CommanderSouth

And I won't say we need to "take it away" with taxes, I'm just as open to them never making it in the first place. I feel as a society, we need to figure out how to reevaluate the value of work and the value of services, so someone working 40 hours can afford a decent apartment and food on the table. We need to work harder to do better, absolutely, the janitor won't earn a mansion, but he shouldn't have to worry about finding a studio/1 bedroom either.

My knee jerk was to say "Stop putting words in my mouth" But, I'll be forward. I don't believe in "taxation is theft". (Not saying you're making that claim necessarily, but that logic often goes there). And what I was calling for was SPECIFICALLY NOT THAT. My Statement of the balance being tricky is literally a response to the idea of what you said. You HAVE to incentivize work through some sort of gain or the very wealthy will stop working at a point, as you said. But I am not against diminishing returns when you have more money than a vast majority of the population, or even entire nations. I'm sorry, I don't believe any one man should have 60+ billion dollars while nations are dying of hunger. But it's also not a sin to be well off. Thus, it's a balance (and a hard one to find), and to a degree, things ARE relative. I am very wealthy compared to others, many even. Which is why I'm talking about very high level things, not personally roughing up Elon Musk or Jeff Bezos in an alley. And to be VERY clear, I'm not talking about some utopian vision of equality, I don't believe that will happen in this life. But I am saying taking SOME away from the top and helping everyone. You can make someone's burden lighter without removing their need to do anything. I don't believe in Communism, or some idea that all work is equal in value with regards to payment. I think a doctor should make more than a janitor. But I very much think the CEO shouldn't make more in a year than I will in multiple lifetimes. According to AFL CIO (summarized by Bing) Based on the realized compensation, the average pay of a Fortune 500 CEO in 2022 was $16.7 million, according to a report by the AFL-CIO. This was a 30% increase from the previous year, and 351 times the pay of the average worker. Yeah, I have a problem with that. We need to work towards change. It's pretty bad when I can quote Weird Al with only mild sarcasm. "Don't take away money, from artists just like me, how else can I afford another solid gold Humvee. And diamond studded swimming pools? The things don't grow on trees."

I’ve watched several of his videos and I can at least say he’s respectful. But I’m sure the algorithm knows I am looking for Pentecostal/Protestant crossover content too Maybe he’s playing the long con and trying to witness to us. But if he does it like we’re supposed to by just being kind, sharing, and being genuinely ok if we don’t bite, then he’s doing it right. If he listens thinks about our message and shares his when applicable, and is respectful of one’s decisions and treats people with love, what else matters? And in all honesty, if that’s his way of proselytizing, send an army of them to Utah. As long as they’re willing to learn while engaging with us and listen to the spirit (even if they don’t end up in the church) that’s all one can ask. I think is be more angry if he DIDNT “witness” to us if he really felt that way.

I would argue a post scarcity society would require a level of technology we do not have now. UBI as a concept could work, I would argue. But yes, not beyond the point that the work required to generate the revenue needed is removed. Which is to say UBI as a total replacement to income generated by work can never work. But UBI as a supplement taken from the massive accumulated wealth at the top could help. But maybe don’t do it as straight UBI. Tax the rich heavier, or close the loopholes allowing such wealth to accumulate and spread it through the lower classes through other means, tax breaks, social programs that aren’t a check, whatever. As much as I love leisure, work is an eternal principle I would argue. You can’t eliminate it. But you can incentivize it while still making things easier on everyone. I guess the short version is, true UBI to eliminate work would never function. Spreading the rewards of the work around to lighten the load for everyone can. But yeah, finding that balance is the trick.

