Quartz Crystal: A youtube channel. Says reality is a matrix stimulated by the energy from souls

originally posted by: 1320Q17yes
Sorta feel it is fear angled, not my cup of tea.

originally posted by: Ruiner1978
a reply to: 1320Q17yes
Open mindedness happens at level 4 once you've unlocked the Blue Balls perk...

Actually, she tells you not to dwell on or be in a state of fear, because you are empowering the fear in your reality. You are the creator of your own reality, and when you dwell in fear, you create that for yourself. Fear is a lower frequency state of being that drains energy from you and prevents you from becoming a creator.

I have emailed Tom of Montalk.net about what he thinks of this and this is what he replied to me.

Quote On Thu, Sep 19, 2019 at 2:53 AM Tom wrote:
Hi,

I agree with this:

> - this reality is an intentional creation by what we would call source, so it is like a matrix that we are trapped in
> - source created this reality so that source could enter into the game
> - source entered into the game as source players
> - besides source players there are soulless ones and entities
> - soulless ones are the people without souls and animals that all don't have souls
> - there are different types of entities that includes reptilians
> - the matrix is scripted to be a certain way
> - the matrix as a whole is scripted to be a certain way
> - all soulless ones are acting based on what is in their script, and their lives are based on scripts
> - scripts are like the storybook in the matrix that is followed
> (you can see how the matrix is scripted when you look into how there are coded numbers that appear all through the matrix in synchronicity, it shows how this matrix is scripted)
> - religion is matrix programming and traps and participation in religions creates black magic attachments to you

> - souls have been reincarnating over and over until they win the game
> - souls use their energy to create the matrix
> - when source players lose their energy it goes to power the matrix by using it to power the entities that act as the soulless ones
> - source players can use their energy to manifest what they want to in their reality and rewrite their script
> - they can do this once they unlock their script and get to a higher frequency
> - source players can program a pendulum to ask questions to their source self

> - if a source player completes inner alchemy they will not have the desire for orgasm anymore
> - emotional states can also take energy from a source player and drain their energy, and can lower their frequency depending on the emotion
> - certain emotions are lower frequency states of being such as anger
> - when a soul does lower frequency things they lose their energy and keep their frequency in a lower state as a result


But not 100% with this:

> - there are only about 1,500,000 souls alive on Earth at this time
> - all other people are soulless, 5000 to every soul

Possible, but no way for me to know the exact number.

> - souls have source fractals and daily supply energies

Not sure what that means exactly, but we do have a Higher Self / Spirit that replenishes us with lifeforce energy.

> - souls can exist on different dimensional planes ranging from one to eleven, called frequency planes

On different planes, yes, but the #11 is pretty specific and I can’t confirm it’s that.

> - lower frequency things include things such as eating meat and having orgasms

Orgasms yes. Eating meat, depends. If you pray over your meal, it’ll help override the frequencies in food. Also a prayed over meat will be higher vibration than not-prayed over cucumber that’s been handled by someone with bad vibes.

> - if a source player is eating meat they can not reach the frequencies 5 or higher

Doubt it.

> - frequency 5 and higher is where you connect to your source self and can unlock your script, and law of attraction starts to work

Ok that’s some real bull**** right there. Law of Attraction is actually constantly working, just that people are attracting mundanity and suffering due to that being their regular mindset. Also, black magic rituals use extremely low frequency but strong vibrations to attract things, i.e. sex magick, so high vibrations aren’t necessary — however, higher vibrations DO make it happen faster, easier, and with fewer negative consequences. So yes, good idea to raise vibes regardless. But the idea that you can’t reality create or raise your vibes if you eat meat, I’ve disproven that many times. So it seems that’s the major flaw or disinfo angle in her work. I mean, she can say whatever she wants about the truth of reality but if she causes truth seekers to commit nutritional suicide and lose the ability to critical think due to iron/B deficiency then I guess that’s mission accomplished for the Matrix, isn’t it… I know plenty of meat eaters who have higher vibes than plenty of vegetarians or vegans, and the latter tend to be space cadets as far as energy and mental clarity goes.

