What Was Born? (Part II)

Posted by Roberta Grimes • December 25, 2021 • 46 Comments

I wonder as I wander out under the sky,
How Jesus the Savior did come for to die.
For poor on’ry people like you and like I…
I wonder as I wander out under the sky.

When Mary birthed Jesus ’twas in a cow’s stall,
With wise men and farmers and shepherds and all.
But high from God’s heaven a star’s light did fall,
And the promise of ages it then did recall.
– John Jacob Niles (1892-1980) “I Wonder as I Wander” (1933)

I’ve wondered whether my title for these two posts might be disrespectful. Aren’t human beings the highest form of material life? We tend to think that to call some phenomenon “Who?” might be more respectful than calling it “What?” Isn’t everything else that might be born into a physical body less important than we are? But what then might we better call the genuine Godhead being born on earth?

This voyage into seeking and finding the ultimate truth that has consumed my life since I was eight has been stunningly successful. It didn’t have to succeed! I realize now how completely the truth has always been governed and controlled from very far above our pay grade. Mindless hamsters in their runs are actually no more completely controlled than you and I are! But the difference is that they are not curious about the fact that their run is nothing more than a run. They never dream that there is something much greater out there beyond those walls.

What I saw when I was eight years old was that out there just beyond my room with its awful purple-cornflower wallpaper was something glorious and blindingly bright. Beyond this mind that is struggling to think is a Mind that is so much greater that I cannot begin to fathom it. Jesus said, “Ask, and it will be given to you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For everyone who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened” (MT 7:7-8). And this much at least, in my old age and after a lifetime of seeking, I have at last triumphantly found:

  • There really is no objective time. There only ever and everywhere is Now.
  • Within our little earthly run, humanity began just 200,000 earth-years ago. We sprang fully formed from nothing in a habitat of a universe that at first was not big and not very much.
  • The Now is continuously being created. And it includes ever more elaborate surroundings as we become ever more curious about who and what we are.

I can see it all so clearly now! Including a lot of its fudges and glitches. Punctuated equilibrium. Cosmological constants that are not actually constant. Once you begin to realize what is going on, you feel like a hamster who has found her way out of the maze and is perched out here on its edge, looking in and watching it happen. It amazes me to see that the scientists are still being so thoroughly outsmarted. But clearly the cleverest of them are not fooled, and they never have been fooled. Max Planck talked about the primacy of consciousness. Albert Einstein told us it is all an illusion, “albeit a very persistent one.”

Even the scientific hamsters who are still in there obliviously running the maze have come to the point of finding a Big Bang at this universe’s fake beginning. Maybe a hundred more earth-years hence, humankind will need to be finding something else that precedes that early event, and so on and on, since we know that something cannot come from nothing. None of it will be real, of course, but since each micro-instant will include every bit of our long-ago-seeming manufactured history, there is nothing about this process that will necessarily raise an alarm. Do you think that perhaps human scientists will eventually ever figure it out? Or will mainstream science continue to play this pointless game for further millennia of artificial non-time to come?

For my part, nothing of this earthly illusion continues to interest me.  I get that it is all illusion, and when you really get the illusion then you are already halfway home. But what I still wonder about is why that highest aspect of the Godhead bothered to show up here two thousand years ago to live a whole lifetime in the person of Jesus. Why was Jesus even born here at all? And now I am coming to think that the question must be even more basic than that. It takes us straight back to the perfect Mind of God at the base of A Course in Miracles. And into the tiny, mad idea of separation at which the Son of God first forgot to laugh, which apparently is what got this whole thing started. There never needed to be a separation at all, or so that is what we are told. We began as part of the mind of God, and we still should be there, even now.

