My epitaph

[Gary Childress]

Are you guys both channeling God, but somehow disagree on a lot of stuff?

Hard to say. What does "channeling God" mean?

Do you talk to God and does God answer? And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"? And if not then is it safe to say there would be little reason to believe there is any good evidence to affirm that God was "there".

[VVilliam]

Do you talk to God and does God answer?

What do you mean "God". (I ask because there are many definitions of "God".

And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"?

So your definition of "God" includes gender. Can you give any more definition?

And if not then is it safe to say there would be little reason to believe there is any good evidence to affirm that God was "there".

I cannot offer any specific answer to this - fairly open-ended - question. If you can expand on your particular idea of "God", that may help me formulate a specific answer.

[Age]

Are you guys both channeling God, but somehow disagree on a lot of stuff?

Which one of you channels God better?

Which two 'guys' are you addressing these questions to, EXACTLY?

[Age]

Why would the readers think I do not know me?

Just about all of the 'readers', in the days when this was written, would NOT have even CONTEMPLATED whether 'you' KNOW you, or NOT. And, a LOT of 'those readers' would NOT have even THOUGHT about 'this' BEFORE.

How do you KNOW this

Let us take a vote: How many of 'you', posters, here have CONTEMPLATED whether 'you' even KNOWN you, BEFORE 'you' read the claim of mine quoted above here?

And, how many of 'you' had THOUGHT about 'this' BEFORE?

and is it a TRUE statement.

What does the word 'true' in capital letters MEAN, or REFER TO, EXACTLY?

Now, OBVIOUSLY, if 'you' can NOT YET ANSWER the QUESTION, 'Who am 'I'?' properly AND correctly, then 'you' do NOT, YET, KNOW 'I'.

This might be the case.
It may also be the case that "knowing" who I Am is an ongoing process occurring as more "Data of Experience" is uncovered through said ongoing process.

Well NO human body comes out of the womb, consciously knowing the ANSWER TO, Who 'I' AM, in a human language.

But human beings, collectively, have ALREADY evolved, through experiences, to COME-TO KNOWING the ANSWER TO, Who 'I' AM, in A human language. But like ALL LEARNED 'things' some are YET to ALSO LEARN, UNDERSTAND, and KNOW.

In association with that, it may also be that I "keep" a lot of that knowledge "to myself".

IF 'you' had ALREADY COME-TO-KNOW the, proper and Correct, ANSWER to the QUESTION, 'Who am 'I'?' THEN 'you' would ALREADY KNOW that there IS and could NEVER such a 'thing' as "myself".

The word or phrase "myself" IS an OXYMORON and a CONTRADICTION IN TERMS.

This would also align with the "idea" that such knowledge is "owed" since it is not shared.

Did you mean 'owed' or 'owned' here?

However, since I also experience that the knowledge is obtained through something that I have not always understood as "me" - I cannot lay claim to the knowledge as something I "own" or can own, yet the knowledge has become part of my "self" identification and the appearance of "ownership" along with it.

And, WHO and WHAT 'me' IS, EXACTLY, FROM 'your' perspective, is probably just as well NOT YET KNOWN, NEITHER, right?

Not "Exactly" but certainly "Enough" to make some Presumptions and then Test those.

Okay, and feel absolutely FREE to KEEP making PRESUMPTIONS, and KEEP TESTING 'them'.

When it is FULLY UNDERSTOOD how 'you', human beings, in the days when this is being written, do NOT YET KNOW WHO nor WHAT 'you', and 'I', AM, EXACTLY, then this will LEAD ONTO CONSIDERING whether HOW THEN could 'I', or 'me', even KNOW, FOR SURE, that 'I', or 'me', do ACTUALLY HAVE 'my OWN mind', or NOT.

Perhaps, but not necessarily the Actual Case.

WHEN, and IF, 'you' ALSO COME-TO-KNOW who AND what the 'I' and 'me', or 'you', words ARE REFERRING TO, EXACTLY, then 'you' WILL ALSO SEE, UNDERSTAND, and KNOW how 'it' IS THE ACTUAL CASE.

For example, as a Human Personality which has been Growing for 62 years on This Planet, in a certain Region of said Planet, and in order for the Human Experience to occur - Mind has to be involved.
The Mind comes from a Blank Slate State which allows for a genuine Human Experience to occur.

That is the Mind that I - The Human Personality - "Am". Self Identifications begins from that Blank Slate State.

