(08-31-2011, 02:36 PM)Tenet Nosce Wrote: Right. I am now bumping up against the point where, in fact, words really start to lose their meaning. I imagine there will be something analagous to a "business" in 4D, meaning some general form which a particular service takes.
when there is something needs to be done, people come together, and do it collectively, and share the results. not only that has been there back into ancient history, it is still practiced in rural communities in various geographies. cooperation.
(08-31-2011, 02:42 PM)Icaro Wrote: Unity. In post #85 you seem to be saying that your notion of harvest even within this thread has molded. Am I misunderstanding you?
Pitting your infallible logic against yourself, the Unity of today would have disagreed with the Unity of a week ago, and a flurry of explanation would have been provided to each of your selves to justify this. Fascinating. I have nothing left to say brother.
its not 'my logic'. its plain, clearly worded direct questions and answers in a written material we are studying.
unity of today would have disagreed with unity of a week ago, since unity of then was not in possession of the quotes clearing the matter in precision. in another sense, unity of today provided the clearly worded quotes from the material to unity of past week, and the unity of past week, is now unity of today.
whereas you on the other hand, are doing all kinds of escapism for NOT accepting a clearly worded, specific question/answer english sentence as it is.
there is no logic/intuition or fallibility/infallibility in this.
'proving fallibility' will not help your argument, since it was never claimed at any given point, and if there is any fallibility or infallibility that is to be put into question, it is the material we are speaking on. since, all conclusions of the unity of past week was based on them. not his 'interpretations', as you have a tendency to base yours on yourself.
when unity of past week was provided with quotes that changed his mind, he changed his mind, instead of resorting to 'intuition' or 'interpretation'. if we take you and your unchanging 'gradualism obligation' as an example in this case for not changing perspective with provided information :
- started off with holding harvest and 'transition/move' into 4d as one and same
- when it was shown that they were not, you switched to arguing harvest had possibly started in 1937 with the move into 4d vibrations
- when it was shown that there were entities waiting for harvest despite being disincarnate, this time you outright went and slapped a 900 year harvest duration out of nowhere
and as of this moment you are still dwelling on it, despite a clear, purpose-specific question asked for querying exactly the same thing, and answer being contrary to what you hold in view as of now. you are just ignoring it and this time :
- going the way of claiming 'intuition' in 'reinterpretation' of a clearly worded, specifically asked question and its plain, blunt, direct answer
see, your perspective has not budget a bit right from the start, despite your responses changed with the information provided. the fixation of having a harvest that is prolonged so long to an extent that it would not matter in a person's lifetime in a direct, all encompassing and discomforting fashion always remains there and seeks a way out.
it didnt happen as such with me. i had had thought that harvest would happen at a given time, and then entities would leave as they saw fit, without having any need for dying for harvest. yet, when i found quotes that were clearly against these with no room for interpretation, i CHANGED my perspective. did not seek a way around the information.