Post #68 "We Are..........."

We chose to build the walls so we could not see Reality, for if we would just catch a glimpse of Reality, we would have to admit what we really are. We are image. We really are not what we dream to be. It's only a dream. We are not Reality or even a likeness to Reality. In a sense, we are a negative distortion of Reality; a negative of Reality, comparatively like a photo and its negative. In a photo negative, the objects appear the opposite to the original photo, yet the objects relate as real to each other and appear as normal to the negative itself. We are image. Image has no being outside of itself. Image can only perceive as image. Image can only perceive Reality as image is able to perceive. Image cannot violate the border, the walls, of its own creation. Image cannot perceive Reality as Reality is only as image can perceive it. To image, reality becomes what image dreams it to be....what image desires it to be....what image chooses it to be, for image is not the consequence of Reality but the consequence of itself. Consequently, in attempts to experience, to explain, to know, or become its host; image can only transfer its own desired qualities onto the host and therefore onto itself. The result is religion's interpretations and descriptions of God. There lies deep within humanity the desire to become God.    The reality of Reality or the reality of non-reality?

Post #67 "We are Creator"

Karl Priam and David Bohm's work in the science of applying three dimensional imaging to understanding the composite nature of archetypal images modeled on the holographic concept  is helpful to the understanding of Reality and Non-reality. Human consciousness chooses. Image comes about through choice. Choosing is the action of consciousness. Consciousness Chooses. Individual consciousness Chooses to image; Chooses to create. The Collective Consciousness chooses to image; chooses to create. The Collective Unconsciousness chooses to image, chooses to create. We are choosers. We are imagers. We are dreamers. We are Creator.

As Collective Consciousness we have created Time. Swiss psychiatrist, Carl Jung recognized a collective consciousness that is shared by all people, through his studies of myths, dreams, hallucinations, and religious visions. Our dreams and images exist for us now and also exist in and from our past and in and from our future for Time is fragile. Consciously and unconsciously the combined imaging of humanity, the sum total of all that we image and all that we dream is Creation. As dreamers and imagers, we are the creators of our world, universe, galaxy, and cosmos. Creation is image because creation is made from Nothing and returns to Nothing. We choose and have chosen to block Reality from our view. We imaged and built the wall. We have mortared it into place. In the beginning we built the first walls. The walls were built from our choice. These walls form the parameters of the heavens and the earth. Our words, such as: walls, galaxy, cosmos, planets, etc. are our terms for the walls we have created to block out Reality from our view so we can only see that which we have created and especially how we see ourselves. We become God. There lies deep within humanity the desire to become God.

Post #66 "Division Developed"

Division is the process of creation. As the process increases and the resulting imprints of image on each level of division become more distorted and more obscure, our ideas of God become more varied and scattered. God also divides and is sought in many places, in many people, and in many events and activities. Of course, Power is what this is all about. It has always been about Power, this desire to become God. We seek God's Power when we are up against our own inherent weakness, fragility, and mortality.

What is 'good' and desirable is often seen as controlled through prayers, rites, ceremonies, petitions, homage, gifts, services, and so on. These come under the heading of religion; whether formal(institutional), informal, private, or personal. The purpose of religion is to save humanity from sin. Without sin or evil there would be no need for religion. Sin and evil are necessary to religion. Within our world, religion has determined and set the moral code for what is good and what is evil. Sin and evil are defined and publicized through laws and commandments. These laws and commandments often become power tools for the elite and a means of controlling the masses. Through religion, a covenant with the ruling God gives access to the ultimate source of power. Religion serves as the link to God. Religion says no one can be 'saved outside of itself, each religion making its own specialized claim.

When bad things happen we feel that our God has failed and deserted us and maybe does not even exist. This dual personality of good and evil allows non-reality or creation, which is created by its God the Collective Consciousness, to block Reality from the scene. Within these parameters or these walls of creation (galaxy, heaven, earth), creation sees itself as the total of all existence. Our reality is a game of  'let's pretend'. The purpose is to make Reality go away. Again, non-reality does not exist to Reality, however Reality is essential to non-reality as its reflected but distorted image. Because reflection is image and not the actuality, it is distorted. It is distorted from being buffeted by many energies on many levels. The reflection becomes more and more distorted with each increment of division, as a distorted mirror image incapable of producing any possible semblance of the Reality, incapable of any possible idea of Knowing. As previously presented, the distortion becomes more pronounced with the passing of each increment of Time. Our creation, our world then, is a distorted mirror image of what is Real. As it is essential for a reflection to depend on the actuality, non-reality needs Reality. It is then, just as essential that non-reality deny that dependence for its existence. Its existence depends on the denial of the reality of Reality.

Post #65 "God or God Substitute?"

Being the determination and the products of creation, we are always, as is creation itself, in the process of division. As we divide, we find ourselves increasingly and constantly needing. We are increasingly and constantly aware of our multiplying insufficencies. We need deity and a defining God for each segment of division, for each purpose, for each possible situation; from a general God, as in our early history, to today's search for a personal God. It becomes rather clear from this that 'God' becomes sectioned off and also divided up as is humanity and as creation itself; to suit any people, any period in history, any circumstance and any situation.

