In a previous post, I touched on the subject of concepts being the greater importance in battles and simply getting rid of an individual doesn’t necessarily remove the concept. That is true in part, but in the more specific sense there was a question posed many moons ago, “how important does someone have to be so that murder becomes assassination?” I found the comparison of terms interesting and brought back that thought when further considering the last post. Dictators are known for their blood thirst and tendency to remove all opposition. This removal eliminates the most probable opposition to one’s rule, but considered in this light, their removal eliminates the philosophy and embodiment of thought which would stand different to the concepts and thought of the present ruler. Keeping the control of thought at this level spawns creations like “1984” and tales of torture from General Sada’s book “Secrets of Sadaam” where individuals would disappear if any negative utterances of the ruler were made known. In a sense, this can be considered population control, and more specifically considered thought control. Divergent philosophies are not allowed and eliminated by the removal of the person embodying them. On that last thought it strikes me that totalitarian ideologies are very insecure as no opposition is permitted. This includes the totalitarian philosophy of islam and any similar political philosophies like communism or our present liberalism. (how respectful is a liberal of any opposing view?) Elimination of opposing concepts was also the birth mother of political correctness where the individual would be required to speak only in a certain fashion so that once fully implemented, the individual’s thoughts would be “politically correct.” The next time one tries to use that term to stop or control a discussion remember its origin.

There is a famous physic’s equation formulated by Einstein – E=mc (squared). What is interesting about this is the correlation of energy and mass. Rather, it is the manner in which the two are interchangeable which makes this amazing. The c is a constant related to the speed of light in a vacuum and thus the only variable is the amount of mass. Use a little algebra and the equation becomes energy divided by mass equals the speed of light in a vacuum squared. The only difference allowed in the equation is the amount of mass present. Energy will alter appropriately to the level providing the speed of light in a vacuum squared. That is what the equation says.
There was a show a bit back called “Home Improvement” where the star uses humor to poke fun at men. There is a bit more to it, but that cuts the purpose to the nub. Anyways, on one segment the star talks with his neighbor and asks this neighbor about what he is worried. “I’m worried that we are just a dream in the mind of a sleeper and the sleeper will wake up and we will no longer exist.” There is a bit of canned laughter and the show continues. That thought stuck with me, because there are some interesting passages in the Bible, for example John 1: in the beginning was the word and the word was with God and the word was God. All things were created by Him and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life and that life was the light of men. There was another passage where the Jesus tells the crowd that God could raise up stones into the sons of Abraham (Matt 3:9). Further, there is a verse where God calls things that aren’t as if they are (Rom 4:17). Note that in each of these cases, words are used and every time words are used, energy is expended. The end is material. It seems that on God’s level, there is a correlation between energy and matter. Note that at every level of physics that research has discovered a new particle, it is known by energy and the energy signature displayed. The existence of matter is known by energy. Just as there can be no line without the difference in color between that point and the background, there can be no matter without energy.

What God has created is an existence of matter expressing ideas and philosophies in a fashion other than the origin. For example: a painter wants to express joy and sets up a canvass. She applies paint and alters brush strokes with color to produce a visual representation of the concept “joy.” God has done a similar presentation, but with a more fantastic set of variables, such that each individual can be considered a unique representation of ideas each tried out in the oven of experience producing further progeny of their concepts when others are willing to adapt their unique concepts to the presentation offered. This can be looked as a round about way to describe learning. It also attempts to describe an interaction in the environment may be more than just a person in the culture. From a spiritual perspective we see concepts tried against each other.

There was an argument I was presented in a college class to diffuse any atheist. To define the term at the outset, the atheist is the individual who says there is no God. This is the philosophy behind the push for evolution providing an alternative to our existence apart from God. The atheist says not only have they not experienced God, you haven’t either. That is the nub of their argument. We were instructed to ask this individual how much of the collective experience they had. In terms of percentage allow them whatever percentage they desire. Then simply ask, “isn’t it possible that God exists in the percentage of experience you have not had? Is it possible that I have had an experience that you have not had?” Only the most arrogant individual would claim to have all experience and hence knowledge derived therefrom. There are common experiences, but the total of interaction with one’s environment is unique for each individual.

Applying this line of reasoning to the spiritual realm with acknowledgment of God’s ability to create, I’m left with the impression that God tries ideas by placing them in the oven of reality and letting them play out through interaction with others. Applying other observations from Scripture about manipulation of these makes sense if God is simply speaking the word to direct the concept (person) to a desired end, or to show results of interaction within certain environments.