Why have we needed to grow spiritually in this illusory place, when consciousness is one continuous vibration? I still don’t really get why we have needed to bother with any of this. I have accepted the explanation given in ACIM because I kept expecting it to begin to make sense, but it still doesn’t really make much sense to me. What makes sense is my mother telling me from where she is now that, “I’m dead! We’re all dead here!” and laughing. That absurd observation makes sense. Having spent most of my lifetime on earth studying the afterlife, and now planning to spend the rest of my life here teaching it, I laughed with my mother as she expected that I would. She has been there now for a decade, exploring and having the time of her life, and now I am about to spend the rest of my lifetime here trying to eradicate the fear of death all over the world because the fear of death is humankind’s greatest enemy. Fear of death is the root and the base of all fears, so when you no longer fear death you no longer fear anything. And yesterday as my family was sharing Christmas dinner I was explaining to my wonderful son-in-law that Craig Hogan and I are about to start Seek Reality Online to share with all the world the truth about the afterlife so we can end the fear of death everywhere and begin an eternity of peace and brotherhood over all the earth.

So then my son-in-law said to me, “Have you reached all the same conclusions?”

I said, “Yes. Perfectly.”

He took a bite of something as he looked at me with some doubt. And then he said, “Really?”

I said, “Really. You can’t get even a piece of paper between our conclusions. And we reached all our conclusions before we met one another.”

He looked at me with polite skepticism. I don’t think that yet seems possible to him. But the fact that everyone who studies the afterlife evidence reaches all the same conclusions has been the whole point for Craig and me! We long ago began to notice that when people who had independently studied the afterlife first met one another, they soon were completing one another’s sentences. And then as they continued to live their lives, we noticed that they cared less and less about selfish and grabby short-term goals. They began to live their lives in an eternal frame. So we have begun to speculate, Craig and I, that if we can educate enough of the world about the fact that human life is eternal, perhaps we really can bring about an end to every cruelty, and then to all wars. At least, it seems to us that it is time to try.

Last year at Christmastime I still was freshly dealing with the fact that Jesus is quite literally God on earth who came to inhabit a human body. I had fought so hard to avoid having to admit that fact. Please pause now and think about what it means for God to literally walk the earth! For my entire life I had been wondering and wandering out there under the sky each Christmastime with the human religion that I so dearly loved, in the manageable reality where Jesus was only, you know, related to God in some way. But the human Jesus I had been imagined wasn’t ever real at all. He was a part of the illusion, just as you and I in material bodies are part of the illusion. The last vestige of the Jesus I was clinging to was the one that had lived and died in just a material body to redeem us from a human-imagined divine judgment. But when I gave up and accepted the evidence on the Shroud of Turin – and that was maybe eighteen months ago now – I surrendered altogether to  the certainty that the risen Lord is not and never has been in any way just some variant of a normal human being. And He had always been so patiently telling us Who He actually was! “I am an aspect of the Godhead,” He had been saying. “The words I say to you I do not speak on my own authority. Rather, it is the Father, living in me, who is doing his work” (JN 14:10). And, “The word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me” (JN 14:24). And even, “Truly, truly, I say to you, the Son can do nothing of His own accord, but only what He sees the Father doing. For whatever the Father does, that the Son does likewise” (JN 5:19).

But, my dear God in Heaven, WHY? Why did God choose to live a human life?

We may not be given to know precisely why the Godhead came to us in the person of Jesus the way He did, and just when He did, until we ourselves are again at home in those glorious gardens with conscious flowers as tall as a man and in colors never seen on earth.

For now, we are told that a literal aspect of the Godhead came to us in the person of Jesus to study us, because the Godhead could not understand why we were having so much trouble using this artificial habitat to raise our personal consciousness vibrations. If that was the reason, in fact it worked, because the Gospel teachings of Jesus are the simplest and most effective method for raising our personal consciousness vibrations that ever have been given to us by anyone.

But still, I don’t think we really have it right. The genuine Godhead is actually GOD! Surely God can figure it out without having to go through living in a human body for an entire lifetime? But God did enter a human body, and all we can do in the face of that fact is fall to our knees and lift up our hearts in perfect love and adoration. God came to earth in the body of Jesus with the same power that continuously manifests this entire material-seeming universe. And that is an objective, verifiable fact that has nothing to do with any religion.

Oh dear Jesus, genuine Godhead on earth, please let us start over just one more time? We promise this time we will try to do better. And this life on earth is so distracting! Please remind us of what we are supposed to be doing?