As a preface to this, I grew up Pentecostal. So when I joined the church, and up until very recently, I struggled with the idea of "the only true and living church". Mostly because I felt it pitted myself against my Mom. She still believed as she did, and she still spoke in tongues, shouted (as in shouted and "flailed") on rare occasions (I've seen less than 10ish times in my life), and could fall out (slain in the spirit in the circles I was in). I see people in churches she would watch and see the same, and I couldn't for the life of me reconcile it. But in the last few months something has dawned on me, the principle of God speaking to people in their langauge. When I combine this with the idea of the Book of Mormon being the "most correct of any book", something clicks. We still need the Bible, we still love the Bible, and the Book of Mormon doesn't replace it. Some people, ourselves included, need those words. God still speaks to people with those words. Then it hit me, hard. And I am SO grateful. Worship, including manifestations, is so often just one yielding to the spirit and just expressing one's self to God. So why wouldn't the Pentecostals speak in tongues? I cry sometimes, and it's just me feeling so overwhelmed I can't express myself otherwise. I am of the mind now that speaking in tongues (an unknown tongue, not the gift of tongues), is a way one can worship, and just because it's not something I do, doesn't mean it isn't valid. We don't play guitar in church, but it doesn't mean it's not of God, and in similar manner, we don't speak in tongues like that, but that doesn't mean it's not of God (in the sense it isn't a pure action of worship vs a manifestation of Satan) and that he doesn't accept that offering. Can someone fake it with malintent, sure. But I've already believed that. But now all these "moves of the spirit" I've seen don't have to be "us vs them". I was listening to a podcast with a fairly "liberal" Mormon. He is still a believer and isn't speaking against authority (and states that himself), even if he himself wonders if things being done are the best. But John Dehlin was interviewing him, and trying to get him to discredit the experiences of Catholic nuns seeing Marian visions, and he wouldn't. He refused, and said basically, "Who am I to say how God would speak to a Catholic? He speaks to us in our language and to what we are able to accept" and then it hit me. People aren't in the church because they don't believe God, they aren't in because A) they don't want it, or B) they aren't ready. If we believe God will have 3 degrees of Glory, why not degrees of churches. Give people what they can handle, and lead them. God loves us all, and in the end, we'll all have access to truth, and we will get what we truly want. He will give us EVERYTHING we can accept. And it's a long game. Don't quench the spirit, don't resist the promptings if you're being drawn, but beyond that, worship how you worship, don't do something you don't feel lead to, and leave the rest in God's hands. And with that logic, I'm content. My Mom loves God, and she speaks in tongues, it's how she manifests what's in her heart, and in my reading, it isn't unscriptural. It just isn't something I do, and I am ok with that. We are "the most correct" of any church, but that would be a dumb reason to throw out the rest, just like we wouldn't throw out the Bible. Show people the truth, and if they want it, they will accept it, and if they don't, they won't. And they may still later, and they may only ever accept a degree of it. But isn't that the idea anyway, isn't that "the vision" of D&C 76? Praise God!

I want to close this out, I've reached a conclusion (thank God). We don't HAVE free will. We ARE free will. At the core of all existence, wills do what wills want. I might have rendered this plainer, but this is sufficiently plain.

Like hooking your mouth up to a firehose My mind feels like I went from nothing being true, to there being so much truth I can't contain it all! (And I know I actually can't in this life, so it's... overwhelming) But in all seriousness, the simple part is true. I am still overwhelmed with how much truth there is. It's like walking with your head down for your entire life and finally looking up and noticing every few feet there is another path you could take and explore, and those branch even more, like an infinite tree. Sharing it with others, in my mind, even brings MORE paths, and it's a fight to not go down every rabbit hole. Not flesh out every idea. At this moment I feel like Charlie Day in Always Sunny, I see the meme where he looks crazy and has all the yarn pinned to the wall. I'm fighting that urge now, because I have realized I am impossibly inundated with beautiful choices, and I can't do them all at once. Which is itself another true and beautiful choice/truth of "Do not run faster than you are able". That's a core one I'm working into myself so I don't go crazy So, is it chemicals in my head influencing my thought patterns, is it God revealing truth? I am accepting it as God initiated, subprime mental state pushing too far... My plan is to just keep it simple and as you said, enjoy life as God intended.

I will also say though, my mental state is a bit chaotic right now. I realized I have been off some of my meds for 2 days accidentally, they aren't hard anti anxiety pills, so I don't think it's some type of withdrawal. Just that realizing it, I figure it's contributing to me not being as calm as I need to be, and being a bit more racing. So I feel there is a great degree of truth in here, but I am also realizing elements of the rambling nature of some of this is a result of my overall mental health, which I need to continue to improve, and I am doing.

