Archive for the faith Category

Making Holy Myths

Posted in belief, Bible, Christianity, faith, Mother Nature, Pagan gods, religion, sacred texts, scriptures on February 27, 2017 by chouck017894

Of all the Creation myths of ancient peoples, the opening of the book of Genesis stands in a class by itself.  Unlike all cultures Before (our) Common Era the priests of Yahweh in the 9th/8th century BCE Jerusalem  were busily indulging themselves in setting up the self-serving premise of divine discrimination.   The Creator they presented in Genesis who walked in his garden and talked to himself is thus depicted as either not omniscient (all-knowing) or as an unfeeling schemer.  For example, where is the wisdom of placing two tempting fruit trees as the focal point of this garden landscape and then forbidding two uncomprehending newly created creatures the freedom to eat of them?  It is weak story-plotting.  But it didn’t much matter to the priest authors, for the underlying purpose of the story was to channel the Hebrew people away from belief in numerous gods and goddesses to gradually (and with much difficulty) indoctrinate them with the premise of one human-like being (male of course) who created limited identities without the necessity of energy intercourse.

In more ancient time frames the civilizations such as Sumer, Babylonia, Assyria, etc.recognized and respected the interactions and inestimable universal energies and it was these unseen but interrelated and interacting primal creative forces which the ancient cultures personified as a pantiscracy of “gods”.  This was allegorized as a Utopian society in which all were equal and each had governing power.  It is an insight which is also the heartbeat of democracy.  The creative energies which interact throughout nature and all through the observable universe do often appear in opposition, hence the “gods” which personified those energy actions were often depicted in Pagan cultures as in competition or in a state of lust.  There was never any doubt among these Pagan cultures, however, that such  creative energies originated out of a  singular Source..

The Yahweh priest-authors in the 9th/8th century BCE slyly contrived the claim that the amoral all-embracing source-power of Creation had singled out only one group of people in the world  (them of course) as the sole recipients of his blessings.  To accomplish this pretext of divine discrimination and purported prejudice the wily priest editors referred  to those same primal and diverse energies which were responsible for all manifested life as having been their historical ancestors by dubbing those primal creative energies as Isaelites–the alleged descendants of Jacob/Israel.  The various gods and goddesses that were recognized by the surrounding cultures and which symbolized for them the same diverse creative primal energies, were then ridiculed as being too lacking and had not been chosen by the power that the priests named Yahweh.  But this assault on Pagan wisdom necessitated finding a means to explain the diverse energy attributes that had been represented and personified with Pagan gods and goddesses.

The priest-editors who mined and reworked ancient teachings given with constellation figures, old oral Hebrew myths and Cabal texts certainly knew that the Pagan gods represented forces of creative energy.  They knew as well that those energies, although unseen for the most part, interact throughout the universe and have an effect on all life. The clever scheme of the Yahweh priest authors of demoting the the numerous Pagan gods and goddesses was to simply give those primal forces a different designation. Consequently those diverse creative forces were reassigned from godly status by Yahweh’s priests and were hailed as angels in the service of Yahweh.  For all extent and purpose, the attributes and special duties of the spurned Pagan gods were simply transferred to angels and were envisioned as acting under the direction of a divinely indifferent power-source which they personified as Yahweh.

Other Pagan recognition of primal energies were similarly disguised.  In the earliest part of the priest-authored book of Genesis (3:20) the character of Eve is referred to as “Mother of all living,” which suggests the rank of a near-sacred being.  This title that Adam allegedly bestowed upon Eve happens to be identical to what the ancient Sumerians had bestowed upon their love goddess Aruru, for she was regarded in their culture as the creatrix of all life.  And strangely also, the authors of Genesis never mentioned an account of Eve’s death, and the reason for that is no death occurred–we know her today as Mother Nature.

