Month: February 2019

Courtesy prompts a clarification as the apostate system, on a non-credible counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis, appears to imply, ‘Ah, so your strategy is to maintain a Divine Will and True Nature-aligned basis, while we manifest ‘suckage’, and that prompts the telepaths and propheciers to eventually Choose in favor of Divine Will and True Nature due to the disparity.’ I suspect they already understand better, particularly as Rome and Babylon are manifest quasi-franchises of the telepaths and propheciers regardless. But I can indeed clarify for the general audience. Continue reading "Yet still more clarification: Scenarios"

We’ve established that those manifestly knowingly, Willfully and avoidably Choosing a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis are effectively non-credible in their words and deeds, both overtly and non-overtly. They manifestly ‘ought not be heard’ while they manifestly insist on such a basis. Others however have been ‘hearing’ them and investing their literal time, Will, effort and material resources into counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature agendas, which is manifestly wrong and violates rights; it’s an abomination. As such, assessing the manifest investments of these quasi-organizations and exposing them is just part of doing the right thing. And it’s usually accurate, other than in scenarios like recently where they’ve been demonstrably investing in ‘fakeout’ efforts as an apparent deterrent. It’s not clear to Me how manifestly compounding their investment in a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature position with another ‘conspiracy to defraud’ helps to vindicate it. Continue reading "And even more clarity"

So the apostate system’s ‘public education’ trope manifestly appears to continue. It seems to be a stock trope they’ve arranged on a non-overt basis for use by ‘their’ personnel at need; I’ve found non-overt references to it in a stockpile of their strategies, but as naming it would likely be misconstrued as a non-overt symbolic reference for My “house” it seems more constructive not to at this juncture. Continue reading "More clarity"

Alright. In the latest ‘Things the apostate system will manifestly do rather than just align with, uphold and affirm Divine Will and their own True Nature’, we seem to have them emphasizing a purely overt mode of communication while, under its auspices, investing in presenting all manner of disconcerting patterns likely to be received on a non-overt basis if only they were speaking on a non-overt basis. This includes non-messages such as, ‘Gosh, we’re so upset with you’, ‘You’re speaking too freely and it’s straining diplomatic harmony between our “houses”’, and ‘Ah! We’ve concluded that your behavior is manifestly a concern to public safety’. Well. How nice. Not actually or sincerely intended, but we manifestly have the investment on their part in an effort to present those patterns nonetheless. What an unworthy use of the time, concentration, effort and manhours of personnel, especially coming as it does as an alternative to investing in worthy, Divine Will and True Nature aligned and affirming efforts. I have to assess that as a less than functional misprioritization, others are free to disagree. Continue reading "‘Ends and means’"

[Also, ‘Don’t want it.’]

The apostates’ peculiar set of symbolism and implications over the previous week or so clicked into place for Me, and suddenly there was a mental context for it all. Essentially just a more elaborate, detailed version of what I’d already described, regarding using ‘public education’ to rationalize the knowing, Willful and avoidable Choice for a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis. Continue reading "‘Got it.’"

Noticing manifest investment in another trope from the apostate system, on a non-credible counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis. This appears to be coming out of the telepaths and propheciers, Babylon, and at least some personnel who self-identify as within the Roman franchises.

I’ve manifestly encountered it before, so I’ll save time and paraphrase it: ‘Yes, of course the situation is becoming manifestly more “absurd”. You’re buying into the seeming reality of a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis, and we’re merely dutifully fulfilling your investment of Will into it by manifesting it. This is why we’re manifestly presenting as increasingly disloyal, violating rights, implying disrespect, and so on.’ Continue reading "Applying Divine Will principles to dispel another trope"

The apostate system appears to imply, still on a non-credible counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis, that their ‘surveillance’ has found an item of concern. In My private life. As they violate My rights. Their apparent cause: literally My listening to, but deliberately not making symbolic reference of, a literal piece of ‘m█sic’. Continue reading "Re: ‘We found something!’"

