Saturday, December 23, 2017

4. Deity

      = Work in Progress =

Yes, you can help improve my writing of this latest blog. Though not interested in perfecting the writing to a t, what is desired is a delivery that is as plain and logical as possible. I need your help wherever my words got in the way. Contact me at Penta Publishing for feedback.


-----

Religious concepts provide excellent opportunities for reviewing what structures of everything people envision within their thinking. Yet it is important to avoid discussing details that can upset large groups of people, not an easy task. In this blog, the word God is discussed, while the latest creation story is also presented about what happened right before the Big Bang process took place.

Discussing the word God is perhaps the easiest way to discuss the religious structure of everything, though it is essential to avoid getting stuck in sensitive details. The great benefit of this word is its conceptual familiarity for most people. Yet the downside of the word is that when asked to describe God most of us would likely be finished in just a few sentences - if that. 

Naturally, a lot has been written and said about God’s creations and messengers - one can easily say volumes! Yet very little has been said about God godself. Admittedly, it is difficult to declare something about God. Point in case, describing God as Him or Her is basically already inappropriate, because God does not have a gender, or God can be said to encompass all genders. Due to God being so difficult to describe, this blog has a pronoun dedicated to God with godself, a word established next to him-, her-, and itself.

Depending on time, place and culture, God has been envisioned as female, male, angry, merciful, a noun applicable to more than one god, or an abstract, such as found with the word balance. For some, God is nature. Once people have set their eyes on one clear meaning, the specific word use does not get questioned much.

Perhaps it is already obvious how complicated it gets to discuss God in a neutral stance, even after finding sensitive words to describe God. For some people, there cannot be a more important and venerated word, and anything that is not exactly in sync with the declared meaning may therefore conjure strong reactions.


In this blog, I want to be respectful to all who use the word God, be it in the singular or when used with the plural of gods. Yet one aspect, that of God Almighty, needs to be pointed out, because it helps in understanding how people can take an artificial step when thinking about the largest of concepts. Where possible, I will use a different example to bring the message home.

-----

Within the human realm, when a dictator decides to give his subjects the freedom to do whatever they like, the dictator ceases to be a dictator. He (dictators tend to be guys) may still be powerful, yet all-empowered he is no longer. The conceptual framework of a dictatorship does not contain giving the option to others to do whatever they like.

Believers in God declare that God has given us human beings free will. In such a framework, God can be mighty indeed - mightiest can also be used - but God cannot be Almighty. By establishing free will in people, they have become mighty themselves, albeit just about their own subject matter. The distinction between mighty and almighty sounds small, but is actually significant


-----

Let's work out the artificial position of almighty, using a different word first. We can declare,
for instance, that the dollar is almighty. It has been said many times and even songs have been written about it. Yet almighty the dollar is not.

The word almighty consists of two positions: all and mighty. With all, we can think currencies, and then declare the dollar the mightiest one of them. Nobody would object to this statement. When reviewing this restriction more closely, however, it can be said that the dollar does not dictate the value of other currencies. Rather, currencies fluctuate among themselves, and not just around the dollar

The euro, the yen, or the yuan (renminbi) all contain an empire of their own, a geographical area in which each of them is mighty.

Some currencies are so weak, another currency such as the dollar may have become the desired currency. For instance, people in Venezuela view the dollar as the stable currency, because their Bolivar is under enormous pressures. A person in Venezuela may know 'for a fact' that the dollar is almighty.

Yet the word all in almighty indicates not currencies, but all. Food is actually mightier in Venezuela at the moment than money. And so would be the love for their country, or getting a good education. To declare the dollar almighty or money almighty is giving greater importance to something than what is actually possible. Declaring anything almighty, one uses automatically an artificial position, swooping away all other vital aspects of life. The word covers ground in an unrealistic manner.

-----

A complicating factor in discussing God Almighty is that there are two distinct ways to use the word God, one involving the general concept covered by the word all, and the other involving the specific concept covered by mighty or mightiest.

The word God can point to everything there is, all. When used this way, everything including all contradictions are combined in this one word, just like the words universe and everything neatly encompass all there is. This God includes all, this God is all. Used this way, there is simply no other context than God. Everything is covered by this one word.


-----
 

God can also be used in a specific manner, with God, for instance, sending Jesus or Mohamed to earth to deliver God’s messages. This God is specific and plays a mighty role as the source of important messages. It is particularly through others that much has been said about God's intentions. Because this God exists in a context with others, God can be declared mighty over these others.

While God used in a context can be mighty or mightiest, this version of God cannot be almighty, because that position would declare that everything and all are in service of God; there would then not be a reason to send messengers. Only when there is free will among people can there be a reason to send messengers. God Almighty does not exist, or if you wish does no longer exist.


Declaring God as Almighty (1) can only be done with one eye shut (0), with combining the general position of All and the specific position of Mighty as if they were one and the same position. By separating the concepts correctly, one can say that God can exist at the highest level possible, be mightiest, and even be declared to be everything. But the combined position of almighty is simply not available. God is by definition not a dominant everything.

-----

With two eyes, each of us cannot do anything other than declare our specific view, our position, as our own. Our planet Earth, for instance, is not found simply anywhere in the universe. It is located in a very specific spot, and it is found billions of light years away from where materialization began. A century ago, no religion knew about this very specific position we find ourselves in, and it shows. The other eye must be opened to get a view that contains this level of depth.

The creation story presented in this blog about what preceded the Big Bang consists of an initial activity that is followed up by an inaction, with this combination leading to materialization. This version is of course in compliance with the 0 – 1 setup. Not only will there be a need for some form of consciousness (1), but there will also be a need for the lack thereof (0), both leading to the process of materialization.

-----

While it is not possible to find data from the time and place before the Big Bang process delivered us its material outcome, there is a window through which we can peer into the previous state of our universe. One serious restriction on the view is that a proposed perspective cannot conflict with the outcome. At the same time, the view must also answer the question how materialization was even possible. Because, why else bother.

If we consider the previous state of our universe a vase, and our current universe that of a vase shattered in an almost infinite number of pieces, then we are confronted with the question how a vase could shatter itself. In our current universe, all we need is a solid floor and enough space for gravity to do its work. But there was no material floor available in the previous state. How can we establish a floor in the former state of our universe?

First off, we need to accept that the previous state is a potentially energized state. The energy in this pre-materialized state can be called dark energy. Dark matter and dark energy are theorized to exist within our current universe, considered non-material in essence. If scientists can play with this term, then dark energy can be used in this blog as the energetic state of the previous version of the universe.

-----

Let's address the required floor on which the vase shatters first. Today, we consider the three dimensions to come in three directional pairs. The pairs are up and down, front and back, left and right. However, there is one additional pair in our three-dimensional reality that is often overlooked because it occurs at the collective level. The pair of in and out exists without a doubt, because our universe is doing just that: all matter is moving outwardly in a collective manner.

There is something special about the in-and-out pair. Though the outward movement can continue on forever, truly ad infinitum, the inward movement has an automatic stop. At some point, it becomes impossible to automatically move inward further as a collective. Believe it or not, we have found our solid floor. Yet a collective direction is then also discovered for dark energy that must have existed as norm before the process of materialization started.

Consider an energized reality. All that is needed is an inward movement occurring within the former energized state of the universe. The inward movement is an activity, and if desired we can place God here. With God, the inward activity can be declared a conscious activity. Naturally, the story can be told without using the word God, and the occurrence would not be any different. Based on the outcome, we can state not only that it occurred, but that it had collective qualities. The activity would endure until
no further inward movement is possible anymore for its central area, forcing an outcome.

-----

Based on the material outcome after the Big Bang, imagine an enormous amount of energy before the Big Bang that is moving inwardly onto its collective self. We know that this collective movement either was not or did not remain a collective throughout. Therefore, right where push comes to shove, there is no longer a collective reality, but rather there are three specific realities.

