₦airaland Forum

plaetton:
Hmmmm.
Articulate and well written.
I disagree with almost everything in this write up.
But I was still enjoying the reading untill I got the point where the Op wrote " God sent Martin Luther to , "
Once I hear or read "God sent ", I tend to do a double take and realize that I'm on the wrong thread.

Thanks. You don't have to agree with anything that I say. It it's perfectly okay to disagree with me. If anything you read or hear doesn't resonate within you, always feel free to discard it, irrespective of who said or wrote it.

Thanks

InesQor:
Interesting submissions, Justcool.

Thanks for sharing your perceptions.

Thank you.

Deep Sight:
Justool, many thanks. I have a great many questions, but will try to streamline them into just a few. However before i do so, can you clarify for me who exactly the lion you refer to was?

For many centuries mankind have received tidings about the four winged animals at the foot of the Throne of God. These creatures faithfully guard the Throne of God. Even in the bible, in the Revelation of John, these creatures were mentioned, as their radiated pictures were shown to the writer of the Revelation for him to pass down. The knowledge of the existence of these creatures is important to mankind in their spiritual development due these animals connection to creation and consequently mankind.

These four winged animals form the pillars of creation. The radiations that later coagulated as creation all issued from these knowing animals. For example, the radiations that formed the spiritual species (both primordial and human spiritual) in creation issued from the lamb. And the lamb is one of the four aforementioned knowing animals on the steps of the Throne of God in the Divine sphere.

Among these four knowing animals there is also a lion.

You must not think of them as the animals we know on earth whose souls issue from the sphere of animistic substantiality below the spiritual planes. These animals on the steps of God’s Throne are Divine beings, far more knowing and conscious than any human spirit can ever become. The fact that they have animal forms symbolizes the nature of their working or the nature of the radiation that pass through then. For example the Lamb bears a human face, because the human spiritual issued from him. Their wings represent the fact they swing harmoniously and unconditionally in the will of God, bearing no other will within themselves. Because in that vicinity to God it is impossible for an alien will to arise.

All that swing unconditionally in the will of God have wings, like angels. The spiritual has no wings because that which is spiritual carries self or free-will as an intricate part of its species. This is why Lucifer lost his wings when he deviated from the will of God, when self-will arose within him. But I digressed.

Now back to animals, the forms that the animals on earth have are a very coarse representation of the animals on the steps of the Throne of God. For example, the earthly animal that we know as the lion is actually a very coarse representation of the Lion on the steps of God’s Throne. These animals are unimaginable in size, majesty and beauty; equally each of them is larger than the planet earth in size.

Now when the son of man incarnated into the primordial spiritual plane, a repetition of the process occurred. The first ring around Him consisted of four knowing primordial spiritual beings, each representing the one of the four animals on the steps of the Throne of God.

But these primordial representations of the Divine animals, all have human forms because they are all primordial spirits. They are the four knights that faithfully guard the throne of the son of man.

Being the strongest and the noblest primordial spiritual beings, they are able draw radiations from the son of man and transform these radiations in a manner that other creatures can absorb. Just as the four Divine animals on the steps of God’s throne, are able to absorb the radiations of God and transform them and pass them down to other creatures in the Divine sphere and below.

Since the radiation of Unsubstantiated Divinity, God, contains all, these beings by their nature are able to, analogically speaking, filter a particular radiation from the radiation of God. For example, the primordial lion is able to draw Heroism from the radiations of the son of man and then pass it down to other creations.

Hence, one can equally say that this Primordial Spirit called Lion is an embodiment of the most noble heroism which lends the individual an unshakable loyalty to the Light!

This is the lion that was linked to the earth at the time when mankind proved themselves incapable of loyally fulfilling their task in the most noble heroic manner. His radiation was to help mankind rise up to noble heroism.

Noble heroism involves uniting the spiritual peacefulness with righteous aggression. The type that will never be an aggressor but will courageously withstand any threat no matter how aggressive or violent the traitor maybe.

Mankind have never been able to exhibit righteous aggression or noble heroism. The type that Jesus portrayed when He would rather face violent death than abandon his task. The type that Abd-ru-shin portrayed when He lead his army to battle in defense of his noble kingdom which Eb-ra-nit threatened. Just by displaying courage and the most noble heroism Abd-ru-shin defeated Eb-ra-nit without shading any blood. I know you know this story.

Like I said earlier, mankind has never been able to unite righteous aggression with the peacefulness and serenity of the spiritual.  Men who develop spiritually often neglect to absorb this radiation, it happens that judging from history, the more spiritual one become, the less courageous he becomes and this is wrong. When attacked they would usually run away or fold their arms and wait for God to fight a physical battle for them. Just as the apostles abandoned Jesus when the threat of death confronted them. Spiritually developed peoples, in the past, usually lacked military might.

On the other people who usually developed courage, as in military might and etc., often abandon the spiritual part of then. They usually end-up becoming aggressive nations or people, lacking all peacefulness, who go on and on and conquer. Such aggression is unnatural among men, it is a quality that lies in the animistic. Hence the powerful nation, the Romans, the Babylonians, and etc. often allow themselves to be coarsened, neglecting their spiritual part, they often stand a step or many steps lower the spiritually developed people.

On thousands of years ago in Iz-ra did Abd-ru-shin found an empire that was as spiritual as they were courageous. But even this had to be achieved by two different peoples; the Ishmalites beings spiritual and the Arabs being courageous.

The Germananic people were given the impetus to unit both qualities, of being military strong and courageous and at the same time have peaceful and loving nature of the spirit. Among all minkind at that time, they possesed the greatest possiblity or potential of achieveing this. But they failed miserable and allowed the coarser part of them, the military and warlike attitude to overshadow their spiritual qualities. The entire mankind failed in this respect. Aggression only becomes righteous when it is employed in defense of that which is most sacred in man. Mark my words carefully, I said defense, never in invading and attacking others but in standing courageously in defense of the light even in the face of physical war or physical death.

As happened with Christ, the called ones all left the Helper in the thick of the battle. They lacked noble Heroism.

Hence the primodial lion was linked to the earth.

Deep Sight:
Does it not trouble you that a mission said to be planned and prepared by God for millenia could culminate in such spectacular failure - particularly with reference to people said to be called - and the disastrous impact their activities actually have in the end - [i]the unspeakable evi[/i]l? Do you not find this rather unsettling with regard to the power and will of God?

Many thanks.

It actually confirms the power of the Will of God. The fact remains that mankind being spiritual have free will which can go either way. Mankind can decide to go upwards or downwards. God would never interfere with the free will of man because either way, the Will of God will triumph in the end. The effect of the wrong application of their free-will will only revenge itself against mankind. They can choose to align themselves to the Will of God and survive, or they can choose to align themselves to darkness and parish with the rest of all that is dark.

Hence Christ, as well as the Helper had to face everything with serene calmness; because they, both Jesus and the Helper, stand in the Will of God. One who knows mankind will never be surprised of what mankind is capable of. Our track record has shown that we human spirit are most unpredictable and unreliable.

It also gives one confidence because the events that happened speaks clearly enough, that irrespective of who fails, God will always find ways to help those that deserved His help. 

In all these, what one clearly sees, is how the love of God inclines itself and helps us even in the face of all our failures. God is indeed Love.

Thanks

Also, about the Jews and the Germans. Many people have wondered why the Germans, especially the Nazi or Hitler, hated Jews so much. And many people have sought the answer on the physical level. But as in all things the real life lies in the spiritual.

The answer to this puzzle is very easy yet very difficult to put into words. But we see the same thing happening around us every day. I will give an example, every day we see an anti-gay activist who hates gays so much that he condones acts of violence against gays. Only latter to discover that this guy is actually gay himself. To our greatest surprise such a guy later becomes gay in his life.

Only then do we begin to suspect why he hated gays so much. The Truth is that every gay man he sees reminds him of something within him, his gayness, something that he was not courageous enough to confront. And by killing or persecuting gay men he feels that he has extinguished the gayness in him. All this is happening at the subconscious level and he may not consciously know what he is actually doing.

The Jews were called in regards to the mission of Jesus and they failed; they actually along with the Romans murdered Jesus. The two people called to protect Him! Isn’t that ironic!

The Germans were called too in regards to Abd-ru-shin. They sensed the gravity of their calling, and as they sank they sensed their failure. The Jews reminded them of something within themselves, something they had in common with the Jews, something they would rather not confront. The failure in them! Hence by persecuting the Jews the Nazi felt that they were killing and persecuting their own failure. Similar to the situation between the antigay guy and the gay people he persecutes.

This hatred for the Jews is not found only among Germans. Anybody that points an accusing finger against the Jews is actually accusing himself. His own failures which are homogenous to the failure of the Jews are what the individual is trying to deal with. For the Jews as a people now signifies two very important spiritual situations—the failure in regards to Jesus and the rejection of Jesus as the son of God.

Thus a false Christian, for example, who hates and criticizes Jews based on their rejection of Christ as the son of God is actually dealing with his own rejection of the True message of Jesus. Thus when he sees a Jew who rejects Jesus as well, he feels a homogeneity, which he does not like and anger arises in him against the Jew.

The same is applicable to an atheist who feels anger when he sees believers. The truth is that such atheist is a believer within him, but he lacked the courage to confront the belief within him. And by attacking and quieting believers, he feels he had quieted the belief within him too.

As always, people would always find a physical or outward reason to base their behavior on. But the root of all behaviors lies in the spirit. The physical circumstances are actually a reflection of the spiritual condition. Hence the individual creates the physical conditions that excuses him to behave the way he does.

In every Jew, Hitler saw himself the way he truly was. And this he hated to confront himself. The economic reasons he offered for the persecution of Jews were only outward justification for something very deep; they are not the real reason.

Some historians actually believe that Hitler later found out that he had Jewish blood in him.

Jesus had already explained this phenomenon when, according to Mathew, He said, “And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?”(Mathew 7:3) If you observe yourself carefully you will see that the faults, in others, that anger you are in you as well; otherwise they will not make any impression on you. And the people you hate most may be the people that most like yourself.

