God and morality

[Alexis Jacobi]

THUS IT WOULD APPEAR, though I do not think it is emphasized let’s say popularly, that what is referred to as Heaven is in fact a relatively temporary state for disembodied souls who attained Grace during their terrestrial life. Salvation, then, is the State of Grace.

In that sense my metaphysical formula was not really off the mark:

Christ liberates man from “the here-below” (the fallen world) for life in a world beyond, constructed one might say of imperishable, divine substance.

There is a further miraculous twist or even more fantastic turning of events however: The world of Heaven, which is a world restored from decay, crime, predatory relationships (the essence of ‘slavery’ but applied to all relationships between biological entities), will “descend” to this plane, or merge with the present plane, and thereafter all souls will live eternally in a perfected, heavenly world.

[Gary Childress]

Is it possible that we were created by an alien species and that the "second coming" is actually the day the aliens will return to Earth and liberate us from the Matrix created by all those other aliens who landed after the first ones? Or maybe L. Ron Hubbard had it right. Is that possible? This "metaphysics" thing is fun!

[Alexis Jacobi]

Now, it is at this point where any discussion of “morality” can actually begin. But how can it be stated in the most direct terms and without resorting to Biblical quotes?

Morality means, quite precisely, actions and ethics which previsualize the World to Come and, as I have often said, morality of a Christian type is “contradictory” to the present ways of Nature, and Nature is a corrupted and terrible state — a state where slavery predominates.

So in answer to Brother Phyllo, the Rights of God can better be defined. But we cannot dismiss the fact that moral actions, and attainment of the State of Grace, are tools both of our own liberation (to a temporary existence in a non-material heaven-realm) from the vice-grips of a terrifying, slave-existence.

[Alexis Jacobi]

How does this world become "the locale of the eternal kingdom"? Are you referring to Christ's alleged return to Earth whereby he raises the dead?

At this point, I see this as obvious, all eschatological question & concerns should be directed to me since, also obviously, Alexis Jacobi is exactly that “hyper-intelligent chimp” and IC (M. Yam ) that wide-eyed lemur clinging to a twig munching a tender leaf …

I have descended here with actionable explanations! No mincing of words, no evasiveness, no rhetorical trickery. Alexis Jacobi is like unto living explanatory water bright with living currents!

You see, Gary, the descent as it were of God into the Earth, and his death and his resurrection, are ‘emblems’ or ‘signs’ of the eventual cure of and transformation of the Earth.

This is why, Gary, I have always noted that your pessimism view of “life as it is” is the incomplete picture of a quasi-Christian. You have become totally disenchanted with ‘the world’ in all its corruption and horror, but cannot bring yourself to, as it were, cross over a River Styx of insurmountable doubt borne of faithlessness, to internalize as Truth the fact that the Supreme Author has a whole new set of possibilities in mind.

[Gary Childress]

How does this world become "the locale of the eternal kingdom"? Are you referring to Christ's alleged return to Earth whereby he raises the dead?

At this point, I see this as obvious, all eschatological question & concerns should be directed to me since, also obviously, Alexis Jacobi is exactly that “hyper-intelligent chimp” and IC (M. Yam ) that wide-eyed lemur clinging to a trig munching a tender leaf …

I have descended here with actionable explanations! No mincing of words, no evasiveness, no rhetorical trickery. Alexis Jacobi is like unto living explanatory water bright with living currents!

You see, Gary, the descent as it were of God into the Earth, and his death and his resurrection, are ‘emblems’ or ‘signs’ of the eventual cure of and transformation of the Earth.

This is why, Gary, I have always noted that your pessimism view if “life as it is” is the incomplete picture of a quasi-Christian. You have become totally disenchanted with ‘the world’ in all its corruption and horror, but cannot bring yourself to, as it were, cross over a River Styx of insurmountable doubt borne of faithlessness that the Supreme Author has a whole new set of possibilities in mind.

Does the Bible support your thesis? Or should we consult the Farmer's Almanac or the Guinness Book of World Records? I want to know the TRUTH!!!!

[Gary Childress]

But if I discover the Truth, the next question becomes, will the men in the black helicopters come to pick me up and intern me in Area 51 with Elvis?

[Alexis Jacobi]

I was not unright to say that the Christian vision is quite similar to that of the Vishnu mythologies. In that mythos, and during the course of the cosmic manifestation, God as Vishnu descends in many different forms into the ‘lower worlds’ where, as St Paul notes, “creation groans”.

We live in a groaning world.

‘The time is out of joint: O cursed spite,
That ever I was born to set it right!’

[Gary Childress]

Come to think of it, if a black helicopter suddenly started hovering over my house right now, I would probably shit a brick! Knock on wood and avoid stepping on a crack; who knows what's going to happen in the world! I mean, I live not far from the Kennedy Space Center. What if NASA keeps the black helicopters hangared there? Were the moon landings faked? It certainly seems possible. The shadows in the photos seem a little off for people standing on the actual moon.

[Alexis Jacobi]

In 1 Corinthians 15:23 there is an important message:

But there is an order to this resurrection: Christ was raised as the first of the harvest; then all who belong to Christ will be raised when he comes back.

