Tolkien's methods of space- and time-travel, by transcarnation and reincarnation

Tolkien thought deeply about how we might actually travel in space and time; and his answers are described in the Notion Club Papers - as explained in a new post at my blog of that name.

What is the meaning of the "woman taken in adultery" story in John Chapter 8?

In my mini-'book' on the Fourth Gospel; I describe my assumptions in reading the Bible; which lead to me to the Fourth Gospel ("John") as the most authoritative Book; and which govern my interpretation of that Gospel. 

Much of this has to do with the unit of meaning that I focus upon - which is neither the Bible as a whole, nor a verse by verse (nor word by word) meaning; but more like a focus on the Book and the narrative-units within it. 

In particular, I pay attention to that which is repeated and re-explained - which I regard as less subject to later error, interpolations, and excisions.

To take a particular example: how do I look-at the episode from the IV Gospel often called "the woman taken in adultery" [see below for text]: What does this episode mean, how do I understand it?

For a start; I am aware of the overall and two-fold message of the IV Gospel; which is (approximately) that we each may have 'salvation' (i.e. eternal resurrected life) by 'following' Jesus. 

This overall message is stated several times, in different ways, throughout the Gospel from its beginning to its end (i.e. the verses at the end of Chapter 20 - Chapter 21 being, I believe, a later addition by another hand). 

In this episode the two-fold message is re-stated, using the frequent 'poetic-metaphor' of light;  in verse 12: Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life. 

This core 'Christian' message required, at the time, refuting a different and prevalent idea; which was that salvation was a matter of avoiding sin, and avoiding sin was a matter of following The Law. 

This is what I think this adultery episode is about. Jesus is confronted by a woman who has sinned, who has broken the law; and, by the old rule, was therefore legitimately 'condemned' to death - and thereby (by the then understanding of 'death') 'damned' to dwell as a depersonalized, demented ghost in Sheol. 

Jesus desires to replace this scheme with one in which death is not damnation; but instead resurrection to a higher, better, fully-loving eternal life in Heaven. 

And this Life Everlasting is to be attained Not by avoiding proscribed sins, but by following Jesus. 

On the one hand; Jesus asserts that it is futile to suppose that we can avoid sin. This story demonstrates that we are all sinners, and therefore there is 'nothing special' about the woman taken in adultery. By the old religion we are all in the same boat as her; all 'deserving' of death for transgressing one or more of The Laws, therefore all destined for damnation (later, if not sooner)...

(In this regard; it needs to be remembered that in the IV Gospel, 'sin' and 'death' are almost synonymous. This is a key that unlocks many otherwise rather obscure passages.)

But the 'good news' Jesus brings and makes possible; is that none of this endemic and universal sinning ultimately matters if we choose follow Jesus; where 'following' means (almost literally) recapitulating his path from this mortal life, through death, and to resurrection in Heaven.

(We are made able to follow Jesus by loving him; which partly means wanting and affirming and committing-to God and divine creation; and this includes rejecting sin/ death. Sin is whatever conflicts with love; and therefore must be repudiated to dwell in Heaven. This is what we term repentance.)

That is what I understand this story to mean, and which fits with the reality and essential nature of Jesus, and with the Gospel as a whole and its repetitions - and therefore I pretty much ignore those specific verses that clash or contradict. 

For example when Jesus is quoted as saying to the woman 'sin no more'; then I note that this is literally false; because it is impossible Not to sin, as Jesus has just demonstrated; therefore this phrase is either a later and mistaken interpolation (which is what I assume), or else must be interpreted in a very contextualized meaning (if you can be bothered!).

Or, what about the business of Jesus writing on the ground? That is obscure, and might be incomplete (due to some later loss or deletion), interpolated; or else the act had some then-understandable 'metaphorical/ poetic' meaning, that has since been lost. 

But it does not really matter - and we need not get hung-up on it; once we understand the necessary and core meaning of the episode as a whole.

So, this is a specific example of how I read the IV Gospel, how I go-about discerning truth from error.

If there are other bits of the IV Gospel that you are seriously confused or 'hung-up' on; you might mention them in the Comments; and I may try to demonstrate how I have understood them - according to this scheme. 

   

**

John.8 [1] Jesus went unto the mount of Olives. [2] And early in the morning he came again into the temple, and all the people came unto him; and he sat down, and taught them. [3] And the scribes and Pharisees brought unto him a woman taken in adultery; and when they had set her in the midst, [4] They say unto him, Master, this woman was taken in adultery, in the very act. [5] Now Moses in the law commanded us, that such should be stoned: but what sayest thou? [6] This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not. [7] So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her. [8] And again he stooped down, and wrote on the ground. [9] And they which heard it, being convicted by their own conscience, went out one by one, beginning at the eldest, even unto the last: and Jesus was left alone, and the woman standing in the midst. [10] When Jesus had lifted up himself, and saw none but the woman, he said unto her, Woman, where are those thine accusers? hath no man condemned thee? [11] She said, No man, Lord. And Jesus said unto her, Neither do I condemn thee: go, and sin no more. [12] Then spake Jesus again unto them, saying, I am the light of the world: he that followeth me shall not walk in darkness, but shall have the light of life.

Problems with my name...

I suppose everybody has problems with their names; because we use them under such widely varied situations and among so many strangers and in unforeseen places. Whereas, originally, our given names would have been used only by those few - maybe a few hundred at most - who already knew us as individuals. 

In general I have been very happy with Bruce Charlton - but there is a long-term and recurrent problem with Bruce. When speaking the name - say in a classroom, or over the telephone - people can't distinguish it. 

I have better-than-average diction (as a consequence of lecturing and some acting) but I still cannot make Bruce clear aurally - people hear it as Buu or maybe Buuss. Inevitably, I need to spell it out...

In Scotland, where the name comes-from (via the French of those dreaded Normans, I'm sorry to say) there is a rolled R, to assist with the earlier part of the word; turning the English monosyllable into almost two syllables: Brrr-ous. 

Ideally, though, to make the word clear aurally would require breaking it into three: Ber-us-ah, maybe...

Charlton has been less of a problem; and the surname was well known in my childhood from the footballer Bobby, who was perhaps - with Pele - the most famous soccer player in the whole world - indeed one of the most famous Englishmen.  

(e.g. - This really happened - Foreigner from the Far East: Where do you come from? Answer: England. Far Eastern Foreigner (smiling and gesturing): Ah - Bobby Charlton!) 

The surname is Northumbrian, and common around here; although rare in and around Bristol where I grew-up (there were only two or three Charltons listed in the phonebook).

Aurally, the name is usually clear. Although, when I lived in Scotland I had, of course, to pronounce it with the rolled R which broke it into three - Cha-rrrul-ton.

The only problem came in the USA, when I was a visiting medical student at Harvard, and used to get paged as "Dac-tor Carlton"... 

A pronunciation that was, frankly, inexcusable; given that Charlton Heston was one of the most famous American film actors of that era; and his name was always pronounced pronounced properly - with an initial Chu, not a Ku. 

But that is a problem with Americans - not with Charlton!