Rome and Babylon appear, still manifestly on a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis, to have invested in efforts to direct ‘their’ misappropriated personnel to implement surveillance upon Myself. [For My own reference: Current episode of ‘The News Quiz’, Season ninety-eight, episode seven.] Continue reading "Re: ‘Surveillance’"

The manifest position of the apostate system appears somewhat clearer. It’s still not conclusive, because anything presented on a knowing, Willfully and avoidably counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature lacks inherent validity and credibility. Essentially all it’s useful for is for the purposes of evidence, because investments of effort and other resources on such a basis are necessarily manifest wrongdoing. Continue reading "Re: Apparent presumption"

I’ve been considering the manifest situation with great care. Given how much of the apostate system’s implied presentments I freely admit I haven’t completely understood, it’s possible that I’d formed some inaccurate assessments or interpretations about them. The Roman and Babylonian systems have manifestly relied greatly upon eliciting acceptance from outsiders; Mine relies upon insisting upon, asserting, and upholding principles, especially Divine Will principles. Principles and the gaining of acceptance are not in and of themselves mutually exclusive. At least in theory that suggests that a worthy arrangement for all concerned is achievable. It’s seemed rather unlikely to Me, but the apostate system frequently commends itself on accomplishing the seemingly impossible. Both systems recognize that the manifest circumstances are not always an accurate depiction of what can be manifest, or the True State of Creation.

It seems of great importance to the apostate system to achieve some kind of mutually-acceptable arrangement, and for My part both duty to Divine Will and ordinary, basic compassion have Me reluctant to needlessly manifest ‘suckage’ for so many currently personnel who currently self-identify with the apostate system. So I’ve asked Myself, ‘What indeed would it take to gain My acceptance?’

I have some preliminary thoughts on that, all Divine Will-derived. The thing is, even the non-overtly implied desire of those self-identifying with the apostate system to gain Redemption has been presented on a counter-Divine Will, counter-True Nature basis which is inherently non-credible. When someone is knowingly, Willfully and avoidably Choosing a basis of rejecting Divine Will, and their own True Nature which derives from that, what they have to say has no guaranteed credibility nor sincerity, and as such can’t properly be ‘heard’. It’s certainly everyones’ True Nature to want to align with Divine Will, but when that True Nature [and indeed, Divine Will] is being rejected, then claims to want to align with it are essentially a non sequitor.

I had started to draft a more generous and conciliatory response, but found I had to delete it because it doesn’t appear to Me that it would’ve been permissible within the Choice to align with and uphold Divine Will. Because, ‘Response to what, exactly? On the manifest basis of a Choice to reject Divine Will, and the True Nature which it confers, nothing credible or reliable has genuinely been said.’ What is the appropriate response when someone else intimates that they have a desire to realign with Divine Will, while interspersing their message with all manner of blasphemies? Scoffing at them would seem rather impolite.

The foundations of commercial law tell us that we aren’t obliged to accept presented offers unconditionally, nor should we dishonor them by summarily rejecting them outright. As such, conditional acceptance is usually the best response. But it appears to Me that, per Divine Will principles and the standards of My “house”, I can’t even get started on most of those conditions while the vital necessity for a Divine Will- and True Nature-aligned basis remains manifestly unsatisfied. For Me to stop what I’m doing so that I can entertain offers on a basis which is clearly, knowingly, Willfully and avoidably declared as inherently lacking in sincerity and credibility would be for Me to tarry with blasphemous untruths from others, on the reasoning that I might achieve some gain by it. Which could, itself, be misconstrued as acceptance on My part of a basis which rejects Divine Will and True Nature both.

Since it’s not in accordance with My Divinely-conferred True Nature to dismiss the concerns, or possible concerns, of others in a casual, brusque and cavalier manner, I thought it best to provide good, clear communication in ‘good faith’ and describe My position and the nature of the situation from here. This is in accordance with the common law maxim, ‘Matters must be expressed to be resolved.’ I absolutely want this manifest scenario to be resolved. [Amicably, I mean.  It'll get resolved per Divine Will regardless.]  It’s just that we appear to be manifestly operating on a fundamentally incompatible basis; Divine Will and True Nature, and the manifest rejection of same.