If anything has a history of division, it is religion. It seems there is a religion for every possible, imaginable need. These needs are often in conflict with each other. In fact, conflict, which results from creation's process of division, is the basis for the division of one religion into many. Religion, that claims and advertises unity, actually is, as every thing else in creation, divisive. Each segment claims God in one way or another. Each religion, creates God according to its own particular need. This created God, as each God of created non-reality, is named, given a history, programed into ritual that recounts many heroic deeds and accomplishments. As in the case of the world's great religions, each of these religions claims One God or at least one primal God, for entity is a requirement of Godhood. Each religion is rooted to and in this One God. These religions also claim a common heritage, in most cases through a holy person, holy place, or holy object. Each religion claims its own unique Choosiness. Each religion feels its duty as 'The Chosen' to remove all other interference, meaning all other Gods of all other religions or beliefs, resulting in our stormy and violent history. As each segment claims the One God, God is divided into the God of this people or the God of that people or of this group or that group, of this country or that country, of this denomination or that denomination, and on and on the division continues, until God, as image, just fades away.

Can God ever be denied--- really denied? Can non-attendance or non-membership in a worshiping community or just outright denial demonstrate or prove a person's denial of God? Is not God that which we worship and depend on----that primary, primal, underlying force in our life; no matter who, what, or where? If this God is not found in the admitted to and accepted forms or places of worship, then is this God deniable? Is God not much more present in that which we would never admit to? Is God, more often than not, that which we most deny, that which we refuse to recognize? Is this denied God, that is the object that is worshipped and absolutely depended on, not found in unrecognizable places of worship, such as: sport arenas, as on playing fields, as in shopping malls, beauty salons, in political arenas, in alcohol consumption, in drug use, in abuse, in competitiveness, and hostilities and outright war, and on and on...............................? Are we not face-to-face with The God of Creation, ----------The God of Non-reality?

Post #64 "Words, Image, Creation, Non-Reality"

This entry begins with Word. A representation of Image is Word. Words form language and through the divisive action of creation, language breaks down into languages. Language breaks down into many, many languages over the course of the history of humanity (humanity-an image of Intelligence). Each language is a further testimony to the process of division that characterizes creation. Each language is a further breakdown into smaller and smaller pieces, as the breakdown of atoms into smaller and smaller subatomic particles. The words 'God' and 'God of Creation' represent and are image. These words do not represent Reality. These words cannot represent Reality. No words can represent Reality. Words and language are powerful symbols of who we are, what we think, and what we want to communicate and not the Reality we seek to represent. What is communicated, and especially what is not communicated, is extremely determinate in personal and interpersonal situations. Communication through words and through lack of words creates power and, consequently, further division.

The God of Creation was and is image. If the God of Creation is image, as is creation image, what is the Reality of what was imaged? What is that which is the Reality of God; God the Image? There is no way that the stuff of non-reality, in other words, the stuff of creation, can know facts or data from what could be referred to as an 'out of our comprehension' and a 'beyond our imagination' and beyond our dreaming, of Reality. We, certainly, cannot name it. We, certainly, cannot possess it. To attempt to do so is playing the games of biblical Genesis which we do not know how not to do. The Collective Consciousness has dreamt itself the God of Creation and has called itself and its world into being, but the Reality is beyond our dreams and reason. The Reality is beyond our mechanical world of mechanical thoughts by mechanical thinkers. We cannot know the Reality. We cannot collect data on Reality. We cannot possess the Reality. We can, however, be sure of the actuality of the Reality of Reality as we can be sure of the reality of non-reality, for if it were not so, nothing of our reality-nothing of our creation, would exist, because our reality does exist----for us. We can be sure of the Reality of Reality, for if it were not so, its image could not be our reality. If it were not so, we could rightly question our existence. For if it were not so, our image could not be our reality.

Post #63 "The Question of Sin"

Religion is a determining and defining patriarchal society. As such it has determined and defined the patriarchal world it has created. As a determining and defining patriarchal society, religion has created sin to create weakness that would promote power. Power cannot exist without weakness. Power creates weakness. Creating and encouraging fear, as fear of sin can be a controlling factor for those in power and for those seeking power. Throughout history, fear has been used to control the masses. Through fear of having sinned, thereby angering a moody and judging God, a created moody and judging God, the masses looked to be saved. Has religion created sin to control the masses by threatening suffering and eternal damnation in a raging pit of fire for the disobedience to commandments and laws it itself has instituted in God.s name?

