Supposing Another Conception

Our present reality is but a conception we have assumed to be true. We have entered the state and clothed ourselves with it. It is, though, a state of mind. Only a state of mind. Because that is what we are. The clothes hurt when you knock your head against them.

But we can assume a different truth and be clothed the different state. Our clothes will be changed if we are loyal in the assumption that the state is true. It is God who is becoming through the intelligence in the imagining of our assumption. The change can be natural through a normal (though orchestrated, spirit influenced) course of events, or instantaneous and as immediate as a change of mental conception.

Don't Imagine: Assume!

Don't be silly, Danny. Assuming anything is imagining. All assumption is done in the imagination.

Aye, that it is, luv. But that is the problem. We have all been told to imagine, but the guy telling us to imagine meant for us to assume. Assuming is imaginal, but it is different from imagining. In imagining you know that you are not it. That is a big handicap to overcome. In assuming you believe that you are.

Yes, it is all done in the imagination. But assuming is a hunk of an attitude: I'm there, this is real, I'm thinking from it, everything else is two-dimensional. In an assumption you can investigate all things like Confucius said to in The Great Learning, and you can find a certain one thing that is contingent on your wish being fulfilled.

Neville investigated being granted passage on the steamship. The ship had to anchor outside the harbor, he and his family would take the tender out to it, they would have to make their way up the gangplank, he would be both happy and sad to go as he waved farewell to his family on Barbados. It is a big thing to assume that you are in. But he would only be on that gangplank if he was already granted passage. No tickie; no plankie. If he is on the gangplank, then he and his family must have been granted passage.

So Neville assumed he marched up the gangplank. The smell of the ocean, the salt on the handrail, the movement of the ship and tender--he ASSUMED his present reality. He got the effect of getting the tickets securely experienced . . . by imagining? Yes, by ASSUMING.

Neville used the term 'assume' frequently. Almost any taped lecture: "Nevertheless that night I slept in Barbados. I ASSUMED that I'm in Barbados in my mother's home. And then I saw America relative to Barbados, and it wasn't under me that night; it was north of me about two thousand miles." Assumed. That's the tool.

Law of Assumption: Perhaps It is Both the Big Bang and the Big Suck

I mentioned on June 23, 2017, that the Law of Assumption must be an expression of the nature of God. But it is odd: "assume that what you desire is past history and you are in its effect, then will come its cause." This reminds me of an idea I had some years ago when I read Neville Goddard's comments on the positron:

"I returned to New York City, and he sent me the 'Scientific News Letter,' dated October the 15th, 1949, in which he said: 'Now, Neville, I apologize for having said what I did. This man is far greater as a physicist than I am as a scientist. He is Professor Feynman, of Cornell University, one of the outstanding physicists of our day in speculative, theoretical physics; and this is his letter. And he wrote in this little letter, which was printed in the magazine, a story concerning the positron, a little particle that is produced in atomic disintegration. It’s like the electron, but differs in this respect. It is positive in its charge instead of being negative.

"Now, these are the words of Feynman, they are not mine. He says: 'The positron is a wrong-way electron. It starts from where it hasn’t been, and it speeds to where it was an instant ago. It is bounced so hard its time sense is reversed, and then it returns to where it hasn’t been.' (Now, this is Feynman, this isn’t Neville.) Then he goes on to say: 'When a little electron is moving speedily in space if it is bounced, it’s deflected, but continues on its course. But if it is bounced so hard, then its time sense is reversed, and it returns to where it hasn’t been.' 'Now,' he said, 'on the basis of this, we must now conclude that the entire concept that man held of the universe is false. We always believed that the future developed slowly out of the past. Now, with this concept which we have seen and photographed, we must now conclude that the entire space-time history of the world is laid out, and we only become aware of increasing portions of it successively.'

"This is 1949. That Professor, Richard Feynman, who is now at Caltech in Pasadena received the Nobel Prize last year for that paper. They held it up almost twenty years, for this is 1968 and he got it in 1967, and the paper came out in 1949. I didn’t know it as a scientist. I knew it as a mystic. I see it. I can’t explain why; I only know everything is. The whole thing is finished, and all I have to do is to adjust to it. If I know what I want for myself or for another, I adjust to it, because the thing is. Well, if I adjust to it and it feels natural, when it feels natural, then I open my eyes upon this world that I have shut out for that purpose. As I open my eyes, I am turned around. I have actually been where reason would deny that I have been there; and then, as I open my eyes, I have been speeding with the speed of light from wherever I have assumed that I am to where physically I am. Now I am so shocked to find that I am not actually there, but I am here physically. My time sense is turned around. And now, I move across a bridge of incidents – a series of events – that compels me to move towards the fulfillment of that invisible state!"

That is from Neville's lecture "Faith," but he mentions the phenomenon cited by Feynman in a number of places.

Oops, my Google search for the above quotation also brought up this: http://practical-neville.blogspot.com/2015/06/nothing-new-under-sun.html

Anyway, what occurred to me was that Feynman's description of the positron might be that of an electron going the opposite direction in time. It seems positively charged because of its time direction and to bounce back to where it hasn't been because of our sketchy observation of it from our time direction. As a consequence of this, the positron's experience of reality is not that of the universe's expansion from the Big Bang, but of a Great Implosion. Dust forms into old and becomes young. Planes take off and land backwards. Light goes into the bulb. Water does flow uphill. Everything future is past and all our past is its future.