If Americans can pronounce a word wrongly: they will. A good example was pointed-out by my brother. 

English spelling is, of course, difficult/ irrational*; and the floating, bouyant, navigational device is pronounced Boy, but spelled Buoy. This confuses English children when encountering the written word; and they often mispronounce it as something-like Boo-oy, or Bu-oy. 

The Americans decided to mispronounce this strange spelling of Buoy, but in a way that is not phonetic! As Boo-ee!

'Nuff said. 

*Thanks, largely, to classically-trained and Francophile lexicographers; who insisted upon spelling spoken-words (including many place names) in forced-accordance with their idiosyncratic and erroneous etymologies. 

Leftist trends are a materialist distortion of innate, spiritual motivations

There is an analytic idea, which I took and somewhat adapted from Rudolf Steiner; and which I have found useful. It is that the leftist trends of the past three centuries (e.g. pacifism, abolition, socialism, nationalism, feminism, vegetarianism, antiracism, environmentalism) are materialist distortions of underlying changes in men's emerging spiritual instincts and motivations. 

Leftism is the greatest evil in the world today, because it represents a vast, changing, expanding range of materializations of spiritual impulses. 

The reason that leftism is a novelty in human history, is because Men have changed. 

And Men have changed ultimately and necessarily for spiritual reasons, reasons that are (no matter how much distorted) originally in accordance with God's plans of creation. 

That is, Man's nature is meant to change through history; in part because different civilizations and societies provide different experiences that are valuable for different souls. God made the world, and God made this way, and he made a world that was meant to 'evolve'. 

But, for God, reality is that the spiritual is always primary. Because 'the material' (which is also always spiritual) is a sub-set of the spiritual. Modern Man has inverted this reality by making the material not just primary but the only reality: in modernity, the spiritual is denied reality. For so long as the spiritual is denied its reality and primacy; we will live in evil-times - since our ultimate values (i.e. the deepest metaphysical assumptions that rationalize our everyday values) are necessarily inverted. 

Leftism ultimately derives from the inevitable distortions that occur when Man's spiritual evolution is forced-into materialist models, and provided with fake materialist solutions.  

We can see this everywhere, all over the political spectrum. A spiritual value, which has some kind of spontaneous inner existence; can only enter public discourse by being 'modelled' materially. Thus human spiritual problems are inevitably re-cast as material problems. This is inevitable because - for our society - only the material is really-real. 

This material model them leads to - apparent - solutions to the original human problem; which are of course material solutions - that is, the solutions derived from the theory are always 'answers' to do with making, destroying, moving, reshaping physical things.  

And therefore leftism always, inevitably, fuels totalitarianism; because when the answers to real human problems are always conceptualized in material terms, then the obvious way - indeed, the imperative - is to impose these material pseudo-answers, by whatever means seems likely to be most effective. 

Therefore; leftism always reduces to the insatiable demand for power over Men; the need for power being rationalized by the imperative of coercively imposing pseudo-materialist solutions, to fake-materializations of genuine but spiritual problems.  

Thus society and civilization is colonized by leftism; colonized incrementally; by materialistic theories that falsely 'explain' spiritual motivations and spiritual phenomena; and by the consequent materialist solutions to the problems thus conceived. 

The deep motivations underlying leftism are therefore spiritual; which is why leftism is powerful and enduring, why leftism is innerly-experienced as value-imperatives. 

But leftism is always and necessarily evil; because these valid inner spiritual motivations are reduced and re-cast into false, outer, material forms. 

Footage of Stukas in a vertical dive

Those who are fascinated by dive-bombers in general, and the Stuka in particular, will enjoy the original footage of (almost-) vertical sustained and controlled diving in the above recent video. This was something that the Ju-87 could and did do, allowing unmatched accuracy; and which (probably) no other aircaft in history has been able to achieve. 

We need-to learn-to do-without "spiritual technologies"

At this phase and stage of things; I am increasingly convinced that we need to work-towards doing-without "spiritual technologies"; because such technologies become less-and-less effective at achieving their aims, and more-and-more likely to corrupt people into alignment with the increasingly evil rulership of this mortal world. 

By spiritual* "technologies" I mean all the many kinds of mediators and aids to spirituality - including some that were once regarded as absolutely essential to Christian salvation. 

I mean "technologies" such as spiritual (or holy) books, artefacts, institutions, activities (e.g. rituals), initiation procedures, drugs, meditative practices and so forth.   

All spiritual technologies in all areas of their usage are weakening, dwindling in effect, and now seem (ever-more-clearly, to me!) to be treated as little more than lifestyle options (almost clubs or 'hobbies') - even/ especially among those who most stridently assert their primacy. 

(For instance: the way that the Roman Catholic Church suspended Mass internationally and without time-limit in 2022, demonstrated their real attitude to such sacraments - Analogous examples could be found for the other Christian denominations and major religions.)

If Not Then What? If we are, as I think we must - sooner or later - to do without these; what instead can guide us and motivate us? 

If we do not have such law-books, such 'blueprints' for living; we instead need:

First - to be clearer about our ultimate aims.

Second - to be clear about the values, according to which such aims will be pursued.

Third - to be conscious of our strongest inner motivations; and seek among them for motivations in accordance with the aims and values we choose to pursue. 

*"Spiritual" I regard as (approximately, in brief) having to do with awareness of dwelling in a living divine creation. Such spirituality is (now, and increasingly) an essential pre-requisite to Christianity. 

Sarah Beth Briggs plays some first-rate (yes!) Mendelssohn: Variations Serieuses Opus 54

A couple of weeks ago I went to a superb piano recital by Sarah Beth Briggs; a local lass who English readers might remembers as the youngest (then) finalist of the BBC Young Musician of the Year in 1984; and who I first heard about (from music student friends) as a prodigy-pupil of Denis Matthews. 

It was a superb concert; and, for me, the highlight was Mendelssohn's "serious variations" Opus 54. I had never heard these before, yet they are the only work of Mendelssohn's I have encountered that I would regard as truly First Rate; excepting his overture to Midsummer Night's Dream - written at 17, and the only great music to have been composed by a child - 17 years old. 

SBB's performance of the Mendelssohn was one of those rare live-music occasions when I was absolutely riveted and entranced - I felt present at one of the musical events of my life. 

At the interval I bought Sarah Beth Brigg's recent CD "Variations" which included this, and several other pieces featured in the recital. I have been re-listening to the Serious Variations repeatedly ever since, and remain extremely impressed and moved by them. 

The rest of the disc is very good too, including Beethoven's variations on God Save the King which I had always assumed were just a kind of over-extended Teutonic joke! The concert revealed them to be of tremendously exciting virtuosity, consistently interesting, and thoroughly enjoyable!  

I did not believe Mendelssohn to be capable of such depth of musicality as he achieves in Opus 54; yet this work is as good as my very favourite Beethoven sonatas and variations; pieces I know very well from a span of more than four decades. 

Anyway: you can hear a snippet of SBB's performance from 3:30 here - or find other performances of the Mendelssohn Variations Serieuses on YouTube - I haven't yet investigated these, but Murray Perahia's performance would be a good bet.  

