User talk:TLOS

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
New logo large.png Welcome to RationalWiki, TLOS!

Please see our guide for newcomers and our community standards.

Tell us how you found RationalWiki here!

If you are interested in contributing:

to RW TLOS... would be fascinated to know in more detail what you think about Amitakh Stanford. Do you know of the Raelians? I am not a Raelian (I follow my own religion), but I have been known hang out with them from time to time. What do you think of Rael? (((Zack Martin))) 10:12, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Thank You for the welcome and continuing a talk.[edit]

I will say this. I have only just read some of the 'Rael' introduction and a few bits and pieces of information down the page. I would like to reiterate at this point on two specific items only.

No one who is connected 'Truly' to 'What Is' needs to pay to be a part of it. There are no rules aside from directing One's life in a manner that is positive, loving and with absolutely no abuses attached to it. That is for here on Earth. As far as the code that we are to live by, there have been many interpretations from the original books. There are actually 26 original books not only 4, (the other 22 where hidden and some tried to destroy), so now we actually have collaborating evidence that is also being scientifically proven.

***I do think that each person should be reading and researching these books them

Selves to find their Own Truth and their Individual Connection to 'What Is'; for that seems to be the main part of this 'code' set out in these writings.

At no juncture is the body/physical and the Self charged a rate to exist within the structure of The Truth.

The body/physical and the Self are to work together - living on this earth, Helping taking care of each other and Mother Earth's needs. We are to feed the body/physical properly for ultimate health, no abuses .....

The human body/physical is of this Earth and We are of the One 'Who Is'..... this entity has been given so many names that you can just take your pick.

At any time, in any part of all of these books anyone may come to whatever conclusion that is the true connection to 'What Is' within them Selves individually..... and that is that.

It is a truly individual connection..... One that is per say 'Divine' in its entirety.....

  • I will add that part of this code does make very clear that at no time are 'The Children of God'

to be sexualized in any way. This from the Mother/Father, Goddess/God to Us.

The basis and main part of this 'code' is Integrity! One must have their 'Integrity' at all times. ( something that parents don't seem to be teaching to their children anymore either )

(and by the way - Elohin is actually Goddess(es) and was put into short form once the books were separated and rewriten and not completely correctly ) El is used but the original word is Elohin and it meant: the Goddess(es) who looked after Mother Earth.

That is to say, a person at no age of either sex (Male or Female), especially the young bodies are not to be 'hurt/abused' in any way. Therefore, this covers manipulation of the person at any level: buying or selling of a human being, any and all sexual abuses, sex crimes, ( crime for that matter ), rape, incest, pedeophilia, polygamy ( for it is stated in the two books of Adam and Eve that Adam was to have only One. Each person has 'Their Other Half', and only their other half - a person is to wait to find 'Their Other Half' at the time that they are to meet and not before. As each person walks down their own path, along that path at one point they will meet each other. This in accordance to the Moons, Stars and Planets, our Universe Systems - each has it's time, place and trajectory - and If any of these were to be taken of their paths what do you think would happen ??? - )

Once a 'person' has been 'hurt' - ( and this seems to be in any way not just sexually) - the process of building this damaging block between the Self and the body/physical begins. If this is not corrected - it creates a human that is only concentrating on the body/physical instead of solely on the 'Spiritual Self'..... ( and then just properly looking after the body - and this is not being taught properly )

This causes the origin of disconnect from the 'Divine Source' to our 'Divine Spiritual Self'. and that to 'Which Is'.....becomes distant and sits behind a curtain if you will. A person can still 'See' this image but it comes across out of focus. There is not to be abuses of any sort.

Thank you for sending a Welcome and commenting. I will enjoy our talks if you want to continue them.

Re: Separate note: As for this Lady's ideas.....[edit]

As for Amitakh Stanford. Everyone has their connection. If this is her manifestation of that connection who is anyone to question it.

My sole thought is: We all have Our Own Individual Connection to 'Find'.

And only until each of Us do our Own Inner Work - will we be able to connect to 'Whatever Is'.

In this Inner Work is sometimes much pain release and most don't like to feel it.

But it must be done! Only then will each Person, actually 'See' their own 'Reflection' as it where.

Upon Seeing ..... each person will be truly connected in their own individual way to the ultimate in ' love, positiveness, guidance, intuitiveness, inner calm, wholeness, and a warm loving feeling of The 'True Self' living in shear acceptance and unquestionable, unconditional Love ' fully well 'knowing'.

It is only through One Self that We will find 'That to Which Is'.

As it goes: I Am That I Am.

Hi[edit]

Tolerance Is This You hiding in a Sock? Тytalk 03:32, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Uh..... no.....[edit]

I am not that person who hides in a sock..... But I'm sure if you look in the laundry at one point..... you might find it (or them, since socks are usually not one but two)..... I may however, be the Lady who lives in a shoe ..... but even that may be in question ..... since I don't know you!

Forgive my rampant paranoia, I see socks everywhere. They are coming to get me, most likely by concealing razor blades in my shoes.Тytalk 04:22, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: Oh my .....[edit]

well, we can't have that ..... then it must be 'ramparts' instead of rampant ..... yes??? although I think you'd have to fortify your feet, not the shoes in that case. Nevertheless ..... I do hope you find your 'Tolerance' ..... you might find a clue in one of the socks. But I would advise you to take out the razor blades first.

Anyway, on a more serious note: no problem..... nice talking with you.

No problem. Тytalk 18:45, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
For the sake of Clarity this user is not Me. My Capitalization may be non-standard but my sentences end with periods. But Welcome TLOS. Might I Suggest that you Reduce the Size of your Posts and Consider Sentence Structure? Or not.--Tolerance (talk) 19:03, 21 August 2011 (UTC)
Re: so..... sock found: Thanks for the welcome..... hello to you too.....
the size of my posts are only introductory ..... sorry you don't like my writing ..... but that's ok .....
I'm not a particularly good writer ..... I'm a programmer!
Hello programmer. I am a programmer too. I used to do a lot of Perl and PHP, but these days mostly Java, and occasionally C... oh and PL/SQL and Javascript and XSLT and similar things too (((Zack Martin))) 11:23, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
We are therefore like-minded. Your list is full. Have you got into C++ or C# at all? Java is so prominent but I make sure I
keep practicing it all - everything morphs in nanoseconds..... yes?.
Never really got in to C++ or C#. I have played around with them both a bit, but never "used them in anger", so to say. I like C# as a language and .NET as a platform, it contains several features I wish Java would adopt. On the other hand, the Microsoft tie-in is a bit much - Java works fine on Windows, multiple Unixes, Linux, mainframe, you just about name it; Microsoft's .NET only runs on Windows. (I know about Mono, but I'm not sure it has the momentum to fully make up for the Microsoft dominance.) Java is a bit of a shrinking game, especially with Oracle buying BEA and then Sun, but there are still multiple big vendors relying on Java (IBM especially, also Red Hat, SAP...) (((Zack Martin))) 09:53, 23 August 2011 (UTC)