Comment: You did.

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: 2 Things (see in situ)

You did.

"May I kindly suggest that you read the Bible? May I also ask that you ask God specifically to reveal to you whether or not Jesus Christ is who the Bible declares Him to be?"

Which Bible?

If I am asked to do something, my wife asks me, my son asks me, my bosses in the past ask me, I do things my way, or I am reprimanded for not doing things their way, then I say give me the script.

Give me the exact way I am supposed to do what you ask of me to do, or I will do what you ask me to do my way.

Here is an example. If I go down the path of seeking the true word of God then I don't think that I will find that true word of God in The King James Version (English) of The Bible, so I will be looking much deeper into the information on that subject offered by Frank O'Collins.

If, on the other hand, you want me to go step by step, reading this sentence and then that sentence, as you point to those sentences, you authorize me to read this, and that, sentence, then I can do that, because you ask me to do that, in that way, and in that way precisely.

I run into this many times in the past, present, and why would this not happen in the future? I will do as asked, my way, or exactly your way, let me know which way you want, and I can do that, or I can be incapable of doing anything else without specific instructions ordering me to do things exactly as told every second of my life.

Yes, I appreciate the opportunity to honor a request by someone, and yes I can do exactly what I am asked to do, up to a demonstrable, accurate, limit, exactly as those limits appear in time and place.

Word by word, sentence by sentence, precisely what you want me to read, when you want me to read it, can be done in time.


The answer is yes.

"May I kindly suggest that you read the Bible?"

Give me the first word first, and then the next one, and then the next one, and I will read those words that you ask me to read. I can comment on them, each in turn, or you can ask me to not comment on them, each in turn, as time goes by in this process.

I can do that, yes, I want to do that, because you ask for me to do that, and why not?

"May I also ask that you ask God specifically to reveal to you whether or not Jesus Christ is who the Bible declares Him to be?"

Which Bible?

Which sentence in the Bible?

Which declaration?

Why don't I ask God to tell me if I can trust your beliefs?

What if I told you that I have been asking God since age 10, and what if I told you that I could believe, or I could disbelieve, that God answered me by connecting me to Frank O'Collins so that I will then be connected to the information discovered and studied by Frank O'Collins whereby the evidence reports what was done by this person, such as King James, at this time, in this place, and then God, doing what God does typically in my case, leaves it up to me to figure it out?

"May I also ask that you ask God specifically to reveal to you whether or not Jesus Christ is who the Bible declares Him to be?"

Which Bible, which sentence, who wrote that sentence, how do you know that the sentence was not written by a deceiver?

I ask. I ask. I ask. When can you understand that I ask, I ask, I ask, I ask. I open the door, the people in suits, and in dresses, are invited into this house, I speak with them, about their versions of The Bible, and I ask the same question, I ask the same question before I found you, connecting with words to you, I ask, I ask, I ask: how do you know that The Bible was not written by The Devil?

When the answer is: "It says so in The Bible," then the conversation ends soon thereafter, because that is not a reasonable answer.

The Nazi arrives at the door, and says it is nothing personal, everything of value must be taken, for the greater good, everything will be consumed, no questions, no rebuttals, no arguments, no defense, the power is absolute, just following orders, here we go, and for just a moment the Nazi expresses something resembling care, and so I get to ask, why are you doing this, and the answer is that this is written here, here, and here, so the case is closed.

A moment later the Nazi is again expressing a measure of care, and I can ask why, why, why do you follow those orders, written there, there, and there, and a page is turned, and it says so right there, and it is merely a copy, and if Frank can be trusted, then the original copy is blood used as ink written on the skin taken from murdered children.

Here is this dear, careful, friend named bear, here am I, and there is Frank, and we are connected in ways that can be accurately measured. One connection is green ink on papers called dollars.

One connection is black letters on white background on computer screens.

One connection is a firm belief in one creator who creates things, but then, that connection becomes confused in significant ways, so that may be the least powerful connection because of all the confusion.

Why is the money, the single money, connection the most powerful connection, the most precise connection, the most destructive connection?

Is it because the other connections depend upon an even worse medium of exchange compared to the fraud money?

Is English the medium of exchange that is like a carpenter teaching carpentry to an apprentice by picking up a wet spaghetti noodle to be used to connect a seat to a leg on a chair?

Look son, this is how this is done?

