DWQA Questions › Tag: risksFilter:AllOpenResolvedClosedUnansweredSort byViewsAnswersVotesTrust is very closely associated with safety. It’s easy to trust when one feels safe, and very difficult when one does not. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs166 views0 answers0 votesIn the animal kingdom, safety is largely arranged by instinct, though some of the more intelligent species do seem to engage in some tutoring of the young. In truly sentient beings, the role of instinct is seemingly performed by a complex and often contradictory and conflicting collection of beliefs, some of which the individual is aware of consciously, and many they are not. Can Creator comment on the similarity of belief to instinct, as well as the critical differences when it comes to feeling and arranging safety for oneself and others?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs165 views0 answers0 votesIn legal contracts, the boilerplate language can get quite lengthy and detailed. It has been said that every sentence in the boilerplate represents something bad and disastrous that happened, which necessitated the invention and introduction of that language into the model contract. Does the complex collection of beliefs held by every sentient being regarding safety and what constitutes it, and what is needed to provide for it, evolve in a similar fashion—that with every disaster, beliefs about safety and what is needed to assure it are created and/or augmented?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs183 views0 answers0 votesIs the overwhelming need for power and control, in fact, an overcompensating desire to provide an adequate level of safety for the self and ones the self cares for?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs179 views0 answers0 votesIt is said that addictions to things we need are the hardest to overcome. One can quit cigarettes cold turkey, but not eating. Likewise one cannot overcome an exaggerated need for safety, by renouncing it completely. It seems that being safe is actually a compromise at all times and places. No one can be perfectly safe, yet we see overcompensation and negligence everywhere all the time, often on display in the same person. It seems acquiring an enlightened perspective on one’s safety is actually akin to enlightenment itself? What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs190 views0 answers0 votesLove is a close kin to safety—in that love in a compelling sense is a condition, a state of safety, and that pure love is pure safety. And where safety is in short supply, we often find love to be as well. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs174 views0 answers0 votesIt seems safety is, in essence, a complex miasma of beliefs, often contradictory. Can Creator tell us how belief replacement can work effectively on this problem? We are told, however, that beliefs that are held and embraced by the individual, are often left alone or avoided because they are considered a product of, or adoption by, free will choice. This seems to be one of the biggest barriers there is in terms of getting help from the divine, for people identify quite strongly with their outlooks and beliefs about safety and what constitutes it. What can Creator tell us?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs187 views0 answers0 votesCan Creator tell us how Empowered Prayer and the Lightworker Healing Protocol can not only provide genuine safety but also divinely align our haphazard beliefs and outlook about it?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Limiting Beliefs196 views0 answers0 votesRichard Rogers said: “The Athenians had an oath for someone who was about to become a citizen. They had to swear that ‘I shall leave the city not less but more beautiful than I found it.'” This would be considered a positive oath. What is Creator’s perspective, and is this oath truly benign?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma239 views0 answers0 votesDr. Viktor Frankl wrote: “… a man who belongs to a given nation is obviously neither guilty nor meritorious by that fact alone. His guilt would begin when, for example, he did not cultivate in himself the special talents of the nation, or took no part in national cultural values; while he would be acting meritoriously if he overcame in himself certain characterological weaknesses of the nation by a conscious process of self-examination.” Frankl’s perspective is quite thought provoking when it is understood that some of the most common oaths sworn today are to the nations that people live in. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma197 views0 answers0 votesNorman Douglas said: “Never take a solemn oath. People might think you mean it.” This would be especially true if it was a “witnessed” event. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma199 views0 answers0 votesDr. Viktor Frankl wrote: “Every one of us knows somehow that the content of his life is somehow preserved and saved.” If the taking of an oath is an affirmative deed that becomes recorded for all of time in the akashic records, one can never get away from it completely, and at the very least, the event will always be in the recorded history of the soul. What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma212 views0 answers0 votesThe most pernicious form of oath is the loyalty oath accompanied by a requirement to carry out a nefarious deed, such as killing another human being. Some people consider this urban myth and don’t want to believe that this actually happens. However, a recent local story about a random shooting was published in Grand Rapids, Michigan. For the story, the reporter consulted with a former Chicago gang member for his analysis. The consultant says to join the gang the shooter was suspected of trying to join, a person must kill a rival gang member or someone random. But the rules are they can’t get caught. What can Creator tell us? Is this an urban myth? And if not, how widespread a problem is it?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma204 views0 answers0 votesIt would seem that the power of an oath depends on how successfully it alters and/or cements belief. Is it correct to say it’s not the oath itself that binds, but the effect it has on the beliefs of oath takers, oath administrators, and oath witnesses?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma184 views0 answers0 votesGeorge Washington said: “Where is the security for property, for reputation, for life, if the sense of religious obligation deserts the oaths.” What is Creator’s perspective?ClosedNicola asked 2 years ago • Karma197 views0 answers0 votes
Nicola