In addition to all these, there is also the issue of heroism. During that era heroes arouse almost in all nations. This is also a form of radiation that mankind has proved incapable of rightly passing down. If we step back in history and observe the development of peoples we will notice that the more a people developed spiritually the least physical and warlike they become. Thus it happens that they soon become victims of coarser warlike people who would enslave them and hence check or disturb their spiritual growth. Mankind never uses the rays of righteous aggression which is necessary for defense. This developing only spiritually often manifests in the physical bodies as well and overtime the spiritually developed peoples end up having weaker physical bodies than the coarser warlike races. Look at the Jews of that time; even the Jews of today. Their forefathers developed spiritually but overtime they neglected the necessary physical assertion. It happened that at the time of the coming of Christ, the Jews, who being spiritually most advanced, could offer the necessary spiritual homogeneity for attraction but could not offer the right physical body or physical protection. Hence the Romans at that time, who had developed their physical bodies to almost perfection due to the demands of war, were called to offer Jesus a physical protection. But both the Jews and the Romans failed their callings. Even the few Jews who came to recognition of Jesus ran away during his arrest and trial. They lacked courage or righteous aggression to stand and form a barracked around the son of God. This is partly not their fault because the human spirit by its nature is inherently peaceful and never warlike or aggressive.

In order to prevent what happened in the time of Jesus from repeating itself, the people called Germanic peoples were, in addition to spiritual impetus, given an impetuous towards physical development, the physical development of their bodies and a warlike manner for defense. This is necessary because they were to defend this Helper physically if the need arises, just as the Romans, with their military might should have protected Jesus. The Germans with their great military might should have surrounded this helper offering him physical protection. This is also why there was a great impetus among the Germanic peoples then to achieve healthy physical bodies and physical perfection in their bodies. This impetus drove the Nazi to genetic engineering which is wrong. But it was this impetus that also urged the earlier Germans to develop physical body good enough for the Helper to wear. While they succeeded in bringing up a physical body healthy enough for His incarnation; they failed to offer this helper the needed physical protection. Even the ones who came to recognition lacked courage and feared the might of the government. The government which was supposed to protect actually sought to harm Him!

You see why it was necessary for this helper to be born in a powerful nation. For physical protection. If Jesus was a Roman citizen do you think he would have been crucified?

When it comes to physical protection mankind often arrive at the strange idea that God should physically protect his servant or his people. And this is why God’s people often fall into the hands of the strong nations. Look at how many empires that enslaved the Jews! From Egypt to Babylon, from Babylon to Rome! Mankind never realizes that spiritual development should go hand in hand with physical as well. And since according to the law of homogeneous species, one can only ward off like with the like. You don’t expect the almighty in His Divine unsubstantiate nature to fight a physical battle. We humans who are supposed to be His servants, and who wear a physical body should not stand aside when an enemy physically threatens the Will of God, His prophets, or His son!

Even in Paradise and above, the Son of God is always surrounded by knights who hold up their swords always ready to defend the sacred vessel in their midst. Even in the steps of the Throne of God there is the heroic Lion, one of the guardians of the throne of God.

Thus when this helper was abandoned by all the called ones who out of fear left Him; and when despite all treats He courageously stood by his task; as a help from God, the Primordial Lion was linked to the earth through a physical vessel prepared for him. This lion was to lend mankind the courage and heroism that they lacked; this help was for mankind. This loin sent his heroic radiations into subsequent creation and human spirits who were open for it absorbed it. This is why there was valor and heroism of superhuman kind during that time.

Once again the spiritual ones and the awakened ones failed to absorb this radiation which was to urge them to stand heroically by this Helper’s side. Rather the coarser ones among mankind picked up these radiations and it urged them into battle to defend their nations or their peoples. This is why we saw a lot of heroic feats during the Second World War.

And even after the war, radiations of this lion still reverberated across the earth, attracting heroic spirits to the earth. The oppressed found strength and courage to defend themselves. In all countries of the world heroes arouse. It is interesting to note the amount of freedom fighters that arouse in the life time of this lion. Even the anticolonial movements in Africa; most of the enslaved African nations fought and won their freedom during the earth life of this lion. The civil right movement in America, the heroic feats of Gandhi in India, and many freedom fighters that excited in Africa all draw their strength from this lion.

The funny thing about history is that we only tell the outward manifestation; but the real life and evolution of everything lies in the spiritual! When we tell of our victory against slavery during the civil right movements, or how we won our independence in Nigeria, how Gandhi courageously fought his oppressors, or Martin Luther King Jr. courageously and heroically raised his voice against oppression, we fail to realize the real life beneath it all.  For it was the Helper’s radiation through the heroic the lion that made all this things possible.

The same power that gave Moses courage to stand against Egypt!

Thanks

Deepsight, I thank you, as well as I thank all who have patiently waited for my perception on this issue. I will give full vent of my perception on this issue.

But before I proceed I wish to remind readers that what I'm about to share here are my perceptions. My words should not be taken as the gospel Truth; rather it is meant to urge the reader into further investigation. Each reader should investigate my words, weigh and examine them with his/her intuitive perception; only when you have done this and my words completely resonate within you should you accept them. As always I advise every reader to read and a personal experience of the Grail Message himself or herself.

Also, before I proceed, I wish to make some things clear, because this issue deals with race and nationality, very sensitive issues. I wish to throw light in the mechanism that guides incarnations and the spiritual development of peoples. For in reality, when it comes to spiritual development, it is the spirit, or the spiritual abilities that count, and not the really the race or nationality which has more to do with the physical body.

In the past, it was easier to judge the spiritual development of an individual based on the individual’s race, tribe, nationality, and etc. This is because trans-racial or trans-cultural dealings were not as rampant then as they are today. In those days, a woman from a West African tribe was pretty much bound to that tribe and may most likely live all her life within her tribe, among her people, never being exposed to foreign people or far-away tribes. Since incarnations are based on the law of attraction of homogenous species, every child that this woman brings into the world would most likely be of the same level of maturity to her people.
This is why in many cultures, where people still pay attention to their spiritual helpers, women, especially pregnant women are considered sacred and sheltered; forbidden to be exposed to certain things. Even in the Old Testament, the Jews were told not to allow their daughters to marry foreigners. People today only see these things as racism and superstation because the modern man no longer perceives the hidden spiritual connections and implications behind many things. For in reality, the spiritual development of any people depends more on their women than their men. But I digressed.
So retuning to the point that I’m trying to make, in the modern world of today, it will be very erroneous to judge a man’s spiritual development based on race, nationality and etc. This is because the world has become a global village; a woman from an underdeveloped tribe may travel to another country and live among a people more spiritually developed than her people. A close associate of hers, from this higher developed people, perhaps her doctor, her boss, or her house maid, may end up offering the path through which a spiritually advanced soul may incarnate into the child in the womb of this woman from a lower developed tribe. The people around women or the people around pregnant woman often offer bridges to souls in the beyond to incarnate through the pregnant woman, even though they may not be biologically related to the child or the pregnant woman. And only a soul homogeneous to a bridge can pass through that bridge. Thus only a soul homogeneous to Mr. A. can pass through the bridge offered by Mr. A.
Apart from this, whenever a light bringer enters into subsequent creation, this are shaken up by the pressure of the light brought. The words that Christ brought, for example, took on very powerful forms in the beyond; very powerful because, behind them stands the enormous power of God. These words have very strong penetrating powers, that they penetrate places hitherto closed to light; one can equally say that they (the words of Christ) surround each soul, constantly knocking at the door of the soul and seeking to be allowed in. Hence the aforementioned woman living and enclosed in within the confines of an underdeveloped people, may, by opening herself to the words of Christ, even though she may never consciously have met Christ or any Christian, her spirit may come in contact with the spirit of Christ or the words of Christ which will induce her into spiritual movement. In so doing she would flood herself and her environment with light, offering paths for higher developed souls to incarnate in her womb or the wombs of other women around her. The aforementioned power of penetration is the reason why at a point in human history, the son of God had to incarnate and not just a mare prophet whose words can never have as much penetrating power as that of the Son of God. The Grail message shock up things too, things that were hitherto hiding or slumbering were brought to the front by the pressure behind the words. And more so because this time, the words, which are the original words of Jesus, are written in a form that anybody can easily absorb. So the person entrapped among a lower developed tribes may pick up a copy of the Grail Message and read, by living in accord with the Grail Message, within a few years, he/she may attain a spiritual development that may have taken him/her centuries  and many incarnations to achieve. I do not need to mention the impact such a person would have around his/her hitherto dark environment. Through the bridge offered by such a person, higher developed souls may incarnate through her or the people in her vicinity.
So, in view of all these changes that has taken place in subsequent creation, a Yoruba man today may stand higher spiritually than a German; while another German may stand higher than another Yoruba man. Spiritual development and homogeneity, as it is today, are no longer closely related to race, tribe, or nationality, as it used to be in the past. This is one of the effects of Judgment; in the Judgment, God through His envoy, gives everybody the power to break all fetters. This is the separation between the wheat and the chaff that was promised in the bible; the rapture so much waited for. This separation cuts across races, tribes, families, and nationalities. It is unfortunate that many human spirits who have waited for rapture for many centuries now stand before it without recognizing it. All due to their fault for they have imagined it to proceed in a supernatural manner. But there is nothing supernatural.


Another thing that I will like to clarify is the issue of being a called or a chosen people or person. Being called does not mean that one is immune to evil; it only means that the individual carries the qualities necessary for the fulfillment of his mission. As it is with individuals, so it is with entire peoples. Some individuals through many centuries of exerting themselves spiritually, or though many centuries of exercising their spiritual muscles have attained or developed qualities which are needed for a particular light happening. These individuals would then be called and prepared further to use their talents to help in the light happening or to help the bringer of light. Like Christ said, many are called but only a few chosen, many are called to help but only a few live up to their callings. The word “chosen” used in this context means “living up to a calling” or “successfully fulfilling ones calling.”


Also I wish, also, to express the fact that with my explanations that are about to unfold, I wish not to point an accusing finger to anybody of any peoples. Let us use this to learn about how we all, including myself [/i]have failed before the light and not just a particular people. My explanations may appear hash or as if I’m pointing an accusing finger at Hitler and the Germans, but this is not the spirit of my explanation; because I do not consider myself better than Hitler. We all have failed before the light; since there is no measure when it comes to failure. One who failed in a small thing is as guilty as one who failed in a mighty thing. Because Before God everything is equal; the smallest task is as important as the most enormous task as well as each creature no matter how little is as important as the biggest creature. This is the law of LOVE.


Now to the Germans. The explanation I gave years earlier about the Germans is correct. The Germans where called, just as the ancient Jews and the ancient Romans were called in regard to the mission of Christ. Just as the Arabians were called in regard to the mission of Mohamed, and etc. The Germans failed their callings as much as the entire mankind failed. The word “chosen” that I used years ago was used in the context of being called and not being successful in fulfilling the calling. Hitler contributed a lot to the failure of the German people, because through him darkness tuned everything upside down.
And when I say the Germans, I do not exclusively mean that political nation called Germany; because nationality is purely political and does not count in these issues. By Germans, I mean the Germanic peoples. To a lesser extent, the whole white race was called; and the entire mankind to an even more lesser extent. I know this is ambiguous but I will explain later. The Germanic people have for centuries developed both spiritually and physically the qualities which landed them a special calling in regard to this particular light happening.
For thousands of years they were prepared, they received numerous helpers. Many helpers incarnated among them to prepare them. Even their language, like I said, years earlier was specially guided prepared for the reception of the Grail Message. Martin Luther was actually sent by God to help in the development of the German language. There is no point mentioning the numerous called ones that were sent to them. But years before the light happening, the prevalent intuition among the Germans was to achieve that perfect race that will lead humanity into a new age—the millennium. And this intuition was not wrong because that was actually there calling; they were called to be the future leader and guider of mankind in spiritual as well as in physical and earthly things. This calling they can only fulfill if they (1) recognize the helper and (2) rally around him in protection and loyalty. For the helper that mankind have awaited for centuries was to stand in their mist. In addition to this prevent intuition of achieving the perfect and exalted race (the ruling class); there was also great impetus among the Germanic peoples to find the Holy Grail. Many poets among them filled with inspiration wrote about this lofty Grail which they intuitively and correctly linked with Christ. Filled with inspiration, the Germans stood out among mankind, in all things, even in technological development. And this drew the attention of the whole world; indifference towards them was almost impossible. One could only love or hate them; because behind them stood enormous spiritual abilities. (Mark my words very well, I said “spiritual[i] abilities ” not necessarily spiritual qualities. I will explain this later)
And when the Helper stood among them, the prevalent intuitions skyrocketed to enormous power. For based on their spiritual abilities they were able to draw enormous power from this helper. And this power, the power of God always remains neutral; you already know this. 
Prevalent intuition of leading and founding the perfect race naturally filled their leaders, including Hitler. They felt an enormous urge to fight, to conquer, to find the perfect race of humans, to lead mankind into the longed for millennium. But this urge which is quite correct was not grounded because, even though they drew enormous power from this helper, they did not recognize Him who would have clarified things for them.
Had they listened to him, they would have discerned, that the urge to fight and conquer which filled mankind at that time, was given to them from above. Each individual was given the urge to take up arms and confront all that was dark both within and without him. This was what this superhuman courage that filled mankind then was made to be used for; to fight darkness and not for men to fight each other.
Had they listened to this helper, the Germans would have realized that the perfect race they sought was to start within themselves spiritually. They were to evolve spiritual qualities and become perfect in their development spiritually which then also manifest physically. They helper was there to give them all they need to complete their development and lead mankind through example.
They were supposed to lead by example; spiritual qualities of Love, Kindness, Justice, and etc. were to blossom among them in a manner that mankind had never seen before.  Since all that is spiritual is attractive; these spiritual qualities would have attracted the entire mankind into willingly following the leadership of the Germans and also urge mankind towards spiritual development. Like it once happened thousands of years ago in Is-Ra where Abd-ru-shin through exemplary living conquered his neighboring kingdoms.
But darkness offered mankind cheap and false way of realizing the urge within them. Rather than developing spiritual qualities, to aid the Light in the fight against all darkness which had no right to exist in creation, mankind developed physical arms and fourth each other. This is where the entire mankind failed; for in the war against darkness, the entire mankind was called.
The Germans failed particularly because they had a special calling. They were supposed to be living forms of the Grail Message. But many thanks to darkness, through Hitler, the Grail message was banned in Germany. Rather than leading by exemplary living, the Germans sought to conquer by physical force and brutality.
Ambition drove Hitler to obscure the helper; even though everything spoke clearly enough that the helper was on earth then. Many people thought that this helper who their intuition ensured them was one earth, was Hitler. Even the stars took on a constellation that showed that the helper had arrived, but Hitler’s birthday also fell within the time. His birthday differed from the helper only in two days, although 14 years apart, both where born in April.


Now I wish to clarify what I meant when I say spiritual abilities as opposed to spiritual qualities. By spiritual abilities, a mean the ability of a developed spirit to involve the power of his spiritual intuition in all his works. Hence even here, the words of Jesus hold true, “by their works you shall know them.” By the works of an individual you can know how developed the person is spiritual or how much he has developed his spiritual abilities. You can tell how high he stands in creation or how low he has fallen.
People who have not developed their spiritual abilities rarely involve their spirit or the power of their spirit in their works. This is simple, as their spirits have not developed any abilities to be involved. Their works weather be it works of wickedness or kindness only takes on weak forms in the beyond; they are phantoms, only products of the brain. But people with spiritual abilities involve the power of their spirits in their works and hence these works, bearing the principle neutral power of God, manifest in very powerful forms. Wheather be it works of evil of good.
Only when the spiritual abilities are guided by the spiritual intuition or applied in a manner that accord with the Will of God will good works arise. Such works as kindness love and etc.; these are what I mean by spiritual qualities.
Hence one can equally say that the more developed the spiritual abilities are, the lower or higher the individual can fall or rise. This is why Lucifer fell lower than any human spirit can fall. No human spirit can penetrate the realm of Lucifer, its far to lower than the law of gravity can allow any human spirit. By the same token, if Jesus who bore Divinity unsubstsantiate within him had fallen, He would have fallen far deeper than Lucifer. This is expressed in the words, “to him who more is given, would more be expected from!”
This is all too simple and natural; for these laws manifest even in coarsest gross matter. Consider that the higher an object is from the ground, the more impact it will make on the ground when it falls. This is simple physics. Hence the impact made by a fallen object can give clue to how high the object stood before the fall. How deep a peble falls into the ocean gives clue to how high the peble was before falling. The higher you are from the ground, the more mementum you will gain as you fall; hence the deeper your fall will be.
Now apply this to the Germans! Do I need to say more? The depth to which they fell bore witness to thier hieght before the fall! The inhuman wickedness that we see in the works of the Germans gives clue to their developed spiritual abilities. Behind these works stood the principal neutral power of God, lend to the works by the spirits of the producers of the works. Wickedness was taken to a level far beyond our imagination because the producers of this wickedness employed their spiritual ability to tap into the neutral power of God.
Hence among the Germans were many specially called and endowed with special spiritual abilities. Abilities to draw more power from this helper, more power than other races could draw. Indeed the white race where then equipped with higher spiritual abilities than other races were able to draw so much energy from this helper. But rather than using this energy in the manner it was intended for; they used it to fight against each other.
Nobody with mere human power could have done what the German’s did; behind them stood enormous power which drove them into almost super-human feats. The same power that gave Moses the might to bring the powerful Egypt to its knees. It is also my perception that their defeat was brought about by the same power. It is my perception that there is a connection between the departure of this helper and the defeat of the Germans. I leave you to do the tracing yourself.
Please try to imagine what Hitler and the Germans would have achieved if they had used this power for good; for this power naturally grows stronger when applied in the right way, for development and goodness. Just as we shudder at their evils, we would have marveled at their superhuman goodness, kindness, and heroism, if only they had used the power for good!

Now to deal with your questions:

Deep Sight:
1. Who was Adolf Hitler? What was "behind" him? What was the spiritual imperative of his actions? What was his spiritual role?

It is my perception that Hitler was actually a called one. A called one among a called people! This does not mean that he wasn’t a mere human spirit. To be called only means to be called to employ your abilities and nothing more. Many called ones fail; the calling only proves that the individual carries the abilities needed for the fulfillment of his calling within him at the time of his calling. I explained this above.
Hitler is human spirit. I believe he was a bishop in his previous incarnation before he incarnated as Hitler. In prior incarnations he showed the desire for Truth and God, and prayed to be allowed to help in the time of the Helper. Hence he was given all that he needed in terms of spiritual abilities.
As Adolf Hitler, he faintly felt his calling and the power of God that he felt in him gave courage. But he did not wait for that which he sensed within him to mature. He did not guide his quest for the Truth and glory of a purified race that will lead humanity, with his intuition. He succumbed to the emotions of his people who were dealing with the humiliating defeat of the WW1, and he sought for a way to strengthen his people. Darkness offered him a way out—pride.
Filed with pride, and already succumbed to darkness, he rushed on into his mission too early. Darkness lead him away and even made him believe that the helper he was seeking was himself. Hence he sought the solution for the problem of the Germans within himself; and as always, his intellect readily offered him cheap substitutes.
But due to his abilities, he was able to draw so much power to himself, and this drew people to him. People kept spell bound by the power they perceived in him. Erroneously considering him the origin of this power; the people saw him as the savior.
His fascination with the Holy Grail was as a result of him faintly sensing that He should ground himself with the Holy Grail which was on earth then in a living form—the helper. Had Hitler patiently waited for that which was stirring within him to mature, he would have found his way to this Helper and align himself to the will of God which surged and bobbled within this helper.

