Wednesday, 13 November 2019


See other formats
By Benjamin Sullivan & James McDermott
© 2017. Panendeism Organization certificate of publication N°- OW120875

Panendeism Organization is dedicated to exploring the vast potential of Panendeism, a world view that is both millennia old and has more recently been hailed by many of the greatest physicists as a potentially true representation of reality. From its shocking implications in science, to its affirmation of human dignity, Panendeism is a promising new focus within the parent philosophy of Deism.

Our focus is to analyze the wealth of scientific data that has been accrued over the past century and promote new and revolutionary ways of investigating and expanding potentially groundbreaking fields of research.

Above all else, we are committed to the cultivation and recognition of all humanity as one extended family in which each member is worthy of value, respect, and friendship. We affirm that all life is also worthy of our care,
respect, and admiration.

For more information about our organization and mission, please visit us on the web at .
© 2017. Panendeism Organization certificate of publication N°- OW120875 [1]


Panendeism (or pan-en-deism), pronounced paen'en'dei Iz'sm, is derived from the Greek pan (nav), meaning all, en (sv) meaning in, and deus (Asug), meaning god. The earliest known use of the term was in 1995 by Jim Garvin 1 , a Korean War veteran and Catholic turned Trappist monk. Garvin described his concept of deity as being similar to the "all-pervading Great Spirit" of the Native Americans, and called it "Pan-en-deism." The term “Panendeism” was officially proposed more recently by Larry Copling in 2001.


Panendeism is an ontological position that explores the interrelationship between God (The Cosmic Mind) and the known attributes of the universe. Combining aspects of Panentheism and Deism, Panendeism proposes an idea of God that both embodies the universe and is transcendent of its observable physical properties. Although examples of Panendeistic thought can be found as early as the 1st millennium BCE, it was not until nearly 3,000 years had passed, at the dawn of the 20th century, that these ideas began to gain traction as a prevailing scientific model of reality.

The first well recorded teachings that evoke the God hypothesis of Panendeism were introduced by Adi Shankara, who unified the Eastern Philosophy of Advaita Vedanta in Hinduism in the 8th century BCE. Later, in the 4th century BCE, Plato’s philosophy of “The One” or “The Good” introduced these concepts to the West and were subsequently expounded upon by Plotinus as in the 2nd century BCE. Much later, in the 17th century CE, Baruch Spinoza would define God as the only thing that exists in his “Short Treatise on God, Man, and His Well-Being,” a work that later earned him the affection of Albert Einstein, who described his own belief as being similar to Spinoza’s.

After Spinoza, German idealism continued to pave the way for Panendeism, with authors such as Immanuel Kant and Johann Gottlieb Fichte, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph von Schelling, and Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel all leaving behind fantastic works that are certainly worth reading. Other wonderful examples include the Transcendentalism of Ralph Waldo Emerson, Henry David Thoreau, and Walt Whitman, as well as the 20th century Process Theism of Alfred North Whitehead and Charles Hartshorne.

With the dawn of the 20th century, science had at last begun to advance to a point at which the potential in several millennia of Panendeistic philosophy began to appear consistent with the objective picture of reality. Einstein’s earth shattering publication of special relativity in 1905 opened the flood gates to an entirely new scientific conception for the very basis of what we perceive as reality. The universe could no longer be seen solely in terms of Newton’s static, unchanging celestial spheres. Our understanding of the entire universe was very suddenly 'transformed' to something infinitely more perplexing, but also remarkably more insightful and potentially closer to the true reality of the Universe. Through one equation, Einstein conceived of a dynamic Universe that behaved like a sea of energy arrayed with an expanding fabric of space-time, and comprised of dynamic and interactive energy modules that could take on the form of matter, light/ radiation, or other forms, unknown: E=MC 2 .

Einstein, who would be echoed by other physicists contemplating the scientific
implications of this quantum sea in which we are immersed and of which we are composed, later mused:

“[Man] experiences himself, his thoughts and feelings as something separate from the rest — a kind of optical delusion of his consciousness. The striving to free oneself from this delusion is the one issue of true religion. Not to nourish it but to try to overcome it is the way to reach the attainable measure of peace of mind. "[2]

In 1905, Max Planck, the father of quantum theory, was among the first to immediately recognize the significance of Einstein’s (later famous) publication. Indeed, much of the initial notoriety Einstein’s theory received was largely thanks to Planck’s efforts to introduce it within the scientific community. After receiving the Nobel Prize in 1918 and spending a lifetime in Quantum Physics, Planck, as its father, unabashedly said this regarding the nature of reality:

As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clearheaded science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about the atoms this much: There is no matter as such! All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particles of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together... We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent Mind. This Mind is the matrix of all matter. [3]

As science continued to unravel the mysteries of reality, new proponents of Panendeistic thought emerged. Niels Bohr, who in 1922, received the Nobel Prize in Physics for his contributions to atomic structure and quantum theory clearly defined Panendeism in these terms:

“We can admittedly find nothing in physics or chemistry that has even a remote bearing on consciousness. Yet all of us know that there is such a thing as consciousness, simply because we have it ourselves. Hence consciousness must be part of nature, or, more generally, of reality, which means that, quite apart from the laws of physics and chemistry, as laid down in quantum theory, we must also consider laws of quite a different kind. ”

Erwin Schrodinger, who in 1933, received the Nobel Prize in Physics for his work on quantum theory, said this:

"It is not possible that this unity of knowledge, feeling and choice which you call your own should have sprung into being from nothingness at a given moment not so long ago; rather this knowledge, feeling, and choice are essentially eternal and unchangeable and numerically one in all men, nay in all sensitive beings. But not in this sense — that you are a part, a piece, of an eternal, infinite being, an aspect or modification of it . . For we should then have the same baffling question:Which part, which aspect are you? What, objectively, differentiates it from the others? No, but, inconceivable as it seems to ordinary reason, you — and all other conscious beings as such — are all in all. Hence, this life of yours. . . is, in a certain sense, the whole. . . This, as we know, is what the Brahmins express in that sacred, mystic formula... 'Tat tvam asi' — this is you. Or, again, in such words as 'I am in the east and in the west, I am below and above, I am this whole world. "

Werner Heisenberg, one of the fathers of quantum mechanics, had this to say
regarding the ultimate nature of reality:

"...The same organizing forces that have shaped nature in all her forms are also responsible for the structure of our minds... Of course, we all know that our own reality depends on the structure of our consciousness; we can objectify no more than a small part of our world. But even when we try to probe into the subjective realm, we cannot ignore the central order. ..In the final analysis, the central order, or the 'one' as it used to be called and with which we commune in the language of religion, must win out. "

David Bohm, a protege of Einstein who's often referred to as one of the most
significant theoretical physicists of the 20th century, said this:

“The field of the finite is all that we can see, hear, touch, remember, and describe. This field is basically that which is manifest, or tangible. The essential quality of the infinite, by contrast, is its subtlety, its intangibility. This quality is conveyed in the word spirit, whose root meaning is "wind, or breath. "

This suggests an invisible but pervasive energy, to which the manifest world of the finite responds. This energy, or spirit, infuses all living beings, and without it any organism must fall apart into its constituent elements. That which is truly alive in the living being is this energy of spirit, and this is never born and never dies.

And these great minds only begin to scrape the surface of names that have both revolutionized science and seen clear implications for a Panendeistic sort of world view. Among many others, Nikola Tesla, Gregory Bateson, Sir Arthur Eddington, Robert Jahn, Sir James Jeans, Henry Margenau, Carl Friedrich Von Weizsacker, Freeman Dyson, and contemporary scientists like Paul Davies and Robert Lanza, have all advocated or affirmed the ontological ideas put forth by Panendeism as both plausible and in perfect harmony with the reality that science reveals to us. Indeed, it is not unfair to say that without the ability of these brilliant minds who forsook their own human perception of reality for the scientific evidence they were presented with, we might never have arrived at the proven theories of quantum physics or relativity, both of which have radically changed the course of human progress over the past century.

Like its parent philosophy Deism, Panendeism is closely related to naturalism and advocates that arguments for the existence of Deity must be maintained through science, reason, and observation of the natural world. Also, as in Deism, Panendeism is reasonably skeptical of - or dismisses religious figureheads, prophets, and claims of divine revelation. Panendeism is more likely to readily avoid the errors of dogma, corruption, oppression, and manipulation often manifest in organized religions, simply because it is self-governed and has no founders, fathers, or leaders. Each Deist or Panendeist, past, present and future, must justify their conclusions and hypotheses by means of the 'God-given' instruments of reason and science. Purely speculative notions are encouraged, where they are presented as speculation. 

Likewise, Panendeism is highly skeptical of claims relating to the suspension of natural law through mediums such as supernatural forces or beings. Panendeism does not seek to define the attributes of Deity beyond affirming that the necessary Uncaused First Cause exists and is itself the underlying substance and cause of reality. By necessity of the proposed interconnection between God and reality, Panendeism proposes and presumes that the entire universe and everything within it is both sacred and meaningful. In this way, scientific knowledge, nature, and being are all modes of spiritual connection to Deity. Each sapient being, and to some degree, every living thing, is and must be part and parcel of God.


Like our progressive science, both Deism and Panendeism represent broad world views that are constantly evolving as knowledge and science progress. However, Panendeism is governed by 5 unchanging principles:

1. We affirm as a defining thesis, that the natural terrestrial world, and the greater Universe we observe are, by very definition, “real,” and acknowledge that these may well be the only semblance of God we shall ever witness with our human eyes. We assert that we, as sapient beings, are an integral part of the whole, and that human observational perception, both material and spiritual, is worthy of our interest, pursuit, and trust.

2. We affirm the primacy of human reason and science as the final arbiters of
truth and error regarding our understanding of the universe, but acknowledge
that human beings embody, by design, integrated intuition and expression that transcend the bounds of science. We propound that qualities such as consciousness, compassion, passion, introspection, interconnection, love, friendship, kindness, hope, goodwill, charity, sincerity, inspiration, music, art, and spirituality, are among these inherent and inspired natural qualities.

3. We affirm that we are, even in our own cognitive abilities, finite. We
acknowledge that human reasoning is limited, our senses and perception are
imperfect, and that we are free to do good or cause harm to others, or leave
others to do good or cause harm. We assert that any action that disrupts the
joy, peace, purpose, or balance of the beings or environment around us, shall
inevitably derogate and diminish both the quality and scope of our own joy,
peace, purpose, balance, and meaning. If such detrimental, counter-intuitive
behavior is embraced by many, we propound that all life could cease to exist in the natural, terrestrial world we inhabit.

4. We affirm that we are endowed by Deity with the inalienable liberty to govern and orchestrate our thoughts and our actions, within the bounds circumscribed by the Laws of Nature, known and unknown, and assert that the entire Universe, and we ourselves, are part and parcel of the Creator Architect- Supreme Being and Cosmic Mind we know as God.

5. We assert that God is not expected to be manifest inter personally in our lives, or through prophets or figureheads, but rather, intra-personally and perhaps in other ways too subtle to be understood or detected by our finite human senses.
Through the intrinsic presence of Deity, we are naturally drawn toward love; a
realization of life; a sense of oneness, brotherhood and sisterhood with the
natural world around us; and thus, we are compelled to live sublime and
purposeful lives. Therefore, among the transcendent purposes unique to sapient life such as human beings, is the seeking after self-understanding, and the externalization of the resulting discovery within to positively affect the material and spiritual world around us and all living things and beings whose paths cross our own, to make the world a better, kinder, and gentler place for all its inhabitants.


Panendeism additionally sets forth a simple 7-point code of conduct:

1. Approach to understanding external reality: Free -thought (rationality,objectivity, and critical-thinking).

2. Arbiters of external truth: Primacy of science and primacy of reason.

3. The universe and everything within it is sacred: We shall endeavor to do good and not cause harm.

4. Discussing or presenting information regarding external reality: Only
scientifically validated information and proven theories should ever be
presented as fact, while suggestive evidence and hypothesis must always be
presented as speculative.

5. Exploring the nature of self, other, and being: Compassion, passion,
introspection, interconnection, love, friendship, kindness, hope, goodwill,
charity, sincerity, inspiration, music, art, and spirituality are all excellent
examples of the benevolent reason-based processes and mechanisms by which we engage in and experience the full spectrum of wonders that life has to offer us.

6. Discussing or presenting information regarding personal experiences or
self: Panendeism, as an entity of philosophy, shall forever refrain from teaching spiritual practices or mysticism, as they have been used throughout recorded history by organized religions and cults to victimize and gain power over innocent people. However, we do recognize that we live in an amazing universe and welcome individuals to freely discuss and explore their own experiences, keeping in mind that things like spirituality and self are different for each person. Anyone who promotes the contrary position or claims to have special powers, methods, or connection to God should be treated with extreme caution and is perhaps more inclined toward Panentheism than Panendeism. 

We encourage exploration, but not evangelism. Personal and public exploration may include any one of a number of things, from sitting atop a mountain as the sun sets or gazing into the vastness of space on a clear night, to a pursuit of science, deep meditation, or the simplest things in life, such as being close to someone you love.

Incompatible with: Organized religion, prophets, figure heads, dogma, false-
information, oppression, and inequality.


Pantheism is the worship of a physical universe and mindless energy force as God, whereas Panendeism postulates that a mindful and transcendent God is the underlying reality of what we perceive as the universe. As with Panentheists, Pantheists tend to present and accept speculations as facts and follow a structure that is more akin to organized religions and dogmatic-theism.


Pandeism is the worship of a physical universe and mindless energy force as a
deceased or destroyed God with a resurrection doctrine that claims God will someday evolve back into being, whereas Panendeism postulates that a mindful and transcendent God is the underlying reality of what we perceive as the universe. A great real-world analogy for this is to imagine the universe as a quantum super-computer.

In this scenario, Panendeism's God would be primarily the processor, memory, and hard drive and Pandeism's God would be the battery. This isn't to say that
Panendeists don't recognize the importance of energy, or see it as part of God, they just don't attribute the vast complexity of the universe solely to it.


While Panendeism and Panenthiesm are fairly similar in their base assumptions, Panendeists tend to look at the universe as being purely comprised of mind, while Panentheists tend look at the universe as being a part of the body of God.

Additionally, Panendeists, being a part of the parent organization of Deism, tend to be more agnostic, speculative, and cautious when it comes to forming and presenting opinions about the true nature of reality, whereas Panentheists tend to present and accept speculations as facts and follow a structure that is more akin to organized religions and dogmatic -theism. Panentheists also tend to more commonly view their relationship with Deity as interpersonal, often engaging in prayer and other religious rituals, while Panendeists often view their relationship with God as intra personal and based upon observation of the natural world, science, and reason.

Moreover, Panendeism's rejection of religious dogma allows it the freedom and agility to remain relevant by taking into consideration and adapting to all new knowledge arising at the forefront of our progressive science.


Panendeism is a recognized member of the Deism Alliance and part of the greater Deism family. As such, Panendeism is not a breakaway from or rejection of Deism, but a concise ontological position within Deism that focuses on the vast sea of contemporary scientific knowledge, especially physics, quantum physics, quantum mechanics, consciousness, and neuroscience. All Panendeists are therefore effectively Deists with a default variation regarding the relationship between Deity and the universe .


• Superior-Mind

• Cosmic-Mind

• Cosmic Consciousness

• Divine-Mind

• Word-Soul

• Supreme Being

• Deity

• Divinity

• Great Spirit

• Creator-Architect-Supreme-Being

• Plenum

• The All

• The All-in-All

• The One


• Bose-Einstein Condensate

• Particle Wave-Duality

• The Anthropic Principal

• Synaptic Tunneling

• Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle

• Pribram's Theory of Sensory Perception

• Bertrand Russell's Consciousness Model

• Michael Lockwood's Theory of Consciousness

• The Theory of Biocentrism

• Alwyn Scott's Consciousness Model

• James Culbertson's Model of Consciousness

• Orchestrated objective reduction (Orch-OR)

• Panpsychism

• Nondualism


1. Albuquerque Journal, Saturday, November 11, 1995, B-10

2. Letter sent by Einstein to Robert S. Marcus, Political Director of the World
Jewish Congress, offering condolences for his son who had succumbed to polio. February 12, 1950

3. Das Wesen der Materie (The Nature of Matter), a 1944 speech in Florence, Italy.
Source: Archiv zur Geschichte der Max-Planck-Gesellschaft, Abt. Va, Rep. 1 1
Planck, Nr. 1797

4. Werner Heisenberg, 1971, Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations, New York: Harper & Row

5. "The Mystic Vision" as translated in Quantum Questions: Mystical Writings of the World's Great Physicists (1984) edited by Ken Wilber

6. Werner Heisenberg, 1971, Physics and Beyond: Encounters and Conversations, New York: Harper & Row

7. Speech written by David Bohm in 1987 for the memorial service of his friend
and University of Pennsylvania classmate, Malcolm Sagenkahn.

Monday, 11 November 2019

Necromancy: Scenarios and pseudo ritual (part 2)

All 3 of these aspects will overlap at times, so I'll first start with the aspect that's easy to explain and the hardest to capture that being the spirit aspect.
Looking at the computer example we can either equate spirit to electricity or perhaps something like data in transit. By that I'll use this example, you have a person as a computer (hardware and data) and for the spirit aspect we would have the electricity input. But what is the actual purpose of necromancy? It could either be to revive a deceased person in whole or it would be to attain information from them.

If we have a computer hooked up to a mainframe server (whether for internet or intranet) and if one was in the process of using email and had sent an email and immediately after clicking 'send' the power to the computer had shut down. What would have happened to the data in the email?
Once the email had been sent that email and data would be in transit and would be accepted by the mainframe server. A reverse IP scan on the header of the email would show the IP of the sender, a MAC lookup would identify the computer that initiated the send. But once the power had been cut both of these identifiers would be invalid as any attempt to contact the computer simply cannot happen.

Now in due time the setup could be once again valid only if the power was restored.

However we have not identified the mainframe server. If you say that the mainframe server is an aspect of God then unless one is on extremely good personal terms with God then whatever information was in the email would be inaccessible or irretrievable. The necromancy aspect here would be to somehow intercept or view the email data in transit. Keeping with the computer example along with inter/intranet we would have to look at a hacking scenario.
Something like packet sniffing or a 'man in the middle' hack but how would something like this be achieved?
Let me put these forward.....I will put forward a situation and that which goes for or against it.
1. A situation is when one knows that someone is going to die and tries to set up an 'intercepting' ritual to take place at death.

The problem with this is that there can be variations of this scenario and with differing variations of those. Another problem is there is no known (that I know of) ritual to perform a purely spirit necromancy, anyway lets go to the possible scenarios.......the base of these scenarios is a 'uncle frank' has a stash of dirty money and he hasn't told you where it is and you want to get it before anyone else does.

1a.) Uncle Frank is dying from cancer, the diagnosis/prognosis says he has a month to live. You see that you have some time to arrange a ritual or have a necromancer on stand by to tap into Uncle Franks spirit.

1b.) Uncle Frank absolutely hates you so you decide to kill him, you can plan for a specific date in order to prepare and execute your necromantic plans.

1c.) Uncle Frank has a twin brother and you offer him a 50/50 cut if he helps you in your plans.

1d.) Uncle Frank is on life support, you see him as low hanging fruit.

============================================== I'll try to answer 1a.)

If Uncle Frank knows he is dying then he would have made plans on what to do with that money and who gets it. May be .....or maybe not, so what you want to do is get info as to where this money is from his spirit.

Problems here would be that you do not exactly know when Uncle Frank will die, also what his final thoughts would be. Any memory the spirit would have would be like RAM, once the power is out its over. In addition he could be hooked up to a morphine drip and if you did somehow tap into his spirit at death you might just end up with gibberish.

So if (big if) I was to attempt to get the info from Uncle Frank it would go along these lines....
1. Unless you are going to stay with Frank 24/7 you will need to bring in others to help you.

2. You and your 'team' would continually need to have Frank thinking about the money and location.

3. Your team would have to include a 'clear', nothing to do with Scientology but rather a person who could self hypnotize themselves to exclude all thought. To more or less put their spirit into suspended animation to act as an antenna of sorts to receive Franks spirit as it leaves his body and in turn capture any data it may have last carried.

4.  A very personal effect of Frank to be held by the clear so as to temporarily direct his departed spirit to the clear.

Myself I don't find this to have any realistic chance of success. Even if there was some success the clear could simply say that Franks spirit had no info on the cash and pocket it himself. If Frank was in a hospital then the ability to setup an environment for this activity would be hampered by medical staff and to circumvent that you would have to cut them in too. And at the end of all this you very likely end up with nothing.

Risk x Effort / Profit = Feasibility
I just cant see this as viable.



This would somewhat be similar to 1a.) but I will note this.....
1. A team would still be needed and most likely someone 'inside' with Frank.
2. If one could definitely guarantee the ability to kill Frank at will then one could tie the kill to astrological/planetary timings to make the necromancy at its most beneficial action.
3. You would need an insider to either keep Frank engaged in conversation and thought as to the cash stash. And most likely have the insider kill Frank, there is another course that being to torture Frank into coughing up the location but in that case why practice necromancy? The necromancy course would only be viable in the event that the astro/planetary timing is ending and Frank hasnt talked but most likely has thought about the location.

This action is probably more viable than 1a.) but not all that much.

I'll give an example where it might be reasonably viable......(when Obama was President)

Obama (POTUS) has been mouthing off about attacking Syria, Syrian and Iranian intel agents go to the U.S. and form a joint operation to watch him. They bring various people of various occult leanings with the operation along with assassins, during the observation of potus they see a meeting occurring with military brass and israeli agents attending the white house and deduct this to be a yes or no meeting as to whether to attack Syria.
Damascus gives the green light to bump off POTUS.
In this situation potus has been constantly thinking about whether or not to attack Syria, most probably has made up his mind and has a rough idea as to when and how he will do it. The necro team is on stand by, the assassins have planned every possible operation (including suicide bombing and hitting secondary targets if POTUS cant be hit)
In such a scenario there would be chaos but if they are looking just for a yes/no answer then it probably is viable.
But the thing is that such an attack on POTUS would guarantee an attack on Syria.

I think it reasonable to say that most nations intel services do have occult departments, so this course of action would be very poor indeed and they would come up with better options.



If Frank has a twin brother there are some factors to consider......
1. The actual date and time each one was born, we are not considering the mechanical hours here but rather the planetary ones and even zodiacal hours. Mechanical hours start at 12:00 am to 12:00 pm for morning or 'daylight' hours and 12:00 pm to 12:00 am for 'night' hours but this in no way is actually correct. Daylight hours start from when the sun rises and end at sunset and night hours are from sunset to sunrise and these 'hours' may vary in actual measurement depending on sunrise and sunset.

I'll use this to try and convey the importance.......
Say ........ Frank was born on the 23rd of November at 4:57 am (lets make it a Tuesday) and his brother was born at 5:11 am. So officially both were born on Tuesday 23rd of November, but if sunrise was at 5:00 am then Frank would have been born on a Monday and would be a Scorpio and his brother would have been born on a Tuesday and would be a Sagittarius.

Even though they would have the same 'spiritual dose' for animation you could find that their personalities may be quite different.

Example.... You have the English language and from that you have American English, Australian English and so on. Even though the speakers of various national types of English can understand each other there are things such as spelling and idioms which might not be understood or may confuse the other. If you were to write a note saying you were going to get a bank cheque then that to me would mean you were going to a bank to get a cheque. If you were to write you were going to get a bank check then that to me would say that you were looking at the background or financial status of a bank or several.

On to the next example.....
Franks mum was a real slut into gangbangs, she conceived Frank and his brother at an orgy and when she gave birth Frank was white and his brother was a nigger. A rarity yes but this does happen I remember some dutch couple in an IVF case where twins were born with different fathers because lazy staff used a pipette that was used by a nigger.
If both twins were born within the same planetary day and hour then it in theory shouldn't make a difference. (I don't know if anyone could relate to a nigger twin ....but.......)

Now as to the stash, a twin would be more able to have some psychic sense if Frank was to try and communicate a final message to his brother concerning this. Even allowing for zodiacal differences he would be able to somewhat comprehend any message, that's if he actually believes in occult type things. If not he may simply choose to ignore it, anyway if both twins were really close he would probably have been told the location of the stash and wouldn't bother with you.



In a situation like this where a person is keep physically alive by machines, has displayed no consciousness and is brain dead you will find that the spirit has already left along with the soul. An option here would be to re-animate the body with a non physical entity such as a demon, angel or some type of celestial entity spirit.

I'll use this computer example.......
Lets say you have a computer with a windows OS, if you can boot off the CD player you can use a Linux live disc. The Linux disc will override the booting of the windows OS and be the OS of the computer while the power is on because it will soak up the RAM, while it may not be operating at the same capacity and speed as the win OS on the hard drive the fact is that the Linux disc will be able to access the hard drive and allow you to view or capture the data within it.

So as to Frank and his stash it may be possible if one could get some sort of entity to take possession of Franks body and access his physical functions and that includes his brain and physical memory. So basically Frank would have to be somewhat fresh on the slab, or better still fresh in the bed before he was declared officially dead. I do think it could be viable for an entity to take possession of Franks body especially if Frank was an atheist because as far as I can see he would not be entitled to any 'protection'.

I suppose some sort of deal could be made between a necromancer and an entity something like 'you tell me where the stash is and i'll let you keep the body'
We do hear of stories or urban legends where someone was in a coma and suddenly recovered with a different personality or amnesia (a reformatted hard drive?).

Another name for these 'new' people is 'walk ins' and they suddenly start espousing the most amazing things when their pre-coma lives were pretty dull. So maybe this could be called re-animating but it is the re-animating of the body but it is not the 'native' spirit', but is this actually possible?

True story.....
I knew a woman who had a sister that have a major brain hemorrhage and was hooked up to machines and basically dead. The family found a preacher, the sort of guy who was called on as a last resort and who was pretty much prepared to go anywhere, anytime to do the work of the Lord. While some preachers (actually I'll say most) run on 'the love of Jesus' stuff, he did the Father, Son and Holy Spirit thing but actually gave a good deal of time to the Holy Spirit. He had the members of the family attend to the womans' bed in hospital, hold hands so as to form a ring around her and led the prayer with reference to the Holy Spirit (I wasn't there so I don't know what exactly was said, I just going on what I was told). After 20 mins of this the woman in the bed suddenly sat up with her eyes open, she didn't speak but seemed to be in some sort of trance. She was only up for about half a minute and then slumped back into bed. So it does seem that this is possible but only on a temporary basis, the woman didn't speak but this could be due to brain damage from the hemorrhage.

With a comatose person hooked up to machines etc. this isn't a case of spirit necromancy but body necromancy, whether a re-animated body would decompose of its own nature I don't know but the laws of thermodynamics would apply if the 'new owner' didn't provide for it.


Now lets deal with body necromancy.......

What would be the purpose of such a thing?

If we stick with the Uncle Frank scenario, then the purpose would be to access his physical memory (brain). Again looking at the last example 1d.) it may be possible to enlist an angel/demon etc. to take possession of Franks body at death, in this you have your own purpose but what of the entity you enlist? Such an entity may or may not acquiesce to your desires, it may just take Franks body, take the money and run. It may use Franks body as a vehicle to propagate hatred against God and if it did so it would be on your head to rectify it, which could mean you would have to kill it and go to jail for killing an already dead man.

So if you wish to continue regardless of the consequences then we would have to find a suitable candidate for the position vacant.

In this we have to link common symbolic factors between Frank as a spirit and soul to his replacement. Remember the only difference between humans and angels/demons is a physical body, both have souls/personalities and the spirit function might differ as human 'spirit' dissipates after death in this world whereas that of entities seems to be self sustaining. Do humans have a spirit after death? This I cannot say for certain because the human spirit while on this earth in this world is for the purpose not only to assist in the animation of the body but primarily to assist in the functioning between the body and the soul. When someone dies there is no need for the spirit to linger within the body and the soul does not need to be animated in the physical realm because there is no body to inhabit or function with. If this wasn't the case then we would be immortal in this world, but the body would still be subject to the laws of thermodynamics meaning we would end up cripples or just rotting into nothing and even worse is that we would be aware of it. Truly it would be a hell on earth.

What do we see today? Corrupt people who pay money hand over fist to buy organs for transplant and operations to have them installed whether legally or illegally. The sort of people who see themselves not only as gods in Assiah but also gods of
Assiah. They remind me of the scene in 'Escape from L.A.' where the Hollywood surgeon sends out thugs to kidnap people in order to butcher them for spare parts so the clients have new organs and new faces.

Just a note....I think the Escape movies reflect the scenario that could very well happen if people go along with the liberal xtianity (I can not call them Christian) crap and other forms of political correctness and self hating suicide.

Some appropriate music....

Necromancy: Scenarios and pseudo ritual (part 1)

I just wanna say 1st that I have never performed necromancy by a specific ritual and don't especially desire to do so. Well first I want to actually discover what is actually meant by 'necromancy' as it seems to have differing definitions to different people. So what I intend to do here is look at if it could actually be done depending on definition.
So lets look at the definition and to what does it apply...
Necromancy is supposed to be the revival of a dead person in order to question them on matters that occurred before their death.
But it doesn't exactly say what it actually is you are trying to revive or resurrect.

Is it the physical body or the spirit or the soul of the deceased? I will define in this instance the spirit as the animating life force of the body and the soul as the conscious life force. In this meaning the soul is the personality of the deceased which can either be pre inherited before birth or characteristics that have been adopted by the person as a result of earthly experiences, necessities and choice. I think that a person can be described reasonably as a sum of physical body + spirit + soul in this instance.
True necromancy would have to be the revival of all 3 factors but this cannot be feasibly possible as far as occult knowledge goes. Not to say it is impossible, but extremely unlikely.

Lets look at the 3 factors.....

Physical - It is possible to revive someone after they are clinically dead as can be seen in hospitals. But the person has to be in the hospital at the time of death, it has to have the best medical facilities (depending on the cause of death) and appropriate medical staff. Myself I think that this could be called 'medical necromancy' but it is not the same type of necromancy as referred to in occult lore.

It is not up to the necromancer to decide who, when or what will be revived or answered in this case. Also there is the consideration as to the cause of death, if a person was burnt to a crisp as a result of a traffic accident then it is not possible to revive that person on a purely physical basis.
If one is unable to speak due to losing their physical ability to do so (fried vocal chords etc.) as well as extreme brain damage then it would be pointless to try to revive them as they can not physically perform (speak) or access data (brain).
Even if the person was still physically intact and revived but did not have their spirit and soul revived all you would really have is a golem or zombie type entity.

It really wouldn't have its own personality per se as its brain functions would be limited to basic logic for survival mode thinking. It would have no personality per se but may just imitate the necromancer or else do nothing of its own volition. Even if it could access its memory and could give an answer to a pre death question it could not apply that answer in the modern context (this depends on how long the person has been dead, its physical senses would not recieve any input from the time of death).

If one revives a dead person just to answer a question and then send them back into the ground or back into the mortuary then there possibly could be some type of success. But if the purpose is to keep the person because of love (wife, husband, child etc.) then we have to deal with the laws of thermodynamics. Without a spirit and soul the revived person can be rotting away and not even be conscious of it.

Offhand I will say that physical necromancy (apart from medical intervention) is not viable.


Spirit - This can just simply described as the animating force, without it the body and soul cannot function with each other.

I'll use this example.... A computer has physical components, the data entered into it is not actually a physical component of the computer but is stored in it. However for one to access the other there has to be electricity flowing into and within the computer. Without electricity the computer cannot function in order to access the data and if the data cannot make itself accessible to other computers then its value is non existent. A computer that cannot access electricity has no value.

So if we look at it this way....
The computer is the physical being
The data is the soul
The electricity is the spirit
For this to operate as a single unit, all 3 need each other.

The spirit is impersonal just like electricity, it may vary in volts and amps but that depends on what it last flowed through such as wires and resistors. And just like electricity, spirit can only be generated. There may be 'varieties' of electricity (AC, DC, static etc.) and these varieties only come about as we can section and recognise them. But electricity is continuous because energy is continuous, it cannot 'not be used' if it is not being visibly used (or that we can discern using our physical senses) then it is kinetic or potential energy which will end up as electricity in one form or another.

Like electricity, spirit holds no memory though if we look at the computer example any memory it may hold might be along the lines of RAM (random access memory) which would be necessary in order for the physical hardware to access the data. I suppose one can say that spirit is like the operating system on a computer and this is also true but without electricity neither the hardware, software or data would be able to function together or access each other. Also physical components such as hard drives do have some coding in them and data can also provide an OS but without electricity both have no value.


Soul - This is the aspect that makes us 'human', well at least to a large degree.

This is the core of our personalities, it is what makes us unique as individuals in our own right. It gives us the final say on our judgments.

Example....we may be faced with a life or death situation such as placing someone you love in a lifeboat even though it means you will not get on and most likely drown. Your physical being will tell you that you will die and argue that you the body should take the place on the lifeboat. It is it going into self preservation mode. A built in physical redundancy if you like, much in the same manner of reproduction. You can fuck hundreds of people but only make love to a few, the body has no emotions of its own. The body never lies about its preservation, you might feel depressed about being a bloated pig but that is your soul speaking, when the body speaks on such matters that's when you feel physical pain.

Lets look at sociopaths, the ones without souls. They don't have emotions as they have no soul and their body and spirit doesn't make up for it, for them it is about physical pleasure and self preservation. This is much in the manner of a robot, it can only act within its physical constraints and has been programmed to recognise danger to its system and functionality such as software that measures temperature which can shut it down or put it into 'sleep' if it overheats etc. Robots have no conscience and cannot judge between right and wrong, sociopaths are the same but they imitate others in order to blend in with the population.
The soul is the seat of our personality, it is the final judge on our decisions but must take input from the body and spirit whether it wishes to or not.

So now hopefully Ive given a rudimentary explanation of the 3 factors within a human being, now lets see how one could access them.

Thursday, 7 November 2019

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?

Can You Show That God Exists Without the Bible?


Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God? And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn?


There are three distinct questions here, these are;
a.) Can you prove that God exists today without using the Bible?
b.) And if so, how do you know that he is the ONLY God
c.) And that all of those other 'gods' who others have claimed to be gods aren't real or else fall into the category of demons or djinn? Or else are not just human beings who have taken upon themselves the title of God or else have had it placed upon them?

Each question logically follows from the one before it. But before we start, we need to resolve a background issue.

What is Proof?

In asking this question, we're basically asking "What kind of proof will be good enough? How much proof is needed?". When we talk about proof, we're talking about establishing some degree of certainty about something.

Scientific knowledge is based on repeated observations, but scientific knowledge is only one kind of knowledge. 
Other kinds include historical knowledge, philosophical knowledge, moral knowledge and personal knowledge. 
These types of knowledge lie outside the bounds of scientific knowledge.

For example, take historical knowledge.
Can you prove that King Henry the Eighth existed? Using the scientific approach of observation and repeatable experiments, this would be impossible. But using historical methods, it is certain that he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This phrase is the key. While not one person living today has ever seen King Henry the Eighth, we know he existed beyond a reasonable doubt. This is why in law courts, a jury must be convinced of guilt beyond a reasonable doubt, not beyond a shadow of a doubt.

So, when we look to prove whether God exists today, a scientific approach will not work. The amount of proof needed is enough so that we can say: "God exists beyond a reasonable doubt".

The Question Restated

We can now restate the questions as such:

Is it reasonable to accept that there is a 'Higher Being' behind this universe? If so, how do we know 'what' or 'who' the Higher Being is? Is There A Higher Being?

a.) Can this Higher Being be proven to exist with using the Bible?
b.) How do you know there is only one Higher Being?
c.) Have there been others who have tried to take the place of the Higher Being?

There are many different arguments for the existence of a Higher Being, none of which rely on the Bible, and none of which can be scientifically proved. Here are a few:

The Argument From Design

When we look at anything which has a design, we rightly conclude that it had a designer. Somebody designed chairs for a purpose.
Let's use this as an example; You walk into an empty room and have a need to sit down, as there is no furniture and have a need then you want a solution - this is emanation. Next you envision that a chair you suit your need and imagine the shape, height and colour of the chair - this is creation. But for your creation to come into being you have to 'blueprints' in order to decide the construction of the chair - this is formation. From that all that remains is the physical action in order to make the chair.
You can add somebody designed a glove to fit over a hand, if one has cold hands or else needs to have them covered then any solution requires a design and has to be practical so it can be used by a variety of human beings and can be replicated if it was designed by human beings for the use of human beings.

We can look at the universe, the complexity of our planet points to a deliberate Designer who not only created our universe but sustains it today through its design. In other words it is the design that sustains itself due to the emanation, creation and formation that is behind the design which could only come from a designer. It would go against the laws of mathematics that the universe came in existence by accident or some random event.

Many examples showing God's design could be given, possibly with no end. But here are a few:

The Earth...its size is perfect. The Earth's size and corresponding gravity holds a thin layer of mostly nitrogen and oxygen gases, only extending about 50 miles above the Earth's surface. If Earth were smaller, an atmosphere would be impossible, like the planet Mercury. If Earth were larger, its atmosphere would contain free hydrogen, like Jupiter. Earth is the only known planet equipped with an atmosphere of the right mixture of gases to sustain plant, animal and human life.

The Earth is located the right distance from the sun. Consider the temperature swings we encounter, roughly -20 degrees to +50 degrees. If the Earth were any further away from the sun, we would all freeze. Any closer and we would burn up. Even a fractional variance in the Earth's position to the sun would make life on Earth impossible. 
The Earth remains this perfect distance from the sun while it rotates around the sun at a speed of nearly 67,000 mph. It is also rotating on its axis, allowing the entire surface of the Earth to be properly warmed and cooled every day.

And our moon is the perfect size and distance from the Earth for its gravitational pull. The moon creates important ocean tides and movement so ocean waters do not stagnate, and yet our massive oceans are restrained from spilling over across the continents.

And then in particular we have human beings, we show an unbelievable amount of design which replicates. Same anatomy as can be seen in regards to the likes of medicine and surgery, we also have life spans which governs our biological being. Even though humans try to prolong their lifespan through various means it does not extend 'life' as they knew it. In order to extend their life people will have all manner of surgeries, all manner of implants and take all manner of drugs, but from all this they will change from their personality nature and end up as drug induced robots and zombies without life.     

Human beings were not designed to be immortal and neither was any other form of physical life on this Earth. If we were immortal then we would not reproduce as designed, but if we did this Earth would be overpopulated and the likes of murder and utter poverty would skyrocket on a global scale and most (if not all) animal species would be extinct due to hunting caused by hunger.

The human brain...simultaneously processes an amazing amount of information. Your brain takes in all the colors and objects you see, the temperature around you, the pressure of your feet against the floor, the sounds around you, the dryness of your mouth, even the texture of your keyboard. Your brain holds and processes all your emotions, thoughts and memories. At the same time your brain keeps track of the ongoing functions of your body like your breathing pattern, eyelid movement, hunger and movement of the muscles in your hands.

The human brain processes more than a million messages a second. Your brain weighs the importance of all this data, filtering out the relatively unimportant. This screening function is what allows you to focus and operate effectively in your world. The brain functions differently than other organs. There is an intelligence to it, the ability to reason, to produce feelings, to dream and plan, to take action, and relate to other people.

The eye...can distinguish among seven million colors. It has automatic focusing and handles an astounding 1.5 million messages -- simultaneously.8 Evolution focuses on mutations and changes from and within existing organisms. Yet evolution alone does not fully explain the initial source of the eye or the brain -- the start of living organisms from nonliving matter.

The DNA code informs and programs a cell's behavior; All instruction, all teaching and all training comes with intent. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, as in binary code like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!

Just as you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three billion lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.
Why is this so amazing? One has to did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the persons body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

Let us continue...

Water...colorless, odorless and without taste, and yet no living thing can survive without it. Plants, animals and human beings consist mostly of water (about two-thirds of the human body is water). You'll see why the characteristics of water are uniquely suited to life:
It has an unusually high boiling point and freezing point. Water allows us to live in an environment of fluctuating temperature changes, while keeping our bodies a steady 37 degrees. Water is a universal solvent. This property of water means that various chemicals, minerals and nutrients can be carried throughout our bodies and into the smallest blood vessels.

Water is also chemically neutral. Without affecting the makeup of the substances it carries, water enables food, medicines and minerals to be absorbed and used by the body.
Water has a unique surface tension. Water in plants can therefore flow upward against gravity, bringing life giving water and nutrients to the top of even the tallest trees.
Water freezes from the top down and floats, so fish can live in the winter.

Ninety-seven percent of the Earth's water is in the oceans. But on our Earth, there is a system designed which removes salt from the water and then distributes that water throughout the globe. Evaporation takes the ocean waters, leaving the salt, and forms clouds which are easily moved by the wind to disperse water over the land, for vegetation, animals and people. It is a system of purification and supply that sustains life on this planet, a system of recycled and reused water.

Much of life as a whole may seem uncertain, but look at what we can count on day after day: gravity remains consistent, a hot cup of coffee left on a counter will get cold, the earth rotates in the same 24 hours, and the speed of light doesn't change - on earth or in galaxies far from us.

How is it that we can identify laws of nature that never change? Why is the universe so orderly, so reliable? And when anomalies occur they can correct themselves. This points to a Designer.