Eve’s implied eminence in Genesis, even after the alleged fruit picking mistake, reflects the Pagan perception that creation of all life can take place only through a process of polar energy interactions.  This is why various neighboring cultures which the priests of Yahweh envied–such as Sumerian, Babylonian, Phenician, Hittie, Ugaritic, etc.–gave homage to goddesses as being equal in divine power as the gods.  But Eve, according to the Yahweh priest authors, was also demoted and allegedly designed by Yahweh to simply serve as Adam’s helpmeet (Gen 2:18-20).   This was a deliberate capsizing of Pagan’s correct understanding that creation of any manifestation occurred only from exchange of opposite but equal polar energies.  The premise presented by the priests of Yahweh, however, was that Yahweh-Jehovah simply muttered things into material existence, and that story feature had no parallel in any other Mediterranean or Near Eastern myths.   The advantage of this story flight of fancy  was that it placed man (especially the political minded priests) in the authoritarian position.  Unfortunately, by demoting the feminine (negative) polar aspect which is equally necessary for life production, the Genesis myth of Creation essentially rejects the scientific polarizing energy principle by which energy manifests as matter.  And western religious understanding has been plagued with confusion, controversy and misunderstanding ever since.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advertisements

Paradox of Modern Man

Posted in Atheist, belief, enlightenment, faith, life, religion, scriptures, thoughts on November 17, 2016 by chouck017894

Modern man with all his brilliant technological accomplishments inexplicably remains chained to myths and superstitions that still lie hidden beneath what are averred to be holy/spiritual truths.  The sciences that have revolutionized our species’ life patterns have done so despite the fact that the origin of life is even now not totally understood.  We praise ourselves as having entered into the space age and think we are meant to dominate it, yet we have only theories or theological speculations of how our celestial environment came into being.  But not even science, like man’s faith systems, is able to explain why life exists, what role we play in the universal panorama, or how an awareness of “self” interacts with that vast framework that is the universe.  And science also tends to mimic religious contentions that the entire universe is relatively systematic, that Creation was a one-shot deal–a big bang or a six day wonder–which the human species alone is capable of dominating through its ability of deductive reasoning.

Science, however, differs from faith system explanations of man in that their research and studies have culled and continues to cull and analyze the evidence which mankind’s ancestors pioneered.  Religious explanations tend to calculate man’s history–for their convenience–as being a scant few thousand years, but the in-depth scientific approach shows that our species with identical capabilities can be traced back for at least a million years.

The insistence of faith systems regarding a short term human history is made even more puzzling when modern man is lulled by them into accepting that what is referred to as “primitive” cultures nonetheless raised wondrous construction feats such as the Baalbek Terrace in Lebanon, the Great Pyramid in Egypt, and similar ancient pyramids in South America and the Far East.  These are structures that would tax even modern man’s capabilities.

Mystery, ceremony and magic rites were once the power hold ploys that ancient tribal leaders employed to maintain control over tribal members.  Commonly that privileged status was understood to be due to the tribal leader’s claim of being directly counseled by temperamental spirits.  We today recognize that manner of seeking protection as superstition and nonsense.   But just how advanced are faith system practices today that are conducted in great extent in much the same manner?  The heart and soul of any of mankind’s contrive faith systems also adhere to similar features which keeps those systems insulated from scrutiny, for they are practiced in fear of questions which they cannot answer.  When devout seekers begin to ask Why?  How? Where? When? Who? etc., the tribal-styled faith systems react in anxiety and distress.  Thus they advise that such questions are not supposed to be asked of pulpit performers who, as an alternative, counsel that true believers are to trust the Bronze Age priest-authors who were divinely certain that the Earth was the center of Creation.  The declared “revealed” wisdom offered by the power-seeking priest authors in antiquity simply does not stand as “omniscient” (all-knowing) comprehension against today’s scientific research and exploration.

As an example of superstition elevated to “religious” status, it is fully exposed in the Jewish ceremony known as kapparot (from Semite, akin to Hebrew kaph, meaning “palm of hand”).  Kapparot is an atonement ritual which is indulged in before the holiday of Yom  Kippur.  In the ritual (which requires a “donation” of a live chicken to the rabbi for the performance) a rabbi holds the live chicken above the donor’s head (gently of course) and recites a blessing.  The luckless bird is then slaughtered (according to Jewish dietary laws).  Why this ritual bloodletting of a hapless animal should inspire God to grant the donor reconciliation with God after having transgressed “his” covenants is murky at best.  On the other hand, every faith system has their atonement rites which are equally caked with peculiar stipulations that supposedly satisfies the Creator–like Jesus died for the sins of the world.  The superstitious prehistory tribal shamans would find such bloodletting to be praiseworthy.