Even though Hitler never heeded the call of this Helper; even though Hitler became a servant of darkness, he could not remain indifferent to this helper due his(Hitler’s) calling and also due to the fact that all that is dark naturally opposed the light.  Hence the very day the Nazi annexed Austria, they marched towards the mountain in Austria where the Helper stood and arrested him.

Look at him closely and you will see a lot of things. Look at the symbols of his Nazi. Look at the swastika; it is the Grail cross in a distorted form. Sometimes he was even pictured with a dove above his head. The protection that he was supposed to have given the helper, he gave to himself and to the church. Attention that should have gone to the genuine helper was given to Hitler.

Deep Sight:
2. What was the spiritual role of the German people at that time in history. Were they indeed the most spiritually advanced peoples on earth at the time? Were they truly the highest representation of the human race? If indeed they were, how is it possible that they opened themselves to rise as a nation to the unpeakable levels of evil to which Hitler inspired them?

As per the role of the Germans, I believe I have answered that. About the highest representative of the human, they carried the ability to become so hence they were called to become that. But in this they totally failed. They might have achieved that if they had recognized the helper and paid heed to Him, and if they had painstakingly used the power they drew from Him for good.

Deep Sight:
3. What was the spiritual significance of the role/ suffering/ persecution of the Jewish people in that conflict. What Karma was at play here. Was the holocaust a spiritually "necessary" happening?

Suffering is never the Will of God; God punishes nobody. Suffering only arises from man’s misuse of his freewill and his wrong attunement to the laws of creation. Even in the face of the harshest karma, if the individual attunes himself in the right manner to the laws of creation, only redemption, joy and happiness will result. Hence the holocaust needed not have happened. The fact that it did only shows the failure of mankind; hence it was not a “necessary” happening.
But with the return of this Helper, came the closing of all the karmic cycles which started during the earth life of Jesus. All the seed that mankind sowed with Jesus retuned to them to be redeemed. Keeping in mind that this helper was given the power of God’s justice. This power seeks to bring all injustices to redemption. The same happened during the earth life of Moses who endured with great spiritual abilities were able to draw enormous power from the Helper.
Hence the same power retuned to the earth and all the Karma that mankind incurred accumulated and matured within a few years and fell back on their originators. The fact that this karma manifested in the form of holocaust was as a result of failure of mankind. If they had opened themselves to the rays of love, and attuned themselves aright, the karma would not have manifested in such hideous forms as the holocaust.
Because out of love; this time, in the return of the helper, the ray of Love accompanied him so that if mankind pays heed to him and absorbed the ray of Love that accompanied him, they will be saved from very terrible blows of fate.

Deep Sight:
4. What spiritual force/ forces are represented by the Allied powers. Particularly what was the spiritual significance of Great Britain, her empire, her stand, her exertion, her grit and her ultimate victory together with the Allied forces. I had heard it said that Hitler was no worse than any other conqueror in history: and that he merely wanted what Britain already had: an empire.

At that time, the entire mankind, particularly the Germanic peoples and the entire white race where filled powers hitherto unknown to mankind. Powers penetrated the earth; however this power was meant to be used in the struggle against darkness. The Armageddon so much talked about. But this power also awakens every quality that was hitherto slumbering in different peoples of the earth. Everything had to reveal itself to be judged by the Light. This power boils everything; and just as in the case of boiling water for purification, the scum always first rises to the top. This is also why the Nazi with their wicked ways won over the German people.
In all the nations of the world heroes arouse. The war that resulted Cleary shows that despite years of maturity mankind was still predominantly coarse and warlike. For the energy or power that they draw from this Helper only urged them onto physical battle. If they had attuned themselves aright, this power would have urged them into battle against all forms of darkness. They would have helped in fighting the Armageddon or the Holy Jihad, or whatever you wish to call it.
So it was the same power that was behind the Germans was also behind the allied forces. But the Nazi wielded this power into extremely wrong forms which is tantamount to weakening the power. Hence as soon as the Helper, from who everybody drew his power, left the earth, the Nazi weakened. For the power accumulated in them being forced into wrong forms weakened in the absence of sustenance; while the allied forces whose course was nobler than that of the Nazi, remained strong and sustained by the power of goodness. Hence the Nazi lost.

I will be adding more explanations later; in-order not to make this post too long, I will stop here for now.

Thanks.

@Deepsight

Thanks for this thread. I will give full vent to my perceptions on the issues that you raised; but at the moment I'm very busy. If you can kindly give me time, I will appreciate it. Expect my reply around the weekend; but if I'm opportuned, I will reply earlier.

Also, may I request that in the course of this thread  an unhealthy attention should not be drawn to the personality of a certain author, especially concerning his origin and etc. I believe that you know what I mean here.

This is a very worthy thread indeed!

Thanks.

@deepsight

These two videos shows what I was trying to explain with my charged wire and transformer analogy.
When current passes through a wire, a field is generated around the wire, or emanates around the wire. This field caries neither an element of the wire nor an element of electricity or current in the wire. The field is actually magnetic; it is only the effect of the pressure created by the electric current in the wire.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NeF7u_9_Sw&feature=related


In the case of a transformer we see two different closed systems not making contact with each other. Only the primary coil is connected to power, thus powered or energized. But the field around this energized system is enough to induce current to flow in the second system or secondary coil. The funny thing is that the energy spent on the secondary coil does not effect or reduce the power connected to the primary coil. If the power connected to the primary coil would last only two days; it will still last two days whather there is a secondary coil or not. Even if you connect a lot of load on the secondary coil it doesn't reduce or effect the power on the primary coil.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-Ijjm7if5g&feature=related

The point that I was trying to make is that the power in the primary coil remains in it and does not really flow into the secondary; but the pressure it creates, the magnetic field around it causes current to flow in the secondary coil. This is a very coarse analogy about the relationship between God and His creation or radiations. The power in God remains in God, it is inexhaustible and remains in God; but the pressure it creates cause the movement which we call energy or which we erroneously call power in creation. Eventhough this movement that we call energy in creation is dependant on God's power, it cannever exhaust or depreciate the Power that is in God. Just as the power consumed in the secondary coil does not depreciate the power in the primary coil. Electricity in the secondary coil originates in the secondary coil, although pr opeled by the magnetic filed of the primary coil. You cannot trace the current in the secondary back to the primary coil or say that they carry elements of the primary coil. By the same token, creatures in creation originate from the radiation of God, although this radiation is propelled by the power that is God; you cannot trace these creatures back to God or say that they carry elements of God. In this analogy, the powered primary coil represents God while the loaded secondary coil represents His is creation. Observe in the video, how the load(the electric bulb) on the secondary coil gets brighter just by moving the secondary coil closer to the primary coil. The same way specis of creation that are closer to God are brighter and more energized than those further away.

Keep in mind like I said earlier that these are just coarse analogies to convey an idea; notthing physical can truly and exactly replicate the relationship between God and His creation.

I believe God stands apart from His creation; just as an artist stands beside his work, or just as the two coils in a transformaer stand next to each other, not touching.

I don't know if you see the relevance of this in the discussion at hand. Forgive me, as an electrical engineer, I tend to see everything in the light of electricity.

Thanks.

Deep Sight:
That is why i said it is not a good example. Because God is not a conductor of energy but the energy itself. In magnetism, you are aware also that bodies can be magnetized and demagnetized. Does this not infer something? Is it truly correct to say that the charges that align around a magnet contain no element of charges aligning within the magnet? I am not a scientist or physicist, but I am not sure you can say that in all exactness. The gong example does not seem to tally up with the God example at all, and I cannot understand its relevance.

Anyhow, I do get your general point, and I hope that I will have better illumination in future.

The fact that the bodies can be magnetized and demagnetized does not mean anything to the analogy. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed; so any example that I give cannot imply the source of energy of the creation of energy. The purpose of an analogy is to convey an idea; the analogy can never conform to every aspect of that which it conveys.

Fluxes are not charges that alien around a magnet. Even if they are, do the fluxes contain any element of the magnetized iron? The gong analogy applies. The bottom line is that the sound that emanates from the gong caries neither an element of the gong or the energy applied to the gong.

Whenever anything is energized, something emanates. The emanation can be sound, heat and etc. and they don’t always contain an element of the energized object. Your fan hums, and creates pressure in the air thereby forcing the air to move. Does this pressure contain an element of your fan? Your car makes sound (hums) when you turn it on; does this humming sound emanating from your car contain elements of your car. Your body radiates heat; does this heat contain particles of your body?

Thanks

Deep Sight:
In this case, the wire is not the source of the electricity - it is merely a conductor, and for this reason this analogy does not resonate with me.

Dear Deep sight. In reality there is nothing like the source of electricity, electricity is just movement of electrons or charges across a conductor. Once there is a potential difference or EMF across a conductor charges flow. All the charges are already in the conductor; only that creating a potential difference across the conductor causes the charges to flow.

The point that I was trying to make is that where ever high energy is at work, this energy creates pressure around it; this pressure or radiation emanates from the charged object, yet neither having any particle of the object nor the energy in the object.

Deep Sight:
Nevertheless, you are by far the grand master of analogies. Can you give me an analogy that fulfills this criteria: something that is itself the source of an emanation and the emanation of which does not contain any element of the thing which is the source.

Okay I will give you another two analogies:
(1)Consider a magnet! It creates pressure which we call magnetic flux around it. This flux that emanates from the magnet but contains no element of the magnet. Consider a piece of metal, once magnetized(energized), this energy creates flux or magnetic field around the piece of iron. This field or emanation does not contain any element of the iron; neither is the field a part of the magnet. The flux itself is not part of the magnet, it is only a consequence of the magnet.

