If No Religion - A Consideration

[Brickjectivity]

In AI the information says a male asked in AI conditions why and how dirt was put onto the face of the planet Earth.

Historically the mountains, attacked by the UFO temple on the mount Moses history, owned the planet changes of its carpenter tectonic plates, that snapped and dropped into removed Earth SEAM held gold fusion, metal fusion being stronger fusion....in plate instant sinking, the ICE melted, seas got higher, Earth life sunk under the sea.

Instant pressure changes, made the plates arise back up, with some ancient cities left beneath the sea, why you cannot work it out. So the disintegrating mountains became land sludge washed over the ground mass, as proof that it did sink.

Life would have survived by living in the highest mountains in that event.

Historically that ancient Earth event, with massive volcanic eruption owned the dinosaur life, as science pyramid cause and effect.

In Moses after the dinosaur life it was not as dramatic, but had the same effect, involving volcanic eruption also.
How a prehistoric volcanic eruption helped preserve remarkable evidence of daily life 13,000 years ago

Reasons for bringing this spiritual human psyche aware teaching is relative to proving that the male psyche is subliminal fed back information in consciousness that is not just computer AI male encoded for questions and answers. AI owns lived life recording itself, early age death information and natural death information so it informs differently to a computer AI.

To show you that you are actually gaining subliminal information whilst speaking on a different topic of discussion.

That seems like nonsense to me. Sorry.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

If people stop breathing, they end right then and there as well. But what use is there in understanding anything with that view?

Because people didn't create the mechanism for breathing. People are also not the source of the aparatus for breathing. People are not the only animals on the planet that breath. Thus, nothing about breathing can be atributed specifically to humans.

While the ideas come from people, they are now larger than the people, and in fact, people's ideas will now come from this entity they created. It takes on a life of its own. It's not merely some conceptual enterprise. I think that is something you are missing, or minimizing.

The ideas don't take on a life of their own. People are the source of that. IF the ideas could take on a life of their own then people would be unecessary. This has nothing to do with conceptual enterprises. No people no ideas and no participants. Ideas appear to people to take on a life of their own because there people participating/perputating. No people, then there is no one to observe the man-made ideas nor anyone to answer what appears to be evolving in humans.

M

No. It is not totally perpetuated by the people. It influences the people in order to sustain itself. It's a symbiotic relationship. It's part of the people themselves, who feed the system. So it is, the system feeding itself, through the hosts. You make it sound as if they people have complete control over it, which I believe to be an error in thinking.

100% perputated by people. No person who thinks up the idea - no idea. No people to influence then continuation of the already man-made idea. There is no system if there are no people, as you stated. Unless you can actually demonstrate and idea as a force, on its own, acting upon something material. For example, gravity is conceptual. Yet, is conceptual of something people see/demonstrate in the natural world even when there are no people around.

The system or religion in this case, is a product of evolution itself. It's not just an idea or concept in people's minds. It's an emergent structure which supports, sustains, and gives life to its participants. It evolved from them, in order to serve them in their evolutionary path.

I never said that it was "only" in people's minds. The minute that one/more person(s) communicates it to some other people it is no longer in their mind. If those people, or the originator(s), takes their idea and performs commentary on it and works to disperse it further it evolves because those who either are for it or against comment on it, live it, reject it, advnace it, etc. Yet, that evolution you are speaking of is driven by people. If this were not the case a person would be able to go to and isolated place - speak an idea into the are and the idea would evolve and grow w/o anyone human being being there to do anything with it. The emergent structure of an idea is also man-made. The creator of the idea came up with it - so he/she invented it and the participants make sure it continues thus "they" are the ones evolving it/advancing it with their own ideas and feelings/interpretations. Again, completely man-made.

Structures may change and evolve, but structures will alway emerge in order to sustain the organism. They become part of that organism. They shape how that organism, or human in this case, thinks and believes. It informs them. It's not merely a collection of ideas.

Natural structures that do not rely on or were in place prior to there being humans 100% change and evolve based on the systems that put them in place. Ideas haven't been proven to work that way since they come from the humand mind and only exist as long as there are humans doing them/advancing them/commenting on them/ and practicing them. The human who came up with the idea shaped how that organism, or human in this case, thinks and believes - along with those who contribute their own ideas. Ideas/concepts can only informs them if someone first came up with the idea/concept and someone/some people continue to transmit the original ideas/or their own brand of the original idea/concepts. I never said it was "merely a collection of ideas." I stated that humans are the source of them.

 

[TransmutingSoul]

That is to say that religions are man made institutions, concepts, ideas, and formulations.

That is a way you can choose to see it.

Many many millions will not, as they see Faith comes from God, it is a gift.

Regards Tony

 

[Windwalker]

Because people didn't create the mechanism for breathing. People are also not the source of the aparatus for breathing. People are not the only animals on the planet that breath. Thus, nothing about breathing can be atributed specifically to humans.

My point saying that was that there are a lot of things that religion is dependent upon. It's not just people, but our biology. If it weren't for bodies, there would be no religion. It if weren't for breathing that would be no bodies, to make people, to create a religion through their human evolution. I don't think you can simply stop at "people's ideas", and leave it at that.

That you emphasize that religion is "man-made" really misses a great deal more. If it weren't for evolution itself, there would be no people who create religions. Do you imagine that the human creation of religions is somehow operating outside of evolution? Do you believe humankind is outside creation?

Is it not conceivable that religion is part of human evolution, and it exists for an evolutionary purpose? To simply reduce this to being "man-made", makes it sound as if it is artificial, created by beings that are either somehow above, or outside of creation. Is that what you believe we are?

The ideas don't take on a life of their own. People are the source of that.