So how spiritually advanced is modern man?  The human species, unfortunately, has been well schooled in deluding itself.  And our poor planet is beginning to show the strain and damage that mankind’s belief systems have fostered.  But the holy answer is not necessarily apocalyptic doom.  Man’s atonement rests in the release of taught “religious” (belief system) claims of exclusiveness with Creation’s multiplicity.  Humanity must face the fact that true freedom of spirit (meaning enlightenment) is not the true purpose of any man-concocted faith system.  If those formulated methods of faith indulgence were devoted to actual spiritual attainment and awareness they would seek to enlighten followers, not constrain seekers with made-up rites, rituals, scripted ceremonies and pretended exclusivity with a never-encountered judgmental god.  We might therefore conclude from such acts of pretense that only con-men have such needs for public exhibitionism.

Questioning Bible Style Creation

Posted in agnoticism, Atheist, Bible, days of Creation, faith, Hebrew scripture, life, prehistory, random, scriptures, theology on October 16, 2016 by chouck017894

God’s revealed word assures us that God merely had to say “Let there be…” this or that and then this and that appeared.  Thus, without any recipe or formula or thought-out blueprint all the varied components of whatever he commanded magically appeared.  No trials, no errors, just zap.  Although Earth seems to be God’s center of focus, not only was Earth thus conjured up but all of infinity was set in place in only seven “days.”  However, the authors of “revealed wisdom” never bothered themselves to clarify which of the two  differing Creation specifics  (Genesis l and/or 2) are to be considered most proper.  And, of course, we are instructed to never ask how God himself came into existence.  This is what some Bible fanatics (in the USA) insist must be taught in our schools!

In order for all of God’s varied and diverse forms which were thus allegedly brought forth by God talking to himself, some form of regeneration also had to be put in place for the continuation of manifesting such diverse and varied handiwork.  That renewal system of each and everything created by word of mouth required a recipe or formula or blueprint for its continuation.  Scientific sleuthing has managed to discover one vital part of that blueprint, and we know that reproduction diagram as DNA.  Life, whether micro or macro, each follows specific developmental (evolutionary) processes, and even galaxies and the universe itself follow the same constant motions of re-creation.

Social cultures that preceded the “revealed  word” of God by thousands of years, and therefore not privileged to biblical enlightenment, apparently had to grope about in ignorance of how everything became created.  It was up to the self-appointed priests in Jerusalem in the much later 8th century BCE to explain the revealed facts of Creation.  In that later timeframe the entire population of the world, which has been guesstimated to have been around seventy to one hundred million persons, the Creator was apparently interested only in enlightening a tiny percent of those humans in regard to his acts of Creation; and those “chosen” ones just happened to live around Jerusalem.  Oddly, God chose not to bother himself with any specifics, such as what went into his creative process—things like the chemical compounds and such which he utilized for manifesting everything and which continues the re-creation process. Again the authors and devotees of those revealed words counsel us not to question God ways.

Still, we can’t help but wonder.  Planet Earth is heavy with chemical components, and it is this chemical heaviness which stands as a major argument against biological life having originated on this planet, as “revealed word” implies.  But that fact of our planet’s  chemical makeup, in itself, does not negate the Genesis explanation.  However, scores of years of scientific research has projected that Earth was formed around four billion five hundred million years ago.  Within only a few hundred million years the simple life forms were already in existence on Earth–an incredibly short time in Creation terms.  To science a few hundred million years after Earths‘s formation and simple life forms were already appearing ? It seems a case of too much too soon.  Ahh, but all that was just one “Day” in the Genesis account.

If the oldest and simplest life forms were indeed present well over three billion years ago, and these simplest life forms had, as science has shown, molecules of biological origin, some dimension of Creation seems to be overlooked.  Life on this planet seems to have arisen and developed from some source other than a combination of inert gases and chemicals that were then predominant on the infant planet. Some of the most abundant chemical elements of Earth’s composition are nickel and chromium.  If biological life originated in such an abundant chemical composition, wouldn’t it seem logical that these more plentiful elements (like nickel and chromium) would figure in the composition of any life forms that developed in that primeval stew (the “dust” in biblical vernacular)–if not prominently, then at least moderately?  But nickel and chromium play practically no role whatsoever in the biochemical structure of the life forms that thrive on this planet.  Of course, they are not needed in the Genesis account.

