It is because our reality is co-created by us, that we are vulnerable to manipulation by the virtual realities of The System

The introduction to a talk Virtual reality and the paranormal, given by Rudolf-Steiner-expert Stanley Messenger in the 1990s, provides a concise account of how it is that Men are so vulnerable to manipulation by the evil-intending fakery of the Virtuality imposed upon us by officialdom and the mass media. 

The point is that when we are born we do not know the world - we only experience 'impressions'; but soon after we begin to add (from ourself) the conceptual basis that we need to understand and to know. 

Because we are each different, distinct (ultimately in soul, also in our genetics and bodily composition) - each thenceforth has a different reality. But our society-environment encourages (demands!) that we assume that there is one perceived reality, universal. So we are already - even as children - living on a false basis: i.e. that the world is the same for everybody. 

We ought to awaken to the realization that we are co-creators of reality - yet people almost never do so; and instead double-down on the belief that there is one reality - and that reality is imposed upon us from externally. 

Because of this error (or self-lie) we are open to be manipulated by external power - almost without limit; since a sufficiently powerful pervasive, incentivized external power can compel upon us false conceptions by-which the sensory impressions get interpreted and understood. 

The way-out is to understand what is happening; and that we intrinsically co-create our reality - and therefore that when the reality imposed upon us is evil, we absolutely need to choose a different reality. 

In different words; we need to understand and reject the evil concepts we have absorbed from evil motivated externals; and to replace these with God-orinetated concepts to which we have acces from our own partly-divine natures and the guidance of the Holy Ghost. 

Then we will understand and know 'the world' by co-creating in a way that is aligned with God's intentions - instead of the Satanic motivation that we (as of 2022) absorb from our environment whenever we remain un-conscious and passive. 

How to escape being thought-controlled

The only way to escape being thought-controlled is for each person to get to the most fundamental level of understanding; where each recognizes the possible understandings; and each chooses his basic understanding of the nature of reality.

If someone can reach this level - he will realize that there is a reality; and/ but that reality needs to be chosen personally. 

Once we have done this, we can be proofed against manipulation by those who seek to impose an unreal 'reality'. 

Reality is real; choice is real - our personally-experienced reality is therefore unavoidably a consequence of our personal choices.

We choose our reality - but that chosen reality may be true or fake; real or unreal; based on deep conviction or passively gone-along-with.   

Manipulation is only possible when we have chosen that reality which is imposed upon us, rather than that reality which really is - because we know it. 

The fundamental level of understanding includes such matters as whether reality is ultimately chaos, or else directed, purposive. Deity or not; god or not - the nature of god and the possibility of having personal relationship with god. The question of how we, personally, can know reality. The question of time - and whether it is an ultimate reality or illusion. The question of whether we are free agents capable of acting from-ourselves, or whether we are wholly-determined by externalities...

But the above are abstract and linguistic descriptions of what needs to be a primary and direct experience of the fundamental issues.

For example - the nature of god. A Christian will need to realize not only that there 'must be' god - but needs to experience god. He needs not merely to have-learned the 'necessary' attributes of god - but actually to know god in the same way a loving child may know his loving parents. 

A mother's love is not known by having been told, nor is it inferred from analysis of her actions; it is known directly; and it is this knowing that leads to faith. Faith in mother - or god. 

That is faith for a Christian - it is confidence in god because god is known, god's personal love is known-from-personal-experience (not learned, reasoned or inferred).    

A Christian with faith is one who has gone to the deepest level at which he realizes the reality and nature of god; and has decided (chosen) to live by that reality. 

He knows he might have rejected that reality, and by default would have done so - he knows that he positively needed to choose it. 

He also knows (from the way they speak and act) that many people never reach that level of direct and personal understanding.

He also knows that he cannot convince anyone else of this personal knowledge - because to convince someone else who lacks that experience would be to achieve the opposite of it!

Such a Christian knows that what matters ultimately is absolutely and necessarily personal to himself, and that it is also absolutely objectively true. It is a matter of completely personal responsibility. 

Because controlled-thought is the default situation. It is the inevitable outcome of passivity and shallowness. We all already-have the habit of being-thought-controlled, until that habit is broken - as described above. And controlled-thinking has converged - so that the thought-controlled have become (and are-becoming more and more) alike. It has thus become easy to identify the thought-controlled.

Only from the deepest level of experience, knowledge, faith - can we become immune to thought-control. 

Only those who are proof against thought-control, and who know real-reality can avoid the toils of evil-motivated and faked reality. 

Only thus can anyone escape demonic manipulation into damnation. 

Spiritual war, transhumanism and the transgender agenda

Modern media and public policy has reached a point where it cannot be understood except in the light of spiritual warfare: Good versus evil, God v the demons, Heaven v hell...

Creation versus the Transhumanism - i.e Man claiming to have-become God-the-creator, and to offer (Here! Now!) an 'Alternative' and better 'Reality'.


Satan has a big problem - which is that he and we and everything are part of God's creation: how then can they be rejected?

The answer is to create what is claimed to be an immaterial Alternative Reality; to choose to inhabit that AR, and by denying that we have made such a choice to claim that the Alternative is really real. In other words, Satan is the lead architect of the transhumanist agenda.

There is no need for you to do a thought experiment and imagine this situation - we are already there (albeit not yet fully so) - with the transgender agenda that has been very rapidly and aggressively imposed by the entirety of the Western ruling Establishment over the past decade.

The transgender agenda (by which self-defined gender incrementally-replaces, completely replaces, sexuality) needs to be recognised as a component of the transhumanist agenda; and both as the major strategy of the demonic agenda in the spiritual war.

Because most of this analysis (God, Good, Creation) is denied; dissenters and realists in The West have been helpless to prevent the imposed-reality of transgenderism - which is now assumed by law, and dissent from which is punished by law (and, worse, by mass media and bureaucratic employers). 

The trans-agenda should be seen as a perfectly rational step towards the kind of Alternative Reality that the demonic powers need to be successful in the context of God's creation. It is part of a world picture that has been building-up over several generations; which has denied God, Creation and Reality - and asserted that this world is humanly constructed ('socially' constructed). The 'Reality' in the phrase itself assumes that reality is man-made, at will.


The appeal of the AR is the promise of freedom and pleasure - since, IF the AR really-was equivalent to created-reality, then in principle we might make Reality any way we pleased; without constraint. For instance; people could choose to be men or women, and swap back and forth at whim! Differences between sexes, classes, races, nations, individual people could be made or abolished!

If all that was true and possible (which of course it is not) there would still be the question of Who Exactly Is In Charge? - and the overwhelming probability that they would be evil-motivated people, who would shape reality to their own selfish ends.

But the problem is compounded by the fact that it is evil demons that are in charge of AR - it is their project; and demonic motivations are different and worse than human motivations; and their agenda goes beyond the gratification of their their own short-term selfishness into the long-term desire for universal damnation.

And - finally - the the very desire to create and dwell in an Alternative Reality on the assumption it is the Only Reality is itself intrinsically evil; because dishonest, because prideful, because of its hedonic hence self-centred/ self-ish motivations.


At some level, perhaps deep, we all know this to be true; which serves only to make its denial more shrill and spiteful.

In a world that denies Good, the Creation and God; the desire for life inside a 'reality' built-around our own pleasures and preferences, yet wholly convincing, is so great that all objections are swept aside by this desperate craving. 

And so, Ladies and Gentlemen (to use forbidden terminology): This is the modern world! 

Here. Now. Compulsory!

We Are Not Alone, objectively - but subjectively, we are alienated

The alien Marvin (the Martian), asserts objective reality 

Modern alienation is a very real thing: which is to say the experience of being cut-off from God, reality, this world, other people... is inescapable as a subjective experience, and this has profound religious, social and political consequences. 

