Esoteric Agenda a Fundamentalist Rhetoric:

.

.

---

.

Mystery Religion [Originally posted on 27th September 2015]: I was once asked a question, “Do you believe in Christ?” and I replied, “Yes,” but I don’t believe in the Catholic Church. His face appeared perplexed. He looked confused about my approach, and a question would probably instil him. How can anyone believe in Christ and not the Church? If one examines the propensity for truth in themselves, a thought might formulate in the mind that questions the current notion of the Church Institution. That it’s more corporate than anything else we might associate it with. Would Christ himself be an advocate of a corrupt institution? Any religious historian knows the story from the King James Bible, “and Jesus went into the temple of God, and cast out all them that sold and bought in the temple, and overthrew the tables of the money-changers, and the seats of them that sold doves.” The Catholic Church amasses billions of dollars, hoarding and not giving, the corrupt Priests and systematic abuse are so rampant it’s become inherent. At the same time, the Church goes out of its way to protect this behaviour. The Vatican only holds a hidden history and knowledge library for the initiated secret group. This knowledge is so profound that it could fix most of the problems that concern the world today. This is not a manifesto to conspire against all Church institutions; it is just outlining its overt fallacy. 

To understand why this is happening, you must first go beyond your programmed understanding and instead dive into esotericism and occult knowledge and an understanding of the Mystery Cults. ß In the early settlements of America, Europeans called this country the New World but secretly called it the New Atlantis. This country was a formation of a plan backed by the Royals (Windsor), and this country, on the surface, was going to be a democratic liberal Country with biblical principles. Its true intention, however, is an advantageous social engineering plan – formed by a principle of the ideal man in the perfect utopia. These brave devout pilgrims were known as Puritans (or “Separatists,” as they called themselves) and were little more than indentured servants to European corporate interests. That took place in a corporate colony – not a religious commune. Any so-called religious venture lurks behind a rich and powerful […] pulling the strings from the get-go. These ideas stem back to the Mystery Cults. 

What were the Mystery Schools? (Just small disclaimers do not take the information on the beginnings of Thoth Hermes as fact but as historical myth) Mystery Cult teachings are a pearl of esoteric spiritual wisdom and philosophy passed down by the initiates through generations. These mystery teachings were formed in the age of Atlantis, where they learned all things consciousness. An Atlantis Priest named Thoth went to Egypt, and through him and two Nacals helped introduce the first Pharaoh, Akhenaten; this Pharaoh was 15-foot-tall and had an elongated skull. He abolished all previous beliefs of God, instilled a one God belief, and used the sun-disk symbol to worship. Akhenaten then developed a new Mystery group, and after a while, the people revoked them and had him killed. During the end of the Egypt Empire, Thoth outlined in the emerald tablets that he met a man from Greece named Pythagoras, to which he taught sacred geometry. Thoth lived in Greece as Hermes Trismegistus. To understand Atlantis times, you must also understand dimensions, frequencies, vibrational grids, vortexes, alchemy, Fallen Angels and sacred geometry (etc.), which all stem from the Mystery Religion, and the average lifespan of an Atlantis being was 900 years.

Throughout the centuries, occult knowledge became prevalent. Then forgotten with the rise of materialism and kept secret through secret societies. Their intentions were innocent at the time; they just had more knowledge than the average person – knowledge stemming back to the Mystery Religion [Cults]. It is believed that the Church infiltrated these societies and then became a steward for that group. They intended to guard that knowledge and prevent it from leaking out. But instead, they demonised the original cult groups and those that would follow them. They have kept the name, but their true intentions are gone, replaced by a new Order (or Empire) to further push their agenda, NWO (Globalism), which is in place today.

Grace Knoche of the Theosophical Society outline in her document titled the ‘Mystery Schools,’ describing the origin and I quote: “Millions upon millions of years ago in the darkness of prehistory, humanity was an infant, a child of Mother Nature, un-awakened, dreamlike, and wrapped in the cloak of mental somnolence. Recognition of egoity slept; instinctual consciousness alone was active. Like a stream of brilliance across the horizon of time, divine beings Manasaputras, sons of mind, descended among the sleeping humans and, with the flame of intellectual solar fire, lighted the wick of latent mind, and lo! The thinker stirred. Self-consciousness wakened, and man became a dynamo of intellectual and emotional power: capable of love, hate, glory, or defeat. Having knowledge, he acquired power; acquiring power, he chose; choosing, he fashioned the fabric of his future; and the perception of this ran like wine through his veins.” (Grace Knoche, n.d)

Grace later explains the Atlantis connection, she says; “time marched on, and the race waxed lusty in power, as Lemuria gave birth to Atlantis, the third root-race to the fourth, the fiercest battle was waged: the war between the lords of light and truth and the lords of darkness and ignorance…Thus were established, some threatening to destroy themselves through spiritual iniquity, the first Mystery Schools. From these early centres sprang other Mystery Schools in all parts of the Atlantean world. By the time the Atlanteans were in their heyday of material splendour, these schools were working their hardest to stem the increasing tide of sorcery.” (Grace Knoche, n.d)

The basis of the Mystery School is predicated on the doctrine that creative knowledge and intellect were given to man, so man could achieve Godhood and become a divine being of who he was supposed to be. The doctrine is one of the same for the established elites – the exclusive knowledge to achieve immortality and become Gods without the help of the creator God – all while denying any accountability of sins in trying to achieve this goal. All this can be stretched back to Adam and Eve, when Satan said to Eve, “Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as Gods, knowing good and evil.” (Satan to Eve, Genesis 3:4-5,). Satan knew that by eating the fruit of life, humankind was subject to death, the line “ye shall not surely die” a lie hidden in words. 

While a collective parallel agenda exists that can match biblical references in Genesis, it’s still a baseless assumption to believe that the New Age is subjected to the same representation. The notion that believing in reincarnation and spiritual evolution is another form of the apple, which I don’t believe. While Buddhists convey that reincarnation is something you must get out of the perpetual cycle, but implying that it’s another form of the apple when it’s just a mere parallel; by its logic, everything after the apple is a sin. It’s a conflict raised by fundamentalism that has some esoteric knowledge. This kind of thinking only reinforces a false Esoteric Agenda; there is splitting and combing history with beliefs. The New Age is relatively new and amorphic. Still, before the New Age label, it was known to be various groups that knew occult and esoteric knowledge in its early days, it was free from the established elite, but once infiltrated started to become more agenda driven. Hence this propensity for an Esoteric Agenda component that the conspiracy Christians loves to advocate – however, mutual exclusivity exists. Discerning truth and fiction should be exercised; this was true for early occultists as well.

Far Right Religion: So here we have Christianity, which works through politics; Christianity is an offset of Egyptian Beliefs; with the understanding of the Mystery Cult teachings, they took over the occult groups, now called Mystery Religions. The Vatican has a vast knowledge of the ancient text, which is not part of Italy and is controlled by the Jesuits. The Catholic Church is responsible for the New-Testament writings, changing explicit Genesis writing while not entirely dismissing the book of Enoch.

There is a contention where the Christian right is trying to convey that the new age is part of the New Order to be one of the same. A certain aspect of this is true; since the founder of Esalen died and the re-interrogation of the Rockefellers as new management to the Esalen Institute – paved the way for the New Age to rise only to become an agenda-driven institute. However, that’s not to say purists or followers of the old New Age can’t exist. And this gives the Christian’s notion as being one of the same as the New Order to be purely based on conjecture – because it would mean discerning many books. Since the Dead Sea Scrolls and Gnostic texts appeared, Christians have not afforded the same contention within themselves. So the spiritualist has to fight two fronts to manoeuvre around, the Christian right and the rational Atheist. The spiritualist has to explain why both are part of a deliberate dialectal polarity set in place for them to waste their time on. The spiritualist is in a way are the new Philosopher and stands outside of these two polarizing beliefs, and here is why?

