  |
|
Revelation
|
 Life To The Image II The image to the beast as set up consists of ten kings reduced to seven with the spare three acting in the capacity of the dialectic balance (as of the dragons' tail), but upon the one king in authority with the (last) crown of satan. The remaining six follow the crowned king with total deference - as with one mind, the mind of the dragon. There are 120 ways to choose three elements from ten. There are also 120 elements in S5. The balance formed by say "g" as the "wine" and "c" as the "oil" with {(a,c,g)=>(a,b,g)<=(b,c,g)} with the middle triple as synthesis of the outer two may be in direct analogy to the absorption of (g)H(g^-1) : g in S5, H=A5. (Where the ten kings in sets of three perform from each unique triple the pre and post multiplication by a unique "g" and its inverse.) Thus the ten kings "test" the factored down system for 'room' to add the false doctrine of the source of leaven to the Laodicean conglomerate. (The "fix is in" though; the factoring down by a transposition from S5 to A5 will always absorb the conjugation by "g".) Factoring down to A5 is as supplied by the "serpent spirits" of the sixth trump - the opposition of antichrist. In a particular octal there are 666 possible bows outside that of Christ's K4 subgroup. Choosing one element "g"as the wine fixes the bows for that given (sun) octal. In the above if (d,e,f) is a static K4 subgroup corresponding to "g" as unity, Then in the balance formed with "b" corresponding to (a,c,g), and "a" to (b,c,g) as "thesis and antithesis" "a" and "b" are absorbed into "c" corresponding to the bow of (a,b,g). We have three theses here, corresponding to (g)H(g^-1) in the sensual or carnal dialectic of 660 elements. The synthesis (a,b,g) or "H" absorbs the thesis and antithesis of "desire" and "act". (corresponding to (a,c,g) and (b,c,g). Note here that the elements c and g as thesis/antithesis are both present.) We know that the above bow with g=1 and (d,e,f) static is in complete contradiction to the choice of "g" as wine and "c"=1 as the oil. The fourth bow can not be formed without a structural contradiction! The synthetic balance of the dragon's given carnal device - temptation "upon the senses" is employed to "model" the "horsemen" dialectic and place the believer in the "balances" with this sensual "dialectic" of A5 in S5. Likewise the Laodicean conglomerate takes the position of the five senses and the source of leaven the place of the logical and tempted mind, or in the process of inter-church "dialogue" the "mouth" speaking great things - temptations and lusts after false gospels. Those "lusts" which is as "confirmed in the churches" through the dialectic process (of the image formed by the ten kings in triples) uses by pre and post multiplication, a factoring down to A5 upon the five churches. The cycles' are added by the "mouthpiece" or proposals of doctrine from the source of leaven, (as the lusts of the eyes) and the factoring down is supplied by the "looking for 'doctrinal room' across the churches" (in analogy to the lusts of the flesh by the image) to uptake the doctrine as acceptable across all the churches. (Further, in analogy to the pride of life. Agreeing to disagree by reaching concensus with the source of leaven.) In other words, each church keeps lapping up the falsehood of poor doctrine from the false prophet's construction. However this includes finding six more elements to complete the numbering of the carnal man to 666. For if we move the mind from the source of leaven to any other church in Laodicea, then we obtain a factor of six to multiply with, and not six further elements to "sum up". We choose instead six transposition elements that we may conjugate (and not simply multiply) the carnal A5 with throughout the full group A6 in S6. Each conjugation represents the substitution of "logic" for a sense in A5. By that process, nothing is absolute (as is logic) but everything, even "new" logic is decided by consensus by sidestepping the absolute. These last six elements are formed by the process of the ten kings in their particular selection. The authority of the dragon is to choose wine from four elements, and then oil from the remaining three outside of the static K4 subgroup, but only two (oil and wine) are needed as thesis and antithesis, (the deck is loaded from the start.) For if the contradiction is pointed out in dialogue that the "wine" is in actuality the "oil" under consideration, then the balance switches to its antithesis, replacing the oil with the wine and vice versa. Arguing against the process itself will lead to a counter proposal that both ideas were "faulty" when paired and a different pair of oil and wine are chosen from the four. In effect, any two from the four, that is "six" possible argument pairs of thesis/antithesis. (forming the transposition to factor down to A5 with - transpositions are self inverse or g = g^-1) Therefore the crowned king of the ten takes the place of "Death" in opposition to the "life" given to the image by the false prophet (the carnality of the Laodicean construct with the source of leaven or false prophet's synagogue of satan.) The resulting system, is "Hell", not "life" or "death". The "Death" entity provides the antithesis to the method of the synthetic "life" - which is the dialectic. The "Hell" that follows after (which is the synthetic life given the image) is when opposed, actually a snare to invite anyone in opposition (to the leavening process) into the role of the "Death position" as antithesis to the complete "carnal senses" method - part of the process itself. The only way to oppose this system without being drawn into the dialectic is to terminate the relationship with the practicing parties involved, or to oppose the method as the two witnesses with the contradictions from the oil and wine as before, until all six pairs are shown to be false: then the dialectic can be corrected. (This is very difficult in this day and age, we have become dull of hearing.) The presence of two opposing and contradictory outcomes in whatever the present setting (in the dialectic here) are at fault - because the process of dialectically motivated dialogue is in contradiction itself. The system is a bugger. The image's "triple" in its place is one of the last six elements, with the "Death" as the crowned king ready to decide, (as above we have "g" paired with "c" as thesis, antithesis; one such pair.) Then the 660 previous elements not only work across the image, but the static senses of each and every single person in the room following the progress of the debate, as to taking one side or the other. The crowd elevate their agreement with the display of "opinion" to become as the "truth" or to put it in its proper place, the gutter. They have "itching ears" as it were - to find agreement and sensual fulfillment in the place of "truth in Christ". There are no fixed absolute truths in this process at all. Thus the number of the "man" is 666 - if and only if that man is antichrist (one of many sons of perdition) - as taking the place of Christ in deciding the proper place of the truth and facts. Then the image itself of the false prophet's construction across the five churches has the same numbering - the five churches act as one image dallying itself along with the beast it rides. The irony is that every one in the room taking part in forming their baseless opinions on the proper place of the absolute truth are just as much an image of satan's jealousy as the whole stinking construct together. It really does stink when one spots the contradictions in the dialogue and the mental cartwheels occur when it is pointed out. (Hegel turns into Marx' dialectic, and then redefines itself altogether before complete contradiction ensues.) |
 |
|