You can't stay out of trouble by being-careful

Back in 2011, I wrote a mini-book called Thought Prison, which was focused on the New Left/ Political Correctness or what we would now call 'woke' ideology -- which, I argued, encompassed the entire mainstream of political and social discourse - including the supposed secular/ not-religious 'right' such as conservatives, republicans, libertarians and nationalists. 

I pointed-out that (even then, a dozen-plus years ago) in such a society of perpetual and self-consuming revolution, there was no way that anyone could - by choice - keep his head down, keep quiet, and stay out of trouble. 

If They, for any reason at all - even momentary expedience - want to get You, or Your institution, corporation, organization/ club/ charity or any grouping - They will get you.  

Because They control the mass/social media, and because the Masses (still!) believe the media and are addicted to it; even if you haven't actually done something anti-woke, They can and will just make up lies that you did do it*.

Enough people with power and influence will believe Them+; and will think you deserve, and therefore support, whatever punishment They decide to inflict; or whatever mob They decide to unleash upon you inflict (with Establishment-protected impunity).   

If They want to get you, They will get you - and what you have done or haven't makes not the slightest difference. 

You cannot stop this. 

Any 'apology' will simply be taken as an admission of guilt; but They will also invent an apology from you (that you never made) if and when it suits the current agenda.   

And you can't do anything about this - except on your side. 

What can you do, then? 

For a start; you might as well cease to worry and don't bother to take defensive action. Be honest with yourself (and those you trust), always exercise your spiritual freedom to choose your beliefs in opposition to the evil ideology of the Establishment. 

You should not be afraid - either in anticipation, or if the worst happens. Fear is not just futile but a sin. 

If you are afraid, acknowledge it is a sin, and repent it. That will help in and of itself. 

Beyond that; the only antidote to fear is faith in God (the Christian God, who is The Creator, wholly loving, and personally concerned with You); so you should regard your own fear as a stimulus to greater faith.  

How much of this you choose to speak, broadcast, or argue; is a personal and secondary matter. The vital consideration is that you take full personal responsibility for your values and discernment of truth, beauty and virtue... 

Be explicit and fully-conscious of all this, in your own mind. 

By full responsibility, I mean your personal responsibility before God and in context of light of life eternal - which are what matter ultimately.  

Believing because of a primary obedience to what your church is currently teaching is a failure to take personal responsibility. As of 2023; those who refuse ultimate responsibility, and claim merely to be following the church's instructions, are just as complicit with the Establishment as those who believe the mass media's evil lies.  

*I have personally experienced this twice - in 2008 and 2010. For example, the biggest circulation UK newspaper, who had never spoke with me quoted - in quotation marks! - something I had not said and did not believe. They just invented it, for the story and or impersonal malice. I have personally known several others to whom this happened. Such spiteful lying has been normal, routine media behaviour for many years. 

+Indeed, almost everybody - except your closest family and friends, will believe anything published against you that is disseminated in the mass media; even if they have known you for years personally, worked alongside you perhaps; and even after you refute the falsehoods face-to-face. (Actually, people do often this even with respect to malicious gossip of unknown provenance.) 

This degree of stubborn mindless credulity I found to be a real eye-opener! - although 2020 et al has demonstrated the obedient-slave mass phenomenon to all with eyes to see.  

Nostalgia

Nostalgia was originally used to describe a kind of pathological (painful - even potentially fatal) homesickness; but is now much more widely used to mean a yearning for something in the past (time of life, place, person, group) - which yearning may be deep, rich and pleasurable. 

Although it is generally regarded as a rather weak and sentimental affliction; I regard nostalgia as, in itself, a Good Thing, especially in potential - because to experience nostalgia is a sign of depth of nature, perhaps evidence of the capability for love; a looking beyond the currently dominating incentives of here-and-now.

But nostalgia is just a beginning; and what matter is what happens next. Like most things, nostalgia can lead to bad outcomes. 

For example, it can lead to the attempt to return to childhood, or a futile attempts to rebuild that which has irrevocably gone (and which probably ought not to be rebuilt anyway). This error might be termed "nostalgia as an end in itself". 

It may also represent (or lead to) a spiritually dangerous things, which is trying to recover and re-live an earlier stage of oneself; trying to undo and forget (rather than learn from and repent) aspects of one's life. 

Or, the opposite; the impossibility of returning to the earlier situation may lead to a kind of despair. The past is seen as entropically-doomed because the world inevitably decays, our memory always degrades, the past is annihilated, death by destruction is the end of all...

This error might be termed nostalgia as a deceptive (because unattainable) vision of the impossible Good. 

Either way; nostalgia can lead to a kind of life-sapping attitude - especially in a secular-materialist society such as ours (one which favours and rewards psychopathic callousness); which perhaps accounts for nostalgia's low-status reputation. 

If, on the other hand, someone has an assumption of his own life as a stage and phase in the experience of an eternal soul; and has the expectation of resurrected life in Heaven to follow death; then nostalgia can assume a very positive role in life, and beyond. 

Nostalgia (potentially) points us in a direction that recognizes the positive value of our own past experiences; and these experiences may include imaginative and empathic experiences; for example the best experiences from reading, arts, television; and the experiences of people with whom we identify (both those people we have known or met, and those about-whom we have learned). 

We may realistically expect such nostalgia experienced in this mortal life, to form (in ways not explicitly comprehensible at present) a vital part of our eternal life in Heaven. 

How the thinking of one person can change the world for the better

I regard it as a simple fact that the thinking of a single person can change the world, and for the better. 

1. It is "thinking" that has the effect, not necessarily a physical-action.

2. As little as one person thinking may be effectual, not necessarily any group, institution or nation.

3. "Change the world", i.e. the 'external' world: the world (including people) outside the 'brain' of the thinker.

4. "For the better", which is change-positively and in line with the will and intention of God. 

(Provoking widespread negative change is easy and common - a spiteful gossip can do it; but I am here talking about a positive and personal contribution to all of divine creation.) 

It may be helpful to draw together the assumptions that lie behind such a statement. 

1. Thoughts are actions in the real world. 

(I was originally convinced of this by Rudolf Steiner's Truth and Knowledge, and The Philosophy of Freedom; and the work of Owen Barfield - such as Saving the Appearances.) 

2. We live in A Creation - and God is the creator, loves us and is concerned with us each as individuals -- all human beings constitute (in some literal sense) God's family of children. 

3. Therefore, God is able and willing - through His ongoing-creation - to take-up, amplify and spread-through-creation any specific thought (or other action) from any one of His Children - when this thought contributes positively to the goals of creation. 

Our main business, therefore; is to think good, positive thoughts - true, beautiful, virtuous; and if we do this, then God can and will take-up these thoughts; and make of them what He will in the world at large. 

Mainstream Left-Right totalitarians, versus the Radical Left (agents of chaos) - Office politics among the demon-affiliated

The Left includes all of the discourse in the public space - so it can be called more accurately the Left-Right - which primary objective is totalitarian - that is, it aims at omni-surveillance and total-control - with the spiritual objective of normalizing and propagating value-inversion, and thereby mass human damnation. 

