Are any of you familiar with Ken Wheelers work?

Kent Wheeler is mainly interested in getting donations. Many of his points have been proven wrong. He's very redundant, has many videos where he repeats the same things.

I used to watch him years ago. Rarely watch his videos anymore.

Just remember, these are terms defined by the masters of the arificial realm. Your opinons are very much, though unwittingly, dependent on these definitions and cultural writings and religions. It is rare that we are capable of original thought. I advise looking up the word, dicionaries, and in the concordances, for you will find your already formed opinion listed as one of the definitions. For instance... SPIRIT - noun - [Latin spiritus, from spiro, to breathe, to blow. The primary sense is to rush or drive.] 1. Primarily, wind; air in motion; hence, breath. All bodies have spirits and pneumatical parts within them. [This sense is now unusual.] 2. Animal excitement, or the effect of it; life; ardor; fire; courage; elevation or vehemence of mind. The troops attacked the enemy with great spirit. The young man has the spirit of youth. He speaks or act with spirit. Spirits, in the plural, is used in nearly a like sense. The troops began to recover their spirits. 3. Vigor of intellect; genius. His wit, his beauty and his spirit. The noblest spirit or genius cannot deserve enough of mankind to pretend to the esteem of heroic virtue. 4. Temper; disposition of mind, habitual or temporary; as a man of a generous spirit or of a revengeful spirit; the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit. Let us go to the house of God in the spirit of prayer. 5. The soul of man; the intelligent, immaterial and immortal part of human beings. [See Soul.] The spirit shall return to God that gave it. Eceles. 12. 6. An immaterial intelligent substance. Spirit is a substance in which thinking, knowing, doubting, and a power of moving do subsist. Hence, 7. An immaterial intelligent being. By which he went and preached to the spirit in prison. I Pet. 3. God is a spirit. John 4:23. 8. Turn of mind; temper; occasions; state of the mind. A perfect judge will read each work of wit, with the same spirit that its author writ. 9. Powers of mind distinct from the body. In spirit perhaps he also saw Rich Mexico, the seat of Montezume. 10. Sentiment; perception. You spirit is too true, your fears too certain. 11. Eager desire; disposition of mind excited and directed to a particular object. God has made a spirit of building succeed a spirit of pulling down. 12. A person of activity; a man of life, vigor or enterprise. The watery kingdom is no bar to stop the foreign spirits, but they come. 13. Persons distinguished by qualities of the mind. Such spirits as he desired to please, such would I choose for my judges. 14. Excitement of mind; animation; cheerfulness; usually in the plural. We found our friend in very good spirits. He has a great flow of spirits. To sing thy praise, would heaven my breath prolong, Infusing spirits worthy such a song. 15. Life or strength of resemblance; essential qualities; as, to set off the face in its true spirit The copy has not the spirit of the original. 16. Something eminently pure and refined. Nor doth the eye itself, that most pure spirit of sense, behold itself. 17. That which hath power or energy; the quality of any substance which manifest life, activity, or the power of strongly affecting other bodies; as the spirit of wine or of any liquor… 19. An apparition; a ghost. 20. The renewed nature of man. Matthew 26:41. Galatians 5:5. 21. The influences of the Holy spirit. Matthew 22:43. Holy Spirit, the third person in the Trinity. - verb transitive - 1. To animate; to actuate; as a spirit. So talkd the spirited sly snake. [Little used.] 2. To animate with vigor; to excite; to encourage; as, civil dissensions spirit the ambition of private man. It is sometimes followed by up; as, to spirit up. 3. To kidnap. To spirit away, to entice or seduce.

To be clear, this is a fallacious retort. You know very well I did not just say anything of the sort. In fact, assuming you haven't read my second book, from my blog, you haven't read my research into this very subject of the ancient origins of the Bible, nor that any concept in the Bible was orignal, but of course ancient wisdom. So, no, that is a very unsafe assumption that you should ignore these ancient scholars after so much time and research and effort by myself was put into showing that to be the case. So let me ask... are you seriously comparing this guy to Plato and the old philosophers? LOL!

In short, you are doing the same thing so-called Christianity has done to the Bible, using water (God's Creation) or part of self-Existence, and using a fiction of man (triangle) as a similitude, a sameness, or as that which somehow God used to design water? You are taking the theories and measurements of man and assuming they are accurate and of God and as high and sacred as It. They are not. And they only apply to this Earth, which is great. But never should you take "sacred geometry" as part of YHVH. It is man-made. Treat it as such - flawed in every way. Temporary. Not part of Nature or Reality. Not self-evident or self-existent. Everything you mention above, from historical characters to history to languages to mathamatics to perspectives of ancient men are not Truth. They are not of a self-existent source. They are not self-evident. Are they useable? Certainly, within the sphere of fictional mathematical measurements and the arts, but not as self-evident Truth. There are no actual constants. Even dark matter and the Big Bang are accepted lies, fillers for the unknown, which by the way dark matter has been disproven as have the Big Bang. These are the religions of science, designed to answer the unanswerable, falsities that cause science itself to be illegitimate on many fronts, especially away from Earth.