Yet alienation is an inwardly-caused phenomenon. Alienation is not a reality imposed by the external nature of things.

We were all spontaneously and involuntarily (and most unconsciously) immersed in "everything else" at the early phases of our existence - and that is the primary reality of divine creation. 

It could be called a complete web of "interconnectedness" - except that "connect" assumes that we begin as separate, and must overcome separateness by connecting. The reality is the opposite - we begin as only partially separated in our awareness from the oneness of divine creation. That is the baseline.  

We modern Men are now alienated because in the course of human development we have each cut ourselves off from that spontaneous immersion in "everything else": the barrier arises from within us. 

That barrier which cuts-off modern adults can be, and is at times, dissolved (or demolished); for instance by dreaming sleep, mental illness and brain disease, intoxication - or sometimes by meditation.

But all of these make us dysfunctional, and none of them succeed in restoring the natural spontaneity of an earlier phase of consciousness.

The earlier phase of spontaneous immersive consciousness is like the childhood phase of development - such that once an individual has developed beyond childhood, childhood can never wholly or healthily be re-established.

In other words; we should take the cut-offness of modern alienation as a fact-of-life and the basis for further developments - yet we also need to bear in mind that the ultimate reality is, as it always was, one in which we are naturally and inescapably immersed in reality - including the reality of the divine, of the universe, of other people. 

Therefore we do not need to "re-connect" because dis-connection is not the problem. 

Instead; the problem is in our own consciousness - which is "stuck" in a phase that denies the reality of its immersion in the whole of divine creation. 

What we need to work-on is our own personal consciousness of reality: we need to become conscious of that we we are currently not conscious. 

Modern Man usually denies the reality of that of which he is not spontaneously conscious - such as the divine. (That is: we deny the reality of God because we Moderns are no longer spontaneously and continuously aware of God, as was once the case.) 

I am saying that we need, instead, to acknowledge the reality of our connectedness-to/ immersion-in the divine; and from that conviction strive to become conscious of the actuality of this link.

Acknowledge reality: then strive for awareness of that reality...

To put it differently; we Modern men have (under God's will) developed alienation, which is an increasing individual independence from the whole - and this development has happened because this is also a greater freedom and agency*. 

In other words; the "universal" awareness that was once spontaneous and inescapable, is now voluntary and chosen.

What is needed is not a return but a development. So, this voluntary and chosen acknowledgement of connectedness to other people/ the world/ God is a new thing - a deliberate step forward - not a surrender or relaxation backwards..

A doing, not an undoing.

Because new, the needful awareness is subjectively experienced differently from the old childhood or child-like consciousness - we need to be self-aware, aware of our own awareness. 

This is not under compulsion nor necessity; this is something that we are aware that we have-chosen (and that it could have been, could be, otherwise). 

From such a perspective, all looks different. We know what we know via our subjectivity - that is; our subjectivity is part of all possibilities of knowing. 

Subjectivity makes everything possible, and a change in the nature of our subjectivity affects everything. 

So a deliberate attention to developing consciousness makes a profound difference to everything - including our experience of Christianity.   

**

*Modern alienation is therefore meant-to-be just a phase; en route to a higher - more developed, indeed more divine - form of consciousness. 

Magical Thinking - The future of Magic

If the magic of Original Participation was Sympathetic Magic; and that of the modern Consciousness Soul era was Ritual Magic - then the magic of the future could be Magical Thinking.

Magical Thinking is Primary Thinking - considered as a form of magic. 

In Magical Thinking, the real self - that is the divine self, that which we inherited from God as being Sons and Daughters of God - knows, predicts and creates.

You have probably experienced this - for example during 'enchanted' times when you knew that the world was an unfolding delight, and that you could depend on 'synchronicity' to make good things happen. Those times and moods when you know that around that corner, over that hill, in that cafe there will be something important and delightful: and there always is.

As long as we stay in the enchanted mode of thinking, then life is good, we are involved-with the world and other people, and all will go well. This is Magical Thinking.

It is Enchant-ment but is Not Enchant-ed - this state of being is not 'imposed' by the surroundings, nor is it 'imagined' by our-selves - instead Magical Thinking is precisely that there is participation going-on between both self and world.

In Primary Thinking, our knowledge of the world is based on our participation-in the unfolding reality of the world; and therefore is bound up with the creativity of our real selves.

Creativity is intrinsic to the Final Participation situation, because Primary Thinking is the thinking of our real, divine and free selves: free in the sense of agent, and agent meaning that the divine mind is an origin of thinking (having 'free will' should be understood in this sense of being an uncaused cause: specifically, an uncaused-cause in the realm of Primary Thinking).

In different words: The real self is divine, hence generates thinking not merely caused, but itself causal - hence the real self knows reality, and is original and creative. The real self knows reality directly, unmediated; and this is also a consequence of Participation - the real self knows reality because in its Primary Thinking, it is identical-with reality.

(In the Original Participation of childhood or early tribal man, the individual also knows reality directly; because he lacks full consciousness, his self is passively immersed in reality. The purpose of the developmental evolution of consciousness is exactly that we become able to participate in reality again; but actively-participate; with freedom and creativity: the fully-divine mode of being.)

Thus in Primary Thinking the thinking is original and generative - it is intrinsically creative. The thinking participates-in the world and brings something new to this world.

Thus Magical Thinking is something by which you change the world, but not by 'manipulating' reality. Instead, the world inevitable changes as a consequence of the unity of the self with reality; and the fact that the self brings something new, original, self-generated to reality.

Magical Thinking is therefore our individual contribution to the God's ongoing creation. It is a real magic, because we personally can know reality including some ability to predict reality; and we personally make-a-difference to reality.

But by Magical Thinking we cannot and will not shape reality to our own personal ends - but only to divine ends.

Thus there cannot be a 'black magic' of Magical Thinking. Magical Thinking is (as we experience it) intrinsically good because it is the divine in us (God immanent) really participating-in the reality of continuing divine creation.

Un-resurrected Men are not perfectible and there can be no Heaven on this earth (Jesus Christ is the only Way to eternal love)

I have often come across variations on the theme that this world and the Men, animals and plants who dwell here are perfectible: that this mortal life can be transformed into Heaven. 

The transformation has been variously expressed; one idea is that the gross materiality of bodies will be transformed into light; or that matter becomes spirit; or (in New Age type thinking) that the vibrational-state or frequency of the planet and everything on it will be raised. 

The underlying idea seems to be that this world as-it-is is "entropically" subject to death, decay, disease, and sin; but that the corruptible "stuff" of mortality and imperfection can be transformed and replaced by in-corruptible stuff... Thus Earth is changed into Heaven.

I regard this metaphysical belief as an early manifestation of Mankind's alienation, of our diminishing participation, of the loss of primal "animism" by which we knew that this reality is constituted by Beings - loving, conscious, purposive beings - and these are the bottom-line explanation. 

Because reality is Beings - therefore restatements of ultimate reality in such terms as vibrations or frequencies, of matter-spirit distinctions, or of light or any other physical property - are all abstractions. (All "physicsy").

That is these ways of understanding reality are all distanced, symbolic, representative - but not reality itself; and only a secondary form of understanding.

If, instead, we embrace the original and spontaneous human understanding of reality in terms of Beings, then we can recognize that what prevents Heaven on Earth is not a matter of matter, not about the "substance" of this world (as if it could be separated from the spirit). But instead that death, sin, insufficiency, "entropy" are a consequence on the inharmoniousness of relationships between Beings. 

In a nutshell: it is the lack of complete and eternal love that prevents our eternal lives and Heaven. 

We must rectify relationships and enable eternal Love to have Heaven. 

Heaven can arise only by Loving God first - that is, recognizing and committing ourselves to God's creation and creative methods and purposes. 

And second: by loving our neighbours/ fellow-Men - in other words Loving All Other Beings - forever.