Christian Right and Atheist institutions have offset followers, such as Christian Science, Agnostics and Humanist. They all have a common ideology, a lack of faith or blatant denial of God. While also having myopia to anyone wanting to reach enlightenment, be awakened, or reach Christ-consciousness, the Christian right will say “Christ” is the son of God, but no one else, just him. The New Age describes reaching Christ-consciousness as the same as reaching enlightenment or being aware or reaching Satori, while the Atheists disbelieve God outright until explained by science. The Christian right has moral ground to reduce the New Age group because it has no wall to stop any merging infiltration, so this gives the Christian right a way to box the New age from being corrupted. And this is dangerous; it gives them a judge-like complex. So, you have an infiltrated Christian right, reducing the New Age to a conspiracy with which the Christian right is also associated. It’s a form of deflection while suggesting their truth is absolute.

Eckhart Tolle, in his book ‘A New Earth,’ in the sub-section ‘Truth: Relative or Absolute,’ subheading ‘I am right you are wrong: outlines that it’s dangerous in personal relationships as well as in interactions between nations, tribes, religions and so on. The history of Christianity is, of course, a prime example of how the belief that you are in sole possession of the truth that is to say, right, can corrupt your actions and behaviour to the point of insanity. For centuries, torturing and burning people alive if their opinion diverged even in the slightest from the Church doctrine or narrow interpretations of the scripture (Truth) was considered right because the victims were “wrong” They were so wrong that they needed to be killed. The truth was considered more important than human life. And what was the truth? A story you had to believe in, which means a bundle of thoughts. (Eckhart Tolle, n.d)

Eckhart describes The Catholic and the churches as correct in identifying relativism that there is no absolute truth to guide human behaviour, one of our time’s evils. Then, stating that “it won’t be found if you look for it in doctrines, ideologies, sets of rules, or stories, and all this is common to the notion of thought.” He says: “Thought can be at best point to the truth, but it is never the truth.” Buddhists say: “The finger pointing to the moon is not the moon.” He then interprets this through the ego; he explains that you can use them in the service of the ego, or you can use them in the service of Truth. If you believe only your religion is the Truth, you are using it in the service of the ego, in such a way; that religion becomes ideology and creates an illusory sense of superiority as well as division and conflict between people. In the service of the Truth, religious teachings represent signposts or maps left behind by awakened humans to assist you in spiritual awakening, that is to say, in becoming free of identification with form. (Eckhart Tolle, n.d)

Eckhart further describes truth inwardly; he outlines: that the truth is inseparable from who you are – yes, you are the truth. If you look for it elsewhere, you will be deceived every time. The very being that you are is truth. Jesus tried to convey that when he said, “I am the way and the truth and the life.” These words uttered by Jesus are one the most powerful and direct pointers to the truth. If understood correctly, if misinterpreted, it can become a great obstacle. (Eckhart Tolle, n.d)

Kierkegaard, a polar opposite of Marxist thinking at the time, is a philosopher who explores Christianity subjectively. He is an existentialist and a kind of early Humanist. He, however, had no interest in external institutions like progress or consumer society, and that individualism was stifled. He says his views on religious belief: “What is this self of mine, it is the most abstract of all things, and yet at the same time, it’s the most concrete. Its freedom, the consciousness of being an individual, which is fundamental in man, is his consciousness of eternity. Christianity is not a doctrine; it is an existence communication, it can only be expounded, when being realized in Men’s Lives.” He later expands a more definitive verse; he says, “My task is so new that in Christianity’s 1800 years, there is literally not one from whom I can learn, on how it should be done? For all extraordinary men who hitherto live have aimed at spreading Christianity, my task is to put a Halt to the lying diffusion of Christianity to help shake off a massive number of nominal Christians. The worst danger for Christianity is not Hersey, heterodoxies, not free thinkers, nor pro-vein wordiness. Still, it’s the kind of orthodoxies, which is hearty twaddle, mediocrity with a dash of sugar, in every way that has come to this that what we all came to know as Christianity, is precisely what Christ came to Abolish.” (Kierkegaard n.d)

And this is no more apparent in contemporary America, especially in the Bible belt area, where they’re entrenched in this cul-de-sac that borders in cult-like status. Upon this, you will have people like Steve Quale (a fundamentalist Christian) preaching New Age ideologies (but more precisely historical myth) that he adopted from the Mystery School teachings, then using that as a vehicle of fear to reinforce an Evangelical following. He makes people aware of this and then brainwashes them by saying that teaching the gospel is the only way. Unknowledgeable Christians fall prey to this, while the New Age only advocates enlightenment within; Quale and his group of followers will use it as means of control through fear.

Alan Watt’s lecture on ‘Jesus and his religion’ outlines that Jesus was a human being like Buddha, Shera Krishna, Rana Hamachi and so forth. Who in their life had a colossal experience of cosmic consciousness, and that this can happen to anyone it’s like falling in love. And that you don’t have to be part of any religion to experience it; he says: “when it hits you, you know it; sometimes it comes from long practice of meditation and spiritual discipline. Sometimes it comes for no reason you can determine; we say it’s the grace of God. That there comes this overwhelming conviction that you have mistaken your identity, that what I thought was me was completely superficial, and I am an expression of X (God), the name that cannot be named, and the Taboo name amongst the Hebrews. There is no longer the separate you; it’s only this happening. And if you have the name in the background, this happening is God, or the will of God, or the Doing of God, or if you don’t have that word in your background – you will say it’s the flowing of the Tao, or it’s the Maya of Brahman, Maya meaning the creative illusion, the play.” This experience can make people feel genuine amongst others and be inspired to see the divine in people’s eyes. (Alan Watts, n.d)

Alan Watts further elaborates that Jesus’sJesus’s Cosmic Experience was not a product of omniscience; Saint Paul makes this clear that Jesus renounced his divine powers to be man, he says: “Let this mind be a new, which was also in Christ Jesus, who being in the form of God, though not equality with God a thing to be hung to, but humbled himself, and made himself of no reputation and was fashioned as a man and became obedient to death.” Theologians call this Kenosis, self-emptying, so an omniscience man or omnipotent would not be a man, so an orthodox doctrine of the nature of Christ, that he was both true God and true man, you must say for true God to be united with a true man. True God has to make a voluntary renunciation of omniscience, omnipotence, and omnipresence. So, therefore, if Jesus was to come out and say, I am the son of God, that’s like saying I am the boss’s son, or I am the boss. 

Everyone will view this as blasphemy or subversion; it’s like trying to introduce democracy into the kingdom of heaven; no man has seen God. In Jesus’s esoteric teachings recorded in the synoptic Gospel, he made it clear that he didn’t come right out there and say he was the son of God. Instead, he identified himself with the messiah described in the second part of the prophet Isaiah. “The suffering serpent who was despised and rejected of men,” and this man is the non-political messiah; it was convenient to make that identification even though it would get him into trouble. However, to his elect disciple, as recorded in Saint John, he said, “before Abraham was, I am, I am the way the Truth and the Life. I am the resurrection of Life, I am the living bread that comes down from heaven, I am the father are one, and he who has seen me has seen the father.” Upon the Jews found out, they put him to death for blasphemy. (Alan Watts, n.d)