The Left has a minority radical wing, whose primary objective is chaos i.e. violent 'revolution'. The radical Left are agents of chaos, their methods are often chaotic, and they desire increased chaos as an outcome. 

The mainstream-totalitarian Left and the radical-revolutionaries can be distinguished, in terms of their priority and main methods; but they cannot be divided - because they are both part of the same movement of the Left; and each depends on the other. 

The totalitarians need the radical, because radicals are the fantasy heroes, inventers, and 'conscience' (actually, a kind-of inverted anti-conscience!) of the bureaucrats and functionaries. The radicals are the energy and inspiration; the avant-garde - and the totalitarians follow. 

And the radicals need the totalitarians; because it is the bureaucrats and mass media who create the protected and subsidized environment in which radicals can survive and thrive, which provide exposure and influence via the media, and who defend the radicals against the only real enemies of the Left-Right (i.e. real Christians). 

What we are seeing at present, is one of the periodic spats of office politics within the Left-Right. 

The demon-serving powers of evil who sit above the mainstream, have set up a new Leftist Civil War within the mainstream - a war between the totalitarian majority mainstream, who support one side; and the radical minority mainstream who support the other. 

This new war will energize and entertain the mainstream of both kinds - especially those who have become bored and directionless. It gives them something urgent to fight for. 

The 2022 war was useless for this purpose; because the entire mainstream, both totalitarians and radicals, were solidly united in opposition to the Fire Nation. Dull, dull, dull...

But the totalitarians and radicals of the mainstream are really excited just now! Both taking hard-lines, and flinging outrageous accusations at each other; because this is a power struggle within The Party, among those who currently control the world. 

Because it is a power struggle among individuals of totalitarian and radical cast, the personal stakes are high! Potential rewards and punishments are extremely different according to who is winning. 

But it is fun, also, because (unlike the Fire Nation situation, where mainstream dissent is crushed) ultimately the new-war stakes are so low! 

The stakes are low* in the sense that neither side of the mainstream can really win; therefore, ultimately (at least among those who aren't merely dupes) neither totalitarians nor radicals really want to win - in the sense of permanently vanquishing their 'enemy'. 

Individuals and parties within the Left just want more power for themselves and their gang. That's all. 

They are all on the same side, totalitarians and radicals sides need each other, and work-together in synergy. 

However this new war turns-out for the agents of chaos personally; the radicals have already won. 

They have already won even if (for instance) all the radicals are soon stripped of power, imprisoned, or killed. Because it is easy to make new radicals. If necessary; new, 'replacement' radicals can be generated by the mainstream at the drop of a hat and in large numbers, in just a few days or weeks - as was discovered in the 1960s and confirmed in the summer of 2020. 

The radicals have already won; because the world has been pushed much further towards the chaos they desire: towards some kind of System-collapse.

And the totalitarians have already lost - because, with every passing week, the global bureaucrats have less and less control of humanities attitudes, thoughts, behaviours. And while radicals are quick and easy to produce; it has taken many decades to build The System.  

+++

*This is, perhaps, an exemplar of Sayre's Law, which states that in any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the issues. The reason is probably that personal stakes are relatively highest when matters of fundamental value are least; maybe because when micro-issues of merely-relative value are concerned, then the reason for such differences are mostly personal. 

Spiritual preparation for war: looking beyond mortal life (in both directions)

As the Sorathic powers do their best to escalate the current war in scope and severity; preparation becomes urgent - and since this is primarily a spiritual war, and the world is more evil-affiliated than ever before (so far as we know): spiritual preparation is primary. 

The main spiritual preparation for an increased possibility of death (oneself perhaps; but more likely from the broader range of loved ones, family, friends, neighbours) is to be on the right side. This means having primary affiliation not to any socio-political entity; but to the side of God, divine creation and Jesus Christ: to want salvation and be prepared to leave-behind all yours sins (i.e. repent) in order to reach Heaven. 

But, beyond that, I think it is a great help to put this mortal life into context; which (for me) is to look beyond mortal life in both directions. 

That is; our life now is in a frame; from-within-which we should both be looking back to before this incarnated/ embodied mortal life -- as well as looking forward to after and beyond this life - to what comes after the body dies. 

In other words; we need to to understand that birth was not the beginning nor is death the end; and we urgently need to sort-out the relevant realities of this situation for ourselves; what it implies for us, and for everyone-else. 

This means that, as well as acknowledging your basic situation; you ought to continue and analyze whether or not you are really satisfied with what you currently are telling yourself is really-true...

And whether you personally endorse your current understanding of "the human condition" from your deepest intuitive convictions. 

(...Whether, that is, you are prepared to take individual responsibility for your convictions - and not try to hand-over ultimate responsibility to some external institution or source.)

As of 2023, as we now are; only on such a basis can we be prepared for death - which is vital whether or not any of us (later or soon) are involved in a destructive war. 

Crisis, what crisis? The best time for spiritual action

Cover art from the Crisis, what crisis? The 1975 LP by Supertramp - deservedly, one of the most popular bands of my middle teens; because of their touches of inspired lyricism. (Of course, the underlying value-tendency of the lyrics was net-evil - but so it goes with successful mass culture. And beauty is always good.) At the time I never noticed how enormous are the sunbathing bloke's feet - human flippers!

When there is an official crisis - as at present; all the presented options are wrong - because all are misdirections from what we ought to be doing. 

The three options at present are actively to support one side or the other, or active pacifism. 

The idea is encapsulated by the message behind the illustration above: we, each and all, should Do Something... Now! Before it is too late! And that something we must do is always material, physical, socio-political (even if, nowadays, symbolic-virtual).  

In effect: the presented-options are all attempting a negation of the negative - which is not a positive. The crisis is the negative, and the choice of actions are designed to negate that negative. 

In theory this might be asserted as 'clearing the ground' for something positive; but that only applies when there is a positive to begin-with. 

And here-and-now, there just isn't. 

To demand we do something, when all the somethings are supportive of one-evil-or-another is a recipe for making things worse. 

What about when the underlying problem of the crisis is spiritual not material - including the exclusion of the spiritual as well as the prevalent value-inversion? What then?

Well, clearly, the response to a spiritually-caused crisis ought to be spiritual -- and yet, the urgency is always for some choice of physical action. 

They always say, and with upfront validity, "Let's just sort-out this crisis first; and then - when this immediate and acute situation is over - that is the right time when we can (and should!) sort-out the spiritual stuff."

Superficially sensible... apparently the only realistic option; but only if you fail to notice that aiding evil (of any kind) is bound to make matters worse overall - and worse spiritually (because that is exactly what we are supposed to set-aside). 

So, what we are being asked to do is to select between counter-productive options: especially when the crisis has not (yet) physically upon us, except virtually; and when the inhabitants of totalitarian bureaucracies are (by design) materially powerless.

And, what when the crisis is never over; but instead we move (or rather, are-moved) from one emergency to the next? The time for spiritual re-evaluation will never be ripe, will never happen. 

