THE BOOK

---

HEGEL’S “DIALECTIC PROCESS”

Take note of that, reader! Unfortunately, the belief still persists in science and religion that the “differences” both disciplines generally hold to will probably never be truly or completely reconciled, and that perhaps they should not be, but why not? Since our purpose is to move from a simple faith/belief position to genuine conviction as to the ‘truth’ of it all, the knowledge contained within Creation-Law perfectly permits a reconciling of the two viewpoints. We will therefore utilise Hegel’s “dialectic process” to identify which of the respective main points of each argument can offer mutual accommodation without losing any genuine substance from either, thus merging the two into one complete and logical whole!

Classically, the subject of Creation has provided the perfect forum for completely opposing views --- primarily that of orthodox Christianity and Creationism against that of the scientific community generally tending toward Darwinism and/or Evolution. Galileo, Darwin and others whose findings challenged Church dogma were invariably branded heretics, and the polite way to reconcile ‘Science’ and ‘Theology’ was simply to agree that each would keep to one’s own area. Basically, science would ask and answer the questions what, why and how empirically; and the church would do the same from the religious or spiritual standpoint.

In April 1997, what was billed as the Great Noah’s Ark Trial was held in a Sydney court. Whilst not a case of an “Evolutionist” versus a “Creationist” in the classic sense, Dr Peter Pockley, a free-lance journalist, nevertheless reported that “...the trial had pitted the belief of many fundamentalist Christians in the literal truth of the poetry in Genesis against the conclusion of science for a 4.5- billion-year-old earth.”

In reality, there is no real discord between the two positions, as we will unveil and reveal. The disagreement exists only in the minds, and therefore in the incorrect interpretations, of the proponents of the respective points of view. Moreover, essentially the same battle, which we note later, was fought in an American State Supreme Court some decades ago.

So even with the current strong corporate-earth mindset today, the age-old question of “man or monkey” still produces passionate debate. Since this Discourse offers clarification of that debate, and with what we have at our disposal, let us now employ Hegel’s “dialectic process” to determine where such truth lies in discovering an origin for ourselves that makes sense. The positions of science and religion should thus blend harmoniously, each supporting the other without disagreement as it obviously should be. For us human beings of earth, we are the proof of this one simple reality.

We exist! We are here!

In the Evolutionist’s corner, Charles Darwin (1809-1882) --- once described as the most dangerous man in England because of the direct challenge to the teachings of Christian orthodoxy that his work of Evolution brought --- proposed that “...all existing vegetable and animal forms were descended from earlier, more primitive forms...” via the simple mechanism of biological evolution. And that evolution was the result of “natural selection”. Science has “pushed back” and accepted a geological “birth-date” for our Solar System and the earth as approximately 4.6 billion years. Darwin thought the age of the earth to be about 300 million years. The age of the universe itself is believed to be around 14 billion years or so.

Historical anecdotes of Darwin’s ideas possibly being correct actually sent shock waves through the “establishment”, with even a distinguished scientist noting that it was “an embarrassing discovery”, and “the less said about it the better”. An “upper-class lady” expressed the hope that it was “not true”, but if it was, then the further hope that it would “not be generally known”. On October 9^th, 2006, Time Magazine published the article: “How We Became Human”. For our purposes; a key text from it:

Opposing Darwin’s, views were the Creationists and Genesis “literalists”. In Darwin’s time, both the ecclesiastic and scientific views were virtually sacrosanct with regard to the doctrinal idea that all vegetable and animal species were created only once in each and every respective form. The views of Aristotle and Plato were not dissimilar to the Christian beliefs, since they basically thought that all animal species were patterned after “eternal ideas”. This Creationist outlook, in concert with the Biblical, genealogical time-frame back to “Adam”, postulated that the earth was “created” about 6,000 years ago.