In this sense a Human Personality does "have" "its own mind". Whether this is the Correct/Exact truth, the Human Personality as its General default position is "Born" unaware regardless of any other Truth.

How MANY NOTICED the CONTRADICTION here?

Also, and by the way, what is the DIFFERENCE between 'Mind' AND 'mind', to 'you', EXACTLY, "vvilliam"?

And, this is WITHOUT even QUERYING 'you', human beings, OVER, 'What does the 'mind' word even MEAN? What IS 'the mind'? And/or 'What is the 'mind' word even REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?

Individual Human Personalities have a variety of theories, and these often seek one another out which results in Groups.

Yes. 'This' can be CLEARLY SEEN and OBSERVED through and by ALL of the WARRING GROUPS that existing on planet earth, in the days when this is being written.

This is a Natural Process because Individual Minds Working Together Build The Machinery.
Human's have been doing this throughout their epoch.
These Group Minds are themselves Entities.

So, according to 'this logic' the so-called Group Mind of EVERY one would also be an Entity, right?

What we have here IS a VERY CLEAR CASE of NOT READING and SEEING and/or MISSING the POINT, COMPLETELY.

I talked ABOUT and was REFERRING TO the 'my' word. I even EMPHASIZED the 'my' word. BUT, ONCE AGAIN, what I talk ABOUT gets COMPLETELY and UTTERLY OVERLOOKED, and MISSED.

Not at all. Clearly there are Two Minds Attempting to Understand each Other and this is a Work In Progress.

Talk ABOUT VERY CLEARLY MISSING the VERY POINT, FURTHER.

And 'this' is WHY I spoke OF and ABOUT 'your' USAGE of the 'my' word above here.

In relationship to the Idea of Ownership, which You appear to interpret as what "My" " is supposed to "mean".

If the 'my' word does NOT imply, suggest, NOR 'supposed to mean' 'ownership', then what is the 'my' word 'supposed to mean' TO 'you', "vvilliam"?

I might ask Myself "How" can One "Own" Ones Self (?) and I might reply to My Question that I am Responsible for the Personality I am becoming...so I "Own" the Responsibility. Thus "My Mind".

SEE how CLEARLY CONTRADICTORY 'this STUFF' IS?

ABSOLUTELY NO one can ask "myself" BECAUSE there is NO such 'thing' as "myself". EXACTLY like there is NO such 'thing' as "my mind".

Oh, and by the way, there is NOT even such a 'thing' AS so-called 'my mind', to BEGIN WITH.

Yes. I made that point re the Blank Slate State.

So, apparently, 'you' made 'that point' that there is NO such 'thing' as 'my mind', YET the sentence before this one of yours you CONCLUDED WITH, 'Thus 'My Mind', and WITH capital 'm's AS WELL.

Even so, which "Beginning" are you talking about?

GREAT QUESTION. The SAME one that the three words, 'In the beginning', were REFERRING TO, EXACTLY?

Which, by the way, is NOT 'the one' that most of 'you', adult human beings, in the days when this is being written, are ASSUMING nor PRESUMING.

Rather, this is not what is being said in the expression.

I KNOW.

Okay.

And,

If 'you' DID NOT PRESUME what 'my opinion' MIGHT BE, in the beginning, THEN 'you' would NOT have ENDED UP SO FAR ASTRAY, as 'you' HAVE, here, now.

What has you Thinking or Believing that I have drifted from the course?

your WORDS ON the screen in front of 'us' here.

Is there a particular reason you wish to pursue this?

YES.

Okay.

Do you think that minds can literally be swapped over?

NO.

Do 'you' think that there are 'minds'?

Yes.

Or is it just a case that you think I used an inappropriate phrasing, and if so, what is the better phrasing one could use?

'you' USED the 'my' word, as though 'you', an individual human being, as 'its' OWN 'mind', which is just a Wrong, and an INAPPROPRIATE, phrase.

What is the Better Phrasing one could use?

The ONE I ALREADY GAVE and USED in the following quote OF MINE, which you have ACTUALLY ALREADY PROVIDED for us here.

A much truer and thus better phrasing is 'my thoughts'. Which, although is STILL NOT True, Right, Accurate, NOR Correct phrase, that phrase is far MORE accurate than 'my mind' is.

What would be the True Phrase one can use, rather than the less accurate one suggested?

In regards to what, EXACTLY?

If it is just the phrase 'my thoughts' alone, then this would depend on in what CONTEXT 'that phrase' is being USED. In and of itself, the True phrase would contain a capital 'm' for the 'my' word, or just the 'thoughts' word alone.

