The final Inspired, Unnecessary Document
Sin is grace. Imperfection is perfection. Yin is Yang. They are so inseparable that their identities and characteristics become meaningless.
Sin is grace because it is acceptance and approval of that which God cannot do. Light is meaningless without darkness. So too, perfection without any contrast- a beautifier.
There is a fundamental need of death, for evil, for erasure of the past and movement blindly toward a future. Make no mistake. Satan is a god. The god of Futility & Despair, for which God’s hope and promise become desirous.
And the paradox of God is that he is human. God without any evil is a human. Entirely; perhaps with more power than anyone could hope to acquire for billions of years, but an inevitability- just read Genesis 11 if you feel skeptical of my claims. However, a righteous God did not create evil. Hmmmm…. Yes, only a human would invent something simply to destroy it. But what about that omnipotence and omnipresence? What about Omnibenevolence and Justice?
God has neither Body nor soul. We have souls, but they are nothing but a metaphysical anchor, dead wait. It is godly, but not God. No, God exists everywhere all at once, which is precisely the same as saying he doesn’t exist anywhere! He is analogous to infinity in another respect- he is a mental description, nothing more or less. How interesting then that we think ourselves either godly or not, when at the very best we can only be humanely.
Scientists, the most ardent of champions of real progress in the entropic world, know this. They see the world as descriptive, while religions take that information as prescription. Ha! As if they could be the worlds doctors, the most hypocritical caste of society!
What folly; and yet, self-justification becomes meaningless in a world where the 3 lb. Lilan Egg is just a storage and processing unit for the many Intangibles in the world. So it can be true- no, is it true: we need God, not the other way around! Except ‘need’ is a prescriptive thought system, and describes nothing; it cannot be in the greatest of Truths.
Science should strive for is’s, not ought’s, and religions the vice versa, even though many humans ‘feel’ the need for both. How frail is this squishy ball of grey matter. Alas, humans are always afraid to stand on their own two legs without help; it is in this way that even the most benign memes can turn against their masters! The most catastrophic fear is that of the Invisible, the Indwelling, and the perceived externals.
We are Barrowers. It is natural, everything borrows from everything else. I am barrowing from those around me and the reverse is true as well. They say that death is free, but actually it comes at an exorbitantly high price: Life. The opposite also can be posited with certainty. These statements are neither contradictory nor circumstantial- the economic system of the Universe is not perfect, nor will it ever be. There is never and always a value of 0. No one can take or give everything entirely; therefore insubstantial existence is what we will find in reality. Every piece of currency :body, mentality, spirituality, everything changes hands ad infinitum, and is the slight differentiation of these bits of Change that allow for the vast proliferation of God’s empty bank accounts. Any statement, no matter how initially worthless, could become an ideal mental/spiritual currency in the fullness of Time, because it will always have been true [= valuable] to someone at some point in time. Yet the world is made of “dollars” not denominations of them, so no one can follow the underground River of Life; its course is completely unpredictable. Yet this river is dry and dead- remember? Again, the identities and 0, 1, and infinity become ambiguously distinct- or is it the reverse?
I had been whiling away the days, and there were a great deal of insidious thoughts that clouds one’s faith. I had struggled so much to believe, for even as I was ordained, I was quickly losing my trust in the Lord. But one day a member of the church asked, “Father Dennis, if God knew what we were going to do beforehand, what choices did we actually make?” He said the words in a depressed manner, though almost flat with emotion, and his face tense, but also lacking emotion.
I sat in a long contemplative silence then realized, “God’s sovereignty and good will are unmatched and irrefutable. No matter what occurs, know that His will in being done to the realization of the best of all possible worlds, both in this, and the hereafter.”
When I had finished, it was as if a great block had been lifted off of my mind, and I suddenly found that once again I realized the truth: I was chosen, as were many others, to come in to the ultimate blessing of God; I could not have been more completely aware of the definition of “rapture” at that moment. I was transported to a place of new faith, a fire had once again been lit in my soul. My face, it seemed, showed the progress of my thoughts; and my patron, Richard- who would later rise to his own fame- merely scrutinized me, and rolled the thoughts around in my his like boulders, waiting for them to settle, before he would speak again.