Yet;  if or when a crisis is resolved, and another has not been assembled, then the spiritual urgency has diminished, the masses are then lulled and distracted by the pleasures of peace and prosperity. 

Official crisis is always the necessary time for spiritual re-evaluation; when 'issues' become real, when mortal life is revealed for the serious thing it is. 

Also; spiritual re-alignment is the only way to solve the crisis. 

From where we now stand, all options are bad, all futures are negative, all actions lead to greater harm... 

Only from a different spiritual perspective may we - possibly, if we are serious about it, and put the spirit first - perceive a positive future; and only a positive future can do us genuine good. 

Responding to the spiritual manipulations of a Fake Pennant event

Fake Pennant events abound - through history, and now! 

A big one has recently happened with the obvious intent to provoke (another) war-front and escalate the ongoing world war III. 

So far, the Fake Pennant seems to be having the effect intended by its devisers. 

But all this is - for almost everybody in the world, as yet - a remote Geopolitical event; known only very indirectly, very incompletely, and with distortion, via the media. Yet most of us will, nonetheless, immediately and increasingly feel the strength of manipulation pressing upon us. 

(First emotional- then spiritual-manipulation). 

That is our first warning - when we take one step back from unconscious emotions, rendering them into conscious feelings; and recognize that we are being-manipulated.  

We can feel the externally-desired responses arising in us. We find ourselves spontaneously taking sides in a conflict between evils. 

What should we do? 

Become aware, then understand what is ongoing - and understand spiritually, rather than materially. 

As of 2023, all the Big Things of which we are made aware by the mass media are spiritual issues primarily - else we would not be getting so many Big Guns firing at us so loudly and often. 

Like all such things now; we are dealing with lies; and whatever truth there may be (and sometimes there is no relevant truth - some of the biggest lies are rooted in total lies) we should not become distracted by trying to do what we cannot possibly do: understand the true material causes of the material problem.

We cannot uncover the specifics of conspiracy; but we can recognize that something is not-what-it-seems. 

By the way the event is propagated in spiritual terms - which we know from self-monitoring, and noting and comparing the responses of rulers and of 'the masses' and known individuals; we can be sure that that there have-been and are elements working to generate and interpret a Fake Pennant event. 

The intention of a Fake Pennant can again be understood from 'self-monitoring'. Currently, the intent is to provoke cycles of resentment and fear to seek some kind of 'final solution' by destruction - some solution depending on the annihilation of the problem (e.g. particular people, or a particular place). 

For the remote masses, the intent is to provoke material fear and despair - rooted in the open-endedly horrific prospects of physical suffering, as war spreads between and within nations. 

Our job as Christians is to recognize that we are being manipulated into fear, resentment and despair; and to reject the validity of these spiritual responses as sinful. 

We cannot resist having these feelings altogether; but we can reject their validity - which is called repentance. 

This entails recalling (and affirming inwardly) that the real war of this world is (now as always) spiritual, not material. 

We should also take confidence from the truth that our own personal awareness, understanding, affiliations, attitudes etc. really make a difference in the real world; and that is exactly why they are being-manipulated so aggressively. 

Even just "noticing" what is happening spiritually; seeing through the lies and seeing the demonic 'at work'; by perceiving the workings of evil in oneself; has an immediate and positive effect. 

To understand and reject it - even more so. 

To transcend all this and take an inwardly God-aligned perspective - more so still. 

So there is much that each- and every-one can and should be doing. 

Of course, this whole thing needs to be done again and again! 

For instance, it should be relatively easy to accomplish when the problems are merely in the mass media; merely remote, virtual and conceptual. 

It may be much harder to accomplish when the problems become personal and experiential (as sooner or later they must, if the problem is really-real - or even if the problem is merely treated and regarded as real). 

Such is life... We are here to learn, and keep-learning, for as long as we are alive. 

The fake nature of geopolitical discourse - All things to all men, hence an instrument of the devil

Everybody loves geopolitical explanations! - at least, everybody in the mass media, and most people else where. 

And yet, using geopolitical analysis, which sounds hard-nosed, and (sort-of) objective... Everybody reaches a different conclusion!

This should serve as a warning, a Red Flag; that we are dealing with some-thing that is evil; and evil not by its usage but by its very nature. 

In other words; we engage in evil when we use and believe geopolitical discourse to discuss and analyze 'world events'. 

Geopolitics is wrong for two main reasons - or classes of reason. 

The first and most fundamental wrongness is that geopolitics is materialistic in its assumptions: geopolitics excludes the reality of God, creation and all that is of the spirit. 

Because these are excluded, and yet these are real and primary; geopolitical discourse misses-out most of what is most important. 

Secondly geopolitics is wrong because it has too many, too subjective, too imprecise, variables.

For a start; geopolitical analysis is based upon evaluating "interest" - in the sense of benefit. In other words, asking who benefits-overall from options X versus Y or Z. 

Yet this matter of what interest means, or what benefit is overall most important, is utterly vague and conjectural. 

Because we cannot perceive another's motivations, all such imputations are - at bottom - little more than guesswork and assumption; that can neither be confirmed nor refuted, because in practice all possible outcomes are compatible with all imputations of interest. 

Any person - and more so any institution, corporation, ethnic group or nation - has many things that might be called interests, many possible ways in which (we suppose) they might benefit (money, power, fame, sex...); and many more ways in which they might wish to avoid harms and suffering (poverty, humiliation, pain, confinement...). 

We can't ever be validly-confident concerning which interest is actually important, or most important, or how the various interests might interact? 

And there will surely be other genuine interests we do not know, have not thought about, or which we under-rate. 

This fundamental and fatal imprecision in geopolitics is compounded by further variables; two in particular - time-scale, and interest-group-boundaries.

Timescale

What is best in the short-term of here-and-now, is almost never the best possibility in the longer-term. Conversely, the best long term possibilities are nearly-always associated with immediate disadvantage or serious risk. 

So, geopolitical analysis has vast - and fatal - wriggle room in identifying self-interest and other kinds of interest; since almost any timescale can be used to 'explain' things - from the immediate and tactically useful, to many and various longer term and 'strategic' advantages... 

Ultimate long term benefit can be assumed for anything from days, weeks and months ahead, to years or even decades ahead; and such assumed benefit  can therefore explain almost any activity leading to almost any outcome.  

Interest-group-boundary

On top of all this, there is the question of who exactly is supposed to be benefitting? Such benefit comes at every level between extremes of the individual, and the entirety of the human population. 

Some specific individual (such as a monarch, president, or dictator); or also their family and minions? Or should it be assumed that some rival person or faction stands to benefit. 

Are we talking about a class (like Marxists)? or are we talking about a race or religion? 

Or maybe it is a corporation or some other social institution like a profession of a branch of government like the military?

At a larger scale - are we talking about a whole nation's interest; or maybe some larger alliance of nations? Or it is the globalist perspective that is being promoted - with multinational organizations?  

Or maybe the interest being sought is that of a secret cabal or conspiracy? 