If Jesus had wanted for any wee thing,
A star in the sky, or a bird on the wing,
Or all of God’s angels in heav’n for to sing,
He surely could have it, ’cause he was the King.
– John Jacob Niles (1892-1980) “I Wonder as I Wander” (1933)

Roberta Grimes
Latest posts by Roberta Grimes (see all)

Subscribe to our mailing list

* indicates required

46 thoughts on “What Was Born? (Part II)

  1. Dear Roberta, I share in your scorn of material science. In fact, while working on my own text about the nature of consciousness it occurred to me that in principle we cannot scientifically ever establish how our material world was formed. I termed this insight the Principle of Interior Unknowability, and quote here the explanation from my text chapter summary: ( ).
    ” Chapter 6. An Absolute Limitation to the Rational Analysis of Experience, Consciousness, and World Origin: the Principle of Interior Unknowability

    After working for approximately a decade to produce a defensible theory for how the world came to be, I realized that I had made zero progress. I questioned why that effort was entirely futile, and came to an interesting conclusion — the question itself implied an observational framework external to a Creation event, but scientists could never in principle locate externally as “privileged observers” to be able to see what happened. Thus, a new postulate for the metaphysics of creation was defined. This postulate was termed the Principle of Interior Unknowability (PIU). It was argued that the PIU stands on two legs of support. The first leg is an analogy posed about fishes born in a fish tank having no opportunity ever to locate outside of their tank. From their interior location in the tank, they (or scientists in the material world) would never be able to learn where it came from or how it was made; the same argument applies if the world were instead conceptualized to be infinite with no boundaries.

    The second leg is a conjectured analogy with Kurt Godel’s Theorem of Undecidability, developed while he was working on his Incompleteness Theorems. This leg of the argument for the PIU reasons that postulates, axioms or assumptions based on internal observations of our world, applied to mathematically model its creation, are susceptible to creating a paradox (historically known as the Liars Paradox) by self-reference. To escape the potential for producing a valueless or misleading paradox, information would have to be gathered external to a system to be used for modeling its creation. ”
    But again to say, we cannot in principle gather any information from our material bodies located in its material world that describes, much less explains, the source.

    Re animals, i.e., hamsters lacking any perspectives on life and death, that was my own perspective until I have experienced the behaviors of my African Gray Parrot Shakespeare by living with him for the past 16 years. For example, when I would leave the house for my day job, my wife Becky would teach him that my absence was termed, “Poppa goes to work.” When I would be gone for several days on a business trip, he would keep saying or asking after I returned, “Poppa goes to work?’ Then he would continue asking for the next week or two with agitated concern, “Poppa go to work?”

    Now, behavioral scientists would castigate my description as an anthropomorphic mistake. However, consider this accurate portrayal of what goes on mornings with Shaky bird who is always locked in his spacious cage overnight to protect himself from biting electrical wires and from chewing on the furniture, with my wife and I out of his sight as he is in our utility room. “Jack, open the door,” repeated a few times in an unemotional tone. Then, “Jack open the door.” shouted loud with increasing agitation louder. Then screaming as if he were being attacked. Failing to get him out in time, he then reverts to a sweetly, softly spoken, “Becky Rose, open the door.” Failing success, he then would resort to screaming Jack” and “Open the door!”

    We see pictures of elephants and chimpanzees morning their dead. Whales and Dolphins appear to morn their dead. While it would be silly to attribute any philosophical understandings to animals, we ought yet recognize that they share intelligent emotional feelings as conscious beings. My point for this excursion is to emphasize that we need to treat animals far better than is common. When I originally learned psychology at college, we were taught that animals were dumb brutes who acted on instincts– that was a terrible mistake.

    1. My dear Jack, I don’t think that I scorn materialist scientists. In fact, I sympathize quite a bit with people who have devoted their lives to an enterprise that is so inherently impossible in its execution. Don’t you? I mean, how hard it must be on some level to realize – as they must, on some level, by the time they finish graduate school – that the enterprise is lost before it is even begun! But still, they try. They take one for the team. They seek to find a break-out moment somewhere. I watch their online presentations, and I root for them right through the moments when they reach their inevitable logical fallacies. And there I virtually-hug them. Even their vaunted Big Bang theory has to be nonsense, right? Even someone as uneducated as I am knows that it’s impossible for something to come from nothing?