This is just a fun idea. Or is it? Positrons have, if my conjecture is correct, already seen the horse race (starting from the winner's circle and run backwards to the start, at that!). They are just traveling from the great dissolution of the universe to the Big Bang itself, but as the Big Suck. ALL THE UNIVERSE EXISTS STATICALLY NOW, regardless of which way we are going. It isn't moving; we are. I am personally glad not to be going back to ovum and sperm forms, though that might be normal to the positron. But can we align the two? Can I assume the winner's circle and travel the positron's past to get there?

"Yo, positron dude. I am going to where you are from." Assume that you are the positron's past beyond the fulfillment of your desire coming towards you across the bridge of incidents. From our perspective it will be the bridge of incidents, the fulfillment of your desire, and then your assumed winner's circle state beyond that. I guess you just have to know exactly what you want and assume to "be" where you have been in the future. Maybe this is why the Book of Genesis starts at the end with the Son of God and the completed perfect Earth. Hmm.

Link to Mitch Horowitz's Lecture on Neville Goddard

To: Daniel Steele
Sent: Wed, Jun 28, 2017 07:05 AM
Subject: Lecture about Neville

Hi Dan,

I ran across this lecture yesterday on the internet by Mitch Horowitz about Neville Goddard. If you have not already heard it I thought you might find it interesting.

PS again continue the good work, thanks

Larry

https://soundcloud.com/phantasmaphile/mitch-horowitzs-lecture-on
___________________

Larry,

Thank you. I do; I do.

Dan Steele

On the Law of Assumption: Do Not Assume That What You Desire Will Happen, But That It DID

The Law of Assumption is an odd law. Assuming that all metaphysical and spiritual laws are due to the nature of God, that they are part and parcel to that nature, the Law of Assumption is weird. Maybe that is why we have such a hard time with it. It is God's nature, but how can it be? The law says that in creation--causation--effect precedes cause; that to cause an event we do not imagine simply that it will happen, but that it did already happen. This is so head-twisting that the first instance of it in the Bible could not be accepted by the translators to mean what it says: "As the Beginning, the Son of God, (the Ineffable) created God: the Heavens and the Earth" (Genesis 1:1 Victor Alexander, Rabbi David A. Cooper, and me).

Whoa. Wait. What?

The Ineffable Most High Source created the Heavens and Earth as God by assuming their effect, the Son of God, as the Beginning. The Cause is underway as the result of the Effect. I told you it was weird.

I have to think about this.

Okay, I'm back to say some more. To create Its Manifestation, the Ineffable assumed the end: the Son of God as an already done deal. Not that He would happen, but that He did happen. Hence we read in the scriptures, "Christ is risen." Well, that is OUR end. From the Beginning.

The Son precedes the Father He proceeds from? What is this to the Eternal? Is Its end before Its beginning also? Is this why It is eternal: It is intelligence that is power to become what It imagines and believes always assuming a greater end, a running end?

So if I desire something I assume that I enjoyed it, and by the time I get it I will desire something else that I enjoyed. No wonder it is hard to keep track.

Prayer to Reworld: Get Used to Asking

One thing Rehnborg insinuates is that the Divine Cause, the Source of the universe, is an Intelligence Who responds to asking. Anybody's asking. He is Consciousness listening to each and every one of us all the time. He is impelling us, surely, but the action of asking is ours to take. Asking in any conceivable way, shape, or form. Compelling us, if He can, to get us to ask.

Our lives are in a way asking. We put forth a statement by them: "Is this right?" Our out-pictured manifestation is His answer: it works, yes; it doesn't work, no. Were to God we'd listen. Expectation, petition, reception -- they are all asking. Jesus, Buddha, jinn, saint, Mother Earth, self -- He doesn't care much who we ask. He responds to asking, and we think, "Oh, I have found it." Well, yeah, sort of. He is impelling, listening, cultivating as a careful husbandman asking as a precious fruit. I think asking and sensitivity to His responses may be the next stage in our spiritual development: "Is this right?" and sensing His response in ways that have not yet entered our imaginations. But first He has to train us to ASK! We won't be asking anyone else then.

I believe the names of the Antediluvian Patriarchs indicate natures, states of being/ATTITUDES that generate the proper asking in us. Noah is that asking. "I want a'nuther world." The Big Guy can reworld the whole earth, but He is opting to reworld just our part of it for the time being. Hey, this is just training.

Abram and Jairus asked, "What about my offspring?" YHWH said, "I will come." He comes to us and our old ladies are restored to being able to bear the Promise, His Light.

So GET USED TO ASKING. Ask, knock, seek. Search. Strive to get to Him Who says, "Come unto Me." Practice His presence and pray, asking in the various forms you find, with praise and thanksgiving.

Among the Misfits: He Whose Nature is Love

I am comfortable among the misfits. The unpolished. A grub myself, after the Navy I lived in a pickup truck for two years occasionally studying metaphysics. I was saved among young, tongue-speaking Pentecostal kids in a commune in Hawaii (hello, Rod Wilson) who got me involved in Orthodox-ish Charismatic Christianity. Yet I am more comfortable with the "mad mystic of 48th Street," Neville Goddard.