These are the two Great Commandments articulated by Jesus Christ; and can be seen as shorthand for the eternal and irrevocable commitment to live by Love; in harmony with God's creative will. 

When beings live by Love, this is eternal - because there is nothing in Heaven (thus conceived) to disrupt or destroy divine creation.  

Since Love is what is needed, and since Love is a choice - we need to recognize that Love is the free act of a Being with agency as an essential attribute. 

Therefore (because Love cannot be imposed, top-down, from-externally); everlasting life and Heaven cannot be imposed, but must instead be chosen: indeed there must be a commitment to live eternally by Love. 

To make our lives eternal and dwell in Heaven is therefore a matter of relationship, and that relationship is voluntary (again, Love cannot be imposed)... 

Thus Heaven cannot be imposed on Earth by any means - what must instead happen is that all the beings of Earth (including the being of Earth itself) must choose to live by Love.   

I cannot see any way that such a lot of choices would be simultaneous, and Heaven cannot be partial; which would seem to mean that either Heaven must be delayed until every Being has chosen it -- which delay seems contradicted by Jesus's teachings (esepcially in the Fourth Gospel - of "John"). Or Heaven is elsewhere. 

(And also there is the fact of at least some apparently eternally-self-damned demons; which would prevent Heaven ever from happening - if indeed all must repent before eternal life can ensue.) 

Heaven surely cannot be partial; because the dwelling in Heaven of selfish or cruel Beings would not be Heaven! It would lead to destruction of that Loving creation which enables both perfection and eternity - and is itself the state of Heaven.

So, it seems to me that Heaven, and our eternal resurrected life therein, must be elsewhere than this earth; and segregated from this world of sin/ death - such that those Beings who have not committed to Love, do-not and cannot affect Heaven. 

My understanding is therefore that this-world cannot be other than it is; which is a consequence of God's Loving creation in a context of primal chaos, creation in the context of Beings that all have some tendency to death, to selfishness, to sin (and some Beings apparently incapable of Love). 

This world is temporary, and creation here is like the rule of a wise and wholly-Good parent imposed on children (i.e. Beings) who vary in their innate degrees of Goodness, and obedience. 

But for eternal life and Heaven to exist, these Beings (us, you and me, included) must be released from obedience in order to choose freely whether or not we want Heaven. 

So, this world is mixed: and has in it both evil (primal chaos, entropy, selfishness...), and also Good - vast and renewing manifestations of God's creative Love. 

Therefore; every Being or entity in this world has direct and personal experience of evil and Good. 

Every Being in this world is in a position to make the eternal commitment to live wholly by Love in a wholly Good "other place" that is Heaven - a Heaven that already exists, and to which we each can go by following Jesus Christ through resurrection, after death.

In other words; we can, will, and must choose either Heaven; or else "more of the same, mixed, kind of thing".  

But this world is not staying the same. 

This world apparently accumulates evil through time, because evil just-is cumulative, and Beings that choose evil become more evil..

(Unless the Beings repent; which means precisely making a commitment to follow Jesus to Heaven.) 

Also; Beings that commit to Good are incrementally being removed from this-world and segregated in Heaven. 

In other words; this mixed world already contains Hell in part and in places; but is becoming more Hell-ish with time. 

In conclusion; Beings such as our-selves can choose Heaven or Hell - both of which we all have experienced in this mixed world. This is the choice between eternally living only by Love; and not making this commitment. 

We can choose Heaven, or we can choose to reject Heaven. 

We can also choose to "delay" our choice -- but this is, in its actual effect, a here-and-now rejection of Heaven, and embrace of this mixed-world, which is tending towards Hell. 

We can go-back on this rejection of Heaven at any time: repentance is always open to every Being. 

But, in this mixed but evil-accumulating world, and given that un-repented evil will become more evil; delaying the choice of Heaven does make salvation more and more difficult. 

Repentance is never impossible, but always gets more difficult with delay. 

Suppose that Mankind crossed a threshold of consciousness from around the millennium... (Steiner and Barfield)

Rudolf Steiner and his 'disciple' Owen Barfield wrote about their conviction that - from around the year 2000 - Mankind would inevitably go-through a progressive process of transformation of consciousness. This had two aspects: 

First the inevitable transformation of consciousness, which meant that Men would create their own 'reality'. 

Second, the open question (which neither Steiner nor Barfield lived to see answered) of whether this transformation would merely happen-to Men - who would remain passively unconscious of it; or else whether Men would consciously and by choice participate in the co-creation of 'reality'. 

This transition is desirable (and part of God's plan) because it brings Men closer to the divine - as free agents who can potentially contrinute to the ongoing of creation. But such a more-divine consciousness could either be angelic (true, and working with God) or demonic (untruthful, and in opposition to the reality of divine creation) 

 

To recapitulate, this approximately-millennial transformation of consciousness would represent the culmination of a centuries-long transition from a time (back in the middle ages) when Men understood objective reality to be 'out there' - something which was perceived by the senses...

To a situation where Men would no longer find objective reality 'out there' and would need to take up the job of consciously being co-creators of reality; by means of their own thinking. 

A transition, that is, between reality being present in The World, and being present in thinking. 

 

It is vital to recognise that while the transformation of consciousness is inevitable - something that just 'unfolds' as part of the development of the species (according to divine destiny); what situation this threshold-crossing leads-us-to; is a contingency that hinges-upon whether the transition is conscious and chosen, or whether it is unconscious and passive. Whether we 'make it happen, or whether it just happens-to-us. 

Both Steiner and Barfield prophesied what kind of thing lay in store for Mankind if Man did not consciously and voluntarily embrace the trasition, through the choice of developing our spiritual knowledge (based on a kind of intuitive thinking, or direct knowing). 

Steiner (for instance) set out the consequences in a 1918 lecture The Work of the Angels in Man's Astral Body; while Barfield wrote about it philosophically in Saving the Appearances and in a more explicit, science-fiction sexual dystopian form in Night Operation. 

 

Let us assume (as I believe is true) that Mankind did indeed cross just such a threshold of consciousness gradually and over the past several decades - then we can see that the Steiner/ Barfield model can make sense of where we are now; and what we ought to do about it. 

We can easily see that modern Man in 2020 is living in a self-contructed reality; a 'virtuality' in which the masses passively imbibe Man-made lies and inverted-values from The System - emanating from a global bureaucracy including governments, the mass-media and official sources such as the legal, health and educational sub-systems. 

And Christians can easily see that this 2020 virtuality is demonic in nature: such that, in choosing to remain unconscious and passive, Mankind as taken the demonic path described prophetically by Stainer and Barfield. 

 

So Men no longer root their knowledge in personal experience and common sense. Due to the development of consciousness, these have become regarded as merely subjective, too labile; and are therefore too weak and unmotivating to overcome the imposed virtual world. 

Modern Man in 2020 instead passively and unconsciously accepts a 'made'-reality which is imposed-upon him, top-down. 

Indeed, so far has this process reached - that in here-and-now we can see that the masses do not even check the claims of The System - but will accept, internalise and defend blatant falsehoods and contradictions asif reality. 

And, because Men remain unconscious and passive and rejecting of the spiritual; we remain also spiritually-isolated and alienated from a world which we perceive as dead, meaningless and without purpose. 

A world of inverted values, compulsory falsehoods, crushing inhumanity; and the near universal prevalence and increasing dominance of fear, denial, resentment and despair - is the natural, inevitable, consequence. 

 

The answer to the current horrors of our post-threshold-crossing virtual world is also provided by Steiner and Barfield; which is that Men need consciously to accept their active role in the co-creation of reality with God. 

(In other words, what I have termed Romantic Christianity, based upon intuitive direct knowing.)

This can, in principle, be begun by anybody at any time - however, the fact that this active, conscious, Christian spirituality has been so delayed (since it first became possible in the late 1700s) means that in the first place Men are living under a weight of false metaphysical assumptions that have been uncosnciously absorbed and passively accepted. 