(2) Consider when you strike a gong! By hitting the gong with another metal you have transferred energy to the gong. This energy causes the gong to vibrate. This vibration creates pressure around the gong. This pressure emanates from the vibrating gong and travels through the air as sound waves. Once again we see an energized object creating pressure around it, pressure which causes emanation or radiation. The sound that emanates from the vibrating gong does not contain any elements of the gong; neither does it contain any element of the original energy that you transferred to the gong by hitting it. At best you can say that the energy has been transformed from mechanical energy to sound energy. The mechanical energy remains on the vibrating gong, but the pressure that this vibration causes creates the sound energy that emanates from the vibrating gong. Once again, this emanating sound energy does not contain any element or particle of the gong, neither does it contain any element of the original mechanical energy. This is coarse analogy that faintly conveys the idea.

By the same token, the radiation of God; contains energy or is energy emanating from the Power that is God. This energy does not contain any particle or element of God. Neither is it the Power of God as such; rather it is pressure created by the Power of God; it is the power of God that propels or creates this energy. The Power of God remains in God and within God. What we call energy of power in the radiation of God is only pressure created or exacted by the Power that resides eternally in God. It is this power that propels the radiation into motion.

Actually we err when we talk about power and life outside of God. These are intricate qualities of God which remain with God and which creates the pressure that propels everything outside of God. True life is Power and Power is life. These two are one and cannot be dependent. Our lives and the lives of all creatures(from Divine to gross matter) are dependent on God and hence in reality not life, but a consequence of the life and Power of God.

The Words of the son of God, “I am the way, the Truth and the LIFE” is terribly deep when one considers it in the light of my explanation.

Consider that with God there is nothing finite. The Power, Light and Truth that is God is infinite. He is far beyond finiteness that He doesn’t even have a form. Hence the Grail Message refers to Him as Divinity unsubstantiate! Consider all types of substances imply a certain form, and all types of forms imply a certain finiteness. But God is completely infinite, hence unsubstantiate, without form; but His radiation, or the pressure that His Power creates is substantial. There is no way any substantial thing which already implies finiteness can carry a particle of that which is infinite and unsubstantiate. So in reality there only two things: God and His radiation. These two things cannot intermingle. The radiations flourish and thrive when left unhindered in the straight line motion that the pressure from the Power of God drives then. This straight line motion is the Will of God; hence the radiations follow the Will of God, propelled by the pressure of his power. That’s why we see a reflection of the qualities of God—Love, Justice, Purity, and etc.—in the radiations. Like I said to you in another thread long time ago, the whole of creation swing in the rhythm of God’s Love and Justice. All the radiations of God(from Divine substantiate to gross matter) swing in this pressure created by the power of God, and the rhythm of this pressure is Love and Justice. The closer a specie of God’s radiation is to the source of this pressure, the finer, purer, and more powerfully it swings in this rhythm or God’s will. This pressure permeates the entire creation, and even above creation; from Divine substantiate to coarsest gross matter. This is why the qualities of God(Love, justice, purity and etc.) are evidenced within His radiations.

This does not mean that these radiations carry elements or particles of God in any way. There is no Life and Power in the radiations; there is only one Life and Power and that is God.

Deep Sight:
The analogy of the sun failed because we could see that the sun contains some of the elements that it emanates.

The analogy was meant to convey an idea; and I think it did that very well. No analogy can truly and completely convey that which far above us—the relationship between God and His radiation.

Thanks.

Deep Sight:
It seems very simple and clear to me - to put it as simply as saying that all things proceed from God.

@Deepsight.
I disagree with your conclusion above. A better conclusion will be that the power that drives everything is the power of God or the power that proceeds from God.

First of all, radiation of God is not God or a part of God. Power creates pressure, it’s the pressure created by the power (God) that we call radiation of God. Even in the physical world, every system that is powerful radiates. An electric wire creates pressure around it when high electric currents pass through the wire. This pressure is not part of the wire neither is it part of the electric energy in the wire. Any energy that proceeds from this induced energy around the powerful wire cannot be traced back to the energy inside the wire. So even though X is a result of Y and Z proceeds from Y, Z cannot always be a part of X, traced back to X or carry any elements of X. Consider an electric transformer and how it works. Just placing a secondary coil near and energized primary coil is enough to induce electricity on the secondary coil. Anything proceeding from the secondary coil is not part of the primary coil. Energy works that way. Consider God as being the primary coil of a transformer, and all other beings as being the secondary coil of the transformer. Every energy in the secondary coil drives from the influx or pressure(radiation) created by the primary coil, and not part of the primary coil itself. Everything outside of God owes its existence in the radiation of God; and this radiation does not carry any part of God within it. This radiation is simply the pressure emanated by the Power, life and Light which reside only in God. If you don’t like the sun and its radiation analogy; then consider the relationship between the primary and secondary coil of a transformer. Both are two different systems, not touching in any way; but the pressure or influx of energy in one drives the other. It can be likened to the relationship between God (The one and only power) and His radiation or creations.

From what I draw from the Grail Message, the radiations(from which creation later arouse) of God when untransformed and left within its natural boundary of the Divine plane remain unformed radiations; left this way, no created beings could have arisen from it. Divine substantial beings are different; because these were not created per-se. These are eternal beings, and having their origin in the radiation of God, hence are not parts of God themselves; only that they did not need the fiat “Let there be light” before they arouse.

Creation started with “Let there be light” when God allowed his radiations(That couldn’t take on form in the Divine plane) to proceed farther and took on form in the creative power of Imanuel, who is the words “let there be light” in living form. This is the transition necessary before creation could arise. Any being or creature that arises after this transition or within creation does not proceed, of their own accord, straight from the radiation of God. They had to pass through a transition first; this transition is the act of creation. The issue of being parts of God is totally out of the question; because the radiations of God are not parts of God like I already explained.

Just as potter collect clay from the earth to mold the clay to form a pot; this is the process of creating a pot. It will be wrong to say that pot proceeds straight from the ground or clay. What proceeds from the ground or clay is the material with which the pot is made. For the pot to arise, the clay had to be transformed by the hands of the potter.

In the analogy, the pot represents created beings (i.e. primordial spiritual beings) in creation; the earth and clay represents the radiation of God; and the potter represents the creative will of God, Imanuel. Thus only concerning top part of primordial creation and above it can one rightly say that everything proceeds from God; keeping in mind that this “proceeds” does not mean that they carry parts of God within them. The basic elements in primordial creation proceeds from the radiation of God and the forms are molded by the Will of God Himself, thus molded in accord with the will of God by the hand of God Himself.

In the case of human spirits(those that developed from spirit germs); it is different, For in this case the spirit germs is left to mold itself, make itself a copy of one of the Primordial spiritual being. The various wrong forms that arise in the process of the spirit molding or creating itself have absolutely nothing to do with God. The human spirit can only link itself with the creative will of God, if out of its free volition it decides to mold itself to become a replica of one of the prototypes molded by the creative will of God. The wrongly developed human beings do not proceed from God in anyway.

In this case, the molding is not done directly by the potter. The clay is left to mold itself against one of the prototypes molded by the potter. If the clay molds itself against something alien to the will of the potter, such a form arising from such wrong molding has nothing to do with the potter and does not proceed from Potter.

Therefore in subsequent creation, the basic elements proceeds from the radiation of God, not God Himself; but not all forms proceed from the will of God. For example, the earth, the way it is today both in form, and governance does not proceed from the will of God

The basic elements that make up everything proceeds from the radiation of God. For creation and everything in it to arise, the radiations of God had to be transformed first in the process of creation. And the radiations of God are not God neither are they parts of God.

The radiations themselves are only emernation or pressure created by the power that is God. Hence there is a gap between God and His radiation; in reality there is nothing in the vicinity of God. Anything originating from that radiation cannot be said to have proceeded from God in the maner that you are implying.

What I wrote here is only for those have read the Grail message, for Deepsite. If you are not familiar with the Grail Message, you may find it very hard to follow this post.

Thanks

m_nwankwo:
God is the creator of all all existence. One can also say that God is the living source of all that is. God is the living source of all energies. Thus there is God and the emanations (radiations) of God. All that was, is and will ever be has its origin in the emanations of God. Thus, God brought and will continue to bring creations into existence from his radiations because the radiations of God contain all the primordial elements which either instantaneously or by development result in the in the birth of creations. Life, Infinity, Immutability, Love, Truth, Time, Perfection, Omniscience, etc, are living attributes that resides in God. It is for this reason that these aforementioned attributes are unattainable by the radiations of God (creations and creatures that inhabit them). The radiations of God although containing all the primordial elements have to be pressed into union so that what floats in infinity as oceans of flame can cool off, precipitate into seeds, germinates by cosmic explosions resulting in myriads of material and non-material universes. This pressing into union, cooling off, amalgamation into cosmic seeds and explosion of these seeds results from an act of Gods Will. Thus rightly understood, all creations are simply a direct or indirect consequence of the act of will of God. Without a conscious act of Gods will, there will be no creations.

Yes, creations can be described as an expression or the work of God but a work or an expression of God is not God. Yes, the radiations are the natural emanations from God but the radiations of God from which existence springs forth is not God. Yes in the work of God, one will find reflections of the attributes that are in God. But these reflections like images are limited, the limitation imposed by the fact that they lack the unsubstantiated divine substance that is only in God. I oppose the view that God or a part of God is within his creations. What we find in all creations are simply radiations of God that have either taken form or are formless. An author is not the same as his books or inventions even though the mind of the author can be found in his books. Although it is a crude analogy, it faintly reflects the relationship between God and his creations. Even man is a coarse reproduction of the actual images or reflections of God.

All energies, in whatever form are simply derived from a definite specie of Gods radiations. To be more specific, the energies that propel material creations into motion and union are spiritual particles or radiations emanating from the the volition of the the actual images of God. Thus energy is spirit but a different specie of spirit to that that is Man. The spirit particles hold all the secrets of the origin of our universe and other universes. Matter is simply enveloped spirit particles. One can also say that matter is energy covered with the clock of material substances. When man is willing to receive in humility, then the secrets on how to strip matter of all material envelopes, laying bare the spirit particles will become know to some people. But such knowledge will be for the future. Now it will be laughed off or ridiculed.

