The feelings of the Earth could not be the feelings of God, for this, the image of the man was not equal to the pleasure of the woman. The image of the man is a virtuous separation, and the spirit of this image is the image of the woman: the spirit of the earth’s sin converted into the man’s virtue.
God had two sons: one bastard, the other one, a stupid; one a trespasser, the other, a possessor; one a weigh, the other, a rapist; one a couch potato, the other, a worker; one a guilty, the other one, a traitor:
There was always a strange schism reigning between the sons of Creator: an insulating characteristic translating a straight adultery: there was a cemetery between them both: that which separates them from vision: what he saw, didn’t feel, and what he felt, he didn’t see: For God’s Dilemma, there was no solution. So, the Word was tried, was tempted, to solve the problem: and so, the history was Created:
It needed to have another beginning: the truth needed to be educated, without bigger explanations, the testimony of someone who learnt from its own mistakes and hits, how to make the Conversion: how to transform the water in wine, how to transform the flower in thorns, modify the landscape, managing to get that the image has one unique interpretation: Thereby, what everyone saw would be exactly equal to what they felt: the image would not be readed, but interpreted. This would be the differential: The Word would contain a Spirit, once readed, heaven and earth would float in middle to body and spirit: the man would be in heaven and on earth at the same time, at the same time that they would have a sensation that they would be talking to their spirit: And in this duel of the senses, the image would appear: it would overwrite, automatically, everything which is natural. Automatically you would say: “I’m immoral, I’m not an animal. The animals don’t love because they’re not fair”: and from so on, the judgement would rise the system. But what wait of the moral, if it, by itself, claims itself as natural, in mode that the history of human conversion is, by itself, an original inversion: the inversion of Natural.
Abel hid a treasure, Cain buried it, Christ founded it and said that ‘Founded is not stolen’.
The Astute Indian argues that this is about a tool, that such a treasure was never hided in the earth, that such a treasure only existed in heaven: and it’s a stratagem, a stratagain, the extract of the consumer: the extraction of a value: A value of use, a value of consumption: that which Earth’s humus said,‘This was never mine: The ferment, the cement of the monument: the image of God’.
This happened because man listens and sees, but doesn’t feel, as a sick who believes in the cure, in the Disease, a formatting of evil: a sharped obelisk, how that rose until heavens, as a pray, an arched plantation of the will, almost in opposition to is greeders precepts, with a must of abandonment, as if there was no obligation, an uncompromised and identified relapse: an impostor, wanting to attribute to itself the right of Legislator: impose prescribed and manuscript results, testimonials, timeless, of rational fables badly counted, for that the Good may impose over them and so accrue sentences: a specie of science of imposition.
Passed then the advantage, may the will so manifest itself: a numeric trouble, where two results affirm to be one. The parents of Unity so confront always in one unique truth: The Resurrection.
The after-life and the after-death, now meet in a Miraculous apparition: aims teeth and strikingly, as a spiky obelisk, a ferrule, pointing straight to heaven, covering with a veil the enemy, a Purification: the camel now became a flea and may pass through the hole of a needle, and justify its condition of a host, a parasite of its own home.
The human image, reduced, shows that its active principle its God’s own essence: the minuscule particle which the atom conceived. The Unity, then Sanctified, arrives in the ears so as the unique sense of comprehension: that the dust is from where everything was made of and by which the Creator justifies its union: a montage, a cloning, of something that was never natural: and so everyone may see and believe in the big monument of moral. It’s how nature understands the pleasure: the will of God, that which, on the woman, was overwritted.
Disconsidering the consumption of what this animal feeds of, the pleasure of God sustains itself by that which he didn’t conceived: as the pen, that wrote in the life that the paper gave to it.
In the same way that nature disaffirms that it was she who wrote, the hand of God distorts on dissexplaining its source of inspiration, of which’s his real intention, or if the intention of real is the explanation, supply itself of something without permission: and make of this the success of his Creation, for in another form, nature wouldn’t give it: and the image of man would never be the pleasure of God.
It may seem strange to the listeners of how the story happened, the story of the supplying, of how the cement appeared. But such a feeling wouldn’t exist if there wasn’t the Sacrifice, the angle of mind, the trade of reason, that which justifies the good and the evil, the beginning and the end, that which is above and that which is on ground: The Resurrection: that’s the key-word: and it’s what reconnects the end to the beginning, the Principle, it’s what makes the thought possible, it’s the explanation of the image in movement, of what didn’t moved.
The unity seems to be an operational system for crazy, because that which one sees one don’t feel, for this, needs to project his senses, taking off life of what he killed.
From here below, it’s about the Cannibal. What I talk now it’s only the explanation of the operational system: The Word, or, the Logos of God.