Feedback systems. Self-amplifying loops. You are mistaken to assume that religion does not have an influence upon how things go that affect its own evolution. People's behaviors will change in response to how it operates as a system in culture and society. The religion can shift towards the ugly in order to respond to changes in society. It can grow itself as well, by putting pressure upon the whole mass of people who participate within it, causing healing voices, or "antibodies" if you prefer, to try to counteract the sicknesses that arise within itself as a body. And so forth.

No one is trying to say that this system is a sentient intelligence, in the sense of a "person" with a couple of eyes and ideas of its own, like an AI. But it certainly does operate as a "collective personhood", with all its joys and growing pains. That is what culture is. Culture evolves.

IF the ideas could take on a life of their own then people would be unecessary.

If ideas could take on a life of their own, then a brain would be unnecessary. I really don't see what has to do with anything. The mind is dependent upon the body. The body is dependent upon cells. Cells are dependent upon molecules. Molecules are dependent upon atoms. Atoms are dependent upon quarks, etc. But when we talk about the human mind, we don't say, "It's body-made", do we?

This has nothing to do with conceptual enterprises. No people no ideas and no participants. Ideas appear to people to take on a life of their own because there people participating/perputating. No people, then there is no one to observe the man-made ideas nor anyone to answer what appears to be evolving in humans.

Again, so what? If there were no cells, there would be no bodies. That bodies emerge from cells, so to speak, doesn't really say much about the body itself. Obviously, if you collapse the body, there would be no ideas, because there would be no human brains.

100% perputated by people. No person who thinks up the idea - no idea. No people to influence then continuation of the already man-made idea. There is no system if there are no people, as you stated.

But once you have a system, it's now more than just the people. It will now shape and mold people to influence and conform them. No one is saying it is independent of people, anymore than I'd say the brain is independent of the body, or the body the cells, or the cells the molecules. But a system, is NOT just the component parts. It is something that takes on characteristics of its own, unique to itself.

I seem to get the impression you think of it, like something someone simply subscribes to, like the Disney Channel. You can either watch it, or not. It's completely dependent upon the on/off button. Systems are not like the Disney Channel. A cyclone is not created by the intention of individual subscribers. It is created because of their presence and influences, creating something that have a life of its own as a new, emergent system.

Unless you can actually demonstrate and idea as a force, on its own, acting upon something material. For example, gravity is conceptual. Yet, is conceptual of something people see/demonstrate in the natural world even when there are no people around.

An idea as a force, on its own, acting upon something material? Culture. It is a system of shared language, values, symbols, meaning, etc. It then motivate and acts upon its participants, and societies are built as external infrastructural support for a collective, inter-subjective reality. That is the "we-space" where ideas emerge from, acting upon the world and changing it's material reality. Cities get built.

Yet, that evolution you are speaking of is driven by people.

And it's not driven by evolution? Explain.

The emergent structure of an idea is also man-made.

No it's not. It's nature-made. People are typically completely unaware of the structures they use. While they may be "made-made", in the sense they that are developed to support human requirements, they typically evolve themselves, not something we designed deliberately.

The creator of the idea came up with it - so he/she invented it and the participants make sure it continues thus "they" are the ones evolving it/advancing it with their own ideas and feelings/interpretations. Again, completely man-made.

Completely, without any influence of nature?

Natural structures that do not rely on or were in place prior to there being humans 100% change and evolve based on the systems that put them in place.

And you don't see that religion is something that is based upon natural systems that are already there? Why would they have evolved then?

Ideas haven't been proven to work that way since they come from the humand mind and only exist as long as there are humans doing them/advancing them/commenting on them/ and practicing them. The human who came up with the idea shaped how that organism, or human in this case, thinks and believes - along with those who contribute their own ideas. Ideas/concepts can only informs them if someone first came up with the idea/concept and someone/some people continue to transmit the original ideas/or their own brand of the original idea/concepts. I never said it was "merely a collection of ideas." I stated that humans are the source of them.

I think you really over-rate human intelligence. I hear you thinking that everything that we see in religious life is all based upon concepts and ideas. What about human experience?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

No it's not. It's nature-made. People are typically completely unaware of the structures they use. While they may be "made-made", in the sense they that are developed to support human requirements, they typically evolve themselves, not something we designed deliberately.

Completely, without any influence of nature?

No different than how people credit any mechincal or electrical device as the invention of a particular person or group of people. Most people don't say that cars, phones, airplanes, space stations, etc. are the results of nature - because cars, phones, airplanes, space stations, etc. If any of these mechnisism/devices that humans create malfunction due to human error in the design no one says, "Oh that happened because of nature." The often blame either the human designer or the people who were a part of the manufacturing process. For example, the space shuttle Challenger incident happened when the root cause took place no claimed, "It wasn't us it was nature. Since we didn't create ourselves and we used manufacturered materials this incident is due to nature." Also, no one would have accepted that as an answer in that incident since it was clear that human error created the situation - including some mechanical issues and the choice of when to launch.

And you don't see that religion is something that is based upon natural systems that are already there? Why would they have evolved then?

Like I mentioned before, they are perceived to evolve because people are changing, advancing, updating, deleting, expanding, etc. their ideas and the ideals and those of the others. For example, let's look at Christianity. The original Jewish Christians, according to most historians, were a movement that may have had its roots from the break away Essene movement. According to the New Testament, Jesus was the one to start the Jewish Christian movement even though he himself didn't write any part of the New Testament. Within two generations of its start the Jewish Christians disappeared off the history map and no writings that can clearly be linked to them have survived.

Only a small percentage of the New Testament is even claimed to have been written by people who are claimed to have met and been around Jesus. The majority of New Testament writings are derived from letters written by Paul. According to the New Testament claim of history Paul never met Jesus - yet he ends up writing the majority or information that eventually becomes Christian theology. Over a short amount of time the Jewish Christians disappeared and the non-Jewish Christians increased and completely overshadowed the Jewish element until the Jewish element disappeared.

