'The other guys' appear to have presented a Divine Will principles fallacy amidst a complex and comparatively sophisticated bout of covert narratives. All these are on a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis. They don’t represent their genuine feelings or position, they’re not particularly sincere, and in the course of presenting them they’ve also been presenting many overt narratives for globalization besides. In order to address the core Divine Will fallacy, I’ll need to address the other narratives in order to get to that core implied argument. I’ll attempt to keep this as brief as is reasonably possible, while being thorough enough to remain coherent.
The first implied narrative was an offer to teach the People Divine Will principles on a counter-Divine Will basis, which I’ve already rejected. This will become important, as we’ll end up right back here by the time we’re through with this.
The second part of this appears to involve covertly implying, on a non-credible counter-Divine Will basis, a ‘for show’ phantasm narrative that I’ve done something, either accepted a counter-Divine Will basis from them or involved some kind of ‘attack’ against them, that had placed Myself in perceived ‘debt’ to them and an onus on Myself. This for example was covertly alluded to with the recent psyop of ‘Russian spies’ and the ‘chemical weapons’ both there and in Syria. They apparently plan to use techniques of ‘cause stalking’ or ‘gang stalking’ to provide convincing supporting evidence of My supposed onus and subsequent demands on their part for a sort of self-imposed ‘house arrest’ scenario in order to ‘atone’ for whatever implied misdeed; they’ve started using a lot of symbolism referencing this, and the ‘house arrest’ scenario has been starting to appear frequently in the international ‘news’. A more careful examination of the symbolism makes evident that they know no such ‘onus’ on My part manifestly exists, just as I do. The covertly-implied narrative appears as baseless as the overt version, and likely designed and intended to disintegrate just as easily.
While we’re on the subject, this is a good opportunity to present something I’ve been meaning to for a while now in terms of clarifying the distinction between ‘applying the law to uphold rights’ and ‘committing an attack’ against someone. Due to the manifest subversion of laws and governance by ‘the other guys’, that point is not as clear now as it could and should be, and as common law tells us, ‘No man ought to derive any benefit of his own wrong.’ [’Commodum ex injuri su non habere debet.’] When I’d first addressed this situation publicly, I’d established the venues of law to apply to it as Divine Will principles and American common law. I’d also provided reference to many of the maxims of common law, established long prior to My own involvement and without My influence, as a fair and impartial means of evaluating and assessing fairness in situations. I’ve found them a pretty accurate implementation of principles of fairness generally. So it should come as no surprise that the maxim ‘The act of the law does no one an injury.’ [’Actus legis nemini facit injuriam’] applies here. That’s a large part of the value of having a system of law based on principles; that they’re clear and readily-accessible in advance, so that we can all be clear on them, so they’re impartial, and so that acting on them is fair to all and party-neutral. To the best of My knowledge ‘the other guys’ are quite well aware of the distinction between applying the law to uphold Divinely-conferred rights and ‘an attack’. I merely provide a clear understanding of that here as a courtesy to all.
Back to the current scenario. We’d appear to have a covertly-implied ‘schooling on a counter-Divine Will basis’ narrative being presented, followed closely by a ‘now you’ve done it; you’ve accepted something into yourself or abandoned Divine Will principles’ narrative. Both were apparently designed to disintegrate rather quickly, and to little effect. It would be entirely too easy to infer that these efforts were instead meant to illustrate a more fundamental metaphysical point. Again, we know that a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis is non-credible and invalid, but I’ll take a moment to consider it because whatever else is true, Divine Will principles are worthy of our examination.
It hadn’t escaped me, the scenario that was presented in the ‘Russian spy’ news symbolism being so eerily similar to the Christian ‘original sin’ motif: a couple had ‘taken into themselves’ something undesirable and unworthy, ‘fell into a deep sleep’, were found in a “container” situation, immediately removed, and later revived. It had seemed an odd congruence at the time, but I’d lacked any more information on context into which to parse it. Now add the ‘an education on a counter-Divine Will basis’ motif that was presented later and a recognizable pattern begins to emerge.
I should probably clarify that as well. In the Christian mythos the ‘exit from Eden’ scenario involved a counter-Divine Will figure presenting as an animal, which I’ll refrain specifying due to its prevalent symbolic connotations. The symbolism of that animal has additional connotations which include ‘education’. The general mythological, symbolic connotation appears to make the argument that this figure, acting on a counter-Divine Will basis, served a Divine Will-aligned purpose by ‘teaching humanity of the consequences of transgressing against Divine Will and True Nature, and thus the vital need to uphold both’, and as such had a legitimate position and basis.
That appears to be the covertly-implied, core argument being presented here: that ‘the other guys’ have been manifestly Choosing a Divine Will-aligned basis in ‘teaching’ the necessity for a Divine Will-aligned basis.
Let’s evaluate that.
You have a manifest basis which comes into direct conflict with Divine Will principles and their own True Nature. It actively encourages the jettisoning of both of those. It manifestly violates Divinely-conferred rights, systematically and for practically everyone - even for animals and indigenous Peoples who did not choose to become involved. It systematically erodes the public understanding of Divine Will principles, and the functioning and even modern recognition of systems of religion and governance established to act upon them. These are all manifest wrongdoing, in conflict with and transgression against, Divine Will and True Nature. Yet it does, in a sense, eventually present a comprehension of these same Divine Will principles. In fairness, the telepaths and propheciers have manifestly been interacting with Me on a generally similar basis, supposedly deeming it quite acceptable and proper.
It’s not, of course. They know that at least as well as I do, and indicate as much through the use of counter-Divine Will symbolism. I suspect it’s much the same with ‘the other guys’ and the manifest quasi-organizations behaving as their franchises.
It’s ‘haggling’, another attempt to sell a faux-duality position of Divine Will and True Nature on the one side, and something manifestly counter to them on the other, and present a sort of ‘package’ of intermingling them. It’s a bit like participating in a ‘crime spree’ and describing it in court as a sort of ‘object lesson to the People about the necessity to uphold the law’.
In fairness I should probably add here that ‘the other guys’ don’t truly and genuinely want money, authority, world domination, etc. on a counter-Divine Will basis; they’ve manifestly been participating in the ‘crime spree’ while lacking even a sincere motive for it, at least the better-educated higher-ranking among them are familiar enough with Divine Will principles to be aware of this. Nevertheless, it’s manifestly been quite intentional and systematic, and the ‘damage is done’, as they say. It could be [and should] retroactively ‘undone’, but while it isn’t the entire pseudo-organization manifestly occupies a position accurately identified by a particular primary color, and a classical Greek element, neither of which I’ll name here for symbolic reasons.
Common sense and even their own system of symbolic reckoning tells us that either those involved Choose a position identified with “white” and “purity”, or they’ll Choose to encounter the manifest resultants of their current manifest position. That Choice, such as it is, is theirs and not Mine. I again encourage them to Choose a consistently Divine Will- and True Nature-aligned position. I want what is good and healthy for everyone.
I’ll offer a bonus parallel here: that of ‘the other guys’’ semi-recent ‘offer’ to collapse “Rome” in return for My Choosing to abandon a Divine Will-aligned position. That is, manifest results in exchange for the jettisoning of everything that genuinely matters. Specific outcomes over truths, ends supposedly justifying the means.
As I’d said, the telepaths and propheciers had presented a similar argument and position to Me themselves; citing ‘necessity’ as the reason deliberate, Willful, systematic and avoidable violations of Divine Will principles and True Nature were being manifestly Chosen. It’s not unlike the Freemasonic covert narrative of diminishing standards due to the supposed ‘infiltration’ by ‘the bad guys’; we find that the underling manifest ‘problem’ that it all purports to solve was brought to us by the same principals bringing us the bogus ‘solution’. It’s manifestly an attempt to sell people on violations of Divine Will principles and True Nature, on one of any number of spurious bases of sophistry and misreasoning, if only they’ll buy it.
Not only do I refuse it, I already know that such efforts are not indicative of anyones’ True Nature and are fundamentally at odds with Divine Will. This includes the telepaths and propheciers, this includes ‘the other guys’, it includes everyone. So that simplifies things immensely.
So we have quite a manifest investment of effort by ‘the other guys’ in what appears to be yet another attempt to sell a bogus Divine Will / counter-Divine Will duality and a rejection of their own True Nature. How much better and more worthy it would have been to invest that effort in simply upholding and affirming Divine Will and their own True Nature, along with the rights conferred to each of us by our shared Creator! To teach a thing, uphold and affirm it. The most effective, worthwhile and legitimate means of teaching a thing, to the best of My knowledge, is by example. Otherwise the result is just a manifest rationalization of 'suckage', and Divine Will principles tell us there can be no acceptable reason for that.