---

ISLAM’S CREATION BELIEFS

Let’s digress from our current “flow” to look at Islam’s take on Adam and Creation, according to M.M. Ali. Whilst Christianity regards Adam as the first man, Islam rates Adam as also an especial prophet. In terms of our “collective” human journey, Islam thus places him as the first, thus primary, figure for the entire human race --- both first man and first prophet. the Koran has many verses about Adam, but along with relevant “explanatory” commentary, we will use just three. From Chapter 2, verse 30, M.M. Ali:

In terms of 30a, Ali states that according to Koranic interpretation, the function of angels is “controlling the forces of nature on the physical side of life”, and their “spiritual function of acting as intermediaries between God and man”. “The existence of such intermediaries has been recognized by righteous men in all ages and countries.” He continues:

Having examined M.M. Ali’s commentary on the points relevant to our essay, there is a need to seriously refute a key aspect of the very verse that he quotes.

(*) In 30d, he very correctly declares God to be “free from all imperfections”. Yet he implies that God might nonetheless place in man the tendency “to make mischief” and “shed blood”; as evidenced by the Koran’s inference to that possibility by the question that the angels put to God. Would they have the effrontery to dare question The Creator Himself? Of course, they would not --- and do not! Why would a so-called ‘perfect book’ about a religion even deign to suggest such a thing?

Two things stand out here. One is the fact that an archangel of God, Gabriel --- who according to the Muslim religious narrative, apparently gave the Koran to Muhammad verbatim --- would know that he and those of similar standing would not so question. They stand in the company of the Highest and Purest Servants of God, possessing great power in their own right. Which is why, when they appear to men, they produce great fear, and offer the words of reassurance: “Fear not!”

On this inference, it would seem to suit Islam’s too-highly elevated view of man ---- or at least “religious man”, or “Muslim man” --- to foment the idea that such Beings must subordinate themselves to us? So wrong, and very “spiritually” dangerous! The second thing that must surely be understood is that Muhammad would not have --- from his own hand --- placed such a notion in the Koran.

Whether we make mischief and shed blood has nothing to do with our “creation”. It does, however, have absolutely everything to do with the exercising of our inherent free will attribute. Moreover, as we will again necessarily reinforce; for the Koran to imply that angels would question the very Power of all that is, is ludicrous, but certainly well within the range of earthly, religious thinking and long-established dogma!

(**) 30c returns us to Islam’s idea that we can, and are meant to, “rule the forces of nature”. Did you get that key word, reader; to “rule”? I wonder if Muslims ever look at television, or do they just blindly read the Koran, to the exclusion of all else? Do they close their eyes to the very obvious reality that we rule absolutely nothing in “Mother Nature”? The glaring and obvious fact is that it is we who are at the mercy of the Forces of Nature. She rules: We do not even “get a look in”!

Now we get more to the actual subject matter of Creation versus Evolution! In the following verse, the Koran uses a single word that, in terms of what we will reveal, shows that word to be completely wrong!

(*) The “strong emphasis” notating the word “created” in its particular context in Ali’s commentary is so emphasised because it is absolutely key in understanding that the too-strong religious belief that we human beings of earth --- of The World of Matter --- are created from dust is one of the greatest errors; one of the greatest “sticking-points, in this crucial subject; for it carries over into ferocious debate in the implacable views of both creationists and evolutionists with respect to the time-frame in which everything came into being.

In this Discourse we will consign to the ashes of religious history that totally wrong belief! Then, reader, you will discover that we of the earth are not “created beings”, but “developed” beings --- formed ---- from the dust of the ground.

(**) ‘Jesus is no more than a mortal’ ... Of all the many appalling errors and distortions in the Koran --- much changed from the time and life of Muhammad --- that seriously transgress the very Will of God and His Perfect Divine Laws of Creation; the above oft-stated supposedly “sacrosanct and non-negotiable Islamic doctrine” stands as the very worst of the very many distortions in the pages of the Koran. Global Islam: One day you will learn how terribly wrong you are.

We will say it again: Your revered prophet, Muhammad, knew that Jesus was The Son of God. Since Muhammad knew that to be fact; why have the ‘keepers of Muslim history and religion” expunged the DIVINE TRUTH of JESUS from the Koran, and thus from the knowledge of all Muslims?

The next verse from M.M. Ali’s translation of the Koran gives us an interesting new Muslim take on the Creation of man, for we have another word closely associated with, but still apart from, “created”. That other word’s actual meaning in the stupendous “Great Creation Process” we must also “put right”. In the same breath in this verse, that word is “fashioned”. Verse 7:11:

(*) The two key words --- created; and fashioned --- we will explain the true meaning of further on.

(**) On the question of angels submitting to Adam, the first man; Islam clearly places much store on the position of man [us] in the Great Creation. Whilst noting that Islamic scholar, M.M. Ali, differentiates between the classes or levels of “angels” in order, most probably, to ensure or promote the sanctity of the wording of verses relating to angels and man in the Koran; nonetheless, the very idea that they [angels] who stand far higher than we ever could, should submit themselves and be subordinate to us, is beyond comprehension. Surely, only a religion could make such a preposterous “placement”. We note that Iblis [Lucifer] didn’t submit.

(Reader: The ‘Person of Lucifer” will be featured in a separate, later Discourse about him. The correct knowledge of him is crucial to the deepest possible human understanding of why we have gotten everything so disastrously-wrong in our long and blood-soaked history. It is critically-essential reading, for it correctly apportions all blame for that “human history” exactly where it fits --- squarely upon us!)

Once we get past this “spur-of-the-moment” segment of Islamic dogma centred on its interpretation of “creation” and into our main text again, we will lead you, reader, into the Truth of what “created” actually means --- and therefore who were actually created --- and to that word from the Koran we have just learned; one that is directly associated with the great, overall, Process of Creation --- some detail about who were “fashioned”.

Let’s note here that whilst we have well-examined the life of Jesus in an earlier Discourse, it may seem that we are belabouring this point of Him, His parentage and Creation way past a useful or fulfilled point, but that is not the case. The harsh reality here for Muslims, Christians and Jews alike is that on this subject of the great Creation-Process, their religious doctrines and dogma there can be likened to an eddy that has cut itself off from a large, fast-flowing river --- the Creative-Process --- and become a stagnating backwater. The eddy and backwater are no longer part of the large and vibrant force of river-power that was once its “dynamic life-force” also, but which has long-since passed it by.

In terms of the Great Creation: Was it not Jesus Who revealed the extent of It when He said:

“In My Father’s House are many Mansions!”

What does that mean, reader? You surely know that He very obviously didn’t mean houses, or flats and apartments. NO! He meant Realms. The “many Mansions” are Realms or Levels of Creation.

If we have difficulty in attempting to grasp the immensity of just our galaxy; and we surely do for it is just one amongst billions in just our universe alone, never mind the uncounted billions more in the “whole” World of Matter --- which we will never ever see anyway --- then how do we even begin the process of understanding the ascending order of Realms that are inherently far, far larger? When will the religions wake up and stop trying to bring the, forever, incomprehensible immensity of all of that down to a silly, inane human level?

That is why; in the context of the Creation of all the Realms that exist therein, the word “created”, particularly as applied to man, is not at all understood by this “big three” of earthly religion. Of them all, however, Islam probably stands most indicted under the Perfect outworking of The Divine Laws of Creation; that which, in Its stupendous Power under the very aegis of The Creator, brought It all into being!

Why does Islam stand especially indicted? Let’s hammer home this Truth once more. There are two primary reasons: One is the dangerous usurping of the actual Spirit of Truth --- IMANUEL/ABD-RU-SHIN --- and wrongly placing Muhammad in that exalted place. The second is:

It does so because of the religion’s implacable
opposition to, and vociferous condemnation of,
Jesus The Son [A PART] of GOD!

Vis-à-vis: “and it is their false belief in the divinity of Jesus that is here condemned”.

So wrong! So terribly, terribly wrong! Islam: It is not Jesus who is condemned, it is all you 1.5 + billion Muslims. That is why the many, many factions of your ‘religion”, all vying for global Islamic supremacy, are killing each other off. For that is the sure outworking of the great and unstoppable Divine Law of Reciprocity!

But, reader, we won’t be able to convince Muslims of the horrendous reality of this dire warning, for they will simply not be sufficiently open to receiving it.

In the end, in its many pages all this book might do is simply show the world that what it says is exactly how it is, or, at the commensurate time of the prophesied destruction of most of the human race, simply reinforce how it all should have been!

Later --- from the Akashic Chronicle --- we will reveal to you, reader, the very words of Muhammad about key aspects of his Prophetship, and the fact that he not only knew he was not the Spirit of Truth, but because of a precise and ordained Reason of Creation-Law for him personally, he absolutely knew that Jesus was The Son of God --- and in his lifetime stated so to Muslim Arabia!

That fact, most unfortunately, has been expunged from Islamic history. Who could have done that, we wonder? Well: As with all religiously-distorted Truth --- always and only the so-called leaders of what is then reduced to just a “faith/religion”!

Thus, in appalling arrogance: The earthly religion of Islam has usurped the very WILL Of GOD --- against Muhammad’s true Teachings!

---

CREATION AND SCIENTIFIC FORMULAE

Now, Reader: Let’s get away from those “religious distortions of the Truth” for a while, clear our heads of it, and delve into some simple non-religious facts about our Discourse of the moment. Right: In determining the various arguments for the “Creation versus Evolution” debate, and in the context of the subject matter in this Discourse, it is vitally important to know what evolution means --- exactly. There is a view in some scientific circles that evolution means “selection by random chance”, and not perhaps to a precise developmental path. British Astronomer, Sir Fred Hoyle, has stated that “...believing that the first cell originated by chance is like believing a tornado could sweep through a junkyard filled with airplane parts and form a Boeing 747”. Professor N. Chandra Wickramasinghe, co-author with Sir Fred Hoyle of “Lifecloud: the Origin of Life in the Universe”, concurs with that view.

Overall, the science of astronomy believes it can trace the Evolution of the universe --- “...on the assumption that matter is created; but just how it is created is another problem altogether, and no theory has given indication of how this came about.” (The Atlas of the Universe, “Origin –-- or Evolution”, p.214) Yet some scientist/theologians believe that Evolution provides clues to the very nature of God.

Plato, (428-347BC) who was basically concerned with what was eternal and immutable on the one hand and on what ‘developed’ on the other --- surely “creation and evolution in one”, --- found mathematics very absorbing because “...mathematical states never change”. Much later in the seventeenth century Galileo observed that the book of nature “...was written in the language of mathematics”. “Measure what can be measured, and make measurable what cannot be measured”; was his view.

The actuality of Immutable Laws, and therefore a Creator of those Laws which automatically govern “His Creation”, negates the idea, for example, that life on Earth could ever have been the result of “random-chance” development. This image does not hold up because the Creative process, under the aegis of The Divine Laws of Creation, translates that very mechanism into precise mathematical formulae in the material spheres. Thus the “Spiritual Law of Numbers” is also mathematical Law which can be noted in everything, everywhere. The Koran prides itself on possessing “advanced science within its pages. Let’s see if it concurs with what we are saying.

For even the “primordial soup”, produced at the birth of our planet aeons ago, had to have had the appropriate formulae out of which eventually developed all the physical life forms and substances for planet earth. And within each will be found the personal-species mathematical formula. Change the formula and you change the substance or thing; if such change can be achieved within the bounds of scientific law which, in reality, has its very genesis in Divine Creation-Law!

Since this Law provides for constant development, but not for alteration outside of what is possible, science, therefore, cannot actually create anything new at all. It can only discover things not previously known, and perhaps produce new combinations, but only from substances that already exist. Even then, however, only within the parameters of what is scientifically and therefore spiritually possible under The Creative Will of precise Creation-Law.

The Bible alludes to this mathematical precision in the exactness of The Laws of Creation by stating that everything is counted, and nothing goes unnoticed. As a simple illustration of this lawful truth, scientific formulae decree that only a precise number and configuration of certain atoms can form molecules of a particular substance. Change the number and a different substance is produced, or the experiment may not work.

For example, one atom of copper, one of sulphur and four of oxygen will combine to produce CuSO₄, which will forever be copper sulphate. Copper sulphate, quite logically therefore, cannot ever be CuSO₆ or CuSO₉. In the same way common salt, mainly sodium chloride; will always be NaCl, not Na₂C1₆ or 8 or any another formula. And sodium bicarbonate, commonly used in the kitchen in the form of baking soda, can only ever be NaHCO₃, not Na₅HCO₇ or anything else.

Physicists have noted signs that the cosmos is custom-made for life and consciousness. It turns out that if the constants of nature --- unchanging numbers like the strength of gravity, the charge of an electron and the mass of a proton --– were the tiniest bit different, then atoms would not hold together, stars would not burn and life would never have made an appearance. John Polkinghorne, a former distinguished physicist at Cambridge University and now an Anglican priest, sagely observes: “When you realise that The Laws of Nature must be incredibly finely tuned to produce the universe we see, that conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it.”