      1. Ah yes, but I do own scorn, for reason. My scorn is not hateful, or vengeful, but instead disappointment at their refusal to cope with inconsistencies in their materialism. Any number of times I’ve had exchanges with neurologists who cling to a pseudo-scholarly belief that the brain produces consciousness. When shown documented instances of accurate observations made from hospital beds of far distant activities, they resort to ad hominem attacks on the researchers. The majority of folks hold to some level of faith in God, as do these neurologists, but yet they professionally cling to the safe story that there really is no immaterial consciousness, even denying their own = scorn.

        1. I do understand, but I don’t think I’m capable of feeling that way. I pity them. How awful it must be to know that your whole system of thought is fundamentally nonsense!

  2. Roberta,
    Thank you for another wonderful and insightful post. The world always seems to find a way to divide and distract humanity. While we try to find ways to overcome these false narratives, I now find myself categorizing people into 2 different categories: those who think materially and cannot see beyond physical death, and those that know consciousness is fundamental and realize our “now” moment never ends. The challenge is to not describe it as an “us vs. them” approach. Once you come to the fundamental consciousness conclusion, there is really no going back. It’s just a matter of time before we add more to our ranks. I believe this is now inevitable.

  3. Roberta; Good job!!!
    I’ll only suggest the answer may be found in the Urantia Book. I personally think if it isn’t what I am referring to comes extremely close… I’m sure the answer is as close as humanely possible…

    If you chose to read this book, not written by any church, you”ll find the 2100+ pages interesting…
    Happy hunting

    1. Oh my dear Skip, there are a number of such books. We don’t recommend any of them, because all of them are pretty close but none of them are precisely on the money. Not yet….

  4. Hi Roberta and friends.
    I’m surprised that people just don’t ask God. I hear speculation. Opinion. Looking in the world for God info.
    Ask God and ye shall receive, right?
    For me, I ask God and I receive the answers. The majority of the time I am answered by Jesus. At times, others will speak. The Consciousness of God, that we are all a part of, is unified, so it doesn’t matter who is designated to answer me from the other side. Spirit is led by truth. Sometimes a human vessel will be the source of a Spirit led answer.
    My understanding; We, on earth, have a covering over our remembrance. The work to awaken, helps rent the veil.

    I was looking for my writing on this very topic of Jesus and His experience coming here and why. Wanted to share what I was told. Must be in my older journal, (not here with me as I write).

    What I do know, from my experiences with this process and God, is, I will receive truth that I can handle and understand at the time. As I continue to expand my awareness, and move to more enlightenment thru my connection with The Divine, those concepts are also expanded on. I am never given more than I can handle.
    Peace to all. Hoping you will ask. We need no middle man.

    1. I was reading over what I posted, and I wish I could edit it. I don’t like how it comes off. Sorry.
      As I read I was reminded that all paths can lead to truth and God, if one is looking and aware.

    2. Oh my dear Sue, the problem is that while we are here we have access to just a small part of our vast, eternal minds (some say 40%; I think it’s more like 20%); and our entire minds, in turn, are just a small part of the Mind of God. We here can play four-level checkers at most, while the Godhead is easily playing hundred-level chess. Yes, there are answers upon answers upon answers! And they aren’t hidden from us, so much as they are revealed in ways that we have trouble understanding beyond the checkers-level. But the fundamental truth – the only truth that really matters – is that the Godhead’s love is infinite. All truly does work for our perfect good!

  5. Hi Roberta,

    Thank you for your post today. I am looking forward to Seek Reality Online! It is needed in humanity’s pursuit of truth and shalom. Jesus appears to 10% of NDErs, is the apparent author of ACIM, and is the center of the New Testament.

    I ordered Hogan’s fourth book, Answers to Life’s Enduring Questions. I already have one of the other three.

    I am curious if you have read Gregg Braden’s The Divine Matrix? Gregg links time, space and all creation through entanglement.

    Grace and peace,
    -Chuck Webb

    1. Turns out that quantum entanglement does not require any instantaneous “spooky action at a distance.” This interpretation that Einstein thought wrong results from the Heisenberg and Bohr philosophical speculation that particles lack a real, tangible existence until energetically observed. Einstein spoofed that anyone would by analogy believe that the Moon did not exist unless it were observed. Einstein lost the argument, because he had only his intuition to rely on, and a hard objectivist philosophical position was adopted. However, in recent years a very subtle form of particle observation, termed “weak measurement,” has been developed and when it was applied particles were found to be real without any energy from observation introduced.