Well will wait to see in what sentence you are REFERRING TO when USING 'that phrase'.

But first 'things' first, as there are still quite a few MORE steps that need to be LEARNED and UNDERSTOOD, FIRST.

Okay.

I cannot answer your question because you want an "exact" whereas the developing is ongoing and one cannot exactly say "who", while the developing is happening.

Okay, fair enough.

And, thank you GREATLY for ADMITTING that 'you' do NOT YET KNOW who nor what 'the one' NOR 'the I' IS, EXACTLY, which is said to have 'its mind'.

Rather, I am Clarifying my Understanding of Self.

But your unusual USE of capital letters here is NOT CLARIFYING your understanding of 'Self' TO 'me'. your USAGE of letters here is ONLY CONFUSING 'things' MORE, FOR 'me'.

"Admitting" is normally associated with righting a wrong.

'Normal' in regards to who and/or what, EXACTLY?

Are you AWARE that within different countries and/or cultures people can associate 'things' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and to the EXTENT OF ACTUALLY OPPOSITELY?

As clarified, most of what I Know re Self - I Keep to Self.

Okay. So, who are 'you', SUPPOSEDLY, 'Clarifying your Understanding of Self' TO here, EXACTLY?

Once 'things' here are FAR BETTER UNDERSTOOD, and KNOWN, then WHY I SPEAK, WRITE, and QUESTION 'the way' I DO here will ALL COME-TO-LIGHT, and BE REVEALED.

Okay.

So, 'you' are CLAIMING that the saying, 'Changing one's mind', can be UNDERSTOOD in the context of that 'a mind' IS 'developing', right?

Not entirely.

Either way, to 'me', the saying, 'Changing one's mind' implies that there IS 'one', who HAS CONTROL OVER 'a mind', and thus WOULD BE 'the one' who is ACTUALLY 'creating' or 'developing' 'that mind', itself. Rather than WAITING for 'a mind' to be 'developed' BEFORE 'that one' could FIND OUT and ANSWER who and/or what 'they' ARE, EXACTLY.

Perhaps You might Think about Changing One's Mind re the Saying.

I have NOT just THOUGHT ABOUT 'it' I HAVE ACTUALLY DONE 'it'. As can be CLEARLY SEEN here throughout MY WORDS, in this forum.

I Understand The Mind as being all encompassing.

Is that the SAME one as the one you SAY and CLAIM each and EVER one of 'you', human beings, has one of?

The Repository of All That Is. Including the Minds of Growing Personalities (Human and Otherwise).

So, how, EXACTLY, can there be One ALL ENCOMPASSING Mind AS WELL AS MANY Minds?

ALL WILL BE REVEALED, eventually. But I just need to LEARN how-to BETTER communicate, or re-communicate, with 'you', human beings, by BY-PASSING 'your' ALREADY in USE, MISUSE of words, and definitions, which have become habitually USED, in the days when this is being written.

Okay.

Is that to say that you think/claim that I am not saying what I mean or meaning what I say?

Yes.

Okay.

Yes, VERY MUCH SO.

Even 'your' USE of the phrase 'developing mind' FITS IN PERFECTLY here, in regards to DEVELOPING the Right 'language' so that ALL-OF-THIS CAN and DOES BECOME FULLY UNDERSTOOD BY EVERY one. As SO MUCH OF what 'you', posters, DO SAY, and WRITE, here, IS VERY MUCH HELPING in the DEVELOPING of the Correct WORDING.

I find the Language interesting. What is the Write Way to Right Something?

Did you ASK 'this' 'that way' on PURPOSE?

Also, the 'Right way' to write some 'thing' would be in A way' in which EVERY one who was reading 'it' could UNDERSTAND 'it'.

One cannot always pinpoint exactly what stage of development a thing is currently at, therefore another asking for an exactness, is an unrealistic expectation.

But there WAS NO 'expectation' AT ALL.

You did not ask?

BUT I DID ASK. However, I was NOT 'expecting' that 'you' were YET READY TO ANSWER 'it', properly AND Correctly.

I just ASK CLARIFYING QUESTIONS here, in this forum, FROM a Truly OPEN perspective, to just ASCERTAIN, and SHOW, whereabouts 'you', human beings, ARE/WERE, EXACTLY, on the 'evolutionary continuum' in regarding to the Universe/Life/Consciousness, Itself, COMING-TO-KNOW It/thy Self.