If science takes the place of God, and or creates its own God; what about sin? Does the nature of sin change? Is the God of religion the same God as the God of science? Is the sin of religion the same sin as the sin of science? Does sin exist in and within itself, or does sin exist in certain situations and under certain prescribed conditions? Is sin the same offense to science as to religion? Can what is seen as good to religion be seen as sin to science and vice versa depending on necessary control measures? What about current issues judged by religion as sinful, such as abortion and on the other hand, the research and use of stem cells? How would science judge, as religion would, a Sabbath spent in research or other studies rather that attendance at a community prayer and worship gathering? How would science judge a fact determined by faith rather than by reason? A close examination of the current concepts of sin lead to murky waters indeed. Would sin not be viewed by most as a violation of one's personal ideals, views, property, possessions, and person hood? Do these views of sin not offer an explanation of the occurrences of disagreements, wars, and conflicts? To what degree and extent do our governing societal laws derive from concepts of good/bad, grace and sin? At what point in the evolution of division, as in division as the function of creation,  are we? Where do we place sin...in Reality or in Non-reality?

Post #62 "How Can God Allow Bad Things to Happen?"

It is through the attempted transference of Reality to non-reality, that what seemingly became  Reality, was and is called and referred to as 'God'. History tells us something of humanity's first confrontation with that which became known and classified as a god or gods. A god or gods were seen in terrifying events of the unknown. The god or gods were the personification of terrifying events that occurred in nature. The god was manifested through displays of power. Unspeakable fear was humanity's initial reaction to the god's display of power. Fear and the resulting instinct of survival, called for appeasement..what could be done to lessen the threat. The god/gods or eventually "God" seemed to have power over life and death. Beyond seeming to have power over life and death, as in cataclysmic events of nature, power was, consequently, also given and attributed to a god or a deity as its proper due. To mollify and appease the god and to buy insurance against further threatening events. As competitiveness is an attribute of humanity, competitiveness is also an attribute of god as the action of division began to divide also God. Humanity divided. God divided. The divided segments of humanity claimed segments of God as their benefactor and Savior. As representatives of the people, these gods or God, actually did and does have power over life and death as the archetype of intelligence/humanity which created its own demise through the process of division that is the determinate of all Creation. Of course, on a higher level of truth, humanity's existence was threatened and on that level God was and is the master of Life and Death. As such, humanity tried and tries to block god's/God's destructive power through appeasement, as in alliances, as in petition, prayer and sacrifice. Eventually  to this end agreements or covenants were made, rituals were enacted; all to insure survival...all to conquer the inevitable death-the block to Perfection.

Non-reality reproduces within itself the Reality/Non-reality dichotomy that it may take on the characteristics and become that Reality. This would be like recreating Reality into a staged reproduction with  actors replacing real life characters. Like cannibalism, non-reality attempts to image (devour) Reality's characteristics and then deny its existence that it may exist in its place. Creation/Intelligence/humanity cannot allow itself to see within itself this dichotomy. Through this imaging and consequent denial of Reality, humanity has struggled throughout history with good and evil, grace and sin. This struggle has shaped who we are and what we do. The questions resonate in every time and culture:"what is good and what is evil?, "how did goodness and evil come about?", "why are evil, pain, and suffering in the world?",  "who or what is responsible?", "where can we place the blame?" And the most profound and most occurring question of all, "How can a God of love allow evil (bad things) to happen?"
.........to be continued...............

Post #61 "Questions Lead to Path"

As questions arising from the reevaluation of religion and science begin to formulate and unfold, a new direction and an untraveled path will begin to emerge. This path begins with religion and then moves through religion. The path then passes to science and moves also through science, as Truth cannot be found by by-passing and ignoring that which has long formed our beliefs and provided and sustained our gods. Along this path many suppressed and ignored questions will arise that will give way to new thoughts to ponder and consider. Allowing these questions and consequent ideas to emerge, we can more confidently and fearlessly approach, address, and scrutinize the basic premises of religion and science and the application of these to the basic and fundamental questions of existence.

These questions that plague us are perhaps causing more psychological conflict than ever as today's societies seem to be living more and more at levels of surface Truth. These questions, that are mostly suppressed because they are difficult to face and deal with are the basic questions of existence that have always evaded and puzzled humanity. These questions are the elemental questions of existence, such as: "who are we?", "from where have we come?", and "what is our purpose?" But as we have been noting throughout this writing is that these questions and all questions cannot be answered in Truth until Non-reality has been recognized as image and not as The Reality. In other words, Truth cannot be accessed without the recognition of the Reality of Non-reality. Also that when these recognitions have been made, we can then, firstly, determine the foremost scientific questions of "what is Real? and 'why is there something rather than nothing. None of these questions can be answered if the search is not seeking answers in the right place. These questions cannot be answered, in Truth, until we recognize the difference of Reality from the 'reality' we have created.