Also that there has been a tremendous amount of accumulated societal damage over 250 years; which must be overcome but cannot be fully reversed - and which will lead to severely sub-optimal outcomes, compared with what 'might have been'. 

 

Nonetheless, what we need to do is clear - and the rewards for doing it are immediate...

We can experience participation in God's ongoing creation - that is, we can experience the universe as alive, conscious and purposive; and ourselves as unique individuals with a special destiny even in this mortal life* 

And who may also (if we accept the offer of Jesus Christ) lead to an harmonious world of relationships with those who also accepted Christ's offer (i.e. Heaven). 

 

*Albeit the rewards and accomplishments will be, like everything in mortal life, incomplete and temporary - needing to be done and redone, over and again, as long as our mortal lives continue.  

There is a Direction to reality - but what is its nature and cause, and the implications?

Before I became a Christian - and on the basis mainly of my academic work in biology - I was convinced that there was a long-term Direction to reality, at least to "reality" on earth since its presumed formation; and that the direction was towards increased "complexity". This led to a strong focus on complex systems theory. 

However; further work revealed that complexity cannot be detected or measured in any genuinely objective manner. Which means that - insofar as the above is true - the study-field of complex systems has smuggled-in human consciousness, unacknowledged. 

I was eventually more-or-less compelled to acknowledge that the Directionality came from a divine source, and that the long-term Direction was more of the nature of consciousness than complexity. 

Which insight I got mostly from Owen Barfield, and also some aspects of Rudolf Steiner.

So I am convinced there is a strategy to reality over the very long term, and that it is of divine origin - and has to do with working towards higher consciousness. 

Yet I still do not feel that I have a sure grasp of what is going on, nor how it works - except negatively; by which I mean that the direction does not come wholly from the top-down, but derives also from the nature of "things"; by which I mean that "things" are actually Beings - and there is a Direction (an irreversibility) intrinsic to the very nature of Beings.  

And because I understand Beings to be eternal, alive, purposive, conscious in origin, capable of self-sustenance - I am inclined to believe that the Direction of reality comes from the (in essence) divine nature of all Beings - rather than something entirely-externally-imposed on reality by God.  

This apparently helps clarify the nature and scope of divine creation; that it is (as Joseph Smith described it) a matter of organization of the pre-existent. 

It clarifies, also, how it is that increase in consciousness is not, of itself, Good. Increasing consciousness is intrinsic to Beings, and therefore it is something that God works-with. 

Increasing consciousness is Not something that leads towards increased fulfilment of God's creative. Thus a being with higher consciousness is Not thereby more-Good.  

(Consciousness is "orthogonal" to Goodness.) 

In terms of morality; increasing consciousness is a thing that happens, like it or not, over the long term, for any Being. 

Being Good, that is living in harmony with God's purposes (living in and from Love) is a separate thing. 

However there is an interaction between consciousness and Goodness, which arises when the reality of increasing of consciousness is denied, or when the attempt is made to reverse the state of consciousness. 

This falls under the category of an evil; because it is a false (untruthful) understanding of reality - and there cannot be harmony with God's plans, when there is dishonesty - or the attempt to distort or invert reality in conformity with the individual will of any Being. 

In sum: we (as individual Beings) have no obligation to seek higher consciousness, but we do have ano obligation to acknowledge that consciousness we actually are. 

Since divine creation incorporates the reality of Direction; it is Good to acknowledge reality and work-from the reality of divine creation; and evil to deny reality and work against divine creation. 

Stay With The System! 'Science' and subjective consciousness in 2021

We live in a post-modern, post-scientific age of incoherence; where we demand two simultaneous incompatibles: 

1. That reality ought to be subordinated to subjective consciousness - i.e. that reality conforms to the prevalent, official, mainstream, global leftist ideology. 

If apparent-reality does not conform to ideology - it is re-defined as not-reality.  

 2. That reality is independent of what we think about it: therefore science is (continues to be) dominant. 

As in I/We follow The Science! 

The apparent contradiction is removed because 'The Science' - that is, the kind of science which is agreed by The System to define reality - is now wholly a part of The System. 

And The System is also the source of ideology. 

The System, on the one hand, claims to be derived-from and driven-by The Science - while continually (and at every level) shaping The Science. 

The System is reality, it is truth (The Science) and it is virtue (the official ideology).

When 'objective reality' (as defined by official science) is part of the same System that regards ideology as primary - then there can be no conflict between science and ideology. 

The System is itself reality - because it defines both the ideology and The Science from which that ideology claims to be derived. This 'works' because it is The System which continually creates agreement/ non-contradiction between the ideology and the science; and this is done (done on an almost daily basis in recent months) by continually re-shaping what counts as science into compatibility with ideology.   

But because The System is bigger than science, and includes science; it is the 'dog' of ideology which is 'wagging the tail' of science.    

However we, as individuals, continue to be subjective. That is; we continue to experience The System as external to our-selves. 

Our consciousness is not within The System - and never can be. 

We can deny or suppress this knowledge - but the fact remains that this separateness is implicit in the experienced fact that we our-selves are required to conform to The System; which requirement is experienced as the need to be changing; the requirement frequently and rapidly to be changing our consciousness.

(Variously called 'consciousness raising', or addressing of 'implicit bias' - meaning that individual consciousness is recurrently falling out-of-step with the 'reality' of The System.) 

Thus we are frequently aware of a 'need' - a demand - to change our-selves in line with The System: and indeed this need/demand is increasingly pressed upon us; with propaganda and manipulations coming from all sides in the world of public discourse; and by requirements to subject ourselves to explicit indoctrination based on the assumption that We All (as individuals) Need To Change. 

From the perspective of The System it is We - as individuals - that are The Problem. 

It is We, as individuals, who have-to change our thinking: for instance in relation to the birdemic-peck, climate, antiracism, sexuality etc. We need to keep-up!

This flows from the base assumption that it is The System which is true reality (because of The Science) - and it is our personal subjectivity (outside The System, as our subjectivity necessarily is) which is unreal, false; and - if subjectivity fails to conform itself to The System - evil; because evil is that which opposes The System.

Opposing The System is evil because The System is the source of ideology-morality. 

The System tells us that our thinking and decision-making ought-to-be ('must' be) within The System - and, since this can only be chosen; we are each called-upon to make that overall choice: the choice of Yes to The System - or No. 

As of 2021 - Yes or No to The System is the foundational choice upon which all other choices depend. 

It is a choice. 

Therefore the great externally-imposed imperative - the only moral/ ethical imperative of these times, one that we all experience here-and-now, as of 2021; is that it is your job and my job and everybody's job - now and for evermore, over and again - to keep making that choice. 

We must: Stay With The System!

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 power and limitations of "magical thinking" - including in totalitarian bureaucracies (as well as Golden Dawn magical societies)

For the purposes of this post, I shall define magical thinking as the method of sustained concentration upon imagined content. Magical thinking is (or was) practiced by the Golden Dawn type magical societies; but also by such mega-mundane (and apparently anti-magical) organizations as those bureaucracies that dominate and typify the modern Western civilization. 

What happens is that there is a recurrent or continuous focus upon specific imagined content - the imagined content may be visual, conceptual - or any other, in principle. 

That imagined content takes-on an objectivity by being reflected back by others in the group, and by being thought-upon continually or recurrently. 

There is a further objectivity that derives from the process of mental training involved in making and sustaining these imagined content - practice and effort can develop powers both of concentration (of single point attention, of cutting out other potential contact); and also the ability inwardly to perceive the imagined content. 

Thus, a "magician" who is capable of this magical thinking, has "powers" with respect to other people; especially the psychological-social power to stay focused on a single objective in a world where most people are highly distractible and lack any core or coherence to their belief systems.