I need consonance of philosophy and reality. I do not get that with the foundations, institutions, committees, doctrines and dogmas of modern Western Christianity. There is a reality I perceive and experience, and what I have been taught in the Church does not align with it. They are talking about it all right, but they aren't getting it. Victor Alexander's translations and C. F. Rehnborg's comprehension can be mentally aligned with the reality I perceive as "the real thing that is going on." Like Neville, these do not sit well with the orthodox. Rehnborg's and Alexander's books are unpolished, unedited, self-published . . . and worth many times their asking price to those who can read the meanings behind the words.

Reading is wrestling. I have read (and in Neville's case listened to) many things many times, and each time I have discovered something new, something completely missed in previous readings. I read again Alexander's Book of Genesis translated from the Ancient Aramaic and noted the themes of abundance, provision, and satiation in their exalted names. God is saying, "I am that abundance from whence is satiation." "The world is just the appeasement of a hunger," Neville said, and it runs through Genesis like a banner.

What made me then pick Rehnborg's Jesus and the New Age of Faith off the shelf? Its resonance with that banner, that theme, that reality. In chapter 31 specifically, THE NEW AGE OF FAITH, he does more to explain Neville and the God of the Bible than anything else I have ever read. The nature of God is love, provision, abundance. No tricks to perform, no doctrines required to be accepted. Take HIS nature upon YOU, and you're cool.

I can hardly read my study copy of The New Age of Faith for all the notes and underlining. I keep a clean copy for pleasure reading and buy spares whenever I find them to give away. Given the option to give a person a great study Bible like the Companion Bible or Jesus and the New Age of Faith, I give The New Age of Faith. Then they can better understand the Bible (not like Jewish mysticism, though).

I have hundreds and hundreds of Christian books, commentaries, lexicons, collections of sermons, etc. The best books I have are Alexander's translations (especially Genesis) and Rehnborg's Jesus and the New Age of Faith. (It was published privately by the C. F. Rehnborg Literary Foundation, 5600 Beach Boulevard, Buena Park, California 90620, in 1955.)

So what did C. F. Rehnborg teach? As far as I know, he did not teach; he ruminated. From 1917 to 1927 he was a businessman in China, where he was besieged by zealous Christian missionaries. A consummately logical man, he could not accept their irrational religious claims and doctrines. But they got him thinking: they had something; they were wrong about it, but there was something there. He investigated and worked it out. The Age of Faith is his conclusion, the conclusion of a logical mind's ruminations upon the assertions and contradictions regarding this perceived and experienced reality. I am glad he kept notes.

His conclusion (spoiler alert) on pages viii and ix (! I could have stopped reading here!) is that "Jesus also taught success and achievement as attainable individual goals, and he taught the manner of living which produced achievement . . . That what man would have he could have." I.e., that Jesus taught Moses' success manual the way Moses meant it. Man can have success because the universe and its Cause are one, and the laws of the universe are simply the nature of that Cause. The Cause is beneficent in nature, and the laws of that nature are the laws of living: "Finally, Jesus taught that the principles of love and brotherhood were in fact consequences of the nature of the universe. They were natural ideals, not constructed ideals, requiring merely to be discovered as all natural laws are discovered. One did not condescendingly ameliorate the terms of harsh existence for other miserable humans by practicing specious love and brotherhood, for misery itself was unnatural. Instead, not to practice true love and brotherhood was to oppose (impose?) selfish conduct to the operation of a natural beneficence. Men prevented men from attaining happiness. Happiness was a natural consequence of a natural order of things; but men were to attain it by a rational use of their common natures and capabilities, just as they walked by using their legs. The universe was the expression of a God postulated to exist by deduction from the facts, and this God could be comprehended by the image of a Father to men. Man could attune himself to the universe, and the things call nobilities were the acts of attunement. Further, this universal Principle of Love, this Cause and Nature of the Universe, made yet other beneficences follow inevitably as related consequences. The resources of the universe were infinite, and just as a human father made the benefits at his control free for the good of his children, so also the Father of all men made the resources of the universe free mankind his children. Not only happiness but every other desirable thing was free to all men for the asking" (p. 399).

For the asking. Believing. "Give us THIS day our bread for THIS day" begs the question of what YHWH means by "Behold, I come quickly." It is in response to our asking: "The whole operation of desiring and receiving is achieved within ourselves by an act of alignment of our "selves" with an immutable and unalterable pattern existing outside ourselves -- inflexible and unchangeable because no element of the universal pattern can be varied without inevitably requiring change in every other element of the universal pattern to some corresponding degree; a change not possible because incompatible with natural law and inconceivable without alteration of the universe. Therefore, the change must be made by altering our "selves" to fit the laws" (p. 400).

"To ask for what one desires, as Jesus said we might, does not come about through any violation of the natural order of things. It is part of the natural order: the universe is made that way. If one follows the Law of Love in his dealings with men (or even if he does not), and if one knows what he wants, then inevitably and certainly life orders itself in such a manner that the desired thing simply happens" (p. 401). Rehnborg says there are no conditions except to accept the relationship. No groveling before a judgmental God. "One believes, one desires and is ready to receive and to be thankful."

Interestingly, Rehnborg frequently mentions Gautama (Buddha) for comparison. I have expressed before that I believe the author of the Book of Mark was an Indian Buddhist Therapeut, a missionary to the West of Asia (see Christian Lindtner Theory*). I believe Mark presents a Jesus of REFINED Buddhism after he, Mark, discovered Moses. You take the heart of Moses' Judaism and the heart of Gautama's Buddhism and you have, voila, Christianity as taught by that famous Jewish Buddhist: Jesus Christ. Mark and his Jesus were misfits trying to start a new Age of Faith, too.

