(06-11-2010, 09:22 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: Aha! :idea: That does clarify a lot for me. So, you felt compelled to elaborate your point, that the logos is not infallible?
nothing aside from infinity is infallible. since infinity has no effect on anything, a non factor, the point zero, it is irrelevant. that makes every existent thing, fallible.
Quote: I invite you to consider this: What if Wanderers are currently enrolled in a course of study that includes the design of 3D realities? Perhaps we are meant to learn from these flaws. Maybe getting indignant is a part of the process, so that we might improve upon these designs when it's our turn.
that goes beyond saying, since there has been 65 million + wanderers and increasing, since 1980 in this planet, mostly belonging to Ra and the other two complexes that aided this world before. combining it with what quo says, there is a specific course for Ra and the other two complexes here.
BUT,
yes, i think there is a greater course here, at least, the guardians that are local to this solar system - notice how they started quarantineing this planet since last 25,000 years. this was not in effect before. moreover, mass incarnation of wanderers were also allowed.
i very much suspect, the guardians that were in charge long ago, when maldek was about, are still in this octave though.
then again that is a matter of debate.
however the faults learned here will be the faults not repeated elsewhere in the universe.
Quote:Hmmm...interesting idea. I think I understand what you are saying. Thus, infallibility is without distortion?
yes. only infinity is infallible, but then again, since infinity doesnt do anything, or isnt done anything to it, it is a non factor, it is irrelevant. this makes any entity, including possibly the infinite intelligence, fallible. hence, the 'learning itself' concept.
Quote:I have a programmer's background, so I'm envisioning a binary tree here.
not powers of two, probably powers of infinite, as much as the power of that local node supports the total draw of energy from itself to its sublogoi.
then again there is also the point that, after a certain point, as Ra says, the energy gets started being supplied directly from 'the creator'. whether Ra meant local logos with this, or, the infinite intelligence, it is not certain. however, it is very possibly the latter.
Quote:I wouldn't call it a failure, necessarily. Perhaps it is simply less than optimal. It would depend upon whatever the definition of success is. Success could be dependent upon a time factor. ie. is it a failure if a certain % of souls aren't harvestable by the end of the cycle? etc. How are success/failure defined? (If this was defined in a previous post, you don't have to repeat it here, but directing me to that post would be appreciated.)
it is a failure if the intent was to give, lets make up an arbitrary measure, 95% free will to entities, but it was seen that doing as such was imbalanced, and lead to disfunctionality. initial plan to give 95% free will fails, lesson is learned. success in a grander scheme in that the limit of free will and cloaking is discovered, specific to the circumstances at hand.
Quote:Or, it may be that your particular ideas had not been considered before. I certainly had not thought of these ideas before.
someone, somewhere, probably considered these before, on this planet. i also got these ideas intuitively or transmittedly, from whatever 'source(s)' that knew or realized these before in this octave, before me. they may not have been voiced in such an open public before, in the age of internet maybe.
Quote:Agreed. That's why this thread hasn't been locked. There is value in this discussion. However, respect is required on this forum, so I was quite serious when I said that further discord would not be tolerated, even if it means locking the thread. But I am optimistic that this won't be necessary. I have faith in our members' capacity to facilitate peaceful resolution.
even if it doesnt happen in this thread, there will be future occasions in which totally irrelevant people get at odds with each other due to discussing topics sensitive to themselves.
just giving an example of the fact that Ra says the ten commandments were given by a negative, service to self source, and the entities gave these as commandments and warnings because the recipient was positive, should be sufficient example on how discussing some topics can become inflammatory for some. this topic alone should directly offend some certain religions' members just because what Ra said, leave aside what may be discussed on that topic.
as i see it, locking of such a discussion because some people with certain conditionings and views may get aggressive against others or the forum, or the topic itself, would be a disservice to others. also, it would mean bowing to a negative reaction/act.
thats why i recommended topic-ban modification to the forum script. it would allow banning of individual users from specific topics, therefore removing those people from just that topic, but not rest of the forum, and also allowing other members who are not getting aggressive, to be able to discuss the topic.