From the perspective of the magician, at least for a while, there is an apparent objective and predictive validity to their imaginings. The magician feels himself powerful, because he can (by the power of his concentration and "vision") influence other people into adopting - or going along with, his plans. 

Because of this psycho-social influence; the magician can also perceive reality in such a way that his plans seem to be coming to fruition, or at least moving in that direction... 

In the vicinity of the magician, people are talking about his vision, perhaps writing and in general communicating about it; more people are being drawn into these communications - and the communications are (in some way or another) having an effect on human behaviour more widely.  

It seems - and this impression may last considerable periods - if not stressed by other imposed pressures -  that the imagined reality is coming true; being brought to reality by the power of concentrated and sustained group-imagination. 

Those who have (like me) participated in large and professionalized bureaucracies (in my case, as a public health doctor in the National Health Service, and a participant in university management committees at several levels) do not, perhaps, realize the extent to which magical thinking is the basis of bureaucracy; and the way in which it is (or appears to be) validated by the experience of the bureaucrats and their leaders. 

For those on the inside; magical thinking - although that is not how it is conceptualized - really works... 

The committees are "inspired" by some imaginary "vision", and they keep focused on it, talking about it, debating its implementation, writing about it, "researching" it, making policies, monitoring "outcomes" and adjusting policies - until they are absolutely convinced of its reality. 

And convinced too that their imagined vision is destined to "come to pass". 

This kind of magical thinking is (more or less) how wholly-manufactured, incoherent, impossible phenomena like the climate agenda, the transagenda and antiracism; have arisen, been sustained, grown - and come to seem both real and inevitable by the totalitarian system participants. 

And the magical thinking of magical societies was very much analogous. Through their systems of study, practice, ritual - through training in concentration and imagination; they developed a quasi objectivity and sense of objective reality and progress that sustained them for some decades. 

But in this mortal and entropic world, magical thinking does not continue for very long unless infused by new personnel, resources, and top-down compulsion (supplemented by bribery and blackmail). These were not available to the magical societies, so they would decline and disappear, or fission and fight each other, or become assimilated to some other agenda that were more powerfully imposed - such as war. 

At an individual level I can attest to the way that a long-term daydream type fantasy - when combined with intense visualization and concentration - can take-on a sense of destiny; such that we automatically come to expect that what we imagine and desire - at least to some sufficiently focused and long-term degree - will sooner or later "come to pass". 

This has often been the case in my life, and so far only a very small minority of such apparent destinies have ever actually come to pass - and often those that were among the least vividly- and concentratedly-imagined.  

My purpose in this post is to suggest that magical thinking is a real thing, and has (from within, and to some extent in actuality) an objective reality - yet that it also contains many pitfalls and problems. 

It is not A Good Thing (of itself) to be able to imagine and concentrate upon chosen material - not in the way that the magical societies used to suppose - and the evidence for this is the way that analogous magical methods are employed by totalitarian bureaucracy. 

But neither is it necessarily a Bad Thing. 

Magical thinking can probably best be conceptualized as a trade-off, in which intensity and focus and progress on a narrow front; are achieved at the cost of a less general, less complete, understanding and participation in the totality of reality. 

The development of narrow sustained focus tends to diminish the capacity and possibility of self-correction; and reduces the chance of repentance when there are falsehoods, errors, and evils. 

It is, as always, a case of First Things First; and our fundamental reality and priority ought to be Christian - and "techniques" ought to operate only within that primary frame. 

The ultimate feebleness of magical thinking is evidenced by the way it is discarded when things get serious, when the chips are down - when the groups are destroyed, corrupted and co-opted to the larger socio=political agenda of the moment.

That is when we need Christianity, and we need a Christianity that is strong sustained, autonomous; and does not depend upon group validation.  

We must be ready and able to stand-alone with God, in spiritual terms; and to create and sustain That reality is our true priority.    

Common Sense Auditing the virtual world - why doesn't it happen?

A few days ago I gave the name of Common Sense Auditing to the idea of cross-checking ordinary experience for consistency: a fancy name for something all children do, and which people in the past did spontaneously and without theorising...

Well, people seem to do this in real life; so that if a member of your family or a neighbour said that it would be inhuman and abhorrent to prevent you from celebrating Christmas ; and then just a few days later told you that they had personally decided to cancel your Christmas celebrations or else you would suffer police arrest and savage fines - you were be highly likely to recognise... lets call it an inconsistency. 

If this kind of thing was hanitual in a colleague, you would be highly likely to regard him as dishonest, incompetent, insane, evil - or perhaps all of these?

 

Most modern man does not take much notice of Real Life. 

For modern Men, real life is something with only personal, subjective importance. Personal experience and observations are just 'anecdotes' which ought to be ignored. 

For 'reality' - for serious, general, objective validity - one must turn to the remote world of 'science' and 'research', of law, economics and all the rest of it. 

But this public, objective world is known to 'the public' only indirectly via the mass media, teachers, government spokesmen... 

Thus 'objective reality' is always elsewhere - but we are only informed of it via the communications institutions.

 

In the virtual world of the mass media, politics, and public discourse generally - people are not disturbed by even such gross incoherence - indeed they not only expect it but will make elaborate excuses for it in order to retain their assumption that their preferred sub-office of The Establishment (which they aspire to serve, if not join) is essentially benign and caring in its motivation. 

In fact, I am not sure whether people even notice incoherence any more. 

They hear leaders and spokesmen say one thing... and then these same leaders say another and opposite thing; and people both expect and experience zero relationship between these two things. 

 

For the mass of Men in modernity; Life is just one damned thing after another. 

And this reflects their deepest most ultimate assumptions; which are that reality is some kind of product of mindless physical causality (the 'laws of science' stuff) and sheer randomness. 

'Real' life is just stuff that happens - so it would be childish and foolish to expect life to make sense...

 

So people don't expect life to make sense - and it doesn't make sense - and so their expectations are confirmed. 

Why bother with 'auditing' a reality that is already believed to be incoherent? You will only discover what you already knew - that nothing adds-up. 

And all this 'deterministic/ randomness' is not a 'belief' that is taught or leaned; it works at a much deeper level of primary, metaphysical assumptions concerning the nature of reality. 

These 'materialist/ scientist/ positivist' assumptions lie behind the specific statements of public discourse; and indeed structure public discourse. 

All of public discourse operates within these assumptions. 

And anything which does Not conform to these assumptions, does not make sense in public discourse - does not engage with it, and does not affect it. 

  

Modern public life is trapped-inside its own assumptions that nothing makes sense, and life is going nowhere. 

And the consequence is that modern life is ruled by sheer power - force, propaganda, money - and modern morality is merely expedience; merely a business of making the most for oneself out of what is being imposed.

And if what is being imposed on Saturday is different from what was being imposed on Wednesday - well, our job is merely to obey, so that U-turn is none of our business... 

Thus this merely-expedient pseudo-morality gets shorter and shorter in its time horizons.

 

Therefore; when the Prime Minister starkly contradicts himself - such that what he says is inhuman on one day becomes mandatory national policy just a few days later (yet, somehow, this does not make him inhuman!)... Then all this is unremarkable; because all we need to do is obey today's diktat; obey in whatever fashion most enhances our short term gratifications...

Indeed it would be dangerously naive (or covertly evil) to expect otherwise, to demand consistency; it would be wicked to require honesty!*

 

*Those who have worked inside a bureaucracy know that this is precisely the case. An honest employee is regarded as a dangerous fanatic. 

My answer to relativism

Modern Men are, like it or not, confronted by what is commonly called relativism; and emerges in the idea that every proposition is 'just' somebody's opinion - and that none are more valid than any other.

This is the deep implicit assumption of modernity - and leads to the totalitarianism of arbitrary (because not valid) behaviours imposed by terror, coercion and propaganda.  

