A Message From “The Family”: On the Theory of An Evolving Deity

rainbow_crystal_eggWhen Mister Rand first entered physical reality in zygote form in the womb of his present incarnation’s mother, he … brought with him into physical reality many experiences of standards fallen short, and his grief and pain over these actions (perceived by him as “failures”) were deeply entrenched in brain and body, so that he literally could not imagine a reality where the concepts of Good and Evil, Beautiful and Ugly, Friend and Enemy, Wanderer and Destination, Beginning and Ending did not hold universal meaning throughout all realities.

Big and small, short and tall, victor/victim,  do you not see that these dualities are only meaningful in Thought Reality? In the other levels of Reality, such as the Physical Planning State, the Dream State, the Nonphysical Planning State, the Plane of Light and Sound, and ultimately, the Plane of the Great Self, dualities slip away and are readily recognized as woefully inadequate to describe the enormous complexities of enfleshment.

But how can this be? asks Mister Rand. In physical reality, pain is real. Cruelty is real. Evil is real. How can you treat these intense negative experiences as neither good nor bad? Or as illusory? They are not illusory. They really hurt. How could a loving God create a universe where such pain can exist? Millions of children all over the world dying of starvation. Justice is one of the faces of the Divine, too. Are you saying that “justice” and “injustice” are meaningless concepts in the quote Higher Realms unquote?

We did not say that these things are illusory. We said simply that they have a reality only in Thought Reality, that reality connected to all minds past, present, and future by your reckoning. As for a loving God creating a universe in which suffering is not only possible but certain, given circumstances, some of your teachers [posit] that God has evolved over the eons of earthly existence, expanding through the levels of consciousness from Force, Threat, and Blame (all the vengeful deities of ancient times) to Acceptance With Intent To Learn; Giving; Loving; and Knowing … One’s true, complete, and immutable nature.

Another way of looking at these matters: that God, having evolved over the billennia into the most expanded consciousness, recognizes that It is not bound by space and time. And so Its expanded awareness is free to proliferate up and down the time stream, throughout all probable universes,  …  [expressing] Itself throughout time and space as though It had always been free to do so. In this way, Divine Love obtains access to all of reality and is free to seek to integrate Its mercies with the entire timestream from the very beginning to the very end (if “beginning” and “end” are words of meaningfulness in this context).

Mister Rand says, This is very complicated. Are you saying that God was once a brute, but having evolved into pure Love, is now rewriting the history of Itself so as to appear always to have been pure Love? We are not saying that deception is involved here. We are positing that the pain and travail available in Thought Reality is a remnant of a Maker less aware of the suffering of Its creation than It later became. And now that Maker, unable to remake what already is, is seeking to bring healing to all of history in all its permutations through the expanding consciousnesses of Its  “little” selves, i.e., the sentient creatures sprung from Its womb who are capable of moral choice and compassionate action.

And so It introduces agents of healing and change into the timestreams, “bodhisattvas” if you will, who emerge, have emerged, and will always emerge at various points in history to bring integration of the divine love-nature into Thought Reality and spacetime experience.

Mister Rand asks, So you are saying that some of us are time travelers sent by All-That-Is into physical reality and Thought Reality to introduce ripples of Love and Light into various periods of history? To which we reply, “That is correct.”

And we thank you for sharing. •

— Channeled 23 July 2017 by Rand B. Lee. All rights reserved.

To Understand Spiritually

buddhaSometimes understanding of the physical and psychological elements and processes involved in a painful situation is not enough to correct the situation, or to prevent the situation from occurring. In such cases it may be helpful to ask questions designed to uncover the greater or deeper context in which the situation has arisen. Understanding a situation from the broadest possible viewpoint I call To Understand Spiritually.

What I consider broad understanding may not be what you consider broad understanding. To the materialist, the broadest possible understanding of a situation may be accomplished by considering the theoretical, philosophical, ethical, moral, historical, or cultural influences on the situation. To the religiously inclined person, the broadest possible understanding may involve exploring the karmic, energic, metaphysical, mythic, or divine influences on the situation.

I consider both approaches useful as long as the seeker of understanding maintains an open mind during the search. Some of us become so attached to a particular way of looking at the world that we become blind to certain truths. It is all too easy to dismiss elements of a situation when they appear to challenge one’s belief systems.

It is vital to bear in mind that the purpose of understanding my painful situation is so that I can take steps to relieve the suffering my situation is causing me. This may seem obvious, but I have found that in many cases, despite years of suffering over a situation of force, threat, or blame, I find that I resist taking the steps necessary to change my situation. Sometimes my resistance is connected to fear of failure or fear of punishment should I succeed in changing my situation (threat). Sometimes my resistance is connected to belief that I do not deserve for my suffering to be relieved (blame). In such cases, I must recognize and accept my resistance with the intention of learning from it, just as I had to do when I began raising myself from control, force, threat, and blame in the first place.

By continuously cultivating an attitude of willingness to accept and learn from reality, I keep my heart open to positive change. And this enables me to attain an even more creative level of consciousness, the level of consciousness that I call To Give.

NEXT: To Give.

Thoughts on Atheism

Recently I’ve been watching on YouTube old uploads of “Q.I.”, a delightful British comedy game show hosted by Stephen Fry. Although he is very polite about it, Fry — who is one of the U.K.’s most famous and popular figures and has come out publicly as gay, bipolar, and an ex-addict — makes clear that he is an atheist and believes that religion is nonsense.

There are as many different kinds of atheists as there are religious people, and for many of the same reasons. Some atheists are raised by parents who were atheists, and religion simply never entered into the formation of their world view. Some atheists are reacting against childhood abuse by religious relatives or groups. Some atheists become so due to severe emotional or physical traumas; they have lived in Hell, and having emerged from it (at least partially), their bitterness has overwhelmed them, or their hope in the ultimate meaning and benevolence of reality has been extinguished.

Some atheists seem to be reacting against the extreme behaviors of certain Fundamentalist religious groups, both in this country and abroad. Some atheists were once believers, but became atheists when, often after long effort and diligence, did not achieve the emotional and spiritual satisfaction for which they had longed from their religious group(s) of their choice. And some atheists appear to declare themselves as such not because they have thought and felt deeply about human ethics, history, and personal pain, but because atheism is currently fashionable among the intelligentsia.

But there are atheists who become so because, in all sincerity, they have seen no evidence in science or history that an unseen spiritual world exists. They believe that all evidences of spiritual interaction with the physically measurable can be better and more simply explained by coincidence, biology, misinterpretation, or fraud. I find that such atheists are seldom contemptuous of or hostile towards believers, and I can respect them because of this.

If you go back over the above gloss of atheism and its causes, you may notice that precisely the same arguments can serve to illumine the motives and experience of self-proclaimed religious people. Some believers are believers because they were raised that way. Some become believers after years of seeking. Some become believers in response to living in Hell, whether the Hell of childhood abuse, war, or addiction. Some become believers because they have had numinous experiences that they simply cannot explain away as delusional. Such believers are seldom contemptuous of or hostile towards atheists, and I can respect them because of this.

Many of us, however, fall somewhere in the middle of these extremes. Sometimes I am certain of the love and protection of the unseen, and my fear of death as extinguishment recedes. Sometimes I am certain that everyone and everything in physical reality are essentially meaningless and accidental, and my fear of death as extinguishment reduces me to sobbing paralysis. And sometimes I simply don’t know. So I call myself a spiritualist agnostic. A skeptical psychic, if you will.

One thing I am certain of: atheists and believers treating one another as enemies comes from places of fear, and fear clouds judgment, making communication impossible. There are no opposite camps, however comforting it may be for me to think so sometimes.