Post #60 "Religion's Case/Science's Case"

Religion, once confident of its hold on truth and morality, is no longer as secure in its belief as in the past, as traditional teachings are now being challenged by recent findings and discoveries. Religion's case has further been threatened by the fact that many recent findings and discoveries have been withheld from public scrutiny for years, have been hidden in secret vaults, or have simply not been made available. Archeology has uncovered long hidden secrets from the past and aided by science, has come forth with new and improved methods for understanding, deciphering, and dating these important discoveries and connections, thereby throwing doubt on long adhered to religious doctrines and beliefs. Religion, furthermore is being challenged by a new generation brought up in a science imbued world wherein many no longer find a relationship to that which was unquestioned and totally accepted as ultimate Truth. Religious faith in general seems to be on a decline as organized religions fail to answer the needs and problems of today. Those of the school of Reason see religion as hindering and stifling free thought as demanded by science's world of proof seeking through rational thinking. The question also arises as to how much religion's values determine the politics of government.

Although science has prided itself on much progress in effecting and solving issues of the substance and workings of the universe, it readily admits that there remains many unanswered questions and unsolved problems. The debris and destruction that lie in the wake of the so-called advances of science and technology are just beginning to come to light and to cause concern, that maybe the payoffs are too costly and perhaps even deadly to lives and to the welfare of humanity and our planet. Is the world safer and are lives really improved when threatening situations arise that are the direct results of these so-called technological advances such as acid rain, the depletion of the ozone layer, violent and unpredictable reactions of an earth battered through climate changes, loss of endangered species, accumulating solid waste, toxic substance in general, and toxic substances found in food, medications, and water supplies, air pollution, scarcity of energy sources, and the use and production of energy, not to mention the threat of these advances in the hands of unscrupulous power-seekers? These threats are just beginning to be manifested. Surely history will show that many technological advances have been a mistake. How many of these innovations have been the result of power-seeking individuals attempting to progress on the fulfillment of humanity's desire to become God. These threats to the safety of humanity and the planet are the nasty underbelly of the gods of science and technology.

Post #59 "Religion to Science"

If we could venture beyond the reality we have created, what would we see and what would we do? Could we ever admit to the possibility of Reality beyond our created reality? Could we take the chance that by Choosing to admit to that Reality we would destroy all that we have created? Would the Choice to admit to that which lies beyond our own creation destroy our efforts to fulfilling our desire to become Perefect, to become God? Can we admit to the reality of non-reality? What of religion and science? Can science extend beyond the walls of Creation-beyond the walls we have imaged? Are religion and science the very tools to satisfy our longings? Our longing to be what? Who we are or who we desire ourselves to be?

Let's begin by taking a look at religion. Dating back to the 16th century, the dualism between mind and body, or Faith and Reason, has become a controversy of enormous proportions. The church, with its long standing faith tradition condemned the ideas emerging from the new reason based philosophy of Rene Descartes and his followers in the Age of the Enlightenment. Now, in our present times it has become more common for the 'other side', that is the side of Reason or the scientific approach, to voice impatience with, and opposition to the traditional views of religion .The struggle traces back beyond the rationalism of Plato and Aristotle. Indeed, the struggle dates back to the beginning of Time.

The struggle can be witnessed in the unfolding of civilization. Is civilization, then, the offspring of religion as well; as the root of science? Does civilization rely on a trusting faith or does civilization rely on a testing and proving rational? Is religion built on faith and trust in a political, rational Mind? Is religion, religion for its own sake or is religion an enforced rationalism that dictates its tenets, beliefs, ritual, commandments and observances? Is religion faith and trust in Reason? Does not science depend on faith in trusting the expertise of those conducting the scientific tests? Certainly every scientist does not run the tests themselves on every question but relies to some extent on the expertise of their colleagues. Now the question arises.....are religion and science really opposed or are they 'two sides of the same coin'? Is religion a science and is science a religion? Do religion and science exist in Reality? Do religion and science exist in non-reality? Or..... could there be a third perspective? If so, where would it exist-Reality or Non-reality? And to what purpose?......Let's see what unfolds.

Post #58 "Reality/Non-reality and Science"

Then, what about science? What about science and Reality/Non-reality? Does science hold the key to Immortality, to freedom from death. It all really looks like it comes down to Immortality...Reality-Immortality, Non-reality-death. It seems, then, that while religion looks to freedom from spiritual death, science, on the other hand, looks to freedom from mortal death. If there is freedom from mortal death, is freedom from spiritual death necessary? If science holds the key, then how does science, in regard to life and death, differ from religion? Is the difference only in terms of the definitions of spiritual and non-spiritual? Could the determining difference be how each system approaches and defines Knowledge? In this case, could Knowledge through Reason rather than Knowledge through Faith, be a better plan?

KNOWLEDGE

Science relies on Knowledge and holds Knowledge to be based on Reason/rational thought. Religion relies on Knowledge through Faith, based on inspiration, tradition, and interpretation. But one could ask of religion, "Faith in what or Faith in whom?"--the very God it seeks to become? Does science, then, seek to be the better determinate and dispenser of the secret ingredients? And if either religion or science actually possess the secrets and hold the keys, would the secrets and keys be made accessible to all? Would there be a price? Who would hold the deed? Why would the one who seemingly possesses Immortality, the very essence of Perfection and, hence, owns the title of the God of Creation want to share that ownership? Who would Know? Who would Know the secrets of God? Who would Choose to Know the secrets of God? Would that Knowledge bring about Godship? What if it did? Then what? After all, God is One. There can't be two Gods or multiple Gods.....Or can there?