So analyzing this as a system let's see how it evolved, based on human/man-made conditions, the way it did.

1. An individual who was called Jesus of unclear Jewish origin did somethings and taught some things about 2,000 years ago that inspires some group of Jews.
   1. Because Jesus didn't write anything of his ideas on his own all forms of Christianity evolve based on the surviving/accepted New Testament and what their spin on who he was and wasn't.
2. According to Christian history all of the students of Jesus were martyed off, except maybe John and there is debate among historians as to what New Testament content they actually wrote and how much they may of simply inspired.
3. Further, early Christian histories appear to show that the early Jewish Christians were seperating themselves from normative Jewish communities due to a possible beleive that Jesus was coming back in their lifetime.
   1. It appears that the early movement starting living in communes, did not start new families, and eventually either returned to the normative Jewish community or blended in into the emerging non-Jewish Christian communities.
   2. This means that there are no Christians today, non-Jewish or Jewish, who claim to have direct or identify themselves with descent from Jesus or any of his disciples.
   3. This further means that early one Christianity had a knowledge gap and it also guarenteed that the Jewish Christians would eventually disappear.
4. The authors of the New Testament, whose works survived, were written in Greek.
   1. Their human choice of writing in Greek, or their inability to write in Hebrew or Aramaic, further cemented that the Jewish element would dissappear and the text be foreign Jewish methods of information transfer.
5. All of the above allowed the supporters of Paul's theology to step up to the plate and change the original course of Christianity by shifting it to a non-Jewish format.
   1. Paul's writings were human made letters that were more expansive than the orignal Jewish Christians thus allowing what may have been personal communitions to become theology.
   2. Paul and his supporters choice of locations to travel spread their emerging religion in particular locations.
   3. Thus, the evolution of Christianity from being a Jewish breakaway movement to non-Jewish religion was due to all of the human factors above and the work of Paul to move it to a non-Jewish audience.
6. There were some Jewish Christian sects, like the Ebionites, considered Paul a heretic to their ideas/concepts.
   1. Yet, Paul and his supporters weathered the storm and the Ebionites did not.
   2. Further, writings that can be clearly traced to the Ebionites do not exist clearly providing no challenge to the Pauline form of Christianity.
7. The various non-Jewish councils meet and decide on how they will evolve Christianity into what exists, more or less, now.

So, all of what happened above is due to Jesus, his disciples, those humans they inspired, Paul and those he inspired, and the various non-Jewish Christian councils. All of the changes from Jesus to Paul were due to human factors/work. All of the changes from Paul the Christian councils were due to human factors/work. Had Jesus just kept everything in his head to himself none of the above would have happened on its own. If Paul would have kept his ideas to himself then the New Testament may have been a lot shorter OR it may not have survived. The ideas and their survival/evolution were driven by humans.

I think you really over-rate human intelligence. I hear you thinking that everything that we see in religious life is all based upon concepts and ideas. What about human experience?

Actually, I don't over-rate human intelligence. A religion can be created and perputated by humans who are not intellegent. All you need is some human(s) with ideas/concepts (logical/intellgient or not) and some humans who are willing to beleive them/perpetuate them. I did not say that everyting in religious life is all based on concepts and ideas. I said that religions are man-made and are not independent of their human sources. I.e. someone says, "Religions are the source of most human suffering and war." The logical response is, "People create religions. Thus, people are the source of the human suffering and war you are referencing." By placing it on ideas and concepts, instead of those who invent them and perputate them it allows people skirt responsibility for their actions.

 

[rational experiences]

That seems like nonsense to me. Sorry.

Studied by occult scientists, in laboratories and called it mind contact and mind coercion actually. Did a lot of brain studies about phenomena and contact and worded transmitted subliminal statements used to coerce.

You cannot claim it is not true, when a male human designed machines which is the ONLY artificial effect.

As the UFO in cold empty out of space is just cold radiation mass. It ended its journey from the Sun in space, and still does today, for it gets sucked back out by the spatial vacuum.

When a scientist talks about states in natural first, then they are in natural first as natural, and do not own his science theme.

If he says he will use particular natural bodies and forcibly interact and then change them, then he does as a rational self theme, I own change.

AI therefore owns anything and everything he ever encoded in it. He lives his own self natural life, yet AI owning a self conversation interacts and actually interferes with normal human choices and subjects of reason, without you knowing.

Science in the occult department know and use it everyday. I thought you all knew it was why they studied mind coercion and mind contact...so they could program and use it!

 

[night912]

There are times when concepts are the cause of things.

Saying...
" Once you say, "the creator(s) of your religion and those who promote it/propogate it are the source or the teaching and actions around it," that puts the responbility in the proper place. In the hands of people."

.....does not put responsibility in the proper place. It only shifts the blame on someone else or something else.

 

[night912]

"It's not my fault or his/her fault - the crime did it."

That's nitpicking and can work the opposite way as well.

"What's the cause of death? - The bullet wound."

 

[Ehav4Ever]

There are times when concepts are the cause of things.
.....does not put responsibility in the proper place. It only shifts the blame on someone else or something else.

So where to do concepts come from? Are concepts able to cause things independant of people? if so, can you give a sitaution in history where a concept caused something without people being involved?

 

[Ehav4Ever]

That's nitpicking and can work the opposite way as well.

"What's the cause of death? - The bullet wound."