Darkness, darkness, darkness, and here are your empty promises to be used to shed light?

I am not speaking about Jesus being a liar, please get past that, what I am saying, again, again, again, in English, is that English is like the wet spaghetti noodle, and English is like the empty promises, and a competitive comparison of one tool side by side with another tool can illustrate the point.

Screws, nails, and glue
A wet spaghetti noodle

Accurate facts measured in great detail
Empty promises

Federal Reserve Notes

1 above is carpentry, the fixing of legs to seats when making a chair.

2 above is the knowing of better ways to go through life.

3 above is the better way to communicate among human beings for better or for worse.

I am not subject to belief as you are, in any way you can measure it, and in any way I can measure it, so your request of me can be honored in your way, precisely your way, each step of the way, in time and place, or, and inevitably, I have to actually take each step, following your specific, precise, orders, each step of the way, or failing to stick to that procedure, I wander off that specific path, and time goes on in that altered direction each time I wander off that path ordered by you.

Which sentence in the Bible first?

Which precise question do you think I don't ask, whereby now you think I could ask, since I don't ask this question of God, never have, but I can start now.

"May I also ask that you ask God specifically to reveal to you whether or not Jesus Christ is who the Bible declares Him to be?"

Suppose, again, I asked that, actually that, precisely that, which assumes a whole lot since we are speaking in English, and since we have not had perfect success in communicating accurately in our experience to date, but suppose I have asked and suppose God sent me to Frank?

Forget that, it is not even possible?

So, forgetting that that is even remotely possible, then, now, I am going to ask God to do as you ask me to ask God to do, and that can happen, since it has not happened, so form the question precisely, in English, for me, please.

I can then have the exact question in view, or I can just ask for you to acknowledge the exact question as I think the exact question is from you to me.


"Please God: reveal to me whether or not Jesus Christ is who the Bible declares Him to be?"

Do you want me to ask that question many times or one time? If many times then how many times? Can I ask that anywhere, or should I ask that at some place specific? Do I have to actually know what it is I'm asking, since I don't at this time know what it is I'm asking for, since the English words are too vague, and therefore potentially misleading for me to know precisely what it is I am actually asking if those are the words I am supposed to be using when I ask God this question?

Those 2 things

1) Read the Bible

2) Ask God if Jesus as God Himself died for you.

Those 2 things

That is more specific. Do I ask out-loud? How many times out-loud? Should I find a priest? Should I be at an alter? Should I drink some wine to simulate drinking blood? Should I eat some bread to simulate eating flesh? Most importantly, to me, why do you still think that I do not ask, almost all the time, for help from God, in any form, any form at all, please, please, please God, please, please help me.

I don't ask the right questions?

I don't speak the right words?

Your questions are better questions than my open ended pleas for help?

I can ask God to poke me with a hot poker to get me on the right path, please, do your worst, whatever, as far as I know, I am on the wrong path one minute, the right path the next, on my own, so bring it on, bring it on, I'm here, and as far as I know you know how to reach me, God, whenever.

So I am not asking the right questions?

You can help me ask the right questions?

You care enough to offer me a better way, and so I agree, and so let me know exactly what I am to ask, when to ask it, how I should ask it, fast, or slow, or really slow, or loud, or a whisper, or whatever is the right way to ask the right questions.

Let me know, precisely, since failing to know precisely is wrong, obviously.

I have not be chosen, yet, or ever, because, obviously, I don't ask the right questions?

Note the question mark.

"Yes, I think that as well, but I also think that hte Dollar Hegemony is not the end game. I believe the end game is a cashless society such that only numbers are transfered from individual to individual and that in accordance with Revelation 13"

Again the medium of exchange is proving to be insufficient, or powerless, in reaching the goal of accurate communication, since the source of the money, in whatever form, paper, things, digits, whatever, is not the POINT, or not the PRINCIPLE, the FORM the Monopoly Money takes, originating from the same source, only points to the PRINCIPLE, the creator of the form, and here I think you are less competitive in measuring how things work out on the bad path.

On the bad path the criminals no longer have rules that govern themselves and therefore there won't be such things as computer networks that work, since there is no one to maintain them, having no true leadership, no common goals, not among the criminals, and not among the victims, the form of currency becomes cruder, not more elaborate.