Post #57 "Reality /Non-reality and Religion"

In the Unfolding of Reality/non-reality.....what about religion?
Do we not turn to religion to find God and the keys to God's kingdom? Has religion not always been that which named, identified, and thereby possessed God and the 'way to God'? We seek Perfection. Is Perfection, therefore, found in and through religion? Is Godship found through religion? If not, why? Has religion not always been seen as the dispenser of God's punishment and God's benevolence? So then, does religion hold the key to God and through God to Reality? Is religion the keeper of the secrets? Is religion the dispenser of the secret ingredients? Does religion hold the map to the secret route to the kingdom of God? Is religion the way to possess God and thereby God's attributes? Is religion The Way to Perfection? Is religion The Way to becoming God?

Has religion failed? Are there possibly other ways to attaining Perfection that do not pass through religion or even pertain to religion? Is religion all about attaining Perfection? Yet, as we have noted, it seems that the pursuit of Perfection brings about death. Death is certainly the result of the failure to attain Perfection. How does religion own and address this failure to achieving Perfection? How does religion reconcile Perfection and Death? Does religion see Perfection as only achievable in an after-life that becomes reachable only through mortal Death?

Post #56 "Who Owns God?"

Religion has until now controlled God, controlled the accessibility to God, controlled the means to acceptance by God. Religion has controlled the assurance or the denial of immortality as in afterlife in God's kingdom known as heaven. By controlling God, religion owns God. By owning God, Religion assumes authority over life by promise of eternal life. Religion also assumes authority over death through its power of bestowing and meting out salvation. Religion is about ownership of God's Power. Here comes the focus of the religion and science controversy for science's goal is also control of life and death through efforts and its ultimate goal-to create life in test tubes. Science works  to forestall death by means of prolonging life. Science ultimately seeks to conquer death by assuming the most sought after attribute of God-Immortality! The longer and better science can prolong life, the closer it comes to claiming Immortality...the Power of God. No wonder the controversy between religion and science is irreconcilable. Religion seeks to control God through ownership and the elimination of God through claiming and possessing God and God's qualities- the Transference of God into religion...God disappearing into religion. Science seeks to control God through elimination by denial of God's existence. Both religion and science seek not only the qualities of God but also the Essence of God; that each might take God's place! The question now takes on profound significance. After all, if God's ultimate Power is possessed and if Immortality is accomplished; what need is there of God?

Post #55 "Naming"

We cannot name that which we do not know. We cannot name that which we do not possess. The act of naming is an act of exerting power over and of claiming ownership. Who could ever know Reality to name Reality? Who could ever assume such power over Reality? Who could ever name Reality 'God' or refer to Reality as god, God, Jehovah, Yahweh, or Buddha, or by any other title or name? The word 'God' really can't apply to that which is unclaimable, unattainable, and certainly, unnameable. The word 'God' or 'god' describes that which has the qualities of creation. These are our words that describe our reality. We don't have and we cannot even 'image-in' words to describe Reality. Creation has built walls blocking Reality. The names we have chosen for 'God' assume that Reality exists in creation and is known to creation. To bestow a name on Reality is to ascribe human qualities of non-existence on Reality thereby creating the image of who or what we need ourselves to be. Through the act of naming, intelligence deifies itself to bring about the act of transference with Reality. Here intelligence creates its own description of itself and names itself  'God'. To name, to dream, or to fantasize is to create. We cannot name, dream or fantasize Reality into existence without creating, without creating image. We cannot create Reality. We cannot possess Reality. The name 'God' in our created reality means all-powerful, all-knowing, all-seeing, all-merciful, and all this and all that, and on and on. These attributes that intelligence gives to its God are the attributes intelligence would bestow on itself. These attribute signify power because that is what creation is all about.

Reality exists. The Choice of Intellect allows Reality to exist for those who so choose. In so choosing, those too exist through the Generation of Reality. Reality is not, nor can be, stagnant. Reality exists-Reality Generates. As the function of intellect chooses, choice causes Reality to exist for those that so choose.In so choosing, these too exist through the Generation of Reality.

Post #54 "Language and God"

There are two, "That Which Is"-the Reality and "That Which Isn't"-the Reality, the image. The image created the impenetrable walls called creation. The Reality had no need to create that which is not Real. The Reality has no need to create that which came from darkness, from the abyss of Nothingness. Here is where language abysmally failed and fails. Language failed because those who built and hid behind walls spoke a language that could not define and confine That Reality-That Which Is, so how could appropriate and acceptable words be found in 'that which is not real' that could communicate 'that which is Real'? Who of those who chose to not hide behind the walls and were deeply aware of the Reality could possibly speak of that which was blocked and not admitted to? Who could ever describe the very thing that needed to be hidden and then destroyed that others could claim that which wasn't theirs to claim? Who could possibly know the name of this Reality, if indeed a name is appropriate and applicable? Who could ever claim the right to know, meaning to possess, the Reality? Yet the act of naming is an act of knowing and thereby possessing! How can the Unknowable be named, described, and thereby possessed by that which does not exist in the Reality of Reality?