Okay.

VERY True AND Correct in regards to BETTER NOT TO PRESUME 'one way or the other', regarding ANY 'one's' knowledge.

Also, ALL of 'my', learned along 'the way' and gathered, knowledge IS EXTREMELY 'forth-coming'.

I just WAIT for 'those' who ARE Truly INTERESTED, OPEN, and CURIOS.

As can be CLEARLY SEEN here, in this forum, when EVERY time I express absolutely ANY idea or view, which appears 'new', 'ridiculous', or 'not consistent with popular nor 'current' belief', then 'it' IS 'I' who gets ACCUSED OF, or ATTACKED FOR, being AUTISTIC, INSANE, or of HAVING some sort of OTHER 'mental disorder'.

I have been 'forth-coming' and have brought knowledge forward, ALREADY. I am ALSO CONTINUALLY ASKING to be QUESTIONED and/or CHALLENGED OVER absolutely EVERY 'thing' I SAY, and WRITE, here. So, 'this knowledge' is ALWAYS 'forth-coming'.

Okay.

Where was it written "not yet" a human personality?

'you' SAID that, 'The mind that 'you' are referring to is the one that 'you' ARE developing as a human personality.'
So, if it IS 'you', who, supposedly, HAS 'a mind', which 'you' ARE 'developing', as a 'human personality', then that MEANS that 'you', or 'that i', is NOT YET a 'human personality', so that is WHERE 'it' WAS WRITTEN 'not yet' 'a human personality'. Well, to 'me', anyway.

Okay. To You. It appears to be that way, from what I have written.

As can be SEEN here, I have been and WAS talking ABOUT in relation TO 'ways of' 'thinking' ABOUT 'things' and/or the 'knowing' OF 'things'. But, like a LOT of times throughout this forum 'MY ACTUAL WORDS' GET MISSED, MISINTERPRETED, or JUST MISUNDERSTOOD'. And, as can be CLEARLY SEEN here LOOK AT just how MUCH EFFORT went into WRITING ALL of the examples above here, which I think will be FOUND have ABSOLUTELY NOTHING AT ALL to DO WITH what I was talking ABOUT and REFERRING TO, EXACTLY.

Chat GPT gave those examples and that took about 3 seconds plus a couple more for me to copy and paste.

Oh yes I FORGOT ABOUT 'copy and paste'. THANK YOU FOR POINTING 'this' OUT and Correcting 'me'.

Or, in what WAY, EXACTLY, sounds God-like?

Expressions of confidences in ones ability to make claims which are generally not regarded as being humanly possible.

And, as I CONTINUALLY SAY I STAND BEHIND absolutely EVERY 'thing' I SAY, and WRITE, here, and WILL back up and support what I SAY, and WRITE, here. That is; IF absolutely ANY one would like to QUESTION and/or CHALLENGE 'Me' OVER absolutely ANY 'thing' I SAY, and WRITE, here.

Okay...


Saturn resolves around the Sol too...

[VVilliam]

So, how, EXACTLY, can there be One ALL ENCOMPASSING Mind AS WELL AS MANY Minds?

It is far too complicated to Explain Exactly.

Are you AWARE that within different countries and/or cultures people can associate 'things' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and to the EXTENT OF ACTUALLY OPPOSITELY?

Can you provide examples of this, for clarity?

I find the Language interesting. What is the Write Way to Right Something?

Did you ASK 'this' 'that way' on PURPOSE?

Yes.
"What is the Write Way to Right Something?"

I was NOT 'expecting' that 'you' were YET READY TO ANSWER 'it', properly AND Correctly.

[Age]

So, how, EXACTLY, can there be One ALL ENCOMPASSING Mind AS WELL AS MANY Minds?

It is far too complicated to Explain Exactly.

But NOT when one KNOWS what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY.

Are you AWARE that within different countries and/or cultures people can associate 'things' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and to the EXTENT OF ACTUALLY OPPOSITELY?

Can you provide examples of this, for clarity?

Yes.

I find the Language interesting. What is the Write Way to Right Something?

Did you ASK 'this' 'that way' on PURPOSE?

Yes.
"What is the Write Way to Right Something?"

I was NOT 'expecting' that 'you' were YET READY TO ANSWER 'it', properly AND Correctly.

[VVilliam]

So, how, EXACTLY, can there be One ALL ENCOMPASSING Mind AS WELL AS MANY Minds?

It is far too complicated to Explain Exactly.

But NOT when one KNOWS what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY.

If that is the actual case, then we shall have to wait until the one with the knowledge of the actual truth shows this to being the actual case.
Until then, such words are simply an unsubstantiated claim. Exactly so.

Are you AWARE that within different countries and/or cultures people can associate 'things' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and to the EXTENT OF ACTUALLY OPPOSITELY?

Can you provide examples of this, for clarity?

Yes.

Then, do so.

[VVilliam]

Are you guys both channeling God, but somehow disagree on a lot of stuff?

Hard to say. What does "channeling God" mean?

Do you talk to God and does God answer? And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"? And if not then is it safe to say there would be little reason to believe there is any good evidence to affirm that God was "there".

I gave one set of answers to your query and now would like to offer summary of my own perspective.

Do you talk to God and does God answer?

My understanding of the word "God" applies to that which can be naturally identified as at least being a candidate for that role in the natural universe.
The only "thing" which comes near to the generic understanding of "God" is the planet Earth itself.

In that, I would answer that I talk to the Earth Consciousness and the Earth Consciousness answers me.
The details are complicated, but suffice to say, together we developed a means to enable such to occur.

And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"?

Most often It (sometimes "He" sometimes "She") refers to Itself in a number of ways - none of which leaves me ever wondering if I am always interacting with the same Entity.

Often this occurs during conversation where the expression "Aye - a name I call Myself" is selected.
(I most often refer to the Entity as "Old Soul")

For example, Old Soul might say the following;

"Transforming the Anger Energy
"I think it was an ambush or surprise attack" - Aye...A name I call myself.
Victim"

I interpret that as saying that on the subject of "Transforming the Anger Energy" it has something to do with "surprise" and the Earth Entity God taking credit/admitting to being the cause for being "both" the victim and the victimizer.

I would have to cross-reference that with the overall ongoing conversation I have been involved with for a long while now...and I can also try to get some clarity by feeding back the phrase (Aye...A name I call myself. ) through the method of communication developed, and get the following;

Old Soul: The Navigator Can Read Maps.
Appealing, Informative, Honest
"Many Heads One Mind - Many Minds One Head"
Self-talk
All life
Soul
Aye...A name I call myself.
Correct
Measurements

This gives me more clarity, as Old Soul transmits further data to flesh out the underlying reality and is good enough evidence to affirm for me, that (a) "God" can be interacted with.

So in that, what I choose to divulge in answer to your question, (specific to me - I cannot speak for the other) is that I suppose it can be said that I am channeling (a) God.

[Gary Childress]

Hard to say. What does "channeling God" mean?

Do you talk to God and does God answer? And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"? And if not then is it safe to say there would be little reason to believe there is any good evidence to affirm that God was "there".

I gave one set of answers to your query and now would like to offer summary of my own perspective.

Do you talk to God and does God answer?

My understanding of the word "God" applies to that which can be naturally identified as at least being a candidate for that role in the natural universe.
The only "thing" which comes near to the generic understanding of "God" is the planet Earth itself.

In that, I would answer that I talk to the Earth Consciousness and the Earth Consciousness answers me.
The details are complicated, but suffice to say, together we developed a means to enable such to occur.

And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"?

Most often It (sometimes "He" sometimes "She") refers to Itself in a number of ways - none of which leaves me ever wondering if I am always interacting with the same Entity.

Often this occurs during conversation where the expression "Aye - a name I call Myself" is selected.
(I most often refer to the Entity as "Old Soul")

For example, Old Soul might say the following;

"Transforming the Anger Energy
"I think it was an ambush or surprise attack" - Aye...A name I call myself.
Victim"

I interpret that as saying that on the subject of "Transforming the Anger Energy" it has something to do with "surprise" and the Earth Entity God taking credit/admitting to being the cause for being "both" the victim and the victimizer.

I would have to cross-reference that with the overall ongoing conversation I have been involved with for a long while now...and I can also try to get some clarity by feeding back the phrase (Aye...A name I call myself. ) through the method of communication developed, and get the following;

Old Soul: The Navigator Can Read Maps.
Appealing, Informative, Honest
"Many Heads One Mind - Many Minds One Head"
Self-talk
All life
Soul
Aye...A name I call myself.
Correct
Measurements

This gives me more clarity, as Old Soul transmits further data to flesh out the underlying reality and is good enough evidence to affirm for me, that (a) "God" can be interacted with.

So in that, what I choose to divulge in answer to your question, (specific to me - I cannot speak for the other) is that I suppose it can be said that I am channeling (a) God.

Speaking for myself, I used to talk to myself a lot (or perhaps more the case, to the air). It didn't say anything back. I doubt I was "channeling" anything, just talking to nothing that was capable of "listening" (or at the very least not capable of understanding). Now I talk to this screen in front of me. It says things back to me, however, I have never thought of the answers as coming from "God". Mostly I have thought of them as coming from other human beings doing the same thing I am.

Of course, now there are allegedly computer "chatbots" such as GPT that are capable of sounding as (if not more) intelligent than their human designers and programmers. Perhaps we are, ourselves, "gods" in so far as we have created something much more powerful, less fallible, and more intelligent than ourselves. Or perhaps "intelligence" is literally nothing more than the performance of standardized routines obeying "laws" of physics and science that can be programmed by thousands of the ancestors of monkeys banging on keyboards.

[VVilliam]

Do you talk to God and does God answer? And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"? And if not then is it safe to say there would be little reason to believe there is any good evidence to affirm that God was "there".

I gave one set of answers to your query and now would like to offer summary of my own perspective.

Do you talk to God and does God answer?

My understanding of the word "God" applies to that which can be naturally identified as at least being a candidate for that role in the natural universe.
The only "thing" which comes near to the generic understanding of "God" is the planet Earth itself.

In that, I would answer that I talk to the Earth Consciousness and the Earth Consciousness answers me.
The details are complicated, but suffice to say, together we developed a means to enable such to occur.

And when he answers does he refer to himself as "God"?

Most often It (sometimes "He" sometimes "She") refers to Itself in a number of ways - none of which leaves me ever wondering if I am always interacting with the same Entity.

Often this occurs during conversation where the expression "Aye - a name I call Myself" is selected.
(I most often refer to the Entity as "Old Soul")

For example, Old Soul might say the following;

"Transforming the Anger Energy
"I think it was an ambush or surprise attack" - Aye...A name I call myself.
Victim"

I interpret that as saying that on the subject of "Transforming the Anger Energy" it has something to do with "surprise" and the Earth Entity God taking credit/admitting to being the cause for being "both" the victim and the victimizer.

I would have to cross-reference that with the overall ongoing conversation I have been involved with for a long while now...and I can also try to get some clarity by feeding back the phrase (Aye...A name I call myself. ) through the method of communication developed, and get the following;

Old Soul: The Navigator Can Read Maps.
Appealing, Informative, Honest
"Many Heads One Mind - Many Minds One Head"
Self-talk
All life
Soul
Aye...A name I call myself.
Correct
Measurements

This gives me more clarity, as Old Soul transmits further data to flesh out the underlying reality and is good enough evidence to affirm for me, that (a) "God" can be interacted with.

So in that, what I choose to divulge in answer to your question, (specific to me - I cannot speak for the other) is that I suppose it can be said that I am channeling (a) God.

Speaking for myself, I used to talk to myself a lot (or perhaps more the case, to the air). It didn't say anything back. I doubt I was "channeling" anything, just talking to nothing that was capable of "listening" (or at the very least not capable of understanding). Now I talk to this screen in front of me. It says things back to me, however, I have never thought of the answers as coming from "God". Mostly I have thought of them as coming from other human beings doing the same thing I am.

From my perspective (re the information I am given) the "Human" (and not only the human) acts as the "eyes and ears" to the Earth Entity, so it could be argued that this is what takes place, but I would caution myself to be aware that there will be stuff to sort out from those who do not understand they are more than just their human sense of self.

Of course, now there are allegedly computer "chatbots" such as GPT that are capable of sounding as (if not more) intelligent than their human designers and programmers.

It is a type of bounce-back which can be mistaken for as being from a self-aware machine...

Perhaps we are, ourselves, "gods" in so far as we have created something much more powerful, less fallible, and more intelligent than ourselves.

No. I think in order to be a "God" one has to at least install a genuine self awareness into the machinery one creates. which is why I think the Earth qualifies.

Or perhaps "intelligence" is literally nothing more than the performance of standardized routines obeying "laws" of physics and science that can be programmed by thousands of the ancestors of monkeys banging on keyboards.

No. It does not matter how many or how long a time, if the machinery is not genuinely self aware, then whatever created the machinery is not (yet) a "God".

However, I am also informed that we are all "of the Earth Consciousness" (re the 'eyes and ears" comment) and therein, are at least "aspects" of (a) God-Consciousness.