And this is because it happens to any mystic who’ve had this experience; it happened to a Sufi Mystic in Persia. With this in mind, Christ was pedestalized, so his troublesome experience with cosmic consciousness would not come and cause a nuisance. Others, who had this experience and expressed it at a time when the Church had power, were persecuted. If you pedestalized Jesus, you strangle the Gospel at birth, and it’s been the tradition in the Catholic Church and Protestant to pass off an emasculated Gospel. Gospel means good news; what is the good news about Gospel ordinarily handed down? “Because here is the revelation of God in Christ Jesus, and we were supposed to follow his life and example, without the unique advantage of being the boss’s son. Now both traditions of catholic and Protestant Churches represent Jesus to us as a freak. Born of a virgin, knowing he is the son of God, having the power of miracles, and knowing it’s impossible to kill him, he will rise again. And so we were asked to take up the cross and follow him – when we don’t know that about ourselves. So, what happened is this, we are delivered by an impossible Gospel.” However, upon this, Christianity institutionalized guilt. (Alan Watts, n.d)

This is the Christianity of most people; now, there is a subtler form of Christianity with the Theologians, the Mystics and the Philosophers. However, this is not what gets preached, “What would the real Gospel be”? The real good news is not simply that Jesus of Nazareth was the son of God, but that he was a powerful son of God who came to open everybody’s eyes – to that fact that you are too. This was said in the 10th chapter of Saint James, verse 30, he said, “I am the father are one; many good works I have shown you from the father. And from which of these do you stone me,” and they said; “for good work we stone you not, but for Blasphemy for being man, make yourself God.” And he replied; “isn’t written in your law, I have said you are Gods, if god called to whom he gave his word, you can’t deny scripture, how can you say I Blaspheme? Because I said I am the son of God.” This isn’t peculiar to Jesus when he says; ‘I am the way, and no man comes to the father,’ but by me, this, I am, this me, is the divine in us. Which in Hebrew is called the Roich Adeni [possibly wring spelling]; this is best outlined in the Esoteric Jews, the Cabalist and the Hasidic. The Roich is the breath which God breathed into the nostril of Adam, which is different from the soul. The Roich (psyche) is the divine in the creature by virtue of which sons of are, or the nature of God, manifestations of the divine. This discovery is the Gospel; that’s the good news, but it has been repressed throughout history in western religion because all western religion has taken the form of celestial monarchies – and, therefore, discouraged democracy in the kingdom of heaven. (Alan Watts, n.d)

Until the teachings of the German mystics in the 15th century – a movement began, such as the Anabaptists, The Brothers of The Free Spirit, Levellers, and the Quakers. This spiritual movement came to this country and found a Republic. It is from the white racist Christians that we have the threat of fascism because they have a Militant religion. And this is not the religion of Jesus, which was the realization of divine son-ship, but the religion about Jesus, which pedestalized him and said only this man, is the divine, and you have better recognize it. Upon this realization, they proclaim themselves as the Church militant, onward Christian soldiers march us to war, utterly exclusive, convinced in advance that examining the doctrines of any other religion is the top religion. Not realizing what it teaches would be far more credible if it were truly Catholic, that is to say, re-stated the truth that has been known from time immemorial. Every religion should be self-critical. Otherwise, it will degenerate into self-righteous hypocrisy, and then we can see this that Jesus speaks not from the situation of a historical Deus Machina, of a weird and extraordinary event, but he is a voice that joins with other voices that have said in every place and time, “wake up man, wake up.” (Alan Watts, n.d)

To conclude: You only have to go to YouTube, and you will see the number of videos depicting the number of Christians still thinking this way; instead of Christian soldiers marching us to war, as Alan watts said, it’s Christian video propaganda spreading backwards ideals, for instance, the demonization of yoga, Zen, meditation practices, that’s just one of many other facets that they will drive to people.

.

• This Blog was really a reaction to bourgeoning New-Fundamentalist; comments on YouTube seem inefficient to get one’s point of view or analysis.

.

Rationality Breeds Atheism (03)

.

.

---

.

Part Three:  A Post-New-Atheism World and the Dangers of the New-Fundamentalist Christian [Originally posted on 19th December 2017]: The extreme religious right that stems from the Evangelical Southern Baptist Christian groups has the literal viewpoint of what Satan is and that he is responsible for everything wrong in the world. In Gnosticism, one speaks of the Demiurge (the architect of creation, a god, but not the True God), also known as the evil mind, aka Jehovah. Some have concluded that Satan can also represent the Demiurge. I can go along with both of these representations. However, not so much as to impose ‘Lucifer’ as ‘Satan’ because there is a clear distinction.

The person of Jesus alone revealed the truth of God; from their perspective, ancient cosmology brought forth its full context. The distinction between the creator and creation was made clear, and the futility of those first fallen angels was plain to see. Therefore, Satan had to reinvent the narrative and repackage himself and his message to convince the people of his worship as a supreme being. Satan for fundamentalists is ‘Lucifer’. Even though no historical text can prove this, there is a separation (but it’s for another subject). 

This narrative or this new perspective he would implement is not relatively new in history. The passing down of hidden knowledge would result in using our pride and arrogance to propel it further. The passing down of occult knowledge (although fundamentalist likes to use the word gnosis as well – In a clever way to re-imagine Gnosticism as something nefarious that aligns with the occult. Which is a non-gnosis or anti-gnosis interpretation from a fundamentalist hiding as an anti-gnostic-fundamentalist-Christian; true gnosis requires something else entirely). This forbidden knowledge was re-branded as science, and much of the groundwork was already in place from the philosophers of Greece. Eventually, it would become sanctified and harmonious with the teaching of the Bible; this harmony would go on towards renascence.           

Their influence started to carry weight amongst theologians and scholars throughout most of the predominant European Christian Countries. Primarily, works from Hermes Trismegistus were translated from Latin and circulated among the intellectuals. Kabala and Alchemy also got attention; the three doctrines formed the basis of the materialistic concept of what we know as ‘science.’ So, science’s origin story comes from pioneers greatly influenced by occult manuscripts as the core tenant of mysticism from the likes of Newton, Copernicus, Bruno, etc. However, in saying this, it’s still a reductionist view. It attempts to simplify those pioneers as mere re-packagers of ancient knowledge. What is missing is that they also brought something new, something of their own, to the material concept that doesn’t inherently tie in with their absolute cosmological viewpoint.    

Quantum physics, as we know it today, began with atomism, and atomism has a similar aspect of breaking things down to particle theory. Atomism soon became Quantum theory; this gave way to nuclear physics centred on central Europe. So, there must be a question about where the predominant physicists came from then. Niels Bore, Zillard, Albert Einstein, Oppenheimer Bros, and Edward Teller come from Central Eastern Europe. In this geographical area, the oral tradition of Kabala was most robust in Europe. Therefore, it’s safe to assume that there was an apparent attempt to make quantum physics fit with Kabala.    

Theoretical Physicist Michio Kaku states: “I’m a theoretical Physicist, and I like to say I walk in the footsteps of giants like Albert Einstein and Niels Bore. I’m not a philosopher; however, I’m rather dazzled by the fact that many of the basic mysteries we find in string theory and the theory of everything seemed to be mirrored in the Zohar and the Kabbala.” This awareness is not singular to Kaku but among the rest of the scientific Physicists community. They’re concerned about the New Age ceasing upon these discoveries as the confirmation of occult knowledge during the Renaissance – which would suggest that they were right about such a notion written in Kabala and other ancient forms of Hermeticism. 