However, I urge you to consider this:

The word sacred carries with it the same duelistic, inversive meanings as every term of art. Holy divine, secret, etc. on one side. Yes. But should a manmade thing (art) be considered as sacred, as sacred geometry? Absolutely not. For when that which is not divine (of God/Nature) is titled as sacred, then the opposite meaning or antynym comes into play. That which is not a Truth should never be considered of God (Truth, holy, sacred). Here, the term sacred must be read as CURSED, UNHOLY, etc. It is an idol. It is artifice. It is form without substance. It is a false assumption, to boot. It is disprovable, and no, beauty is not a result of it. These are the lies (beliefs) told by followers of a cursed object. Sure sounds good though, doesn't it? If you choose to hole and untruth as holy and sacred, then you are no better than any religion with its own doctrine. One thing about worshiping the Truth (YHVH) is that you lose your belief in that which is not Truth. You lose hope, because hope breeds inaction. Again, to call anything not self-evident or self-existent as sacred is to put a curse on it, or rather, to be cursed by the consequences of believing in it

And whatever you think of water, I assure you that life does not exist because of water alone, nor should the "shape" of it be used as some sacred measurement. Water is sacred only because it is part of YHVH (TRUTH). I find that the only things made sacred are things that aren't Truths. Sacred Geometry is not Truth, nor is it applicable to reality. Math is a perfect system only because it is designed that way. It is not Truth. There are no numbers in Nature. These are tools of science, and science is a man-made, non-self-evident process. The scientific method is great, but hardly used today. Water is a healing agent, yes. Because the body and much of Existence requires it. But what about extremophiles? They can live in anything, even in lava, and absolutely without oxygen (part of water). If you want my opinion, the mysteries of life and of the universe (GOD) are beautiful and wonderous not because they are known by man, which the certainly are not, but because they are unknown. Man is not supposed to know these things, only to appriciate the wonder and beauty of them. But man creates connect the dots with stars and treats them as Zodiac Gods in the sky, taking literally their own invented allegorical navigation artifices. Or maybe there is a bull in the sky, and maybe I am a lion (leo). LOL! Just like everything metaphoric in the Bible, it cannot be read without knowing Truth from manmade fiction and lies accepted as theoretical truths. To hold sacred anything but Truth is considered sin, a word that comes from synn, the prefix to words like synthetic. Artifice. Untruths. The thing is, I am not asking you to believe in God, or one God. God isn't a God, God damn it! All gods are either ficional or men claiming flattering titles (which is against the Bible/Law of Nature) of kingship or soverignty or power of any kind over nature and man. YHVH, Jehovah, is not a god. The term was not used for YHVH because it was used for men pretending God-like authority. It is used to say I have only one God, and it is not a man or a mythology. But the clear division of these terms God and Jehovah are clear, for the term Jehovah was always used (over 6000 times) in the old texts, again, a term of ancient antiquity (as translated today). It was the church and religions that wanted us to forget this word, removing it from the modern dog-lating (English) Bibles, causing worship of men as gods (kings and popes). Why? Because kings are gods. Jehovah is not a God. It is clearly defined as what is sel-Existent and self-Evident, as all of Life and what Exists that is not altered or invented by men. The difference here is moumental, because in the end, we are all part of Jehovah. We don't not worship it as a god, but as part of It's Whole. We cannot exist without it. It is Existence. It is Truth. Do not ever confuse what is manmade with what is a self-evident, self-existent Truth. History is always a lie. What can be gleemed from history by rational, resaonable, truth-seeking men is only what is self-evident. All the rest exists as recorded, singular "events" in a false timeline to prove the false existence of some power or reason behind false gods having power. Your life is not in history books. You are powerless. There is no time, it is manmade. Yet as a tool, it is useful to us. But time is money, and time is the very foundational structure of legalism, of contracts, and of all debt and duty. Without time and thus history there is no justification for false, legal gods to rule. When the history of the United States is known to be false, this is when the United States must become a dictator, as all false gods must eventuall become. The first commandment is to not worship false gods. This is defined as presidents, prime ministers, governors, kings, magestrates, etc. Anyone with false authority challenging the Low of Nature. YHVH is not something that exists or does not exist because of anyone's belief in It. It is defined as that which Exists and is not artificial. To not belive in YHVH is to not believe in Existence itself, which is to be an atheist. Anarchy is close behind... Look at this guy and trust your eyes, but also listen to all the sources of so-called Truth and count how many are self-evident and self-existent. The one truth I did here him slip in is that all these topics must be understoond in with the caveat that YHVH cannot be objectively known. Defined, this means in a way that is not dependent on the mind for existence; as that which exists actually, not theoretically or as a theory or belief of man At the same time, reason must prevail over the mind, not logic. Logic is over manmade things, while reason is said to be "the light" in the Natural realm. I don't believe in YHVH. YHVH has no need for my empty belief. My only duty to YHVH is to follow Its Law. My belief in anything is counteracted by my ignorance of It and It's Law. Chritianity is a false doctrine designed to cause lawlessness (in nature) so that the pope and other false gods may rule in the stead of (anti) YHVH. I hold YHVH to be self-evident and self-existent, or rather, self-existence Itsself. My belief will not change the Truth, nor will my non-belief. I either act according to Truth or I do not. No manner of church membership or claims of spirutality can substitue ignorance of the Law, which in both legalism and in God's Realm is never an acceptable excuse.

Ponder that for a moment, and then tell me what it is you hold as sacred?

Good luck...

-Clint

I urge extreme caution with this type... many doctrines from many gnostic sources. Anarchy. The lies of science mixed with the lies of mystics. Everything he speaks of comes from the Bible, yet is twisted into theosophic and alternative matters. There is no golden ratio in literal terms, this is clear. The exact measurements of such "ratios" in nature never acutally appear, and everything is not the same. Simularity of design is not sameness. These logic arguements are defeated by reason. Here are some examples you should see: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1Jj-sJ78O6M https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ghUs-84NAAU https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3LVijzZAe4 I tell you, anything that sounds incredible probably is. We will keep debunking everything you guys send, but I hope you will start researching them yourself. It's pretty easy to disprove what Brandon and I are, but it does take time. -Clint

Hi Marko,

Hmmmm .. now I know what to do? Interesting I suppose? Thank you for sharing this link as it gives a bit of support to the point I have come to. I’ve never heard of this man, he seems to be pretty sharp, at least he comes off that way in the thirty minute video? There are many out there just like him who confidently speak about what they “think” they know. Can any of what he said be confirmed and backed up and how exactly would you do it? He cites ancient text and recorders of it, as well teachers of these texts and he seems to insinuate that they were not correct and his interpretation is what it or they were “really” saying?

For “me” this type of information might be somewhat entertaining? After showing us his superior intellect for thirty minutes and finishing with now you know what to do? That struck me as pretty funny but I don’t think he was ending on a comedic note? My brain was shutting off after a while which is no doubt due to my inability to stay engaged and focused on things these past years but it mostly sounded like Charlie Brown’s mom speaking to him in that Peanuts cartoon. I stand by what I said about no one really knows shit. They or even “we” might “think” we know things but in actuality we don’t really know, at least not to the extent that we think, including Ken?

Consider the things you felt strongly about thirty years ago, twenty, ten or even last year or last month, do you still have the same conviction you did back then and if not, why? Did something change? Did you change? Did we learn something else from someone else’s perspective? Was that past information proven wrong or was the guru or presenter exposed as a misleading or even a fraud?

Through our travels and studies over the years we have been told that we “know”, that we know “all” the answers, they are within. This used to really piss me off because all those years I said I don’t know and of course I was right (at least I "think" I was) but those teachers would kind of hold that idea over us, like “they” knew and we didn’t? I used to think if they did indeed know then just tell us, tell me, but it would come back as within us all is the knowing, the answer to everything? Still working on that or honestly, not really working at all on that, just living.

So it goes that we know everything while in fact knowing nothing, at least that’s how I interpret the landscape? Remaining in the question is another lesson that’s been handed down, remaining in the question means to infinity a continuous question with no final answer? Little children have this down to a science, their favorite question is “why” and as soon as we answer the why it is immediately followed up with another why and another until we get tired of trying to answer them or until we really don’t know why and shut them down because we have no answer for them?

Anyhow, everyone should do what they feel they should do, it’s all part of the journey, isn’t it?

Here’s what Kurt Vonnegut had to say about life …

“we are all here to fart around”

Now there’s some wisdom I can really get behind! Time to start farting around!

Kind blessings,

kelly

golly, he's a bit much for me! Maybe I am just a simple person with a simple mind, but my understanding is also simple. The way I understand the 'soul' is, it is a combination of the spirit and you retain your thinking apparatus, although it is not the physical brain. The spirit and your memory, your ability to perceive etc , some call the brain, remains in tack. Like when you die, you loose your physical body but you retain your spirit and ability to perceive and understand, and remember...aka....the soul. Spirit plus thinking equals soul. That is my understanding and how I would define it.