Is it important to show that Holy Scripture is both a theological and scientific document?

Yes and no.

For much of the faithful who embrace traditional religious doctrine, no other proof of the sacredness and inerrancy of God’s Word is required than the literal meaning of its narratives (and strong faith.) So they are happy campers.

For Swedenborgians, the Divine authority of Holy Scripture is found within higher levels of meaning that can be lawfully abstracted out of the Bible stories.

For scientists, they would need to see how God’s Holy Word could help them formulate an all-encompassing theory of causal process. Such a potent “revelation” would more than turn heads in a world that seems to be spinning out of control!

I personally believe that the biggest paradigm shift in the history of human ideas will be brought on by the descent of the Holy City, The New Jerusalem. This descent of new concepts from heaven will include unexpected insights and evidence that all things in the created world actually came from patterning principles hidden within the multilevel architecture of God’s Words (John 1:1-3).

While Swedenborgians have the best shot at helping to usher in such potent new knowledge that could ultimately unify science and theology, their ecclesiastical trajectory is taking them further away from preparing their deeper theology for a serious encounter with science and the post-modern world.

I have written a new book, Proving God, and created this blog site for the purpose of offering clues to procuring a scientifically plausible theistic model of reality. Of course, one must expect to be hammered from all sides for making such a “preposterous” claim. And indeed, I often get hammered.

While I can easily see how such ideas might be threatening to contemporary academia, even I bristle when fellow Swedenborgians take issue with me. So I will challenge them here and now to explain to me—through their advanced theology—why the numbers “three” and “seven” have the same symbolic meaning? There is more to divine order and divine dynamics than threefoldness.

In an earlier blog post I attempted to show that the different colors of a rainbow were a physical metaphor for the unfolding of biblical passages into a holistic series expressing God’s Divine order. One reader logically challenged this blueprint by asking why my exposition was not arbitrary. Another reader offered a more perplexing challenge—that all my observations of nature and Scripture were merely appearances.

Both “challengers” have studied Swedenborgian doctrine, so I was careful to include the chapter number and verses of the biblical passages that I used to make my point about the divine sequencing of universal causal process—so that they could double check Swedenborg on his own exposition of these very same verses. If one investigates the deeper exegesis of these precise passages, as given by Swedenborg, he or she will learn that the phrases “And it came to pass” or “it was” represent a new distinct state, step, gravitational center and trajectory within the Bible story. My pointing to these non-continuous steps and distinctions is taken from the Lord God’s revealed wisdom, as described by Swedenborg—not merely from appearances of my faulty eyes and intellect.

I fully expect people to follow my leads and make the proper efforts—whether they purchase my book or not.

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
This entry was posted in god, Reality, religion, science, symbolism, unity and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

29 Responses to Is it important to show that Holy Scripture is both a theological and scientific document?

  1. Sue says:

    I’m glad you put “challengers” in quote marks because I don’t think I’m challenging you as much as I am trying to understand you. I did concede that you are right about ‘octaves’ meaning seven and not eight (and not being arbitrary). See? You just had to explain it less scientifically so that I could see your scientific point better.

    Glenn and anon are giving you good advice to make your theory more concrete by applying it to something scientific that most of us understand (i.e. medicine). Something, anything. Doesn’t have to be medicine, that’s just an example of where most people understand science already. That way we could follow you more easily. Once we see what you mean, then we could follow you into infinity/physics/schmynics. It’s just a suggestion: don’t begin so far beyond common science knowledge. Even brilliant scientists will understand better if you begin with medicine. Think of it as a shortcut to the minds of your audience.

    You could ask the question of your readers, “in what ways has Swedenborg or belief in God given you a scientific eureka moment?”

  2. thegodguy says:

    Dear Sue,

    It is not just me who is difficult to understand but Swedenborg. Do you think Swedenborg is completely understood? I feel that my goal will be a success if readers begin to feel they need to make more efforts at understanding the things the Lord God is anxious to share.