Two aspects of the scientific community have two agendas that combine, like a fork in the road joining to one main road. One aspect of science is the propaganda aspect that employs non-scientists (or actors) as scientists (or Scientism agents) to set up many iconographic front-men as a direct answer (but this wasn’t always the case decades ago) to the ever-growing Flat Earth movement questions. They also align themselves with an Atheistic ideology to instil in the masses a hyperreal notion of space being absolute when it’s an illusion. What is absolute are particles that most physicists would agree upon, although most also believe in the hyperreal-space notion. The other aspect of this plan is the uncertainty part that correlates with the observer aspect (I say uncertainty because particles can’t be measured, but waves left by particles can). This led to a simulated theory aspect; there is still a discovery process. For the most part, a simulation, holographic or infinite parallel dimensions paradigm is almost certain at this point; too much evidence is piling up to say otherwise. Is there a plan for this part, common logic would suggest they would hide this, but they are letting everybody know – which suggests something else is at work. So, one aspect of science propagates with an atheistic viewpoint, and the other advocates a simulacrum, which leads to a creator (or an intelligent designer); how can both exist under the same banner as science? I guess one is a business model with a nihilism concept, and the other is a business model with varying degrees of truth.

The new-Atheist movement is declining much in the same way as Globalism; in the title of John Ralston Saul’s book The ‘Collapse of Globalism’ One little aspect of Ralston’s book through his synopsis States: “That ideologies come and go, God, Kings, Dictators and so forth – we went through a period of 30 to 40 years where for the first time in history economics has been promoted from 3 to 4 in the rank of importance to number one. It’s the most important thing, and everything is seen through economics – civilisations are being dragged or structured through the lens of economics. The loss of humanism and the citizen as a source of legitimacy has now taken a back seat to economics, becoming the new source for legitimacy.” Therefore, the hyperreal-space notion is declining in people’s worldviews. And that’s because economics forms legitimacy, but you won’t find NASA losing its grant money in the billions soon; if it did, it would affect the other science departments that play on simulation ideas. So, there is a morphing of mutual exclusivity between the sciences because they’re economically bound and funded.     

The anti-gnostic-conspiracy-Christian-fundamentalist would speculate what is at work – they have concluded that Quantum theory is just a repackaged occult worldview. This magical worldview has been made to look refined, polished and empirical but has been guided all along – That all stems from Babylonian mysticism. Atomism is an occult teaching birthed by demons intrinsic to Pantheism (Monotheism), which was re-booted by alchemy and hermeticism and gave way to the scientific revolution. At the core of occultism (or divination), the practitioners do not believe he is being fooled by demons, regardless of what method of practice they use, Tarot Cards, Wigi Boards, Sigils, and so forth. Speculating that it would result in a physical manifestation by spiritual beings, they could also manipulate particles themselves. Therefore, the demonic realm could manipulate those results, which are suggestive, meaning that double slit experiments had been manipulated – to further technology regarding Cern and other Colliders to perpetuate the coming of the literal anti-Christ ‘Satan.’        

‘You just have to shake your head and laugh’ not at the concept because I’m a conspiracy buff. But at the audacity to portray subjects that lean towards esoteric or occult knowledge. To something that can be summed up or simplified in the fundamentalist propaganda model – sprinkled with a veneer of the aethereal when they induce theological speculation. The kind of stuff they can come up with, it’s clear they love to reduce, simplify, slander, exclude their Christian history and re-interpret anything that can match their fundamentalist viewpoint. I’ve noticed that they become good at indexing occultism and esotericism, which is, ironically, a good starting point. Still, they do not give it or elaborate on what meaningful insights those teachings can bring. You have to look at those subjects deeply before making any conclusion. They suggest that science came from Kabala and Hermeticism, which is true, and those esoteric teachings started in the Babylonian Mystery Cults; however, so did Christianity. The Bible was birthed in the Babylonian Mystery Schools (or Cults). Science could be the result of the evolution of Kabala and Hermeticism because science is its machine. Much like how Christianity was formed that resulted in numerous denominations.                

You have to realize, much like the ‘D/Tao’that [Christianity is a way, even Jesus’s earliest followers were known as ‘the way’ even before “Christian” was coined (Acts 9:2, 11:26). A way implies direction, here the direction of the seeker as he or she moves toward God. Everything changes when one embarks upon “the way.” Having decided to move toward God, one finds that certain forces help while others oppose. Hence, Christianity tends to view the opposition in much the same fashion; the Hebrew word Satan, from which the devil’s proper name is derived, means “opponent.” The devil is the sum of the cosmic forces opposing the journey toward God – viewed as a conscious person. Individual thoughts and desires that oppose our way are known as ‘demons’ or ‘evil spirits’’ esoterically, these are the “enemies” mentioned by the Psalmists. While Christianity is not the first of the world religions to view evil in this light (that honour probably goes to Zoroastrianism), it is the one that has emphasised it the most. The struggle with the devil can be viewed as wrestling with everything that moves us away from God. – Richard Smoley, Jay Kinney   

It’s pretty straightforward that the anti-gnostic-conspiracy-Christian-fundamentalist is embarking on digital-evangelical-missionary work to show the way. Still, it’s not the true way because it employs a sort of militant intellectual point of view. Being digital, it has a habit of being amorphic and, therefore, changes it enough to convey its fundamentalist-intellectual-militancy. It’s not because Christianity is under attack or scrutiny. It’s because there is a troublesome aspect in embracing or calling oneself a Christian when you know that doing so results in all sorts of theological baggage,  particularly that of Christian assumptions and morality only reinforced by decades of politicised fundamentalism.   

The new-Atheist groups from Dawkins and Harris are starting to lose their hold on their not-so-demoralised followers now that something new has challenged them (the Flat Earth movement). It’s a given that Christians will always challenge them; it’s inevitable perpetual conflict, but that something new is not entirely new, but a rediscovery of absolute truth; absolute in the sense that what goes up must come down, or the ground in which we stand is transfixed or still. Was this new-Atheist movement a sort of resistance to the counter-reformation against irrationality seeping into the managerial class (the betas to the elite)? They came about because of them; it was cleverly collaborated and executed, using tactics like (puritan) shaming. 

Dawkins himself admitted in an interview with Ben Stein that nobody knows how the universe started and that we can only postulate that sort of event that might have been for the origin of life. It would have to be a self-replicating molecule when prompted with a question about the possibility of intelligent design. He stated, “In some early time somewhere in the universe, a civilisation evolved probably in some Darwinian means to a very high level of technology, and designed the form of life they seeded onto this planet. That is an intriguing possibility, and I suppose you can find evidence in the details of biochemistry/molecular biology that you might find a signature of some designer – and that designer could be a higher intelligence. That higher intelligence itself had to come about by an explicable process, and it couldn’t just jump into existence spontaneously, that’s the point.” Stein summarises that Dawkins is not against intelligent design, just certain types of designers like God. 

There is a subtle reverberation with Dawkins’s statement between people and not a positive one that they unknowingly listen to a type of science fiction (or a myth) disguised as probable theories. I recall William Shatner stating that science fiction and science are the same. For a gnostic, this can ring true. And this is what Dawkins has done more subtly. There is a hint of Ancient Astronaut Theology of a literal Alien God, and not the one described in Gnosticism, for the True God, is often described as an Alien God, but something more literal, more Archon-like. [The Gnostic creation myths portrayed the creator of this world as an imperfect lesser god, known as the Demiurge or Yaltabaoth, who was the accidental result of an attempt by Sophia (Wisdom) – a feminine facet of the true God – to experience the act of creation of her own. According to some versions of the myth, Yaltabaoth, in turn, created still lesser planetary rulers called Archons, and the world itself, including Man. – Richard Smoley, Jay Kinney]

The only difference is that Gnostics believe in a True God, and Dawkins does not; he cleverly adopted ancient alien theology for his own God Delusion propaganda. It’s because it can match a hyperreal-space notion. Furthermore, he adopted Erich Von Daniken’s concept of ‘Cargo Cults’ for his book ‘The God Delusion of how advanced technology exposure can affect tribal cultures and hints that Christianity began the same way as the cargo cults. He states, “The entire history of some of these cults, from initiation to expiry, is wrapped up within living memory. Unlike the cult of Jesus, whose origins are not reliably attested, we can see the whole course of events before our eyes (and even here, as we shall see, some details are now lost). It is fascinating to guess that the cult of Christianity almost certainly began in the same way and spread at the same high speed.”

