July 29, 2015

Time, existence, legalism, God

Time, existence, legalism, God-- a curious mix of ideas, yet to me, all are related. 
Despite speculation from antiquity and analysis by modern scientists, we still don't know what time really is. We experience it as the one thing utterly beyond the control of anyone, no matter how rich or intelligent. The great leveller, time passes for each individual equally. Sure, we can experience it as passing slower or faster, subjectively; but our objective measurements assure us of time's impartiality.

Some people may have the ability to 'see' into the past or the future; but they themselves are still stuck in the intractable present moment of the inexorable tide of time. In a sense, time is the fabric of reality, the substrate of all that exists. Each individual appears in existence at a moment in time, and is thereafter swept along in its relentless current, until that final moment when that life ends.

The Biblical psalmist gave the average human life 'three score and ten' years (70), and in all the centuries, it's still a good estimate for the typical person. In the vastness of eternity, 70 years is barely a blip. So, what's the point, then, of such a brief existence? It's a question that rarely occurs to anyone during the 'prime' of life, but becomes much more nagging in our latter years.

Those thinkers with a sense of humor and language have noted that 'the present is a gift'... thus, to be used wisely. Time-- the resource we all share in common-- is the classroom, the learning opportunity, the training ground for souls. Think of it-- the whole concept of 'development' (evolution, if you're of that mind-set) of both species and individuals, can only occur within the context of time.

For humans, we are born with only a sophisticated 'processor' constantly monitoring the external world. Our 'hard drive' (memory) contains only the sensory inputs of those months in the womb. We spend the duration of our life absorbing new 'information,' both sensory and cerebral data. Each new item of 'data' is filtered thru a gateway constructed by a lifetime of personal experiences we call perception.

That brings us to legality. Spiritual (or 'personal' if you prefer) development requires other people. A guru meditating on a remote mountain, or a castaway on a deserted island cannot undergo much development in isolation. It's by existing with other souls that we are compelled to grow spiritually. And as soon as there are two or more people, we need an understanding of how to behave-- i.e. rules, laws.

Rules and laws become ensconced in traditions and religions. People of similar conventions cluster together in groups that evolved into kingdoms and nations. Legal structures were instituted; governments of various flavors developed in different countries. Today, governments spend most of their time inventing and codifying new laws... truly a chilling thought.

Among religions, some are more legalistic than others; but they all have their 'expectations' of their adherents. One thing that makes 'fundamentalists' of any faiths similar is their belief that a supreme deity is scrutinizing every person on Earth to see if they are following the rules, and to punish them if they're not. Muslims and Christians (as they've come to be) in particular seem prone to this harshly patriarchic outlook on religion.

Yet Jesus spent his short ministry on Earth trying to get people to see God as their 'heavenly father,' not a mean-spirited dictator, but a kind-hearted parental figure. As he pointed out in his sermons, if we fallible, human parents know that children cannot be expected to have full adult knowledge and behavior, then why should we believe that God is out to condemn us spiritual learners for every little misdemeanor?

That's the point of all this, the reason we exist in this temporal plane-- to learn! You don't learn in one dazzling instant (altho we may gain certain insights in this fashion, along the way). It's a process, based on experience. Process necessarily entails the passage of time. Experience implies trial and error; discovering what 'works' (brings order, harmony) and what doesn't (creates disharmony).

While all living things have a degree of consciousness (and some even say that non-living matter also does), it is humans that have fully self-reflective consciousness. We know that we know. Those who stop and ponder it must conclude that consciousness is a miracle. We take it for granted because it's our very nature... 'cogito ergo sum,' as Descartes put it.

Like time, tho, consciousness is elusive of determining exactly. What is it? How does it work? Does it survive physical death? We don't have definitive, provable answers. To atheists who deny anything beyond the material, apparent world, I say that consciousness is too wonderful to exist in futility!

That brings us full circle, so to say. Our existence takes place in the ineffable background of time, which exists to enable our soul development from self-absorbed self-awareness to the ultimate realization that we, all of us, are connected to a greater reality. Isn't that miraculous, or what?

July 1, 2015

What's at the End of the Rainbow?

On June 26, 2015, the US Supreme Court made its ruling requiring same-sex 'marriage' in all the states. The reaction from the public was stunning. Almost instantly, Facebook was full of gushing accolades from a spectrum of 'friends,' many of whom superimposed a 'rainbow' of color over their usual F/b profile photo. Other social media sites were similarly filled with the general euphoria.

People, great and small, heterosexual or otherwise, even 'Christians' (if such a thing still exists) were all represented in the online celebrations. Yes, a small number, comparatively, lamented the decision, some of them even predicting great calamity on the USA for it. 
But among the general populace, it was clear-- the Matrix was holding, the spell of the secret sorcerers was working as intended; people generally didn't just accept the gay marriage ruling-- they rejoiced in it!