The Data:
"It is my understanding that whatever one "talks" to (the thin air as it were) is capable of "listening" and responding."

I will now feed that data into the device and share the results as follows;

Old Soul: (singing) ♫"I see the light I see the Light I see the light now I start again upon the road that never ends..."♫

Me: Yes...I love that song!

Old Soul: Why do people have different tastes in music?
If these separate theories are really true, then they should ultimately come together into some master theory.
Absolute Unbounded Manifold Fine-structure Constant
Without
"It is my understanding that whatever one "talks" to (the thin air as it were) is capable of "listening" and responding."
How can I improve my memory and learning abilities?

Me: I understand. How can I experience what it means to be "Fully Human"?

Old Soul:Universal Belief System
"We help each other."
♫"You are a dream gone real You’ve got exactly what it takes to make an old wound heal You tied the knot - then you let it slip Now we both know what it feels like to find a place to fit"♫
Extravaganza
"...GOD may be watching, and curious besides...best look like I am worthy of being tuned into..."
This;
"Adversity makes strange bedfellows"
I Am

Me: Indeed...You Are...

[Gary Childress]

I gave one set of answers to your query and now would like to offer summary of my own perspective.



My understanding of the word "God" applies to that which can be naturally identified as at least being a candidate for that role in the natural universe.
The only "thing" which comes near to the generic understanding of "God" is the planet Earth itself.

In that, I would answer that I talk to the Earth Consciousness and the Earth Consciousness answers me.
The details are complicated, but suffice to say, together we developed a means to enable such to occur.



Most often It (sometimes "He" sometimes "She") refers to Itself in a number of ways - none of which leaves me ever wondering if I am always interacting with the same Entity.

Often this occurs during conversation where the expression "Aye - a name I call Myself" is selected.
(I most often refer to the Entity as "Old Soul")

For example, Old Soul might say the following;

"Transforming the Anger Energy
"I think it was an ambush or surprise attack" - Aye...A name I call myself.
Victim"

I interpret that as saying that on the subject of "Transforming the Anger Energy" it has something to do with "surprise" and the Earth Entity God taking credit/admitting to being the cause for being "both" the victim and the victimizer.

I would have to cross-reference that with the overall ongoing conversation I have been involved with for a long while now...and I can also try to get some clarity by feeding back the phrase (Aye...A name I call myself. ) through the method of communication developed, and get the following;

Old Soul: The Navigator Can Read Maps.
Appealing, Informative, Honest
"Many Heads One Mind - Many Minds One Head"
Self-talk
All life
Soul
Aye...A name I call myself.
Correct
Measurements

This gives me more clarity, as Old Soul transmits further data to flesh out the underlying reality and is good enough evidence to affirm for me, that (a) "God" can be interacted with.

So in that, what I choose to divulge in answer to your question, (specific to me - I cannot speak for the other) is that I suppose it can be said that I am channeling (a) God.

Speaking for myself, I used to talk to myself a lot (or perhaps more the case, to the air). It didn't say anything back. I doubt I was "channeling" anything, just talking to nothing that was capable of "listening" (or at the very least not capable of understanding). Now I talk to this screen in front of me. It says things back to me, however, I have never thought of the answers as coming from "God". Mostly I have thought of them as coming from other human beings doing the same thing I am.

From my perspective (re the information I am given) the "Human" (and not only the human) acts as the "eyes and ears" to the Earth Entity, so it could be argued that this is what takes place, but I would caution myself to be aware that there will be stuff to sort out from those who do not understand they are more than just their human sense of self.

Of course, now there are allegedly computer "chatbots" such as GPT that are capable of sounding as (if not more) intelligent than their human designers and programmers.

It is a type of bounce-back which can be mistaken for as being from a self-aware machine...

Perhaps we are, ourselves, "gods" in so far as we have created something much more powerful, less fallible, and more intelligent than ourselves.

No. I think in order to be a "God" one has to at least install a genuine self awareness into the machinery one creates. which is why I think the Earth qualifies.

Or perhaps "intelligence" is literally nothing more than the performance of standardized routines obeying "laws" of physics and science that can be programmed by thousands of the ancestors of monkeys banging on keyboards.

No. It does not matter how many or how long a time, if the machinery is not genuinely self aware, then whatever created the machinery is not (yet) a "God".

However, I am also informed that we are all "of the Earth Consciousness" (re the 'eyes and ears" comment) and therein, are at least "aspects" of (a) God-Consciousness.