He would describe how those cultures would have felt; he says, “It seems that in every case, the islanders were bowled over by the wondrous possessions of the white immigrants to their islands, including administrators, soldiers and missionaries. They were perhaps the victims of (Arthur C.) Clarke’s Third Law, which I quoted in Chapter 2: ‘Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.'” What exactly is he trying to infer? – That Jesus was an Alien and that followers of Jesus became cults because he seemed magically/technologically superior. Or was he trying to infer by those two quotes that the god-man Jesus “began the same way” as the cargo cults, softened by liking it to a famous ancient astronaut narrative by Arthur C. Clarke? And this is akin to a kind of heresy; the fundamentalist Christians will surely think so, but also mainstream Christians. 

Atheism could be the effect of a dominant church history spanning two millennia; what if that history wasn’t so rigid or didn’t happen? You will find that spiritual experience is the driving force that propelled many of the earliest believers. And among the followers of this new religion, there were many approaches. One of those approaches came from the Gnostics, and the same sense of alienation among modern followers of the spirit came with it. This is where the distinction arises – to dispel or question the notion of a cargo-cult theology that is inherently material with a pinch of sci-fi. This is because both the cargo-Cult and a Panspermia theory require a container that is space, which does not exist but only exists as a hyperreal-space notion. A theory of dimensional barriers beyond the firmament is a theory that has more merit than a space notion. A localised universe doesn’t necessarily negate the existence of what we know to be Aliens or Archons that were manifested by the Demiurge – who could have had a hand in our evolution as Human Beings.   

.

Rationality Breeds Atheism (02):

.

.

---

.

Part two: Atheism, a Collective Push to Detach You from Yourself. [Originally posted on 30th September 2015]: Atheism is a collective push to detach you from yourself, your universe, and your notion of God. On occasion, intellectuals have made a strong denouncement of God. In their interviews, the word God comes up as a misrepresentation of what God may be. Atheists who bind themselves with science are portrayed as a group of intelligent people. However, they cannot differentiate between the mystery of the universe, actual events and dogmas. They become dogmatic in themselves and, at the same time, convince the people who follow them to be dogmatic as well.

For some, God could be the unknowable ‘D/Tao’, a word deriving from the ‘Tao Te Ching,’ meaning “the way.” It’s challenging to assume that this group is part of the plan to collectively promote this way of thinking (the nihilist or material way of thinking) or if it is just a bunch of individuals, through no fault of their own, collectively believing that there is no god.

Lord Martin Rees says: “Science of any kind that teaches us is that even the simplest things are hard to understand, the Hydrogen Atom for instance, and that makes me rather suspicious of anyone who claims to have a quick and easy answer, to any deep aspect of reality, I think the most we can hope for is an incomplete and metaphorical understanding, and therefore I’m not myself someone who can accept any specific religious dogmas.” In the simplest term, he says we have no complete understanding of science and therefore any understanding of the Universe, and god must also be incomplete, he says “quick and easy answer, to any deep aspect of reality.”  

Anyone who’s had an enlightenment experience will tell you, “Oh! That’s all it is, how I can be so blind. It’s been with me all this time; it’s easy and simple.” Being enlightened is not for the chosen; it’s merely arbitrary. Allan Watts describes it as catching a cold, it comes, then it goes – and it feels like a universal harmonizing feeling, but it’s a cold you don’t want to lose. Some people seek holistic drugs, Zen, and yoga meditation, but for others, it comes out of the blue. Lord Martin Rees has indirectly told the truth by saying the best we can hope for is an incomplete and metaphorical understanding, so by being aware of experience, the truth is complete. The symbolic interpretation is perhaps better understood through referencing rational calculation and the meta-physics with body and spirit. 

Refrain from being swayed by technical jargon and vocabulary; they can often serve as a means of trickery, a sleight of hand. Many conventional thinkers dismiss metaphysics as pseudoscience, even when undeniable evidence supports it within the framework of traditional science. These thinkers manipulate the truth and context by changing definitions and suggestions. I’m not advocating for pseudo-mysticism; I’m simply reporting what already exists in discourse. However, it’s worth noting that atheists often aim to demystify the supernatural. Even their concept of the Big Bang theory is inherently supernatural—after all, the idea of something coming from nothing is, by definition, magical.

Sam Harris discusses  neuroscience, says: “Everything about your mind can be damaged; by damaging the brain, you can cease to recognise faces, cease to know the name of animals, but still name tools, the fragmentation in which our mind is parcellated, the level of the brain, is not at all intuitive, and there is a lot to know about it, what we’re being asked to consider is that if you damage one part of the brain, subjectivity is lost, damage another more is lost, and yet you damage the whole thing at death, we can rise of the brain with our faculties intact recognizing grandma and speaking English.” For an intellect, it is a relatively simplistic way of grasping the brain’s functions and how the spirit functions.

Sam Harris is examining the brain as if it were a biomechanical computer. Most computers connect to the internet through the Net or the Web. Before they can connect, you must set up the Wi-Fi or connect to a device that enables connectivity. Similarly, the brain has the pineal gland responsible for dreams. This gland produces D.M.T., a substance that can be thought of as a form of “bio Wi-Fi” that connects us to a deeper source of understanding. Some may refer to this source as the unknowable Tao, a concept transcending our comprehension. If a computer is missing components, it cannot connect to the internet. In the same way, if a part of the brain is damaged, it may seek alternative pathways to reach that source of understanding. However, this process can result in losing other functions, such as memory or motor skills. Fortunately, the brain is designed so well that the pineal gland is positioned right in the centre, protected by layers of the grey matter surrounding it.

We know we can measure thoughts by measuring the wavelengths and frequency, yet nothing in the brain holds them (thoughts). Can you create your thoughts in the external world from your mind? And this could explain intuition, so you can still get your message across with a combination of emotions and thoughts. Have you wondered how animals communicate, all based on psychic connectivity? Harris says, “It’s not all intuitive,” it’s intuitive and more. Harris later proclaims that we rise from the brain – this is an attempt to demystify the supernatural. Metaphysics is a study beyond physics; this is basic 101; consciousness is separate from the brain and the body. Harris’s logic is outdated and backward.

Some great books outline the subject of meta-science to unravel an understanding of this topic. (Lee Blaydon), “The Science of Spirituality,” Dalai Lama, “A Universe in a Single Atom,” Dr Moss Amos, “The Basic Code of the Universe”, and Dr Charles T. Tart, “The End of Materialism.”

Richard Feynman, on religious stories, with his glib vocabulary, states: “I can’t believe the special stories that have been made up, they seem too simple, too connected, and too local too provisional, the Earth, they came to the Earth! One of the aspects of God came to Earth! Mind you! And look what’s out there; how can it be in proportion.” Juliana Hatfield, an alternative rock singer, described it well, “Simplicity is Beautiful,” I’m astonished at how he couldn’t say the word Jesus Christ. It’s a typical anti-Christ mindset, a damaging one at that.

The Flower of Life is a symbol that can only be described as simplicity combined with complexity. The understanding of this symbol is more predominant in the minds of the collective, as shown by the example of an embryo splitting into two and then four. Everything in creation comes from this sacred geometric symbol. Yet, no institution, country or culture owns this symbol. I can only emphasize this in small synopsis because the subject is complex. The formation of this symbol can be described as consciousness or Spirit floating in a Void. It then expands its consciousness, resulting in the first circle, and the circle divides and moves to the edge; this creates the Vesica Piscis. Within the Piscis is knowledge of width, length, depth, proportion, square roots of two, three, five, and light information.