> What is even more interesting is that she said this matrix we are currently in is actually a secondary matrix that was created from the primary matrix that we are hooked up to, but that both are powered by source energies. She says that there are entities that come from the primary matrix and plug into the physical matrix and that it includes entities such as aliens and reptilians.

Yes that’s a good theory and I find it plausible. Though, it could also be the reverse, that aliens/reptilians are products of THIS matrix, and WE are the spirits from a higher TRUE matrix that have come here into this FALSE one and come under the subjugation of these aliens/reptilians.

>
> What do you think about all that she says? Is any of this original to you? What she says seems very plausible to me.

Well the stuff in her material I find true I’ve also seen/read elsewhere, while the stuff that’s unique to her material I find kind of dubious to be honest.

- Tom

projectavalon.net... rs-create-the-matrix.

I don't understand why there have been so many negative responses to this thread
I made another thread about this on a different webside and there was nowhere near as much opposition as on this website.

a reply to: SourceTruth
Now that's an interesting question. I think your confusing people showing concern for you as negative responses. However you raise a fair question.

You were more open with your age on the ATS thread so that may have triggered a parental response of sorts.

Rather than just dismissing you as a loon they saw a lost kid who's looking for their place in the world.

This made them more invested and therefore more passionate with their responses.

Just a theory, how would you explain it?

originally posted by: SourceTruth
projectavalon.net... rs-create-the-matrix.

I don't understand why there have been so many negative responses to this thread
I made another thread about this on a different webside and there was nowhere near as much opposition as on this website.

It is to this sites credit that it's members are less inclined to support self indulgent woo.

a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar

There were some posts that were made to try to talk to me in that way. But there were far more posts that were negative and oppositional responses such as many of yours.

I may be young but I am not lost. It may seem like that to others but that does not reflect who I really am.

I think that people are attacking the philosophy that I presented because it is an easy target for people. It is easy for people to dismiss and attack it because it presents unconcentionality.

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: SourceTruth
projectavalon.net... rs-create-the-matrix.

I don't understand why there have been so many negative responses to this thread
I made another thread about this on a different webside and there was nowhere near as much opposition as on this website.

It is to this sites credit that it's members are less inclined to support self indulgent woo.

This website is a conspiracy forum, so you are wrong when you say that its members do not support woo.

You will call anything that challenges established ways of thinking as woo.

a reply to: SourceTruth

I support woo! You're right. It's a conspiracy website. Many on here forgot that in light of more and more political threads.

originally posted by: SourceTruth

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: SourceTruth
projectavalon.net... rs-create-the-matrix.

I don't understand why there have been so many negative responses to this thread
I made another thread about this on a different webside and there was nowhere near as much opposition as on this website.

It is to this sites credit that it's members are less inclined to support self indulgent woo.

This website is a conspiracy forum, so you are wrong when you say that its members do not support woo.

You will call anything that challenges established ways of thinking as woo.

I think there are many mysteries that challenge established ways of thinking (if there is such a thing). This is a conspiracy forum and indeed there is a lot of woo but it does get called out for what it is (for the most part).

Just saying something doesn't make it true. You say 'not everyone has a soul', so for that to be a viable statement we must first establish what a soul is, and verify it's existence. Then we might move on to the idea that not everyone has one. I doubt we can do that though...it's a bit like proving God or some such.

You have been asked many times what a 'soul' is and you have still not answered that basic question to anyone's satisfaction.

a reply to: midicon

This is a conspiracy forum and indeed there is a lot of woo but it does get called out for what it is (for the most part).

What I meant by my statement is that there is a lot of what people like you would call woo, but I did not mean to say that I don't agree with the woo. I do agree with much of the "woo" that is presented on this website.

This "woo" is not being "called out" as you describe, but rather dismissumed in an unreasonable way.