That title isn't meant to be too flippant. The last week has been utter torment, and I may struggle with it all the rest of my life. I legit thought about going back to the mental health facility I visited a few months ago. As you may remember, to make all seem too simple, I got caught up in the chicken and egg question. For all the trouble I had, I was just trying to solve this question, and being able to be a bit more removed from the hyper focus I had on it (I was looking beyond the mark), I have more clarity. In fact a challenge I am facing, is in light of this truth, I feel like I am hooked up to a firehose of truth, and I need to turn it down, because everything seems to be coming so fast now. I know I have a lot to catch up on. There are many ideas that I understand are true now, even as I type this I my mind is racing and making new connections, realizing new truths, which is to say I'm coming to know things I already knew, but in a deeper sense. So pray for me I don't look beyond the mark in a good thing of seeking and finding truth, and in turn hurt myself by running faster than I am able. The good thing is I'm learning truth, I just need to stop wearing myself out I wanted to share my journal entry today. Today has been a coalescence of all of the struggle, back and forth, truth, misunderstanding, and confusion I have dealt with during this time I have questioned Free Will and existence. This is me working together the puzzle pieces, and I did that over the course of a drive home from my in laws, with my wife in the car. I talked and she listened, though she was happy, she also had agreed with me, and had felt this way for years, so a bit of the excitement was surprising to her. When I did this entry,I honestly wrote it with the ability to share it in mind, so the super sacred bits (AKA, the bits that are only meant for me ) are left out. I also wrote so I could remember, remember, that I know I have felt to sing the song of redeeming love. That is to say, I know I'll get pushback from Satan later, it honestly happened DURING the day today, while I was going through all of this. So my wife said I should journal it, and thus I did. If you don't have a few minutes, come back later. This is a stupid long wall of text, with a swath of quotes. But it is also long enough to be self sufficient, and not a fragment I have to fix later. === Ok, so I HAVE a testimony. This is going to be difficult, incomplete, and not fully worded well enough. I have received pure revelation. I have received a testimony of the Gospel. The words I use will be my own, but they will never truly express what I know. Before I begin, I am going to argue from a rejection of creation “ex nihilo” (out of nothing). Because nothing being turned into something is a contradiction. It’s a married bachelor, nothing is nothing because it does not exist. God can’t make a married bachelor, because those things are not possible. If you believe that, you could also say “God can Lie” and if he could, he wouldn’t be God, because we know God can’t lie. Something can’t be itself and it’s opposite, or it would negate itself, and not exist. So that was too many words, but anyway, beyond that, let’s go! To quote the prophet Joseph Smith. Doctrine and Covenants 128: 18 I might have rendered a plainer translation to this, but it is sufficiently plain to suit my purpose as it stands. And that is a sufficiently plain to suit my purpose. And that is how I intend to render this testimony. I have come to discover truth, diamond truth as McConkie would say, eternal truth as I would say. And he DID in fact say just that in the devotional Seven Deadly Heresies. Now let me list some axioms (I guess in academic circles we call these caveats): —There is no salvation in believing a false doctrine. —Truth, diamond truth, truth unmixed with error, truth alone leads to salvation. —What we believe determines what we do. —No man can be saved in ignorance of God and his laws. —Man is saved no faster than he gains knowledge of Jesus Christ and the saving truths of his everlasting gospel. —Gospel doctrines belong to the Lord, not to men. They are his. He ordained them, he reveals them, and he expects us to believe them. —The doctrines of salvation are not discovered in a laboratory or on a geological field trip or by accompanying Darwin around the world. They come by revelation and in no other way. —Our sole concern in seeking truth should be to learn and believe what the Lord knows and believes. Providentially he has set forth some of his views in the holy scriptures. —Our goal as mortals is to gain the mind of Christ, to believe what he believes, to think what he thinks, to say what he says, to do what he does, and to be as he is. —We are called upon to reject all heresies and cleave unto all truth. Only then can we progress according to the divine plan. As the Lord has said, Whatever principle of intelligence we attain unto in this life, it will rise with us in the resurrection. And if a person gains more knowledge and intelligence in this life through his diligence and obedience than another, he will have so much the advantage in the world to come. [D&C 130:18–19] Which, reading these now, I believe every single point. I think there is some flourish that is McConkie, but that’s here nor there So Eternal Truth 1: It must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. From 2 Nephi: 11 For it must needs be, that there is an opposition in all things. If not so, my firstborn in the wilderness, righteousness could not be brought to pass, neither wickedness, neither holiness nor misery, neither good nor bad. Wherefore, all things must needs be a compound in one; wherefore, if it should be one body it must needs remain as dead, having no life neither death, nor corruption nor incorruption, happiness nor misery, neither sense nor insensibility. 12 Wherefore, it must needs have been created for a thing of naught; wherefore there would have been no purpose in the end of its creation. Wherefore, this thing must needs destroy the wisdom of God and his eternal purposes, and also the power, and the mercy, and the justice of God. 13 And if ye shall say there is no law, ye shall also say there is no sin. If ye shall say there is no sin, ye shall also say there is no righteousness. And if there be no righteousness there be no happiness. And if there be no righteousness nor happiness there be no punishment nor misery. And if these things are not there is no God. And if there is no God we are not, neither the earth; for there could have been no creation of things, neither to act nor to be acted upon; wherefore, all things must have vanished away. From Abraham 3: (This skips 18 and 20) 17 Now, if there be two things, one above the other, and the moon be above the earth, then it may be that a planet or a star may exist above it; and there is nothing that the Lord thy God shall take in his heart to do but what he will do it. ... 