    I am challenging minds to think harder. You are asking me to hand things over on a silver platter. Life doesn’t work that way! Only through conscious effort can new knowledge escape the prison of mere memory-data and progress deeper into our inner spirit and essence.

    Spiritually yours,

  3. carla friedrich says:

    The Lord God gave us the Opened Word so that we could infill scientifica with goodness! (moral compass)

    • Sue says:

      I think Carla is exactly right -that’s how science and theology mix. We don’t use the Word to make the scientifica. We use the Word to infill our scientifica with goodness.

      I was thinking of an answer to my question about “how has Sw or belief in God given you a scientific eureka moment?” I can’t think of any time it has for me (but I may think of one eventually). But I do often smell Swedenborgian ideas within science knowledge now. And it does help me confirm the truth of it. I’ll hear something scientific and say “hey, that’s Swedenborgian!” And then I believe it more.

      • thegodguy says:

        Dear Sue,

        You will notice that the theme for this blog is “Love is the ultimate science.” And if you really did read my book you could not help noticing that I addressed science from the dynamics of spiritual love. I even described the “flow of time” as the unfolding of goodness.”

        All truth must be confirmed from the Holy Word. For instance, current quantum mechanics fails to meet the requirements of the correspondence principle. This should tell Swedenborgian scholars that there is something flawed about quantum theory.

        Got to go. Working on a major new book project!

  4. Sue says:

    Actually, I always got the feeling that Swedenborg WAS handing his ideas to me on a silver platter. He had rapport with his audience, always trying to anticipate where he might lose them and taking steps to re-explain. And re-explain. The ideas were difficult, but his explanations were clear.

    You are an excellent writer sometimes (your biographical chapter on Sw. in your latest book comes to mind). And a colorful writer. And an entertaining writer. But I am certain bright scientific minds can’t follow yours when it comes to physics.

  5. Glenn says:


    While I can easily see how such ideas might be threatening to contemporary academia, even I bristle when fellow Swedenborgians take issue with me.

    Do you mean to suggest that you’re one of the last people anyone would expect to bristle when challenged? Or did you mean to say, I can easily see how such ideas might be threatening to contemporary academia, but I bristle when fellow Swedenborgians take issue with me?

    Either way, used to be that you fulminated. Now you’re merely bristling. I’d call that an improvement.

    You mentioned series above.

    Here is one definition of series: A number of objects or events arranged or coming one after the other in succession.

    When Swedenborg’s life is viewed as a series, i.e., when his life is viewed with the aid of a time-line, it is easy to see two things, and soundly conclude a third:

    1) Swedenborg’s cosmology precedes his theology.

    2) Swedenborg’s cosmology was not derived from “higher levels of meaning that can be lawfully abstracted out of the Bible stories.” (It wasn’t until after he had fashioned and expounded upon his cosmology that his mind was opened internally and he could see those higher levels. So he said. And, at least from a series or time-line perspective, no happening is antecedent to any other happening which preceded it. The import is clear, and already has been articulated.)

    3) Given 1) and 2), even if your claim is true–the one about Swedenborg’s cosmology offering a scientific explanation (for the creation of the universe) which is superior to anything offered by quantum theory or classical physics–it does not validly follow that scientists need to see how God’s Holy Word could help them formulate an all-encompassing theory of causal process.

    Lastly, confirming a scientific truth (as scientists in general might understand ‘scientific truth’) in “God’s Holy Word” is not at all the same thing as deriving such scientific truth from “God’s Holy Word”.

    Sue’s suggestion above is a good one. And if you could carry it further and successfully encourage people to publish examples of where they had originally derived ‘scientific truths’ (again, as scientists in general might understand ‘scientific truth’) from “God’s Holy Word”, you would [most certainly] more than turn heads in a world that seems to be spinning out of control.


