God’s expanding universe

It is a part of science’s recorded history that in the 1920s astronomers discovered that the universe was not static, but expanding. Later, it was discovered that this expansion was even speeding up!

This expansion is not just an explosion of matter (Big Bang) or the mere distribution of energy and momentum into space but the expansion of spacetime and reality itself. To account for this expansion and its acceleration, physicists theorize that the universe might also consist of “black energy,” which opposes the force of gravity.

I would like to challenge the premise of the two above paragraphs. First, that the concept of an expanding universe is a 20th century discovery. Scientist/theologian Emanuel Swedenborg made the same assertion in the 18th century.

Second, Swedenborg did not attribute this expansion to any kind of physical principle, but to a theological one. His model of reality starts with an Infinite Creator-God. He maintained that all created (finite) structures are recipient forms of God’s creative influence. To put this into scientific language, God’s perpetual influence represents the fluxes of active information. Information is form, therefore it is a form adapted to the disposition of the quality of its dynamical force.

Since this force has its origins in God’s Infinite love, there is a succession of causal processes by which love finds form in usefulness and utility from spiritual first principles all the way down into inert matter and its subsequent cohesion into more complex structures, including the human brain.

Nothing emerges into time and space unless it has utility or serves some purpose. This usefulness in all things of the universe are analogs of God’s goodness (love) and is the reason why all created forms are in relationship and are simultaneously connected non-locally from the non-material unifying force of love.

So all nature is formed by and reacts to God’s essential nature of infinite goodness and utility. Nature is expanding because in order to reflect and express a more perfect conductivity to this divine influence, it must constantly expand in its operations. This expansion takes place horizontally and vertically. Horizontally through the continuing creation and expansion of spacetime and new matter (star nurseries). Vertically through the increase and evolution of complexity and the emergence of intelligent life forms and human consciousness.

It is through human consciousness that God can make Himself known to humanity and form real relationships with each of us through spiritual principles of reciprocal love. By choosing spiritual values to live by, we help the Creator form a spiritual body within us that can live beyond the constraints of space and time and expand our serviceableness to eternity. Religion refers to this infinitely expansive realm of evolved and noble utility as heaven.

My new book Proving God provides a more in-depth look at this topic, not from mere faith but from a scientifically plausible theory.

Interested? Visit http://www.provinggod.com

About these ads

About thegodguy

EDWARD F. SYLVIA, M.T.S. Philosopher/Theologian Edward F. Sylvia attended the School of Visual Arts in New York and received his Master of Theological Studies at the Pacific School of Religion in Berkeley, CA and a Certificate of Swedenborgian Studies from the Swedenborgian House of Studies. He is a member of the Center for Theology and the Natural Sciences (C.T.N.S.) and the Swedenborg Scientific Association (S.S.A.). Award-winning author of "Sermon From the Compost Pile: Seven Steps Toward Creating An Inner Garden" and "Proving God," which fulfills a continuing vision that God’s fingerprints of love can be found everywhere in the manifest universe. His most recent book, "Swedenborg & Gurdjieff: The Missing Links" is an edgy collection of anti-intuitive essays for personal transformation that challenges and inspires. He has been a student of the ideas of both Emanuel Swedenborg and George I. Gurdjieff for over thirty years. Read more about TheGodGuy, his books and his ideas at http://www.staircasepress.com
This entry was posted in god, Life after death, love, Reality, religion, science, spirituality, unity and tagged , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to God’s expanding universe

  1. “Vertically through the increase and evolution of complexity and the emergence of intelligent life forms and human consciousness.”

    Precisely, it’s here, in “vertical dimension” that the whole concept has huge problems. If emergence of ANY human consciousness was the final purpose, then it’s done long ago and history since then is nonsense (religions including). Looking at the result, one can assume, however, that this rudimentary level of consciousness cannot be the final purpose of (even) earthly evolution in principle: it’s a crudely half-done pancake. What is particularly surprising is that this half-finished (practically inoperative) product did not follow that universal evolutionary process of “complexity growth” upgrading it to a minimum complete version during especially the last two millennia of “new-world” history, coinciding precisely with the “Christian era”. Indeed, there was no progress (and even degradation instead, especially in the very last period) of human intelligence since “classic” civilisations of ancient world. It is simply astonishing taking into account the huge empirical, technical, scientific and cultural progress during the same period. That’s why the standard argument to “wait” evidently fails: if there was no progress of consciousness in this indeed quite “enlightening”, now ending period and nothing indicates it today (rather the opposite, quite visibly), then it cannot progress by any means as such, without a new “extraordinary” miracle (direct divine intervention), which is “another matter”, unpredictable and apparently not in the habits of local divinity. Another standard argument about “good God but bad man” doesn’t apply here either as man’s evolution is not about any fixed qualities of the species (and not really guided by its direct efforts).

    It follows then that God’s purpose itself is not what you assume it to be based on “vertical evolution” argument. Indeed, why are you so sure that “man’s paradise” is the only possible “higher” (spiritual, divine) purpose? It’s rather a too “anthropomorphic” way of thinking: because we’d like to have an earthly paradise for us here, then God certainly wants its spiritual version out there. What if “spiritual reality” is much more subtle (complex!) than an advanced version of the United States of America for the happy few? :) In any case, this consciousness evolution contradiction (i.e. the absence of any its progress at all, there where it should take place by all means) is a strong indication in that direction, especially because consciousness is certainly a strongly spiritually involved property.

    And by the way, the standard Big Bang expansion is certainly a wrong idea resulting from artificial limitations of mechanistic science and showing today omnipresent fatal contradictions (“dark energy” is only one of them). One gets a major and increasingly acknowledged “(standard) cosmology crisis” today. Big Bang (universe expansion idea) is maintained as “standard (and unique valid) theory” only because of the ultimate corruption of official science structure today (too far from any good indeed!) as explicitly acknowledged by the huge and growing proportion of professional scientists (multiple references are readily available). This is what I tried to explain in previous comments: when you try to rely, even only “spiritually”, on (totally deficient) today’s science framework, you risk losing together with its (provably) very limited concepts. In particular, that same official science can neither provide a consistent definition of complexity, while boldly manipulating with this popular notion (you also seem to rely seriously upon it): is it an “objective” and reliable form of knowledge?

  2. A related question is why people like you so much fascinated by maybe indeed remarkable but rather old “unconventional” theology accept so easily and without doubt as “the most plausible” the official science dogma, while it’s certainly much more limited with respect to physical reality than traditional religion with respect to “spiritual reality”? In other words, even in our “enlightened” epoch, should a much more consistent science framework first become old and forgotten/deformed (with its author being definitely dead for a long time) before being “rediscovered” as a much better basis for those “spiritual” studies? If you’re not dogmatic in “spiritual” matters, why you stick so definitely to scientific, much uglier dogmas (and related limited way of thinking)? There is deep contradiction here with respect to your major idea of spiritual progress, etc. The latter somehow starts already here, in this life, right? Don’t you see that official science has really nothing to do with it and is actually strongly opposed to it? Why not to support something much more consistent and in particular spiritually rich (in science), by efforts of those who are so much interested in spiritual progress? These ones are not missing, especially in USA (different versions and some are VERY powerful), but are so incredibly limited by the evidently limited official science framework (after strongly insisting on how they are unlimited in the most advanced sense)… Nothing new without direct order from Jesus Christ in person? But I think he already gave it, just in that direction of “open doors”…

  3. thegodguy says:

    Dear Andrei,

    Thank you for the intellectual depth of your thought. You yourself have admitted that these complex issues cannot be adequately addressed in a blog post. I choose various topics to spark interest in my upcoming book which was written to more adequately address challenges like yours.

    Where the heck did you get the idea that I equate spiritual reality to an advanced version of the United States of America?

    The evolution of complexity is indeed vertical because it leads to increased intelligence and consciousness until it becomes first-person phenomenal experience in the human race. It is subjective, person-level experience that allows humans to choose what they value most. Humans have made poor choices from self-prudence and ego-reasoning. The problems of the world that you allude to are the results of life-choices made from faulty reasoning.

    Consciousness is indeed a spiritually involved property because it is the living activity of a person’s “Ruling Love.” Love (like and dislike) focuses human attention and organizes one’s memory data into real coherent structure. What is unrecognized is that this psycho-structure represents the continuing vertical trajectory of bio-complexity into a non-material realm.

    Why do you insist that I embrace official science? My scientific framework challenges the New Paradigm physics and its materialistic ideology. I try to use similar scientific language merely to bring them into the discussion.

    Again, from the things you have shared with me and my readers I know we are in more agreement than in disagreement. Your continued dialog is appreciated.

    By the way, please revisit http://www.swedenborg.com

    It was corrupted because I had left out a “n” in the web address.

    Spiritually yours,
    TheGodGuy

    .

  4. You don’t say in your answer why the purpose of spiritual reality must be paradise for human “souls”. It could well be spiritual but different from “paradise for (almost) all” (like USA in this physical world :) ). For example, it could rather be something in the direction of the famous novel/film 2001: A Space Odyssey, i.e. creation of new (different) worlds from certain “advanced” elements of this world, etc., or any other divine purpose we can even hardly guess from within our quite low, basically material reality. Why should we be so advanced here as to be able to guess unambiguously the genuine purpose of God? After all, any canonical religion source, even taken completely seriously, is but a finite, actually very limited representation of infinite divinity that should be accessible to massive, particularly limited level of consciousness… And the rest is our more or less “logical” or “attractive” guesses that may be arbitrary different from the unreduced spiritual reality out there. The strange absence of progress of consciousness I discuss above may be a sign of such other purposes of spiritual reality.

  5. thegodguy says:

    Dear Andrei,

    See my blog post entitled “The Purpose of Creation.” Again this is just a tiny sampling of how I address God’s purpose in both creation and evolution in my upcoming book. It is consistent with a God of Infinite love.

    Other chapters in my book address the topological features of the spiritual world as well as why there is a retardation in the progress of human consciousness. The topic of human consciousness and its spiritual potentials can only be adequately expressed from a multi-level model of the human cognitive architecture. The human intellect and its various functions are not continuous but are discrete. For instance, the cognitive functions of human imagination and rational thought are as different from each other as a square is to its root, a general to its particular, or a compound to its simple.

    There are no guesses because principles are applied to models with explanatory and predictive powers. I even show that these distinct levels of mind follow geometrical and mathematical laws by which constraints are removed and mental process becomes more expansive and abstract.

    Spiritually yours,
    TheGodGuy

  6. You still avoid direct answers (sorry but I reject persisting reference to your future book – if you care most about the truth itself), but let me approach it from another side by saying that irrespective of details, your entire teaching is too far away from today’s physical world realities, tendencies and humans. It’s true that you’re talking mainly about “another world”, but you’re obviously addressing this-world dwellers and show a big interest in their (positive) reaction. In addition, according to the teaching, there are strong links between “this” and “that” life. But virtually all that you say here would be true “always”, irrespective of particular situation in the world and state of mind of its dwellers. However, this state of the world and dominating level of consciousness of its human dwellers, as well as quite evident and very strong change of both, are very special, unprecedented today. Specifically, if the “eternal” curve of complexity and consciousness growth goes always upwards, this particular planetary civilisation today goes down in a catastrophically self-amplifying way, with very tangible, both “material” and “mental”, practical results. This “exponential divergence” is a major, irreducible and quite significant effect, for both “this” and “that” world, which you seem to avoid. In this VERY special, unusual situation you come out before those real people and preach “as usual”, though maybe defending some “unorthodox” teaching (but dating from several centuries ago). Humans are massively falling in heavy loss, despair and confusion (which is especially evident beyond your vast but relatively very small “earthly paradise”), and some highly “educated” and “inspired” prophets “from the centre” come to tell them only that they should behave well to get to paradise… A bit too familiar unfortunately and isn’t really inspiring…

    It’s not really a reproach, I just note that something is wrong in this (now quickly growing) difference between that allegedly “wise” but finally “traditional” advice (up to details of interpretation of your interest but honestly of less importance for them, simple candidates to paradise) and real-time-bifurcating reality… What do you imagine, after all, that people will massively read your book and massively change in the direction of paradise? Or if it’s only for a disappearing minority of some interested scholars and “advanced believers“, should we deduce that they are the only promising candidates to paradise? I can see only catastrophically growing ruptures, already within this world, let alone between this and that world…

    You always say, optimistically, “we think in the same direction”. But who “we”, two of us or maybe yet a few dozens or hundreds of others (with internal differences exponentially growing with scale, even for them)? And all of it happens in a practically exploding world (how about the real, human “Big Bang”, here and how? :) ), so that even though we may think, exceptionally, in a similar way, we are forced to live in very different, always diverging ways. I think you would be surprised about how huge real-life and human differences actually are in this world beyond its decorated “developed” facades closer to you, and they continue to grow explosively… In such a world, no way for ANY business as usual, however “divine” it may be, especially when some of us risk getting to that another world – or at least to a real hell in this world – very, very soon and quite ahead of usually expected schedule, irrespective of behaviour and personal progress… Time for war, not a sermon, figuratively speaking. I hope figuratively…

    Maybe universe is expanding, but something closer to us is strongly shrinking, the internal “universe” of dominating, real human consciousness (as shown by evolution of real human interests). Good luck to you in the universe but … which one, when they are so different? Absolutely dominating human universe is already so small that to preach a paradise successfully, you’d better propose its working, tangible version accessible here and now! :)

  7. thegodguy says:

    Dear Andrei,

    My statements that we think alike are not based on our similar solutions but in our similar concerns for a degenerating world. I am not trying to take credit for your world view and belief system.

    You say I avoid direct questions when you yourself have had no response to some details that I have shared with you. If you brush off my statements that the human intellect is multiplexed how can you even evaluate what I am up to?

    Heaven or hell is indeed here and now. These are opposite qualities that we choose to nurture. Heaven (or hell) is not someplace you go to. It is something you become. By watching what people do everyday you can determine what they hold most important and what they nurture (this is their true faith – regardless of what church or institution they claim to belong to.)

    When people die and shed their physical bodies their spirit remains. What is their spirit? Their spirit is what they nurtured – for this is what animates them. Therefore, in the spiritual world, we become who we really are. This is the essence of cosmic justice. And shows why God never judges. The whole point of any divine teaching is to love others! This effects what we nurture (in a way that is eternally favorable).

    Love is the answer. But it is the hardest thing to do. People trust their self-interests and self-judgment. If you challenge this behavior they simply make you an enemy. That is the human predicament!

    By the way, if you think I am dodging your questions, what solutions do you propose?

    The frustration most people have with God is that they expect the divine to “kick ass” and set everything right. People have the right to be assholes! A God of Love gives humans the freedom to choose what they love. We have the power to create our own spiritual reality – otherwise it would not be our own!

    Spiritually yours,
    TheGodGuy

  8. “By the way, if you think I am dodging your questions, what solutions do you propose?”

    Many of them because I do have an explicative, rigorous and clearly extended approach (you can easily find details in my links) that solves real problems, instead of manipulating fruitlessly around heavily reduced, purely abstract “models” (modern official science) or advance various “plausible” hypotheses (philosophy-theology, which I respect more than that openly lying “science”, but it cannot provide truly reliable results either).

    But just because of such a situation, a unifying and definitely right solution would be to join much more explicitly the efforts of all those different (complementary) approaches, like yours and mine, which are actually unified by the tendency to attain the real, really complete (and therefore most consistent) truth, at least with questions of current, reasonable interest. This is especially important right now, just because of that critical divergence we agree upon between the necessary/possible growth of consciousness and its practically dominating fall. Interacting only at a distance, through writings, etc. is not enough, either for ourselves or even more for those others who may have a more general but definite interest in such extended kind of insight. The need for this essential intellectual and spiritual progress is not smaller or less critical today than that for a new religious doctrine two thousand years ago. I don’t think we need and should provide yet another “church” or “religion”, but a qualitatively new kind of much more universal (provably universal, problem-solving!) knowledge – yes, this would be very much needed right now, from any point of view. You may have many more of practical, interactive possibilities than I am, but in any case the “best solution” would be to unify constructively all our results and possibilities (together with all interested people) towards such more active, explicit initiation and progress of that new kind of knowledge, in all possible ways. You may see better if there are real possibilities for it, but if not, then it all will remain at the level of these separated visions and occasional discussions between just few “sages” … not enough for a paradise, probably? :)

    As concerns “multiplexed human intellect”, I agree with you and have my own rigorous theory of (unreduced) consciousness (which they say doesn’t exist), but here too, however interesting a theoretical discussion may be, it would have a much greater meaning if this real intellect wouldn’t remain strangely blocked close to its lowest possible level at a time when higher levels become increasingly indispensable, even for quite practical problem solution in this material world (let alone much greater purposes you’re thinking about). And for the only way to practically develop that “multiplexity” – see again the above universal solution. Just another reason to try it and start moving up, at least for those who really want it. I think they do exist and even would like to participate in that kind of progress but presently it’s a too scattered, only virtual structure, as far as I can see…

  9. thegodguy says:

    Dear Andrei.

    Your zeal is causing you to make unfair judgments.

    You mock me when I say that I have expressed the details of my ideas in a book yet you yourself say that you have “explicative, rigorous and clearly extended approach that solves real problems” if one merely goes to your links. Books, links, they’re the same thing!

    Unifying our results are indeed a possibility but not my priority. Constructive unification requires that we both spend hours learning about each others solutions and finding points of “contact.” Unfortunately, I am about to launch a new book (as you know) and its promotion and marketing present me with major challenges.

    But I take your proposal seriously.

    Spiritually yours,
    TheGodGuy

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s