I hope it is, by now, sufficiently clear that geopolitics is so imprecise and slippery a discourse that it can  explain anything in any number of ways; can blame anyone (or nobody) with equal pseudo-validity! It can impute almost any kind of motivations and intentions, across almost any time-frame.

And, in sum, I hope it is clear that geopolitical analysis is a fake!

So, why do we all so easily and often fall into it (I do not exempt myself). 

The reason is that geopolitical discourse is ultimately a demonic temptation; and (as Jesus told us) we are all sinners! Many of us will fall tpo the temptations of geopolitics - especially when so many other people are doing it, all the time. 

Geopolitics is inescapable, because geopolitical discourse functions - at high levels of power, where people take such matter seriously, to justify anything to anyone. 

Consider a war, as an example. 

Geopolitics can appeal to the interests of people on opposite sides of wars, to all kinds of rival factions within those sides and crossing those side - and reference interest across all timescales*... 

Such that every-body and every-group (at least all with power) may simultaneously believe that he is pursuing his interests by starting a war, escalating a war, pursuing that war!  

Now; imagine that - behind all the geopolitical discourse was some person or group - call him Satan! - who wanted war, or societal destruction - starvation, torment, disease... Wanted these for their own sake, from sheer spitefulness, because they made him feel good... because that is his nature.  

"Satan" could pursue his destructive goals via geopolitics; by identifying powerful individuals and groups, and encouraging them all to pursue particular kinds of self-interest... different groups, different benefits, different timescales...  

So - in the end - lots of people and groups were following Satan's agenda of destruction; but each and all of them were under the impression that each was pursuing his own self-interest! (Various kinds of interest, over some various time-frames). 

Such is the nature our world - and increasingly so. 

We cannot cease to sin altogether; but we can recognize and repent our sins - and that is what we ought to do in relation to geopolitics. 

We can recognize that geopolitics is a fake discipline, that provides fake explanations to-order; and is therefore used to manipulate people towards underlying goals of which they may all be unaware. 

Because behind geopolitics lies the spiritual war of this world; and that (not geopolitics) is where we should be looking for explanations and guidance. 

*To clarify: those who desire to trigger, sustain or escalate the destructiveness of war; will typically try to work using individuals and groups on both sides of the conflict; agents who - using geopolitical arguments - can both simultaneously be convinced that war will be in their own interests - of one sort or another (power, money, religious), in one timescale or another (but - in war - usually short-medium term). 

What's new in the Satanic agenda since 2020? War, mainly.

The greatest novelty from the Global Establishment since the totalitarian coup of 2020 is surely war, specifically engineering and escalating world war III; presented as "a good thing" or even as an absolutely essential thing. 

This is a tough sell for the totalitarians! - because the kind of war which is being pushed-for will destroy all the (albeit incoherent) aims of the existing major-core leftists issues, by which the world has been changed. All-out, everywhere, world war - will put an end to Great Reset type 'concerns' about a climate 'emergency', the transagenda, antiracism... and all the rest of that kind of thing. 

All these leftist-evil-agendas depend upon the 'rulers' and their minions accepting, and living-by, the delusion that their pet projects will incrementally be implemented in a future society dedicated to this-kind-of-stuff. 

Of course, these pet projects are all in actuality socially-destructive in effect, and therefore can never really be implemented; because the more rapidly the agendas 'succeed', the more rapidly society will crumble - so the authorities will be unable to impose them. 

That awareness of the incompatibility of world war (2023 style) with new-left-totalitarianism is, however, blocked by continual propaganda and the continual construction of a virtual-reality; a 'virtuality' existing in a closed-circle of mutually-reinforcing mass-media with bureaucratic statements and rules. 

But war? It is indeed a very tough sell to convince bureaucrats and media moguls that a long-term, unrestricted, international war will be compatible with their cherished ideologies! Because it simply isn't!

Yet, remarkably, for the past year-and-a-half; they do seem to have been convinced! 

Convinced by a combination of multiple Total Lies with increased censorship, and levels of frenzied national-demonization not seen for a century... Indeed, recent demonization and persecutions of the Fire Nation and its citizens have been in some ways (especially financial and economic) never before seen anywhere or at any time in the modern era. 

The leadership/ minion class has not even noticed that the sanctions and measures imposed ostensibly to destroy the Fire Nation have, in fact and surely quite clearly, harmed the imposing nations - and that was their intention from the very start, which is why they continue to be escalated. By such means; the war has been used to accelerate the purposive-suicide of The West (the West being Satan's prime target in recent generations - even above the Fire Nation). 

So, the stupidity and obedience of the rulers and their minions turns out to be very great indeed; and they really seem not to have noted the gross and widening discrepancy between the bureaucratic-media version of reality, and what they can observe and experience for themselves!

But the longer the situation continues, and the wider the gap in realities, the more difficult it seems to be to sell a proposed war of unprecedented destruction as being (somehow!) helpful to the attainment of the totalitarian-leftist 'utopia' of Agenda 2030 and the Great Reset!

I think that this is what is going-on behind-the-scenes of the Western Establishment at present. 

All the participants are affiliated with evil, servants of Satan; but the mostly-evil Ahrimanic totalitarians are (at last!) starting to wake-up to the incompatibility of their ultra-controlled world-view with the chaos of wreckage and killing, favoured by of the more-wholly-evil Sorathic spiteful-destroyers. 

I personally do not want either of these groups to prevail! 

Indeed, the mostly-but-partly evil totalitarians vision of a world of omni-surveillance and total mind-control is spiritually even worse than a world of total war, horrific bodily suffering, and mega-death. 

Mankind has painted itself into this Satanic corner, by many generations of wrong and evil choices and decisions - and by continuing in these falsehoods. There are no good options for The World. 

Maybe we will be faced with a choice between supporting wholesale spiritual destruction (totalitarianism) or else supporting gross physical destruction (war)... certainly that seems like the way that Satan desires us to see things. 

I hope that - when the crunch comes - I will choose neither.  

The News or Nihilism - your (self-imposed) only choice

We modern people substantially make our reality, thus choose our reality: just look around you! So primal/ childhood unconsciousness and instinct is not an option, not if we are to live as a human among humans. (And anyone who is genuinely prepared to hand-back the human ticket and live as an unconscious, instinctive animal, would not be arguing about it: just shutting-up and doing it.) 

Yes, but what reality do we choose? 

En mass, on-average, We choose The News.

That is reality... Whatever The News says is what-passes-for objectivity. Despite that The News is incoherent, labile and evil - it is the only reality we have... 

(We are, to some extent, allowed to select from-within The News - i.e. the approved media, the ones that are not blocked; we have that 'freedom'! We can therefore, each and all of us, be unique individuals; with our very-own choice and combination of official News-reality -- Yippee!)

But suppose we reject The News - what then? 

If we do not live in the world of The News, what other world may we inhabit?

Behind The News is... Nihilism - nothingness, non-objectivity. 

You step outside The News, and you are on your own, mate! You will then inhabit a world where there is only your-word against the-world.