Punctuating the silence once more: “Pastor, that may be true, but if I didn’t choose Him, then why am I being rewarded? And why not many others choose as well?”
A great sadness seemed to precipitate, like slowly forming dew droplets in the late part of a mild spring, and the understanding came with it. The great cost of happiness, of grace.
All I managed to say was, “The good Lord cannot have everyone to himself, for it is by the darkness of the world God’s light shines so brilliantly.”
And although I feel in the deepest part of my convicted heart that God’s will is perfect, I couldn’t help but worry about the fate of such a man, occupying Mr. Dawkins’ mind that was all ego, and nothing of God.
Desires are temporal trials
darkness resonates in the
Chambers of the Mind
those petty wraiths can be shoed
away from items, people
but these scurrying,
insectile vermin unite.
A deliberate force which
Conquers, commands, yet…
Desire itself, immortalized-
the blackest shade
As God is the harbinger of
love, peace, and truth
He cannot escape himself
He has naturally
The Greatest of Shadows
Light defines all
People have lived, in the full spectrum of blessedness and cursedness, and have decided that life is not worth living. What fundamentally is different about the afterlife? How is eternity advantageous, practical, or just??
What matters? I implore you, tell.
But then I must ask another question:
What lasts for eternity? What do we know?
And another thing, yes, that one answer: Information
That is all that Is…
But of that, Time, and our reality,
is there forever? Have you seen it?
“This” is a Magician’s hat, at most we
feel the texture, perhaps we hear a brain….
Illusion and reality merge,
illumination and shadow, the panorama
of our setting Sunrise- the majesty of
the spreading Twilight
An important associated quote:
“In fact, we philosophers and ‘free spirits’ feel ourselves irradiated by a new dawn that the ‘old God is dead’; our hearts overflow with gratitude, astonishment, presentiment, and expectation. At last, the horizon seems open once more, granting even that it is not bright; our ships can at last put out to sea in face of every danger; every hazard is again permitted to the discerner; the sea, our sea, again lies open before us; perhaps before did such an ‘open sea exist.”
poetry is just words
emanating from the lips of the soundless
Cognitive thoughts the crazy people think
those senseless images of pears, birds, and rivers…
War and death are all too common,
love and loss now a mere cliché
Insanity provoking the sanest contemplation
And yet still the listeners and readers show
All the masochists of the most pathetic sort
trying to squish their minds around simple models
Fail miserably, for why should I care?
This is all Made Up Crap
Alas, an epiphany! How fortuitous, to think that I have perhaps not dried up the parts of my mind that are capable of creating and discussing new concepts. But we will see. The question now is: Where do the false-truths go?
It may seem something austere in its utter vacuity- to say nothing about the complete contradiction inherent in such a question. It doesn’t even have to be a statement to be wrong! Yet, let us ponder the opposite idea: things that are true- in the ordinary sense, in the regular world- exist. 2+2=4, for average values of 2, oranges are orange; the sea battle that occurs tomorrow will be one by the ship with the captain that did not die right before its commencement, and so on. They are parts of reality, to the express exclusion of falsehoods. Thus, the question becomes: where or what is nonexistence? Can anything not exist? Existence may be queer, but the idea of dealing with something which not only lacks substance of empirical value of any kind, but must forever by its very nature remain impossible to probe physically or mentally or even spiritually- should such a possibility even exist- ought to be something that puzzles one. But people avert their eyes from the invisible- it seems only natural to do so. “Maybe Something” certainly exists in both of these two worlds- the one that exists, and the one (many?) that do not; men to dot ever tire of looking at things they “think they see.” So why does this taboo against impossibility, unreality, falsehood, hold so much sway? Such concepts are the sacrifices that are offered up to summon the very essence of truth- Sir Arther Conen Doyle made the remark here famous: “Eliminate the impossible, and whatever remains, is the truth.” Indeed, empiricism- therefore science, rationalism- therefore psychology, and half of Philosophy is based on the idea that, barring finding truths, we can eliminate falsehoods. The exile of ideas must be to some place- the opposite of epistemological musing? So what does it mean for something to not exist- and in a state as such, naturally observe a falsehood? Nonexistence’s necessary existence is that formidable lie, and a beast that seems to come at us only when we wish to extend ourselves past reality, and into MS territory.