19 And the Lord said unto me: These two facts do exist, that there are two spirits, one being more intelligent than the other; there shall be another more intelligent than they; I am the Lord thy God, I am more intelligent than they all. ... 21 I dwell in the midst of them all; I now, therefore, have come down unto thee to declare unto thee the works which my hands have made, wherein my wisdom excelleth them all, for I rule in the heavens above, and in the earth beneath, in all wisdom and prudence, over all the intelligences thine eyes have seen from the beginning; I came down in the beginning in the midst of all the intelligences thou hast seen. 22 Now the Lord had shown unto me, Abraham, the intelligences that were organized before the world was; and among all these there were many of the noble and great ones; 23 And God saw these souls that they were good, and he stood in the midst of them, and he said: These I will make my rulers; for he stood among those that were spirits, and he saw that they were good; and he said unto me: Abraham, thou art one of them; thou wast chosen before thou wast born. 24 And there stood one among them that was like unto God, and he said unto those who were with him: We will go down, for there is space there, and we will take of these materials, and we will make an earth whereon these may dwell; 25 And we will prove them herewith, to see if they will do all things whatsoever the Lord their God shall command them; From one of Joseph Smith’s last sermons, the “King Follet Sermon/Discourse” I have another subject to dwell upon, which is calculated to exalt man; but it is impossible for me to say much on this subject. I shall therefore just touch upon it, for time will not permit me to say all. It is associated with the subject of the resurrection of the dead—namely, the soul—the mind of man —the immortal spirit. Where did it come from? All learned men and doctors of divinity say that God created it in the beginning; but it is not so: the very idea lessens man in my estimation. I do not believe the doctrine; I know better. Hear it, all ye ends of the world; for God has told me so; and if you don’t believe me, it will not make the truth without effect. I will make a man appear a fool before I get through; if he does not believe it. I am going to tell of things more noble. We say that God Himself is a self-existing being. Who told you so? It is correct enough; but how did it get into your heads? Who told you that man did not exist in like manner upon the same principles? Man does exist upon the same principles. God made a tabernacle and put a spirit into it, and it became a living soul. (Refers to the Bible.) How does it read in the Hebrew? It does not say in the Hebrew that God created the spirit of man. It says, “God made man out of the earth and put into him Adam’s spirit, and so became a living body.” The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal [co-eternal] with God himself. I know that my testimony is true; hence, when I talk to these mourners, what have they lost? Their relatives and friends are only separated from their bodies for a short season: their spirits which existed with God have left the tabernacle of clay only for a little moment, as it were; and they now exist in a place where they converse together the same as we do on the earth. I am dwelling on the immortality of the spirit of man. Is it logical to say that the intelligence of spirits is immortal, and yet that it has a beginning? The intelligence of spirits had no beginning, neither will it have an end. That is good logic. That which has a beginning may have an end. There never was a time when there were not spirits; for they are co-equal [co-eternal] with our Father in heaven. I want to reason more on the spirit of man; for I am dwelling on the body and spirit of man—on the subject of the dead. I take my ring from my finger and liken it unto the mind of man—the immortal part, because it had no beginning. Suppose you cut it in two; then it has a beginning and an end; but join it again, and it continues one eternal round. So with the spirit of man. As the Lord liveth, if it had a beginning, it will have an end. All the fools and learned and wise men from the beginning of creation, who say that the spirit of man had a beginning, prove that it must have an end; and if that doctrine is true, then the doctrine of annihilation would be true. But if I am right, I might with boldness proclaim from the housetops that God never had the power to create the spirit of man at all. God himself could not create himself. Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from age to age and there is no creation about it. All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement. The first principles of man are self-existent with God. God himself, finding he was in the midst of spirits and glory, because he was more intelligent, saw proper to institute laws whereby the rest could have a privilege to advance like himself. The relationship we have with God places us in a situation to advance in knowledge. He has power to institute laws to instruct the weaker intelligences, that they may be exalted with Himself, so that they might have one glory upon another, and all that knowledge, power, glory, and intelligence, which is requisite in order to save them in the world of spirits. This is good doctrine. It tastes good. I can taste the principles of eternal life, and so can you. They are given to me by the revelations of Jesus Christ; and I know that when I tell you these words of eternal life as they are given to me, you taste them, and I know that you believe them. You say honey is sweet, and so do I. I can also taste the spirit of eternal life. I know that it is good; and when I tell you of these things which were given me by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, you are bound to receive them as sweet, and rejoice more and more. With this as a basis, I will say that a plain enough understanding of “opposition in all things” can be that “all things are not one”. I know I exist. I also know my wife exists. We are separate beings, or as I am beginning to call it, “wills” (I am fond of the idea of a Phylote in Xenocide, from the Ender Saga, the chapter on Free Will gives a plain enough rendering of what I think, so read it if you like). Since we are separate wills, we are both eternal, and if these two spirits exists, one is above another (probably her ) And another above us, and God is greater than all. And I repeat from Joseph (this is spliced from above) God himself could not create himself. The mind or the intelligence which man possesses is co-equal [co-eternal] with God himself. Intelligence is eternal and exists upon a self-existent principle. It is a spirit from age to age and there is no creation about it. All the minds and spirits that God ever sent into the world are susceptible of enlargement. And from Doctrine and Covenants 93: 29 Man was also in the beginning with God. Intelligence, or the light of truth, was not created or made, neither indeed can be. 30 All truth is independent in that sphere in which God has placed it, to act for itself, as all intelligence also; otherwise there is no existence. 