Relativism is not just wrong, but incoherent - yet it is a response to the unsatisfactory nature of traditional formulations of objective knowledge. Traditional objectivity required an unthinking and automatic understanding of what-we-perceive; and when that understanding became contested and the necessary role of human consciousness in knowledge became evident; then this led first to idealism - when everything was in the mind. 

At first, because most people agreed on the nature of reality, that seemed to work; but as disagreements about reality emerged, then idealism required to be bolstered by adding a requirement for cultural or national similarity, in order that there be cohesion and a shared world.

Western Man's self-consciousness continued to increase, until relativism emerged as an individualized form of idealism - each Man creating his own reality; and order and cooperation needing to be externally imposed. 

Relativism = idealism at the individual level. Everything is mind, and ultimately everything is My mind...

The contextual universe of relativism was (is) seen as fundamentally chaotic, with creation and 'order' as temporary and superficial phenomena imposed on a situation of increasing randomness (entropy). 

Nowadays, we can only overcome relativism by explicit means; by clarifying our primary (metaphysical) assumptions and (as it were) inviting others to consider them, and choose whether or not to share them. 

My assumptions include that:

1. There is - as a matter of fact, not principle - one creation, made by one God. 

2. This creation unfolds in sequential Time - which is not reversible, so that creation is cumulative.  

This means that creation is not arbitrary, because it is motivated by one God (given purpose); and made harmonious (given meaning) by the fact of being the product of one God; and because creation cannot be undone. 

Cannot be undone because of the sequential nature of Time; which is the case because Time is intrinsic to the Beingness of God: i.e. because God is a Being. 

And to be a Being entails Life; which entails Time, change, complexity, potential for growth and development, purposiveness etc (this list is not a definition of a Being - which is here assumed to be primary aspect of reality and cannot be further subdivided - but just pointing at attributes we recognize as characteristic of a living Being). 

Thus creation is continuous, and cumulative, and can be reshaped and added to - but none of this alters historical reality. 

The continuity of creation means that creation is harmonious both 'horizontally' (here-and-now) and 'vertically' (through Time) - and that these are inseparable.

It is this quality of creation which means that relativism is false. Some things are coherent with creation, others are opposed to creation - therefore creation is objective with reference to creation primarily, and secondarily with all aspects of creation, all that has-been created (and their creations).

That by which creation coheres is Love: and objectivity reduces ultimately to Love: Love of God primarily, and love of Fellow Man (including other Beings) secondarily. 

That is, the Two Great Commandments. 

Objectivity is therefore as real as Love, and of the same nature. One who rejects, or is incapable of, Love is necessarily a relativist; which is to say he rejects God and Fellow Men, and tries to live in his own personal world...

Which is another way of describing hell. 

  

The world is getting the reality it has chosen

As I said earlier today; we participate in the creation of reality - and we choose (each of us) the basis of that participation - therefore we (like it or not, and most deny it) are responsible for the basic features of our reality: both individually and en masse. 

Put simply: By our ultimate (metaphysical) assumptions concerning the nature of reality; so reality is shaped (and there can be no knowable reality without ultimate assumptions). 

Therefore - the basic nature of our reality is a downstream consequence of our structuring assumptions. 

This is what we see all around us. Yes, of course there is an evil (i.e. on-the-side of Satan) Global Establishment that (early in 2020) successfully - and with near-zero opposition - implemented a global totalitarian coup under cover of being the (regrettably necessary) response to the fake birdemic. 

But the fact is that this was overwhelmingly welcomed at the time and since - despite continuing changes in the 'rationale' for the birdemic-'response'; despite massive and obvious dishonesty, despite glaring incoherence of propaganda and regulations.  

And this is a straightforwardly predictable consequence of the decisions people have made, en masse, regarding the nature of the world. You could call it 'justice', or 'karma'; you could call it a punishment... but whatever you call it, we can observe the link between ultimate convictions and outcomes. 

On the one hand, the world is now a very nasty place and getting worse by the week; and on the other hand, the vast majority approve of this nastiness and want it to increase.

Of course, it is the masses who do and will suffer the most (both now, and after death) - and it is natural to want to alleviate the colossal scale of this suffering. Yet, since the suffering is self-wished and self-imposed - and since those with power relish the suffering masses and do everything than can to amplify that suffering; the suffering will surely come.  

In sum; people en masse have chosen to take the side of evil in the spiritual war - have actively repelled their awareness of the fact; and that choice will (naturally) have mass consequences. 

Even more simply: People, globally, are responsible for the qualitative increase in their own suffering since early 2020 (and for the situation which led to that increase). 

If people, globally, do not like their reality, which is based on lies and evil-motivation; they can choose instead to live by a reality that is true and which takes the side of God and the Good.

They must then first identify, then revise their ultimate assumptions.  

It is never too late for this; although the choice gets harder and harder, the longer repentance is delayed; the longer that lies are defended and evil is excused...

Because reality is co-created...

It should be (but mostly is not) obvious that the mainstream socio-political/ media/ institutional world is invented, and is a virtual reality. We know because it changes so fast, is so grossly incoherent, and because we can see the actual processes by which it is generated. 

We know, because we have seen him, that there is a man behind the curtain - albeit we have decided to pay him no attention; and will deny that we do know.

This reflects the basic truth that reality is now and always co-created (some out-there, some in-here); because human consciousness is always involved (somewhere): perceptions always require interpetation, and interpretation always comes from consciousness. 

This means that the mainstream made-up reality is shared only because it is imposed on millions of people by manipulations and propaganda, backed by surveillance and monitoring, enforced by incentives and punishments. 

But this mainstream 'reality' is incoherent and misery inflicting; and for a Christian it is evil - in increasingly obvious ways to those who do not accept the mainstream conceptual programming. 

Why, then, do we not break free and make our own, and better, reality? Why do (self-identified) Christians meekly accept a systemically-evil world (evil built into the concepts). Why not simply reject that which is imposed forcibly and manipulatively? Why is this So Hard?

I think the main reason is fear - because the apparatus for imposition is truly vast; and backed by large majorities and tremendous force; and the consequent fear of being existentially alone. After all; being in a minority of one is hard to distinguish from insanity.

People whose life is spanned by birth and death have no reason or possibility for going against the majority: even when the majority view induces fear, resentment and despair; even when it promotes self-loathing and covert suicide: even when the mainstream-approved life is not worth living, and that fact is increasingly open, and explicitly acknowledged.

The only possible escape from The System is when one's world view extends beyond mortal life; in particular extends into a personal life beyond biological death.   

Primary creation (of God the Father) is opt-out; the second creation (of Jesus Christ) is opt-in

The primary creation was imposed-upon the pre-existing and eternal Beings by God. 

This imposition was by necessity. Before creation, Beings existed in isolation and without relationships - thus direction, purpose and meaning in a creation based-upon Love emerged only after primary creation. 

In this sense, also, freedom and the capacity for an agency based on distinguishing the self from the not-self was only possible post-creation. 

(i.e. We cannot know we are a self until after we know of other selves.)  

Therefore it was impossible for any Being to opt-out of creation, until after creation, because there could be no consent to creation, nor of 'opting', until after creation had-happened -- hence the necessity for its imposition. 

But Love is by mutual consent only; and this meant that Beings were 'incorporated' into primary creation without consent; and (it seems) some of them withdrew consent almost immediately. 

To be clear: all the Beings of creation (even Satan, the first rebel against God) have been, even if briefly, subordinated to God's creation. 

Probably some who withdrew consent - who rapidly opted-out of creation - were incapable of Love; probably others were capable of Love, but did Not wish to make Love the basis of 'organization'... 

Those who opted-out include what we regard as Satan and the demons - in other words these were never-incarnated spirit Beings. 