Post #53 "So...What About God"

Let's return to Carl Sagan's questions on two conflicting or alternative hypothesis which are representative of one of science's profound theological questions. "....if we say that God made the universe, it is reasonable to ask, "And who made God?" The answer to the afore noted query lies in the understanding of Reality and non-reality. The answer must begin with establishing just what we are talking about when we say "God". We seemingly have, according to several ancient gospels and writings, two Gods, one of which is the God of Creation. Who or What was the gospels referring to as 'The Other' ....the One which is not the God of Creation? The Reality? The Reality, as previously discussed, surely did not create non-reality. The Reality, (which must by quality of Entity be un-named) surely did not "make the universe". This is the Reality that was hidden by the walls of creation. How could science possibly know about or, more accurately, admit to "This which is" as of Reality, which is not and cannot be admitted to by a mechanical world of mechanical thinkers thinking mechanical thoughts? For that matter, how could anyone know about or admit to 'That which Is'? For 'That Which Is' makes anything 'other', 'that which is not'. For many, many years, Truth has been hidden. Lies have been told, over and over again, lies on top of lies on top of lies. Each lie added to all the other lies, creating a great mound made up of layers of non-reality all piled on top of each other, each additional layer getting farther and farther away from any grasp of Truth at all. For what is Truth anyway, if not Reality?

Post #52 "The Question of God"

Let's consider God, here. God is certainly the point of contention between religion and science. How would religion and science view God in relation to Reality and Non-reality? How would religion and science view the reality of non-reality? How would religion and science view the reality of 'Nothing'? How do religion and science respond to the question of what happens when 'nothing' stirs? How do religion and science respond to the following questions?...... What happens when 'nothing' stirs? What about 'nothing' stirring 'nothing'? Does not movement/friction produce heat which in turn produces water? What causes 'nothing' to move? What causes vibration in 'Nothingness'? What stirs this vast limitless void? Religion's answer is sure and confident. Science, however, is baffled and seemingly has no answer to the God question. Science also seems to be uncomfortable with religion's faith response. So, what about God?

Would God be in Nothingness? Would God begin that which would end and dissolve in the abyss? Would God create a self-image that does not really exist? Would God create a cosmos and whatever lies beyond that does not exist in that God's own Reality? Would God create that which begins and then ends? Is this God of religion a God of Nothingness?

If Creation, as image, is the Place of non-reality, then this God of religion must be the God of Creation and the God of Creation must be the God of Non-reality. Does this God, then, exist only within the realm of that which is created, being that that which is created exists only to and within itself and does not exist in Reality? What of the Reality that is the subject or the host of that which is imaged? Is this issue where religion and science refuse to meet? Actually, it seems that science wants  to find a rationale for or against the existence of God. The issue of god, gods, or God creating what may be 'nothing' seems to be at the heart of the religion/science conflict. Reality or Non-reality? Can that which is God, create that which is 'nothing'/image? This seems a valid question.

Post #51 "Choice Unfolding"

The story follows that Archangel Lucifer and the bad angels depart for a place where God does not exist. Now all is ready, the Collective Consciousness Chooses, the Choice is a choice of Power. Power is energy. Power shudders. Power moves, stirring and whipping the primordial waters into a frenzy and a fury. The God of Creation appears from the future, (for how else could the movement to be God be a process if it does not move from a beginning to completion) on the newly imaged scene-the reflecting surface on which the image is projecting. The God of Creation separates light from darkness and proclaims that all is good. Energy creates heat. Heat produces water. The God of Creation divides the waters. So begins the biblical story of Creation. So begins the scientific story of the division of atoms. So begins the division, the process of the separation that defines creation; the fracturing of the image of reality into many levels-of Time, of Place, of history.The image divides and separates into smaller and smaller pieces, each piece imprinted with a memory of Reality that gets dimmer and more distorted with the passing of each layer/level of Time. Adam and Eve have Chosen and depart the Garden for a place where they no longer walk and talk with God. Creation-the new existence on the outside of Reality. The scene is reset with new characters. The duality of Reality and non-reality is imaged on the duality of division. Image. Mirror-image. History is born and waits to be played out. How can this take place? Will there be no remembrance? How can one be God or even act like God or know God's name, for who could possible know God, that is, if Reality could possibly have a 'God'? How can anyone remember what is too painful to remember and has been canceled out of existence?

Post #50 "The Choosing"

Here, Consciousness Chose, and here, Consciousness continues Choosing, for choosing is the action of consciousness. Consciousness chooses. This choice is the choice of the Collective Consciousness and the Collective Unconsciousness. Choice remains outside Time, way before humanity appears on the scene. in Time-in history. But what is Time anyway? Time is not readily measured nor put in test tubes and so remains as nebulous as substance which, as we know, does not really exist at all.