31 Behold, here is the agency of man, and here is the condemnation of man; because that which was from the beginning is plainly manifest unto them, and they receive not the light. 32 And every man whose spirit receiveth not the light is under condemnation. 33 For man is spirit. The elements are eternal, and spirit and element, inseparably connected, receive a fulness of joy; 34 And when separated, man cannot receive a fulness of joy. 35 The elements are the tabernacle of God; yea, man is the tabernacle of God, even temples; and whatsoever temple is defiled, God shall destroy that temple. 36 The glory of God is intelligence, or, in other words, light and truth. 37 Light and truth forsake that evil one. So what exists and is eternal is the mind or intelligence of man, that is susceptible of enlargement. I can render a plainer version, but I’m taking so long, I need to stop myself. Suffice it to say that when you combine these all together it paints a picture. (Like a Buffalo Drawing, you need to take it as a drawing and the intention, that is, a buffalo. Do not focus on the literal graphite flakes on wood pulp. They may be true, but you miss the point. You do what the Book of Mormon calls in Jacob 4, looking beyond the mark. In a way, they rejected the Buffalo in favor of the graphite flakes on wood pulp. They wanted more than plainness, they wanted to keep going, which while you CAN do, you can become blind to the bigger picture. 14 But behold, the Jews were a stiffnecked people; and they despised the words of plainness, and killed the prophets, and sought for things that they could not understand. Wherefore, because of their blindness, which blindness came by looking beyond the mark, they must needs fall; for God hath taken away his plainness from them, and delivered unto them many things which they cannot understand, because they desired it. And because they desired it God hath done it, that they may stumble. So all of this is to say, all existence is based on intelligence doing what intelligence wants to do everything in existence is to a degree, intelligent, it has a will. So if you go all the way to bedrock, the eternal basis of existence is again, uncaused “wills” or Phylotes, or Intelligences, doing what they want. That will may manifest in apparently deterministic behavior, but it’s doing it because it wills it. It IS the cause, and it IS eternal. And since we know that existence manifests as an infinite variety of things, trees, cars, people, plants, animals, we know that “opposition in all things” or a “differentiation” in all things, exists. It is often said that the only thing we have to give God is our will, at least in the protestant circles I grew up in. The believe was, the only thing you can give your God, is yourself, because he doesn’t have you. I believed that then, and I believe it now. But the problem is, I didn’t take the time to realize what that actually means (and I doubt many that say it do, but I could be wrong). Anyway. If God doesn’t “have” my will, it means he didn’t CREATE my will. It means that my will (whatever that word fully entails, because I can only describe it in a broad sense) HAS to be uncaused. And since I am uncaused, I am : Like God in nature (Not better than, or even equal to, just LIKE) Not the only thing in existence And since those two fact are evident, there is... An opposition in all things. During that fun trip, we also learn/infer some other eternal truths, including aspects of the nature of God (though not expounded super well) and eternity and eternal things (also not spelled out as well I would like right now) but I’m tired, and this simple idea (and I argue, eternal truth) has taken almost an hour and a half to type up. But this being true tells me that Joseph Smith was a prophet, the Book of Mormon is true, the Doctrine and Covenants is the Pearl of Great Price is true, and since the only group in general (churches aside) that believes all of those things is the LDS church, I am willing to take the step of faith to say the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints is the church for me to be in. I could say that in a more pointed manner, but I’m not in the mood to say things to invite discussion. I’m just saying that given the information I have found, I am accepting it on faith as true. Because while I feel like I learned a LOT, I’m not omniscient yet, but I also fully believe it. I have had a trial of my faith, and I have received this witness (also a Book of Mormon idea, which furthers the feedback loop of it’s truth in my mind, but again, I’m tired ) know several layers of this logic are self reliant. This entire blob could be reduced to, It’s true because it’s true. And I see that. As much as I’d love to continue (and I will), I’m done for now. I’ll discuss my hot takes on eternal things soon. I’m shutting off my brain, I’m not taking input, I’m not looking for refinement. I’m just basking where I am. If I need to change or revise it, I’m open to that, and will. But not now, I need this moment. I’ve fought HARD for this moment. I almost started considering going to the mental health facility because of this mental work I’ve been doing. Which makes this moment a blessing, and honestly one of the most supernal and incomparable In my life. I know if I did my due diligence there could be others, but for right now, I’m celebrating this win. One last fun little quip. I wish I had the faith and belief before, because they would have helped me during this struggle. But as is the case in life, while it would have helped, to be sure, that just isn’t how life works. Enos wrestled and THEN got the awesome rewards. (See Book of Mormon feedback loop, lol). There are more good examples of this, but if I keep going, I’ll keep going, so I won’t, so I won’t

Ah, the beauty of CS Lewis Though I don't know if that's where it came from originally, Mere Christianity is where I first heard it. And it's still glorious to hear now.

Maybe the faith to tell a mountain to move hence to yonder place, is the same faith needed to say "let there be light". That could be part of what we're working towards. I'm hesitant to call the work of God as done "in faith", but perhaps the idea isn't too far off. Maybe that's the thing we can only get here that prepares us to be like him.

I also have an inkling of an idea. I think I know the reason we're here. I also think I know what the veil is. I think we're here to experience a causal, temporal existence. I am thinking we are eternal, like God. But unlike God, we are experiencing our temporal lives now. We haven't finished our "probation" in time. When we get out the other side, we'll be eternal beings who know non eternity. And the veil? It's time. We can only experience now, we are disconnected from eternity. Our causal nature is the thing that keeps us from "remembering", and perhaps remembering isn't even a good word, it's just the best word we have (which, weakness of language, and it's imprecise nature is something else that has been hitting me hard late). If we were still eternal, we'd exist like God does, and you would just be, and how could you even HAVE faith. If you are like God, it isn't that you could reject it/need faith, you would just BE IT. Faith ONLY exists because of time. It ONLY exists because we can NOT BE a thing, or a thing can NOT BE (now), but can BE (later), faith requires causality, faith requires possibilities and not certainties. Faith is what is required to know that there is something beyond you. Faith is humility to know things that are not (YET) can be (or were). That may be a way it's a principle of power. It drives action.

I made the mistake of getting cocky a few months ago when I had some revelations/clarity that made it much harder for me to question the church. Devil couldn't get to the church, might as well dig the dirt out from underneath it. I'll come out of this better I think, but I'm going to be a heck of a lot more humble

Oh it very much is, but I'm often finding myself questioning core things to our teaching...

I am also realizing that there is a part of this that it isn't possible to understand. A non causal (timeless, everything all at once) existence. Since we exist, (which is the only thing I can measure with any certainty, and even then...) something has to exist eternally. Either WE are the non causal thing, which we can't fully understand, or we COME from a non causal thing, which we also can't fully understand. So by virtue of existence, non causality HAS to exist at some level/plane/point. At least the logic is sound for the next few hours

I mean, if I'm part of the rally, I don't know it. So perhaps I get sad or confused (like I am) for a while, and then ideally get back out of it, and get back to the delusion. Or I don't. Nothing changes because nothing could. For the implication to be true? I'm coming to wonder if it simply would have to be true, and not be able to be measured from the inside. If it's from being deterministic in nature, there no cause to see. If it's from a cause I can't yet see, there's no cause to see (yet). Though my logic is within system being measured, since B) has happened enough, then I feel it's better for my existence to go with B). And then my behavior resumes with nagging questions.

It's ironic, I feel this now. I understand you show me someone showing, demonstrating, free will, so finely tuned, so well used, it APPEARS deterministic. Which is a feat none of us can do, and I have the gall to call it the exact opposite. It's like someone painted a picture that even on the pixel level looks like a photograph. It's so convincing, I tell you it's a fake. Sorta like that. Since it looks like a photo, it couldn't NOT be

Really nothing. Just my idea of what is below the surface would change and ironically, I can’t see under it anyway, so why does it matter? I have to internalize that question, which is what I’m working on. The more I think about it the more, I think that there are things we don’t understand, and in that space is almost certainly where the answer to how our free will, so, works. Even still, something that came up in Enders game (xenocide) that I had to go back and listen to again is the discussion about free Will. Ender and Miro we’re having a discussion about free Will, and Ender brought up the point that he felt that everything at its basic level was intelligent matter doing what intelligent matter wants, and he says that he felt like we were made of the same stuff. He positive that we have always existed, and we have always done what we want, I like that too the views that some in the church have on intelligences to me that makes all the sense in the world, and it aligns very well with Abraham three. And it does give me some solace, some hope that those who deny free will or simply wrong. And they could be, and I hope they are. One thing I have come to learn is that there must be opposition in all things, and that statement about everything being one wasn’t just mumbo-jumbo if there was no differentiation between things, nothing could exist. Everything exist because it’s not the same thing , and there is a powerful truth, and that’s what I’m beginning to try to grab hold of and pull myself up from there.

FWIW, the last sentence may be true, and may be meant with total love, but my initial response to "You don't understand agency" was a knee to the groin. Just remember, sometimes some context can help with words (I say this with understanding, not with malice.) In any event, you are correct. The whole problem I am having is NOT understanding agency Which is causing me great pain right now. That said, I am arguing from the point that, being in flight requires submission to laws. Another way to say where I am coming from is to say, God has basically said, I will always be in flight. Through having said that, he has limited his choices in a sense. He now HAS to be in flight or he is a liar. Knowing he cannot be in flight AND a liar, it follows he will always be in flight. And if that comes from a mastery of will to the point that he can make such a pronouncement, then that's fine. I'm just arguing that statement is now limiting his options. It's very much like the understanding that agency isn't "free", we can choose actions, but not consequences. Which we would need to understand also applies to God. Maybe that is exaltation, being able to say, with intent, and certainty, I will never do wrong. And having the ability to hold your desire to that infinitely. Then, and only then, could you be called God, in the position sense.

You just have to assume now that the want never changes.

Because I am thinking of "Being God" as the flight in your example. The entity Elohim, is currently in flight. We call his state of flight as him "being God". Thus for him to be God, he must remain in flight, which means he has to obey those laws that keep him aloft. You could say he wants to, but since we know he will always be God, we also know that will CANNOT change. Which APPEARS to rob his agency. Though if you treat it as he WILL NOT change, the issue is a non issue. He's doing it becaue he wants to. If that makes sense.

To run that idea of completeness a bit further. Perhaps the pain is the process of not "being true" perhaps the "not true" in us is what causes pain. You often see peace for people in the most dire situations as they accept their situation. Maybe being one with your existence is the peace. I don't know, perhaps I'm carrying it too far, but something in there feels true. It seems to resolve the dilemma of Godhood. God WILL do the things God does, but on it's face that robs God of agency, but we believe he DOES have agency. And perhaps that's exaltation, enlightenment, nirvana, whatever you call it. Submitting your will to truth, to "God". And then, when we are fully submitted, our being becomes one with "God" and like 2 hydrogens and one oxygen becoming water, the man, the wife, and the Lord, all become the new "God" particle. And since we now no longer do the thing an oxygen does, and we do the things water does, we are at peace. Maybe all we are is oxygen preparing and striving to become water. To be joined in a way we can't yet understand fully. I want to say, comparing God's free will to ours is helpful because God is technically deterministic, but we would believe he has free will. Interesting. Perhaps correct, but perhaps not. But interesting.

Another musing (spaghetti at the wall) I have not came to terms with free will yet, but a thought is percolating in my mind. Similar to how I've thought before, becoming like God is becoming the I AM, it means becoming all powerful, all knowing. It comes by aligning oursleves to "truth" to what "is". So does it hurt to kick against the pricks? It does, because the pricks are what is true. Fighting truth is pointless. So we need to continue to align our will to his, this life is to work on bringing our alignment to his. It would follow that "the amt of knowledge we gain in this life benefits the next" makes sense to mean the degree to which we are "becoming true". So maybe we WON'T have free will in the end. We'll just do what God's DO. But if we do it because we chose it, then it doesn't matter, we are doing it. So Wilcox's lesson is still powerful. Whether we practice for A) or practice for B), we still practice. Perhaps that is the fundamental misunderstanding, that just because something looks or behaves deterministically doesn't mean it isn't free. So might it be with all matter. Perhaps that is Godhood. Perhaps doing the things God does BECAUSE WE WANT it, is the key. We aren't like the lower intelligences, they do because they are commanded, we will do because we desire. And God can help us change that desire. He can help us become "complete" and all pain comes from NOT yet being complete. Knowing spirit is matter and a fullness of joy is body AND spirit united makes the difference. Like a new atom, perhaps the FULLNESS, COMPLETENESS of joy comes in changing the atom that our intelligence IS.

This is a lot like thinking a table is solid your whole life until you realize that there are gaps in the atoms, and that if you were small enough, you could pass through. Maybe the moral is, don't look too closely. Or better yet, at a tiny level you don't have free will (AKA CAN PASS THROUGH) but at a regular level, you do (AKA CAN NOT PASS THROUGH).

I beginning to realize that everyone operates from assumptions. Even if you go down to bedrock, you have an assumption, 2 in fact. 1) You exist 2) Something external to you exists independently of you. (Because I found there are people who don't believe this, but I feel those turn into causal nightmares, so I'm leaving it alone. Mostly because assumption 1 opens the door wide enough to make assumption 2 follow logically) (IMPLIED) 3) We can know things about 1 and 2 And you move up from there. Implicitly in 2 (and to a degree 3) is where all measurement lives. But that's where I'm realizing, everything we do is driven by the assumption we exist. And if we do (which it sure seems like), then something IS, or IS NOT (Opposition in all things, lest all things be one). Since we also assume 3, it would follow that there will be evidence of X, and X exists. But the evidence doesn't CAUSE X, it's indicative that X exists. Which introduces the possibility or misinterpretation of X evidence. Since this is possible, Free Will deniers can be wrong (not of malintent, but of misunderstanding). Ergo, evaluation of evidence is needed. (Which I could argue permits a choice, and solves the whole argument anyway, but I'll resist.) But the important thing is, we all assume things, we have to, and if those assumptions are wrong, they lead to a wrong conclusion. (See King Follet, if we go wrong for the start, it's hard to get back). It makes me wonder, if existence itself REQUIRES choice. Which, I'm fine with