Just saying something doesn't make it true. You say 'not everyone has a soul', so for that to be a viable statement we must first establish what a soul is, and verify it's existence. Then we might move on to the idea that not everyone has one. I doubt we can do that though...it's a bit like proving God or some such.

We can discuss this idea as long as we both agree on what a soul is and that it exists.

Thete are only two choices: one is that everyone has a soul and one that there isn't. The idea that not everyone has a soul has more explanatory power than the idea that everyone has a soul, which is why it is a superior idea.8

You have been asked many times what a 'soul' is and you have still not answered that basic question to anyone's satisfaction.

This is completely unfair and false for you to say about me. I have indeed provided answers when I have been asked to define a soul in my other thread. Although that is not the main focus of this thread I have done that. It is completey unfair because you are not acknowledging my previous posts.

originally posted by: blueman12
a reply to: SourceTruth

I support woo! You're right. It's a conspiracy website. Many on here forgot that in light of more and more political threads.

Yes, people do not realize this.

originally posted by: Purpapengus
a reply to: SourceTruth

My problem with these "views" is that they claim the world is an illusion while presenting a way to get "material gain". If the world is an illusion, than the gain is an illusion. If the world if all in your head then it shouldn't matter if you're on the top or the bottom of it, at the point you realize it's all fake, why should it matter? Time to quit and go do something else.

Excellent point. Note what the greatest teacher ever to walk on this earth said to the ones who were to pass on his knowledge about reality, and in particular about a specific subject:

“You received free, give free.” (Matthew 10:8) Jesus issued that instruction to his apostles when he sent them forth to preach the good news about God's Kingdom, which is meant to set matters straight and undo the bad effects of human rule influenced by Satan's hidden guidance, bring an end to sickness and death, and turn the earth into a paradise like the garden of Eden was. Did the apostles obey this directive? Yes, and they continued to do so even after Jesus departed from the earth.

For instance, when the former sorcerer Simon saw the miraculous powers possessed by the apostles Peter and John, he offered to pay them to impart that power to him. But Peter rebuked Simon, saying: “May your silver perish with you, because you thought through money to get possession of the free gift of God.”​—Acts 8:18-20.

The apostle Paul displayed a spirit similar to Peter’s. Paul could have allowed himself to be a financial burden to his Christian brothers in Corinth. However, he worked with his own hands to support himself. (Acts 18:1-3) Thus, he could say with confidence that he had preached the good news to the Corinthians “without cost.”​—1 Corinthians 4:12; 9:18.

Sad to say, many who claim to be followers of Christ have not shown the same willingness to “give free.” Indeed, many of the religious leaders in Christendom will “instruct just for a price.” (Micah 3:11) Some religious leaders have even become wealthy from money collected from their flocks. In 1989, one U.S. evangelist was sentenced to a jail term of 45 years. The reason? He had been “defrauding supporters of millions of dollars and using some of the money to buy homes, cars, holidays and even an air-conditioned dog kennel.”​—People’s Daily Graphic, October 7, 1989.

In Ghana, according to the Ghanaian Times of March 31, 1990, a Roman Catholic priest took money that had been collected during one church service and hurled it back at the congregation. “His reason,” says the paper, “was that, as adults, they were expected to contribute in higher denominations.” Not surprisingly, many churches even try to appeal to greed in its members, actively promoting gambling activities and other schemes in order to raise money.

The motives, intentions and behavioural pattern of the woman in the youtube channel mentioned in the OP, don't seem that dissimilar.

Nothing wrong with a thirst for knowledge. Knowledge (Greek: gnoʹsis) is put in a very favorable light in the Christian Greek Scriptures. However, not all that men may call “knowledge” is to be sought, because philosophies and views exist that are “falsely called ‘knowledge.’” (1Ti 6:20) The recommended knowledge is about God and his purposes. (2Pe 1:5)

Whereas having knowledge (information alone) might result in a feeling of superiority, our knowing “the love of the Christ which surpasses knowledge,” that is, knowing this love by experience because we are personally imitating his loving ways, will balance and give wholesome direction to our use of any information we may have gained.​—Eph 3:19.