It will move five times further, creating the seed of life, or some call it the ‘Genesis pattern.’ Each day of the book of Genesis can equate to each circle of the seed of life. On the second day, the circle moved, thus creating light; the first sentence of Genesis states, “And the Earth was without form, and Void – and darkness was upon the face of the deep, and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters. God said, ‘Let there be light,’ and there was light.” The key here is in the order: God moved, and then came light. After three spheres, you get the Holy Trinity. Half of the creation was completed on the fourth day of creation, and more information was given on the fifth day. On the sixth day, a geometric miracle appeared, and the circle completed a six-pedal flower; therefore, what we know as the Bible’s creation story was accomplished in six days. (Jordan Duchnycz, n.d)

When you continue with more circles, you get the Egg of Life. By connecting those centres, you will see a cube; this is also the morph-genic structure that created your body. Each cell around the egg has Zona Pellucida. If you eliminate that and add more circles, you get the fruit of life with a thirteen-pattern circle. You get Metatron’s Cube by combining male lines to the circles and adding straight lines to every circle. All five platonic solids can be found in Metatron’s Cube. And this is where alchemy and the zero-point energy come from. Everything about the elements of reality is tied together from Plutonic solids that come from Metatron’s cube, which is formed out of the Fruit of Life, which comes from the Flower of Life that Spirit makes. (Jordan Duchnycz, n.d)

Richard Feynman says, “It’s too simple, too connected,” well … ‘yes’ and ‘no,’ and as I mentioned, complexity mixed in with simplicity, his right about being connected and the Tao (God) is a poet. He later says, “Aspect of God came to Earth,” meaning Christ. But, this is hard for some to formulate because it exercises miracles; well, a Buddhist has no problems with miracles, and the practice of Psyche (Magic) was around before Christ. So, by describing the miracle of birth coinciding with the flower of Life, ‘do you see we are the product of miracles and that we are part of the Tao (God)? The only difference with Christ is that he was free from the Adamic X chromosome; this dives into Theology and History for another thesis.

Sam Harris again states: “Let’s say a three-day embryo has a Soul worthy of our moral concern; problems await this description. Embryos can split; we call them identical twins. Is this a case of one splitting into two Souls? Embryos can fuse and become a Chimera. Where is the other Human Soul? It’s time we realize that this arithmetic of souls doesn’t make any sense.” Well, with the flower of life I described, it’s doubling. Embryos splitting means two sets of Flowers of Life, each with its consciousness, made even more special with an inherent psyche connection. As adults, twins can feel their sibling’s emotions, even living in different cities. It only further supports a psyche connection and consciousness. Harris’s strategy to claim that only singular souls per one Embryo can manifest and, therefore, is a speculation of the absoulte; when the egg splits into two, it creates two possibilities, generating its flower of life by which each gets its light and life. 

VS Ramachandran on Split-Brain Patient claims in his lecture: “so, now here’s the big question; do you believe in God? So, the right hemisphere of the brain says yes, and then the same question to the left hemisphere, they answer no. So, here is a human being, with right brain saying yes, left saying no. So, if these people die, does one right hemisphere go to heaven, left hemisphere go to hell.” In the middle of that statement he also says that this finding should have sent Tsunami to the theology community, but it barely made a ripple. It didn’t raise a ripple because it’s not that profound. Instead, their reaction is like an equilibrium water state, and here’s why?

In his lecture on split-brain patients, VS Ramachandran claims: “So, now here’s the big question: do you believe in God? So, the right hemisphere of the brain says yes, and then the same question goes to the left hemisphere, which answers no. So, here is a human being, with the right brain saying yes and the left saying no. So, if these people die, does one right hemisphere go to heaven and the left hemisphere go to hell.” In the middle of that statement, he also says that this finding should have sent Tsunami to the theological community, but it barely made a ripple. It didn’t raise a ripple because it’s not that profound. Instead, their reaction is like an equilibrium water state, and here’s why.

Leonard Susskind says: “I don’t believe intelligence designed the universe; I believe the same way a human being was designed, through random mutation, a bunch of carbon oxygen and other stuff, for that mutation to work on. Upon this basic randomness, statistics and the law of physics that led to this design, the same is true of the universe.” he is talking about evolution through Darwinism.

Dr Stephen Meyer’s book, “Darwin Doubt,” is about the Cambrian explosion and the sudden geological appearance of most major groups of animals in a geological period – called the Cambrian, 530 million years ago. Darwin himself addressed this in his book. Meyer underlines two mysteries surrounding the doubt. Darwin believed life should unfold slowly and gradually. He described life as a branching tree, and at the base of the tree, it represented a one-cell organism, and all the terminal branches represented all the life we see today. The connecting branches represented intermediate forms that rose through time. He also thought this process should slowly unfold because his mechanism for natural selection acting on random variations also had to act gradually. Hence, fossil records came to be. The first significant group of animals came on the scene – fully formed abruptly through the sedimentary layer. (Stephen Meyer, n.d)

Darwin hoped future Palaeontologists could find that missing sequence. However, Meyer describes current Palaeontologist findings as only intensifying the mystery instead of alleviating the problem. Meyer underlines two mysteries concerning the doubt: the mystery of missing fossils and an engineering problem: what is the information generating life? If you want to build a life through non-living chemicals, you need information in the form of D.N.A. – to construct the proteins to make cells viable, but if you want to create a new life from the pre-existing form, you need reams of digital code. This requires everything to be new, and all of those require information. Natural selection and random mutation are inept mechanisms for generating new information; random information degrades, and mutated cells degrade. Finding new genes or proteins for the time allowed in the evolutionary process is mathematically improbable. (Stephen Meyer, n.d)

Meyer describes the intelligent design as the idea of certain features of the biological system that are best explained by an intelligent cause rather than an undirected process, such as natural selection acting on random mutation. (Stephen Meyer, n.d)

Leonard Susskind’s remarks are just opinion-based; they are not facts. Although, by his logic, he should have wavering feelings because of ‘Darwin’s Doubt,’ he believes in a myth formulated by Darwin’s incomplete scientific truth.

Stephen Fry on the natural world says: “The wonder of nature must be taken in its totality, it is a wonderful thing, it’s marvellous, and the ideas of an Atheist or Humanist don’t marvel and wonder at reality, is nonsensical. We wonder all the way; we don’t just stop and say what we don’t understand, I will call God. And this is what humanity has done historically. God was everything 1000 years ago because we understood almost nothing about the natural world, so it could all be God. God receded and receded as we understood more, so suddenly now, he is barely anywhere.”

Stephen Fry is saying that an Atheist or Humanist “goes all the way” in trying to understand how the world works and how things are and disregarding their ability to marvel at nature is nonsensical. And this is untrue because what atheists don’t understand becomes the thing they believe through hypothetical assumptions of what scientists theorize. Which gets blurred into fact and so becomes a stopping point rather than going all the way. Then he assumes we know as much as we did in understanding what we know 1000 to 2000 years ago, and by that, believing in God is people’s default thinking. The truth is never that simple; human history goes as far back as 100,000 years (maybe even millions). We knew a lot more back then than we know now. We were far more intelligent back then (research hidden history, Atlantis and the Mystery Religion). Through Greek history and the Middle Ages and Renaissance, we were at the lowest part of our history in terms of knowledge (with the exclusion of Pythagorean schools and philosophers). We are now waking up to the realization and understanding of our beginnings. Our worldview is now changing from an old Newtonian paradigm to a quantum crystallized spiritual viewpoint, and soon, disbelieving God will recede. This reductionist point of view will also cease to exist in the future.

Garrett Lisi, a particle physicist, describes a discovery in the scientific field (it’s less of a discovery but a rediscovery of what has been written before in esoteric texts) that explains that having automatic free will is a given. Still, we’re also part of a whole. Quantum mechanics suggests a continual branching out of possibilities. As humans, we experience time individually as one possibility. It comes down to the consensus of geometry and its interaction between elementary particles that can be enhanced when everything is in balance. He demonstrates how particles that create point particles work when they plot them out and shows how they move; the result is a string of sacred geometric symbols.             

I’ll conclude with the first verse of the ‘Tao Ti Ching.’ “The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao. The name that can be named is the eternal name. The Tau is both named and nameless. As nameless, it is the origin of all things; as named, it is the Mother of 10,000 things. Ever desire-less, one can see the mystery; ever desiring, one sees only the manifestations. And the mystery itself is the doorway to all understanding.” – Lao Tza.

.

Reference:

_______________________

Meyer.S n.d., Darwin’s Doubt The explosive origin of animal Life and the Case for intelligent design, Website Interview, viewed 30 Spetember. 2015,http://darwinsdoubt.com

Duchnycz.J n.d., Thoughts, Male & Female, YouTube Video Thesis, viewed 30 September

Lao Tza., Tao Teh Ching, First verse of the Tao the Ching, viewed 30 September 2015,

Rationality Breeds Atheism (01):

.

---

.

Part One: An Examination of Steven Hawking [Originally posted on 27th September 2015]: Most knowledgeable individuals are rationalists, and we hold them in high regard. In contrast, physicists, scientists, and philosophers often communicate in ways that sound intelligent. They can formulate complex mathematics and theories that seem very convincing.

We value what they are saying, and we see them as our leaders, but at the same time, you will find that most of these rationalist thinkers invoke a type of Atheism. However, not all of them are like that. Some know the truth through their experiences and dramatically change their viewpoint. This reversal of ideology gives them more merit; thinkers who changed their point of view are worth listening to even more than their opposite counterparts. Whether they’re aware of it, their counterparts are pushing for another plan that has been around for centuries.

Hawking is part of a group that redefined what we know to be Matter as something entirely different; before this, the assumption was materialistic in its explanation; this line of thinking then morphs into something more elucidated. Soon reinterpretation of points of Matter spread through time, and the notion of location began to give way to probabilities. The new view of Matter had a mentalist state of interpretation; it was no longer about transfixed calculations and variable energies and more about the possibility. And this started one of the first waves of groups to describe Matter as something that can tie in with spirit; this new paradigm shift is a u-turn from the intellectual universe that would halter such thinking. With this recent emergence, it would Link Matter with emotions.    

 We go about our days not realizing we move in the realm of spirit; this unintentional awareness is due to years of conditioning, the slow persuasion of an intelligent system, which gives no credence to spirit. Therefore, any validation we give ourselves is derided when it’s the effect of that conditioning. Hawking would take the new interpretation of probabilities to his own and apply it to astrophysics (non-science), resulting in a mixed bag of fiction and non-fiction equations.    

Most Physicists are still approaching their viewpoint in the Newtonian era of thinking (the mechanistic, linear way of thinking). It collects high-level math but dismisses what it means. They will push aside any notion of consciousness, free will, and the connection of all things. If they did, they would have to question or at least add to their calculation God, and that’s unacceptable to them.    

But with any worldview, much like ideologies, it can change – a developmental issue can start to occur; throughout history, we can determine this, but history itself is not subject to change except when it becomes a myth. Science has always been about evolving to change within paradigms. Thomas Coon, a sociologist, suggests that science develops through revolutions; an example is by examining the followers of Aristotle (Aristotelianism) that within their environment made good sense. The idea is that Matter is intrinsic to earth, with fire and water. And how objects move, that those objects moved in perfect circles and that God had made the universe in a particular way. All these things made rational sense with our understanding of the universe at the time. But with any world view, seeds of change are often planted, with Newton coming along and changing the normal perception that soon began the Newtonian perspective.      

And this allowed people to have a more comprehensive understanding of the universe and how this can occur by being aware of things that cannot be explained. For example, in the Aristotelian worldview, the problem that arose was the retrograde motion of the planets, whereby the Earth was at the centre of the solar system. All the planets and the sun revolved around the Earth in perfect circles; you would be able to calculate how they move across the sky throughout the year, but certain planets went backwards in a retrograde motion. And this made no sense within the world view, so the Aristotelian scientist came up with a notion called epicycle; these were complex mathematical structures to keep alive the paradigm that matches their false truth about how the universe worked.   

Copernicus came along with other individuals and suggested that changing our worldview and recognizing that Earth revolved around the Sun and Mercury and Venus were closer to the Sun could immediately explain retrograde motion. Then Newton came along and explained Gravity; however, our understanding of Gravity is different from what Newton was trying to convey. All this resulted in a new/current world view; two in half centuries later would bring about the Quantum revolution made famous by Max Plank.

There is still this undeniable fact that within any worldview come this underlying problem of how the Universe functions in totality. In doing so, the scientific community must get over one huge problem. This problem was suggested in 1994 by (David Chalmers) a young Australian Physicist and Philosopher; he indicated that there is no explanation of how inanimate Matter and Atoms and Electricity within the brain can create consciousness because consciousness is a different thing from physical processes.

So, this is the current modernity; this is where science and spirituality are slowly becoming related, where once believing in spirituality or God became boxed into categories, and in this case, the superstitious box, this separation held us back for more than half a century.

Unlike Hawking, Newton was a wiser man than he was (I say ‘was’ as past tense because I believe the real Hawking died, and what we have instead is a puppet and ‘anti-Hawking’). Newton came up with the notion of Gravity upon sitting underneath an apple tree, and the apple has had fallen on his head gave him a moment of clarity for Gravity to emerge (there is meaningful symbolism in this story). Unfortunately, Gravity seems to be a loaded argument among Flat Earthers. And they claim it doesn’t exist in a sense that applies to the hyperreal-space notion. Suggesting a redefinition of Gravity and only applying it to density and dimensions gives it more credibility. And this is similar to what Hawking has done; he appropriated and applied hyperreal-space notions to probabilities, applying an illusion to probabilities that would result in nothing when you know the illusion no longer exists. 

Newton was a wiser man because he spent his remaining years decoding the universe, his surroundings, and the goings on that surrounded him. He viewed himself as a prophet of God. He wrote under numerous pseudonyms that coincided with his decoding method of deciphering anagrams. Mathematician John Nash would report similar findings though his process may be different.    

On being an Atheist or Agnostic: An Agnostic is just an Atheist free from blame, who would view the universe or the world as an automatic machine without a creator. In contrast, you can describe that being an agnostic is not having any certainty of ideological belief systems, which seems to give credibility. That’s because the heart of agnosticism is about opening up the interior space in which to “know” (to be gnostic), one must be ruthlessly honest with oneself about what one doesn’t know. I don’t believe in this notion that you have to be agnostic to be gnostic. Only because a person I’ve known for about 30 years described himself as an agnostic but would call me an ‘idiot’ for not believing in the moon landings, there is no openness to the truth when you’re simultaneously demoralized. Agnostics’ central assertion is that God or divine reality is unknowable, a reduction and seemingly untrue. It would seem they want to believe and to be shown the truth but aren’t inherently open to it, but on their surface, they are. And this is the state of mind in which the Scientism groups are.   

Steven Hawking says, “M theory doesn’t disprove god, but it makes him unnecessary it predicts that the universe will be spontaneously created by nothing, without the need for a creator.” There are a few things with this quote that raises questions. First, let’s put an underline under the word theory meaning it’s incomplete, and science is about seeking truth in its purest form. But because they can make mathematical equations about this subject, we pass it off as truth. Second, how can something come into being without creation? There has to be something to be nothing; in other words, if nothing is all, then it’s oblivion, but because the theory is the ‘big bang,’ there had to be something for nothing to be created. So in actuality, it makes God very necessary.

Mike Adams from divinitynews.com outlines Steven Hawkins’s views – on page one of Hawkins’s book, the Grand Design, it has a quote in which he says: “philosophy is dead; philosophy has not kept up with modern developments in science, particularly physics.” This arrogant statement infers that philosophy’s success can only be measured by the degree to which it keeps up with physics. Only physics alone can best understand everything; the grand design will come apparent if we can work out the math. Studying sub-atomic particles is the way to understand the mystery of being, those tiny moments and fractions that unfurl moments before the big bang. To kill philosophy is to kill of questions only philosophy can answer, questions like; what is consciousness? Is there a God? What happens after death? How do we know what we know? What does it mean to exist? Can love be measured? How does consciousness interact with matter and energy? And why are we here? (Mike Adams, n.d)

The God particle isn’t a particle: particle physicists who study particles don’t study particles because everybody knows when observing such things, it moves away. So instead, they study probability waves left behind from the particles. What they have discovered during these studies is the notion of consciousness, that consciousness collapses waves of probability into seemingly real particles – into our seemingly real world. Without consciousness and the observer, there is nothing to translate the apparent laws of physics to observable and testable events in the first place. Physics cannot be fully explained without taking consciousness into consideration. (Mike Adams, n.d)

Some of Hawking’s main contentions in his book emphasize that “we are all robots” (this is funny considering the high probability that he is a puppet agent who functions like a robot). Hawking does not believe in consciousness or free will. He firmly believes we are just deterministic machines that behave like biological puppets, driven by predictable mechanistic bio-mechanical impulses. He states: “though we feel that we can choose what we do, our understanding of the molecular basis of biological processes are governed by the laws of physics and chemistry and therefore are as determined as the orbits of the planets.” “Recent experiments in neuroscience support the view that our physical brain following the known laws of science determines our actions and not some agency that exists outside those laws.” 

Francis Crick, the co-discoverer of D.N.A, conveys that awareness is no more than a feeling generated in the brain. He says, “You, your joys and sorrows, your memories and your ambitions, your sense of personal identity and free will, are in fact no more than the behaviour of a vast assembly of nerve cells and their associated molecules.” In his book, ‘The Astonishing Hypothesis,’ both these authors firmly believe that we are just mindless robots with no souls. One can only ask, who then wrote their books, was the ‘Grand Design’ merely a spontaneous regurgitation of neurological ricochets cascading through his head without any intention behind them. Within this logic, his book is a mindless account of physics. (Mike Adams, n.d)

Hawking would also convey that recent research on the human brain can be determined by certain parts of the brain when electrically stimulated, it would make certain body parts move, and it could even make the lips move and talk. So, with this evidence, he would suggest that we have no free will. And this is a reductionist notion to convey; you can tie a string in my hand and move it like a puppet. It doesn’t mean I can’t choose to move it on my own with conscience intentions, translated through the body and to the brain. Hawking only proves that by artificially inducing electrical stimuli in the brain, there is a biological component to our existence, not that the biological component is in its entirety. (Mike Adams, n.d)

Hawking’s deterministic and reductionist views are dangerous, especially describing humanity as mindless robots. Determinism’s definition is the state of affairs, including every human decision and action; it is the inevitable and necessary consequence of the antecedent state of affairs. So, by definition, it can absolve anyone from any responsibility they choose to act on, even criminal acts, because they were just working through bio-mechanical impulses through no fault of their own. And so this idea is stretched so far as to be used to foreshadow any ethics. And then it can be a seed to commit outrageous crimes such as genocide or some de-population agendas, all in the name of a baseless scientific concept, this concept of a mindless, soulless, bio-mechanical machine. Steven Hawkins states, “Ethics hasn’t kept up with physics,” but at a closer inspection, it is physics that hasn’t kept up with ethics. (Mike Adams, n.d)

There are waves of these rational thinkers that think similarly in this way, invoking that a belief in God is irrational. People like Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hicks, Lord Martin Rees, Sam Harris, Richard Feynman, Noam Chomsky, Stephen Fry, Leonard Susskind, Bertrand Russell, Richard Carrier, Sir David Attenborough, Neil Degrasse and VS Ramachandran. I can’t go into detail for all of these people because the main contention for this thesis is Hawkins; that’s not to say they are free from analysis or examination of their teachings and preaching; that’s for another article down the line.

When asked any prudent theistic question, they all have a predictable, calculated explanation of their doctrines; they use a sense of magic in their vocabulary to trick or, more precisely, deflate the question. A perfect example of this is Christopher Hicks, you listen to any of his lectures, and it’s like listening to the character, the “Architect” from the Matrix. They do this because the question itself is far more profound than any high calculation or vocabulary; the question asks you to look within, like, “Who are you”?

These are knowledgeable people, well-read and eloquent in their field, does not mean we should take their word for truth. Much of what they say is true but tends to miss out on many literary facts, predominately religious history and spiritual and philosophical myths. They disdain the mysterious dogma so much that their science mutates towards scientism, which in turn becomes their dogma. They will always mention the religious atrocities that have happened in the past while leaving out important information regarding that the early mystery Christian-religion institutions were the subject of infiltration from highly funded secret groups, insidious would then push their agenda. Not all sacred institutions are free from this malicious group; the Muslim countries are the last institutions holding up a fight.

One must wonder if the Atheist groups are pushing for this Globalized/NWO agenda. Recent evidence promotes this to be the case. You’d only have to look at their chosen logo for this nihilistic group, its two lines from the pentagram symbol; incidentally, a symbol that warns of bad spirits.

It could be said that such high intelligence makes you think too much and by that you lose touch of what is real. Ultimately a belief in God is so simple to understand and easy to reach if one is initiated, Christ says “God is within,” the truth is, if you seek truth you’re simultaneously seeking God. It comes easy to people who are spiritually awaken. In order to be awakened you have to be open, but not in the way that views an inverted look at agnosticism, but to be open in a more spiritual gnostic sense, hence “god is within.”

Peter Russell worked with Steve Hawking when Hawking’s condition started to manifest physically. He is a mathematician and is an excellent example of a rational, pragmatic scientist taking a u-turn from conventional science and delving into meta-physic science. He combines the study of spirituality with science, which results in some comparative and interesting viewpoints. He travelled to the east and learnt the myth of Indian theology. His books “Waking Up in Time” and “From Science to God” can better illustrate subjects like free will, determinism, and consciousness. His approach to meditation, spirituality and questioning existence is relevant.

Many people think Hawking’s life is a charade when he is a puppet and that early in his career, he found something that could change the perspectives of how we view the world. Maybe so poignant that those views of conventional physics could change the mindset of the rationale community, but before he could deploy the changing paradigm, he was stopped. The voice you hear is not his own; the context from that backward technological voice box is not his own. The notion delves into the conspiracy realm; nevertheless, some conspiracy turns out to be true.

And this is just speculation on Hawking’s story, and would also perpetuate a false dichotomy about a hyperreal space, never the less. Before, the guys in black suits came for him. Could it be that what he found was, in fact – from the words of Jed McKenna; “That the universe isn’t expanding forward, but expanding backwards, all the seemingly infinite particles and fragments coming together following an incalculable precise trajectory back to wholeness. Fitting themselves together with miraculous an un-airing accuracy, and by observing the perfection of any part, we know the perfection of the whole. The universe isn’t flying apart, but flying together.” (Jed McKenna, n.d).

.

Michael Keefe.

.

_______________________

Reference:

Adams.M n.d., The God Within, YouTube Video Thesis, DivinityNow.com viewed 27 September

McKenna. J n.d., Spiritually Incorrect Enlightenment, All will arrive, YouTube Video Thesis, viewed 27 September