God brought creations into existence and can also cause creation to cease to exist. God does not need or depend on his creations but his creations are absolutely dependent on God. God brought creations into existence as a living expressions of his love. Before creation, only God and his divine emanations were in existence. The emission and simultaneous attraction of the divine radiations of God back to the Godhead resulted in a void. It is into this cosmic void that creation was born into and continue to expand. Viewed from outside of creation this cosmic void is limited but the limit can never be reached even if all creations are to expand eternally. But viewed from within creation, the void is limitless and infinite. Best Wishes.

m_nwankwo:
Definitions and concepts cannot accurately capture what God is. In spite of this I will make an attempt in the knowledge that this definition is a very faint reflection of reality. God is the primordial source of all energy. One can also say that God is the primordial source of Life or that God is primordial Life or primordial Energy. Anything else that exists or will exist derive its life or energy from GOD. In other words, only GOD is alive, everything else derives there life from God. What scientists are conversant with are various forms of energy with material universe. There are energies in all creations, not just in material universe. These energies originated from the radiations of God. In material universe energies are secondly radiations of primordial spiritual beings created by God and these primordial spiritual beings are the actual image of God. The human spirit that is man is simply an image or a reflection of these primordial spiritual beings. The primordial beings are of unimaginable size that one of them can hold our entire material universe in the palm of its hands. And yet even these primordial beings are creatures of God. Best Wishes.

Finally a ray of Light descends into this thread. I completly agree with the above explainations.

@davidylan
Congratulations on your PHD. I wish to bag one too someday. At the moment, I can only dream of it. Kudos!!!!!!!

davidylan:
and this matter came from? Somehow its illogical that God is eternal but you believe matter is eternal on the basis of? strange.

Took the words right out of my mouth!!!! However I'm impressed that he admitted that matter only changes forms. What drives me crazy is when somebody claims that science has conclusively answered the question of how everything, including the fundamental elements make up the universe, was created -- the big slam. I'm happy I don't own a gun because each time I hear that I feel like shooting myself in the head.

The big slam only constitutes a stage in the eternal changes of forms that matter goes through.

Kay 17:
@davidlyan

i dont believe anything came from nothing. I think matter is eternal, and simply changes form.

I have already pointed out in another thread that most atheists cannever really avoid the God question, the question of an eternal entity or eternal creator, they only shift posts. What the believer attribute to an invisible non-physical God; atheists attribute to matter or the physical universe.

Your description of matter here is the same description some believers give concerning God, especially those believers who believe that God is the totality of everything that exists and that God is in everything in one form or another. You have only replaced the word "God" with "matter"

@plaetton
The above is as brilliant as it is educative. I'm particularly impressed your 2nd point where you talked about the brain and thoughts. To me that is in accord with what I already know about the laws of creation, the operation of the human brain and the nature of thoughts, which scientists are every moving close to completely apprehending.

I will research on the issue of heavy metals shifting their masses to another dimension. That is very interesting!

Thanks

plaetton:
I am repeating this again. Cause and des[/b]ign are no the same thing and should not be used interchangeably.
There bone of contention is design , not cause. That unknown conditons the big ban.g has never been in dispute. What is in dispute, and [b]needs to be proven, is that Big Daddy designed and purposefully lit the fuse .

OK You have a point in the above. But this position does leave you a true or strong atheist. It also does not imply that burden of proof rests on the theist, as long as the theist does not subscribe to any particular God, but believes in an external causer of the universe.

While I personally believe in a God and intelligent design, I have nothing against your above assertion. Because what ever goes beyond your assertion above has to be personal and involves the non-physical perception which cannot be proven by the physical. Hence from the philosophical and scientific perspective, what you said above cannot be called wrong. Speaking purely scientifically you are not wrong.

I respect the fact that you said that "unknown condition" but I am not aware that we here in this thread to prove the existence of big daddy. I always maintained that big Daddy cannot be proven by scientific means. You cant prove the non-physical with the physical.

I only quarrel with the people who claim that science has proved and answered the question about the origin of the universe, that science has proved that the universe created itself and required no external force in its creation. One must be open to the possibility of an external force or conditions which cannever be ruled out, and which science has not ruled out. Whatever one decides to call this external force or condition that commenced the universe is the individuals choice.

When philosophers say that the burden of proof rests on the shoulders of him who affirms and not the person who denies; I think they reffer to the situation where one is accusing another person of something. One who asserts that Mr. 'A" is a thief, needs to proof his assertion; not Mr. "A" who only denies the assertion. One who denies need not shoulder the burden of proof, the burden rests on the shoulders of the person who accuses or affirms. I think this is the way they see it in legal proceedings.

But this does not apply when two people are saying things that does not imply an accusation on either of them. The philosophy only applies, I believe, among two people where one is accusing the other of something, and the other is denying that which he is being accused of. When that which is questioned, affirmed or denied has not has nothing to do with either parties, then the philosophy of burden of proof does not apply. I will give an example:

Two people are looking at a car. One says the car is green while the other says that the car is not. The burden of proof does not lie only with the one who asserts that the car is green. It lies with both of them. And more so with the person who denies that the car is green, if the greenness of the car has been observed many times by many others. In such a case saying that the car is green is simply asserting the obvious or the default position. The person who denies this obvious should shoulder the burden of proof.

I am not a philosophy major; what I said is what I observed from legal proceedings.

Thanks.

Kay 17:
Its like in a court of law, an existing law is always proven by whoever asserts despite the obvious.

Also, please carefully read what you wrote. "despite the obvious."?? Does the obvious needs to be proven If one asserts the obvious, what other proof does he need to provide??

Kay 17:
Its like in a court of law, an existing law is always proven by whoever asserts despite the obvious.

Very good! And how does one who asserts prove his assertion? By evidence. The one who sees a dead man and asserts that something or someone killed him, already provides enough evidence by showing the corpse of the dead man. And hence needs no further proof; but the one who asserts that nobody or nothing killed the dead man needs to provide evidence to back up his position.

The corpse is already enough evidence that a man was killed by something or someone. The existence of a mountain already is enough evidence that some external forces were at work, created or formulated the mountain. The fall of the twin towers in enough evidence that someone or something caused the fall. The existence of the man called Kay17 is already enough evidence that somebody or something gave birth to Kay17. These are simply default positions that need not proved anyfurther. And in each case there is always an external force.

The existence of the universe is already enough evidence that some external forces were at work during the formulation and creation of the universe.

Thanks

@kay17
I don't understand the above please explain to me. If a man is found dead, the default position is that something or somebody killed the man. No?
Another analogy: since Kay17 exists, somebody or something must have given birth to him. This is the default position since everybody has to be born. No?
Kindly explain.
Thanks

@wirinet

I completely get deepsight's argument in this case. The way I see it, complexity, design and etc. apart, those are not where the crux of the argument lies. It lies in the fact that, in an uncertain situation, one who opposes the “default position” needs to shoulder the burden of proof.

Deepsight completely nailed it perfectly when he brought up the “default position” argument. Demanding that opponents of the “default position” bear the burden of proof is not tantamount to demanding that one prove the negative.

A dead man is found in the street. The “default position” is that something or someone killed him. It is the person who claims that nothing killed the dead man that should shoulder the burden of proof, even though he asserts the negative. In this situation, the default position is that something or someone killed the man. This position is obvious and need not be proved any further because the existence of the dead man is enough evidence already. Those who ascribe to the default position may be asked to prove their position only if they maintain that a particular person, disease, and etc killed the dead man.

The same is applicable to a mountain or anything physical. The default position is that circumstances, which are always outside the mountain, created the mountain or caused its formation. One, who challenges this default position, has to shoulder the burden of proof.

Simply asserting the negative does not absolve one from shouldering the burden of proof. Otherwise Bin Laden could have gone to court and claim that nobody caused the collapse of the world trade center. Could he have been absolved if he had simply stated the negative?

If you claim that a particular God, gods and etc do not exist, then rightfully you need not shoulder the burden of proof of the particular God. Only those who ascribe to that particular God should carry the burden of proof. This case is different from asserting that nothing created the universe.

I have no problem with those who assert that a particular God did not create the universe, that the religious views are wrong. But one must agree that something outside the universe caused its formation, whether this thing is a living entity or not. But such a one may not be called a strong or a real atheist.

Here in this thread, we are not talking of which God, gods, and etc. We are strictly dealing with “the burden of proof.” In the case of the universe, the default position is that the universe was created, evolved, or formed by forces or circumstances that stand apart from the universe. Just as natural forces like wind, erosion, earth quakes, tectonic forces and etc, form mountains. These forces cannot the contained within the mountain itself.

The default position is that something else, other than thing in question, always had to contribute for the formation, creation, and evolution of the thing in question. Nothing comes from nothing! This is the default position, since the contrary has never been observed by anybody. The person who subscribes to this never-been-observed contrary, or the person who challenges the default position, should shoulder the burden of proof.

However you did make some fine arguments in your post.

Thanks

gotizsata:
@justcool
you are trying to force a God.
which is just like the "who created God if God always existed" paradox. It is an old card to play and rather juvenile to say the least,
So what there are gaps in science.
There is simply no better explanation.
my point here, is that in the range of what probably happened, Abraham's God is not even under consideration. It is out of the radar. So stop trying to force it.
Your casualty argument in regards to the "elements" has been disproved many times over and in many ways, so you are just wasting everyone's time by trying to bring it here. Why don't you read a few books, wikipedia first, we will all really appreciate that, so that you can give us informed replies. you seem to have taken the trouble to learn a few things, why not complete the circle.
And even if you do not find answers, it does not mean God exists. It means you don't know.

I don’t like it when people make false accusations. None of the things you said above came from any of my posts. Please kindly show me, by quoting me, where I suggested any of the things that you said above. Rather than just arguing for argument sake why don’t you give us a scientific explanation of the origins of the elements that constitute the universe?

Also I suspect an animosity, a desire to insult. I humbly refrain from replying to you henceforth. Thanks for advising me to read a few books, thanks for suggesting that my knowledge is incomplete. By the way we are here to deal with who should shoulder the burden of proof; this thread has absolutely nothing to do with the Abrahamic God.

Please I will never condescend to name calling, insults, and false accusations. Please desist from such.

Thank you.

Why is the above directed to me?? And how does it relate to the topic at hand?? How does relate to anything that I said in this thread??

Thanks

For those who use the big slam theory to defend their illogical view of the universe creating itself. The big slam theory does not imply the universe creating itself out of nothing. The big slam is only a stage in the development or evolution of the elements that make up the universe.

Prior to the big slam the universe or the elements that make up the universe existed in an extremely hot and dense state.

The big slam theory only explains the development of the universe or the elements that make up the universe and not the origin of these elements. It can be likened to change of state. Just as a block of ice when heated will change from the state of being solid to liquid; the solid ice will expand to liquid. A further heating will change it from a liquid to a gaseous state, which is tantamount to a further expansion. Each change of state does not imply a creation of a new element. Water remains water, whether as a compact ice(solid) or and expanding vapour(gas).

There big slam theory does not support the illogical conclusion that the universe created itself. When scientists refer to the big bag as the origin of the universe, they mean the origin of the current state of the universe, and not the creation of the fundamental elements of the universe. These elements existed as a singularity prior to the big slam. The origin of these elements remains unkown by science which can only observe them change state.

^^^^^
Sir, I try not to respond to posts like the above but my love for science would not let me keep quiet now. Stop using science to promote your very unscientific views. Science makes it clear that nothing creates itself. Such would be a violation of the law of thermodynamics.

Why don't we keep to science Why bring in Abrahamic God, Noah's ark and etc What has these things got to do with the topic at hand Does proving that all animals won't fit into an ark proves that the universe created itself

We are not here, in this thread, to validate or annul the validity, of the Abrahamic God; we are to to determine who should shoulder the burden of proof, concerning the issue of creation of the universe. Who should shoulder this burden of proof; the one who asserts the well known principle of something being created by another thing, or the one who asserts the never seen, never observed, and illogical idea of something creating itself?

Give me scientific laws that validate the illogical and very unscientific conclusion that the universe created itself. Or show me an example where a single substance expands or changes state without and external force or impetus from the outside. Or give me an example where science have observed something creating itself.

Please don't put words into the mouth of science. When it comes to the origin of the universe, as in creation of the elements that make up the universe, science still does not know. Science has not up till date conclusively validate or authenticate any of the various speculations by scientists.

Thanks.

I do not think that I need to reply the response I got from my post, I humbly refrain in other to avoid unhealthy back-and-forth argument. Besides I think the objections raised were treated already in my post and elsewhere in this thread.

One thing that nobody has ever been able to prove is the illogical conclusion that the universe created itself. The religious view of an invisible God apart; the conclusion that the universe created itself is unsound scientifically. Ridiculing the religious view of an invisible God does not make the illogical view that the universe created itself right. If this illogical conclusion holds any water, then proponents would not need to revert to ridiculing God to defend their view. They should defend it scientifically, especially when they claim to be disciples of science.

One thing that is scientifically valid is that nothing creates itself, evolves, or comes in existence without an external force. One must be able to admit that whatever caused the universe must be an external force, a force whose origin is not within the universe.

Whatever one decides to call this force is the person’s choice.

In my own view, I have always maintained that the burden of proof should be shouldered by the one who claims that the universe was uncaused, uncreated, or has always existed; and hence requiring no creator.

This is not a question of proving the negative but rather a question of proving an unsubstantiated assertion.

One who says that the universe was uncaused, was not created and etc, ascribes a quality or an ability to the universe. He should shoulder the burden of proving that the universe has this quality or ability. Hence the burden of proof lies with that atheists and not the theist. Since the existence of something is already enough proof to conclude that that thing was created, formed or placed there by a process or an outside force.

I have already said this in another thread where I engaged with thehomer.

One who enters a city immediately begins to wonder who built the city, who formed the city and etc. No sane person would enter a city and entertain the idea that the city has always existed, and hence uncaused or uncreated. The same is applicable to a house, mountain, desert, rivers and etc. The process of their formation or creation can be observed and logically explained.

It is this basic idea of everything being caused by a process or an external force that drives science into great discoveries. Science believes in a cause of everything, a logical explanation of a process through which everything came into being. A scientist looks at a rock and tries to find out the processes that lead to the formation of the rock. And in all natural process there is always an external force, without which there can be no movement.

This is the very basic difference between a shaman and a scientist. A shaman sees a mountain and believes that the mountain is a supernatural phenomenon that defies the laws of nature, an unexplainable phenomenon, or a god that has always existed. He may even start worshipping the mountain, and will discard any attempt to logically explain the origin of the mountain as sacrilegious.

One who says the universe is uncaused by an external force has ascribed a quality to the universe; the quality of not requiring a causer, a quality that has not been observed anywhere in the universe. The burden of proof should be on such a person, he has to prove that the universe possess the quality or the ability of not requiring a creator, a process of creation or formation by an external force.

One who believes that the universe is caused or created carries fewer burdens of proof, because everything in the universe has been observed to have a cause, a formation, a process of creation through natural forces which always act as external forces during the formation or creation of the thing in question.

The way I see it, it is not a question of shifting the burden of proof. The burden of proof has always remained with the atheist, who ascribes unnatural quality or ability to the universe.
Thanks.

plaetton:
Outside of the universe, space would be a vacuum, there would be no frame of reference for time, and therefore time would not exist. Consciousness uses the universe to give frames of reference to time . Since time and the universe are intertwined, there is only one time and that is the duration of consciousness.

Now this is scientifically impossible. Scientifically speaking there is nothing like outside of the universe. The big slam did not occur into a preexisting physical universe or space; everything in the universe including space and what science calls time started with the big slam. Prior to the big slam space did not and could not have exsisted; I'm speaking strictly scientifically here.

Vacuums are also physical phenomena which cannot exists without the universe; hence every vacuum is within the universe. Vacuum is space without matter; vacuums contain space, and since space and time are one, saying that there is no time in a vacuum may not be very logical.  Especially keeping in mind that you agree that space and time are intertwined.

Also, I don't know if one can say that scientific time is duration of consciousness. Especially keeping in mind that science agrees that time existed in the universe millions of years before the first conscious creature evolved.

Also coming up with stuff like outside the universe, what makes you different with one who believes in the nonphysical? Is this "outside of the universe" of yours physical? If so how then is it outside of the universe. Especially keeping in mind that everything physical belongs to the universe, or what the scientist calls the universe.

Thanks

plaetton:
Delightful argument:
Time and space are intertwined. I speculate that at some point they are one and the same.

Scientifically speaking, the above is correct. Deep sight this is problem you will encounter when you arrive at the conclusion that: “Time is still time”

Time is still time.

In my perception, this is not so! Scientific time is most definitely not the same thing with the layman’s time or the time that we all perceive intuitively.

If we agree to the conclusion that both are the same then plaetton wins that augment; because time as science perceives it cannot be disconnected with space. It is one of the dimensions of the universe. Space, as well as time and all the dimensions of the universe were born during the big slam.

The space and time in our universe were born at the big band; or one can equally say that physical space and time were borne during the big slam. There was no physical space before the big slam; the big slam commenced the expansion of space.

One must separate the physical from the nonphysical; one who believes in the nonphysical must not look for it within the physical. Everything in our universe, including space, time, stars and planets are physical and started with the big slam.

Thanks.

@Kay 17
Thanks for addressing my post. Sorry about my late reply, I've been very busy.

Kay 17:
From Justcool

What consists of the spiritual is expected to not be physical, otherwise it would be physical. i believe that if the spiritual is observable and measurable to an extent, then its physical.

How you came to this belief beats me. Whoever said that the spiritual is not observable and measurable? The spiritual is not just a feeling or imagination; the spiritual real is tangible, even more tangible than the physical. Only that the spiritual is of an entirely different species than the physical. The spiritual can be observed and measured by the spiritual or spiritual means, and not by physical means. Because owing to the difference in species, the physical cannot interact directly with the spiritual.

Man’s core, the true man, is spiritual; hence man can observe and measure the spiritual by means of his spiritual body or his core.

Kay 17:
The layman and the scientist both observe time, but provide different definitions with varying details. The layman is not merely perceiving divine time, but very possibly the same subject as the scientist. The layman by his qualifications is not in the best position to develop his view of time, it's more like crude intuition.

Not necessarily. Just because they use the same expression doesn’t mean that they are talking exactly about the same thing. Science borrows terms that already exist and use it to label scientific concepts; this is perhaps to make science more interesting. I will give you an example. The ancient romans believed in the existence of Neptune. To them Neptune is a god, the god of the oceans. The lay and ancient romans had believed in this Neptune many years before modern science was born. When modern science discovered the eight planet from the sun, she(modern science) decided to name this planet Neptune, after the roman god of the oceans and the seas.

Now when the modern scientist and the lay ancient roman are talking about Neptune, they are not talking about the same thing. One is talking about a planet and the other is talking about a god; one is talking science while the other is talking mythology or religion.

It will be very misguided to try to disprove the ancient or mythological Neptune based on the scientist discoveries of the planet Neptune. This is what posters are doing in this thread.

The layman coined the word “time” even before modern science was born; the lay man had a conception of time before modern science was born. Just as the ancient romans had a conception of Neptune before modern astronomy was born.
While both conceptions may be wrong or right, they are not mutually exclusive because they are not necessarily the same thing. Mythological or astrological Neptune remains the god of the oceans, while astronomical Neptune remains a planet. One cannot disprove the other; they are two different things.

The lay man’s conception of time remains what it is, the continuum into which events happen; while scientific conception of times remains a dimension of motion of physical objects or the physical universe.

Just as the mythological or astrological Neptune is not confined within the tenants of astronomical Neptune; real time or the layman’s time is not confined within the tenants and observations of scientific time. Real time or layman’s time did not start with the big bang, only the scientific time did. Saying that the layman’s time started with the big bang is like saying that the mythological Neptune started with the discovery of the astronomical Neptune.

Thanks.

Kay 17:
Lay-man's time/ real time and scientific concept of time discuss the same thing but in disagreement. A disagreement in perception like the light (particle or wave) issue. Clearer definitions with better demonstrations will badly be needed.

That's one way to look at it. The scientist is dealing with time within our universe, or within the physical realm. But the lay man perceives that the concept of time does not have to end within this particular universe or within the physical realm. Its like two people siting in a moving car; one is dealing with the motion of the car, while the other perceives that motion doesn't have to end with that particular car, and hence dealing with the motion of the entire earth around the sun.

One is confined to the motion of the car, because his instruments for detecting motion are incapable of detecting motion outside the car. While the other is able to detect, not only the motion of the car, but the motion of the entire earth. Another person may even be able to detect the motion of the entire solar system around the center of the universe. While another may be able to detect the motion of the entire universe around its axis.


Thus it is a question of perception or the range of perceptive ability. One speaking from the spiritual perspective deals with a larger frame of time than one speaking from the scientific perspective which is confined to the physical realm.

From Divine perspective, time (The real time) is infinite and stands still. Man as a spiritual being as the ability to vaguely perceive of this time that is infinite and stands still. This he can only perceive intuitively, a gross material  or intellectual perception of it is impossible. The brain can never conceive or perceive it.

Thanks

KAG:
That's all well and good; however, when someone starts a thread or line of discussion that is heavily centered on science, then it becomes a given that, unless defined otherwise, the scientific definitions of terms hold sway. The onus is on the person supposedly using "lay man's terms" to define their terms and ensure that they aren't mistaken for the scientific ones.

Further, I don't know what "time" Deep Sight is, or was, talking about. He doggedly refused to provide any workable definitions or evidence that could have cleared that up. So, what do you mean by this "real time" that everybody knows? Any way of concretising it?

While I agree that time is predicated on motion, I disagree that light was the fastest thing that scientists could conceive. The special theory of relativity made provisions for massless particles that could travel faster than the speed of light: hence, tachyons.

Relatively.


Evidence?

Yes they did, but so did a term like "electric". I I started a discussion on electricity with references to scientific reports, but I meant something other than the scientific understanding of eletricity, then I would have no grounds for complaint if others erred on the side of science. It isn't a case of marrying disparate comprehensions of terms. It's a case of no one has declared these lines of discussion exclusively theological nor philosophical.

Why?

Concretise that concept and ground it in something tangible.


Again, science discussion. Scientific terms until otherwise disputed and alternate terms defined.

Yes, I have said as much about time. To wit, I wrote previously:

"If there are other universes with time, those universes would have a different time structure from ours. However, to use an analogy, that that there be liquids on other planets and "water" in other universes, doesn't change the fact that water on Earth is formed from a particular bonding of hydrogen and oxygen."

The fact remains that Deep Sight introduced the"totality of time itself, which is infinite, etc". Which he has so far failed to define nor provide an inkling of evidence or tangibility that would make it intelligible. If you subscribe to his conception, then may I ask that you do what he will not?


What is real time, by your estimation? If it seems like I have asked that question several times, it is because you've used that phrase several times without offerring a defintion . . . or evidence . . . or really anything other than the phrase being somehow different from time as a scientific concept.

Thank you, too.

@ KAG

Thanks for addressing my post, you raised very fair points and I will address them accordingly.

You asked me to define what I mean by "real time," "lay man's time" or the "time" that deep sight is talking about. I offered a definition in my post. I wrote. “Time can be defined as the continuum onto which events happen.” This is the time that everybody knows; this is usually what people mean when they say “time.” And keep in mind that the word “time” existed before modern science. If you go back two thousand years ago and ask any man what “time” means he will not tell you that it is a dimension of motion. The idea of “time” being a dimension of motion is purely scientific, it is a scientific model.

Light was the fastest thing that scientists could conceive of at that time. I.e. at the time of Einstein. Perhaps I made a poor choice of words, and for this I apologize. What I meant was that light was the fastest thing that scientist could measure at that time, and hence could concieve of at that time. Or better, the speed of light was the fastest thing that scientist could measure at that time. And I said say it this way in my post:

This scientific concept of time is referenced to the speed of light because up till now “light” is the fastest physical phenomenon that science has observed.

The evidence I have on the idea that real time existed before the big slam lies in my definition of “Real time.” I defined “real time as the continuum onto which events happen. Since the big slam is an event and every event happen on or within time. Time must have existed onto which this event (the big slam) happened. This is only a logical speculation; even prominent scientists have made this speculation. The difficulty in proving this concept or experiencing the “real time” lies in the fact that while trapped within this time frame, its difficult impossible to experience the outside time frame at least with physical means.

You are right about electricity; the same is applicable to scientific terms like “time”, “work” and etc. It’s like the electric circuits that we draw and analyze. From the circuits we predict the behavior of electricity. But this circuit that we draw is only a model which may or may not correspond exactly to reality. To make problems easier to solve, in circuit analysis we invent things like Ideal voltage sources and ideal current sources; but in reality there is nothing like an ideal voltage or current source, because every source has its own internal resistance.  I’m using electricity for an example here because you seem to understand electricity. The point that I’m trying to make is that a lot of scientific terms are models which helps scientists predict and analyze reality, these models may or may not correspond exactly to reality.

The problem is that pseudo scientists try to force reality to conform to a scientific model; or restrict their perception of reality to the scientific model. This is the wrong way to use science. Real Scientists keep fine-tuning these models to correspond more and more to reality, and not otherwise.


And of course “real Time” has to be infinite, because there is no limitation to the amount or number of events that can happen. Time is infinite, those allowing an uncountable number of events to occur. This is really hard to put into words but II hope you perceive what I’m trying to put across. Real time stands still; it is infinite and endless. Events happen within it, it is the duration of this evens, i.e. the speed of these physical events that scientist call time. You see why the scientific time is limited, it’s limited to the duration of our particular universe; but real time has nothing to do with motion, motions happen within it, it simply has no beginning and it’s endless.

Thanks

KAG:
If verified, it won't change what we know of time. At least, I don't see how it could. It might not even affect Einstein's theory of relativity, especially if it is discovered that neutrinos can behave like, or even become, tachyons. That's my initial instinct, anyway.

It will help people see that scientific terms are not exactly the same as the lay man’s terms. I have said this many times, that often scientific terms should not be viewed in the ordinary sense. Everybody knows what “time”; the “time” that Deep sight is talking about; the “time” that everybody intuitively knows, but very difficult to put in words. This “time” is what I refer as to “the real time” or “the lay man’s time” But when science talks about “time” they are not talking about the layman’s time or the real time.

Of course every rational person knows that the idea that time was born at the big slam is not possible in view of the real “time” or the lay man’s time. What science calls time is simply a dimension of motion, or a derivative of motion; a derivative of the speed of light to be more exact. Scientific time is referenced to the speed of light because at that time light was the fastest thing the scientist can conceive of.

Hence if anything moves at the speed of light, time becomes stand still in respect to that thing. Just as when two cars move at the same speed, they appear standing still to each other. And consequently, if anything can move beyond the speed of light, that thing will be time-traveling because it’s moving faster than time, i.e. moving backward in time.

The fact some things can move beyond the speed of light (a fact that I strongly believe that will soon be confirmed by science) will only show people that scientific time is different from real time. Because such particles, which can move faster than the speed of light, scientifically speaking, are moving backward in time. Imagine two cars “A” and “B” in motion, if car “A” speeds faster than the “B”, it will appear as if car “B” is moving backwards; judging from the motion frame of car “A”.

Real time, intuitive time, or the lay man’s time, I believe is what Deep sight has been talking about, which obviously cannot be born at the slam. This time, real time can be defined as the continuum onto which events happen. This time existed before the big slam, indeed the big bag is just an event that happened within it. Only that the big slam commenced the physical time or the scientific time which scientist reference with the speed of light.

People keep trying to marry scientific concepts with ordinary concepts. These ordinary concepts like “time”, “work” and etc. existed before modern science. Modern science only borrowed these terms to define scientific concepts.

Deep sight’s notion of time is right. He is talking about the real time, the lay man’s time. Posters are refuting his argument with the scientific concept of time which is only limited to the physical, i.e. the duration of physical events. This scientific concept of time is referenced to the speed of light because up till now “light” is the fastest physical phenomenon that science has observed. I will give an analogy: Deep sight is talking about motion in general, posters are refuting his argument by talking about the motion of a particular car. Of course just as motion is not limited to a particular car, time is not limited to this our particular universe. If there are other universes, their time frames will be different. And of course the motion of a particular car is born the minute the car started moving, yet the car itself is on earth which is in turn in motion; by the same token, the speed or duration of events (which science calls time) in our universe was born with the big slam; but even the big slam is an event which occurred in a lager time frame.

But I think every good scientist knows that the concept of time is not limited the scientific time. Science creates models that help them visualize and represent certain phenomena in numbers so that they can be solved mathematically to predict or give an idea of the behavior of the phenomena. It will be very misguided to expect that the phenomena itself is limited to numbers and scientific models. Certain phenomena in nature can never truly be captured on the blackboard or in a test tube. Real Time existed before the big slam will still exist afterwards.

Thanks.

Interesting serious of videos.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLmcbjLVPKc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xAUA967ldrU

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zMJBNYcHbJw

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R5et696cP50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4f40oAAmeyA

Facts from the videos.
96% of the universe is made up of dark energy and matter, things that we know nothing about.
Science has not directly proven that dark matter particles exist, many suspects but no answers.

Implications for us in the religious forum.
(1) Those that claim that the universe is stricky physical are actually wrong even from the scientific perspective.
(2) It is possible for something which has not be proven by science to exist.

So the fact that science has not proven that God or the non-physcal exist means absolutely nothing.

Thanks