E·piʹgno·sis, a strengthened form of gnoʹsis (e·piʹ, meaning “additional”), can often be seen from the context to mean “exact, accurate, or full knowledge.” Thus Paul wrote about some who were learning (taking in knowledge) “yet never able to come to an accurate knowledge of truth.” (2Ti 3:6, 7)

As means of communicating have expanded—from printing to the telephone, radio, television, and the Internet—the flow of persuasive messages has dramatically accelerated. This communications revolution has led to information overload, as people are inundated by countless messages from every quarter. Many respond to this pressure by absorbing messages more quickly and accepting them without questioning or analyzing them.

The cunning propagandist, or marketeer (seller) of (their own) philosophies/ideas, loves such shortcuts—especially those that short-circuit rational thought. Propaganda or marketing encourages this by agitating the emotions, by exploiting insecurities, by capitalizing on the ambiguity of language, and by bending rules of logic. As history bears out, such tactics can prove all too effective.

So we need to be selective. We need to scrutinize whatever is presented to us, deciding what to accept and what to reject. More on that later.

There is a difference—a big difference—between education and propaganda or marketing. Education shows you how to think. Propaganda or marketing tells you what to think. Good educators present all sides of an issue and encourage discussion. Propagandists or marketeers (of philosophies) relentlessly force you to hear their view and discourage discussion. Often their real motives are not apparent. They sift the facts, exploiting the useful ones and concealing the others. They also distort and twist facts, specializing in lies and half-truths. Your emotions, not your logical thinking abilities, are their target.

The propagandist or marketeer (of philosophies/ideas and ideologies, or supposed "knowledge"/"science") makes sure that his message appears to be the right and moral one and that it gives you a sense of importance and belonging if you follow it. You are one of the smart ones, you are not alone, you are comfortable and secure—so they say.

How can you protect yourself from the types of people that the Bible calls “profitless talkers” and “deceivers of the mind”? (Titus 1:10) Once you are familiar with some of their tricks, you are in a better position to evaluate any message or information that comes your way. One way to do that I mentioned before:

Be selective: A completely open mind could be likened to a pipe that lets just anything flow through it—even sewage. No one wants a mind contaminated with poison. Solomon, a king and educator in ancient times, warned: “Anyone inexperienced puts faith in every word, but the shrewd one considers his steps.” (Proverbs 14:15) So we need to be selective. We need to scrutinize whatever is presented to us, deciding what to accept and what to reject.

However, we do not want to be so narrow that we refuse to consider facts that can improve our thinking. How can we find the right balance? By adopting a standard with which to measure new information. ...
...
Use discernment: Discernment is “acuteness of judgment.” It is “the power or faculty of the mind by which it distinguishes one thing from another.” A person with discernment perceives subtleties of ideas or things and has good judgment.

Using discernment, we will be able to recognize those who are merely using “smooth talk and complimentary speech” in order to “seduce the hearts of guileless ones.” (Romans 16:18) [whereislogic: or those who are merely tickling people's ears, see 2 Timothy 4:3,4]

Source: Do Not Be a Victim of Propaganda! Awake!—2000

a reply to: SourceTruth

The only 'woo' I have called out so far is the pendulum nonsense. I notice that when the lady used her pendulum her hand was not in view, such is the way lol. We once had a poster here adamant that he wasn't moving his pendulum but at least he had the courage to upload a couple of videos and eventually realised (after some back and forth) that it was involuntary micro muscle movement. No big deal really.

You say...

"We can discuss this idea as long as we both agree on what a soul is and that it exists"

That statement in itself negates any conversation because I don't know what a soul is or indeed if such a thing exists at all. Now you might tell me what you think a soul is but that doesn't prove anything.
The idea that it is some sort of explanation for the way some people behave is just that....an idea.