      I have published about this finding, Uncertainty Principle in Light of the “Weak” Measurement Experiments, here ( ). When tests of the EPR Paradox hypothesis are conducted and supported, the positive results are due to the fact that the two new particles formed for testing have their features set when they are created, not later on when observed– no spooky instantaneous signal is required. Two Nobel laureates in private email agree with my paper.

      The reason that quantum computers continue to suffer from uncontrolled particle decoherence is that the particles are always naturally decoherent (are real, not the fuzzy statistical distributions speculated about from the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle). The Schrodinger wave equation does an excellent job of modelling particle behaviors when measured, but the speculated interim superposition state does not exist; the Schrodinger cat is NOT both alive and dead until observed, it is either dead or alive.

      1. Dr. H: Although your findings make a lot more sense than the “spooky action at a distance” theory, could you elaborate a bit more on these particles – not the ones formed for testing, but just in general i.e. if the features of these particles are already set, what causes that, or is this just another mystery of the universe due to our confinement in this simulation without the ability to look at things from outside of it?

        1. Why and how particles were fundamentally created by God is beyond science. The issue about the nature of the existence of electrons and photons as the objects of scientific investigation that I have addressed starts with an insight that Werner Heisenberg thought he achieved while attempting to observe and precisely measure the trajectory of electrons through his lab devices. An electron has speed, and with its tiny bit of material being (condensed energy as Einstein demonstrated by his equation that E = M C squared), so on measure would be of its momentum; as the electron travels it interacts with the electromagnetic field of the lab equipment which register its momentum. Exactly where it is (even though continuously moving) when observed is also a desired measure, and that might be done by showering the electron’s path with light to create a shadow revealing its position when its momentum was measured. Heisenberg realized that as he would attempt to fine tune his measurements so that if one were made more precise, the other would become less precise, because the means for measurement were interacting with the particles state of existence. Their was a limit to the possible precision of measurement for both momentum and location, and so he cleverly wrote an equation that represented this limit in terms of the tiny factor termed the Planck length. So far, so good. But the Heisenberg and his senior prof, Niels Bohr, inferred that the inability to simultaneously measure a particle with great precision implied that the particle must not be regarded as having any such definite existence for both momentum and location– that perspective implemented the philosophical perspective of operationalism in physics which yet endures to this day, and that philosophical inference (that the particle lacks a definite existence until energetically observed) is what created the mischief. Erwin Schrodinger produced an equation applying differential calculus (Heisenberg wrote an equivalent equation applying matrix algebra) to model the particle’s behavior (it provides a very precise math model for the observed behavior). However, because of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle and its companion Copenhagen Interpretation by Bohr that particles own an infinity of possible existences until energetically observed (termed a superposition state), Einstein with two colleagues detected a serious problem with the belief in superposition states.

          In a paper referred to as the EPR Paradox ( ), the application of the Schrodinger wave equation could produce a bizarre result. So, for example, if a photon were spilt into two lower energy particles, according to Heisenberg and Bohr (and a puzzled Schrodinger), the two particles did not own any definite existence until energetically observed. Photons and electrons are known to have spin properties. To satisfy the Law of preservation of energy, the two newly created particles must have opposite, complementary spins that sum to zero. The EPR paper pointed out that when the first of the two particles to be measured after they were created shows up with its spin (randomly achieved), then the wave equation predicted that the other particle would have to automatically, and instantaneously acquire the complementary spin– no matter how far distant the two particles were, e.g., the two particles could be on the opposite ends of the universe, billions of light years apart, but would have to instantaneously be set into complementary balance. There was no known signaling mechanism (hence, “spooky”), and the signal would have to violate Special Relativity Theory be traveling faster than light speed. Schrodinger termed this effect quantum entanglement. It took some fifty years to test if quantum entanglement was true ( ).

          Numerous experiments have continued to find that quantum entanglement is true, but while the effect is true, the explanation does not require any instantaneous spooky signaling. When the two particles to be tested are created, they do not own the hazy statistical superposition state, but are instead definite, real entities just as Einstein had intuited.