(Look around, and you will find many News stories with this subtext. They may even acknowledge that The News hates you, and wants you dead! [Actually They really want you damned - but can't say it within the materialism of The News.] The News may rub it in your face that They are trying to immiserate, hurt, maim and kill you... But then - what else is there? Leave The News and you are dead anyway!)

Or maybe you have a few allies - but then so what? Family and some friends is not The Economy. 

You don't have police, army, control of the laws, ability to print money; or the mass media to label you a disgusting, dumb, evil outlaw - and declare open-season on you. 

You don't have a linked-bureaucracy that extends almost everywhere and supplies almost everything. 

You can't live separate from The News; and if you even try and show any sign of succeeding, The News will stop you whenever it wants. 

Such is life. Such is life on the mainstream secular world-view - materialistic metaphysics - which everybody is taught and which is everywhere reinforced in the public domain - not mainly be statements, but wholly by assumptions. 

God, Heaven, the soul, the spirit, creation, reality of values - our whole public world is built and functions on the basis that none of these are real. In the bureaucracies which run everything nowadays; all rules and procedures exclude the reality of of God/ creation/ soul/ spirit etc etc. 

There is just The News, the objectivity to the current Establishment diktat - which is always a lie; or there is Nihilism, nothing, mere subjectivity - which is not even a lie.  

On the one hand we have belief in The News hence obedient service to purposive evil; on the other hand - if we reject The News - there is fear, leading to despair. 

Such are the choices in our materialist (God-excluding, Heaven-excluding, spirit-excluding etc) world view; and our world functions on materialist assumptions. 

Modern Men are  - for the only time in history - absolutely imprisoned by their assumptions, by their metaphysics. 

And - while Modern Men hold these assumptions - they have nowhere to turn but The News, nowhere to run but into Nihilism... no escape that is not worse than whatever they already have. 

We cannot escape - even in our thoughts! - because, according to our deepest beliefs; reality just-is The News backed by Nihilism. 

Our prison is absolutely secure, because it is self-chosen; and the cage is double-locked because we refuse to acknowledge that we have thus chosen, and continue thus to choose - day-by-day, minute-by-minute. 

So long as we personally (and culturally) exclude that extended reality of God, Heaven, the spirit, life beyond life etc; we shall necessarily remain trapped by the dilemma of The News versus Nihilism. 

**

If, on the other hand; we choose to acknowledge the reality of God, divine creation; if we choose the possibility of Heaven, and primacy of eternal spirit - then we are-escaped already. 

Having escaped - the task of our life, our purpose or destiny, can begin. 

But not until after we have escaped. 

The nature of "the Normans": Binge-watching/ listening to John Le Carre adaptations

My spontaneous aversion to England's Norman ruling class goes back a long way; and used to be so strong (in some respects) that until last week I had never been able to get myself to read (or watch an adaptation of) John Le Carre's famously excellent Cold War spy stories; often concerning the classic fictional character of George Smiley - and taking place in the world of the Normans.   

Having found the 1965 movie of The spy who came in from the cold to be thought-provoking and resonant; I then watched another movie, and the BBC TV series of Tinker, Tailor Soldier, Spy and Smiley's People - starring Alec Guinness; and also listened to some more radio play adaptations. A real binge...

I enjoyed a lot about these works, and have found myself stimulated in several directions. 

Yet at bottom I find the whole atmosphere of the social world depicted as alien. I dislike all of the characters - even Smiley -  who all seem to have blunted humanity and zero metaphysical depth. I've had enough for now!

Even the undeniable courage of these Normans, seems to be tainted with a suspicion that it comes from insensibility combined with sensation-seeking (e.g. through sex, drink, violence, sadism, self-humiliation, infighting, betrayal, snobbery etc - anything that rings your bell, to pass the time). 

Underpinning which is a weird sense of Norman tribalism - rooted in their assumed superiority to laws and rules intended for the little people - that destroys any possibility of genuine justice: and indeed any possibility of being personally affiliated to the cause of Good.  

(This combination is seen very early in Norman-English history, for example The Anarchy.)  

In other words; Le Carre's world (at least in these versions) is nihilistic and futile, and is inhabited by men and women who strike me as nihilistic at their very core. 

I assume this reflects Le Carre's own (considerable) strengths, and limitations, as a Man. In an interview I watched he was extremely intelligent, insightful and interesting - yet underneath I sensed... nothing. 

What I am talking about is something missing - something human that is missing*. 

It's as if, for Normans life is a game - but nothing more than a game. The game is arbitrary (war, seduction, snobbery, diplomacy, sport, literature, careerism - it doesn't matter) - but the game has neither meaning nor purpose; because for Normans there is none to be had. 

Each Norman plays a part, tries to play it well (or, at least, to sabotage the others) because that is the best way to fill-in time - but it is nothing more than a part which is played; and ultimately the game doesn't really matter, because nothing ultimately matters... 

*I assume that this deficiency, and the consequent blankness, is what David Icke et al are getting at when they call these people (and some other social groups as well - Normans are not the only ones) reptilians, lizard-people, or actual extra-terrestrials. I would assume, rather, that it is some mixture of an innate deficiency in the capacity for love; with varying degrees of demonic influence and control. 

Recognizing Final Participation - inspiration plus personal creativity

If we assume that because Final Participation (FP) is our destiny, what God wants from us at this stage of things; then perhaps it ought not to be impossibly difficult or rare. Perhaps we should expect to see Final Participation in our own lives; and in those of at least some people whose work is recoded in the public domain. 

Maybe the difficulty in locating Final Participation is in recognizing it as something genuinely different and new, and therefore misclassifying it under old categories - because the old categories are all we know.  

To clarify; Final Participation is an engagement with reality, in which we bring to bear our own creativity - to participate in creating. 

This could be participation with divine creation (this is what I understand to happen in Heaven); or participation with another person's created work - perhaps someone from the past. 

This can serve as an illustration - taking the example of JRR Tolkien's The Lord of the Rings (LotR). 

Two widely known categories of engagement with life, with works; could be termed 'projection' and 'channeling' - and I will contrast these with Final Participation.

Projection

Projection is not intentionally a participation, because it describes what happens when a reader of Tolkien projects his own concerns onto the book. 

This seems to be the usual practice of Tolkien mass-fandom. Except minimally; the projecting fan-reader does not experience what Tolkien himself felt or intended; but instead uses the book (selectively and distortingly) as fuel for his own interests. 

For example such a fan might read LotR as-if it were a "sword and sorcery" novel, being interested only by the fights, magic, monsters, spectacle etc; and either not-noticing, skipping-over or forgetting the other material. Or, to judge by the content of one genre of fan-fictions; quite a few readers even seem to read Tolkien in a subversive fashion, as fuel for their personal sexual fantasies.   

Therefor projection is not a form of 'participation' except very minimally, unconsciously, unintentionally; because the intent is to impose oneself upon the-other. 

Channeling

The ideal behind the form of participation I am calling channeling, is that the reader become so totally immersed in the work that he identifies completely with the author. 

This is a contemplative, not creative, ideally-non-participating form of engagement - because the ideal is that the reader be passive, absorptive, and reflective. The reader seeks to lose-himself-in the work 

This is, indeed, the form that has been called 'inspiration' and which used-to be (in the pre-modern era) the form that so-called 'creativity' took. The 'creator' was supposed to be a clear-channel for God/ The Gods/ The Muses - and himself to play no personal role in what emerged.

In other words; with channeling, with inspired work, the ideal is non-participation. 

This channeling is therefore a particular example of what Owen Barfield termed Original Participation - which is the primal relationship with the world of the child or the early tribal Man. It does have elements of participating; but only in the secondary sense that we are then (and almost fully) engaged with the world, with life, with other beings. But (when channeling works) we are so immersed in the flow of external things, that while our own participation in them is inevitable, it is intentionally minimal.  

Perhaps the ideal of the medieval sculptor working on one of the great cathedrals might serve as an illustration. He is contented to be anonymous, and forgotten, and to work in exactly the same style as every other mason - because his personal nature should 'stand-aside' and should not have anything to do with the product. I have heard of musicians (conductors and soloists) who regard their interpretations likewise: they try to identify so closely with the composer that they lose-themselves in the perormance altogether. 

In terms of Tolkien, this is perhaps the ideal of the best kind of literary critic of the old school: he attempts to expound Tolkien, and not to 'interfere' by interjecting personal views or evaluations. In particular, he is very wary of 'projection', which he regards as itself a gross and unscholarly error, leading to distortions such as anachronism.  

Final Participation

For an example of FP we need to go to Tolkien himself, in his writing of Lord of the Rings; and to that activity which he termed "subcreation". 

This - I suggest - is the relationship between JRRT and his 'source material' - which came from the author's engagement with his academic subject of philology (the language-focused study of old texts), and his other concerns such as mythology, and the matter of England. 

I believe that Tolkien not only had a deep immersion in his sources; but that he also went beyond immersion in his 'sources'. That is; JRRT went beyond the contemplative-passive processes of channeling, and brought his own creativity to bear on the material that he was experiencing from-within. 

There are innumerable examples. Tolkien's elves are rooted in Icelandic, Norse, Anglo-Saxon, Celtic material from his philosophical studies - the words for elves, their histories, their implications (as discussed by Tom Shippey in Roots and Branches); but Tolkien also brought a deep and intense personal interest and concern with elves - which he envisaged as an ideal type of certain aspects of Men; blessed with innate health and extreme longevity, greater love of the earth, greater skills and intelligence, and magical powers. 

And yet Tolkien felt a need to explain (to himself, primarily) how and why it was that elves were (more or less) estranged from, then replaced by, Men - who became rulers of this earth; despite that Men seemed inferior, overall. 

To generate acceptable answers to these (and other) questions about elves, problems about myth, England and so forth; Tolkien needed to go beyond existing material and theories: he needed to enlist his own creativity. 

I consider Tolkien's writing of LotR as a publicly-available example of Final Participation. 

In the first place JRRT was inspired by many, already existing, source materials; and had immersed himself in these materials so that he could, when needed or desired, 'channel'/ expound/ explain these materials in their own terms, in the context of the times and places of their composition. 

But in the second place Tolkien wanted to do more than just passively be-inspired-by; he wanted actively to generate something new by bringing to bear from-himself to participate with that which others had created.  

This was (pretty much) what he termed subcreation. 

To generalize, I think it would therefore be reasonably accurate to state that:

Final Participation = Inspiration plus Personal Creativity 

As such, examples can be generated from other areas of the arts, sciences etc. The pianist Glenn Gould did not just 'channel' Bach (as some have wrongly claimed), because, although he was steeped in Bach's creative mind and intent - Gould also added his own creativity, to make something participated. A synthesis, rather than recreation. 

A creative scientist of genius must, of course, build upon the valid science of his precursors; but as well as selecting from among the already-existing scientific literature that he deeply understands in its own terms (which might be said to 'inspire' him); and as well as extrapolating this work; the great scientist will bring something new, something original: from himself - in order to make a qualitative breakthrough.  

In sum; I hope the above might help make clearer what is meant by Final Participation; and to help recognize when it occurs in our own lives. 

Mostly; in this mortal life, entropy and evil are what kill Men - God's creation sustains us alive, for His purposes

I hope the title is largely self-explanatory. 

In this mortal state we all live in an entropic world, among many evil Beings; the tendency towards death is endemic, omnipresent, cumulative - and therefore we will always die, sooner or later. 

What sustains us alive in face of this constant tendency to change, corruption, disintegration, degeneration and disease - is that we are each a part of God's creation. 

Thus life is a continuing and moment-by-moment divine gift of God; continual, that is, for so long as God sustains it - until God's creation is overwhelmed by evil acts, or inevitably/ eventually by entropy. 

In a basic and overall sense, therefore, it is not God that kills us; and also we may be killed against God's plan for us, against personal divine destiny (especially when acutely overwhelmed by evil intent). 

However; while we live, it is God that is keeping-us-alive. 

Yet God may withdraw His creative sustenance; and then we will soon die from evil or entropy. 

God is keeping us alive for His divine, creative purposes; including the hope that we will choose salvation when we die (and thereby escape both entropy and evil, by entering the second creation); and will learn the spiritual lessons that would most benefit us while we live.  

Those who have been sustained alive for unusually long periods, into extreme old age; might therefore assume that this is for the purpose of our divine destiny; either in hope we shall chose salvation, or in hope that we will learn some-thing God regards as important for us. 

"Wrong" questions rarely, if ever, lead to "right" answers - a comment by Francis Berger

A comment by Francis Berger yesterday included the significant statement that wrong questions rarely, if ever, lead to right answers. 

This is important, because the opposite is so often assumed: for instance, the idea that it doesn't much matter what is our question, because all paths will eventually lead to the truth. Or the related idea that a good way to lead someone to follow Jesus, is to encourage him to ask questions - and answer each of them as they arise. Another version is the idea that the open arena of public assertion, counter-assertion and debate, will tend to lead (by a kind of natural selection) to the emergence of truth. 

But if wrong questions do Not lead to right answers; then these common assumptions are dangerously false. 

If, instead, truth is to be known by asking the right question; then this frantic business of challenge and response needs to stop; and people should instead be thinking about the questions they are asking - why they ask this question, what assumptions it is based-on, what kind of answer they seek, and what they propose to do with an answer...

Instead of comparing and critiquing; we need to focus primarily on asking the one right question. 

The business of a spiritual or philosophical quest - indeed the whole business of mortal life itself! - takes on a transformed complexion when we recognize that the question is more important than the answer; and that wrong questions don't lead to right answers, no matter how many times they are multiplied.

We shouldn't "crack our brains" puzzling over answers - but over questions. 

A properly-formed question will answer itself; and in ways that we understand immediately (although implications of the answer will unfold through time). 

Furthermore; this explains why we cannot rely on external authorities to supply us either with questions, or with answers - since we our-selves must fully understand the question, in order fully to understand the answer.

If we do not do it for ourselves, it will not be done.