DWQA Questions › Tag: divine perspectiveFilter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnansweredSort byViewsAnswersVotesA viewer writes, “I thought you would find this writing interesting by Tom Montalk: ‘Interesting thing to ponder: what’s stronger, military might or divine power? The obvious answer is divine power. But then you look at history: 1) 10-20 million Christians killed by the Soviets; 2) 1000s of Christians killed by ISIS in the Middle East this past decade alone; 3) 100s of thousands of Christian children during the Crusades headed to Jerusalem only to be killed or sold into slavery on their way; 4) Always that good Christian family in the news who lost everything in a storm or earthquake or flood. You would think, based on this, that God clearly favors communists and Muslims and natural disasters. Besides, why should divinity favor Christians? What about all the other religions? But millions of communists, Muslims, and Jews have died as well over the centuries. Is there any class of people that’s consistently protected by the divine against military might? You could go back to the Old Testament and the Israelites and what was done for them, which if true, brings up the question of why back then and not since? Yet there’s no doubt that tyrannies and armies have risen and fallen and, in the end, spirituality and religion has endured. So spirit has the last laugh, but was it a Pyrrhic victory considering the millions lost? Or do we place too much value on life and comfort, and death, torture, and slavery isn’t that big of a deal in the eyes of eternity? There are also countless anecdotes of individuals and small groups of people being saved by supernatural intervention. Mysterious strangers helping them only to disappear without a trace, or voices telling them where to seek shelter, or the very laws of physics being bent to keep them from dying. And we have key people being guided by supernatural influences to exert their position/authority to help many other people. So certain individuals matter at certain times enough to get major intervention. But what’s missing is collective, massive, open divine intervention against military physical force, especially in the last 1000 years, let alone modern times. That hasn’t happened to my knowledge, unless it’s been covered up. And because of that, the USSR could kill up to 20 million Christians because it had the military might to do so, and because, for whatever reason, divine power doesn’t prevent collective events.'” His first question is: “Is divinity unable to [prevent collective events]? Then it’s not omnipotent.” What is Creator’s Perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator683 views0 answers0 votesThe author says this about the divine choosing to not intervene on behalf of groups: “Then it condoned genocide in the 20th century and favored the Nazis and Communists over Christians and Jews. If it’s willing to sacrifice them, what does that say about our safety during the coming times?” What is Creator’s Perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator504 views0 answers0 votesThe author further asks about divine intervention on behalf of groups: “Did it do that once upon a time, like with the Israelites? If so, why not now? And does that have anything to do with the supposed quarantine that went into effect 3k years ago preventing aliens from openly interfering with human development? Or were the Israelites being protected by aliens? Or is the history of the Israelites fabricated?” What is Creator’s Perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator500 views0 answers0 votesThe author continues: “If it [divine power] doesn’t prevent genocide, what is the reason? Karma of the victims? If so, does that mean mass murderers are guiltless because they are just fulfilling the karmic “wishes” of the victims and thus doing them a spiritual service?” What is Creator’s Perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator564 views0 answers0 votesThe author continues: “Or is the temporary victory of military might, and the thousands or millions that suffer as a result, merely a product of the rules of the game here, a necessary side effect of free will being an integral part of this whole experience?” What is Creator’s Perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator446 views0 answers0 votesThe author continues: “Would too much intervention destroy free will and also ruin the fiction by which souls here find full immersion in their catalytic experiences? Does that serve as an exploit in the game, by which dark forces can play the rules so well that they end up checkmating divinity and get to enact decades of enslavement, torture, oppression?” What is Creator’s Perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator441 views0 answers0 votesThe author continues: “If so, then it’s absolutely true that “God helps those who help themselves” and “You have to meet God halfway,” generally speaking, as the miracles come via grace and are therefore not reliable, like clockwork, as history has shown.” What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Creator417 views0 answers0 votesWikipedia defines the Dunning-Kruger effect as follows: “The Dunning–Kruger effect is a cognitive bias whereby people with low ability, expertise, or experience regarding a certain type of a task or area of knowledge tend to overestimate their ability or knowledge.” This effect seems common, and when encountered, almost completely resistant to challenge or debate. What is Creator’s perspective on the Dunning-Kruger effect? How much can be attributed to subconscious programming, and how much to the simple immaturity of the incarnated human?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption447 views0 answers0 votesA person with Dunning-Kruger might say something like, “… of course, I don’t know. I don’t NEED to know. I have COMMON SENSE.” And then expects their opinion to carry equal (or even greater) weight in a given debate. Can Creator share just how a person comes to think this way?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption431 views0 answers0 votesAnother behavior related to Dunning-Kruger would be a tendency to appeal to some kind of superior credential, even and especially if it is completely unrelated to the given debate at hand. Such a credential would be physical age: “Well young man, I am twenty years your senior, I think I know a thing or two.” Or, “You’re talking to a decorated veteran, show some respect!” Or, “I’ve lived a good life, had a lucrative career, raised three upstanding children, and am a grandparent to boot! I think my opinion should matter!” This tendency to take shelter in some kind of superior, if wholly unrelated and even irrelevant credential, is widespread and sometimes very problematic. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption397 views0 answers0 votesCreator described the ego in a previous GetWisdom LIVE program as follows: “The ego is a limited vessel, a limited capability that puts the self, first. As such, it is kind of like having a suit of armor that is self-protective. It might be awkward to wear, inconvenient, even drag you down from the sheer weight and inconvenience of suiting up before you make an excursion where you are at risk, but a potential lifesaver if you are attacked and would otherwise be vulnerable and perish. The suit of armor gives you a fighting chance at least. The ego, in the same way, is more like a weapon in being quite focused on your supremacy. In a sense, it is your last refuge to maintain an advantage and hold your ground to stand up to those who would bully you or intimidate, and provide a wherewithal to weather the storm.” The Dunning-Kruger effect appears to be the ego fulfilling this very function in a crude, imprecise, but very forceful and compelling manner. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption391 views0 answers0 votesCreator has previously discussed five principal selves that make up the human being—the deep subconscious, subconscious, cellular consciousness, primary or conscious self, and the higher self. What about the ego? Can it be, should it be, characterized as a “sixth self?” And if not, why not?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption392 views0 answers0 votesWe have learned that some skills, muscle memory, and other proclivities we call natural talent, can be recorded in the akashic records, and re-introduced into the cellular consciousness of a new body in a new incarnation. This is how natural talent can be carried over from lifetime to lifetime. What about the ego? Is it also recorded in the akashic records and re-introduced in some fashion to a new incarnation? Is it, like karma and physical talent, left behind when one becomes a light being but re acquired upon a new incarnation (so the incarnating soul can essentially pick up where they left off)? Is the ego truly left behind when the departing consciousness enters the light and is it one of the big reasons there is more wisdom and clarity as light beings? Or is the ego of a particular lifetime utterly lost upon transition, and new incarnations start off with an essentially blank ego?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption403 views0 answers0 votesCreator has said that the angels have egos. It would be assumed then that light beings also have egos of some sort. Is there a difference between the ego of a physical incarnation, and the ego of a light being?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption368 views0 answers0 votesThe ego does not appear to be brain-dependent, as lost soul spirits, when encountered by human victims and healers and psychics, seem to display lots of functioning ego characteristics. Can Creator comment on the ego’s reliance or lack of reliance on the physical brain?ClosedNicola asked 3 years ago • Human Corruption366 views0 answers0 votes
Nicola