This is why Catholicism places such emphasis on the decision of the individual to realize what is conceived as the most important realization and turning: that we are, the Earth is, in a process of transformation, and “history” is in this sense the process by which the transformation is occurring.

So God descended and did for man what needed to be done to begin a process that then moves, inexorably, to its finality: a totally transformed creation.

Therefore — and here I do wish to insist on the linkage between these ideas, so foundational to the Occident — we have some means at our disposal to view and to understand the quite frankly psychotic groanings of men in our world today. The foundations are shaking. There is tremendous fear, angst, apprehension and paranoid imaginings of upwelling of totally disruptive and indeed overturning possibilities.

[Gary Childress]

Therefore — and here I do wish to insist on the linkage between these ideas, so foundational to the Occident — we have some means at our disposal to view and to understand the quite frankly psychotic groanings of men in our world today. The foundations are shaking.

What about the psychotic groanings of people 2000 years ago? Can we understand them too?

[phyllo]

In your case you do not believe or sense there is any such divinity. So any description of “God’s rights” cannot make any sense. Your interaction with the question ends there, no?

I'm quite capable of dealing with hypothetical situations.

In this hypothetical God has established that men will serve a range of principles defined as moral. Men either realize (intuit) that obligation, or they rebel against it.

Your move …

First of all, men and women have to establish that these "principles" actually come from God. Good luck with that, since all we have is people talking and writing about what God wants. If God is talking to you, there is an excellent possibility that you are talking to yourself. A God which makes a direct address to the general population would be something.

Next, men and women would have to decide if they want to go along with these "principles". It's not "realizing that obligation" or "rebelling". It's judging whether these principles are good or bad. Judging whether this God is good or bad.

One decides to serve, to follow, to obey or not.

I don't doubt that some will just turn off their minds and blindly do whatever their God says to do.

The rest, hopefully the vast majority , will reason, judge, evaluate, think and apply standards to God and God's Principles.

[Alexis Jacobi]

There is a way to examine Hamlet if it is seen as sacred art: Art dealing on man’s psychology, the realization of our condition that St Paul sums up as “groaning”.

From Shakespeare in the Light of Sacred Art by Marin Lings:

The Queen is not merely Hamlet's mother; she is his whole ancestral line going back to Eve herself; and inasmuch as she is Eve, she represents, in general, the fallen human soul, especially in its passive aspect. In other words, she represents that passivity which in man's primordial state was turned towards Heaven and which after it lost contact with the Spirit has come more or less under the sway of the devil or, in the words of the play, having sated itself in a celestial bed has come to prey on garbage. Like the father and son in Henry IV, mother and son here can each be taken separately as representing 'Everyman', but above all they are to be taken together as constituting fallen human soul, Hamlet himself being the personification of its active aspect — its conscience and its intelligence. The attitude of the son towards his mother, which many people consider to be something of an enigma and which has prompted more than one grotesque explanation, is amply explained if we consider that allegorically mother and son are one person, different faculties of one and thesame soul.

[Gary Childress]

In your case you do not believe or sense there is any such divinity. So any description of “God’s rights” cannot make any sense. Your interaction with the question ends there, no?

I'm quite capable of dealing with hypothetical situations.

In this hypothetical God has established that men will serve a range of principles defined as moral. Men either realize (intuit) that obligation, or they rebel against it.

Your move …

First of all, men and women have to establish that these "principles" actually come from God. Good luck with that, since all we have is people talking and writing about what God wants. If God is talking to you, there is an excellent possibility that you are talking to yourself. A God which makes a direct address to the general population would be something.

Next, men and women would have to decide if they want to go along with these "principles". It's not "realizing that obligation" or "rebelling". It's judging whether these principles are good or bad. Judging whether this God is good or bad.

One decides to serve, to follow, to obey or not.

I don't doubt that some will just turn off their minds and blindly do whatever their God says to do.

The rest, hopefully the vast majority , will reason, judge, evaluate, think and apply standards to God and God's Principles.

The above actually sounds pretty rational and reasonable. Don't ruin a perfectly good metaphysical jaunt into the human imagination! I plan on emailing the American tabloid, the National Enquirer, with my revelations!

[Alexis Jacobi]

The rest, hopefully the vast majority, will reason, judge, evaluate, think and apply standards to God and God's Principles.

But you must admit, as I have been pointing out, that in your case, for you, it is all phantasy. It has no real substance. Why do you even speak of God and God’s principles when, for you, these are not real?

You really need to clarify and double-down on where in fact you stand, Phyllo.

[phyllo]

Morality means, quite precisely, actions and ethics which previsualize the World to Come and, as I have often said, morality of a Christian type is “contradictory” to the present ways of Nature, and Nature is a corrupted and terrible state — a state where slavery predominates.

I hope that "ethics which previsualize the World to Come" means evaluating the consequences of actions otherwise it's nutty.

"Nature is corrupted" - God created Nature. If humans can corrupt Nature, then how impotent is God? How little foresight did God have?