These stories that have been alluded to in this writing-the Angelic Fight in the Heavenlies and the Garden of Eden belong to biblical lore and to mythology. To take these stories literally, plus the many other such stories, is to miss the point and the purpose completely. It would be like assuming the trivial while missing the whole. Of course, missing the point makes it easier to continue the imaging, to continue the game, for whoever would want to see the truth of the situation. These stories that illustrate the Choosing of Consciousness did not only happen but are happening now in the nebulousness of Time. The Choice is being made over and over, lies upon lies, image upon image, until the mountain is so high it is impossible to see anything. But who would want to see? It is easier to continue to hide behind the walls of so many civilizations, so many settlements and cities, behind religion, behind science, technology, and all the many facades we have assumed as our private and personal kingdoms. It is all really a tribute to Power and to our frustrated attempts to be 'God'. It is all here on the levels of Time, with each step closer to death.

Post #49 "The Unfolding"

Here the energy, the chaos that begins the creation of the cosmic microwave background is apparent. Here Time begins its journey. Here begins the division that composes creation, unfolding from life to death over and over again. Here the walls of the womb called earth move, enfolding protectively about itself, keeping itself in and keeping out what is not its own. Once more the questions posed near the beginning of this writing on the tel in Jericho of Israel/Palestine: At what level was Creation closest to Truth? Where was the image the least distorted that most resembles Reality? At which level was a new level created rather than admitting to what was Real and what was not real? The stuff of Creation unfolds; each in its own time-frame. Humanity appears, at its own place and in its own time.

Post #48 "Pretense"

Here is where the pretense begins. If we Choose to activate our desire to become God-to become Reality, we set in motion the wheels of creation, creating ourselves as we image ourselves to be. We create ourselves as we image God to be...as we image ourselves becoming God. We create ourselves to be in God's place, to possess all that God is and to have all that we deem God to possess. What we desire is what we dream and need God to be. We desire and dream what we need God's place to be. We dream and desire ourselves to be in God's place, in God's Reality. As we dream and desire that Reality, we make that Reality over into our own reality that we may possess it. In our choosing to become God, we image ourselves as possessing all power, as able to do all things and be all things, for after all, we have become 'God'. Consequently, for us dreamers and choosers, Reality can no longer exist. We must deny Reality and play the game as though the transference between humanity and God has occurred. We must play the game that the God of Creation is the God of Reality, as we dream, desire, and choose it to be

Post #47 "Many Actors-Many Stages"

Essentially, if Reality exists, non-reality exists.

The pattern of duality governs creation by replaying the Reality/non-reality scenario but with a different cast of characters on a different stage on the levels of history.

With each replay, with each level of Time, the Reality/non-reality duality moves farther

away from Truth thus becoming fainter and more distorted.

Here, from another angle, the angle of duality,

begins the chaos described in the ancient mythologies of the biblical heavenly battle and

the biblical Genesis accounts.

 

In these accounts, all does not go as desired for the main characters.

Surely the characters, as all of humanity,

realized and realize that their desired transference with God did not take place,

however the roles were played.

Loss resulted,

the loss of heaven in the first story

and the loss of the garden in the second. 

Also, as we may see it more now than at any other time in history

------the loss of innocence.

 

More precisely, the loss could be seen as the loss of God.

Or is it the loss of Reality?

None of the characters in the stories became anything resembling God because Reality was lost,

only the distorted image of Reality resulted.

The question of God and Reality finally presents itself.

 Or, is the question between God and the God of Creation?

Let's consider one of science's profound theological questions.

Carl Sagan, one of the greatest scientists of our times, pondered what he saw as two

conflicting or alternative hypothesis.

"One is that the universe was always here,

and the other is that God was always here.

Why is it immediately obvious that one of these is more likely than the other?

Or put another way, if we say that God made the universe,

it is reasonable to then ask-and

who made God?"

(The Varieties of Scientific Experience by Carl Sagan).

Surviving Gnostic writings that have been labeled as such by religion

and then, consequently,

excluded from the official bible of the church refer to two Gods,

one of which is the God of Creation.

Valentinus, the Gnostic to whom the Gospel of Truth  recently discovered at Nag Hammadi

is attributed,

says that in a secret doctrine received by him from Theudas, a disciple of Paul,

it is revealed that, "the one whom most Christians naively worship as creator,

is in reality, only the image of the true God."

(The Gnostic Gospels, Elaine Pagels).

 

Irenaeus, bishop at the time of Valentinus feared repercussions on clerical authority as Gnosis

gave a theological justification to reject the authority of the church.

Politically speaking, it is obvious why these books would have to be eliminated

at a time when a unified hierarchy of church office was being established.

The unfolding of Reality/non-reality continues.



