Category Archives: Advanced

Atheism’s Core Problem

The Atheistic belief revolves around certain philosophical arguments to justify its stance. Logically it is based on an impossibility, you cannot prove a negative. Since proving that something does not exist is an impossibility, the default is to use absurdity. Arguments such as, “Could God make a rock so heavy, that he could not lift it?” or “God is as real as a flying spaghetti monster.” All of the logical absurdity arguments are always rooted in some form of physical realm, they have to be, because it is only in the physical realm one can create a logical absurdity. If an extra dimensional entity exists it cannot be proven or disproved using basic physics. Even though as a race our understanding of the extra dimensions is increasing, the atheistic belief cannot form logical absurdities using our newly discovered knowledge because physically rooted absurdities do not hold up under our new knowledge.

One of the first monotheistic religions to exist was Judaism and it put forward the idea that God had no physical attributes what so ever. This in itself was a complex subject matter that humans in the physical realm have a hard time grasping. It is only when God appears (real or not) to manifest physically that the God concept can be attacked. These physical forms are many with not the least of which of course being religion.

However, if one is to believe in an extra dimensional entity that is present in all things then one must also accept that God is also present in Atheism and uses it as a tool for its ultimate purpose. What is presented in Atheism instead is a standing opposing character reference. Despite their unwavering need to define a godless reality, they never the less proceed to apply universal physical traits to God in order to make the concept vulnerable, in their belief, to attack. The most important universal characteristic they apply is that of God being good. This question usually takes the form of, “If God is good why does God allow this certain bad event to occur.” The logical route isn’t that God is bad, instead they force a different choice, “God is either good or does not exist.” This of course is because regardless of actual existence, the definition of God we all know and Atheism reviles and fights against anything that seems to counter our internal definition of God. Atheism leads the fight against those who use God to their own selfish gratification.

Objectively we know that suffering is good. Suffering drives us and without suffering we would not have choice. Objectivity does not seem to work with atheism when it comes to proving God. We want God to be personally self serving, if God cannot satisfy our most selfish of desires, God does not exist. However, this is important because it drives selfishness into a corner. It makes us question our very essence which is that of selfishness and selfishness seems completely incompatible with God.

Which bring us to the crux, if any application of selfishness makes God absurd or incomprehensible to us, why is that? Its because God cannot be understood in any selfish definition because an ultimate extra dimensional entity is the antithesis of selfishness. The paradox serves a specific purpose, to help us define something that is our opposite.


The End of Discovery

r317168_1406985A group of individuals stand on an observation deck of a space station over looking earth. They watch the blue orb below as a female voice talks to them, “This is earth, our originator. While it has the highest biological diversity in our galaxy, it also has the highest historical death toll of organic life.” A child no more then 10 years old who had went through flash education looks over at the woman, “What is your opinion of the great human exodus from earth?” The woman snaps back to reality from reading her rehearsed script from memory, “Well there was really no reason to leave. After the human race completed cellular re-calibration, there was nothing stopping us from living there indefinitely.” The woman paused for a moment and then breathing out said, “I am of the opinion that there is the hope that something new will emerge from it that can associate itself with us.” The child looked at the woman with an inquisitive look, “You mean you were of the opinion right? According to hyper quantum mechanics we can predict everything that will happen on that planet down to the atom.” The woman frowned a bit, “Yes, of course, I meant was of the opinion.”

There is a commonly held belief that as much as we discover, there will always be more. Another concept that is related to this is that even if we figured out how everything works in science, there will always be the spiritual realm to discover. What if there is a limit? A critical mass of knowledge that can explain everything. Let’s hypothetically imagine for a moment that through neurotheology we could explain things like spirituality, religion, and we even discover that, through some means we are currently not fully aware of, our brains are all communicating with each other and this explains everything from coincidence to remote viewing. How would we handle this?

If the universe is discovered and we can even explain spirituality, what would the future of humanity hold? This idea might be disastrous to some and I don’t think it would be limited to those deeply religious or spiritual individuals either. A lot of scientists, including famous atheist Richard Dawkins, believe that we don’t need religion because there is so much to be discovered in science. Science is an endless well of things that will astound us, that is the hope, but what if they are wrong? I also personally believe that a lot of scientists who maintain religious ties do so because they personally want to believe that there will always be something more for them to discover. Francis Collins, one of the primary directors of the human genome project, is an evangelical christian.

“This universe is nothing but a womb.”

There is a lot of different ideas about our existence such as us being the product of a divine entity, a product of chemical chance, and also that we are all God. If all those ideas were wrong, what would we be? We’re not a creation of a third party (God), we are not here simply by chemical chance (a mere bi-product of galaxy emergence), and we are also not God. So what are we? This might seem like a logical impossibility, surely one of those previous ideas has to be the correct one. There is another possible explanation and that is we are the birth place of that thing we call God or as I title the process, Elolight. This universe is nothing but a womb and every life form that emerges in it has nothing more then the potential of ripping a multidimensional tear in the universe to escape to a reality beyond this one. The biggest danger is not discovery, or that things will die, the biggest danger is that this universe will not give birth to its intended child.

A New Driving Force

Deep within every religion, or every belief system, is an insidious truth that has been masked not by an organized conspiracy or a shady divine entity but instead it is concealed by ourselves. The Christian church will often quote a verse that states the wages of sin is death as they promote your eternal salvation and life. There is a problem with this belief because the reason any of us are alive is because of sin based on their belief. According to genesis it was eve sinning that forced them to procreate which lead to us. The christian framework doesn’t really support this because on one hand it says God loves us and then on the other hand says that God is not responsible for evil. If God did not Orchestate the events in the garden of Eden then God never had any intention of any of us living and if he did he is responsible for orchestrating sin.

However, I am not particularly interested in that debate because of regardless of the outcome I know something else to be true. Our world is not moved by good, it is moved by selfishness masquerading as good. Let’s take two very hyperbolic examples Starbucks and murder. One is good and the other one is evil but both of them utilize the exact same method and belief system. In one you had the creator of Starbucks do something to try and modify the world so it could be made a better place for himself. In the other situation (murder) you have someone taking a life in order to modify their world in an attempt (be it a very bad one) to change their world. Now we have a majority agreement that murder is bad since none of us want to be murdered and we have come to the conclusion that this particular selfishness should not be allowed.

Every religion on the planet has one primary objective and that is to indulge our most selfish deepest desires. There is nothing more selfish then wanting to live forever and this desire is so deep religions promise it to get converts in droves. Even helping other is an investment in our personal selfishness because ultimately we do on to others as we want to have done to ourselves. This is all caused by our interpersonal independence driven by our ego that we are the most important thing in the universe. Humans are so important that God made an entire planet for us and everything it does has to involve us. We’re so great that it is completely fathomable that God would come as various humans because that only makes sense right?

Whether it is reaching a zen like state or building a futuristic reality they both have the goal of satisfying us.

Our arrogance is so great that we define everything by our standard. We are corrupt and we can’t avoid it because everything in us is about what we can get. We define spiritual truth by how it makes us feel not what is actually true. Individuality is defended aggressively because this desire feeds our deepest of selfish desires. Whether it is reaching a divine zen like state or building a futuristic reality they both have the goal of satisfying us. If evil is something to be avoided it is also the most powerful and influential force in the universe. All religions are setup to fail because their ultimate goal is about satisfying the self but we will ultimately want something more.

We will want more then heaven, we will want more then death, we will want more then life. If we define good and evil simply as events that positively or negatively affect us then there is no good or evil but just selfish forces of different colors designed to make the happy chemicals fire off in our brain. If we can’t escape our perpetual need to satisfy our corporeal selves there is no need to be concerned with the after-life and hell because we have already arrived. Don’t let yourself be fooled by those claiming not to be materialistic because the exchange of material goods in this world for a potential everlasting life in the next is satisfying the corporeal need to live forever.

The Perfect Feeling

We are all obsessed with our feelings whether we acknowledge it or not. When evil acts happen around us we feel horrible and we are left asking ourselves why? The reality is a trait both good and evil share is they are both highly addictive. Most of us generally walk down the path of light because goodness corresponds directly to human survival. However, on both paths their is the hope of revelation. We are constantly hunting down the revelation of how the universe functions and by this I mean we seek to understand if the world is either good or evil. Many humans who witness injustice will feel deeply disturbed and try to right the wrong because the universe functioning the way they need is critical to their psyche.

The concepts we know as good and evil are nothing more then masks for our selfish desires and a veil to the prison we are in.

How can evil truly exist if every evil act we classify as evil can lead to positives? Shootings can draw communities together  and even make presidential candidates stop fighting and reflect. If evil is simply acts that would vanish with our demise then evil is not a persistent force. The reality is that the true evil of the universe, the invisible force that permeates all existence, is the fight. The concepts we know as good and evil are nothing more then masks for our selfish desires and a veil to the prison we are in.

We all feel there is something wrong with the universe and even someone who feels they have discovered the truth through religion longs to leave this universe. This idea has been with us since Plato and The Allegory of the Cave. All pleasure and pain is ultimately short lived but the war in our universe will continue until we choose to stop.

We all desire to gain more of certain feelings such as happiness, peace, or power. All of these feelings are fleeting because they are merely reactions to an imperfect world. We are designed to pursue these feelings because they satisfy the biological. Even meditation, the “hallmark” of spirituality, is merely a feeling to suppress the negative feeling of noise and chaos. So what is the perfect feeling?

The perfect feeling is not a sensation like we traditionally know it, it can be seen as post-peace. It’s an existence in a self perpetuating presence that is void of chaos and corruption. If one gains the feeling in this reality it is momentary at best. If one feels the perfect feeling, the moment they leave it, it will change to something else because the feeling can’t be felt or understood within the confines of our chaotic subjective existence. It can’t be compared to other feelings because it is only a feeling because there is no other close word for it. This 4th dimensional feeling can only be felt from within itself and this is what we are striving for with ascension.

Perfect Selflessness

“I derive neither pleasure or sadness from giving. I give not because I must but because it is an all consuming characteristic of what I am. It is not a desire or a thirst and I wish for nothing in return except for the capability to continue doing it but I do not give to sustain this ability.” – A possibility of Elolight.

There is not very much that gives as much joy as giving. Yet even our most noblest of intentions has roots in want. We help others because we want to improve the world for ourselves. It is impossible to escape this reality but we can start to imagine this capability even if we don’t possess it yet.

Marx Promoted Capitalism Accidentally

The biggest mistake Marx made was informing the group he referred to as the  proletariat of what they would ultimately do. Marx believed that a series of events would occur which would ultimately lead to socialism and communism all fueled by the engine of capitalism. Capitalism would eventually turn over after a widespread proletariat revolution and there was a high probability this would of happened organically but because of activism it stopped.

Instead of a wide spread revolution what you got was micro revolutions that occurred from company to company in the form of unions. The unions demanded higher wages and then got them. This effectively increased the standard quality of life for the average proletariat which made a wide spread revolution improbable and most likely impossible.

Marx believed, some what as I do, that as the means of production got better this would slowly make capitalism collapse in on itself. If you get good enough at producing things then less humans are needed and less will have jobs and ultimately this group may become cohesive and demand the abundance. The biggest irony is that the biggest hurdle to a socialist/communist revolution is greed by the proletariat. By visualizing a socialist utopia, the proletariat instead of letting capitalism run its pure and absolute course which would of lead to what they wanted instead demanded the changes now, the problem is that society is not actually at a point where it could ever support something like pure socialism or communism. We don’t have super abundance.

If you need to wait 10 minutes for bread, you just spent 10 minutes of your total net worth or the cost of the bread was 10 minutes.

Super abundance means that if the means of production were taken over by a co-operative there would be so much there would never be a wait. If you have to stand in line to get something that is your personal currency or money, it doesn’t matter that it does not have a physical representation, it’s still a currency. Let me elaborate, if you need to wait 10 minutes for bread, you just spent 10 minutes of your total net worth or the cost of the bread was 10 minutes. If you want to get a new car and the wait is 6 months, the cost is 6 months. If there is any form of waiting super abundance does not exist. The problem with these systems is that the people in control end up with more time (currency) because they can get things faster. It’s capitalism but instead of rewarding innovation or passion, it rewards authority. This is the problem with all modern day political philosophies on socialism and communism they negate the fact that currency will always exist as long as there is scarcity. The only difference between communism and capitalism is that in communism the currency is in time and the people in charge of the time didn’t have to do anything to get more of it. This will of course lead to a drastic decrease in quality of life because corruption is much harder to prove.

The only difference between communism and capitalism is that in communism the currency is in time and the people in charge of the time didn’t have to do anything to get more of it.

In order to have a wide spread revolution you would need a wide spread discontent. The problem is as the means of production increases the capitalists can continually to marginally increase the standard quality of life for their workers to make sure a revolution never happens. However, even if you could have a revolution what would happen? It might work temporarily but because of the issues stated above, and the lack of super abundance, people’s quality of life would drastically decrease which would ultimately lead people back to capitalism and proclaim these other political systems do not work.

The dream, in my opinion, of Elolight is super abundance where we can get anything we want or need in almost an instant and there is a fundamental change in human psychology. However, we cannot jump directly to this because it is impossible. Implementing political systems that may work far far in the future now will only set us back when they ultimately collapse and force us to get back on the original course we were on.

The Plight

Everything complex begins as simple and crude. Advancement comes at the price of its predecessors. However, advancement can take place only within the confines of chaos and with a catalyst of some sort. In the case of humans the catalyst is scarcity which is the scarcity of resources and time.

This plight which is the catalyst for evolution is also the catalyst for destruction. In order to evolve further humans must gain new catalysts and depreciate current ones. The process of conversion from the new to old cannot be instantaneous, it must be progressive.

While all primitive instincts must be phased out eventually to ascend, they cannot be phased out without an alternative and in some cases may require biological modification and/or evolution. For instance if procreation was turned to mechanical means, humans would still have the primitive instinct to copulate. Also sex is a mechanism for justifying chaos. While absolute peace may be far superior to any form of euphoria, we are incapable of experiencing complete peace short of absolute and completed Ascension. So pleasure must remain with us until the final pleasure is Ascension.

All happiness is a justification of chaos. In the absence of chaos, happiness does not exist, there is only peace. Every happy moment is an indication of temporary subjective ordering of life and chaos. Absolute happiness is the absolution of emotion. Since this objective is far off, the pursuit of purified happiness and peace are the most straight forward method to Ascension.

  1. Chaos Exists
  2. Happiness is the ordering of chaos
  3. Less Chaos equals more happiness
  4. No Chaos equals peace, but no happiness
  5. No emotion equals Ascension

When I reference Chaos, I am not only referring to external circumstance, but internal circumstance as well. A person’s life may be completely ordered on the outside but due to emotion they may be chaotic on the inside. Emotion is a mechanism of ordering internal chaos. While we should strive to order the external, without internal management, no amount of external order will affect one’s inside state. The Flow is actually a form of temporary external chaos that results in an internal ordering for better or for worse. It is almost always an external event that push us to change, however, in very rare instances one can have an internal event that makes them see their current life in a different state.

Let me give an example, someone I knew hated their job but they still went every day. Every day they did the exact same thing and became emotionally bored. While his life was externally ordered, inside he was chaos. He was constantly wrestling with what he should do with his life. He eventually quit and moved on to a he job he found more fulfilling. There was not a major shift of order from one job to the next, but what did change was the order inside of him. If I believed complete external order would lead to happiness, I would not believe in the flow. The flow is sometimes temporary or longer lasting moments of external chaos that lead to potentially more happiness. If emotion did not exist, he would of never got bored, and therefore would of potentially been happy /content with the work he was originally doing. Emotion exists in order to consolidate and order our internal state.