    PS I’d apologize for continuing the ‘hammering’, but I’m rather fearful that your inner slug would feel deprived of the opportunity to maturely respond with growth to the challenge.

  6. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Sorry my blog posts fall way short of your expectations. That is what I get for attempting to communicate with those who are more mature than I. However, the scientific community would certainly not find Holy Scripture on par with their “rational” explorations and discoveries unless it somehow helped to augment their models of reality.

    (You are right Sue, nobody understands what I am saying.)

    Swedenborgians in general have become too intellectually smug for me (except when it comes to contemplating the lack of growth in their churches).

    Please consider that Swedenborg was being intellectually lead by the Lord all through his life. Therefore, his approach to science was quite different from others of his era. Many Swedenborgians make the mistake that Swedenborg’s science was limited by the times he was living in. I am challenging that assessment.

    When he wrote “Worship and Love of God” he bemoaned the fact that scientists “see everything but understand nothing.” He concluded that his book was written “for angels not men.” When the Lord appeared to him at the London Inn, Swedenborg had been pondering about the deeper mysteries hidden within the Holy Word. He had discovered the concept of correspondences from his scientific efforts (overseen by the Lord). These scientific discoveries were later confirmed by his careful observations in the spiritual world and deeper revelations of the Holy Word.

    Swedenborg’s science was ALWAYS theistic!

    The order (science) in the physical world has its origins in heaven’s Divine order. This Divine order is cleverly “hidden” within the layered architecture of God’s Holy Word. The process of spiritual regeneration follows the laws of evolution and is the Lord God’s wise strategy to allow human organic complexity to be exalted for eternal life in a non-material realm. This is a whole new area for Swedenborgian scholarship – and it fits the bill for rectifying the contemporary and “enlightened” worldview that denounces the authority and inerrancy of Scripture. The New Jerusalem will boldly meet scientists on their on terms!

    Glenn, you are not challenging me. I am challenging you!

    Spiritually yours,

  7. Glenn says:

    Sorry for the flurry of comments. Last one:

    Carla in her comment hit the nail on the head.


  8. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Since Carla hit the nail on the head there is no reason for me to address your “flurry” of comments. By the way, Carla endorsed my book “Proving God.” She is simply verifying the theme for my blog site that “Love is the ultimate science.” If you had read my book (like she has) you would have been aware that my scientific approach is based on the dynamics of love and goodness (uses).

    Spiritually yours,

  9. Glenn says:


    By the way, Carla endorsed my book “Proving God.”

    When I the chance, I’ll be sure to read about that endorsement over at Amazon.


  10. thegodguy says:

    FYI – Her endorsement is printed in the front of the book.

    Spiritually yours,

  11. Glenn says:


    That being the case, I won’t have a chance to read Carla’s endorsement. Unless, that is, arrangements are made with Amazon so that (potential) customers can search inside the book. As for purchasing your book so that I might read Carla’s endorsement, I do take bait, but there is a limit to the bait that I take.

    You recently wrote in another blog,

    …without making distinctions we can never hope to come closer to finding the Lord God’s Truth.

    And Carla wrote above,

    The Lord God gave us the Opened Word so that we could infill scientifica with goodness! (moral compass)

    I see in Carla’s comment a distinction that is absent from (what you say is) the theme of your blog, “Love is the ultimate science”.

    I realize the theme is an advertizing/marketing gimmick, meant to capture people’s attention and lure them in. That is fine, as far as it goes. But it goes further, by containing a forewarning to those who get lured in.

    In saying that love is the ultimate science, what is being said is that love is a science. This clearly is not true, and the best that can be said about it is that it is a misimpression. It may be that it is not your intention to convey such a misimpression, but, your intention aside, the words themselves do indeed convey it.

    So, the theme points to a categorical confusion. And more than a few people who read your blog come to realize that it doesn’t just point to a categorical confusion, but is emblematic of a tendency towards the confusion of categories.

    Perhaps the breeding of such confusion is intentional, just another advertizing/marketing gimmick, and is based on the manipulative premise that once confused, people, not likely the experience of confusion, will seek clarity, and in these efforts to seek clarity will become more informed.

    OTOH, perhaps the breeding of such confusion is not intentional. If so, it would seem clear that while you recognize the importance and value of distinctions, you as yet have difficulty if not with the distinctions themselves, then in expressing those distinctions.

    Well, I feel the friction brewing between us yet again. So, let’s disarm it. Here is a point regarding which I feel reasonable confident that we can agree on:

    o By means of the influx of love, and of affection therefrom, into scientifics, truths are made manifest and are elevated into the rational.

    But just as, that water fills a basin doesn’t mean water is a basin, so too, that love informs science doesn’t that love is a science (let alone the ‘ultimate’ science).


  12. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Again, our friction comes from my efforts to express Swedenborg’s ideas in new ways – ways that can capture the imagination of an increasingly secular and post-modern world.

    If you like Carla’s comment fine. But how can you “infill science with goodness” unless science can act as a recipient form for goodness. You cannot simply force the issue. Love adapts form (truth) to its own disposition just as physical force adapts kinetic energy into the proper form corresponding to its disposition. That is why universal nature is a theater representative of the Lord’s heavenly kingdom. Therefore all God’s influx terminates into nature and all its laws. How can love not be a science – God’s science. My book shows how love can inform science. I show in my book how love provides a means by which scienctists can improve on their models of reality (even scientists will admit that their theories are a work in progress).

    How then am I confusing categories? I am trying to break through the artificial separation and barrier created by today’s flawed science and theologies. What the heck are you afraid of anyway? Is the New Jerusalem limited to just preaching? Does creating a spiritual body within our physical body (that is adapted to receiving influences from the Spiritual Sun) happen willy-nilly or through real orderly, lawful and discernible steps? A person who wishes to sincerely manifest spiritual goodness through loving God and the neighbor need not worry about all the angelic details of regeneration. However, then we must ask ourselves why Swedenborg would waste his time writing volumes and volumes of information that represent “overkill” to the average churchgoer?

    In this troubled world I am amazed by the “Swedenborgian resistance” to someone like me who is trying a fresh approach to evangelism. Carla is one of the few Swedenborgian ministers who grasp what I am attempting to do.

    Spiritually yours,

  13. Sue says:

    If it really is science, then embrace the challenges! Isn’t that practically what science is all about? If love really wants to be a science, I think she’s going to have to buck up and thicken her skin.

  14. thegodguy says:

    Dear Sue,

    What the heck are you talking about? What challenges are you talking about? Whose skin needs thickening?

  15. Sue says:

    You come across as defensive a lot. Unreasonably so – I don’t think you get hammered all that hard.

    But also, Love herself should be above the fray of science. It’s like painting a target on her.

  16. Glenn says:


    One can be zealous without also being crazy and irrational (so to speak). You don’t see where you are. Others do. Because you believe you’re not, you think others are ‘fearful’ and ‘resistant’ when they try to help.

    When I first connected to the internet back in 1998, I ran across people claiming that religion makes people nuts. I thought they were nuts, as I hadn’t ever encountered anyone regarding whom that could be legitimately said. But now you are helping to revise my opinion of them.

    How then am I confusing categories?

    See what I mean? People try to help, and in goes in one ear and out the other. To wit,

    How can love not be a science

    You can add, God’s science, but that only makes it worse. Love is not science. And God as well, being love, is not science. This was pointed out–that love is not science–in the comment you are responding to. Yet you immediately repeat the same mistake.

    You expect credibility based on the fact of having studied Swedenborg for nearly three full decades, yet still cannot grasp that Swedenborg distinguishes between: a) love; and b) knowledge (science). Love is not knowledge, and knowledge is not love. Love is not science, and science is not love.