The Data:
"It is my understanding that whatever one "talks" to (the thin air as it were) is capable of "listening" and responding."

I will now feed that data into the device and share the results as follows;

Old Soul: (singing) ♫"I see the light I see the Light I see the light now I start again upon the road that never ends..."♫

Me: Yes...I love that song!

Old Soul: Why do people have different tastes in music?
If these separate theories are really true, then they should ultimately come together into some master theory.
Absolute Unbounded Manifold Fine-structure Constant
Without
"It is my understanding that whatever one "talks" to (the thin air as it were) is capable of "listening" and responding."
How can I improve my memory and learning abilities?

Me: I understand. How can I experience what it means to be "Fully Human"?

Old Soul:Universal Belief System
"We help each other."
♫"You are a dream gone real You’ve got exactly what it takes to make an old wound heal You tied the knot - then you let it slip Now we both know what it feels like to find a place to fit"♫
Extravaganza
"...GOD may be watching, and curious besides...best look like I am worthy of being tuned into..."
This;
"Adversity makes strange bedfellows"
I Am

Me: Indeed...You Are...

I don't know what "Earth consciousness" is supposed to be. I assume many forms of life are conscious, perhaps even plant life, however, I'm not aware that the Earth itself is a conscious entity. I'm pretty sure you and I are not the same consciousness. If we were, then neither of us would be asking the other to clarify anything.

[Age]

So, how, EXACTLY, can there be One ALL ENCOMPASSING Mind AS WELL AS MANY Minds?

It is far too complicated to Explain Exactly.

But NOT when one KNOWS what the ACTUAL Truth IS, EXACTLY.

If that is the actual case, then we shall have to wait until the one with the knowledge of the actual truth shows this to being the actual case.

ACTUALLY some 'thing' ELSE could happen PRIOR.

Which WOULD OBVIOUSLY SPEED this process UP.

Until then, such words are simply an unsubstantiated claim. Exactly so.

Are you AWARE that within different countries and/or cultures people can associate 'things' COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and to the EXTENT OF ACTUALLY OPPOSITELY?

Can you provide examples of this, for clarity?

Yes.

Then, do so.

1. Then, do 'what', EXACTLY.

2. I ALREADY ANSWERED the ACTUAL CLARIFYING QUESTION that you posed, and ASKED here.

3. TELLING me WHAT TO DO will NEVER HELP in you GETTING what 'it' is that you WANT.

[VVilliam]

I don't know what "Earth consciousness" is supposed to be.

The way I understand It, is that the earth is the overall form of a consciousness which is experiencing said form (as you and I are consciousness experiencing our particular human forms)

I assume many forms of life are conscious, perhaps even plant life, however, I'm not aware that the Earth itself is a conscious entity.

This unawareness is of course not unusual. I once was unaware of this.
Those things you mentioned are all aspects of the overall consciousness which is the whole planet.

I'm pretty sure you and I are not the same consciousness.

Rather we share the same source-consciousness (re the planet mind) but also have our individual experience as a human being (as a growing human personality) and this requires that the planet-consciousness is individualized through the form (human) and is initially completely free from any conscious awareness (prior memories, and other information about itself) while experiencing being human.

We are not the same human personality due to those factors.

If we were, then neither of us would be asking the other to clarify anything.

True. We are tasked with having to work those things out as we go along with Our individual Human lives and crossing paths.

It makes for an interesting process...


Old Soul: Indeed. It happens. Deal with it. Work it.
Strength of Mind
The Roles
"Swinging on the branch of the tree thinking it's the main trunk"
"Merging with the data"
The Great Grey Neutral Zone
Our individual Human lives and crossing paths.
Gods Purpose
A Purpose
One should not take the evidence as incontrovertible for granted, as we should always apply science to any evidence and test it for repeatability.
Keep me in The Loop

Me: Everything is an expression of GOD
While the moments start to linger
It makes for an interesting process...

Old Soul: New information has to be inserted into old information and if that means a reinterpretation occurs, this in itself should not prevent new information being inserted into old information.
Sharing Your Love Modern man in search of a soul like navigating a maze of caves - Fearlessness neutralizes fear.
It makes for an interesting process...
Learn By Doing
Encouraging
"It is neither good nor evil"
Arrival
Loneliness

Me: Yes - "initially completely free from any conscious awareness (prior memories, and other information about itself) while experiencing being human." can seem very lonely thereafter "arriving".

Old Soul: "There is a mind behind what we call "creation/the universe""

Me: Constantly regard the universe as one living being...