The leftovers will end up the food:
The consumption is the extraction of the converted. To feed is not to eat, but to extract converting. This isn’t exactly to plant, but to create empty spaces: extract the naturalness of something and convert it into virtue, to the point where there will be no more nature to be converted, because nature was completely killed, consumed, the sand was transformed in dust, and the dust in cement, and the cement in monument: a lapid, a sepulture, an ornament, an adorn, a structure, which, after having destroyed all, reducing its own by itself, until the sense of Creation: the face of God.
Last of all, a small observation: to admit that nothing existed is to admit that God created death, more yet: that it’s a creation of death: that death created God: that the Universe was created: that the Nothing existed before God: that a sentiment preexisted: the loneliness: A real falsification of the human feelings: a magnific interpretation and anteposition of the results: that in the beginning, the universe was not a part of God: so God created the Seed, in his own image and likeness: the Word.
Not less interesting it’s the appearing of Virtue as process of a purification, and how the maleficence appeared, the science of evil and of the bad functioning: the explanation of the win, of the shepherd and of its conducer: the universe now had a joint authorship: and the duality would now separate itself once for all from its Creator: at the same time that the divergence converted for a future approximation, something that would be made cautiously, in a window of reason, the judgement, the plain space of sense, where a point may be then projected, the abstraction allowed to visualize two results, integralized in some point ahead, a horizon of mind, the existence would exist forward: Wow! This sick seemed to have gone too far…[!]: he would’ve gone in the future, and pushed the past forward, he could now be in the present and habitate in two dimensions: live in heaven and on earth at the same time. It was borning then the Conscience, the fusion of the Good and the Evil: the tree was together again in Paradise, because death was once more its principle: and all that was supernatural, it was Divine, it wasn’t earthly, it was the Operational System:
The powerful virtual machine was mounted and now all those who don’t feel nothing could feel something, of those who now don’t feel anything anymore, and now live of the machine of mind as well: it was only access the conscient and download some image of what one saw, and reflect in the judgement what felt: it would have a self-will proper and improper of what felt.
This is the strict explanation of the principle of that which was installed, it may seem unperceived, but, that the judgement vortices wander between Sacrifice and Resurrection.
Would the human being have been a victim of a bad install? Or that which was installed is nothing beyond the Image of Creation[?]. The word, the seed that reaches the ears, tells us that love needs to be planted. But the real comprehension of the receipt of the harvest it’s not obtained only with the result, but with the fulfilling of a primordial normative act, an obligation, entitled the first human commandment:
The conversion of love in virtue: the transformation of nature in food: the origin of all the supplying.
Once understood the Cannibal, the one who consumes itself, and understood a little more about the consumption, it gets easier to understand the hunger and the food as well: because it’s from this relation that the explanation of life comes from: the one who don’t consume, don’t live, because don’t possess an image of heave: don’t have the pleasure of the man nor the will of God.
And in this point, we reach the end of our article, and the explanation of Sacrifice: and what’s its relation with the Resurrection. The stairs of mind keeps us active in the present, as the breath of life in the quotidian, as if in an hour or another it meets with God, in the exact moment where an idea would make any sense: a specie of buzzing with a scream of satisfaction: “Uff! I thought I had died, but now I’m alive again”; “I Understood!! It’s Christ!”, “Oh, fuck, this guy knew too much..! Also…he was a son of God..!”… “Dude, for me, whatever..”: Whatever no, bro, pay attention in the Word: Christ was not Son of God, Christ was God Resurrected: Christ already existed before the Creation, it’s not a simple connection, it’s God in flesh and bone, pay attention in your neck, for so that your head do not separate of your body, as a circumcising: Why you think that the thoughts were once yours? You really think that you’re not part of the body of God? You really think that Christy was not God? How would there be a Resurrection then, huh? You need to die, to born: otherwise you wouldn’t have how to understand the Sacrifice, and much less, the Resurrection: if Christ didn’t existed in the beginning, there wouldn’t have and explanation, for a simple constatation: he was not God.
Solved then the question. And the why of the discussion a circa of the Unity and its incredible transformation: in a moment becomes two and then suddenly becomes three: the Holy Trinity: A history of the Jews, Pharisees and Christians: a same story translated and so resumed as The Word, where the death was the lie: and the life, the truth: a strange duality, of two distinct dimensions, but that the result may not be achieved without the angle of the reason, a place where lie and truth meets, the middle of the mind, the separation of the sick, the exact location of love: there will be planted the seed, there will grow the illusion: you’ll have the sensation that nature is dying, at the same time that you’ll understand that is the body of God installing itself and increasing its total consumption: there will occur the consumption: the transformation of natural.
Therefore, the consumption, as a primordial act, which the explanative power was deduced from spatial formulas, possesses a plain geometry and unidirectional, where the evolving sense may be resumed as a sequential value. From a unity, you may extract a potency, a determination, a prophecy, a prevision: a science: and understand all of this as an illumination act, or, simply, the explanation of a sick: that which sees and that never felt: and the reason why of all his construction. And, due to that, is that we may then extract the unique sense of the word: the construction: The Creation is a construction.
There’s another explanation for this, love happened. But it was preferred to say that that was God who Created.
‘The immoral it’s me’ – so said Adam to God. The conversation in the corner happened a day before. No one knows for sure it’s localization, if it was on earth or it heaven, but the most probable place, once that in unity everything is a probability, is that it was in Paradise, the road that divides the judgement of mind, the preferred Logos of God*. And God would have so prophesized:
Thou art not an animal, Adam, you think that you are, but you are not: who knows is me, it was I who created you: therefore, as you are, I am. You are the man, the animal is that which don’t hide its sex. You are not natural, you’re divine, those who live dressed. If you try to be an animal, you’ll die, because, on nature, everything is perishable. Being naked is to offer to the judgement the enjoyment: the sex is the offer of nature, for this, natural is to eat without obtaining pleasure. Being naked is to provide the state of insubordination, it’s to accept being possessed, for that which possessed you: the man is that which dominates the nature, possesses it: if don’t possess it, will be possessed, will be an immoral, will feel naked in my presence, for feeling natural: and for feeling natural, you will not be feeling as a man, but as an animal.
So Adam spoke: The immoral, it’s me.
God had already asked him, ‘Who told you that you were naked?’
And Adam answered: The immorality.
The feeling of loss of immortality: the man stopped being from god: and immediately, he thought that he had separated from God: God was not on his interior anymore: and he had the sensation of have died: Curiously, death appeared. Even more: nature had witnessed the birth of God: the history of the original principle: original of the specie: more yet: the concept of Specie: the homo sapiens attributed to itself a concept of God: more yet: a value of God: able to attribute a value to all things, give them name and definition: everything possesses a body and everything possesses an end:
And from this weird classification, the Divine Creature rises, stands up, erect, correct, firm on its heels, attribute to itself an importance of Lord. More yet, of The Creator. The history of Creation describes a unique moment: the one of Separation: how God separated from Nature: and that, that which was borning, in between that which was dying, was the man Surging, was God borning, screaming, sputtering, urging, falling on earth on his knees in a compulsive gesture of dragging off his own eyes, ears, nose, skin and senses, crying low, in a spontaneous self-convincing: “I’m not an animal.”:
This dissacceptation of his naturalness, remounts not only what happened in Paradise, in Genesis, in the genetics, in the history of evolution: the death of the natural. There’s no evolution on nature, there’s no mutation on nature, is God borning and explaining its own Creation: You’re still not complete, you still didn’t destroy all the natural:
It was the obelisk borning, as a teeth: that made God moan in birth of pain: God didn’t knew for sure if his entrails were being torned on from the inside or if they were being torned by the outside. The birth, by itself, already indicated the suffering: A Sacrifice, that which would explain the Resurrection: for that which was dying, it was what was being created:
The birth of Christ is God Resurged as an obelisk: already ready and finished: the concept of moral.
What to say…. When I rethink the Creation, and remember of it, it’s that, the first thing that’s teached to a kid, it’s the death: ‘You’re going to die, girl!’: The best form of obligation.
The belief on death provided systems, an occupational value unavailable: do not occupy with God is to be dying. This makes us rethink how all of this started: Eva didn’t worry with God: it’s subtle, but it’s there: She didn’t mind with God, she didn’t care about the Word, she didn’t care with the man. In Judaism the literatures are very quick, you need to pay attention.
And what’s the consequence of it? There will be many consequences, because sequence is what it doesn’t lacks, but, unity possesses a standard sequence. To perceive them, you need to angle the vision: angle, because it’s about an angle: the writings are inside a square, and for you to move along the sides, you need to use a triangle. Exactly: the Bible is geometric. In a way that the man would be a scarified on trying to make the woman care for him. He would say, “You only care about the earth”; and she would say, “you only care about heaven”; he would say “you don’t feel nothing for heaven”, and she would say “you don’t feel nothing for the earth”.
So Adam looked for God once more, and God proffered the Sentence: “Are you a man or not? Go there and kill the woman, impose your feelings over hers. Whether you live in the pleasure of a man, or you’ll live in the pleasure of the woman. You must choose where you want to live: on heaven or on earth.”