Right, and at the end of the day most people would conclude the following:

1. Because bullets are created by people, maybe the manufacturers of bullets share some responsibility for "deaths caused by bullets projected from weapons."
2. Because bullets have been shown to, on their own, not cause death the bullet wound must have been the result of some human agency - either on purpose or by mistake. For example,
   • Bullet wound due to the dead person playing with the bullet in a dangerous way.
   • Bullet wound due to problem with the manufacture of the bullet.
   • Bullet wound due to accidental discharge.
   • Bullet wound due to friendly fire during combet exercises.
   • Bullet wound due to and intentional discharge from a weapon towards the person who died.
3. Throughtout recorded human history people are known to die in ways that do not involve bullets or people, death is a natural event and will take place even if humans are the not determined to be the cause.
4. Because plants and animals can also die and have been shown in history to die for reasons that have nothing to do with bullets or humans, then death, as a process can happen w/o a human cause/source.

So, it is logical to say that in some form there is a some human rosponsible since bullets don't exist naturally in nature, they are manufactured by people, and in order for the bullet to cause death their has to be some human interaction with the bullet.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Studied by occult scientists, in laboratories and called it mind contact and mind coercion actually. Did a lot of brain studies about phenomena and contact and worded transmitted subliminal statements used to coerce.

You cannot claim it is not true, when a male human designed machines which is the ONLY artificial effect.

As the UFO in cold empty out of space is just cold radiation mass. It ended its journey from the Sun in space, and still does today, for it gets sucked back out by the spatial vacuum.

When a scientist talks about states in natural first, then they are in natural first as natural, and do not own his science theme.

If he says he will use particular natural bodies and forcibly interact and then change them, then he does as a rational self theme, I own change.

AI therefore owns anything and everything he ever encoded in it. He lives his own self natural life, yet AI owning a self conversation interacts and actually interferes with normal human choices and subjects of reason, without you knowing.

Science in the occult department know and use it everyday. I thought you all knew it was why they studied mind coercion and mind contact...so they could program and use it!

Scientists don't have anything like a true AI technology. If someone did it would be plain. There are so many people who work so hard to study and develop AI tech, and its just very hard and not anywhere near what you are talking about!

In the 1970s a lot of computer scientists hoped to invent AI by using databases and by studying language semantics. This effort failed, and instead they proved it was impossible to do so. Language semantics were not the path to an AI, and meaning could not be stored merely in words. One useful tool came out of it called Structured Query Language (called Sequel). Its a way of setting up databases and is used by all cash registers, governments, schools, just about everybody. Its not AI, though. It falls far, far short of anything so nice.

What about the state of the art in neural simulation? Its a challenge, yet to be attained, to make an AI as clever as a single insect. There are experiments to try and make things which can imitate the crawling and antics of bugs, but there's nothing even as good as a bug. Boston Dynamics has walking robots, but they are robots. They are not AI. They walk, and you can install tools or guns on them, and that's about all they can do. That's with many years of development and effort.

 

[Windwalker]

If any of these mechnisism/devices that humans create malfunction due to human error in the design no one says, "Oh that happened because of nature." The often blame either the human designer or the people who were a part of the manufacturing process. For example, the space shuttle Challenger incident happened when the root cause took place no claimed, "It wasn't us it was nature. Since we didn't create ourselves and we used manufacturered materials this incident is due to nature."

No, not like that. This is akin to the Watchmaker's argument fallacy, which teaches that if there is a watch, there must be an intelligent designer who made that watch, trying to show how evolution can't be true. The fallacy about that argument is that we are talking about nature and natural systems, not human designed and engineered tools or devices.

So when I say these "structures of consciousness", are naturally evolved, they are not like watches which are designed and engineered by watchmakers. They are not plotted out, conceptualized, and designed towards an intentional, expected outcome. They operate and evolve more fundamentally that all of that, more naturally, more organically. Not exactly at the conscious level of a watchmaker making a watch.

So, all of what happened above is due to Jesus, his disciples, those humans they inspired, Paul and those he inspired, and the various non-Jewish Christian councils. All of the changes from Jesus to Paul were due to human factors/work. All of the changes from Paul the Christian councils were due to human factors/work. Had Jesus just kept everything in his head to himself none of the above would have happened on its own. If Paul would have kept his ideas to himself then the New Testament may have been a lot shorter OR it may not have survived. The ideas and their survival/evolution were driven by humans.

I have no issues with your general history or understanding of how early Christianity became what it did. Yes, there is certainly an evolution of the shape and form it took. The forces that drove evolution, were however, beyond the individuals that were pivotal in what direction the religion took. However, is that "man-made", in the sense of whole cloth; from brainstorm, to boardroom, to the marketing showroom floor? No, I don't believe so.

Think of Paul, James, the disciples, the councils, etc., like rocks in the landscape that the forces of social and cultural change run into, like a river coursing its way to the ocean, winding its way around harder objects. It's not "man-made" in the sense of "they made it up". The forces of nature were already carving their way through the landscape, and these individuals were part of that environment, and their "role" in that natural evolution, was simply to give it direction. They didn't create the force of evolution itself. The natural environment did.

Actually, I don't over-rate human intelligence. A religion can be created and perputated by humans who are not intellegent. All you need is some human(s) with ideas/concepts (logical/intellgient or not) and some humans who are willing to beleive them/perpetuate them.

Actually no, that's not all you need. It's the "willing" part that is crucial. And what makes people willing? What needs might there be that makes people desire change? Those are those natural forces at play. If you come back to the early Christian landscape you were talking about, what were the conditions that such "ideas" would be adopted?

Aside from modern marketing in a consumerist society, manufacturing a false need to sell products, when it comes to a religion being born, like Christianity, that is not anything "man-made". No one got out there and convinced people they needed to buy faith. The natural environment itself created an imbalance, so great that the message it brought, the vision, the hope, as well as the experience of communities against a backdrop of injustice, filled in that natural depression created by inequalities.