You asked me before what spiritual knowledge I have and I said none, which is true, but there was a time when I would have answered differently. I am a little older and wiser now.

So good luck with the threads and your journey.

Regards midicon

a reply to: midicon

What about everything else that I discussed in my OP? Do you have anything to say about the reat of the statements in my OP?

You asked me before what spiritual knowledge I have and I said none, which is true, but there was a time when I would have answered differently. I am a little older and wiser now.

Interesting... What did you realize about the previous knowledge that you thought you had when you were younger?

a reply to: whereislogic

Can you explain why you believe that this is spiritual propaganda? Or how it relates to this thread?

originally posted by: midicon

originally posted by: SourceTruth
projectavalon.net... rs-create-the-matrix.

I don't understand why there have been so many negative responses to this thread
I made another thread about this on a different webside and there was nowhere near as much opposition as on this website.

It is to this sites credit that it's members are less inclined to support self indulgent woo.

I'd say this site still has a poor record in that department. Especially in the Philosophy and Metaphysics + Aliens and UFOs forums. The latter forum drawing quite a lot of attention and commentary. The General Conspiracies forum and most of the green forums not having a much better record either.

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: SourceTruth

What makes you think that your religion is any better than the so-calles "propaganda" you speak off?

A lifetime of beneficial education, observation and exercising my thinking abilities (according to the advice described at Hebrews 5:14 and 1 Thessalonians 5:21, quoted further below), my ability to use logic and reason on the evidence available to me*, including facts and observations (*: or made available by inquiry, a search for knowledge and discovery, while seperating fact from fiction, right from wrong, regarding things that are claimed to be discoveries or knowledge/"science" by others). Regarding topics such as:

propaganda and marketing (which share many similarities)
history (I'm a great fan of the notion of learning from our history, especially where it intersects with the other topics of interest listed here)
logic
philosophy
psychology and human behavioural patterns, both historical and current
theology
religion
true knowledge vs that which is falsely called "knowledge" or "science" (which are synonyms)
mathematics
biology
physics
geology
astronomy
economics

I'm a bit of a polymath with a 'facility' for math (aptitude?). I'm not expecting you to agree with any of my views and warnings in my previous comment, you don't seem the type, but other than that, you have not had the same experiences, chosen education or path of inquiry that I have had or taken.

Hebrews 5:14

14 But solid food belongs to mature people, to those who through use have their powers of discernment* [Or “their perceptive powers.”] trained to distinguish both right and wrong.

1 Thessalonians 5:21

21 Make sure of all things; hold fast to what is fine.

A great example of mine (not as great as the teacher I mentioned in my previous comment though), Isaac Newton, took the same biblical advice to heart and built what has been termed "modern science" or "the modern scientific method" by others after him, around it. Along with a few more details discussed in the article linked in my signature, under the advice and heading "Put information to the test:", which follows the section called "Use discernment:" from which I already quoted before. As Newton put it:

"Rule I. We are to admit no more causes of natural things than such as are both true and sufficient to explain their appearances.
...
Rule IV. In experimental philosophy we are to look upon propositions collected by general induction from phenomena as accurately or very nearly true, notwithstanding any contrary hypotheses that may be imagined, 'till such time as other phenomena occur, by which they may either be made more accurate, or liable to exceptions,

This rule we must follow, that the argument of induction may not be evaded by hypotheses." (compare with what I quoted about being selective and using discernment. Something that is mentioned under the topic of 'putting information to the test' about some people being like sponges, soaking up whatever they come across, also relates to this; as it relates to the text under my accountname)

“As in Mathematicks, so in Natural Philosophy, the Investigation of difficult Things by the Method of Analysis, ought ever to precede the Method of Composition. This Analysis consists in making Experiments and Observations, and in drawing general Conclusions from them by Induction, and admitting of no Objections against the Conclusions, but such as are taken from Experiments, or other certain Truths. For Hypotheses are not to be regarded in experimental Philosophy.”
- Isaac Newton (from Philosophiæ Naturalis Principia Mathematica)

a reply to: whereislogic

I'd say this site still has a poor record in that department. Especially in the Philosophy and Metaphysics + Aliens and UFOs forums. The latter forum drawing quite a lot of attention and commentary. The General Conspiracies forum and most of the green forums not having a much better record either.