"The greatest scientists have been struck by how strange this is. There is no logical necessity for a universe that obeys rules, let alone one that abides by the rules of mathematics. This astonishment springs from the recognition that the universe doesn't have to behave this way. It is easy to imagine a universe in which conditions change unpredictably from instant to instant, or even a universe in which things pop in and out of existence."
Dinesh D'Souza, What's So Great about Christianity; (Regnery Publishing, Inc, 2007, chapter 11)

Richard Feynman, a Nobel Prize winner for quantum electrodynamics, said,
"Why nature is mathematical is a mystery...The fact that there are rules at all is a kind of miracle."
Richard Feynman, The Meaning of It All: Thoughts of a Citizen-Scientist (New York: BasicBooks, 1998)

We can also compare the universe to the likes of a railway system, at any given time all over the Earth there are thousands of trains on a multitude of railway tracks. There may be accidents and collisions but in comparison to the amount of journeys this is in fact a fraction. Likewise in the universe there may be collisions between comets and rocks of various placements and sizes. Considering the amount of rocks and comets in the universe the mathematical odds that this planet should have been hit and ultimately destroyed defies the laws of mathematics.

As we see we find ourselves with the intuition that random, unplanned, unexplained accident just couldn't produce the order, beauty, elegance, and seeming purpose that we experience in the natural world around us. More notable is that the components within the order have the ability to replicate and reproduce within the segments of the order. Examples are humans reproducing with humans, dogs reproducing with dogs, plants reproducing with plants usually by pollination (which can require division of the sexes) or else asexually as seen in the likes of plant grafts or else by 'splitting'. As we see these days because of political correctness and the continuous redefining of words and terms there are those who claim cross breeding within a species is 'evolution'. It is not, the amount of chromosomes has not changed.

In terms of reproduction there cannot be interbreeding between various species because of the various number of chromosomes between the species. The DNA/RNA of each creature will not ultimately absorb that of any other, it may be 'absorbed' with the aid of various chemicals and drugs. But then the problem will be two fold; the first problem is that the receiver will constantly need chemicals and drugs in order to keep the absorbsion. The second being that the constant ingestation of chemicals and drugs will either kill the receiver or else have them in a continuous sickly condition.

"Look round the world; contemplate the whole and every part of it: You will find it to be nothing but one great machine, subdivided into an infinite number of lesser machines, which again admit of subdivisions to a degree beyond what human senses and faculties can trace and explain. All these various machines, and even their most minute parts, are adjusted to each other with an accuracy which ravishes into admiration all men who have ever contemplated them. The curious adapting of means to ends, throughout all nature, resembles exactly, though it much exceeds, the productions of human contrivance; of human design, thought, wisdom, and intelligence. Since, therefore, the effects resemble each other, we are led to infer, by all the rules of analogy, that the causes also resemble; and that the Author of Nature is somewhat similar to the mind of man, though possessed of much larger faculties, proportioned to the grandeur of the work which he has executed. By this argument a posteriori, and by this argument alone, do we prove at once the existence of a Deity, and his similarity to human mind and intelligence."
 - Hume 1779

Design type arguments are largely unproblematic when based upon things nature clearly could not or would not produce (e.g., most human artifacts), or when the intelligent agency is itself ‘natural’ (human). Identifying designed traces of ‘lost’ human civilisations could in principle be uncontroversial or even nearly trivial. If we are confronted with something which nature unaided by an intelligence truly could not or would not produce (e.g., a DVD player), a design conclusion of some sort is very nearly inescapable. The unproblematic nature of such arguments has often been appropriated as a foundation for analogous inferences concerning (things in) nature. But in cases involving design in (or of) nature itself inferences are more problematic. Things actually in nature presumably are among those things which nature could or would produce, the intelligence in question would typically presumably not be within nature, and our everyday types of design inferences would appear to be wide of the mark.

But despite the variety of spirited critical attacks they have elicited, design arguments have historically had and continue to have widespread intuitive appeal—indeed, it is sometimes claimed that design arguments are the most persuasive of all purely philosophical theistic arguments.

Cosmological arguments begin with the bare fact that there are contingently existing things and end with conclusions concerning the existence of a maker with the power to account for the existence of those contingent things. Teleological arguments (or arguments from design) by contrast begin with a much more specialised catalogue of properties and end with a conclusion concerning the existence of a designer with the intellectual properties (knowledge, purpose, understanding, foresight, wisdom, intention) necessary to design the things exhibiting the special properties in question. In broad outline, then, teleological arguments focus upon finding and identifying various traces of the operation of a mind in nature's temporal and physical structures, behaviors and paths. Order of some significant type is usually the starting point of design arguments. Various advocates have focused on different types, levels and instances of order, have suggested different logical connections between order, design and designer and have pursued different levels of rigor

Design Inference Patterns

The historical arguments of interest are precisely the potentially problematic ones—inferences beginning with some empirical features of nature taken as (or argued to be) design-indicative, and concluding with the designedness of, and a designer of, the phenomena in question. A standard but separable second step—the natural theology step—involves identifying the designer as God, often via particular properties and powers required by the designing in question. Although the argument wielded its greatest intellectual influence during the 18th and early 19th centuries, it goes back at least to the Greeks and in extremely clipped form comprises one of Aquinas's Five Ways.

Design Arguments Example:

Entity 'A'  (stone) within nature is like specified human creation 'B' (concrete) in relevant respects because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent non-human agency. Like effects typically have like causes (or like explanations, like existence requirements, etc.) Therefore it is (highly) probable that 'B' has 'A' precisely because it is a product of deliberate design by an intelligent human agency. But as to item 'A'? If you were in find a stone in a riverbed for example, would you know how old it is and how it was created?

On a theistic level it can be argued that as man was created in the image of God; then man too will create in the image of God. Whether that be by reproduction or replication in relation to animate (such as children) or inanimate (such as concrete) 'objects'.

 Some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are design-like (exhibit a cognition-resonating, intention-shaped character). Design-like properties are not producible by (unguided) natural means—i.e., any phenomenon exhibiting such properties must be a product of intentional design. Therefore some things in nature (or nature itself, the cosmos) are products of intentional design. And of course, the capacity for intentional design requires an agency of some type. An agency of some type would have to refer to a Higher Intelligence or Higher Being or as we commonly say... God.