Examples such as offered by Sergey in his histories of Russia exemplify what happens when Legal is dropped from Crime and there is only Crime left to be in force, forcing people, connecting people by that force of crime without anything resembling Legality, Legitimacy, Authority, of any kind other than Might making Right, which is, again, a self-evident lie.

To me this is like the reverse of the Tar Baby Fable, as digital currency is competitive in the sense of being very high in qualities, such as accuracy, accountability, reliability, and having a fixed power to purchase that does not change deceptively if at all, and the costs of such a competitive currency, legal or otherwise, are reduced down to a minimum. So to me the Legal Criminals invent a Boogie Man whereby no one in their right mind would ever dream of going to a digital currency because doing so is the path to Hell on Earth, of course, and therefore anyone touching such a thing, anyone even thinking about it, will burn in Hell forever.

Those are my thoughts about that in English, and those are not my thoughts that Jesus is a liar, because, and again, if I have a thought that Jesus is a liar, instead of those thoughts I did write, I could write "Jesus is a liar" because that is what I thought instead of what I did think, so any taking out of what I actually wrote, which is what I actually think, and any placing of "Jesus is a liar" put in place of what I actually thought, and what I actually think is not my doing.

"The new conglomarate pharmacy in town causes its employes to have a barcode sticker on their forehand that they must use each time they log into the computer system. We live in a day where the technology is available. (I just had a creepy thought, maybe they are reducing the world population so that they can manage the system.)"

I think that Legal Criminals are only able to gain any power, at all, by crude means, and any power they have otherwise is power generated by good means, but it is good means stolen, again proving the point. So...having that understood in my mind, but perhaps not anyone else having that understood, and me not having a means by which to communicate this measure of things accurately, I can stumble around in the dark, using a wet noodle instead of a flash light, and I can try to convey what that means in context.

What that means in context, is that End Times, so called, will be crude, not elaborate, whereby the lack of any good things, any good ideas, any good actions, is exactly that, that way, as the worst are better, and as the better are made worse, because all those good things that could work to credit the good for being good, and all those good things that could discredit bad people for being bad, precisely, are unused.

In other words the End Times reported by the bad people are lies, misdirections, and whole fabrications of falsehood, so much so that the good people who have good ideas, who do good things, are punished for having those good ideas, and punished for doing good things, and the bad people are rewarded for doing bad things, and the bad people are rewarding for those really good (if destruction is good), if not predictable, ideas. The best destroyers have the best ideas since War is so, so, so, good for the economy.

In other words the End Times are not mysterious, elaborate, complex, mazes of technological wizardry, they are instead, base, simple, and predictable. End Times, having many examples in history to pick from, and study, and know, and avoid, if anyone cares to avoid End Times, are times when crime pays really well.

Bands of very obedient people follow very evil leaders, hither and thither, searching for and finding anyone weaker and therefore anyone worth destroying, the most evil doing what every evil person does best, or even better, again very predictable, very base, stuff, such as lying.

Lying is on the short list.

They also threaten.

That is on the short list.

They are also violent.

There is the whole list, and before End Times there are people who were innocent, but that pool of innocent people dries up in a pool of innocent blood, and therefore in End Times there are no more innocent people left, not even babies, because really evil people, worth their title, worth that authority, eat babies.

Why go there? The answer is always the same.

I was just following orders.

Which orders where those?

Were those orders elaborate orders?

No, they are always the same orders, each time.



Rob, Rape, Torture, Murder, and Mass Murder also known as Violence.

Short list, not complicated, easy to see on a chart, easy to measure accurately, precisely, and unmistakably what it is exactly, with any words that you want to use, in any language, whenever anyone cares to label it, an accurate label, or a false label, once it is in your face you know what it is, with or without the label.


Legal Crime is merely a stepping stone.

When it is no longer Crime hidden behind a False Front, it is what it is, and I don't need one good book to clue me in about it, it is abundantly clear, it is the same thing each time, the same short list, each time.



Invest in it, what do you think you will get?

"Thank you for those words they are mutual. And I will look forward to discussing again."

I jumped ahead in the Episodes to a current Episode and my question is now (I have to check) recorded in Episode 131.

I can discuss my question to Frank in detail if you care to do so too.

I plan on attending the Wednesday events as I can, and eventually I will find how to call and speak to Frank directly.

We don't have to discuss anything relating to Frank, but his answer to my first question inspires me to ask more questions.