Post #46 "Defining Reality"

The subject of Reality and Non-reality cannot exclude the consideration of god or gods or God. Words can be applied to Non-reality as non-reality is image. Words are not applicable for Reality, for Reality cannot be reduced to symbols as it cannot be reduced to image and remain what it is.Creation results when the imaged components of our non-reality attempt to express the inexpressible. We create  the image. We create God! We create many gods. Language gives possession to that described so that what is described becomes the symbolic Word. This is the case for the word 'God". God becomes what we make God to be. God takes on the characteristics the given word suggests. These characteristics are the qualities of our creation. We formulate the word and the word recreates God.

The Reality, however, exists as Reality. Our attempts at defining the Reality cannot have an affect on Reality. No matter what we do, we are unable to affect the Reality. Now apply this to the chaos that called forth creation according to the bible and according to science. Apply this to the two biblical mythological stories we have been using for illustration and discussion. The Reality cannot be possessed by us because we have named it, nor can we know it because we think we can describe it. The God we create simply is not the Reality we sought to capture and possess. The description of the affects of creation cannot be put into words. Words cannot describe and we cannot know Reality. We cannot name or try to define that which we are incapable of knowing. Our efforts throughout history have resulted in the God we have created and recreated over and over again and again. Somehow these results end up with a God that resembles humanity and reminds humanity of itself and all that it desires to be.

Post #45 "Duality"

Hot to cold. Up to down. High to low. Reality to Non-reality. The relationship between what is Real and what is not Real is duality. Consequently the relationship between Reality and Non-reality is not only duality but is the basis of all duality. From this, all that follows must also be duality. The original duality is Reality to non-reality or from the point of view of creation; non-reality to Reality , non-reality which must prove Reality to be non-existent. This relationship plays out in the relationship of image to image that repeats throughout the layers or levels or tiers of history. The relationship can also be defined as non-God to God as in non-reality to Reality. This basic relationship underlines the  totality of existence. Here is an example of where language absolutely fails to present and represent the Reality and the relationship of Reality to non-reality. Language, which is symbolic, cannot describe that which is Reality and not able to abide in our created existence.

Post #44 "The Process of Creation"

The process of Creation begins here with Choice. What the biblical Genesis story does not account for is the impetus, or the energy, that caused the wind to stir the waters of the primordial abyss. Science also does not account for what caused the Big Bang.The Choice of the Collective Consciousness is, here again, the impetus, the energy, that set free the photons of light that created the cosmic microwave background. The action of consciousness, which is Choice, empowered the creation of Time, of Place, of Substance, where Reality could not exist, for only that which is not image exists in Reality and not in the image. Reality cannot exist in Creation for Creation is image. The end determines the beginning. The future determines the past. The destruction of Creation set the chaos of pre-creation in motion. The destruction of Creation is the force of primordial energy and pre-creation in motion. The destruction of Creation is the force of primordial energy and the force behind the creation of black energy, black holes, and black matter. The future indeed creates the past, for Time, as Place and Matter, is not only nebulous but does not exist.

Post #43 "The Quest"

In the quest for permanence, for perfection, for wholeness, image seeks ultimate power and the reality of existence from outside itself beyond its own determined and constructed walls. This quest precedes Time, becomes Time, and continues in Time. As Time divides down and passes more quickly through the levels of history, the process of division, moving from collective humanity and collective consciousness, centers this quest in the individual-in individual consciousness. Through the process of division, the Intellect of our so-called present time in history, finds it more and more impossible to think beyond the mechanical world of mechanical thoughts by mechanical thinkers. In continuing the quest, in continuing the image, gods are created and embraced to provide and insure what we seek. These gods, created by image in Time are the archetypes of image and are therefore image themselves. These are the gods of creation.

Post #42 "Building Blocks of Creation"

The Choice is the impetus that calls forth the building blocks of Creation. Firstly, the Choice has blocked Reality but remains only a fleeting image locked into its own Place-the framework of cosmos, planet, or world. Ultimately on the individual level, that of humanity, the image breaks-down into pieces of itself. Secondly, the Choice also blocks out Reality from within its created framework of Time for creation has not achieved immortality. The third block is the creation of Matter. Matter provides the surface on which Reality is projected. Thus Matter creates the confining walls of creation. The walls/barriers of non-reality cause a spiraling, inverted, and a frantic distortion of the reflection of Reality, as in distortion occurring in imaging in holographic science. The Image of consciousness continues choosing and chooses to remain unaware of failure until faced with its own fragility and mortality. We choose to deny and choose to remain unaware of the failure of our choices to possess power we deem necessary to insure our existence. We choose to remain absolutely unaware of our basic failure.

POST #41 "Image"

Image creates and recreates as it watches itself fall into its own undeniable non-existence. The choice of consciousness to become God resulted and results in the creation of image. The irony is that image, while seeking to become Reality, cannot sustain itself because it never succeeded in becoming the Reality it sought and seeks. Consequently, that choice, that image, has not achieved Reality. But has it achieved becoming the God of Creation? The ultimate archetype of humanity is the God of Creation. The Collective Consciousness is the God of Creation.