Our Toyspace Is Moaning and Groaning To Expand Into God’s Kingdom


I call the knowledge and state of our society relative to the Kingdom of God Toyspace. As for relating everything to God liken unto the scripture “Do everything unto the Lord…” Toyspace has been sanctified unto God only. In our present Toyspace we have the Word of God as written in the bible; this text is always sanctified.

Why Toyspace when we already have the terms natural and supernatural? Well, because the new age movement has claimed most meanings, and have brainwashed the minds of people; especially, the youth whom now believe that Christianity or religion in general is obsolete and foolish. So, I could say that Toyspace is an intermediate state as we transform into the Kingdom of God. One doesn’t have to die in order to enter the Kingdom of God. Jesus says that “the Kingdom of Heaven is at hand…” The main enemy who resist the transformation unto the Kingdom of God is self and many selves collectively.

The natural world is founded by God’s principles or, in a scientific sense, the physics thereof. The physical world conditions us, and makes suggestions to us…forms us. Our minds with our human design seeks convenience and the best economic paradigm; less efforts and more gratification. Man was created to live in Heaven, plain and simple. The immutable principles of the physical world and our physical human design imposes on each other dynamically and we learn laws.

Our conditioning by the physical world creates inductively a spiritual paradigm that we call a personal relationship with God, our Creator. We now have the struggle to have faith in our spiritual beliefs as we do our physical beliefs or beyond belief unto facts. As we believe the fact of gravity we should believe our spiritual law as a fact just the same. This is where faith comes into play. Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the Word of God.

As we know to be a fact jumping off a mountain activates the principle of gravity. Well, holding to “Seek God’s Kingdom and His Righteousness, and God shall add All unto you” activates a fact from God. Strong faith avails much; but faith without doubt does supernatural works and can change time.

All the dynamics of creation is screaming and moaning “See The Living Word of God, Jesus.” because He is Who our Creator is talking about. Release, and behold the complete and wholeness of God’s Spirit. It takes a life to put all the suggestions and conditions together into one whole Spirit of life given to each one of us by God.

Romans 1:20
New King James Version (NKJV)
20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse,

Hebrews 11:3
By faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that the things which are seen were not made of things which are visible.

*** Will Myers

Please “Donate” any amount to support the ministry’s research and development. Just click the link below:

https://www.paypal.com/cgi-bin/webscr?cmd=_s-xclick&hosted_button_id=DKCQUR7YG7W5U

Share this:

Advertisements

About Will Myers

I am an "Intelligent Design" writer who has the Christian faith. Part of my background is that I have a degree in physics, and have been inducted into the National Physics Honor Society. Sigma Pi Sigma, for life. My interest has lead me into metaphysics, farther into Christianity. Optimum metaphysics becomes religion.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

4 Responses to Our Toyspace Is Moaning and Groaning To Expand Into God’s Kingdom

  1. Andrés Gómez Emilsson says:

    Will Mayers wrote:
    “Andres, thanks for your comments. Yes, the power of self-suggestion is well respected, and plays a role in faith. In my attempt to become oneness and harmonious with the universe or world was going fine until I encountered sophisticated orchestration which caused me great adversities in my life. I realized later that I needed a Savior. After 25 years, I found that Savior in the Form of Jesus. All adversities that I have encountered during the past 25 years until present has been inclusive to the problems that Jesus can solve. I may be delusional but it works and is all inclusive. My faith has grown much.”

    Thank you for answering. Before I go on, let me tell you that you sound like genuinely reasonable person who is knowledgable about many aspects of science and has thought about these issues a lot. That said, it is an empirical fact that being intelligent is not all that is needed to have accurate beliefs. Rationality, the ability to look at the evidence and think critically about its implications has a very low correlation with other cognitive abilities traditionally measured by psychological tests (read: “What Intelligence Tests Miss” by Keith E. Stanovich). It is also an empirical facts that when you ask an intelligent person to defend their beliefs *regardless of how they got them in the first place* they will find creative and plausible-sounding arguments for anything. You just have to go and read the apologists of Islam to see this mechanism operating clearly. You will see that they build a case that is non-trivially false, but in the light of more careful assessments they are shown to have significant problems. This is the case with your articles.

    An example? Let us take your article “Can Science Be Reconciled With The Word of God?” You argue that in order to interpret the real meaning of the passages in the Bible we have to interpret what they meant for the first audience. On a second thought… wouldn’t it be expected of a perfect God to be clear and straightforward to the creatures he designed at all times? It seems baffling that the Bible is so obscure at times, and at others so clearly immoral. But somehow this doesn’t give you a hint.

