| |
| Gods |  And perhaps, from their reticene we can deduce, Einstein was not promoting a theory with punctual irony, but more opening a debate, surreptitiously: If he was actually saying God does exist, then from a modern scientific perspective, it might be fraudulent, if not dishonest to continue this blatant fabrication that Gods do not exist beyond this mortal realm; for to do so might just produce a calamity all of us would wish to avoid.
For if there is more than one God, and they are indeed dimensional, then what might that pose for our future? To abandon all hope and faith in God, as science suggest may inevitably produce a wanton world riddled with corruption, licentiousness and depravity, which some might argue has been around for years anyway, so what difference would it make?
But my point is this, if God or Gods do only survive by the principle of worship, then to vacate that belief could be a final reference to our own basic survival. It would be pretentious for anyone of us to say we comprehend or fully understand the ecumenical matters that wash across our world. Because we don't. We know very little of science, the laws of physics and cosmology, and even less of God.
Yet if Gods do tenant our universe, as dimensional Gods, as the Romans and Greeks might have had, then a natural assumption to make would be, they will seek to extend their power and influence. Some people might say that nonsense, and I suppose, if I viewed the hypothesis partially from the scientific world, which I'm more than capable of doing, then I might agree. But let us just momentarily keep in mind some of that scientic criteria, the way we discovered the nothingness.
Before we actually wrote the chapter on the nothingness, most might have ridiculed a nothingness belief, but when we examine, forensically, the text definition under lexicon context we see parameters shift to a more explicable location. And therefore, from a theologian interpretation we could assume that God has certain characteristics similar to our own; and I will not suggest feature contusions, or recognizable traits, but more the principle which envelopes us all, our action and thoughts.
If biblical teaching is right, and man was created in God's image, the image identifiable should be sense rather than substance, then from our own actions we should assume God, or Gods must carry with them certain goals - and ambitions.
And if that translates into anything we might be capable of viewing objectively, which I very much doubt, due to preconceived ideas and notions that have already been decided upon without examination, then I honestly believe our future might be precarious at best.
So God might police our region of space?
I would personally say that over simplify's things; although it might allow us to pursue a more solid ambit for God or God(s) introduction into our known universe in the first place.
We've already stated, there's nothing in the universe that manifests, emerges or happens without doing so for a reason. And bear in mind we view these events laterally, simply because we have no deep insight into the way things actually are. It's easy in life to dismiss beliefs, especially when we cannot squeeze them into our own vision of life, but when a human being chooses to change the rules, they may cause irreparable damage.
To treat God similar to a democratic process, where we choose governing rules a la carte could signal an immediate end of existence. If indeed God does inhabit our region of the universe for a specific purpose, and we forsake that identity, we might mistakenly abandon also our very own region of space; for if there are other Gods out there, waiting patiently to stake a claim on our area, and we have run the only policeman in town, (our God) out, then who will protect us from those marauding universal cut-throats heading our way. The chances are, no one will save us, we will be resigned to oblivion and left to fester in a wanton savagery described in biblical terms as Evil.
Anthology forward one page back one page
|
|
| |
|
» 