Obviously, I'm among the minority who were less than thrilled by this latest sleight of hand by those who are re-engineering society in every respect. To make that statement immediately triggers the automatic response-- a tirade of pre-defined, derogatory epithets, all designed to short-circuit any and every attempt at evoking serious thought or dialog on the subject. The great majority, confident that their numbers must affirm veracity, are certain that people like me are intolerant, ill-informed bigots who will soon be eclipsed by the inexorable progress of liberal history.

Hence, it's extremely difficult to even try to get those euphoric proponents of 'gay rights' to look beyond their 'victory' into the kind of future that it could very likely entail. These people are blind to the fact that everywhere this law has been enacted, the new 'rights' of a tiny minority have trumped the traditional rights of the majority. Business persons whose conscience does not allow them to support 'gay/lesbian marriage' by providing services to such unions, have been heavily penalized by civil authorities. Such cases (e.g. cake-decorators, pastors, hall-rentals, etc.) are well-known by now.

Those obvious cases are merely the tip of the wedge. Next, anyone who does not express homage to the LGBT+ bandwagon will be labelled a bigot (at best) and liable to be prosecuted for various, newly-generated crimes of 'hate.' For anyone whose conscience does not acknowledge gay rights, jobs may be lost, with no recourse; certain memberships may be denied; there's no telling how far this 'tail-wagging-dog' effect may go!

You who scoff at such dire predictions speak so because you're satisfied with the new status quo, but cannot, or will not, project into where this legislation can (therefore, will) lead. This wonderful new 'liberation' of society will just bring less freedom for the majority. Because this is breaking new ground-- the enshrining in law of a re-definition of an ages-old, fundamental aspect of society-- we don't know where it will lead.

But we can certainly predict, based on historical parallels, where it could lead. Because the holy Bible contains passages that clearly condemn homosexual behavior, it will very likely soon be attacked as 'hate literature.' Sounds crazy? Just wait a bit, and see how long it takes for this to happen. We thought our constitution guaranteed freedom of religion, but already that freedom has been side-lined by the new power of gay rights.

Once the scriptures come under attack by the newly invigorated 'thought-police,' the mainstream populace, who were so euphoric on June 26, 2015, will join the chorus of those who would outlaw the Bible. 'It's just time for progress,' they will assure themselves.

Once the holy writ comes under attack, it won't take long before anyone professing to be a Christian will also be denounced. How will tens of thousands of believers be prosecuted? I don't know. Perhaps Christians will be given the choice-- become an 'enlightened Christian' by recognizing and paying homage to gay rights, or else face severe censure... or worse.

The whole issue is a conundrum to begin with. First of all, marriage by definition is the union of a man and a woman. You can't come along after thousands of years and by waving a legal wand, change the meaning of marriage to encompass any two persons! Why won't the 'gay community' be satisfied to have 'civil unions' acknowledged in law? Why do they insist on high-jacking the God-given institution of (heterosexual) marriage?

I know of gay people who are happy to simply live together quietly, without demanding any special rights. Yet the leaders of these minorities are determined that they must re-define marriage to their specifications. Why? It's part of the whole re-engineering of society that is now being advanced with haste, as I've written about in another essay ('Pole Shift Under Way!'). Everything in the natural order of life is being overturned and replaced with a perverted substitute. Marriage is no exception. And it's happening with little resistance from the great majority.

The gay rights agenda is one example (and a significant one) of how the hidden social engineers operate in order to bring about their desired revisions to society. They always intertwine some good aspects with the bad (their new versions). By playing on the liberal, tolerant tendencies of the majority, they push their agenda via their dominance of the mainstream media. Under the constant 'programming' from TV 'news' and other channels, such as Hollywood 'entertainment,' the population comes to eagerly embrace the new 'improvements'.

It's all very subtle and sophisticated. The gay agenda is promoted by a 'black' president, under a heavy emphasis on 'acceptance of everyone.' Thus, to oppose one aspect is considered as opposition to all aspects-- if you don't warmly accept gays, you must also be prejudiced against blacks and, by extension, all 'visible minorities.' No wonder all those good, white, heterosexual, liberal-minded young people are so ecstatic over the Supreme Court ruling-- deep down, they know they damn well better be, or else be denounced as intolerant dinosaurs!

It's like the whole 'security' scam that has been sold as a benefit to keep everyone safe from those shadowy terrorists, who always seem to pop up just when public enthusiasm for the indignities of security screening seems to be waning. They know how to pull people's strings of fear and patriotism and tolerance, to jerk us into whatever direction they choose.

Like the Trojan Horse that was welcomed into the bosom of Troy as a great gift, the gay marriage ruling will prove to be another Dark Horse that brings disastrous consequences to society as a whole. When the secret rulers of the Western world fully close their trap of slavery, it will be thanks to people's eager embrace of those metaphorical chains.