You are completely right about this. When I came to this forum I believed that it would be more open to new concepts from people such as myself because of this, but it seems that it has not been so. I have posted this thread OP on another forum and I did not get anywhere as much opposition and negativity as I did here.

A lifetime of beneficial education, observation and exercising my thinking abilities, my ability to use logic and reason on the evidence available to me*, including facts and observations (*: or made available by inquiry, a search for knowledge and discovery, while seperating fact from fiction regarding things that are claimed to be discoveries or knowledge/"science" by others). Regarding topics such as:

propaganda and marketing (which share many similarities)
history (I'm a great fan of the notion of learning from our history)
logic
philosophy
psychology and human behavioural patterns, both historical and current
theology
religion
true knowledge vs that which is falsely called "knowledge" or "science" (which are synonyms)
mathematics
biology
physics
geology
astronomy
economics

I notice that you mentioned mathematics and sciences, which are subjects that I am also interested in and am knowledgeable about. I know about the other subjects but not nearly as kuch as I do about math and science.

I'm a bit of a polymath with a 'facility' for math (aptitude?). I'm not expecting you to agree with any of my views and warnings in my previous comment, you don't seem the type, but other than that, you have not had the same experiences, chosen education or path of inquiry that I have had or taken.

I believe that I have a fair amount of knowledge that will enable me to have a discussion on the topics.

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: whereislogic

Can you explain why you believe that this is spiritual propaganda? Or how it relates to this thread?

Regarding the first question: no, because I haven't even contemplated whether the term "propaganda" is even appropiate to use to refer to the information presented on the youtube channel being offered by you as containing beneficial knowledge and education about reality, let alone actually referred to it as "propaganda". That seems to be your rather blunt way of interpreting my comment to Purpapengus about "material gain", reading it into my comment. Perhaps to distract or degrade any actual things I've been talking about, which did indeed contain some things about the relation between propaganda and marketing, which in turn relates to attempts made at material gain.

Which brings us to the answer to the 2nd question, actually, it answers it already. Don't see the need to further elaborate. Especially if you already think it's too off-topic, yet did not feel the need to point that out to Purpapengus when you responded to him/her, perhaps because he/she was quite a bit more succinct with his/her commentary. With the additional effect of not saying all that much, even though it was still an excellent point and something interesting to think about. Deserving of something more than a short dismissive response.

originally posted by: whereislogic

originally posted by: SourceTruth
a reply to: whereislogic

Can you explain why you believe that this is spiritual propaganda? Or how it relates to this thread?

Regarding the first question: no, because I haven't even contemplated whether the term "propaganda" is even appropiate to use to refer to the information presented on the youtube channel being offered by you as containing beneficial knowledge and education about reality, let alone actually referred to it as "propaganda". That seems to be your rather blunt way of interpreting my comment to Purpapengus about "material gain", reading it into my comment. Perhaps to distract or degrade any actual things I've been talking about, which did indeed contain some things about the relation between propaganda and marketing, which in turn relates to attempts made at material gain.

Which brings us to the answer to the 2nd question, actually, it answers it already. Don't see the need to further elaborate. Especially if you already think it's too off-topic, yet did not feel the need to point that out to Purpapengus when you responded to him/her, perhaps because he/she was quite a bit more succinct with his/her commentary. With the additional effect of not saying all that much, even though it was still an excellent point and something interesting to think about. Better than a short dismissive response.

I don't have an issue with your post being off-topic. I don't think it is too off topic, it is jist an offshoot of discussion. I was just trying to se eif you meant to relate this to my OP.