I may have said before that nonexistence is merely the state which we can only never see the invisible thing that is out there, and that it must in fact, be real, otherwise all things in existence would have no truth value to them, and no knowledge would be possible value, as it would both fail to exist, but be a specific form of nonexistence- something which, like a black hole, “has no hair.”
Curious thing those black holes, they are indeed a vortex of curiosity, they are a fascinating phenomenon which literally form boundaries beyond which our understanding fails us- timelessness, quantum identity ceases, its even purported to be such a link to other physical worlds. String Theory, long on postulates but short on evidence at this point in time, makes the fantastic statement that these are merely massive elementary particles, like electrons or photons. It is such a bald physical entity that its conceptual parallel with existent Nonexistences seems noteworthy; they are paradoxes that do yet remain with us. We cannot know what they are besides their uniqueness as entities, but we know what they aren’t. The intriguing possibility that the universe exists as a massive quantum computer- mental components attached, would seem to allow for these banished ideas to be embodied fully in such bizarre demons of cosmology…
So, if we assume that Reality is the sum total of all information- whether true or false, known or unknown, possible and impossible even, then falsehoods are merely relativistic entities. Such is so for other universes, which in principle do exist under Eternal Inflation and/or Chaotic Inflationary models espoused by Guth, who fittingly takes a liking to the string theorist community, for their “shared enthusiasm for things that have no empirical consequences” as he puts it in one of his lectures. This final pronouncement and somewhat explanation only leads back to where we started at the top of the page: what is the “mechanism” whereby possible truths are relocated to other distinct realities? It has been asserted all throughout physics that knowledge, ironically enough, may allow one to positively ID the trajectory of spacetime itself. But, with the advent of Quantum mechanics, and black holes that ruin the information that falls prey to them, such information is nearly impossible to get, and even so, only the various possibilities, the googolplex of various worlds. So, truth changes in time, and truth changes time as well? It seems that the effects of Intelligence are very good at manipulating reality on the smallest of scales. At least, if Intelligence’s true aim is to frustrate itself, then this propensity shows no bounds. Quantum bits are ever shifting, reality is amorphous when we aren’t looking at it, yet we claim to even empirically be able to know the universe as a physical entity? This is a dubious statement, especially given the “Cat-and-Mouse” framework of chasing down concrete reality. It leads many to consider that Intelligence is the Universe, or that the universe is intelligent. Either way, what can we infer about truth, or rather, what isn’t true?
There would certainly be a subset of realities that cannot be real: those that do not adhere to our rules of logic, mathematics, and/or physics wouldn’t strictly speaking be realities, but artificial realms which could not be sustained indefinitely. This is particularly true if logic is thrown out the window whenever one leaves the universe. But, if logic departs, then how should the Illogical be constrained by logic? The unsustainable would be perfectly serene and timeless, just like a multiverse, simply because it could.
I’ve made mention of this, that impossibility produces all possibilities simultaneously by way of a trick of nature: impossibility cannot infringe upon possible worlds, because if it were, then the identities of impossibility and possibility would be moot, and we wouldn’t be here to discuss the matter. Unless of course all of this is but one moment that disobeys timeless Impossibility- an objection which would, in its very conception, prove that Possibility is once again a subset- a natural product of the Impossible. What the parameters are for Possibility are unnecessary considerations, because even if there were only a finite set of possible worlds, impossibility could simply change that. After all, the human mind imagines worlds and individuals- which, given the unique nature of consciousness, are nearly universes unto themselves. Imagined individuals are, for all intents and purposes, indistinguishable from real persons. It is impossible to make the distinction between this dream we call life and the dreams we call “self”- and personalities change, even so much as coming into existence as two or more identities in one mind. Adding to this that we seem to be at the whim of the determined universe, even if only probabilistically, even if only neurologically, there is little difference between ourselves and those imagined beings in a book, which do not know that they are imagined- for the most part.
This seems to be a trend- of being unable to make distinctions in the light of all that we have at our disposal- and if I am unable to tell the difference between reality and obvious fiction- it seems unlikely that there is one. We may or may not be connected to other realities- and if the chance exists, then some of these fictions are indeed related. We may or may not be able to control ourselves- but if the possibility exists, then there certainly are some peoples that can, and do not interfere with those of us that do not. I do not even need to limit them to avoiding our deterministic universe- after all- we do not understand what determinism really is, at the end of the day.