First, at one point at the center of the inward movement, no inward movement is possible anymore. As mentioned this area may have had the size of 380,000 light years, so it is by no means a bulwark the size of a pinhead. Let's declare this area to consist of dark matter.

Second, surrounding the central immobile area, movement is still occurring, but it is not occurring in a uniform manner anymore. Where friction is possible near the immobile area, side-way movements are found. Envision this energized area the basis for materialization.

Third, and farther out, the overall movement is still inward, as if the plan hadn't changed. The pressure for the area of friction occurs due to the continued inward movement from the outer areas. Lastly, therefore, this continuing not-stopping energy is exactly like the original dark energy.

What started out as a collective behavior is no longer collective in nature. The center is immobile, a frontier area surrounding this large ball of dark energy is moving sideways, and the exterior parts are continuing to collectively move inwards.

-----

Based on the fact that it ended up with a vase shattering all over the place, we know something went terribly wrong, and this must have been where the friction is occurring. The sideways movement in the area of friction is simply not sustainable, and the dark energy is locally warped, broken up into pieces. Not only does this transform the area of friction into matter, it also unleashes enormous outward pressures, because the collective movement is no longer collective and therefore no longer contained.

The story is already complete if the immobile inner area became mobile again, moving outwardly. Enormous outward pressures are unleashed, and anything that materialized in the area of friction would have been catapulted outwardly. Though the story is told just with simple details, it does fit the outcome as discovered by scientists. A significant distinction is that the immobile area delivers the push, but is itself not materialized.

-----

Let’s recapture this image in different words, making light of it
a bit. Imagine a million eggs on an inbound flight towards one another. Yes, the results will be a scramble. There is not necessarily much speed involved, so let’s make this event go extremely slow as to not break anything. At some point, eggs are meeting up 'shoulder to shoulder' at the center, and yet more eggs are moving inwardly.

It is not the center egg that will give way; this egg is shielded from the mounting pressures by the strength of the scales of all surrounding eggs. Rather, in the areas located right outside the equilibrium where strength of scales meets inward pressures, the conditions for breakage are just right; those eggs will be beat.

It does not matter how we envision the energy of the previous state, because there will automatically be a perfect-storm momentum between localized strengths and inward pressures. All that is required is an energized state moving inwardly. It won't be dead-center that gives way to the mounting pressures. Rather, where the tiniest amount of friction is possible next to the highest possible level of tension, those eggs are toast.

Where the conscious (1) movement occurred, an outcome of unintended (0) consequences followed. Where a collective dark-energy movement was started up, individual packages of dark energy ended up being squeezed out by the collective setup. Where at first there was control, the result contained areas without control.

The packages of dark energy materialized under specific conditions, and it shows. The process of inward movement contained an automatic limit, and this limit is subsequently expressed in matter. Consider the fact that no matter in our universe is infinite; all matter is limited. There is also a collective quality attached to matter, even though this, too, has its limitations.

Our planet Earth is the largest unit of matter we live on. While it is enormous compared to our own physical sizes, it is a limited place. The largest material entity in our universe is a limited place. Matter shows us the experienced original limit; packages of dark energy found themselves subjected to a collective force whose limitation got expressed in specific local spots.

-----

In this blog all are encouraged to continue believing in God, albeit that the Almighty position is declared an artificial position. It is not that God cannot be mighty or mightiest, but Almighty is simply not available without making serfs out of ourselves. Our Universe 2.0 is moving outwardly, and the prior condition
therefore would have been an inward condition that automatically contained a final moment, ending the Universe 1.0 setup.

In the next blog the secret contents of the pyramid is revealed. 



Blog Chips 

-----

Narrative based on In Search of a Cyclops, published by Penta Publishing.

Feel this draft can use some improvement? Send feedback at: pentapublishing.com


0 Comments:

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home