. This doesn’t mean that you can’t help clean others yards periodically. Yet until one cleans their OWN yard they will never understand that value.
In conclusion, there are many avenues to go with this topic, such as how to define synthetic. One definition is that synthetics are anything that is manipulated on a molecular or cellular level. Also, anything that doesn’t have a natural life cycle (such as plastics since once plastic is created it always exists and does not break down in nature, unless you consider lava or some types of acid LOL). In other words, where is the line between how humans can manipulate nature? It’s one thing to make things that once never existed in nature, such as cotton t-shirts, wooden chairs, rubber tires, etc, and something else to make synthetic things.
1 Corinthians 10:23 basically says, “All is permissible but not all is beneficial”. Yet again, where do we divide the line between what is beneficial or not? For instance, if we are created as organic beings in an organic world then how can anything we do or conceive of be anything else but a natural process (hence organic)? None the less toxins exist naturally and synthetically.
I’ll stop here. Feed back is welcomed. :decision:
http://battleofearth.wordpress.com/2013/04/24/2045-a-new-era-for-humanity/
01hbkh4hXEk
After watching the video…would you say it’s bad, or good, or neutral?
This topic encompasses everything for US. It inevitably touches the root purpose and direction of ALL our lives…
First, let me preface by suggesting that ALL that IS….IS ALL, and therefore IS Reality…be it actual or conceptual, etc. As such, ALL is Natural in that nothing unreal can exist. So we must either accept ALL as valid, OR we will need to make distinctions.
Theoretically it’s easy to perceive that ALL is equal and therefore of equal value. However, when bad (or evil) things happen to us humans we start to hold preferences toward those things that prevent us from suffering or having “bad” experiences. (Note: Excluding those that that deliberately like suffering and bad things.)
As for me I tend to steer clear of bad things and treat others as I would myself. Even so, I still push the envelope of my comfort zone and what is familiar if I feel stagnant or a pull towards change. The irony is that by doing so I can be seen as someone’s discomfort and bad. We can’t please everyone all of the time. And I’m not into being indoctrinated into a beLIEf paradigm so I guess the answer I see is “live and let live”.
Anyway, in my studies of these two paths (what I call organic vs. synthetic) there are archetypes or various role models that represent the ramifications of either. For instance, the synthetic path (especially as it pertains to technology) has the politicians, bankers, scientist and captains of industry at its head. And they make it an EASY path and readily accessible to most people regardless of their personal development.
Then you have the more difficult path epitomized in many ways by the spiritually enlightened such as the Masters of the Far East who have attained many if not most of the capabilities that any technology could achieve except through a organic compatible process (such as these Masters http://18siddha.blogspot.com) .
Both paths are based in science. One is exclusively and consistently based in gnosis (direct experience) and the other may have aspects of gnosis but is mostly NOT.
In short, it seems the PTB wants us dependant on “them” (as an outside source). Whereas the organic path is more about cleaning your own backyard and letting others clean theirs. This doesn’t mean that you can’t help clean others yards periodically. Yet until one cleans their OWN yard they will never understand that value.
In conclusion, there are many avenues to go with this topic, such as how to define synthetic. One definition is that synthetics are anything that is manipulated on a molecular or cellular level. Also, anything that doesn’t have a natural life cycle (such as plastics since once plastic is created it always exists and does not break down in nature, unless you consider lava or some types of acid LOL). In other words, where is the line between how humans can manipulate nature? It’s one thing to make things that once never existed in nature, such as cotton t-shirts, wooden chairs, rubber tires, etc, and something else to make synthetic things.
1 Corinthians 10:23 basically says, “All is permissible but not all is beneficial”. Yet again, where do we divide the line between what is beneficial or not? For instance, if we are created as organic beings in an organic world then how can anything we do or conceive of be anything else but a natural process (hence organic)? None the less toxins exist naturally and synthetically.
I’ll stop here. Feed back is welcomed. :decision: