Re: “Water rights”

Unplanned life scenarios can become extraordinary opportunities to clear up presumptions regarding procedure, rights and basic principles.

Collectively, the apostates have apparently been investing in non-credible efforts on a non-overt, counter-Divine Will basis to imply to Me essentially, ‘Now you’ve done it. You’ve compromised on your own principles and you’re out of order.’ Anything on a knowing, Willful and avoidable counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis is intrinsically non-credible, it’s of course received as just so much ‘static’. Additionally, it’s presumption for someone manifestly Choosing a counter-Divine Will basis to attempt to speak regarding individuals or entities on a Divine Will-aligned basis. One genuinely, legitimately and validly exists. The other does not, is only ephemerally manifest, and its basis is merely fiat. It’s essentially becoming a maxim that it’s spurious attempting to address an issue that’s in a context larger than one’s own manifestly-Chosen basis.

Next, I’ll make sure any presumptions about using a Divine Will-aligned, non-overt basis are cleared up. Interacting on an overt basis is of course greatly preferred and more standard, but in scenarios in which that’s been precluded [regions like mainland China or North Korea, for example], the Choice becomes either not to spread an understanding of Divine Will principles [which would be a dereliction of duty to Divine Will] or to use a non-overt basis to do so. In such circumstances that isn’t a knowing, Willful and avoidable Choice but rather basic duress. Application of a non-overt format to clarify and educate regarding Divine Will when overt means have been precluded by others has long been standard operating procedure within My “house”, and I’ve openly stated as much. The onus in those scenarios doesn’t fall on those against whom more overt methods have been precluded, but rather upon those precluding it. This is just common sense.

Next, the apostates have been attempting to imply [again, on a non-credible, non-overt, counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis] collectively and in a particular case individually that My doing so has been unappreciated and unwanted by a certain individual, and that continuing to do so constitutes a form of harassment or other violation of their rights. As per usual, what’s said or implied on a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis is inherently non-credible; I have no means of ascertaining that it’s true. I have noticed certain investments and behaviors which could be interpreted to corroborate their contextualization, but when left to Choose between what’s manifest and what’s in accordance with Divine Will and someones’ True Nature, I’m left to regard the latter as the sincere, genuine, legitimate and credible.

With regards to ‘rights’, what a lot of new concepts the apostates seem to be learning! The knowing, Willful and avoidable Choice to reject Divine Will and True Nature is also necessarily the Choice to reject all claim to the products of those things, including rights [which are of course God-given] and even ones’ own vital life essence [which I’ll address momentarily]. The apostates’ system routinely and systematically violates rights, from police performing ‘no-knock warrant’ raids, to rampant public frauds, to ‘non-judicial foreclosures’, fiat ‘asset forfeitures’, subversions, usurpations, and a plethora of unworthy behaviors too numerous to mention. Obviously they still have the rights conferred to them by Divine Will, but they’ve knowingly, Willfully and avoidably Chosen to forfeit their claim to them and can in fairness bring no just cause against anyone for their violation. All they manifestly have is fiat, the application of which would of course only compound their manifest liabilities both individually and collectively. Violations of their rights are thus a matter to be resolved between someone Choosing to remain Divine Will-aligned and our Creator, and when I’m educating in accordance with duty for and in service to that Creator the ‘warrant’ to do so is something about which I’m fairly confident. We can’t have the Will of a Greater Authority precluded by a lesser and expect to have fairness, particularly when that lesser authority’s protests are on a basis which is non-credible, spurious and less than sincere. I’m simply attempting to ‘return stolen property’ to its rightful Owner. If it should also manifestly alleviate a situation greatly detrimental to My interests and caused by the apostates’ Choice to reject both Divine Will and their own True Nature, so much the better. That was never just in the first place.

It’s completely unprincipled and unfounded to have the apostates knowingly, Willfully and avoidably Choose a manifestly counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature position, and then by investing in various agendas on that basis lay claim to territory, property, people and relationships. Particularly when it detriments of those who Choose to remain distinct from that Chosen basis. That’s the encroachment here. You can’t take a spurious and illegitimate position, claim everything as being under its authority, and then validly claim legitimacy to maintain control over it. The very word ‘property’ refers to what is ‘properly’ [meaning ‘by rights’] owned or controlled by someone. Chuck out Divine Will and you chuck out rights, reducing any property claims to meaninglessness. All you’re manifestly left with is duress and fiat, and there are limits to how much that can be applied. But let us maintain a very clear distinction between that and legitimacy.

Finally, and appropriately so, the manifest Choice by the apostates to forfeit their own vital life-force. It’s part and parcel of the knowing, Willful and avoidable Choice to dissociate themselves from their own True Nature and the Divine Will which confers it to them. They’re manifestly being afforded Divine grace at present, but it’s nevertheless a Choice in which they’re manifestly investing themselves on the regular. It just hasn’t manifested all of its results yet, and because of that the apostates seem to have developed a mindset that because that has been temporarily suspended, it doesn’t actually exist. It’s a natural function of the interaction of their manifest Choice with the Workings of Divine Will principles, and I’ve cited it in My communiques for years now. I just wasn’t sure how, specifically, it would find its eventual actuation. In the interim, I appear to have found it detailed in the Christian mythos. Speaking in of course completely literal and overt terms only here, I’ll summarize:

The penultimate Seal blew in 1780 and 1833, and the last Seal is the Second Coming.

Where does this leave us? Prior to the Second Coming, we still have the Antitypical equivalent of the stoning of Stephen to occur, anti-Sabbath laws, and then Probation closes. That’s when we get the Antitypical version of the last seven of the ‘Ten Plagu█s of Egypt’. In the Typical version, the first three affected everyone, and the last seven affected only the Egyptians.

Given the plethora of prophecies that’ve already been fulfilled right on time, it’s not clear how or why Rome and Babylon intend to fulfill their ambitions of empire. Particularly given that it all gets nixed regardless, and they do it at the cost of dissociating themselves from the Source of their own vitality.

If this information were presented and prevalently and understood a lot of the recreants would likely get it, opt themselves out, and get rescued from that situation before it finalizes on them.

That’s probably the reasoning for the Three Angels’ Messages.

So there appears to quite literally be a Divine mandate, a Divinely-issued ‘warrant’, to get that information to the recreants. While it’s currently very important to sort out, globalization is ultimately a side-issue. The core issue is Divine Will- and True Nature-alignment. What’s come to be colloquially termed ‘the saving of souls’, or more accurately a best effort to ensure that the People continue to have a knowing, Willful, informed Choice to retain their access to the life force that’s provided to them by their alignment with Divine Will.

Rights are important, God-given and should be respected and upheld. But it’s spurious for anyone to make a claim on a basis which they themselves have Chosen to reject, and in a scenario where I’m left to Choose between upholding Divinely-conferred rights and doing My duty for the Divine Will which conferred them, I’m left on My own recognizance to make a judgement call. I’m pretty confident with that, particularly when all implied objections to it are inherently non-credible and “absurd” in the first place.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *