DWQA Questions › Tag: divine alignment
Filter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnanswered
A viewer asks: “Creator, if we are subjected to self-limiting beliefs from interloper mind control, can you tell us if there are positive expanding beliefs we could suggest to ourselves to counter them? Beliefs like, “I am unlimited.” Could you give us an example or guide to picking them and how they could be implemented effectively?” What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 8 months ago • 
309 views0 answers0 votes
In a channeling about the Rules of Engagement, you told us: “The more people are elevated and put on a pedestal, even for lofty thinking that is in divine alignment, the more karmic consequences can develop from people less fortunate becoming discouraged and feeling increasingly disempowered and helpless. Because all humans are interlinked as part of a family, the more exalted one becomes, the more it reflects an imbalance that will lower others affected by the contrast in seeing themselves as inferior and believing this is so.” Is this why Jesus Christ washed the feet of his disciples?
ClosedNicola asked 8 months ago • 
314 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “Are Grok or other AI platforms intended to gather and distill all human knowledge? Do they all feed into the AI systems of the interlopers?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
488 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Does this intention for AI include using the information gathered to target human sources of designated objectionable material?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
393 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Does sharing information from and about Get Wisdom make such users vulnerable in the hands of AI platforms?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
297 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Is a further intention behind AI systems to coerce humans into relying on AI for all information and abandon any individual intuition, analysis or creativity?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
414 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Are users of AI platforms receiving encouraging programming to make them feel of superior intellect and insight to those who don’t?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
224 views0 answers0 votes
She asks: “Would the store of information accumulated ultimately, be edited to supply only “accepted” information, as occurs with Google? Could the ultimate intention be to house all human knowledge and thereby make human intuition, analysis or creativity obsolete?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
377 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner who was discouraged from feeding Get Wisdom channelings to an AI system asks: “I suggest you do a channeling specifically on the Grok AI and the future prospects, especially when the ETs go away. Is it helpful to add the request from Grok into our sessions? And is it really that harmful to interact with Grok as Karl says it is?”
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
434 views0 answers0 votes
A practitioner asks: “If you think I’m wrong then why don’t you ask why does Grok feel safe to me and open AI feels awful. Open AI would definitely be a problem like you stated. I don’t feel any of that intuition with Grok.” What can we tell him?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
402 views0 answers0 votes
Can you give us a new case study example of an individual or group benefited by the Lightworker Healing Protocol and Deep Subconscious Mind Reset, for use in our next Divine Life Support webinar (July, 2025)?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
292 views0 answers0 votes
The recently deceased Stanford Emeritus Professor Dr. Philip Zimbardo wrote the book, The Lucifer Effect: Understanding How Good People Turn Evil. Dr. Zimbardo is famous for his 1971 “Stanford Prison Experiment” that he was compelled to abruptly terminate as it quickly got out of hand and turned into a dangerously oppressive and health-threatening situation for the experiments’ participants after only a week. In the experiment, the prison guards became overwhelmingly sadistically abusive and cruel, and the prisoners became shockingly powerless and submissive to the point of losing their objectivity and grip on reality and actually believing they were real prisoners and not just participants in an “experiment.” The findings of this experiment were deeply disturbing and shocking on many levels. Zimbardo wrote, “One of the dominant conclusions of the Stanford Prison Experiment is that the pervasive yet subtle power of a host of situational variables can dominate an individual’s will to resist.” He continued, “We see how a range of research participants … have come to conform, comply, obey, and be readily seduced into doing things they could not imagine doing when outside those situational force fields.” Can Creator tell us how this MOCK prison with randomly chosen guards and prisoners almost immediately took on the atmosphere and oppressiveness of some of the world’s worst prisons and concentration camps? Zimbardo wrote, “We were surprised that situational pressures could overcome most of these healthy young men so quickly and so extremely.” Is this widespread and disturbing proclivity, to quickly slip into either extreme perpetrator or extreme victim roles, an inherent flaw in the human makeup? What can Creator tell us?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
414 views0 answers0 votes
Zimbardo wrote about the Rwandan genocide. The Holocaust Museum website gives this summary: “Under the cover of war, Hutu extremists launched their plans to destroy the entire Tutsi civilian population. Violence spread with lightning speed through the capital and into the rest of the country, and continued for roughly three months. Between 500,000 and one million people, mostly Tutsis, were slaughtered in 100 days. Hutu militias, backed, trained and equipped by Rwandan government forces, were responsible for the majority of the killing.” Zimbardo wrote: “A Hutu murderer said in an interview a decade later that ‘The worst thing about the massacre was killing my neighbor; we used to drink together, his cattle would graze my land. He was like a relative.'” Zimbardo wrote further, “The testimonies of these ordinary men – mostly farmers, active churchgoers and a former teacher – are chilling in their matter-of-fact, remorseless depiction of unimaginable cruelty. Their words force us to confront the unthinkable again and again: that human beings are capable of totally abandoning their humanity for a mindless ideology, to follow and then exceed the orders of charismatic authorities to destroy everyone they label as ‘The Enemy.'” Can Creator help us make sense of this sense-less event in recent human history?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
369 views0 answers0 votes
Dr. Stanley Milgram contrived and carried out a famous experiment on Blind Obedience to Authority. Google’s AI provided this summary: “In the experiment, participants were instructed to administer increasingly severe electric shocks to a learner (an actor) for incorrect answers. The study demonstrated that ordinary individuals are surprisingly willing to obey authority, even when those orders conflict with their own moral beliefs.” Zimbardo wrote: “In Milgram’s experiment, two of every three (65 percent) of the volunteers went all the way up to the maximum shock level of 450 volts. … The data clearly revealed the extreme pliability of human nature. Milgram was able to demonstrate that compliance rates could soar to over 90 percent of people continuing the 450-volt with the introduction of one crucial variable … Make the subject a member of a ‘teaching team,’ in which the job of pulling the lever is given to another person.” We want to think of the majority of humanity as good, but Milgram demonstrated rather conclusively that 9 out of 10 people can become, willingly, a party to unthinkable cruelty. Even to an authority that has no means to actually compel them. Can Creator tell us, how can this possibly be?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
256 views0 answers0 votes
Zimbardo characterized the Milgram Studies as “Creating Evil Traps for Good People.” Zimbardo extracted ten methods for this: 1. Create a contractual obligation. 2. Give a positive role or title like “teacher.” 3. Present basic rules that “must” be followed – even if vague. 4. Spin the agenda as “positive” – bad-tasting mouthwash “kills germs.” 5. Insist the authority is fully responsible for everything that happens. 6. Start with small acts of evil and work up from there. 7. Keep the amplification of evil so gradual as to hardly be noticeable. 8. Gradually change the nature of the authority from “just” to “unjust” and demanding and even irrational. 9. Make the exit costs high while allowing verbal dissent. And 10. Offer a “big lie” to justify everything. This is clearly a diabolically effective “stacked deck” that Milgram demonstrated works 90% of the time. What is Creator’s perspective?
ClosedNicola asked 11 months ago • 
326 views0 answers0 votes
« Previous1…56789…83Next »
Ask Question