    Of course, since you don’t get the distinction after nearly three full decades of exposure to it, I hadn’t any right to expect that you would get it after pointing it out in the comment you responded to. (So it’s fair to ask, who’s being ‘irrational’ and ‘crazy’ here in this instance?)

    A person who wishes to sincerely manifest spiritual goodness through loving God and the neighbor need not worry about all the angelic details of regeneration.


    However, then we must ask ourselves why Swedenborg would waste his time writing volumes and volumes of information that represent “overkill” to the average churchgoer?

    Now you ask a good question. It is a very good question, and gets to the heart of the matter. Not the heart of the matter as you think it is, but as rational and reasonable secular people recognize it to be.

    Swedenborg’s “overkill” was an attempt at being rational and reasonable in explaining things in (sometimes excruciating) detail for other than those you mention above (who wish to sincerely manifest spiritual goodness through loving God and the neighbor).

    Your “new” approach is indeed new. It inverts Swedenborg’s rational appeals to reason, and is an emotional blitzkreig running rampant over the meaning of rational and reasonable, like a spastic bull in a china shop. (I’m overstating the case somewhat; but you get the idea.)

    I have no doubt–none whatsoever–that you are having and will continue to have success in pulling people into the slip-stream of your irrationalism. You got sucked into G’s slip-stream, so you know both that it’ll work and how it works.

    One need only read through the comments (accumulated here over the years) to see that many of the very kinds of people you have tried to reach have offered helpful suggestions as to how you might better make your case. They are hungry, they are thirsty, they want to hear.

    But one can also see that the overall, general reaction has been one that is defensive and put-offish. A sure-fire remedy for success that is part of the (I would guess) new age of advertizing and marketing techniques–swat away as pesky gnats the people you are trying to reach. (I am not referring to myself.)

    Since you are trying a new approach, and there is no precedent for its success (at least in respect to Swedenborg), you do need to be open to the possibility that it might not be as successful as you would hope.

    And notifications of ‘bugs’ from users are clues to you as to how the approach might be adjusted, modified or tinkered with.

    If you are constantly and continuously misunderstood, where does the problem lie? You can’t blame it on the people you’re trying to reach, for if they already understood, there’d be no need to reach them. So, who do you think it is that needs to make adjustments?


  17. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn and Sue,

    I am waiting for your books to come out. I promise to purchase them! That way you both can make it absolutely clear to me not only where I am going wrong but why I am going insane.

    I must now somehow come to think that John 1:1-3 is incorrect by implying that everything created came from the Word. I was simply nuts trying to suggest that the laws of the universe (the science behind creation) emerge from God’s Love and Truth. I was nuts thinking I could make Swedenborgian theology more popular in the world by showing that its richness could even offer scientists new insights into what makes the universe “tick.” Love is the agency behind why the physical universe is profoundly interconnected, interrelated and interdependent! The same principle of love that can unify all people unifies and maintains all things in the universe (above the fray?).

    And, I am really going nuts when I observe that the Swedenborgian Church is continuing to fracture rather than strengthen unity. This must be just an appearance.

    How dare I teach people indirectly. How dare God NOT let the dove stay at an angelic women’s windowsill (in Conjugial Love) to permit her to tell Swedenborg even MORE secrets!

    My success is that I have indeed struck a nerve. So I will continue onwards. I am already on the second chapter of my new book.

    Your humble learner,

  18. Glenn says:


    Richard Feynman, the deceased physicist (who also was an atheist), felt that Western civilization stood by “two great heritages”. One, he said, is science–which involves “the humility of the intellect.” And the other, he said, is Christian ethics–which involves “the humility of the spirit.”


  19. Sue says:

    Ah, GodGuy, you said, “I am waiting for your books to come out. I promise to purchase them!”

    By total coincidence I am writing a novel. Just started. Seriously. So, I will hold you to that – hey! I have an advance sale. And, it is sure to be great fodder for nasty reviews.

    I don’t think you are crazy, btw, just defensive. And that would probably be ok, except that you wrote a book called Proving God. That opens the door to lots of naysaying and criticism (and compliments, too).

  20. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Guess what happens when a person adopts spiritual love and humility into their spirit? Well, one’s new state of love begins re-forming their psycho-organic interiors. This reorganization is nothing less than the creation of a spiritual body (which very few Swedenborgians discus). Spirits are real organic forms!

    Some people are quite content focusing on loving others and keeping things that simple. Other people want to know more – like what structural changes take place deep within us as we choose more inclusive and better qualities of love. My book simply explores this later issue, especially for those who have become allergic to all kinds of religious terminology.

    (And I don’t think Swedenborg separated the intellect from the spirit as Feynman did. I am glad for you that you think Feynman was on to something in spite of what Swedenborg teaches.)

    The humility of spirit produces real changes in the polarity and organics of our inner make-up. Furthermore, theoretical physicists are concerned with foundational issues. If love is the primary SUBSTANCE of the universe than love is relevant to foundational issues.

    Enjoy your TV programs next week!

    Spiritually yours,

  21. Glenn says:


    And I’m glad (but only in a tongue-in-cheek kind of way) you have a large audience who is interested in your explanations of the organic structure of gall bladders in disincarnate bodies.


  22. thegodguy says:

    Dear Sue,

    I will purchase your book when it is published. Good luck! Now I just need Glenn to tell me he has started writing his book as well. This is getting exciting!

    Spiritually yours,

  23. thegodguy says:

    Dear Glenn,

    Concerning gall bladders –

    “The states of spirits and angels, with all their varieties, can in no wise be understood without a knowledge of the human body; for the Lord’s kingdom is like a man.” Gee, I wonder who said that? Whoever did, must have been wacky for mixing science with spiritual love! Horrible! Horrible!

    I stand corrected.

  24. carla friedrich says:

    If it isn’t good it isn’t true! when we say something is true (scientifica/spiritual fact)- we’re merely acknowledging we recognize there is goodness in it… good to come from out of it… potential good within can unfold over time (uses/ ultimated good)
    And on the other, inmhop, i think we can either derive or confirm truth from the substance of God’s Holy Word (articulated Love). carla

  25. thegodguy says:

    Dear Carla,

    Yes indeed. Truth is the means by which LOVE takes form and comes into existence. Some of my readers are uncomfortable when I translate such a concept into scientific terms – as if everything the Lord God does is with a snap of the fingers instead of an orderly and lawful process. God is order itself and the ultimate scientist of the universe!

    Spiritually yours,

  26. Sundancer says:

    The book of books the most Holy Bible sets the highest standard for Science and Religion..for human thought and action. Human action includes politics so the bible is chock full of politics and governments as finitum..with the final war of the titans being Armageddon over there in what is called “the Holy Land” and is not just a meta4 for the clash of ideas and ideals in each and every soul..but a clashing of the soul of each nation as well as the soul of each man (and woman of course).
    You so far are tip toeing around all the political ramifications of the fall of man and the consequences of that “fall” and the effects of “sin” in each and every man. Oh by the way the definition of sin is simply “missing the missing the bulls eye in that target..or falling short of perfection…better yet.

    Until you allow the politics feature of the biblical message to join your other mental activities of science and religion you are not yet fulfilling God’s plans nor His Son’s plans and warnings to his children on earth. Our invasion of Iraq, (Babylon’s motherland and where the tower of Babel was (is) located is one of the most apparent physical and current events . First lets look at Babel to get a taste of things to come.

    Genesis Chapter 11 “Throughout the whole earth men spoke the same language, with the same vocabulary. Now as they moved eastward they found a plain in the land of Sinar(Babylonia…Iraq) where they settled. They said to one another, “Come, let us make bricks and bake them in the fire.” For stone they used bricks and for mortar they used bitumen (still oozing out of the ground in the Middle East, and still the mortar that holds the International Tower Building Corporations together, as they reach for the heavens in the form of The New World Order) Come, they said, let us build a town and a tower with its top reaching heaven. Let us make a name for ourselves, so that we may not be scattered about the whole earth.
    Now Yahweh came down to see the town and the tower that the sons of man had built. “So they are all a single people with a single language! There will be nothing to hard for them to do.(Multinational Monopoly Corporatism, the combining of all resources to the common goal of reaching a type of heaven on earth under their own steam or power, no need of a saviour) Come let us go down and confuse their language on the spot so that they can no longer understand one another.. Yahweh scattered them thence over the face of the whole earth, and they stopped building the town. It was named Babel, therefore, because there Yahweh confused the language of the whole earth.”

    Another significant symbolic aspect of this story is the makeup of the materials used to build the city, kiln fried brick with tar as a bonding agent. Kiln dried bricks instead of stone, the building material of choice, that God builds with throughout the Bible, and tar or bitumen a byproduct of the oil reserves under the desert floors that holds the worlds economies together today. The commodity that wars are fought over to keep mans’ machines running, and that unites all the armies of the world in a common endeavor of dominion over the resources of that region and the world.

    That brings us up to the present time in the game.
    Did you know Saddam Hussein, today, has rebuilt the ancient city of Babylon?

    So what? Here is Zecheriah guided by His Majesty to tell us what we need to know about the politics, science, and religious combinations or ingredients all swirling together in a vortex of all the dynamics of human thoughts, behaviors and realizations, delusions, and hazards to our spiritual welfare..down here…stuck in the quagmire of the bitumen and clay required to build (or rebuild) that corporate state/church, kingdom, destined to rise in our faces as the personification of all evil with all its attendant trappings of “goodness”, wealth and power has its last hurrah.

    Then the angel who was speaking to me (Zecheriah) came forward and said to me, “Look up and see what this is that is appearing.
    I asked, “what is it?” He replied, “it is a measuring basket”. And he added, “this is the iniquity of the people throughout the land.”
    Then the cover of lead was raised, and there in the basket sat a woman! He said “This is wickedness,” and he pushed her back into the basket and pushed the lead cover back over its mouth.
    Then I looked up- and there before me were two women, with the wind in their wings! They had the wings like that of a stork, and they lifted up the basket between heaven and earth. “Where are they taking the basket?” I asked the angel who was speaking to me.
    He replied, “To the country of Babylonia to build a house for it. When the house is ready the basket will be set in its place (or base).”
    Zecheriah 5:5-11.

    The house is virtually finished now as we “blithely” followed the “corporate” (fascist) pied pipers into Iraq to set the sage for that man that engineers and mesmerizes humanity with such startling weapons, pysical and metaphysical, that “science” and “religion” can muster up.

    So Mr. Good Guy until your mind is equipped and ready to submit to the entire “word of God” and its will not be serving His Majesty completely or wholly.

    C’mon now you can it it because God is about to do a new thing that is beyond anyones telling, as He prepares His true church we find in that rumpus room known as The Book of Revelations where politics, religion, science, God and Satan and humanity all meet head on…for real..not for meta 4.

    Mr. Good is a peek at that real church..His bride to be as He conjures up a New Thing. (when God does a “new” thing, He does something totally off the books and charts that we are familiar with that we spout so many thoughts and feelings about “reality”, a moch abused and much overused word.

    Always remember His thoughts are not our thoughts.

    I suppose this will not reach the great unwashed..alas..but if any or part of it makes it through your filters..or shads..feel free since it is “the truth” after All and Everything else has come and gone.

    (Harumph!) (kidding..sort of)

    (as foretold and foreseen by Zeceriah

  27. thegodguy says:

    Dear Sundancer,

    Thank you for contributing to this discussion!

    Spiritually yours,

Leave a Reply

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

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

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s