David Wilcock SEVERELY threatened. SEND HIM YOUR PRAYERS

[zenmaster]

There is a vast breach between the type of discernment which you are applying to the teachings and the context in which I am using the terminology. But there is no need to create a debate where none is necessary. Again that is thinking with the flesh, by which I mean allowing the intellect to get in the way of actual understanding.

"Actual understanding" is not possible, here in 3D 'flesh' - so kind of a moot point. You've stated, for example, that thinking and attachment (identification) are the same - I disagree with that premise. The faculties of evaluation, such as thinking-based analysis, may be extremely helpful with discernment and understanding here. Attachment is just a 'default state' when there is a distortion towards imbalance which requires that an idea (the emotive content derived from it) substitute for the thing it suggests.

Never do I suggest that applying discernment is foolhardy. What I point out is the regularity of foolhardy discernment when one thinks the way man in his brainwashed state typically thinks. the flesh, in the sense that I use it, refers more to the state that man's submission to his worldly attachments stand between him and his spiritual reality.

I think most of the individuals you are addressing would consider such basic concepts as 'worldly attachments' almost passé.

I advise All to be certain they are taking the entirety of the teaching into context and not using portions to meet with their own philosophies. There is no benefit in debate, only in understanding. So we respectfully leave the discerning to the individual efforts.

However, debate and understanding aren't mutually exclusive, of course.

I do thank you for your attention, and ask that you consider what I have pointed out about the mentality of the mob. It is very obvious, and very detrimental to David W.'s teachings.

This is doubtful. DW's teachings are part of a 'mob mentality', after all. Subcultural memes rise and fall all of the time.