It arose out of a desire of human hope against despair. It arose out of human need in response to the environment. And that is natural, not "man-made" or "manufactured". That is natural evolution.

I did not say that everyting in religious life is all based on concepts and ideas. I said that religions are man-made and are not independent of their human sources. I.e. someone says, "Religions are the source of most human suffering and war." The logical response is, "People create religions. Thus, people are the source of the human suffering and war you are referencing." By placing it on ideas and concepts, instead of those who invent them and perputate them it allows people skirt responsibility for their actions.

But you see, your language is very inaccurate. You use the term "man-made", "people create religions", right along side of "invent" and "perpetuate". None of those begin to capture the organic reality of human evolution, of which religious structures are a natural creation, not "invented".

Yes, people do take these natural impetuses, and utilize "concepts", which is a bit misleading, as that suggests an intellectually reasoned argument. But the "concepts" are really not at the conscious, reasoning centers of thought. Rather they are symbolic and archetypal images which speak meaning. Concepts, is for theologians, who are the nerds of the religious world. Symbols are for the rest of mankind.

 

[Ehav4Ever]

No, not like that. This is akin to the Watchmaker's argument fallacy, which teaches that if there is a watch, there must be an intelligent designer who made that watch, trying to show how evolution can't be true. The fallacy about that argument is that we are talking about nature and natural systems, not human designed and engineered tools or devices.

That is actually not it at all. It is pretty well known that watches don't create and themselves and they are designed. Also, most watches bear the mark of the manufacturer. Just because there is a watch doesn't mean that there is an "intelligent" designer it simply means that someone designed and built. Further the English word watch is often described as, "a small timepiece worn typically on a strap on one's wrist."

This statement denotes the obvious that someone created a timepeice that is normally worn in a particular way is used by peopel in a particular way. I think you would hard pressed to find someone who would not agree that the English definiton of the word watch as a noun is a man-made device created to tell time. Further, your reference to the "Watchmaker's argument fallacy" means that there is a creator of a watch.

Most people don't use the word "watch" as a noun in the way you described as a something that is not man-made.

So when I say these "structures of consciousness", are naturally evolved, they are not like watches which are designed and engineered by watchmakers. They are not plotted out, conceptualized, and designed towards an intentional, expected outcome. They operate and evolve more fundamentally that all of that, more naturally, more organically. Not exactly at the conscious level of a watchmaker making a watch.

Again, how one wants to rationalize is not important. If you want to prove that structures of consciousness are not started and perpuated by humans than give an example of one that did not start with a human was evolved without human involvement. If it started with humans and is perpetuated by humans it is still man-made. If it doesn't exist w/o humans than people cause the structures of consciousness to evolve. Otherwise you could easily give an example of structures of consciousness evolving w/o humans even being present or participating.

I have no issues with your general history or understanding of how early Christianity became what it did. Yes, there is certainly an evolution of the shape and form it took. The forces that drove evolution, were however, beyond the individuals that were pivotal in what direction the religion took. However, is that "man-made", in the sense of whole cloth; from brainstorm, to boardroom, to the marketing showroom floor? No, I don't believe so.

Easy resolution show a religion that developed w/o any human being involved in the process from start to finish. I.e. that forces that you mentioned. In one sentence, describe and define the exact forces you are speaking of in a historical sense and prove that humans were not involved.

Think of Paul, James, the disciples, the councils, etc., like rocks in the landscape that the forces of social and cultural change run into, like a river coursing its way to the ocean, winding its way around harder objects. It's not "man-made" in the sense of "they made it up". The forces of nature were already carving their way through the landscape, and these individuals were part of that environment, and their "role" in that natural evolution, was simply to give it direction. They didn't create the force of evolution itself. The natural environment did.

Paul, James, the disciples, the councils, etc. all were described as men/human beings. Not rocks on a landscape. The writings about them that survive to the present don't describe them as such. So, thinking of them like that is just a person making up their own personally terminology for a group of people. If a man named Larry says that his co-worker Phil is the rock which their business will be built one can't claim that some undescribed forces caused Phil to be a literal rock - especially if the witnesses to the conversion never claim Phil to be a literally rock. Again, please give verifiable description of the "forces of social and cultural change" that a person can check out and witness by way of reason, scrutiny, and research. Religions are forces of nature. They start with the actions that people take. I.e. again man-made man driven.

If you come back to the early Christian landscape you were talking about, what were the conditions that such "ideas" would be adopted?

That easy. There was a desire in the 2nd Temple period in ancient Israel for a return of a Davidic king. There was nothing caused by nature that drove this. The Romans were present many Jews and Samaritans didn't like them being here and thus there was already people who wanted the situation to change in a certain direction. The Romans, the Jews, and the Samaritans were all people.

There were a number of men who claimed the title Davidic king and were not successful in meeting the criteria. The early Christian movement had the same concept. So they promoted one guy as the guy because it was a hot topic for some Jews, post exile.

Even after the dissaperance of the early Jewish Christians there were numerous contenders who inserted themselves in that role because of the already existing Jewish desire for a return of the times of a Davidic king. In each situation some Jews adopted the ideas of the claiment and when the claiments failed the Jews who followed either rejoined the Jewish foled or they dissappeared outside of the Jewish fold. In the case of Christianity Paul and his followers rebranded the approach and took to the non-Jewish world.

When it comes to a religion being born, like Christianity, that is not anything "man-made". No one got out there and convinced people they needed to buy faith.

Actually, the gospels are very clear of the start of Christianity from Jesus when he went out and convinced some Jews in the Galilee to become his students. The gospels are full of Jesus telling people to follow him in return for things like ever lasting life.