Because primary creation cannot be undone or reversed (because now Beings Know about each other) the 'rebels' ultimate or distal 'goal' (insofar as they are explicitly aware of it) is a power-based reality; in which Beings are in a situation of antagonism and attempted domination or exploitation - which themselves (and, maybe, some recruits?) as the dominant exploiters. 

In a nutshell; the demons, and all others who have rejected Love/ God/ creation at some later point - aspire to a reality based-on relationships of power and selfishness. 

Thus they have chosen to opt-out of primary creation.

In primary creation (which was all of creation before the advent of Jesus Christ) God operates as a power acting-upon us, i.e. upon Beings. 

In a sense; God does creation to us. 

Living in creation is therefore the default situation; from-which we would need to opt-out if we did not want it.  

This imposed-creation situation was recognized by all the old religions, and still is recognized (at least implicitly) by those religions that have a supreme God but do not recognize the truth and desirability of Jesus Christ. 

Therefore the Old Gods, and the understanding of the ancient monotheistic God of the Hebrews or the later God of Islam - regard God as primarily power. 

And such a God of non-optional imposed-creation demands of us obedient service above all else - which goes-with a relationship as essentially one of awe, fear, submission, propitiation etc. That is; a relationship analogous to that of an ignorant peasant towards the absolute Emperor of vast domains. 

As I said; this attitude is a natural consequence of the primary creation in which creation was done to us. Our understanding-of and relationship-to God is of one who is done-to - who is insignificant; not one who participates-in, or who himself contributes something of substantive value. 

The secondary creation was made-to-happen by Jesus Christ; and this fundamentally changed our relation with God. 

The second creation was (for the first time) an opt-in situation, and made God (potentially) the supreme beloved Father of a vast family -- rather than King of 'a people'. 

Since the second creation; God no longer requires or desires us to regard him as primarily a power, but a loving parent; God no longer requires our obedient submission to His imposed authority, but invites our loving participation in his continuing work of creation. 

The secondary creation involves Beings that are already free agents, and who know about other Beings; it involves making the choice of an eternal commitment to live harmoniously with other beings guided by, and in a condition of, mutual love. 

This secondary creation mode-of-Being is achieved by the willing transformation that is resurrection - and the second creation is called Heaven, a situation where we go by our own active desire.  

In the second creation; we are Not supposed-to regard God as remote, incomprehensible, as like a Monarch or a Judge before which we ought-to abase ourselves in submission and obedience... 

And we are Not supposed to regard our-selves as insignificant, superfluous, functionless... but as irreplaceable and able to add some-thing worthwhile to what-is - across eternity.  

We are instead supposed to have an attitude to God of love, gratitude, joy, positivity, energy, excitement; a desire to bring the best of ourselves to the work of God's divine family; to join-in with the plans of divine creating.  

Because the second creation is opt-in; some who reject God include those who opted-out after becoming incarnated into this mortal life. They lived in primary creation as pre-mortal spirits without opting-out; but after they were born as Men, they made the decision (whether before or after death) "not to opt-into" the second creation.

To clarify: Because the second creation is opt-in; there are those who positively reject the second or the first creation (presumably Satan and the demons, but probably others too), but also those who negatively do not want the second creation. These may still be prepared not to opt-out from the first creation - these would include many religious but-not-Christian people, including some self-identified Christians who actually don't want what Jesus offers!.   

The difference between dwelling in the first and second creation is therefore a vital difference for Christians to grasp; if they are not to fall-into an attitude to God that fits the opt-out primary, but not the opt-in secondary creation.

"Christians" who get their idea of God from the pre-Jesus era of the Jews of the Old Testament, tend to have the 'negative' attitudes of the first creation (e.g. the primacy of obedience to power), but fail to understand or embrace the essential qualitative difference that Jesus made. 

Such people are sometimes therefore de facto non-Christians, in terms of their attitudes and expectations, and their desires. 

But the reality is that Jesus Christ changed the fundamental possibilities of reality; things are possible since Jesus that were not possible before Jesus.

The Big Question is whether we personally want what Jesus made possible - or not? 

If we want it, we each must choose it. 

We must then opt-in...

H/T - Loic Simond for a comment that triggered the thinking that led to this post. 

The problem of freedom And harmony in creation

The problem (for God) is to harmonise the individual free-wills of a multitude of men. This must be on the one hand a choice, yet on the other hand robust - permanent - if Heaven is to be viable.

It was the work of Jesus to enable free wills to harmonise in this way.

This could not be achieved by The Father - he could only subordinate wills, passively, by obedience to his laws. It could only be achieved by the Son.

This was possible because the real-divine self is universal - and thus selves are 'overlapping', but the incarnated body is capable of genuine agency. In this way, a choice of the real-divine self has universal consequences.

So, while thinking from false, or superficial selves is merely a personal and private fantasy; thinking from the real-divine self is a potentially-universal, shared reality. The 'mechanism' of salvation is consciousness - and by theosis - meaning that it is by becoming divine in our thinking that we attain to permanent salvation, in which state all wills are naturally aligned, because all are thinking from reality.

(Reality being the creation of God.)

In this sense, the mechanism of salvation by the incarnate Jesus, was that Jesus was thinking from his real-divine self, and whatever he achieved in his body was therefore universal.

But this becoming-divine (divination) of consciousness can only be chosen; it cannot be imposed. Thus Jesus need to be incarnated as a Man, to make this free choice.

In contrast, those who take a path of not-thinking, or of obedience merely to the father - and also those who choose a path of amplifying their purely-personal imaginings - cannot move to the level of universal reality that is Heaven. 

It is love that enables the move; love that makes people want reality; hence the two great 'commandments' to love God and 'neighbour'. These commandments are not orders to be 'obeyed'; they are an objective description of the choices that are required.

Unless you love God and his creation and also your neighbours - who will dwell with you in Heaven - then you Will Not join it.

We join as individuals; but we then live in-creation with all others who live in-creation.

If you do Not want to live with these others in chosen harmony, because you love them; then you will Not inhabit creation. You will therefore live out-of-creation, in chaos; either consciously alone in your own imagination, or else unconsciously (unaware) alone in chaos (Nirvanah). 

Choice is a necessary aspect of free will, which is a fact of existence; the creative harmony of Heaven cannot be imposed but most be chosen - and for Heaven to be harmony it must be chosen for love.

Into the New Age - a summary of what did happen, and what should have happened

There was a great deal of speculation in The West of the late Twentieth Century concerning a New Age of consciousness that was approaching around the millennium. 

In a sense other that its advocates intended; this was in the event correct - and now the New Age is here, and we are now living in it.

Men here-and-now believe what they want to believe, but it is probably clearer to think of this in terms of Men choose the reality they inhabit. 

And it is the nature of Men's choices that determines the reality they inhabit. 

The characteristic is that in this New Age, Men choose their own reality. 

Everybody is doing it - whether they know it or not; but with differences. The differences lies in whether the chosen reality is true or false; and whether the choosing is conscious or unconscious, active or passive, inner or outer, personal or groupish. 

Most people have unconsciously absorbed an externally-devised false reality - and do so, apparently, in order to have a feeling of being members of a group. 

This choice is of the totalitarian-made and officially endorsed and imposed virtuality. 

Some accept and embrace this false reality as real - these are the mainstream leftist-materialists. 

Others choose some other non-mainstream but external, groupish and partly-fake reality; which is converged-with (although not - yet - fully absorbed-into) mainstream secular leftism: these are those who get their world view secondhand from churches, or other social institutions. 

In a world where all groups are (more, or less) participants in the totalitarian fake-world; the only way of choosing to believe and inhabit the real-and-true world is by choosing actively, consciously, for oneself - and from oneself.

And surely this is what God wants from us? 

Surely this is precisely what Jesus asks from us in the Fourth Gospel? 

The lesson of so-called AI: Most of Man's "thinking" is just "thinking-about", like the abstract symbolic token-juggling of Artificial Intelligence

If you have ever experienced real thinking on a subject, you will know that this rare and relatively brief activity is qualitatively different from thinking-about the same thing. 

Once you have actually thought on a matter, you can recognize when others have not - but are merely parroting on that subject. And you will also be aware that most of your own speaking and writing is also a species of parroting - even when it is a matter of parroting your own previous real-thinking... 

(This, by the way, is analogous to Wittgenstein's distinction between doing Philosophy, and the usual academic business of just "parroting" on the subject. It is what I mean when I say that I was only doing science from 1994 to 2015, although I was officially "a scientist" for some years on either side of that.)   

The current mass imposition of so-called "AI" (Artificial Intelligence) provides one potentially valuable learning experience, if it makes us realize (with shame) how much of our own mental activity is hardly superior to the kind of automatic and unconscious processing of these computer programmes.

The shame is that Man is free, hence capable of doing more than parroting. 

But computers are not Beings and cannot be free; hence they are always, only, and necessarily; forever stuck in the activity of "thinking-about" - by which I mean the whole business is symbolic and abstract, and the relationship of this token-juggling to real-reality is purely asserted; and the validity of the assertion purely conjectural*. 

(*This applies even when computers are used by spiritual Beings, such - especially- as demons; the computer cannot ever itself become a Being, because all Beings are eternally pre-existent, and cannot be made or destroyed. But a computer and its activities may be included within the scope of the spirit of a Being; rather as (but in a material way) the water in our blood may be included in our own Being.) 

We can describe the business of thinking-about in terms of tokens; tokens that "represent" things, concepts etc, and the "thinking-about" is the process of (for instance) selecting, extracting, extrapolating, combining, and arranging these tokens. 

The tokens are supposed to represent reality, in some way; but there is no "participation" in this reality - the token is not that which it represents, and the processes of token manipulation are utterly separate from the reality that is supposed to be represented by it. 

No matter how much it may be claimed otherwise, the tokens and what happens to them, are not that which they purport to represent.  

But there is another kind of thinking which is involved in the actuality of that which is being-thought, a thinking that participates in reality. This is a matter I have tried to discuss in terms such as primary thinking, and direct knowing (and which is discussed in Rudolf Steiner's books Truth and Knowledge, and The Philosophy of Freedom). 

This participating-thinking can be envisaged (although this description here is linguistic, hence itself, of course, a model) in terms of our thinking becoming the same as the thinking of other Beings; a sharing of thinking in real time. 

This is reality, because participated thinking is real - so to believe the above we must also recognize that our thinking is potentially part of ultimate reality... Our thinking (when it is primary) changes the world. 

But many/most people nowadays assert that our human thinking is itself always-and-only a symbolic activity, that our thinking is just another instance of token-juggling - and this elucidates why so many people are so completely confused by and about AI. 

They are confused because they have pre-decided that human thinking is exactly the same kind of abstract symbolic merely-representative activity as computation, then they can find no difference between thinking and the stuff that AI programs are doing.

Yet much/most of what we modern Westerners call thinking is indeed guilty as charged: merely symbolic, merely representative, merely pattern-making with tokens...  

And perhaps more so now than ever before, because of our ideology that this Must Be what thinking is, that thinking cannot-be otherwise - and to believe anything else is wishful thinking or delusional. 

Thereby, that non-participating, alienated, symbolic-representative understanding of the world which led-to, is-encapsulated-by, and is imposed upon Men by the current so-called AI - becomes habitual, and indeed mandatory, in public discourse. 

To think otherwise is partly a matter of assumptions, and partly of experience. If you have never experienced primary thinking, direct knowing, then it is easy to believe that it does not exist - or that it is just a self-deluded variant of that token-juggling which constitutes almost all of our personal, social, and professional living. 

And people probably never will experience the participating possible in thinking, if they are not motivated to do it; unless they invest a level of time, attention and effort that is extraordinarily rare - even, or especially, among the intellectual classes involved in science, academic, law, philosophy - and Christian theology. 

Note: A clearer understanding of the distinction between abstract-symbolic, token-shuffling thinking-about, and the participative possibility of real thinking, may be had from a careful reading of Owen Barfield's Saving the Appearances (1957). 

What is Time?

A recent post by William James Tychonievich has made me start thinking again about Time, and how to understand it. I first began considering Time some 20 years ago, after reading a book called Ceremonial Time (by JH Mitchell).

Furthermore, I am currently reading a new book by Jeremy Naydler (In the Shadow of the Machine), in the course of which he discusses the effect of the invention of the clockwork-clock on the mind of Men of the Middle Ages.

Naydler argues that the clock began as explicitly a model of reality (early clocks often had moving models of the planets). But soon the mechanical model usurped consciousness, so that it became regarded as real reality - and that situation continues today, in a modified form. This was a major step in the abstraction that utimately led to The Computer (or Information) - which nowadays provides (for many people) the 'reality' to which human minds can only aspire, can only subordinate themselves...


We naturally think of Time as a kind of 'physics', and tell time by engineering. Originally; this 'Objective' Time was astronomical, based on the day, lunar month and year; but now we regard astronomical time as deficient, because (by our engineering definitions) astronomical days, months and years do not fit together in neat fractions.

We moderns regard Time as abstract, external and Objective - to such as extent that we try to assert that Time has nothing to do with individual Men's consciousnesses; and it is impicit that we are each ideally and properly subordinated to Objective Time. In effect, Men make this Objective Time by our culture-bound philosophy, science, engineering... project it onto the Universe... and then regard ourselves as utterly bound-by-it!

In fact, this modern Objective concept of Time is incoherent (as demonstrated by advanced physics, as well as philosophy) - and in reality our Time is merely a practical expedient for the coordination and control of our kind of civilisation.


What strikes me (since reading Ceremonial Time) is that for young children, and for 'hunter-gatherer' early tribal Men, Time is a psychological concept - in the sense that it is something that exists in minds.

However, it is vital to remember that the 'psychology' of children and tribal people includes what would be regarded by modern science as religious, spiritual or supernatural aspects. Ceremonial Time could be termed Subjective Time; but the current divorce between Subjective and Objective is not a necessary aspect of reality; rather, it is a product of our materialist metaphysics.

To be more exact, we Westerners are currently but very temporarily inside an alienating delusion; the effect is that we try to live by an absolutely artificial, unnatural concept of Time.But if we are able to develop a more honest and coherent metaphysics, then Time could again become Subjective and Objective both. 


So what ought we to do about it? I believe that Men should live by Subjective Time - and that this is how Men live in pre-mortal and post-mortal life. Christians can look-forward to living by Subjective Time in Heaven.

But how about now? What ought we to be aiming at?

Well, I think we should be aiming at an adult version of that Subjective child state we all (presumably) went through. The child was immersed-in Time, unconscious of its existence, swept-along by it. Children share a unified subjective Time because they are unaware of its separate existence - it is like an invisible ocean inside of each child - each inner ocean connected with all others. Children are moved-by the tides and waves of this sea. 

In our striving we should not be trying to live by any different concept than the child's; rather striving to become aware of Subjective Time, to stand apart from it in thought, to contemplate and interact-with Time.

So, the reality of Time is in each of us; we can be aware-of and know the inner ocean; we can know our-selves to be distinct from it; and we can interact with it consciously - indeed, we cannot help doing so. We can re-connect with Time.


If Objectivity is that which makes a world shared and public and universal; then modern Man understands Time as something external that is imposed-upon everybody. All we can do as individuals is recognise this brute fact.

But our aim should be to understand Time as something that cannot be separated from the minds of Men, and therefore as something that with-which we each interact.

We are part of Time, whether we recognise this fact, or not - the child lives as part of Time but does not recognise the fact; the adult may recognise reality; if he so chooses. And in this recognition is freedom: divine freedom.