*My reason for believing Mark to be an Indian missionary has to do with first language interference in his second language learning. Per Lindtner, he writes Greek as an Indian would, and as an ESL teacher I agree. Mark isn't saying, for instance, that Jesus immediately did this and that; he is using an associate term for the Sanskrit "and then . . ." We all thought Mark just had some quirks, and that Jesus must have visited India in his undocumented youth. No, he didn't go to India; an Indian came to Palestine and wrote the first Gospel!

It makes sense that the Source and Cause of the universe is an expanding, intelligent being. Increase and abundance would thus be Its nature. Asking for and receiving abundant provision would not be an exception but rather the rule in such a being as we are in.

Pruning Shears of Revision: Jesus and the Little Children's Salt

My two previous posts have been about the discovery of "pruning"--revision--as a prayer technique in the Bible, specifically Genesis chapters 12 through 20, where Sarah has been barren and is rejuvenated to bearing the promise late in life through revision, her experience with Pharaoh revisioned as Abimelech; and in Mark 5:21-43 where Jesus raises Jairus' daughter from the dead, a revision of Jairus as the woman with the issue of blood. Oops, did I forget to explain that?

Jairus (to be light, or if you would, light to be) has sought out Jesus. The woman with the issue of blood is JAIRUS, as is his daughter. Jairus' spiritually unfulfilled life is what he has sought out Jesus--God--for. He wants to be light. The old woman's physicians (and Pharaoh?) cannot help is his daughter (allegorically), but he wishes her rejuvenated, young and fruitful. He is told it is a lost cause, but no, Jesus comes unto his house, Jairus' mind, And when He (God) was come in, He took the revisioned damsel by the hand and said, "Little girl, rise." Astonishing.

The nature of the believer in these stories and in this technique makes me wonder if the child passages--"unless you become as a little child" (Matthew 18), and "suffer the little children to come unto me" (Mark 9)--are not related to revision. For in revision you, your consciousness Abraham, become as a little child--Isaac--and laugh! And as Jacob your inner God-man usurps the past with a new vision to allow the promise of a new cause to come forth. OMG you are a chain reaction.

Related then to these possible revision stories is the salt passage, Mark 9:49-50. Fire consumes. The present must be consumed for the future to have a place to manifest. Sacrifices are salted to help the fire consume them. Revisioning salts the present state for consumption, allowing it to fade into the past and the desired cause to become manifest. We need revision to be salty, to season the past--"an offering salted with fire"--to make spiritual progress. If we do not do revising, how can we make the present (the remaining effect of past) salted to be consummed and changed into what we desire?

"Assuredly, I say to you, unless you are converted (changed in your mind) and become as little children (happy in your revision), you will by no means enter the kingdom (promise) of heaven. 4 Therefore whoever humbles himself as this little child is the greatest (God) in the kingdom of heaven" (Matthew 18:3-4).

On the Pruning Shears of Revision: Evidence from the Bible, Moses' Success Manual: Some Notes on Revising the Past per Jairus' Daughter and Sarah's Rejuvenation Being the Same Account

Ref. Neville Goddard's lecture, "The Pruning Shears of Revision": http://realneville.com/txt/the_pruning_shears_of_revision.htm

Continuing my previous post, http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2017/06/revise-past-jairus-daughter-and-sarahs.html:

Revision is the mental re-creation of our lives.

Sarah's time with Abimelech was a REVISION of her earlier experience with Pharaoh which restored her to youthful fruitfulness to bear the Promise. No one I know of has ever noticed that. I asked in my last post how we all missed that. The answer is only Victor Alexander's translation from the ancient Aramaic notes that Abimelech and his nation were holy. Alexander's translation made me think, "Holy? The Philistines? How were the Philistines holy?" You ask; God answers:

Abraham and Sarah are to us allegories. As Abram, Abraham was conscious of unity--oneness--with God, the Exalted Father. But this consciousness was still in the "famine" of ignorance due to the amnesia from the transition from God-consciousness into human consciousness, which is an effective scrub of awareness, intelligence, and wisdom.

Aware of unity with the Exalted Father, Abram's consciousness was princely--"Sarai." Aware that God is the Merciful Father, Abraham, oh, wow, that then must be our manifestation. Merciful-Father consciousness, Abraham, is not just princely, it is the prinCESS--Sarah--capable of bringing forth the Promise of spiritual progress and graduation unto the next level. Hallelujah. Rejoice with laughter and singing, and again I say, REJOICE!! LAUGH!! BECAUSE IT REAL!! AND IT IS TRUE !! These are states of consciousness.

Cool promise, but where is transformation? YHWH, which is the Ineffable in action (imagining Jethro to us!), said he would return Abram's awareness and rejuvenate Sarah to spiritual fruitfulness. Abram's initial "spiritual" effort had been work in the flesh, Egypt, as Pharaoh. This can never really cut the mustard. Sarai must be revisioned as Sarah, and this revisioning is the rejuvenation. In Gadar, the shelter housing the brain, the past fleshly works (all Abram's wombs had been stopped) are set aside for God--made holy--and Sarah is exalted. Note all the differences between Abimelech's and Pharaoh's responses to Sarah. Holy Abimelech of the revisioning mind blesses her, as though all the things that went wrong before have now gone right.

