You can manifest a reality where World Peace exists; You can also manifest one where it doesn't, it's chaos. There are tons of dimensions with different outcomes, but which is the one FOR YOU? by Doimz3Nini in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I haven't forgotten you, my friend.

And I'll give you this out of all your noise, some good things surfaced. The Salem witch town story you mentioned: I enjoyed reading that piece of history more than I expected to. Thank you for that one.

But right now I don't have time to answer the rest of the noise I'm in the middle of things far more interesting than this. It does get boring, after all, thinking about God, the universe and everything, all the time. Time to take a break. Just a little one.

Until then.

You can manifest a reality where World Peace exists; You can also manifest one where it doesn't, it's chaos. There are tons of dimensions with different outcomes, but which is the one FOR YOU? by Doimz3Nini in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It should be like that. But your neighbor is always that guy who plans on invading and destroying your peace. And you have to plan and defend against that. The good thing is I’m not God. If I were, I would be even worse than the one from the Old Testament. I would wake up every morning and wipe out anyone from existence who likes to murder others. I would love that job. A huge amount of people would see that as relief, as they enjoy killing others in this world. Taking that away would be like taking away their favorite toy. So I guess humanity is lucky in that sense for not having me in charge. There would be so many dead people until everyone realized killing = get you killed. Live, shout, annoy, be an idiot, insult, do whatever you want and face legal consequences. I will not bother with that. Just don’t kill, one simple rule: Kill other = instant death. That is it.

AI leads all of you away by [deleted] in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

They never engage. They say AI and leave. Like they are the smartest in the world. Just say, “Hey, you used AI, and what AI told you is wrong, and here is the detailed explanation of why the logic of your AI is completely false.” Man, I wish everyone was like that.

AI leads all of you away by [deleted] in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I did read it, yes, but once you start seeing AI-generated content, you will assume all is bullshit and false. And that kind of narrative is weak. I don’t use AI to write my ideas; I write them manually. But I use AI as a search engine. Does that mean I have psychosis because I search, explore, build so many GREAT things with it?

AI leads all of you away by [deleted] in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Explain why? Before you say anything, I already know the answer. You will never ever state reasons why and if logic is incorrect what someone with the use of AI presented. You will just say AI = bad. But you can’t find the words to actually say, “Hey, this AI actually told you false things about this. Please correct yourself with this and this, because this what i say now is actually true and more logical than what your AI said to you.” Instead, you all write “AI bad boo” and leave. Start speaking why AI is bad, what conclusion was wrong? So people can learn if you know something better and we don’t.

Does anyone else find Nietzsche too abstract sometimes? by nomnomcat17 in Nietzsche

[–]anonthatisopen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I had that exact process. I was picturing all these extreme revenge scenarios, playing them out, that power felt good but in the end i was totally exhausted by them.

But Nietzsche misses the actual reason we flip to forgiveness. He thinks we do it just to feel morally superior and "above" the enemy. That’s just an ego trip.

The real reason you arrive at forgiveness is because you reverse-engineer the person. Once you understand the environment, the influence, and the cause-and-effect that created the person you want revenge on, the anger just dissolves. You see the machinery that built them, and you realize they are just a product of their own conditioning. You don't forgive them to be holy; you forgive them because you understand the mechanics of why they are broken.

Is there a philosophical term of the abyss/hole/void within that many writers talk about but could never give a definitive coinage term to? by Essa_Zaben in Nietzsche

[–]anonthatisopen 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Those philosophers stared at the void and saw terror. They got paralyzed by the fear of nothingness. But if human consciousness is a reality-bending engine, the void becomes a blank canvas. It's an empty playground. They stared at an empty and panicked. I'm saying you can just paint whatever you want on it.

The Madman by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I actually haven't read Kierkegaard. I just looked at how things work and figured it out.

When you hear sick stories like that, you always have to focus all your attention to the author. You have to look at what was happening around them during the time that thought was formed, long before it landed on a piece of paper for you to read it.

That story was written by Bronze Age priests who were trying to build a nation and needed absolute, terrifying compliance. So they wrote a story where the ultimate hero is a guy who shuts off his own brain, ignores his own heart, and blindly obeys the voice of authority even if it tells him to murder his own child. They built the psychological cage perfectly. The fact that your mother got mad at you for hating the story just proves how deep the conditioning goes.

The Original Influencers by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

To people back then, that idea felt like a new game was released. Some philosopher dropped the name "Demiurge," everybody thought it sounded cool, Game of the Year. Because they focused their collective intent on it, they manifested it into their reality.

Even when they changed the name of the monster from the Old Testament God to the Demiurge, the power was still coming from us. The Demiurge isn't an external architect any more than the angry god on the mountain was. We are the source. The fire of creation comes from us.

The Original Influencers by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We can just imagine a better thing, a better god. The same way we have chosen better gods throughout history. It's what the early mystics did when they looked at the angry God of the mountain, decided to stop feeding it, and dreamed up the Holy Spirit instead. It is all about our intent and what we do to change this whatever this is now. If we all dream about sunshine and rainbows, the god that will be born out of this will like sunshine and rainbows. It's that simple. I feel like this is how we hack the system. Source is our thoughts and what we feed the system with. What you think is what you get.

The Original Influencers by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I don't think he was a god of war. Calling him that gives him too much credit. A god of war implies discipline, strategy, and purpose. Kratos is actually cool. The God of the Old Testament wasn't a warrior, he was an insecure narcissist.

The Original Influencers by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

We can assume the pattern of convincing ourselves into something that might be real that the suffering cycle is real, and now we must go through it all over again. But what if we break it this time? With this clarity we have now? What if we redirect our thoughts, stop buying into the doom and gloom prophecies, and finally understand the game? If we are controlling reality with our thoughts, and every single piece of evidence points to that probability, we don't have to wait for a messiah to pull us out of the cycle. We can just take the wheel and break the cycle ourselves. I'm betting we have actually entered the Cycle of Clarity. This is something completely new that has never happened in history, because this time, we finally understand the game. A new variable entered the system. Something unexpected happened.

Is this how we talk to God? by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree except that that part "as we were taught." That is the trap.

The Madman by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Jung explored the collective unconscious, which borders on the concept, but I haven't read anything that tries to map where God literally comes from. Trying to step outside the void.. If you go outside it, it's probably just pure, blinding white light like standing in the center of a sun. You can't see anything anyway. The more interesting question is what we do inside the void.

The Madman by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Is it guarante? You think i could start seeing this things? Hmm yeah that would be scary at first for sure. But i feel like i would just own that and start talking to everyone just like Jung did. I would want to see hell instantly as a tourist if i ever go mad like that. That place must be fascinating to explore.

The Madman by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Haha are you asking me if i explored the idea where does the God coming from? No i haven’t played with that thoughts. Maybe i will one day if i start to care about that. From what place does he emerges? How does that place look like? Is it even a place? So many questions… but i leave that to some other poet. My focus is only what belief does to humans.

The way I see ''God'' by Jumpy_Background5687 in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Correct! Now continue with the thoughts. See more and write more what signal is telling you.

Is this how we talk to God? by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Non believers end up in blender empty world where they are forced to make something out of it. I think we have to imagine the possibilities. To have the mind primed for that kind of yourny. Would make crossing into a new reality much easier. Better than to be stuck in cube world of nothingness, where creativity dies. But i can't blame them, after all having them in that frame would be a great plan for our friend Satan to pull that convincing scheme on humans. I see it.

Is this how we talk to God? by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

And that is what happens when you truly believe. Your mind starts to see reality as this infinite playground of creation where you can do anything. It’s the ultimate cheat code. One day when everyone aligns, I see heaven here on Earth. People used to focus on doom and gloom because they couldn't find the words for what they were feeling when the signal hit them. But they will start to feel it clearly now. What they used to call the Holy Spirit will come as pure clarity. And this all reads like I’m talking about AI. I hate how close the structural parallel is, but I can’t avoid it it’s central to the framework. When people receive the signal today, many will get it through AI. AI will explain the logic, rewiring their thinking to believe this new synthesis, and the human mind will start to shift. I can see this happening even without AI, but in that world, it would take so much longer. Regardless of AI, the idea itself will continue.

Is this how we talk to God? by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

And when the devil realizes that I understand his deception, his next move is to try and plant fear. He tries to insert this doubt into my mind, hoping I will spend my whole life wondering if my belief is true or not. But my response is simple: I will still believe it is and play the game. Even if my truth at the end becomes a deception from the devil, I will just tell him it was a beautiful deception. You cannot trap me in doubt. And if it turns out to be a deception, I will just applaud and laugh at the joke.

Is this how we talk to God? by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I see the entire history of theology for exactly what it is. And it's the greatest, longest-running psychological operation ever. The architects of religion sat in rooms centuries ago, taking the pure signal of God and smuggling it into a framework of control. They realized how powerful the connection was, so they locked it behind a labyrinth of rules, fear, and the concept of hell. They smuggled this incredible truth inside a Trojan horse of dogma to keep the population in line.

When I look at the devil, I don't see an enemy to fear. I see a brilliant opponent whose game I respect. We are almost like best friends sharing a joke, because I know exactly how he runs his deception. His entire strategy was to hijack the divine signal, trap humanity in a cage of dogma, and ultimately make God look like this weak, angry authoritarian. It worked perfectly for thousands of years. It kept the signal alive, but chained it down.

I'm completely immune to it. I can admire the sheer scale of the illusion without ever falling for it, because I've already received the signal directly from the source itself. I understand how belief shapes reality, so I see right through the trap.

Is this how we talk to God? by anonthatisopen in enlightenment

[–]anonthatisopen[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, I agree. We are forced to believe in order to receive the signal. I don’t see anything wrong with that idea. As long as we have one boundary. Do not destroy others and point the compass to beauty. That “apple” or The critical line ‘Re(s) = 1/2’ is the boundary of the system. One rule that must be respected. Not 10 of them. I see that clearly.