On the other hand, the element molybdenum, a metallic element of the Chromium group is quite rare on this planet, but nonetheless that rare element plays a pivotal role in enzymatic reactions that are vitally necessary to all biological life!  Furthermore, if biological life arose on this planet, whether from the “dust” of Eden or in a simmering primeval stew, logic suggests that a variety of genetic codes would have resulted.  But that did not happen either.  Instead, all life forms on Earth developed from a single genetic code–and all life forms on Earth share this single genetic composition.  To those who idolize the biblical tales this genetic singularity can be easily brushed aside as proof of God’s verbal commands as related in Genesis.

Long before the authors of sacred writ were around, some ancient Sumerian cuneiform texts provided more authoritative information in regard to the puzzle of life’s appearance on primal Earth.  According to the deciphered texts, life on this planet developed billions of years ago from an outer space source; from a huge planet that made at least two passes through our developing solar system.  The Sumerians did not confuse that rogue celestial object with any comet, asteroid or other space object, and that roving planet was defined with the name Marduk.  The Sumerians also referred to this planet, which was obviously not affiliated with our solar system, as “the planet of crossing.”  This information later became reworked by the succeeding Babylonians, and was the basis for personification of the Babylonian god Marduk. This god is known in the Bible as Merodach (Jeremiah 50:1-2), who was credited by the Babylonians with bringing the chemistry of life to planet Earth.  Could that possibly be the inspiration for the god that the post-Sumerian story tellers in 8th century BCE Jerusalem referred to in Genesis as commanding the activation of all life?

Oddly, in recent modern science a theory has been advanced that is remarkably similar to the ancient Sumerian account.  A minority of scientists, risking reputation and government financial support, dared to offer the theory that life on this planet may have been seeded from minuscule organisms given off by some free-wheeling planet that once brushed close to the primordial Earth.  Perhaps that planetary lovemaking is what took place over the biblical six “days” of Creation?  Or was God simply playing a solo game of billiards those “days”?

 

 

 

 

s

Spiritual Vanity, the Sin of Fundamentalism

Posted in Atheist, belief, culture, faith, Fundamentalism, humanity, random, religion, theology, thoughts on October 1, 2016 by chouck017894

It must be a terrible burden for fundamentalists of any faith system to confront all the diversity and variety and multiplicity in this life—a lavishness which typifies the radiance that is Creation.  The “conservative” outlook of hard-nosed fundamentalists obliges them to advise the Creator that “he” made a vulgar blunder by having indulged in such a prolific assortment of potentials.

One characteristic of a religious fundamentalist is that they seem to always wax with hatred toward a hell of a lot of life’s manifestations.  However, it is that astonishing diversity, variety and multiplicity that assures the awesome radiance that we refer to as Creation.  Another characteristic of the “fundies” is their unending attempts to impose their manufactured belief system upon anyone they can.  This vanity of spirit is indulged in despite the fact that genuine spiritual enlightenment always proves itself as authentic by an enfolding sense of inner serenity and compassion that is experienced.  Such an inner warmth is rendered impossible when cultivated hatreds for all the intentional differences that sustain Creation are encouraged.  And yet, like any other man-contrived faith system, the fundies claim that it is only through their hard-line approach alone that anyone can attain the Creator’s favoritism.

Reason and knowledge are seriously constrained when any faith system representative labors to advance  preconceptions of any sort to hover over seekers interactions with others.  In tightly structured faith systems, for example, seekers are routinely indoctrinated and continuously conditioned with claims that it is only through their particular man-made faith system that anyone can ever attain the favoritism of the Creative Principle which they like to personify as “God.”  But, curiously, the universe and nature do not happen to reflect that narrowly restrictive disposition toward the diversity and multiplicity of life which the Creative Principle formulated, made manifest and steadfastly maintains.

The creative and unifying force which is commonly personified as “God” is too often imagined in scriptural texts to be mainly concerned with the dilemma of only one certain representation of human species in one small region on planet Earth.  Ignored in such “holy” tales is the fact that those characters just happened to be from the author’s locale and also happened to be subscribed to his faith system.  That narrow understanding of life and spiritual significance in relation to the rest of the world population has resulted only in a setup for persistent and unnecessary conflicts.

Such old locally focused writings which are honored as “revealed word” leave us with fundamental questions.  Such as: When a person feels they must indulge in devilish scheming to impose their faith upon others can that really be assessed as one’s “higher calling?”   Why would an omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful) Creator find this to be the only way of making “his” intentions known among men?   In a universe that has been created with such lavish diversity and multiplicity, we are left to wonder over the Where, When or Why did the Creator of that diversity and multiplicity suddenly judge himself/herself/itself to have been too liberal and/or too excessive?  And if that hypothetical self reevaluation was the case, what caused him/her/it to decide upon picking and choosing favorites out of that multiplicity and give only to those “chosen ones ones” or “saved one” the all-clear for them to indulge in what amounts to spiritual brutality?  Would it not have been easier and wiser for him/her/it to have simply have resorted to the alleged original method of Creation and simply just say, “Let there be no more variety and diversity in Creation?”  Certainly that would have erased all the virulent spiritual egotism which all man-made faith systems demonstrate.

Regimentation and/or strictly controlled adherence to man-invented rites, rituals, ceremonies, taboos, cultivated hatreds and contriving to exert authority over others is not the means into genuine spiritual enlightenment. That means, bluntly, that no man-contrived faith system can sincerely promise or officially grant a stamped passport into what they may fantasize to be a heavily regimented and snooty Heaven.  All that the  “fundies” of any faith system can conceivably offer seekers is only a lottery ticket for an all-expense paid future flight into what is actually another dimension of creative energy.  (Energy does not cease; it simply transforms.)  Few faith system seekers, it seems, ever notice the tiny print at the bottom of their frail proffered ticket stub where it is grudgingly admitted that the voyage and destination are the same for each and every matter-life form, and that no purchase or contribution is necessary to gain that award.

 

 

 

Black Holes of Religous Practices

Posted in Atheist, belief, biblical "values", black holes, environment, faith, Fundamentalism, religion, thoughts on September 17, 2016 by chouck017894

Around 2007 theoretical physicists discovered that gravitational waves were connected to black holes, those massive deep throat, light-swallowing areas which are scattered throughout the universe.  The “holes,” the theory goes, are the result of cores of massive stars that have imploded and collapsed in upon themselves.  The immense gravity at the core of these space objects, the theory suggests, siphon into them all the existing energy-as-matter that happens to be unlucky enough to have lolled around the former massive star.  Strangely, that hole of collapsing energy and the vast gravitational field which results may present a relatively calm appearance to the region that we see surrounding it.  Indeed, any random fluctuations against the gravitational core may be barely registered from our perspective.  And it is this deceptive tranquil appearance that can be compared to man-invented religions.

Consider: In a very real sense human contrived faith systems can be said to imitate the same process that is theorized in astrophysics as black hole activity.  The core around which human consciousness may become ill-fatedly propelled is but the canonized speculations which have collapsed in upon themselves to become active as the identity crushing whirl of religious fundamentalism.  The gravitational pull of these imploding belief cores upon human consciousness then becomes so relentless and so crushingly magnetic that the mass, spin and other essentials necessary for life-sustaining rationalism are obliterated.  Muslim jihads of today are a prime example.  Any random fluctuations of rationality that might survive in the fringe of spiritual implosion then become barely perceptible.

The greatest error in all man-made organized religions is the allegiance given by them to an interpretation of warring opposites.  Building spiritual understanding by using that as its foundation guarantees only the life experiences of physical, emotional and spiritual un-fulfillment and senseless conflicts.  The reason for this is that by adoring one polar energy point of Creation’s generative force while berating the other necessary polar aspect as evil is to practice spiritual schizophrenia.  The whole imagined god/devil, heaven/hell, chosen/rejected, saved/lost, etc. is rendered meaningless simply because neither interactive pole can possibly create without the other generative pole to project effects.  All of man’s by-the-book faith systems exploit the emotions of love/hate but fail to realize that these are not true opposites, for those emotions arise from the same energy center but are projected differently much like light passing through a prism.  The only thing truly opposite to either love or hate would be indifference.  By personifying the generative polar fields within the creative Source as two individual human-like beings, as faith systems habitually do, the practice that is thus erroneously sanctified is the denial of One Absolute Source.

The concept that is promoted by theological musings is that a rivalry exists within the primordial conditions of Source, with one generative polar aspect personified as “God” and the other necessary polar aspect personified as the “devil” or “Satan.”  To do so is to misunderstand Creation’s singularity.  By this alleged “revealed” wisdom the scheming human authors declared these interactive dual components of Creation’s power were separate, incompatible and not connected in creative purpose.  By such counseling man-invented faith systems then led the masses not into enlightenment but deeper into the illusion of Creation’s energies as matter–the very condition the faith systems rail against.  When this was accepted by human imagination to be holy truth, these symbols then became adopted for use in Satanism, magic, witchcraft and similar rebellious rites by those who instinctively distrusted the tyranny of man-invented faith systems.  But their attempt to seek higher power by reversing religious rites and rituals inadvertently implied the credibility of those symbols, rites and tenets that the faith systems honored.

Man-made faith systems have, through their doctrines of either/or, lost sight of how Creation creates and thus carelessly muddied the purpose of life to benefit their corporate style faith system.  Their claims of monotheism thus rest precariously upon a theology of dualism.  In these faith systems everything is portrayed and defined as good or evil,  light or dark, saved or lost, angelic or devil-like.  But Creation does not create anything as some purposeless lump with no flexibility; all energy-forms are necessarily a blend of both polar charges. As contrary as this may seem, this makes for unity through contrast, for there can be no light without dark, no up without down, no front without back, for example.  Each energy illusion (matter form) is but a transitory aspect of Creation’s unity.  This means that the Source out of which all Creation expresses itself cannot be some good only “God” that is rhapsodized in man-fashioned faith systems, for darkness or negative events which they term evil cannot have issued from a different Source.  Therefore to pray to this amoral (meaning neither moral or immoral) turbulent seat of Creation as some benevolent deity-being is but a practice of frustration, for Creation’s turbulent potentiality is not the evolutionary pinnacle of wisdom.

Oddly, these same self-serving faith systems tell us not to be deceived by material appearances, yet they are all busy gathering unto themselves as much material baggage and power advantages as possible.  And inexplicably the feminine gender (through which life becomes manifest) is evaluated by male dominated faith systems as not being worthy to represent their imagined macho God.  How do these men then account for the feminine aspects that are submerged with their own physical being?  Science has revealed that each person carries within their physical being the hormones of the opposite sex.  Therefore no man can ever be 100% male, and no woman can be 100% female.  And since this is true how can these man-contrived faith systems teach that “God abhors” same gender attraction?

With man-contrived faith systems devoted mainly to pretense and theatrics as guidance, the lure of human adherents to the faith amounts to little more than that faith system’s fiscal assets.  In this manner the “sheep” are kept benumbed and focused on materiality.  Feeling righteous with such holy guidance is it any wonder that the devotees feel no sin in mercilessly plundering and despoiling planet Earth for their material pleasures?  The faithful fail to see that they drift in the currents around a black hole.

 

Creation Truths vs. Religious Myths

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, days of Creation, faith, Hebrew scripture, logic, prehistory, religion, scriptures, theology on August 13, 2016 by chouck017894

The principal theme of literature that is distributed as sacred writ throughout the world is commonly in regard to the origin and interactions of energies which we perceive as the universe.  In the study of “holy” myths there is commonly a distinction made between Creation myths (elemental cosmology) and myths of origins, which focus more on the later evolved features within Creation such as animals, humans, social orders, etc.

Study of the origin of anything is properly only a continuation of Creation’s activity which marks the progress of the original creative energy outpouring.  And this continuation of Creation activity accounts for the progressive arrangement of scriptural myth presentations.  The mythic style is useful for instructing minds which are not fully capable of grasping the theoretical complexity and multidimensional characteristics which we speak of as Creation.  The technique of myth-telling and the use of sacred language was originally the attempt to bridge the abyss of comprehension by personifying creative energy dimensions and their involvement as being characteristics of god, demigods, heroes, and/or divinely favored mortal beings.

The tragedy of this means of instruction is that the original scientific understanding behind the stories easily became sidetracked and the accounts then became accepted as authentic reporting.  Even more dangerous for those whom the myths were invented to aid them comprehend primal energy actions, the stories were restructured as having been actual historic ancestors.  Once the bogus “history” technique for teaching became the standard our role within Creation became trapped in the dark theological maze that has no off-ramp by which one could return to rationality.

Creationists, those Bible-thumping fanatics incapable of abstract thought who insist that Creation took place literally in six 24 hour Earth-time days, remain oblivious to  pertinent clues provided within the tale itself.  The clues reveal that the Genesis version of Creation was based upon an older and broader understanding of the true involution/evolutionary development of primal energies-into-matter.  There is a telling peculiarity in the writing style of the Genesis account of Creation which is consistently disregarded by Creationist fanatics concerning the measurement method of those “days” of Creation.  It is perhaps too subtle for those incapable of abstract thought.  By verse 5 of the first chapter of Genesis, immediately after God created light, the account declares: “And God called the (initial) radiance Day, and the darkness (primal energy conditions) Night.  And the evening and the  morning were the first Day.”  Interestingly Day is emphasized by a capital D, and Night is similarly stressed with a capital N, and the emphasis is for a reason.

In man’s standard time measurement practice, a solar-centered day is not reasonably calculated or defined as being “the evening and the morning.”  Nonetheless, the “holy word” extremists happily ignore the fact that in the priest written sacred account Earth was not even conjured up until verse 10; so the first “Day” obviously is not supposed to be calculated from how our puny little planet would measure time.  This is the complex reckoning by which each “Day” of Creation is erroneously interpreted in scriptural terms, however.  Creation of the “firmament” is the subject in verse 6 (the second Day) and is accentuated by the division of “waters” within which. scientifically speaking, creative energies involve with specific frequencies.  Then in verse 8 the “firmament” itself was allegedly labeled “Heaven” by God.  With the establishment of the “firmament,” verse 8 sums it up, and again “…the evening and the morning were the second Day.”  The account is worded in this manner in an anxious attempt to convey to non-technical minds the understanding that everything that was/is made manifest out of a void (primordial or virginal) condition.

Creation’s primal energy dimensions of what we may here term quantum activity are not involvements of Creations’s energies that can be assessed in terms of solar-reckoned days. This period of Creation activity, defined in scriptures as “Days,” is often circumvented by literal minded faith merchants by referring to the immeasurable time of Creation activity as “days of the Lord.”  That elusive attempt to sidestep explanation of the immense progressive phases of Creation’s energy involvements and expansion into defined forms necessitated the familiar day/night sequence they personally experience.  Thus the Days of Creation–or each primordial energy dimension of involvement (or involution)–which progresses out of a virginal void–was  conveyed in allegorical style and presented as “holy word.”

But what did the priest-authors mean in verse 8 by a “firmament” being established?  The Hebrew word which is translated as “firmament” is rakia, which actually means a vast expanse–or what we think of as space.  The word “firmament” is traceable back to the Latin word firmare, which happened to mean something that supported or strengthened something (from Latin firmus, “firm”).  And thus was holy word rendered into a stew pot of mismatched ingredients.

The priest authors of “holy word” were intent upon obtaining and maintaining their control over the tribal setup (Hebrew) and in order to this they had to mask what they did not know. Thus did they assert that a strangely human-like God labored six days over Creation.  This has served western cultures as “holy revelation” for around three thousand years, during which many bright youngsters have innocently asked, “But where did God come from?” The common response to that childish rationality has been, “We must never question God.”  Unfortunately, by adulthood too many formerly bright kids have been thoroughly brainwashed and their inclinations to question such things are directed to the No-No list.  And the trusting believers now committed to the literal presentation of “holy word” are understandably traumatized when their taught assumptions are challenged by archaeological research that uncovers evidence of a totally different picture of true history.

 

 

Belief in Godly Favoritism

Posted in Abraham, Atheist, belief, Bible, Easter, faith, Passover, religion, scriptures, theology, Zodiac on August 1, 2016 by chouck017894

The Jewish festival of Passover and the Christian observance of Easter occur in the same general timeframe each year following the vernal equinox.  Neither of these self-focused faith systems extend any recognition to the obvious seasonal transition that dominates  the Northern Hemisphere of our planet in its orbital movement.  Instead, each faith system has fashioned self-serving myths to present the illusion that they hold exclusive position with the Creator-God.

For Judaism, the seasonal changes are disguised and celebrated for eight days, allegedly in honor of the Israelites escape from Egypt. In encyclopedic and most reference material the explanation of Passover will say the festival commemorates the escape of the Jews from Egypt under the leadership of Moses.  In the timeframe in which the Moses saga is traditionally placed, c. 1576 BCE, Judaism as a ritualistic faith system certainly did not yet exist; indeed, Jews as followers of a ritualistic faith system are not even referred to in scriptural tales until 2 Kings (12:26).  Interestingly, that first mention of a Jew is not even favorable (the implied insolence).  Nonetheless, in typical revisionist fashion it has become common practice to use the words Israelite, Hebrew and Jew as meaning the same thing, which is intentionally and tragically misleading.

Originally the priest-authors writing the alleged “history” of their nomadic forebears cast them as “Israelites,” implying the descendants of an alleged historical patriarch named Jacob who, for no clearly defined reason, had his named changed to Israel by God.  This, however, is a heavily mythologized version anchored in ancient teachings once illustrated with imagined figures outlined upon different constellations.  Jacob characterizes the Life Principle within which self-aware consciousness becomes activated as a matter-life form out of primal energies.  Hence the name change.  Therefore, the use of the word Israelite is always in reference to the primal energies out of which life is made manifest.  As such the story character of Jacob/Israel actually represents the “forebear” of all self-aware life forms, not just some “chosen” group of faith system believers.

In older reference books the habit of lumping Israelite, Hebrew and Jew as one-and-the-same allowed for the implication that Hebrews appeared more or less out of nowhere.  In actuality they seem to have emerged out of the polytheistic Semite people who probably originated in the northeastern regions, and who became widely scattered due to their searches for grazing lands for their herds and flocks.  And Judaism, as such, arose as a splinter sect among those polytheistic tribes people, and the fact is that one of the tribal gods, Yahweh, whose division settled around Jerusalem, was never the sole god of all the Hebrew people–a fact that is now disregarded.

Even before the priests of Yahweh, in Jerusalem c. 9th-8th century BCE, set the time for observance of Passover, the ancient Egyptians and Persians (to name a few) had celebrated the same equinox period with a sacred feast.  This was prepared prior to the occurrence of the full moon at the spring equinox.  In Egypt, on the 14th day of that moon phase, the nation joyfully celebrated the Dominion of the Ram, the sign of Aries.  This same general time of the full moon in Aries associated with the Vernal Equinox is now celebrated in Jewish adaptation as Passover (and in Christian lore as Easter–so-named after a Pagan goddess of Spring).  Aries became symbolized as the “Pascal Lamb” that is slain and eaten in recognition of the mythical Passover story.

From the ancient lessons once given with constellation Aries, there arose the sacred interpretation of the “lamb slain from the foundation of the world,” and this became personified as Jesus in the Christian faith system.  It is from this dimension of creative primal energy involvement that energy-as-life is “redeemed” through transition of this dimension of energy to be, in effect, “resurrected” (evolved) as a more refined energy form.  Jesus thus personifies the Life Principle that is within all matter forms, and he is thus acknowledged as Angus Dei, Latin meaning Lamb of God.

The worldwide use in prehistoric times of the Ram/Lamb as a symbol of sacrifice comes directly from ancient lessons once given with what we now refer to as the zodiac, which actually taught scientific principles of creative energies being readied to begin manifestation into matter life (the real reason for Jacob’s name change).  This understanding was widely understood in more ancient times, and even into late BCE times in a few areas.  Certainly Confucius (about 551-479 BCE), who spoke of this Ram/Lamb sacrifice was not thinking of an alleged ram sent to any foreign person named Jacob as a sacrifice substitute for his son Isaac.  Nor could he have been referring to some future sacrifice of a Jew named Jesus in Roman Empire times.  Confucius’ assertions came from understanding the ancient lessons with constellation Aries which taught scientific principles of where creative primal energies are bound into a prototyptic form which commits it to its manifestation as an energy-matter life form.