The solution of this mystery is the simple explanation of the Adultery: the woman would be an adulterous for loving nature. The Jew didn’t manage to kill the woman, because Judaism hadn’t such capacity for this. The operational system still needed some modifications, nothing structural, heaven and earth had already been created and their respective objects as well. But there was a ‘but’: there was no angle between them both. For this reason, Christ appeared only after, Behold[!] as one unique result. Wow, come on, Unity, what do you want with this duality of yours? An angle, to say that’s three. It looked like a system update, but on reality it was the solution of the Theorem. How to produce a heterogenic substance, producing one unique solution[?], it was lacking the image being felt: and where it was suffering, now became pleasure. To the woman, it was said: “Thou wilt not die anymore, sign here only thy confession of adultery: accept that you are a whore, a servant of the earth, and will never serve the heaven without being dressed up, without thy head being covered by the veil, the veil of submission, of the surrender, of the constatation, that without God, you will be always of the enemy: it was your punishment, you forgot, in Paradise? It’s written, it’s just go there and interpretate. It’s the history of betrayal.
And this was the sentence of the woman. After having the heart destroyed and don’t love anyone else, she will look for another one, in another place, a place that she would never love, and would never call home. With the virtuosity, comes the vanity: and her hairs now belong to the eternal: the love for the illusion: a position: the woman now occupies with an image, understood the productivity and works for the Lord: no longer as a servant, but as a man, its own possessor: consumes now the beauty, the nature, the status of divine: that possesses a God in her interior, offert now its gains and that became a provider. The sweat of earth explains now its love: a pleasure of being alone, the freedom, that which you conquered: The Society achieves now its apogee: not only its gains over the natural values, but also the justification of its moral values: the conversion of the flower in thorn: the story of the one alone.
The Unity presents itself now as a little powder, and where it will rise all its construction.
From this stratagem were born the two sons of God: e from them, their results. One rested, asexual, and the other one a weigh, a rapist. For have being the pleasure of God implanted, the human being became a consumer.
The sex constitutes, jurassically, into what separated heaven and earth. It constitutes, in the prismatic vision of the sick as a primordial angle of the mind. But what is sex exactly: sex is the possession of an image. Who is its possessor? The battle is waged in the level of feelings. In the interpretation of God, the man in some point would find out that he is not a natural being, and this would inevitably happen on his first excititation. Therefore, Adam did not have sex with Eve in Paradise: in this moment, he would feel an immoral: He would have been angled between a man and an animal.
The understanding of God, and this is say the understanding of the Jew, is that, in this moment, it would begin the via-crúcis of man on his way to his definition.
And the difficulty is exactly in the point where, through that point he could not have pleasure with the woman anymore, love that moment: this would be understood as Adultery for God. And the imposition of feeling bad with itself, it’s the history of the Biblical results, as its triangles are mounted, where the vortices is always the judgement. As they were created, there are convictions of thoughts that were never yours, but of something strange: the will of God: the will of the Jew: What a curse brought to earth this sentence[!]. As if the conduct of something unsustainable that turned the world spiritual could in facto change all the structure of the natural.
For treating of an image and of a problem of hard comprehension, I proposed a history divided in four parts and, inside of each one, four parts: and the connection between all this stories forming four parts as well. This explainable model is the inversion of the Ex Cathedra language, that remakes the interposition to the natural.
It’s perceivable to the common sense that the Judaic history constitutes itself of fictious elements, where the imaginary proposes a small court: there you can see the right and wrong, the sensation of which path to be followed, front to determined situation, not only its interpretation, but the incorporation of the feelings as well: on reading it, you should feel like that too, for, in this way, you would do the conversion of natural into virtue. It’s perceivable that the history of Christ is a history of Purification, but the biggest difficulty is to perceive that all this and, that the Word of God, on itself, it’s indeed about a sexual angle, of how nature became so understood and resumed.
Thereby, for my understanding, other images will be offered: and another interpretation.
Well known histories, which were very well told, are not fairy tales, nor fables, nor parables, nor talent, neither is about a new interpretation. To know what was written is much more than a compromise and, to tell them, is a satisfaction, not for nature, but to the human being, which interpreted it and understood them very well. But indeed, didn’t realized what he did. It’s not about a new judgement. Among Catholic and Protestants, Sadducees and Pharisees, from Essen and Novatians, nor from Egypt, nor the Roman Empire, what happened in the East: but that, that which is written is not omnipotent: before nature, God will be always naked: because she knows well the origin of his power, the origin of his suffering, and all of his determination. The question is pretty basic: where was the pleasure, when everything happened? And this is the explanation of the two Sons of God: and how the woman appeared.
The first will be Hypatia, the second, Cleopatra and Marc Antony, the third one, David and Bathsheba, and the fourth, Cain and Eve. All of them are entitled The History that Didn’t Happened, and all of them possesses the same resulting rational flux:
Will – Pleasure – Desire – Sex:
The Black Box: The Four Angles of Reason: For they are the spiritual primordiality of the process of conversion, of how love became virtue.
These ideas, they’re part of the closure of two previous posts about the understanding of the woman and, by analogy, of the man, and their respective naturalness.
I didn’t came to listen, I came to say, everything that I saw, in the house of the owner.. I want to say, didn’t came to listen, I came to say, everything I heard in the room of the owner, of thy Lord.