With Sarah's position restored by Abimelech with a thousand pieces of silver--redemption--to Abraham, the Lord has restored her to bearing the long awaited Promise. The God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, the usurper, is the God we are united with IN THESE STATES OF BEING: our imagination! These are states of consciousness we all enter as we mature and grow spiritually. Through them we become Israel: God ruling as Man, and wind up being Joseph, the Savior, in this Egypt (still in this world). This Joseph, along with Mariam, become the parents of the Messiah, our God-anointed consciousness of being God. But I digress.

Call God in on it and apply the pruning shears of revision in remembering the past as it ought to have been . . . as though it had been . . . and is now as you wanted it to be, with praise and thanksgiving. The Kingdom of God has to do with attitudes. Believe it and reminisce: "Isn't it wonderful!"

Revise the Past: Jairus' Daughter and Sarah's Rejuvenation Are Parallel Accounts

I have written about this before: http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2016/03/abrahams-sarah-and-jairus-daughter-are.html

This is based on Neville Goddard's lecture, "The Pruning Shears of Revision": http://realneville.com/txt/the_pruning_shears_of_revision.htm

Revision is a prayer technique in which one changes his or her memory of experiences. Mentally changing recollection of effects brings about change in their causes. That sounds weird and illogical, but the point is that it works, and if it works, you have found God.

To the point: when you are imagining for causation, revise your past, not your future. Case at point: I remembered a friend from my childhood. Never dated, just a good friend, but it occured to me that if I had not been a complete idiot at that age she could have been a girlfriend, even my wife. If I had not been a complete idiot at that time.

Remembering that past potential, my marriage immediately just about came undone. Maybe you have been there. Knowing what was going on, that my imaginings were pushing manifestation that direction, I revised my imaginings to what my relationship with my wife could have been at that age. Whoa! Talk about the spark that kindles the flame! A complete flip in my relationship. Oh, a principle: revise the past.

You want something that you do not have, but you want it now. Which means that you would have gotten it in the past. Faith says that you have received it . . . in the past. You do not imagine that you are going to get it; you imagine that you have GOTTEN it. At the end of the day you wish you had received a certain letter. You do not revision tomorrow receiving the letter; you revision the PAST of earlier today having RECEIVED it. You do not plan; you reminisce. You enter reverie.

For example: Neville Goddard explained that Esau is the flesh and Jacob the spirit, the "inner man." These are to us allegories, as are Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar. Sarah the spirit, and Hagar the flesh. Sarah as Abraham's spiritual potential isn't bearing any fruit. Effort in the flesh just messes things up. Enter God: "I will return Sarah to youthful fruitfulness." Note that Sarai, princely, becomes Sarah, princess. There is a difference.

Here is what we all have been missing: Sarah's time with Abimelech is a revision of her earlier time with Pharaoh. It is a revision of the past, and Sarah--the Promise bearer--is restored to bear the Promise. Whoa! How did we miss that one?

Probably the same way we all miss Jairus' calling Jesus to restore his daughter being a revision of the woman with the issue of blood! The woman is Jairus' spiritual potential that is barren, and if she can but touch the hem of His garment she will be restored to youthful fruitfulness. How does she touch? In the Temple, the mind, you approach God with a revision of the past youth as you desire it to have been: you got AND HAVE the letter, you heard so-and-so say that they GOT what they wanted . . . whatever. In the past. You revise THE PAST.


Something else written in the past:
http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2013/11/changing-past-to-right-future-my-take.html

My favorite example of healing the past is the woman with the bad back on the nineteenth page of The Law and the Promise. She had jumped from a swing as a child and landed badly, injuring her back. Learning of this principle of revising the past, she imagined herself as a child on the swing again. It took marked effort, but eventually she could feel the breeze in her hair and the sensation of swinging . . . and she jumped, landing perfectly. "Mommy! Mommy! Watch what I can do! Watch mommy!" Over and over she swang and sailed through the air, landing perfectly every time. And in reverie she fell asleep. Darned if those aches and pains she had suffered with for all those years didn't just go away. Her (and God's) conception of her back was changed, and as promised, Jesus came soon with healing in his wings.



An odd thought that, that our hope is in the past . . . revisioned. There's gotta be a post in that. Maybe about how creation was initially imagined perfect in Genesis chapter one. Can we imagine that?

Please see next post: http://imagicworldview.blogspot.com/2017/06/on-pruning-shears-of-revision-evidence.html

Sitting Around Like a Dork While Unity Fiddles and Burns

Perhaps like me, you have been known to waste time, to procrastinate, to be slow to get anything done. Neil Douglas-Klotz in The Hidden Gospel: Decoding the Spiritual Message of the Aramaic Jesus (Quest Books, 1999), notes that the name (nature) Alaha means Sacred Unity. Gandy and Freke in Jesus and the Lost Goddess (Three Rivers Press, 2001), conclude that the lost "Goddess" (spoiler alert!) is our oneness, our unity with God. Is there anything in the world more important to be doing than exercising and promulgating our unity with God? I catch myself sitting around like a dork while this unity lies waste in my life and the lives of others. Can you guess what the church of Jesus Christ is supposed to be doing?

Neville Goddard was not so. He practiced (!) unity with God and preached it "24-7." After discovering that we are what we are, he PRACTICED revisioning, meditating, hearing, and envisioning. Initially, it takes intense effort to "hear as though one heard." He keeps telling us through his lectures that it is not enough to know about causation by imagination, we have to DO it. And as it did for him, it takes PRACTICE: constant, repetitive practice. If Consciousness is the only reality, where ought we be and be learning how to live?

A Note on the Absence of Future

Robert Young in his Literal Translation of the Bible argued that there was no future tense in the ancient Hebrew. They could refer to the future with auxiliaries, of course; e.g., "When you come to the fork in the road, go left," but as for a genuine future tense, no. This is why I mentally convert future tenses in the Bible to the present tense. Why read something in the future when it wasn't said in the future? This keeps me from waiting for something that is already here, like Christ for instance.

The Key to the Bible: Jethro in the Lord's Prayer

Jethro means "His jutting over." The abundance that is the Ineffable--what It, the Ineffable, is beyond our experience--is Jethro, and that is the key to the Bible. Jethro is what "Behold, I come quickly" (Rev. 22:12) is all about. When you understand that Jethro was the Father in the Law of God to Moses, and that "shepherding the flocks of Jethro" was contemplative thought, you are well on the way to understanding the scriptures.

The overriding influence in life is our destiny to fulfill the scriptures. THAT is what is going on no matter what we do in life. We may live a thousand lives until we stop blaspheming the Holy Spirit and accept Her testimony that we are He. Which brings us to the Lord's prayer as I have explained per Neville Goddard and Fenton.

Because the Ineffable's abundance is our destiny as we become His Manifestation better than we have been before, His name (nature) MUST be being hallowed. His Kingdom MUST be being restored. His will MUST be being done. It is not like we have a choice in the matter: we have no independence, only individuality. 

The Revelation of Jesus Christ Given by God: Is Summed Up in 22:20 "Indeed I am Coming Soon" (Alexander)

The message of the Book of Revelation is "Worthy is the Lamb." Worthy is the Lamb. How and why? Despite everything else, He comes soon. In power. Saving. Providing. Because what is imagined as effect is caused NOW.

We are learning the constant connection between Consciousness and Manifestation. Cause desired, in truth, happens concurrent to imagined effect. It is immediate, relevant to our situation. Nature, the shadow of God, takes little (if any) time.

Manifestation of our word comes SOON. We imagine and the world changes beginning NOW. Our attitude is fixed and the world adjusts to it FROM HENCEFORTH. Daniel's prayer in chapter 10 was answered the first day he began to pray; it existed, though it took three weeks to get to him. Repentance is immediate.

Neville Goddard's father imagined each morning what interactions he was going to have during the day, and thus they were. Neville applied the principle to his HAVING passage on the steamer from Barbados, and thus he had. We imagine it DONE, and there it is!

The worthy Lamb, Christ, (be)comes SOON! Because we are He, just as He are we.

Caused Without Agency: The Evidence that Consciousness--"God"--is the Only Reality

What would convince you that God is real and that Divine Consciousness is the only reality? I suggest that it is demonstation of things caused without agency. No agency of this world, anyway.

For myself, I was in an occult meditation when my mind's eye was suddenly enabled to see in the spiritual realm, and there was a demon. Someone had turned that ability on--had caused it--and it wasn't me, nor the demon. My very close friend at the time had a horrible migraine and blamed Jesus for it (she had been reading testimony tracts and booklets about him in poor lighting): "He caused it, and he can have it!" she flippantly said. And it was instantly GONE. She couldn't make her head hurt! Perhaps here was the origin of "OH. MY. GOD!"

The daydream of Jesus being flogged and crucified was emotional, but then the imaginary Jesus turned his head toward me and said, "Come unto Me," AUDIBLY. Concretely in the hearing lobe of the brain. Looking intently at my own fingertips, the right fingers a tad longer than the left, Charles Hunter asked Jesus to make everyone's limbs the right length, and I watched my left fingertips extend to the same as the right. I did not feel a thing; the arm just extended.

I am not going anywhere.

Creation without agency is an idea I first heard in the movie "Forbidden Planet." The long vanished Krell had so developed their brains that they could create without agency. "Without agency?" the astonished Leslie Neilson asked. Thus the Krell had destroyed each other by their jealous and spiteful dreams.

I found it humorous that while Forbidden Planet was obviously taken from Shakespeare's play The Tempest, they couldn't figure out what had originally inspired Shakespeare. Come on! The play is about "Prospero," obviously prosperity--Jethro--which comes from God WITHOUT AGENCY. Duh.

Thus it is important for us to note needs and imaginings and their correlative fulfillment and unagencied provision. Get beyond "Well, it would have happened anyway," to recognizing that "It worked." For when it works coincidentally--without agency--you have found Him, the Eternal God who has become your own, wonderful, human imagination.

Every State is its Own Concrete Reality

The Ineffable's Consciousness, "God," is the NOT the only reality. There is the Ineffable No-thing's reality beyond Its imagination; Imagination, of which reality we are part; and there is physical, "concrete" material reality--the manifestation of intelligence. We three are One, a singular Unit, a Whole. There is no division between these realities.

Consciousness is the Spirit, the Ineffable's intelligence, which is power to become what it conceptualizes and believes that it is. Led by the Ineffable Source, God conceptualizes itself as, say, a ball, and believing, its intelligence transcends into a physical, material ball; i.e., concrete reality, the manifestation of the Source.

To say that the ball is imaginary is misleading as it is physically real, but it is only physically real to the perception of that imagined conception. Each conception's physical reality stands on its own. Each state's world is physically manifest as concrete material only to the state the Ineffable and God, Its Consciousness, are imagining. Only to that conception.

So reality is imaginary, but the Ineffable's Intelligence has (is) the power to become, to transcend into physical reality concrete to that imagination. Thus states imagined are physically real to the senses because the senses are in the intelligence of that conceived state. Without God/Consciousness traveling in time and space, unlimited numbers of states are available IN POTENTIAL. They are not stacked or filed on top of one another. Imagined and believed, they become physically, materially manifest as Intelligence transcends into the conception, giving it concrete reality to the senses. As God thinks, so its reality is.

We are not physically here. I mean yes, we are, but not really. WE are of divine Mind, and "here" is actually there. Physically, I had one arm that was a smidge shorter than the other. Asked to make them the same length, "Jesus" imagined the short one was as long as the other, and I watched it become so. Asked to so imagine, Jesus imagined my hyper-extended back healed, and I felt it become so. When my heart-attitude was in deep repentance I imagined Jesus being crucified right before me, and by thought he spoke to me audibly, and I heard his voice in my PHYSICAL brain.

Good news: the Up-side Guys see us in NOW our completed Like-Him state, and we, Intelligence, are transcending naturally--according to our conceptualization--into that state.

In Memory of Dr. Rely Hines

Rely Hines has long passed from this earth, but he still inspires me. The last time I saw him, he was teaching The Abundant Life at a Presbyterian church near Pearl City on Oahu, Hawaii, not far from Pearl Harbor where I was stationed in the Navy. He had been my Biblical Theology professor at Melodyland School of Theology in Anaheim, California. If I had not learned Biblical Theology from him, as opposed to just the Systematic Theology and Christian Doctrine that was otherwise offered, I probably would not be writing this blog to you now.

I remember the zeal with which Rely taught The Abundant Life. It was his life, the underlying theme of all he taught; he taught in earnest and with enthusiasm. The Abundant Life was known to Moses as "Jethro." Jethro means "His jutting-over-the-brim super-abundance" (you won't find that in any course on Systematic Theology or Christian Doctrine; this is BIBLICAL theology). Moses (actually our inner germ of the Gospel) wanted to know how to have the Abundant Life. God informed him, "It comes from Me."

Well, actually he said (according to Alexander's translation of Exodus 3:14 from the ancient Aramaic), "Ahiyeh Ashur hiyeh," which means, "I am the Source, the Creative Power from which it comes. This is what you will say to the Children of Israel, 'The Source has sent me over to you (that you might have the Abundant Life, also).'"

Ahiyeh: It is my intent that becomes; i.e., I am The Source
Ashur: The Creative Power: the Consciousness (Imagination) of the Ineffable, of which
hiyeh: It (Jethro/The Abundant Life) becomes

Sent over, Rely Hines did everything he could to get the Life of Abundance into people's minds. I cannot remember, of course, all the things he said, but I remember the life Rely lived: constant praise and worship honoring God with thanksgiving and gratitude in the Holy Spirit. He read passages of scripture out loud during meals. All affection to God. Ministry and counseling to people.

The Father is the Source of the Mother from whom the Abundant Life comes, so to get the Abundant Life, go to Him. What a great guide Dr. Rely Hines life has been to me. Thank you, Rely.

Re Rev. James Durham

I write this blog because I know -- KNOW!! -- that God is real, and that what I learn of him he wants you to know also. I think it is the same for this guy, too:

http://highercallingministriesintl.com/writings

The Pattern of Failure: Idols in the Temple

The world is imagic. That is, the entire world--its beings, cultures, societies and histories--presents the image of God. Because it IS the Image of God; it is the Manifestation--appearing or form--of God. "This," speaking of the whole world, "is his picture, his being." Not necessarily good, though, is it? That is because we also are included in God, at least a part of God in this stage, so that the world is showing us, too. Our part of the picture is not pretty, except that it shows how God is becoming.

Yes, God does not change from being God, but he develops. Grows. Matures. I mean, hey, look at us. We are God dumbed-down in order to develop past our limitations as God. Our ignorance has been isolated and almost purified in birth into humanhood--dumbed to the max. That is consequential to this amnesia. We have to overcome it to become what was missing in us as God. That is our accepted assignment. (My definition of God here, by the way, is the Consciousness/Intelligence/Imagination/Spirit of the Ineffable Most High No-thing. God is the Image of the Ineffable as we are the image of God--all of us co-existent without division. THAT is your Trinity.)

In recent weeks and months I have been dealing with, or rather I should say God has been dealing with me, about the Season of Grace, basically the 490-year period between the destruction of the first Temple in Jerusalem and the destruction of the second Temple. The period seems significant to me--a great portion of the Bible is dedicated to it--and I was surprised to find that the Jews have no name for it. I deduced The Season of Grace from Victor Alexander's translations from the ancient Aramaic and his comments therein.

What I have gotten from God is that this was (and is) a God-planned and executed image of ourselves in this life . . . HIGHLIGHTED. This was God banging a gong to get our attention; it's a specially constructed illustration. The prophets screeched it: "Seventy sevens shall rest upon your nation and upon the town of your reverence, so as the obligations may be concluded and the sins may be curtailed, so that the abominations shall be abandoned, and that they may usher in the eternal righteousness, such as the vision and the prophesies (sic) may be fulfilled, and to the Anointed One we may commit our blessings" (Daniel 9:24 Alexander). You can hardly see it through all the flags.

I thought God was interested in the difference between the translation above and its fulfillment and the Hebrew/Jewish version. But no, there is a PATTERN here. He is slapping me upside along the head with a two-by-four screaming, "Look. at. the. pattern." Okay, okay.

Oh. The pattern. In the Season of Grace. There is a pattern: rebellion against God leads to the destruction of the first Temple. This leads to captivity, threat and hardship, a common life for awhile, a return and rebuilding the Temple to better than before, the coming of Christ and . . . oh, yeah, the rebellion.

Two heads existed at the end of the Season of Grace: there were the people who had been prepared by the teachers of righteousness for the Messiah--who became the manifestation of the Messiah--and there were those who rejected them. I do not even suppose a single individual who was rejected, but a whole class of people who were persecuted--the "Christians" (as those Jews came to be called at Antioch). They were the Manifestation of the Man who is "Jesus Christ." I have got that, Christianity, and I have got the rebellion. God is saying, "Wake up and be aware of the opportunity that is before you . . . and which can be lost if you don't shape up and fly right."

Failure is at hand in spite of all the progress I have made. The Jews produced the early prophets, but they had also produced idolaters in the first Temple. Given the season of Grace, here they were at the end again with prophets . . . and rebels in the second temple. Adam had his corruption in Cain, but when through the Antediluvian Patriarchs he attained the rest that is Noah, he floated above the corruption unto the new world. That was good, but then he got drunk and Kham went all evily. Moses was doing pretty good with revelations and all, until he struck the rock in anger. Israel crossed the Jordan and Jericho fell, but Achan wanted other riches, and it led to slaughter. I have the feeling that I could go on for a month and not exhaust all the illustrations contrasting God's proffered success and ultimate failure. But it is never final. We pop up here again. Have another go, Dan. You want not to fail? Get the idols out of the Temple and finish with a single mind.

For about as long as God has been dealing with me about the Season of Grace, I have been reflecting on what might have been if I had not been a complete idiot when I was young. A bunch of what-ifs: "I COULD HAVE . . ." but didn't. That is looking back. Looking forward, "I CAN . . . I CAN get the idols out of my consciousness, and I CAN keep the Torah (i.e., its meaning, mystically understood). I CAN have the anointing."

We are all given the measure of self-control for righteousness and holiness (Acts 24:25), but if we pass on that and desire instead any other things we forfeit the opportunity. It's got to be a singular desire. Think right. Got to try to not be a complete idiot again.

Locating the Gospel Inside

Not having a father, I was a really ignorant, undirected kid. I didn't know that we were supposed to have ambitions or plans. I never contemplated the future, never considered what I could accomplish or become. I was completely undirected and unmotivated until I was converted (became a born-again Christian) at the age of twenty-five. That did not unstupid me, but at least I had a father now.

After a long while I reflected on what I could have had and become if I hadn't been so careless in my early years:  "I could have . . ." A lot of things fill the blank.

Now I look at my life and see the unity we have OFFERED to us by the Ineffable.

Locating the Gospel: Unity With Certainty In Its Doing

As I see it, the Gospel is our unity with the Ineffable, the incomprehensible No-thing. "It" is not something separate, divided, or distant from us. We are It; limited, but It. Perhaps we could say the Gospel is that the limitations are being dealt with with a certainty. The "eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him" (1 Cor. 2:9 KJV) refers to the incomprehensible part--Its qualities--we shall eventually attain to.

Neville Goddard's Imagining "All the Tones of Reality" and Bill Hamon's Shout of Faith

I do not normally watch the televised program Sid Roth's It's Supernatural, but every once in awhile something interesting from it comes up on my Youtube suggestions. Thus I saw Bill Hamon's declaration that he met Michael the archangel. I am fine with that. I understand that God speaks to us in ILLUSTRATIONS. God chooses to do that, and like I said, I am fine with it. I understand that the illustrations convey VALUES, and I choose to believe the values I learn from the illustrations instead of the illustrations themselves. God is a capable teacher, and I try to be a capable student.

Dr. Hamon said some very interesting things in this short half-hour program that illustrate, to me, the UNITY we have with God. Our faith, expressed here, is effective there. Apply this statement to the causative imagining principle of being "there" and thinking FROM the desired place and situation. The secret is FEELING that it is real. That is FAITH. Faith is belief it is DONE. We should have such faith that what we imagine is real that we give Bill Hamon's demonstrated shout of faith.

Another valuable concept was that we perform prophetic acts of faith. What we do here as natural people in our prophetic act is replicated there by angels as spiritual warfare. Read through the illustration: we imagine, and God works it out. The principle is our unity with God: we, here, are seated with Christ, there, in heavenly places. We cannot be in two places at one time, so the two must be ONE.

If you can stand the over-the-top enthusiasm (be strong and tolerant), please watch the seventh minute (7:00 to 8:00), 18 to 20, and 27:00 to 27:30 or so. He discusses speaking in tongues, which I hope you do. I do not especially endorse any of the products advertised, as you do not need to buy anything to receive the gift of tongues from God.

Oh, one other important thing Dr. Hamon said: the angels have to wait for our shout. So imagine unto faith that it is DONE, and at least in your mind, give a shout! Or, rather, let your imagining BE your shout of Hallelujah.

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=iNjrGAiwcVU