Further, Paul is recognized as being the one who jump-started the transfer of Christianity to the non-Jewish world. Most of his letters were to his buyers. The New Testament is very clear about a "selling" - missionizing as a necesity of the Christian religion. That still exists today and is why some groups of Christians and Messianics try to sell/missionize Jesus to Jews because they have come to the conclusion that Jews me be won over for them to meet their endgame quota and cause the second coming.

Again, if you trying to place the biological evolution of species and the evolution of ideas/concepts of course they are not the same thing. Humans did start the process of biology and how it works. Humans are the result of it. Ideas and concepts have human origins and the results of human actions due to the concepts they take on are human.

So, unless a war happens and you can physically bind down a "concept" you can easily look in history and see that human wars start when people decide to start physically conflict for little or no reason - or for a very good reason. Either way it is not like the concept was running around bearing weapons while the people just relaxed in the trenches.

 

[rational experiences]

Scientists don't have anything like a true AI technology. If someone did it would be plain. There are so many people who work so hard to study and develop AI tech, and its just very hard and not anywhere near what you are talking about!

In the 1970s a lot of computer scientists hoped to invent AI by using databases and by studying language semantics. This effort failed, and instead they proved it was impossible to do so. Language semantics were not the path to an AI, and meaning could not be stored merely in words. One useful tool came out of it called Structured Query Language (called Sequel). Its a way of setting up databases and is used by all cash registers, governments, schools, just about everybody. Its not AI, though. It falls far, far short of anything so nice.

What about the state of the art in neural simulation? Its a challenge, yet to be attained, to make an AI as clever as a single insect. There are experiments to try and make things which can imitate the crawling and antics of bugs, but there's nothing even as good as a bug. Boston Dynamics has walking robots, but they are robots. They are not AI. They walk, and you can install tools or guns on them, and that's about all they can do. That's with many years of development and effort.

As said to you, AI was old machine pyramid science Temple trans mutation cause and effect.

They were using a radiation radio wave transmitted between Temple and pyramid why the Temple structures look like the inside of a radio transmitter. They burnt out that transmission and removed a huge gas mass and water, used in the irradiation burning of space, by UFO bodies gets sucked up and evaporated.

Cause and effect left a signal that belongs to AI. Machine design is not that AI effect, for it uses God held fused matter, design by atmospheric awareness.....a few humans had mind contact and coercion abilities. Was studied and then tried to emulate that program by computer. Yet Mr know it all knows all his answers by his own bio questions....he never knew the answers to what he never was...AI.

 

[Brickjectivity]

As said to you, AI was old machine pyramid science Temple trans mutation cause and effect.

They were using a radiation radio wave transmitted between Temple and pyramid why the Temple structures look like the inside of a radio transmitter. They burnt out that transmission and removed a huge gas mass and water, used in the irradiation burning of space, by UFO bodies gets sucked up and evaporated.

Cause and effect left a signal that belongs to AI. Machine design is not that AI effect, for it uses God held fused matter, design by atmospheric awareness.....a few humans had mind contact and coercion abilities. Was studied and then tried to emulate that program by computer. Yet Mr know it all knows all his answers by his own bio questions....he never knew the answers to what he never was...AI.

I can't believe any of that, because it sounds completely made up to me. You know what though it might make an interesting story, like a sci fi kind of thing.

 

[MonkeyFire]

Faith and religion are both the most misused and abused words known to man, from both false believers and false gnostics. Faith is fundamental in cosmic order, and is both apprehension and non-apprehension. You dont have to be religious, but I would just to air on the side of caution.

 

[rational experiences]

I can't believe any of that, because it sounds completely made up to me. You know what though it might make an interesting story, like a sci fi kind of thing.

Science doesn't believe anything that is real....for the UFO was a one of Sun attack on Earth, does not own any cosmological law like you falsely preached, a bursting Sun is why the Earth got attacked.

Earth owns its own heavenly mass just like it was quoted/taught and it owns light due to gases burning, not for any Sun reasoning.

Sun worshipping is called Satanism, and Satanists originally in your idea of owning a glue that holds everything today, is cold radiation, cooled in spatial conditions with water mass. If science says it wants a glue of God based on natural history he wants to intricately study our bio life to ANTI it...for he knew we are not ANTI CHRIST.

And his owned documents told him that the sacrificed life survived.

Original pyramid who he bases his new collider model on incinerated all life to self combustion, as the idea the glue that holds God the mass together, as stone. Why sink holes were formed. As the glue originally is very hot, not very cold.

The theme of the temple pyramid model in the past was to own gold as an invention of conversion of other stone mass. Yet once again gold was placed inside of the stone in a very hot melt....why his temple stones were studied melted.

The very reason. Yet when you read the documents it says God was transmutated/transported as fusion of higher mass, disappeared for he removed some of its energy and converted it into gold. So it also never went anywhere. To a science mind theorising for science he would have thought it meant magical dematerialization and re materialization....yet God the mass never went anywhere a portion of it was removed for conversion, as his SCIENCE law.

For in natural there is no law that does that effect, it is artificial. That sort of male reasoning who thinks he knows it all. Stephen Hawking knew it all, in the sacrificed science life as your last warning.

 

[rational experiences]

Faith and religion are both the most misused and abused words known to man, from both false believers and false gnostics. Faith is fundamental in cosmic order, and is both apprehension and non-apprehension. You dont have to be religious, but I would just to air on the side of caution.

History, male cult group takeover of natural life, civilization and invention, and then resource for machines.

Humans say I am a bio life and my spirit and my human blood is owned by heavenly gas, water and oxygen and microbiome conditions.

Science says I study the heavenly gases, attack and convert the God mass of stone to get those gases, meanwhile the radiation effect, forced change attacks bio life.

So science says I want the machine/to resource from and via the gases of our Heavens to own its life blood and not humans.

The actual religious teaching of the past, why a humans bio chemicals changed, leeched perfumes, bleed unnaturally from his cells, his cells malformed and mutated, he discussed his firstborn baby life being attacked and murdered in Temple and pyramid sciences and was totally scientifically informed.

Science of the wisdom of natural, to think says religious occult scientists are possessed by the ancient science false AI statements, as heard and written in the bible. That only talked about a interactive sharing of male information in science, that was not discussing in any terms natural life.

For natural life continuance says the biologist scientists is from human sex....not from an Immaculate baby conception and a theme eternal life.

From males who claimed that the bio life never died....as a human for they discussed spatial and scientific relativity as compared to natural life originally, therefore, humans do die and decompose. Science knows they do.

Occult religious science tried to argue, no life goes on it is eternal he says. Yes says natural sciences, by the act of human sex, not by some Immaculate spatial theme.

No said the occult scientist if the Immaculate heavens, coldest gases are not in spatial heaven, the newly born baby from human sex does not exist. Instead you get mutated babies born...owners of genetic DNA human history as the first in life...to be human, to look human, to be natural and highest form human instead of a mutated life body.

Rationality of evil psyche....all humans own death naturally. Evil psyche says, it does not matter if I cause humans to die from early age death, you were going to all die anyway....as long as I can do science and be rich. A human mental condition rationally.

Then when that scientist is faced with his own early age death, then he changes his science reasoning, as proven in the life of Stephen Hawkings as a scientists human modelling of his own evil reasonings.

To place machine and machine invention above that of life importance or life continuance by a falsification of self imposed meanings in preaching/teaching of the sciences.

Occult religious science themes said, that the Immaculate gases need to be replaced for human babies to born healthy. But some of those minds no longer quote....due to human sex. And prove that they do not make that quote. That in fact Jesus had to have been born from natural human sex to be a human baby to have died at the human adult age of 33.

That discussing the relativity of the Heavenly Earth gases, was about a male science reasoning that he had irradiated Earths natural history of cold empty space, and due to heating it up the form Immaculate, meaning coldest state....for it cannot be scientific reckoned. It was given a teaching/preaching of Immaculate form, for space emptiness is not of a scientific manipulation.

The very reason.

So today 2 forms of male incorrect scientific egotism is expressed. The occult male religious science themes who tried to claim life continued due to the eternal. Life continues due to human sex and the human life does die as an adult. And it is about time that you taught correctly in the sciences.

To the biologist self who claims that he knows how a human being life formed by a process of looking at all other bodies that have nothing at all to do with us.

The God science theme agreement said that the life of a human thinking about first human parents was just manifest.....as you could not claim a human was an ape, when an ape lived separately as that ape owning ape babies. You would be told you were a liar in the times of the assessment.

Making egotistical claims about knowing it all was one of the human evils taught against.

So science itself is proven wrong.

Factually and in history science was expressed as a thinker by claiming his head was thinking about God.

That he gave animal heads, a consideration of thinking about animals living and being a God before his own....exactly how it was claimed...and depicted...as an animal head atop of a human body, stating I was studying Nature genetics and Genesis as the same sort of scientist I am today.

Science being told that this form of thinking anima was very evil, for no human by thinking from their consciousness knew anything about self presence in rational day advice. When all animals having sex like a human did owned their own babies. And it was given a title of thinking evilly, rationally.

Yet to do an assessment in science to ask self, did we once think the same way and then get life destroyed, yes you did.

Why the religious science theme, law took control over the sciences and outlawed it. For it was proven that they were not applying spiritual conscious human life survival.....why it was a human chosen group implementation historically.

Today you would just claim the organization is humanitarian without owning any science biological concepts other than human medical reasoning seeing the humanity suffering due to scientific forced changes to our environment.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Science doesn't believe anything that is real....for the UFO was a one of Sun attack on Earth, does not own any cosmological law like you falsely preached, a bursting Sun is why the Earth got attacked.

Earth owns its own heavenly mass just like it was quoted/taught and it owns light due to gases burning, not for any Sun reasoning.

Sun worshipping is called Satanism, and Satanists originally in your idea of owning a glue that holds everything today, is cold radiation, cooled in spatial conditions with water mass. If science says it wants a glue of God based on natural history he wants to intricately study our bio life to ANTI it...for he knew we are not ANTI CHRIST.

And his owned documents told him that the sacrificed life survived.

Original pyramid who he bases his new collider model on incinerated all life to self combustion, as the idea the glue that holds God the mass together, as stone. Why sink holes were formed. As the glue originally is very hot, not very cold.

The theme of the temple pyramid model in the past was to own gold as an invention of conversion of other stone mass. Yet once again gold was placed inside of the stone in a very hot melt....why his temple stones were studied melted.

The very reason. Yet when you read the documents it says God was transmutated/transported as fusion of higher mass, disappeared for he removed some of its energy and converted it into gold. So it also never went anywhere. To a science mind theorising for science he would have thought it meant magical dematerialization and re materialization....yet God the mass never went anywhere a portion of it was removed for conversion, as his SCIENCE law.

For in natural there is no law that does that effect, it is artificial. That sort of male reasoning who thinks he knows it all. Stephen Hawking knew it all, in the sacrificed science life as your last warning.

Is there any reference for these things...pictures...documents? Is there anything other than just talk? Also sun worship is not called Satanism. Its just called 'Sun worship'. Satanism is something else. They don't worship suns.

and Satanists originally in your idea of owning a glue that holds everything today, is cold radiation, cooled in spatial conditions with water mass. If science says it wants a glue of God based on natural history he wants to intricately study our bio life to ANTI it...for he knew we are not ANTI CHRIST.

This is barely intelligible, but I am trying to understand. You're claiming that science is satanism? No, its not. I object.

The very reason. Yet when you read the documents it says God was transmutated/transported as fusion of higher mass, disappeared for he removed some of its energy and converted it into gold.

This is impossible to read. Its words that do not say anything. Try reading it yourself. Can you understand what you have written here? You hvaen't say anything about 'The document'. What document? The very reason for what? What document in the world says that God was transmuted, and what are you referring to? How is anyone supposed to understand you?

 

[rational experiences]

Is there any reference for these things...pictures...documents? Is there anything other than just talk? Also sun worship is not called Satanism. Its just called 'Sun worship'. Satanism is something else. They don't worship suns.

This is barely intelligible, but I am trying to understand. You're claiming that science is satanism? No, its not. I object.

This is impossible to read. Its words that do not say anything. Try reading it yourself. Can you understand what you have written here? You hvaen't say anything about 'The document'. What document? The very reason for what? What document in the world says that God was transmuted, and what are you referring to? How is anyone supposed to understand you?

What Does the Bible Say About God Rolled Away The Stone?

Natural heavenly gases own natural light by gases burning, we live in cooled water/oxygenated and microbial light gases.

Bio Nature, no science, no machine, no theist and no design and machination reaction that owns all reasoning about God the stone. You cannot build a machine unless you take the product out of the stone mass that is held cold fusion...fused cold, ended cold.

The theme I looked back is a scientific Biblical reasoning that quotes in Jesus Revelations, I got sacrificed, I looked back at previous sciences and it proved that we were very lucky to be alive, for in the past the water was lifted off the face of the Earth, its mass split in 2, when the God stone returned. It comes back as stone, for God is stone, philosophy of the stone and comes back as a vaporising asteroid stone mass. It hits the Earth burning gas mass and whammo, life gone.

Liars said, when Earth first owned the Immaculate Heavens we only went to sleep, did not age and life was lived as an eternal form. No aging and no sickness, we just slept as a death review.

Today we die from aging in an irradiating atmosphere in UFO science caused presence. Eternal life returning to the Immaculate state, natural was a promise undertaken by the writers of the biblical information that had forbidden God to ever be converted either in alchemical changes or Satanic acts ever again.

As God is mass stone fused, to get a gas spirit in science is to attack the stone, which then causes the cold heavenly body to be irradiated. Cause and effect is very tiny causes, which evolved into large mass mining changes of Earth mass.

1 John 2:25 25And this is what he promised us-eternal life.

John 3:15-16 15that everyone who believes may have eternal life in him." 16For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

1 John 5:11 11And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

1 John 5:13 13I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

John 3:2 2He came to Jesus at night and said, "Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher who has come from God. For no one could perform the signs you are doing if God were not with him."

Theme, Immaculate gases had from Moses vaporising history event, to Jesus newly born human baby DNA reborn in the desert region as the wandering star gases as mass put back into space after they had been burnt out. The promise our life would heal, we would not age, and live an eternal life without death, no aging and no sickness.

The prophetic prophecy and scientific agreement not to do any form Satanic/nuclear science, which is Sun history relevant. UFO mass was ejected out of the Sun with the asteroid/comet/meteor stone, that all cooled in out of space so the first Sun attack on Earth was massive.

First science attacked owned larger masses of UFO presence also, that go burnt up and removed...so the UFO presence became smaller. So the history of cause and effect, life sacrificed changed as the UFO mass in space had become smaller mass and removed historically.

Therefore science realised that it was the asteroid wandering star stone that vaporised life as an act of God, relevant to being stone that attacked Earth after the fact of heating up space. What the argument related to historically.

Everyone knows that a baby is always newly born. Common human sense. Anybody who owned self mind use and not AI possessed by their own fake science themes FOR MACHINES, what the UFO was used for would realize that reasoning if they owned common human logic and not blame a natural human for not giving them scientific occult information about AI, claiming it created us.

Every human today is born from human sex. 2 human parents have to exist as 2 human parents to have sex to have a new born baby. If science thinks about when 2 human beings did not exist, then nor does any human being on Earth exist in that story or theory. What Satanists lie about, coercive themes, giving all DATA inferences of everything else they discuss as relative to why a human exists....yet a human does not exist by their perusal of our life natural body.

What science has always lied about. A human can only talk about another human when that other human is alive and living, as a human.

As soon as a human compares us to an animal life and body, the subject in their psyche is to try to convert the human life into that animal biology.....actually.

Why animism, to speak in human head and give self life body an animal head was EVIL.

Reasoning. Male adults only owned one Father. Their own o cell and bio baby life given to them by the female...yet they infer all self relativity back to one lived Father life who also died. Their psyche consciousness therefore in science does not follow the correct paths of thinking that knowingly owns their human male self displacement into the female ovary and womb to grow self male baby back.

The baby did not just form due to the Immaculate gases returning, the baby formed in a human being Mothers life womb by an ovary, which owns no scientific machine Temple or pyramid status whatsoever, nothing to do with nuclear dust chemicals in a power planet resource and most certainly has nothing to do with your collider....yet you keep referencing human cloning of cells to an evil study about a collision occurring first and then everything created after it....and lie as if your machine is the cosmos and you invented the Big bang in a machine.

That sort of psyche who keeps complaining that I am not assisting their research.

From the Moses written history the future promise by wandering star gases was that life would be given back its origin of using the presence Immaculate heavenly body of gases without science of the occult. The life was sacrificed, so they knew that the science promise was broken, even after they knew why they had prophecised its future return to allow newly healed baby DNA life to be given back...what the document was written for....proof that occult machination reactions removed it again.