    The original problem with your line of reasoning comes way earlier: To restrict the domain of science. Just as science has gone as far as to explore the chemical composition of Pluto, it has also explored far closer and socially important aspects of human life such as the Bible.

    Did you know that there is ample evidence ranging from historical linguistics to archeology that shows that Moses did not write any part of the Bible and that what supposedly happened in Egypt actually never took place? More so, the motivations behind the writers of the Bible are also known to academics… they are not unfathomable… the reasons range from political, tribal and economic goals to self-promotion and identity building. Not unlike, of course, other religious texts throughout the ages. For more on this read “The Bible with Sources Revealed” by Richard Elliott Friedman or “A History of God” by Karen Armstrong. I hope you realize that what we know about the sociology of religion as well as human psychology already explain the existence and use of texts like the Bible. There is not need to take the text itself at face value.

    Another example?

    In your other article “The Bible Is a Textbook Of Science” you wrote:

    “Those who, by faith, accept the Biblical cosmogony, do so for a perfectly good reason. It is obviously impossible to prove that God does not exist. There is, at the very least, a good possibility that He does exist. If so, it follows that all things are His creatures. The very minds with which we attempt to develop logical thought-structures are created by Him and must operate within the limitations which He has set upon them. It is therefore necessary, if we would understand anything of the true origin, purpose, and destiny of the world and of ourselves, for us to look to God for His own revelation of these things. God can only be known as He wills to be known.”

    So the reason is that “there is a chance” and that it is impossible to prove that God does not exist. Well, I am sure you are aware that it is also impossible to prove that The Flying Spagetti Monster does not exist. And that there is a chance that ge exists… and that his true message is encoded in Russian cereal boxes. Since this is obviously *possible* then we certainly need to go look for those boxes and try to live according to the secret messages presented in them. I am sure you see the overwhelming problem with your argument. You pick one unfalsifiable hypothesis and for no rational reason you identify it as far more plausible than any of an uncountably large set of alternative mutually exclusive hypothesis.

    What about your argument about uniformitarianism being a matter of faith? Ah, that one I like, because as a child I used to tease others by telling them that maybe we had been created 5 minutes ago. Sure. But in the absence of any coherent evidence, how can we choose between the infinitude of equally arbitrary hypothesis? Should we divide the world by those who just happen to believe the world was created last Monday and those that think it was created last Tuesday? Both hypothesis are equally unfalsifiable. To think that you will simply *be lucky* to choose the true state of affairs in spite of *not having any reason to think it is true* is baffling. In all likelihood, you will be wrong. What is truly distressing is that for thousands of years people actually killed each other over unfalsifiable hypothesis 😦 Be careful with what you believe, it may be contagious to people who will take it seriously.

    Now, either you are convince by your own arguments (unlikely), or worse…

    I do not mean to be harsh, but together with your response to my first comment, what you are doing seems intellectual dishonest. To be frank, maybe you do not realize it now, so I don’t blame you:

    On the one hand you present a case Christianity (why the Bible ought to have more authority than the Bhagavad Gita is not clear from what you have written), and on the other, you acknowledge in your response to my comment that your faith comes from the psychological need of a savior and not a reasonable argument. But if this is so, then why try to convince others of something you know is probably untrue?

    If you don’t realize it already, you believe that you believe, but you don’t actually believe. At least that is the impression I gather from all this. If you don’t know about this distinction google “Belief in Belief” and “Belief in Self-Deception” and read the LessWrong articles that come up.

    All in all, I am hopeful that you will acknowledge our position in the cosmos. Is it important? Why not just buy any of the ready made fantasies? Because we have not yet discovered how to live in harmony, and we know empirically that appealing to religion does not create peace and it harms people’s rationality, which is much needed in an age where nuanced informed opinions are so desperately needed.

    Take care,

    P.S. Think about your argument in favor of considering as equally reasonable the “uniformitarian” assumption and the

    Like

    • Andres, thanks for your opinions. As you probably know, Inourishonopposingopinions; from them I grow. The first thing that caught my attention was your assuming that the scholastics of our scientific disciplinestrumpedany faith by having the logical and reasonable answers. I would like to refer to an example where 99.9999% of humans believe that the term mass is an absolute definition of things that light reflects and feel heavier than air when in actually the term mass is a conventional term awaiting for a more improved definition. The essence of these things remain under investigation. Now, correct me if I am wrong, you believe that the life sciences alone with input from all of the other disciplines has the complete and satisfactory answer. I have studiedsociology, philosophy, and psychology; each of these disciplines had their frontier workers searching for the more improved answers.No, the absolute andunquestionableanswer is at present beyond us all. We put faith into most every thing to some degree; the car starting, the chair holding when seating or even crossing a bridge. Yes, you are correct when you assumed that I knew a little bit about science. I was elected and inducted into the National Physics Honor Society in 1982. But, my education began when I had forgotten about everything that I had learn prior. I guess I could say that everything learned became a potential. God is an Infinite Potentiality. All of man’s knowledge is liquid to some degree. Faith is always needed. Man knows not the absolute. But, I have faith in God that He is an Absolute. I can not prove it, I just inductively and deductively belief it; maybe I could call it an educated guess that started working to improve my life.

      Like

      • Andrés Gómez Emilsson says:

        If I compare what you just explained to the titles and contents of your articles I find a profound discrepancy. In your articles you talk about scientific proof [sic] that the Bible is the word of God and provide some arguments to support the notion that Christian dogma and the Christian experience reveals Truth that science cannot, for foundational reasons, reveal. But in your response you seem to agree that this is just a guess, and that your faith originated from an emotional need. And that it works well for you. Compelling evidence? Just as many fervent supporters of homeopathy swear by its effectiveness. It doesn’t make it true. I suggest the other LessWrong articles, starting from “No, Really, I’ve Deceived Myself.” I am sure you will find them interesting at worst.

        First, I agree with the idea that science if dynamic and we might be mistaken for a long time. But what does this tell you about the world? How does this inform you about the way to seek Truth? As far as I am understand, thinking that the Bible was revealed by God was in fact something that many scientists and thinkers used to believe. But then came more evidence and techniques, such as historical linguistics, that reveal to anyone who has eyes and is willing to learn that the Bible started as a polytheistic book, and that the Pentateuch has at least four authors with *conflicting* goals trying to spin the work to fulfill their own political objectives. Sure you can then again say “science has been wrong in the past, this is not the last word”, and you would be RIGHT with that. But that is not what you say, instead you say “science could be wrong, THEREFORE the text should be taken at face value.” I am sure you undertand it is a non non sequitur.

        I am seeking the Truth regardless of the consequences. Are you? Or is Truth, for you, a secondary value? If there was no God, or Christianity was as invented as any other religion, would you want to believe this? Something that I remind myself daily is that I want to believe what is true no matter what that is. Is that your philosophy? Or would you rather believe in Christ even if God did not exist and Jesus was a spiritual teacher like so many Yogis in India?

        For obvious reasons your answer to those questions are of vital importance:

        If you do want to know the Truth then you will admit the problems I pointed out (which you probably already know) of your arguments.

        If you don’t… I can’t do anything about it. If you prefer looking like you are a good faithful person in the remote case that there is a God that will punish you for disbelief then I can’t be persuasive because you will always have that nagging voice in your faith telling you “I shouldn’t doubt these things, believing is a virtue.”

        Don’t worry, a being who is capable of creating love and know it intimately would not punish anyone for arbitrary reasons. Heck, I doubt he would punish *anyone*. But most importantly, he would never punish someone for honestly looking and acknowledging what appears to be True once all facts are considered.

        Like

  2. Andrés Gómez Emilsson says:

    Take a random sample of a hundred persons who are sincerely seeking “the Truth.” Come back in one year. What have we got? Well, 31 converted to Christianity, 23 to Islam, 15 or so to Hinduism, and so on. Perhaps not even that, since thinking critically has been associated with reduced confidence in the truth claims of religious traditions. But regardless of how sincere and dedicated the group began, they were all susceptible to the influence of other people’s beliefs and ideologies. And if one thing is certain is that there is no objective reason to think that any one person who converted to a religion is now significantly closer to the Truth than the rest.

    The point of my example is this: We know scientifically that it is possible for people to have a ‘crystal clear’ divine revelation and be delusional about the reality of the message. It turns out that if you really want to believe something, you don’t actually need convincing reasons. Are the mystical revelations that characterize Christianity the only valid ones? If so, what test could we conduct to determine this?

    It is a fact that people of all religions feel in their gut that it was truly Krishna, or some entity whatever, that gave them wisdom, insight and morals. A far more plausible explanation comes from recognizing the fact that our brains are neuroplastic and can induce almost any experience if one focuses long enough. In Buddhist meditation, for example, one is constantly re-wiring one’s brain in order to improve the ability of noticing subtle sensations. But unlike other traditions, it does not ask you to look for specific sensations.

    But self-suggestion is not the only well studied psychological phenomena that shows that the primary form of evidence for specific brands of Theism is bogus. We also have evolutionary memetics, sociology and history (ahem, have you read “A History of God” by Karen Armstrong?).

    Like

Leave a Reply

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

WordPress.com Logo

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

Google+ photo

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

Twitter picture

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

Facebook photo

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

w

Connecting to %s