Is Intelligence the ability to alter reality, or is reality the ability of the world to imitate such Intelligence- while possessing no genuine talent of its own- like most machines? Some mix of the two is, as stated, possible, or even yet, neither. All that allows for this is the relative absolutes of non-communicative realities. The relative aspect deals with the interaction of concepts that are contingently doing so, and the absolute aspect with the fact that only a finite amount of concepts are allowed to play at any given time. After all, you can’t play poker with an infinite amount of players, even with an infinite amount of decks in play. Some metaphysics will win in some realities, and different ones in others. The winnings are most likely just shares of possibility in that universe. Those with no winnings- such as free will- make themselves scarce; those with a little cash on hand- play a small part
All that is left, it seems, are the special cases for impossible scenarios- where concepts cannot work together, metaphysically speaking. These scenarios are simply “house take all” realities that have no influence on any other worlds except that Impossibility does not assume a null state: it doesn’t “stay” impossible, meaning that the only impossibility was the existence of nonexistence- or, it could be reversed- the nonexistence of existence. You see, something would begin to exist, but be swallowed up by dominant nonexistence- like a quantum singularity, which, if universal would be the same as nonexistence because it’s possibilities- it’s probable growth into a distinct spacetime/ reality would never be realized. I do not make that most egregious distinction of the “infinite wait” versus “not at all” argument. I keep stating that if something doesn’t interact with the World- though it may be a fractal contingency in such a world (read “any novel whatsoever”)- then it is the same as it not existing. Imaginary things are conceptual not factual lies, they occupy our time- but it is the illusion that keeps us busy, not the real incarnation itself.
But, this is too a distinction- and it can interpreted that in fact we are seeding realities- or more accurately, weakly interacting with those realities. It would be the same as if the Matrix concept (something that is not unique, but readily available) were extended a great amount of times- and each artificial reality creates the next- and finally it loops back onto itself. The human conception of ego does this very trick. It is an illusion of self control created by other forces and processes that passes a threshold of conceptual and physical memory states, such that is functions as a force all on its own, and working to continue doing so by continually feeding back into this circuit. Which, of course is physically evidenced by how synapses have an incredible amount of plasticity to them, and how a written system of thought was derived from and made as a storage for these processes, and in so doing, creating an “ego-less” conceptual feedback loop analogous to our own brains. All that we do especially well as human beings- our only true talent- is imitation. Evidenced is provided by neuroscience once again in mirror neurons- which allow for human interaction; the “instant replay” function of our problem solving skills; and mental imagery; and added to our own robust skills of contemplation, created our knack for invention- taking concepts out of nature- animals, plants, the stars, eventually to the point that concepts controlled us as much as we did them. The same thing occurs in every human being, until the process is stopped by more powerful forces.
And just how “life” emerged from its imitation by nonliving substances and our own social system is built upon us imitating the meanings in words and behaviors of others, reality may be just the best imitation that exists right now for us. I certainly can see no alternative to this compelling state of affairs: that imaginary planes cohabitate in a larger reality; that we ourselves are suffused with pre-existing artificial concepts and continue to process and create paradigms; that we cannot find a limit to what truth and knowledge are even though we know more about those concepts to the exclusion of all other species- would lead me to think that the distinction between reality and fantasy is only as great as the persuasive evidences that this is a genuine article- me, the world, logic and truth, and all of these evidences are based on the same principle. That reality can be taken at face value when even all of this is taken into account is laughable, as nonexistence implies a state of existence. “Why is there something rather than nothing?” One possible answer: reality is impossible to create, and Impossibility creates. Logic is unnecessary when it cannot explain what happened to allow something impossible to become possible, and yet brazenly tacking logic onto something which it should not apply has the interesting result of producing a scenario which allows for Possible to merely play second fiddle in the grandest of schemes, and that our unique reality becomes a necessary product of the relationship of paradoxes in formulating thought. Considering Epimendes’ Paradox, that: “This statement is false.” As just one such catalyst for truth and falsehood being simultaneous in reality , then such a quaint little universe such as ours is only a figurative stone’s throw away…