Archive for the scriptures Category

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.


Religion and Social Ills

Posted in Atheist, belief, faith, logic, monotheism, random, religion, scriptures, theology, thoughts on July 12, 2016 by chouck017894

Mankind’s many, many faith systems are each self-advertised and promoted as the positive method that inspires people to live their lives with more respectfulness and righteousness. But are practices which are formulated to pivot upon judgmental and prejudicial behavior toward “God’s” intended diversity really the untainted “narrow path” to attain Heaven or Paradise?

When faith systems teach seekers that all human entities skate on thin ice at the edge of the black hole of “sin” the minds of the faithful are persistently maneuvered into a submerged fear-based emotional state.  Faith system merchants often lace their promotional spiels with heavy condemnation over minor differences which human entities are prone to.  The “flock” has then been “blessed” with inappropriate belief that their faith system holds some especial and exclusive favor with the all-inclusive  Creative Source.  It’s an excellent tactic for the faith merchants, but it is hell on a devout person’s rationality.  The sly inference of never quite measuring up to God’s expectations for you tends to fester in the subconscious, and that negative energy is inclined to gestate over time and give birth to little deformed demons of resentment.

Since personal consciousness rests within a god-ordained animal configuration during its limited matter life experience the natural response to all the subtle negativity packaged into faith system merchandising is a stimulation of the hypothalamus which often triggers an inbred fight or flight response.  But the crafted “religious” dictum is that you are allowed to do neither.  The internal physical/mental mechanism then must adjust something like this: The blood vessels become constricted and blood pressure rises; stomach acidity increases; and body muscles remain tense to get ready for physical confrontation.  The most immediate result of all this built-in internal defense activity is that it serves to suppress the immune system which is the body’s defense against genuine life-threatening conditions.

Western organized by-the-book faith systems prosper because they have always sermonized that there is a constant threat which allegedly exists between each persons’s soul and the possibility of oblivion.  Cultivation of fear for the unknown makes for an easy target for faith merchants to hit.  And the built-in advantage is that it also keeps the faithful suspicious of any minor but natural (God ordained) differences which individualizes each person’s interests or lifestyle.  It is a scientifically proven fact that over eighty percent of all human dysfunctions have been traced to emotional stress.  So is mankind’s higher potential really being served by such cultivation of fanaticism, suspicion and intolerance as is religiously churned out by man-invented faith systems?

Organized faith systems regularly stand guilty of emphasizing and passing judgment on what are but minor natural differences rather than counseling tolerance and inspiring understanding of God-intended diversity and variety.  These by-the-book faith systems generally give much lip service to tolerance and charity, but this is too often disproved by their typical attitude that their faith system alone–and it alone–holds some exclusive position with the Creative Source which they personify as “God.”  The inappropriate cultivation of belief that their faith system possess some exclusive expressway into  an imagined Creator’s favor generates only inappropriate expectations, both of others and of self.  The indulgence in such belief programming brushes extremely close to what may be termed true sin, for it sets believers upon a path of negative life occurrences–i.e. judgmental attitudes, feelings of guilt over natural desires, practicing conditional love, avoidance of personal responsibility, lack of forgiveness, lust for material things, and a host of other favorite themes of faith system merchants.

The concept of monotheism is actually a practice of personifying the all-inclusive Creative Source as a principled, judgmental human-like being (God).  This allows for the conducting of corporate-style business under the assertion that the powers which created and sustains everything is human-like and plays favorites with the diverse and varied energy combinations that are manifested as the human species.  This is a conman tactic which is then slyly intensified by grafting a foreboding of death and judgment into their sales pitch.  This further allows those claiming to hold the moral high ground to peddle their faith system’s insurance which promises a glorious afterlife.  Unfortunately mankind can never attain its higher potential through such ego-stroking indulgence.

Such faith system practices will never ensure that peace, tolerance and brotherly love will actually be achieved by followers of hard line faith systems.  Any acceptance and true charity for the intended diversity that is active as life would deprive those self-appointed god-ambassadors of their pretense of god-blessed authority.  Thus man-made faith systems commonly teach judgment passing, hairsplitting, self-serving rites and rituals, spiritual exclusiveness, and similar ego-stroking propaganda.  For seekers it all comes at a steep price: loss of the true access into higher alignment with universal power which is gained only through tolerance–which then flowers as enlightenment.



From A Jewish Cult To Christianity

Posted in agnoticism, Atheist, belief, Bible, Christianity, faith, Hebrew scripture, Joshua, random, religion, scriptures on June 5, 2016 by chouck017894

In the timeframe of the expanding Roman Empire the aristocrats and literati in Roman society became more and more uneasy at the intense antagonism that flared repeatedly in the region of Palestine.  The unease of these prominent Roman citizens was not simply political concern but, for several, it also involved relationships through marriage to important families in that region.  This interrelationship provided closer perception to underlying conditions there which simmered in that occupied territory, and it was thus known that there was an active but subdued movement in Jewish culture among the Nazarene which focused on a messiah-like being called Jesus, a name derived from the legendary Joshua (Jeschu).  As uprisings steadily increased throughout Palestine the Roman aristocrats and literati sought a means to counter the Jewish conviction that they alone possessed exclusive godly guidance which their priest-written scriptures avowed.  There were some in Rome’s upper echelon who began to ponder over the possibility that the Jesus cult which was already active in Palestine could in some way provide the wedge that might be used to modify the Jewish obstinacy and thus a more cooperative conduct would be established.

Among those few privileged class Roman citizens the idea of such a wedge led to research and their findings showed that a number of attributes credited to Joshua were also shared by Pagan solar gods such as Apollo, Helios and others.  Joshua was, after all, credited with halting the sun in its course.  That alleged feat was certainly at least equal to any miracle that had been ascribed to Pagan sun gods or to Moses.  Joshua was also revered among Jews as a deliverer, a messiah–albeit a violent, murderous one–whose holocaustal conquests were claimed to have been approved and brought about by their Lord.  What would happen, the privileged Romans wondered, if a new deliverer/messiah appeared, one through whom the Lord would offer a new covenant?

A ticklish proposal of drawing upon the underground Nazarene cult’s fascination with Jesus rested in the Roman authors attempting to provide Jesus with a biological lineage.  In hope of appealing to Jewish sensibilities the Roman authors sought to provide one genealogical version in Matthew 1:1-16, written c. 70-75 CE, which traced Jesus’ decent from Abraham. This genealogy seems intent upon showing that Jesus was of royal lineage–from Abraham to David–even going so far as to refer to Jesus as “son of David” throughout the book of Matthew.  This version of biological background includes four women–a curious accounting whey you consider that in the priest-composed Hebrew Scripture the listing of lineage was always traced back only through male forebears.  Even more curious is that in the later Luke version three of those four females happened to be non-Israelite women.  Was that provision possibly calculated to open the way for gentiles to also be accepted as among God’s alleged “chosen”?

The genealogy as offered in Luke 3:23-38, written c. 84-90 CE, made the attempt to trace Jesus’ biological background even further to Adam!  Luke’s genealogy introduced a different tack by using Jewish textual traditions such as incorporating numerological exercises to present the family tree of Jesus.  This led to various speculations over time.  According to some old Greek manuscripts there was thus declared to have been 11×7 generations from Adam to Abraham. Other Greek manuscripts, however, as well as the Catholic Vulgate and the Syrian Peshito, assert there were 76 generations between Adam to Abraham, while other Latin genealogies list on 72.  Regardless of the quibbling over how many generations between all the impossible-to-trace biblical characters, the purpose of the claims  was to show that Jesus was not only the fulfillment of the history of Israel but to illustrate that Jesus was also the savior of the (Roman) world.  The fly in the ointment, we might say, is that such genealogical lines are utterly pointless if Jesus was, as claimed, born of a Jewish virgin name Mary who was unsuspectingly impregnated by divine spirit.

But why assert a miraculous “virgin birth” claim at all?  Not so coincidentally many ancient Pagan cultures had myths of their major god impregnating a virgin who bore him a demigod son.  The Greek god Zeus and  Roman god Jupiter, among others, were said to have impregnated other women.  All such virgin birth myths had originated out of extremely ancient teachings regarding causation and creation–in lessons using stars of various constellations as illustrations.  Those lessons taught the scientific principle which is now known–that primal energies–virginal conditions–involve and evolve to manifest as matter.

The focus of the Roman authors of Gospel remained upon Jewish examples, partly because the very first Gospel book which had been written, Mark, c.50-55 CE, had referred to a “prophecy” from the Jew’s revered book of Isaiah.  The Roman author of Mark happened to slyly misquote Isaiah 7:14 as “Behold, the Virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel.”  Why did the Jewish prophet say Emmanuel if he meant Jesus? The name Jesus is derived from Joshua, and a prophet worth his salt would know that.  The actual priest-written book of Isaiah simply stated, “…a young woman with child…” and implying the event described was to occur in the timeframe of Isaiah.  So the text that Mark borrowed did not exactly verify that Isaiah prophesied a coming messiah named Jesus.

Thus around 70 CE the Roman author of the Gospel book of Matthew (now listed canonically as the first Gospel) labored very hard to update both the earlier book of Mark as well as his own first edition of Matthew.  And the author indulged himself as well in some holy slight of hand, and Lo! –today those blind with belief still believe that Jesus was the mortal son of god who was born to a virgin Jewish girl.

A Few Biblical Crimes

Posted in agnoticism, Atheist, belief, Bible, faith, Hebrew scripture, random, religion, scriptures, thoughts on May 13, 2016 by chouck017894

For some two to three thousand years the Bible has been advertised and promoted as being the ultimate in moral guidance for mankind.  But anyone with genuine respect for moral conduct and ethical behavior toward their fellow man often staggers away in bewilderment after reading some holy accounts.

Indeed, the opening chapters of Genesis brusquely kick things off with a highly questionable take on common ethics.  The naive couple, Adam and Eve, the last of the Creator’s handiwork, were seemingly fashioned only for fun and games.  Naked and clueless they were placed in a deceptively paradisaical setting–a setting which featured two breathtakingly beautiful fruit-bearing trees as it focal point.  Ah, but these were declared to be off limits as a food source for God’s not-too-bright last creations.  This is clearly a case of crafty entrapment, not omniscient wisdom.  But God is pictured as outraged and declared that death is to be their punishment–and not just for Adam and  Eve, but for all matter-life forms!  The first human couple had absolutely no experience as life beings, so how could they have possibly comprehended what the threat of death meant?

Ethics and compassion soon got another below-the-belt attack in the “revealed” record of Cain and Abel, the sons of Adam and Eve.  Cain was a farmer and Abel was a sheepherder. For all the bounty that God had graciously allowed them God expected both of them should bring material offerings to him in gratitude.  Abel slit a sheep’s throat and God found this to be extremely pleasing, but Cain’s gift taken from laboriously tended fields, was scorned by the Creator.  Cain, of course, smarted at this discrimination and in a jealous frenzy killed his brother.  According to the Bible there were no actual criminal laws established in Paradise, nor had there been need for such law in a family of four.  So the homicide of Abel cannot be termed murder or even manslaughter.  So the Omniscient One banished Cain from his native land and Cain was commanded not to till the ground anymore.  Apparently Cain was expected to starve himself to death.  Or perhaps that was the Omniscient One’s plan for Cain’s evolutionary success, for Cain became wonderfully successful as a builder of cities after that..  Still we can’e help but wonder–is infinite punishment for “sins” committed by a finite being’s brief life really the caliber of a Creator’s justice?

The same loose concepts of holy moral/ethical conduct is continued throughout holy word.  Aggression is highly praised in divine tales, and war crimes pass as acceptable practice–if carried out for the security of a man-invented faith system.  For example, under Moses’ generalship the Israelites are glorified for having killed off all the Midianite men, their kings and the prophet Balaam.  Joshua is portrayed as reveling in holocaustic violence in which even thousands of noncombatant women, children, and the aged were slaughtered.  Deceitful David exterminated men, women and children in various stories, even sawing victims in half or hacking them to pieces.

In a number of holy stories characters are admired for homicide.  The alleged “prophet” Elijah, for example, is glorified for killing 450 priests of Baal to “justify” Jehovah and is held as exemplary.  And there is Elisha, Elijah’s successor, who called upon God to send two bears to kill children who had dared to mock his bald head.  And there is Esther who is praised for plotting the mass murders of Persians.  And there is Jezebel who trumped up false charges against a father and his two sons so they would be slain.

Sexual misconduct, as long as it is strictly heterosexual, is routinely sniffed over. Abraham’s nephew, Lot, and his two daughters merit no chastising for acts of incest.  The maltreatment of Sarah whom Abraham loaned out to the king for material benefits is brushed over. Isaac, their son, followed dad’s example and passed his wife off to the king as his sister for favors.  Good old David, indulged in adultery and had the husband set up for assassination.  Dinah, Jacob’s daughter, too young to give legal consent, was defiled by her half-brother, prince Shechem.  How do these tales and many other similar holy tales teach anyone how they are to achieve a personal state of grace?

Strangely, impurity is a constant counterpoint played upon in holy tales, but the “impurity” is always about following some man-invented routine of pretentiousness and mannerisms as being the only method that God approves.  The impurity angle is more of a concern in Judaism and Islam, but subliminally it lingers in Christianity also.  This springs primarily from the claim that just being born–expelled from a woman’s body–renders each person impure.  It’s that old “original sin” scam.  It is never explained why, if the Creator is omniscient (all knowing), “he” could not have devised a more practical manner for multiplying new life.  Nonetheless, that little oversight allows for his self-appointed representatives to have steady employment in their self-devised theatrics.  For example, to make up for original impurity some sects insist that one’s hair must be trimmed in a strict prescribed manner, or certain foods must be avoided or prepared in a ritual way, and of course certain theatrics (man-contrived rites, rituals, ceremonies, etc.) must be performed.

Such is the enticement and lure of man-written holy books.  The emphasis is commonly placed upon following some man-devised routine as though it was magically set down in stone and perhaps delivered on some mountain top.  That, however, is not the all-inclusive nature of true spirit.  Rigidity and inflexibility happen to be the conditions of something that is dead.



Holy Machismo!

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, biological traits, faith, random, religion, scriptures, sex, theology on May 1, 2016 by chouck017894

The three major religions (and their many faith system schisms) of western cultures were all structured by male authors upon a not too subtle animosity toward the active bearing principle (regarded as passive/feminine) which functions within Creation’s source.  This juvenile attitude is inexcusable since that energy-production principle is critically essential for continuing expansion.  It is also rather cowardly rhetoric for male “shepherds of the faith” to apply the “put the blame on woman” argument in an attempt to absolve themselves from all the error and sin in the world.  Such rationale and finger pointing fails to camouflage the fact that it is the man-is-superior propaganda of man-written sacred texts which has accounted for the bulk of mankind’s wars and atrocities.  Certainly feminine curiosity or womanly wiles or motherly patience have not inflicted such continuing despair and grief upon the world scene as has the fraudulent male-is-superior depictions of holiness.

The holy books of the three major western faith systems–the Torah, New Testament and Quran–inelegantly place the alleged curse of “man’s fall” and “original sin” upon the slender shoulders of the feminine sex with the astonishing alibi of a  talking serpent!  Well, imbibing too much holy wine can certainly inspire guys to invent excuses.  Despite the necessary bearing-forth principle within Creation’s source being characteristically defined as negative by the male authors, that bearing forth aspect was deemed to be feminine and was an affront to priestly pretense of their positive spirituality.  Nonetheless, that womanly strength still manages to somehow keep life’s foundation functioning with some semblance of stability.

The three faith systems of western cultures, all of which are rigorously “run-by-the-book,” grudgingly allow women only partial redemption for their alleged lesser position: women are intended, so say the man-written “revealed” holy word, only to marry and bear their boastful providers with offspring (preferably male).  In this way these three interrelated man-superior faith systems assign the responsibilities and chores of domestic life and child rearing as almost compensating for the feminine genders’ (Eve’s) responsibility of man’s alleged “fall from grace.”

In the priest composed Torah account of Creation, Genesis 2 gives a slightly different account than is in Genesis 1.  In the second version (as in Genesis 2:21-22) the Creator’s concern for Adam’s loneliness seems to have necessitated the surgical removal of some part of Adam’s anatomy to initiate a means of human reproduction.  Apparently by that phase of the Creator’s craftsmanship the Creator had run out of creative “let there be” words to recite.  What this hackneyed version of human life production reveals, unintentionally so, is that it is polar (positive/negative energies) exchanges which account for the manifestation of any and all matter-life and inanimate matter.  The generative systems that the alleged male Creator supposedly set in place for the continuance (propagation) of any life species was a built-in feature which specifies only that every manifested material thing automatically carries both those generating polar opposites within themselves.  There are no exceptions to this “go forth and multiply” law of Creation.

That the male authors of “holy texts” were obsessed with their own genitals is clearly evident with the character of Aaron (whose name just happens to mean “to conceive”) in the book of Exodus (chapter 28).  The fascination with their physical generative equipment ranked by the priest authors as their prime paraphernalia, is spelled out in that particular chapter of Exodus.  There the instructions for the curious “sacred garments” which are to be worn for generating their faith system are suggestive, to say the least.  To assess the true meaning of all the peculiarities in holy tales remember that euphemisms are employed repeatedly throughout all scriptural texts.  In Exodus, for example, the “holy” garments that are to be worn by the high priest included such paraphernalia as the ephod, two onyx stones, a pouch of gold, and a breastplate.  There is a side note to be considered here, and that is that the word “sacred” is itself derived from the Hebrew word sacre, which refers to the phallus.  In the “garment” metaphor used in Exodus as to what God’s representatives are to wear, the feminine aspect is something which is entered into or put on, as “golden rings.”  We will leave to your analysis any metaphoric explanation as to what “holy oil” alluded to in this “holy” account.

What the formulated sacred language style reveals to us is that the sacred texts such as in Exodus utilize a lot of adolescent sexual role playing to explain gentic purity–i.e. reproduction after its own species.  If life was originally a condition of hermaphroditism–i.e. two polar aspects in one energy form (Adam) as the opening of “holy word” claims–then each division of that singular form had to keep some characteristics from each energy pole (positive/negative) within each separate parts if creative purpose was to be actively maintained within those parts.  This means, as a consequence, that no man is ever one hundred percent male, and no woman is ever one hundred percent female.  For example, men still retain nipples, and women possess a clitoris, which is erectile tissue.  That’s just the outer odds and ends of physical personification; there are even more energy-exchange features within every physical form.  Indeed, hormone treatments can alter one’s physical structure.

Because sacred texts do not deal honestly with sexual polarity the practice became established for passing judgments over various kinds of sexual magnetism, and these are grossly and needlessly exhibited in social problems to this day.  The genderless Life Principle (commonly personified as a male God), as demonstrated in Nature itself, cares nothing about sexual chastity: its only concern is genetic purity, meaning that the only limitation that the Life Principle (God) placed upon sexual relationships was only in regard to species consistency.  In other words, each species must create only after its own kind.  Sacred texts refuse to honestly admit that there are allowable variations of sexual polarity and exchange.  The scheming male authors preferred instead to labor over the reproduction aspects of sexual activity–to insure the steady increase of followers.  Willfully ignored and adamantly denied are the equally inherent and important revitalizing and emotional characteristics of sexual expression.  This pretty much assures that the genuine abiding principle of magnetism known as love will be kept focused in the reproduction perspective to insure a continuous supply of seekers.

The Life Principle (called God) gave considerable attention to producing many diverse forms of life expression, and in the priest composed scriptural tales this variety and diversity of Creation activity and diversity of Creation activity is personified as the numerous Levites, the successors of Aaron.  It is, therefore, ironic and a tad hypocritical to make use of such scriptural characters and the alleged situation in which they are presented as a means of launching condemnation of any non-productive sexual activity.  Such characters as Aaron and the Levites, etc. are sacred language metaphors for the revitalizing  (generative) energies of Creation.  If doubtful, just remember the exotic details of the garments that the high priest (Aaron) was supposedly instructed to wear when ministering “in the holy place” (Exodus 28:6).  Listed are the ephod, two onyx stones, a pouch of gold, breastplate, golden rings, and holy oil, all of which refer to the physical means of life creation and revitalization.  Some apologists have suggested that the word “ephod” was derived from the Akkadian word epattu (plural epadatu), which referred to some type of expensive garment.  In the third century BCE modification of holy word, the Septuagint, an attempt was made to whitewash the original sexual inference by altering ephod to suggest a shoulder strap of a tunic; in this way the ephod could be linked with the breastplate of judgment (which happen to act as a pouch containing the Urim and Thummin), Exodus 28:30.  Thus did holy world evolve through a series of deviations and disguises.  Beneath the whitewash of sacred language, however, the titillating flavor remains.  So, the next time you see some pompous Bishop strutting around in his elaborate costumes and balancing that phallic-imaged miter upon his head, try not to snicker.

*related post: Sex in Sacred Disguise, March 2009
















Born Again, A Holy Brainteaser

Posted in belief, Bible, Christianity, faith, random, religion, scriptures, theology, thoughts on April 1, 2016 by chouck017894

Anything that stunts or hampers the evolutionary process which we speak of as “life” has to be cast off (religiously promoted as “sacrificed”), otherwise our awareness of self (consciousness) cannot advance into its intended evolutionary potential.  This is the true meaning behind the Gospel verse saying that you must be “born again” (John 3:3).  It is important to note that Jesus, the personification of the Life Principle, is portrayed as allegedly saying this to a bit-part character named Nicodemus–a character who appears only twice in Christian myth.  He is defined, for some strange reason , as “…a ruler of the Jews.”  It should be noted that names in scriptural myths usually hold subtle meaning for those in the know.

The  name Nicodemus, as an example, is a cunning devise that passes along hidden meaning only to those who have been initiated into sacred language technique, for it is fashioned upon the Latin words nechos and demos, which is to say, matter and demon (densest energy action). Thus in this story line Nicodemus actually represents the potential of Creation energy which passes over into defined material form.  When life becomes defined in the energy involvement as a dense matter form it is the beginning of the qualification process which results in transmogrification (changed into a more evolved energy form).  This was a feature in the Pagan mystery school teachings which was refashioned and summed up in Jesus allegedly saying, “No on can see the Kingdom of God unless he is born again.”  The manner of being “born again” was explained to Nicodemus (verse 3) “…Except a man be born of water and of the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.”  What is referred to here is the “spirit” that moved upon the “waters” of Creation in Genesis 1:2.

Then later, after Jesus is crucified, it is Nicodemus who allegedly assists in the entombment of Jesus (John 19:19).  This verse says, “And there came also Nicodemus, which first came to Jesus by night, and brought a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about an hundred pound weight.” It is important to note that Nicodemus is referred to as which, not who.  This subtly confirms that what is being referred to is not about some human being, but a personification of an aspect of Creation energy which assisted in the bringing life forth out of void conditions (night).  This is sacred language technique used to alter prehistory lessons that had taught of primal energy involvement (Life Principle) that develops as matter-form with consciousness.  The technique that was used in the John account was fashioned upon those ancient teachings concerning Creation processes and the wording actually admits this by referring to Nicodemus as “…the man that came to him (Jesus) in the night the first time.”  There is no explanation ever given regarding the “first time,” only the vague inference that it concerned the initial appearance when Nicodemus is said to have allegedly approached Jesus “in the night” (John 3:1-2).  Read that line again: Nicodemus is the man that came; not the man who came.  The word “that” suggests an undefined thing or action, but the word “who” would be the proper designation if the verse had designated an actual living person.  This is, again, sacred language technique being  used to disguise Creation forces as a being, but secret knowledge is conveyed through the inanimate terms of “which” and “that” as reference.

Chapter 19 of John then closes with two verse (41-42) that is expressed like an afterthought: “Now in the place where he was crucified there was a garden; and in the garden a new sepulcher, wherein was never a man yet laid.  There laid they Jesus therefore because of the Jews preparation day”…(referring to Passover–Creation energy passing over into dense matter).  This “garden” referred to, “…wherein was never man yet laid”  is one and the same as the Garden of Eden in the Creation story.  Therefore the sepulcher “wherein was never man yet laid: was drawn directly upon ancient lessons regarding the archetype Earth where life is to arise as explained in prehistory cosmology lessons: so the “tomb” referred to is an allegory and has absolutely nothing to do with some actual sepulcher in Judea.

Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea are depicted as coming to the sepulcher together, and strangely they brought medicinal potions, not potions commonly used in that timeframe for preparation of a body for burial. Spices and ointments, myrrh and aloes according to John 19:39, which infer that Jesus was not dead but in a state of energy alteration.  He was indeed to be resurrected, but not as it has come to be interpreted.  Revitalized we could say today.  Remember, no time was wasted in taking down the seemingly lifeless body of Jesus, and it is made clear that they hurried to place him in a new tomb.  And too, the two Marys, mother of James and Mary Magdalene, also brought similar medicinal provisions when they went to the tomb immediately after the end of the Sabbath.  And what about the location setting–the curious location of the crucifixion allegedly taking place immediately adjacent to the privately owned garden where a brand new tomb awaited?  That was peculiarly convenient for such a public execution.  Ignored is that customarily persons crucified were rarely allowed to be taken down to be interred, for enemies of Roman governing were allowed no such honor.

There is still another angle to this plot line which links it to the book of Genesis, the book of beginnings: consider the two Gospel characters named Joseph in peripheral roles. It should b remembered that the name Joseph in Hebrew means “he shall add”–like a builder.  Joseph in Genesis is the eleventh son of the patriarch Jacob/Israel, and it is he who supposedly moved his whole family to Egypt where his descendants remained and multiplied until Moses led the Israelites toward the Promised Land (energy as matter).  In Gospel we thus have the widowed Joseph who became the husband of Mary, the surrogate father of Jesus, and he was allegedly a carpenter–one who builds or adds to.  And finally there is also Joseph of Arimathea, a rich Jew who is depicted as coming “secretly” in the night (as had Nicodemus also) to the sepulcher to take away the body of Jesus (for reconstruction).  As bit players neither of these Josephs have any speaking roles.  This later Joseph appears in the story only to bury Jesus, mimicking how Joseph in Genesis buried his father Jacob (50:7-13). From this divine storyline the Catholic Church put forth the claim that Joseph of Arimathea (the rich Jew) later became the founder of Christianity in Britain and founded the monastery at Glastonbury.  And he, of course, is regarded as a “saint.”

And that, as they say, is the holy truth.  .


Continuous Modifications in Faith Fashions

Posted in Atheist, belief, Bible, faith, Hebrew scripture, random, religion, scriptures on March 1, 2016 by chouck017894

Truth, it has been said, defines a principle which stands unchanged under any inquiry. By this measure of dependability we have a means to evaluate the reliability of claims, traditions and tenets of any faith system.  The reason for this thought has been initiated by a memory of events that occurred in 2011 concerning rabbis in Ashkelon, Israel where attempts were then being made to close out an ancient African-Jewish practice of Judaism–the ancient unmodified priest led version.

The Ethiopian followers of the more ancient Jewish faith system of belief claimed to be descendants of the alleged “lost tribes” of Dan.  It is a fact that for well over a thousand years ancient Jewish practices as once established in the crude book of Leviticus–a book that had been written by priests for priests and jimmied between Exodus and Numbers and which interrupted the Israelite plot line.  This early style version continued to be followed and led by priests in far-off Ethiopian communities.  Isolated from the rest of the Jewish factions the Ethiopian division maintained scriptural instructions on priesthood while in the rest of the Jewish world the priesthood was phased out and replaced by rabbis. Consequently the scriptural recorded practices such as sacrificing animals and the collection of first fruits of the harvest (for priest use) had prevailed among the Ethiopian Jews.  The old priest formula had remained in place in the distant African communities and the result of this was a reaction of discrimination in Israel against the Ethiopian immigrants who had followed the rejected earlier form of practiced reverence.  Neither side, apparently, had ever been alerted by god as to which of these two man-contrived methods of devotional indulgences was his preferred system to honor him.

The early priest concocted method of Judaic faith which the Ethiopian believers still followed was phased out around the later part of the sixth century BCE.  Indeed, it was in Babylonia where the actual character of the Jewish people began to be shaped among the exiles and where Judaism as such was really shaped.  Cyrus II of Persia freed the people of Judah from Babylonian captivity c. 536 BCE and aided the exiles return to Judah.  Virtually all that had once been instilled as sacred practice by the earlier Jerusalem priests of Yahweh had been largely forgotten after seven decades of exile in Babylonia.

In the life altering seventy year exile which is referred to as the Babylonian Captivity the people from Judah had been heavily influenced by the Chaldean and Persian cultures, which became united into one nation by the military might of Cyrus.  For the people returning to the land of Judah a sense of national unity became confident and optimistic.  By this time the Judaic people were accustomed to and influenced by the religion of Zoroaster.   Indeed, there is a Talmudic passage that freely acknowledges that the name of the months, and even the letters of the alphabet were brought back with the refugees who returned to the land of exile.  It was after the return to their homeland that the literature which is now cherished as the Torah was assembled and imposed by the priest authors as law.

The principal architect of the reconstruction of Judaic culture is claimed to have been a priest name Ezra–a somewhat shadowy figure of whom nothing really positive has ever been found in support of such a person.  The most likely scenario, dare we speculate, is that a few enterprising men who returned to the homeland discovered and utilized the earlier versions of priest-written “history” and exclaimed “aha!”  Here was a treasure trove: it only needed a bit of editing.  This they did under the nom de plum of Ezra to lend the aura of a divine messenger.  The Temple was rebuilt, and at the meetings held there this revised and edited “history” anthology was read aloud, which for all extent and purpose, gave holy authority to the texts.

To promote the amended anthology as holy authority the reworked texts were asserted to have been dictated by God to Moses,  so the editing job followed the same motivational reasoning of the earlier priest-authors of Yahweh.  It was in this same timeframe of Temple reconstruction that the rewrite authors also utilized the Babylonian character of Job, which, theologically speaking, is not Judaic in flavor.  It was in this borrowed literary work that Judaism was presented with the premier appearance of Satan–with a capital S. Unfortunately, the anonymous authors, i.e. Ezra, misinterpreted the astronomical and zodiacal significance pertinent to the original Babylonian story which clarified the relationship of such things as the names of the months, and the cosmological significance of the purely symbolic “angels”.  The “angels” in the borrowed literature were earlier references to the solar family’s planets.  It was not acknowledged even in the Babylonian version, however, that it was from Zoroaster that ideas of angels had become separated from ancient planetary references and reinterpreted by Zoroaster as making up an infernal hierarchy.  As a consequence ancient wisdom and symbolism became hopelessly confused.  And subsequent faith systems which have splintered off from this background have only added to that confusion.

The point which has been labored for here is that faith system modifications have been going on ever since our distant ancestors climbed down from primordial trees.  Different environments and life stresses always color previous superstitions, and it was the most boisterous and belligerent activists who most often managed to badger their pet superstitions into tribal culture as “holy law.”.

Black Holes of Religious Practice

Posted in Atheist, belief, enlightenment, faith, random, religion, scriptures, theology, thoughts on February 14, 2016 by chouck017894

(Recent scientific breakthrough regarding gravitational waves and black hole connection has inspired the release of this 2007 unpublished posting.)

Black holes, theoretical physicists tell us, are 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 themselves all the existing energy-as-matter that happen to be unlucky enough to have cruised around the former massive star.  Strangely, that hole of collapsing energy and the vast gravitational field which results may present a relatively smooth, calm appearing picture 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 we dare to compare to man-invented faith systems.

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 is attracted may become ill-fatedly propelled as a knot of superstition which has collapsed in upon itself to often 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, so crushingly magnetic that the mass, spin and other essentials for life sustaining rationalism are obliterated.  Any random fluctuations of rationality that might survive in the fringe of spiritual relativity then become barely perceptible.  The “paradise” which is achieved either in or around these devastating holes is comparable to the compressed condition of spiritual emptiness at which fundamentalists of any man invented faith system excel.

The greatest error in all the man-made organized religions is the allegiance given by them to the interpretation of warring opposites.  Building spiritual  understanding by using that as its foundation guarantees only the life experiences of physical, emotional and spiritual non-fulfillment and senseless conflicts.  The reason for this is that by adoring only one aspect of Creation’s necessary polar activity issuing out of Source as “God” while condemning the other necessary polar aspect as evil is to practice spiritual schizophrenia. The whole imagined god/devil. heaven/hell, chosen/rejected, save/lost, etc. is rendered meaningless simply because neither creative pole can exist  without the other to project meaning.  All man’s by-the-book faith systems exploit the emotions of love/hate but fail to realize that these are not real opposites for these 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 a love/hate projection could only be indifference.  By personifying the creative polar fields within the creative Source as two outside beings as faith system practice habitually do, the practice that is mistakenly sanctified is the denial of One Cause.

Such a pattern of thought then actively asserts that a rivalry exists in the primordial conditions which are responsible for Creation, with one polar aspect personified as “God” and the other necessary aspect personified as the “devil” or “Satan.”  By this type of alleged “revealed” wisdom the human authors declared these necessary dual components of creative force were separate, incompatible and utterly divorced in creative purpose. By such counseling the man-invented faith systems then led the masses not into enlightenment but deeper into the illusion of Creation’s energies which we experience as matter–the very conditions which faith systems rail against.  When this was then accepted by human imagination as holy truth, these symbols then became adopted and adapted by those who instinctively distrusted the tyranny of man-invented faith systems, but they then used the symbols in Satanism, magic, witchcraft and similar rebellious rites.  In attempting to seek higher power by reversing religious rites and rituals (such as reciting the the Lord’s Prayer backwards, etc.) the only thing accomplished in practicing reversal of the rites was to give credence to the very tenets they claimed to disbelieve.

Man-made faith systems have, through their doctrines of either/or, lost sight of how Creation creates and carelessly muddied the purpose of life for the purpose that profited their corporate religion.  Their theological claims of monotheism rest precariously upon a necessity of dualism, however.  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 powers do not create anything as being exclusively this way or that way, but creates everything as a blend of all energy powers.  As contrary as this may seem, this makes for unity through contrast and contained instability, for there can be no light without dark, no up without down, no front without back, for example.  Each energy illusion is but an 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 evil, darkness or negative events cannot have issued from a different Source.  Therefore, to pray to this amoral (meaning neither moral or immoral) primal seat of Creation as some deity-being who is the evolutionary pinnacle of wisdom is but a practice of frustration.

Oddly, these same 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.  Matter-form, they tell us, means nothing before their version of God, and yet females are to be considered by male dominated faith systems as not being worthy to represent the Creative power that is personified as God.  How do these men then account for the feminine aspects that lie submerged within their own physical being when everyone–indeed every animate species–carries within their physical being the hormones of the opposite sex?  No one can be 100% male, and no one can be 100% female.  And since this is a scientifically proven fact, why do they teach such things as the feigned horror of homoerotic attractions?

With man-contrived faith systems devoted to supernaturalism as guidance then human purpose has become accepted as being nothing more than economic man.  Such faith thus keeps mankind locked in a trap as some amoral creature with an obsession for/with material possessions.  In such a setup it is then easy to regard it as righteous for Earth to be mercilessly plundered and despoiled, for holy wisdom asserts that some distant god approves it all and that “he” or something exclusive to their faith will absolve humankind for its lack of responsibility.














5 g


Biblical Characterizations

Posted in Bible, Hebrew scripture, prehistory, random, religion, scriptures on February 8, 2016 by chouck017894

How reliable are biblical texts?  Common sense whispers to spirit that because every “revealed” account was penned by human industry the potential for trip-ups may be obscured in the prose like landmines that could blow up the crafted stories.  A critical assessment of scriptural accounts can often reveal to the curious reader that few, if any, characters in accepted sacred texts actually represent any verifiable historical persons. After the Genesis characters have established the “chosen ones” plot line the scriptural tales seemingly venture into later alleged historical events where some sparse documentation might be possible.  Peculiarly, the only characters included with any evidence of having had verifiable existence are always presented in peripheral roles. It is in this manner that the suggestion of historic authenticity is offered.  This is a writing technique that has always been used in composing believable story-lines of fiction, and is still in use in the novels, stage plays, movie formats and television plays today.

The character of Abram/Abraham, for example, is the earliest personality provided in Genesis (11) who is presented as having had a vague correspondence within world history. However, even his homeland as sketched out in Genesis 12:1-5 was only vaguely alluded to with the mention of of Haran and Abram’s moving southeast …”unto the place of Sichem, unto the plain of Moreh.  And the Canaanite was then in the land.”  The implied movement is in the direction of the Chaldean port city of Ur.

We should not forget that the scriptural works so highly honored as holy narrative actually concerned only one very small segment of the world’s population in prehistory and those biographical drafts were not gathered into book form which could be referred to until Iron Age times, c. 9-8th centuries BCE.  That means that the bulk of literature which is revered as the Old Testament was not composed and promoted by priest authors until many, many centuries after the events they depicted.  Again, of the entire world’s population in the earlier timeframes as presented by the priest-written stories concern only one small group of people–their alleged ancestors.  When the scriptural tales seemingly venture into later alleged historical events where some sparse documentation might be possible the only characters with any evidence of having had verifiable existence are, as noted, always presented in peripheral roles.

Add to this that there is strong indication that the priest-authors also drew upon earlier teachings from several different cultures.  It is not coincidence that in Persia there were stories told of a deity named Ahriman; curiously, his original name was Abriman and the substituted letter H in the name for the B indicated the attainment of his pass over into a matter-defined personality.  Ahriman (with the H) was regarded to be a deity who ruled over the kingdom of darkness–in other words the void out of which Creation issues.  We should note as well that the Babylonians were familiar with a like character from their similar literature who was named Abarama.  And the authors of Genesis also knew of the eastern writings in which Brahma is given as the Creator of the universe and is first in a trinity which included Vishnu and Siva.*  The H (two vertical lines held together by a horizontal line) in the name indicated the involvement of polar principles necessary for advancing Creation.  Thus the letter H was also incorporated into Abram as Abraham to indicate when primal energy passed over and manifested into matter life. (*Siva is commonly presented as the principle of destruction: more correctly the transformation out of the illusion of energy as matter.)

Abraham, like all the Genesis characters such as Adam, Noah, Jacob, Isaac, etc., etc. are but personifications for the creative Life Principle as it passes over the various energy dimensions of development and which culminate in matter form where it is to be qualified.  Consider the various myths that surround Abram/Abraham which certainly could not apply if this character had been an actual mortal being.  Supposedly the name Abram means “exalted”  or “lifted up.”  Again this is sacred language being used to personify and portray scientific principles of Creation which were earlier taught in extreme antiquity which the authors of Genesis did not understand.  Abram (not yet Abraham) personifies earliest primal energy involvement which is to pass over from an energy prototype into definable form.  Those ancient scientific teachings upon which the story is based had become lost due to various planetary disturbances, and myths arose in an attempt to explain the invisible powers of Creation.  Thus among the many footnotes to holy accounts we are expected to believe that the angel Gabriel fed the infant Abram for ten days with milk from his little finger!  This conveniently dismissed the need for any scientific understanding of the primal energy dimensions that lead into development as energy-matter forms.  And another tale related that when Abram was born his face was so radiant that it lit up the entire cave in which he had been born.  The “cave” in all such myths and sacred stories always symbolized the void (Source) out of which all Creation issues, and is why so many saviors and heroes of ancient myths were claimed to have been born in caves.

This manner of characterizing the dimensions of primal energies as actual physical ancestors of an alleged “chosen” people is the technique used to give apparent legitimization to the books now known as the Old Testament.  Although misleading in its underpinnings the literary works do hold many self-evident truths.  So inspirational were these priest-crafted tales which seemed to legitimatize the ancestral claims due to written word that a whole belief culture arose that stubbornly stood defiant against many kingdoms and empires.  It was not coincidence therefore that it was during the timeframe of the Roman Empire that a Jewish character was chosen by Roman authors to be the superstar in collected narratives now know as the New Testament.  These crafted tales begin with Jesus’ birth being set in a manger, and for centuries mangers were then commonly located within caves.  And the sequence of his recorded miracles—from his first water into wine to his ultimate transfiguration —allegorize the involving energy dimensions of Creation into cosmic harmonization as once given in prehistory times with lessons illustrated with heaven’s constellations

Failure of By-The-Book Faith Systems

Posted in Astronomy, Hebrew scripture, prehistory, religion, scriptures on January 1, 2016 by chouck017894

Genuine history shows that each of the three sister monotheistic faith systems of western cultures were launched as an insurrectionary movement against an established social order which had tended to honor a broad-based tolerance for diverse spiritual practices.  The hard-line monotheistic faith systems which dominate western cultures today expanded and have maintained their power structures only by indoctrination practices which have included perceptible intimidation tactics and even terrorism (such as is brutally demonstrated in Muslim extremists to this day).  The underlying fact is that the whole purpose of monotheistic practice was to establish a closed environment in which each person is doggedly conditioned to submit and obey an upper echelon of the system’s hierarchy.

The method of any by-the-book faith system’s empowerment is to inject subconscious fear of godly retribution by his withholding any promise of attaining a glorious afterlife if any seeker fails to obey the faith system’s representatives.  With this improvable assertion of a paradisiacal afterlife for the alleged favorites of God , the “flock” is persuaded to sheepishly submit and obey.  To keep faith system discipline the contention is put forth that the all-enfolding Life Principle (which is personified as “God”) favors them alone: however, this assertion is the very antithesis of spiritual freedom, inner peace, tolerance, compassion, fairness, justice, ethics, morality, and all other true qualities which elevate spirit into an evolved state of existence.

As a consequence the formalized by-the-book “religions” that are today presented to us as spiritual guidance are faith systems which are constructed and characterized by their constant arguments over artificial objectives, empty symbols, phony prophets, shallow judgments of others, prejudices over superficialities, and pompous ritualism which intentionally keep seekers blind to our personal interrelatedness to all the rest of the universe.  What this shows is that man-made faith systems are essentially geared to regulate material greed and self-promotional events, not to actually guide seekers into personal attunement with Creation’s forces.  When man-composed “holy word” texts are primarily assertions about godly nit-picking and jealousy, accounts of wars, invasions, killings and similar irreverent acts toward all interrelated intelligent beings something is tragically inappropriate for authentic spiritual counselling.  Certainly the glorification of such provoked conflicts with life’s intended diversity and variety only encourage the practices of prejudice and self-indulgence, and should not be held as the foundation of ethical/moral attitude for social interchange.

Only in fairly recent times has the means been established to provide the capability to check the reliability and truthfulness of many “holy word” accounts.  That painstaking science is biblical archaeology.  For well over a century of digs throughout Israel, Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon there have been uncovered factual details of everyday life during the timeframes and events that make up the bulk of Hebrew Scriptures.  The discoveries have often stunned and dismayed even the archaeologists, and the implications have horrified those who wish to believe that the books thought of as “holy word” are actually God’s revealed truth.  The  books known as the Old Testament were not actually codified until around the eighth/seventh centuries BCE–or generations after the alleged events.  And the reason for that labor of systemizing such works was the political crisis which loomed over Judah in the timeframe following the fall of the kingdom of Israel to the north which had fallen to Assyria.  Thus the origins and purpose for writing the stories of “God’s chosen ones” have to be reassessed with an eye kept upon the political crises that motivated them.

Likewise the New Testament composed within the Roman Empire timeframe should be reassessed with an eye on the political crisis that the Jewish fanatics in Palestine presented to the Empire.  During the Roman occupation of Palestine the Jews pointed to their priest-written “Scriptures” as proof that they were answerable only to God and divine exclusivity, and not surprisingly this brought the Jews into constant friction with the  Roman Empire.

In assessing the “holy book” of western culture faith systems it should also be remembered that the Arab region had no prophet or written work to unite the people until the timeframe of Mohammad (570?-632 CE).  The fundamental tenets of Islam are: 1) There is one God (Allah):  2) Man must to submit and obey Allah: and 3) The world will end with a great judgment.  These tenets have direct and undeniable association with Judaic and Christian systems of belief–which Mohammad just happened to have heard and built upon during his many caravan merchant travels.

Lost in these by-the-book faith systems’ contrived rituals, unfortunately, is any means of perceiving one’s own personal spiritual alignment with the highest essences which are the foundation of our real self. The exploration of our inner self with the motivation to establish meaningful balance with nature and the universe is not a feature of any of the three regimented faith systems of the  western world.  Everything remains focused upon the faith system itself which subconsciously tells the seekers that the individual is not of any particular importance to the all-too-human-like deity. Nothing in this form of faith system commerce is even suggestive of addressing the actual spiritual qualities which are inherent within every being.  Instead every seeker is instructed to submit and obey their man-written holy book instructions but are not really shown any means of opening themselves for the experience of spiritual evolving.  The difference between practicing a religion and making oneself open to spiritual vitality is a different as taking or receiving.  If emphasis is upon ideology and ritualism, then it is religion, for religious practice can only take its authority from those who relinquish their spiritual energy to it.  On the other hand, that essential spiritual quality which is the essence of each personal identity can align with Cosmic Conscience only by achieving a reflective state of consciousness, for what we term spirit within our self is a reflective component of that higher Creative Conscience.  If personal attention is grounded in what is only a theatrical perfomance then the path into the higher state of spiritual awareness remains blocked.

Bluntly, A person’s genuine spiritual evolution begins to malfunction as soon as exterior authority is imposed upon it.

These website posts have often referred to ancient lessons which concerned Creation/cosmology and life purpose, and those lessons were once illustrated by using the universe itself as background–the use of groups of stars (constellations) to illustrate the lessons.  That prehistory means of instruction was not corrupted with any pretentious claims that universal truths were accessible only through some regimented, club-like membership-only faith system.  There was then no merchandising of our spiritual connection into that higher power; there were no claims of a monopoly on universal truths as made by the by-the-book faith systems today–systems that distinguish themselves primarily by their hostility toward each other for their own material gain.  Mankind must awaken to the fact that there can be no expansion or attainment of spiritual enlightenment from such corporate-style by-the-book faith systems, for they are demonstratively superficial in the universe as a whole and, on the smaller scale, too implausible and unnatural to technological cultures. Clearly what humankind is in desperate need of is not pretense of faith system exclusivity but a new dimension of consciousness.