          Over the past few years, experimenters devised a means of observing particles with such slight amounts of energy that the observation would not affect them, termed “weak” measurement. Results from such experiments demonstrated that the particles owned a real existence as Einstein had intuited.

          1. Thanks, but your explanation is just as mysterious as the Uncertainty Principal. Even though it eliminates “spooky signalling,” it still implies to me that there is thought and planning present since the features of the particles are already set. That couldn’t just happen at random

      2. But my dear Jack, we have a cat, and the whole dead-but-also-alive thing is so much what a cat would enjoy doing to its people! It’s so disappointing to think that it doesn’t actually happen :-(!!

        1. The really important disappointment will be coming from the industry that is attempting to design quantum computers that make use of superposition states and instantaneous quantum entanglement. Currently, the engineers are frustrated, because their computers produce unreliable results. The industry claims that the problem is that it is difficult for the particles they use to sustain their superposition states until calculations are performed with them. The problem is termed decoherence, meaning that the particles prematurely become real by interacting with the computer hardware. My analysis shows instead that the particles employed are always decoherent, because superposition states are a fiction. Last year I served at the request of the Nat Academy of Sciences on a research program review, and where it came to programs to develop quantum computing, I communicated the problem and provided my published paper; I have also attempted to get DARPA and the Fed agencies working on quantum computers to realize the problem is not merely sporadic unreliability, but inherent unreliability. The reactions are similar in kind to the neurologists who refuse to seriously consider that they are working from fictional beliefs.

    2. Hello my dear Chuck! I have indeed read Gregg Braden’s book, but quite awhile back. I am an admirer of his!

  6. Hi guys
    Wow blown away and comforted by all your observations and suggestions of reading materials ..
    I struggle with “experiencing “ God, spirit , and would love to connect , maybe God is holding back cos I couldn’t handle it ..I know the way I believe has changed (dropped religion) and that has been a journey, however does anyone else feel inadequate because of a lack of a “spiritual experience “.. I did hear someone say in my head although I know it was my voice , to leave the church and let’s do this together , been down numerous rabbit holes since then……that was over 10 years ago and I was terrified as the church had been my crutch for 25 years,, I had a pervasive fear of death and was searching for and pleading every day for God to take it away (nope didn’t happen)so leaving the “church” was enormous for me….. still searching for the comforting experience, yet I know I did the right thing… ….
    I’m so sorry this is completely of the thread of this blog my apologies…
    Mr hiller and fellow searchers of the Way …have a happy healthy new year and let’s hope it’s covid free ….
    With love and virtual kisses Louise xxxxxx

    1. Dear Louise, Several years ago Dr. Bruce Greyson gave an excellent presentation on evidence for consciousness functioning when the brain could not account for that ( ). He also recently published a book that reviewed his career experiences interviewing people who had Near Death Experiences, After ( ), and it tells a great story. The 2016 text, The Self Does not Die, (
      ) documents over a hundred cases in which individuals whose brain had stopped normal functioning reported on activities they witnessed distant from their body that were later verified by research to be highly accurate. My own text also works to explain the nature of consciousness as eternal. and attaching to the body for experience and spiritual development that is not available in the bliss of our Heavenly home.

      As Roberta so well explains, our life in the material world is best described as an illusion, but it does serve the purpose of spiritual development. When you pass, you will return home, and lost loved ones, including pets, will be there for you.

    2. Oh my dear, you aren’t off the thread at all! You are a seeker, as are we all, and openly sharing that experience here. Keep watching this space, and in a few months we will be inviting you to join Seek Reality Online and truly and forever altogether vanquish your fear of death!

    3. Louise, our experiences are very similar. I don’t feel inadequate, I am learning to experience the spiritual in a different way then the ‘church’ structure. I was told the same as you…leave and we will do this together. For me, this is what keeps coming to mind…”Be still, and know that I am God”.
      I really have to trust .
      When I read your comment I was jolted with the similarities. Thanks for sharing. Very helpful.
      Blessings to you.

  7. Thanks to all for the interesting comments. I am a bit unnerved by the fact that we regularly discredit traditional beliefs concerning the purpose for God’s trip to earth while at the same time remain in search of the real reasons.
    My comment to Sue: There is no reason to edit your original post since I know exactly what you are talking about. I also have been told a story which reveals a real purpose but have been reluctant to disclose it on this web site. Would be very interested in hearing your version at some point.

    1. Oh my dear Tom, the “traditional beliefs” concerning the reason for God’s trip to earth was that Jesus “came for to die, for poor lonely people like you and like I,” to redeem us from God’s judgment for our sins, and it was refuted by Jesus Himself directly in the Gospels, so we know that’s out. Jesus told us that
      “For not even the Father judges anyone, but He has given all judgment to the Son, so that all will honor the Son even as they honor the Father” (JN 5:22-23), and

      “If anyone hears My sayings and does not keep them, I do not judge him; for I did not come to judge the world, but to save the world” (JN 12:47).

      Save the world from what, Jesus?

      When you read the Gospels through carefully, it is hard to escape the conclusion that He came to save the world from… religious lies and nonsense. ‘Nuff said.

      So we are left to develop a genuine relationship with the genuine Lord Jesus, and to ask Him why He came and what He truly wants us to do!

  8. Hi Roberta: I noticed that in your blog and in the comments you used quotes from the Gospel of John. He certainly seems to have had a more mystical take on things, doesn’t he? Maybe that’s why I like him. This brings to mind what he has Jesus saying in JN 1:51, “Very truly, I tell you, you will see heaven opened and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of Man.” It gives the impression that Jesus himself, or his teachings, will be the ladder or stairway to Heaven that Jacob saw in his dream back in Genesis 28 – another reference to Jesus coming to replace the OT God with his updated teachings of love and forgiveness? This brings up an interesting question. Could all the angels discussed in those old writings, and even to this day, actually be an attempt to conceptualize the collective of perfected beings, as you have postulated the Godhead to be? Tradition holds that angels may appear to humans as apparitions in human form, but don’t actually incarnate in human bodies (or is it just that they no longer need to?) Is Jesus an example of one of the “angels,” as humans saw the perfected members of the Godhead, actually coming into full human form to get better “intel” and boots on the ground, so to speak? Maybe they felt such a mission was needed to steer the proverbial Titanic away from the iceberg. Did becoming one of us and having actual skin in the game, AKA Jesus, the Son of Man, as he enigmatically called himself, somehow change the way they could interact with and influence us (that thorny issue of free will), with him as the physical bridge? If there’s anything to what I’m speculating, was Jesus the first to do this, and will he be the last?

    1. Oh my goodness, dear Scott, I have no idea. I think Jesus is the first, but I don’t think there is any way for us even to imagine whether He will be the last!

  9. to me the idea that Jesus came here to live life as a human so the Godhead could understand us makes a lot of sense. it’s hard to imagine how something as expansive and grand as the Godhead could comprehend us at all from its perspective without having our experience. the truly amazing thing is that the Godhead cared to do such a thing. talk about a sacrifice! that’s the highest example of love I can imagine.

    1. Oh, yes precisely, my dear Lorie! Jesus came to us from the highest Godhead, entered and lived in a human body, “looked through its eyes” for thirty years and carefully studied us to learn why we were having so much trouble using these human lives to grow spiritually, spoke against our fake religions, gave us the best set of spiritual teachings ever given to us by any spiritual teacher, and then at almost the last minute decided to die on a cross (rather than being directly subsumed back into the higher levels of Consciousness) and then re-animated His dead material body to prove to us that death is just an illusion and we also won’t die. He did all of that for us! No question!

      And I have been content with knowing that, especially after convincing myself that we have incontrovertible evidence that the Shroud of Turin is the genuine Shroud that wrapped the risen Lord.

      But still, it makes sense to US. And we are not GOD. We don’t think as the Godhead thinks. I want to know what make sense to GOD.

      1. It is important to remember this—that we must look at all, not from the perspective of this experience we perceive as incarnation, but from the greater point of view of All That Is, or we aren’t really “getting it.” I am looking forward to Seek Reality Online.

      2. I don’t think it is a coincidence that the shroud looks like the “real deal” now that we have the technology to do research on it. It is true that we can’t understand how the Godhead thinks from our limited perspective in a physical reality, so maybe it is meant to be that we have to wait until a time when we shed our physical bodies in order to progress our thinking further. Down here, there are too many distractions, and most people don’t give anything else a second thought. Many still think that their lives here are what is important and that nothing else matters.

        1. I will venture to add, no creature starts here or ends here. We were never born and we will never die. We are having the same experience Jesus had–we are eternal beings perceiving our existence through a specific filter in order to learn more; it’s the extent and the degree to which we learn that differentiates our experience from Jesus’, but it is the same. We agree to accept that as part of the experience.

          1. My darling Mike, I don’t think that we are quite having the Lord God’s same experience. But we are probably being challenged with greater experiences than people have had in the past, to the extent that we are capable of benefiting from them. That I do believe!

        2. Yes, my dear Lola. The story of the Shroud is a fascinating one! It has marks on it that appear on just one side of the fibers and would have made no sense at the time they were created, nor for many generations thereafter, but that in fact are a photographic negative. I think that was what most of all convinced me of its authenticity!

          1. Me too, plus the fact that there was many different types of pollen found on it, some of which only exist in the area of Judea. I don’t think a hoaxer from the Middle Ages would have even known about pollen let alone how to transport it from such a great distance.

  10. Thank you for the insights shared in this group. The test will be if this knowledge is disguised as fresh discoveries in the future.

    1. My dear Albert, we are beginning to see odd sorts of synchronicities even now, even before the end of 2021. I think there is a much better year a-borning!

  11. Interesting point, Scott, since I believe that Jesus was actually an angel prior to his incarnation.
    My prior comments were somewhat misunderstood. While I do not really accept the traditional reasons for the incarnation of Jesus, they do come across as quite specific. The reason given here of confronting religious lies and nonsense seems
    quite negative and general which leaves me searching for more.

  12. Very interesting Tom. Thank you for sharing that. I have gotten some inklings myself that there is some sort of important angel role in the Jesus story, beyond just showing up and making some prouncements, as it the gospels, but exactly what I don’t know. The question of what angels are and how they fit in with spirit guides has been on my mind lately. Some folks can apparently see or speak with angels. Do you feel they are connected with, or the source of, the story you mentioned receiving about Jesus? I hope you will feel comfortable with sharing more at some point.

  13. Dearest Roberta and everyone – I’d like to wish you all a most happy new year. I hope this new, sun orbit cycle will be blessed for each and every one of us. 🌅 (Of course, I wished Christmas blessings to everyone too, though I did not manage to articulate them in this forum.🎄)

    I am thoroughly enjoying our connections and resulting discourse here; being all too often fascinated by the myriad perspective variations and spiritual subtlety experienced along the way.

    And Roberta, at the outset of 2022 I gladly take up the understanding of Mikey Morgan, as elucidated by his amazing mother Carol. I’ve listened to the latest Seek Reality episode featuring them a few weeks ago, and one thing I heard has really stuck with me: Each person’s perspective needs to be respected. All too often someone’s opposite perspective to our own is a result of their life experience and the ideas and beliefs accrued by it. It may not be that a person with the opposite view is ‘evil’ or ‘malevolent’ – perhaps they mean well but have just developed an alternative perspective to our own.

    As it is a Sixth Level Being of the Afterlife who espouses this, I am inclined to look closely at Mikey Morgan’s understanding. Roberta, I try to remain open to new and enlightening ideas, particularly if they exorcise long held, moribund conditionings.

    So – the act of respecting someone’s perspective and hence, that person as a whole stops one RESENTING them for ideas opposite our own. Perhaps this is the path of FORGIVENESS after all. 🙂

    Perhaps the individual who happens to be a toxicologist is more likely to believe that Shrodinger’s cat is indeed dead. Alternately, a neonatal nurse may be completely hopeful that Shrodinger’s cat is alive to the point of believing this to be the case. One is right and one is wrong (as Dr Hillier has thankfully informed us 👍).

    But in the end, maybe it doesn’t matter who is right or wrong. Maybe the fact that each person and their perspective is respected is what is truly important. 🙏🏼❣️🕊🌅

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *