"In the beginning God created ...."

[William]

"Anyone who thinks we exist within a creation is also saying that we exist within a Reality Simulation."

Often Christians argue that we do not exist within a Simulated Reality while maintaining that we exist within a Creation.

What is the difference between existing within a Reality Simulation and existing within a Creation?

[The Tanager]

Point being, there was disagreement in which it was decided to create the physical universe so that it might be discovered therein. what the truth actually was.

Where is the Christian 'mythology' that speaks of this?

On top of that which it hides...

Are you saying the texts, as we have them now, speak of this and Christians have misinterpreted them or that the true events speak of this and Christian 'mythology' has created texts which misinterpret the truth? Or something else?

[William]

Are you sugesting that the angels were happy with the creation of our univrse because they now could share their love with another created species.

At least in part, yes.

Point being, there was disagreement in which it was decided to create the physical universe so that it might be discovered therein. what the truth actually was.

Where is the Christian 'mythology' that speaks of this?

On top of that which it hides...

I am saying that The tradition is that "all was not well in the heavenly realms" as per a democratic choice of 1 third of the sentient beings disagreeing with the imagery...tradition also has it that the reason was "jealousy" but was it really?

Point being, there was disagreement in which it was decided to create the physical universe so that it might be discovered therein, what the truth actually was.

And so The Creator made a simulated holographic universe in which The Creator could put consciousness into - and give that consciousness the impression that it "had a beginning"...and thus the angels rejoiced at the result...now they could - at least potentially - find out what the actual truth was...it looked promising enough to rejoice in...

[The Tanager]

Discover the truth of what? What the angelic disagreement was? Christian texts do not say that the physical universe was created in order to discover the truth of the angelic disagreement, as far as I have ever noticed. If you disagree, then point me to the text.

If you agree, then that would seem to mean you are doing the second option I spoke of: saying Christian mythology has gotten the story wrong. If so, then back to my question to you in post 45: where is the support for this, considering all sources of evidence at our disposal?

[William]

You are not following the narrative of my observations. Why do you think that the script is where such information is to be found? Rather what I am point to is that tradition is such, that it dovetails in with the simulation theory. My narrative is showing that. The script that you ask about, is hiding that.

Are you suggesting that the tradition regarding the heavenly host is incorrect? There was no argument among the Angelkind?

[PinSeeker]

Importantly when the religious filters are removed we have something underneath it to examine.

The argument [ongoing] is that the mythology has within it clear enough indication that the creation of our particular universe [the one we are all currently experiencing] is simulated for the purpose of finding something out.

The tradition is that "all was not well in the heavenly realms" as per a democratic choice of 1 third of the sentient beings disagreeing with the imagery...tradition also has it that the reason was "jealousy" but was it really?

Point being, there was disagreement in which it was decided to create the physical universe so that it might be discovered therein. what the truth actually was.

And so The Creator made a simulated holographic universe in which The Creator could put consciousness into - and give that consciousness the impression that it "had a beginning"...and thus the angels rejoiced at the result...now they could - at least potentially - find out what the actual truth was...it looked promising enough to rejoice in...

LOL! You're the one applying the filter, William. Probably unbeknownst to you. And a contrived narrative all your own. "Still a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest" (Simon and Garfunkel, The Boxer, 1968). It is what it is.

Grace and peace to you.

[William]

I listen to Jason'. He seems to think it a simply matter of my speaking in a way that his mind understands.

Manu Iti: Yes. The telling of stories Jason. Can you imagine what it would be like to experience being a member of the Patupaiarehe Species? They hear and see each others thoughts...in that they are one entity...one mind... many branches...

I point to the image of the Sphere to stress my point...

Manu Iti: Stories can help us see through the covering our minds are under...wherever the human hangover derived - and as I say - they were 'hacked' so things became confusing for them and they had to sort themselves out using other means...words and their meanings eventually became a type of barrier to their understanding because the meanings were all based around their belief systems...their belief systems had hacked their minds and shaped their words

At that I pretend to scrunch up an imaginary item between my hands. I do so, until the item has become just a small object which I roll between my fingers...I hold up my hand while doing this and point at the action with a finger of my other hand...



Manu Iti: This is that type of belief, and this...

I dig the heal of my foot into the dirt beneath my feet, then bend down and drop the invisible item into the shallow indentation I have made...then cover that up with dirt to bury it.

Manu Iti:...is what is best done with said type of beliefs...

I pause for a few moments and listen for the crickets. They have stopped their chirping.

Manu Iti: Things which become barriers to building relationships into inter-relationships are best treated in that manner.

I point to the disturbed spot of dirt I made...

[Revelations won]

In the Beginning God Created..

To all interested parties,

Perhaps it might be well to consider an expanded view of “creation”.

First, many have presented creation with a theory that everything was created from nothing or an ex-nihilo perspective.

Perhaps it might be well to explore the concept that “creation” can also be understood as “organizing matter”.

For example, are the “elements eternal”? If one were to view the elements as eternal, and one had the power and full knowledge
to organize or reorganize the atomic structure of various elements within the scope of that power, could not one therefore organize or create any and all things?

Consider the account of Christ turning the water into wine. If one was endowed with the power to re-organize or restructure the basic elements of water is there any limit to what could be “created’?

If you had the power to separate the oxygen from the hydrogen elements, what kind of explosive power could you obtain with 1000 gallons of water?

Let’s apply this to another viewpoint. If something had a beginning, could it not also have an end?

If we were to clearly understand that the elements are eternal in nature and that they were not created nor indeed can be, then there would be no beginning and therefor have no end.

One could modify, rearrange, the elemental structure of any given element to create something totally different, but the element would still exist.

This would allow for limitless growth and progress in creation.

Have you considered how little we may know regarding the “Origin and destiny of man?

Do you actually know of an ultimate beginning of man?

We all know that our mortal bodies were created by our earthly father and mother.

We are also taught that God is indeed the father of our spirit bodies.

Where did our intelligences begin to exist?

Are there graduated levels of intelligences?

Are our intelligences co-eternal with God?

If not where did they begin?

If they had no beginning could they also have no end or be eternal in nature?

Is there anything in the scriptures to show that God would forever deny us the opportunity of eternal progression?

The above should provoke deep and solemn and ponderous thoughts for one to learn all the above answers.

Kind regards,
RW

[bjs1]

All we have to understand is that such a reality exists which is alternative to our own. Christians think of this alternate reality as being "The Heavenly Realms."

[I leave it to those who think such, to define their own 'Heavenly Realms' - and whether there is any difference between the two realities. (physical Universe and Heaven]

Also to remind one and all, Just because there is a 'heaven' which can be experienced as 'real' does not in itself prove that it too, is not a simulation of yet another reality...3, 2, 1...

There are various views that include the existence of some form of an alternate reality. String Theory, M Theory, Multiverse, and belief in Heaven are some examples. The belief that a kind of alternate reality exists does not mean that either reality is a simulation of the other one.

[The Tanager]

You are not following the narrative of my observations. Why do you think that the script is where such information is to be found? Rather what I am point to is that tradition is such, that it dovetails in with the simulation theory. My narrative is showing that. The script that you ask about, is hiding that.

Are you suggesting that the tradition regarding the heavenly host is incorrect? There was no argument among the Angelkind?

I thought that was what you were saying but I wanted to make sure so I asked questions instead of just assuming and unintentionally creating a straw man that would lead to further misunderstandings.

Yes, parts of Christian 'mythology' can fit your simulation theory. Those same parts can also fit the love theory. So, my question remains. Why should one accept the simulation theory you are proposing as truth?

[William]

You are not following the narrative of my observations. Why do you think that the script is where such information is to be found? Rather what I am point to is that tradition is such, that it dovetails in with the simulation theory. My narrative is showing that. The script that you ask about, is hiding that.

Are you suggesting that the tradition regarding the heavenly host is incorrect? There was no argument among the Angelkind?

I thought that was what you were saying but I wanted to make sure so I asked questions instead of just assuming and unintentionally creating a straw man that would lead to further misunderstandings.

Yes, parts of Christian 'mythology' can fit your simulation theory. Those same parts can also fit the love theory. So, my question remains. Why should one accept the simulation theory you are proposing as truth?

Oh I see.

Can you tell me why you think ST does not 'fit' with LT?