Charles Townes, who shared the 1964 Nobel Prize in physics for discovering the principles of the laser, goes further: “Many have a feeling that somehow intelligence must have been involved in the laws of the universe.” And the authors of “The Mystery of Life’s Origin concluded that: a “...Creator beyond the cosmos...” is the most plausible explanation of life’s origins. (Emphases mine.)

Yet on the question of Evolution, other scientists sharing similar views to Fred Hoyle and N. Chandra Wickramasinghe include Colin Patterson, senior palaeontologist at the British Museum who, after believing in evolution for more than 20 years, nonetheless claimed he was “duped”. Charles Darwin seemingly noted that not one change of species into another is on record, and he could not prove that a single species had been changed. In 1984, the former President of the French Biological Society, Professor Louis Bounovre, stated: “Evolutionism is a fairy tale for grown-ups.”

On the other hand, Arthur Peacocke, a biochemist who became a priest in the Church of England in 1971, has no quarrel with Evolution for he finds in it signs of God’s nature. He infers from Evolution that God has chosen to limit His Omnipotence and Omniscience. In his apparent view, it is the appearance of chance mutations and the Darwinian laws of natural selection acting on this “variation” that bring about the diversity of life on Earth. Theologian, John Haught, founder of the Georgetown (University) Centre for the Study of Science and Religion, believes ‘this process suggests a Divine humility, a God who acts altruistically for the good of Creation’.

As we have previously stated, the sticking point in this whole debate is perhaps not actually that of Creation versus Evolution in any case, but probably more that of the time-frame required, producing either one --- or both together! For if a time period for such a thing as “Evolutionary-Creation” can be logically established then both viewpoints can be accommodated in perfect harmony. In our view, therefore, the one key question in this debate that must be considered --- yet rarely is --- is:

“Can Creation also be Evolution?” And/or vice-versa?
Our reply is an unequivocal: — Yes, it can. And, moreover, it is!

However, to more fully grasp the greater picture that this long-contended issue demands, we need to seriously understand that whilst the Creative processes brought into being the whole Creation, the Higher Realms of the Non-material World were not subject to the evolutionary processes that we are familiar with down here. So, it is vitally important to therefore set in place a demarcating barrier between the Pure Creation of those far Higher Realms — and Creation and Evolution on Earth in The World of Matter.

Evolution is thus a necessary and vital part of the Creative-process down here. Because the history of life on Earth is clearly one of aeons-long ‘evolving’ for all life-forms, evolution and the Creative-process are therefore inseparable — down here. That is simply because The Will of God must inherently be both natural and logical in all processes. That fact inherently stems from the Perfection of His Creative Will. Therefore, since it is vitally important to understand what we actually mean by “Evolution” --- or what it is supposed to mean --- from our particular standpoint we shall state it to mean, and also encompass and promote, “natural development”! We do not mean “random selection”, or anything even remotely equating to any kind of “chaos theory” either.

Unfortunately, the respective default settings of science and religion presently seem to be so irreconcilable that there would appear to be no grounds anywhere for a meaningful merger of both realities. On the one hand science seems generally to hold to a kind of “eternal doubt” paradigm whilst the basic core of religion is faith. Since a major sticking point remains the possible time period necessary to accept both the scientific and religious or theological viewpoints, these two contentious aspects will nonetheless be drawn together to show that such a merger is not only possible but is actually the true position --- notwithstanding the many interpretations to the contrary from proponents of both disciplines.

At this point in our analysis, we should clarify the question of exactly who and what we are. If we unequivocally state that our true origin is not that of The World of Matter, we logically imply that we cannot be purely physical in origin, just as some of the early Greek philosophers surmised. Therefore, it may be presumed that the Earth Plane of the Material World is not our true home but a material one for the time that we are ordained to live on it. Yet the apparent obvious reality appears to indicate the opposite. We see, hear and feel everything around us as being solid and material. To all intents and purposes, it seems logical to believe that we are solely material beings. Should we expect that to be the last word, however? In this seeming quandary lies the key!

If we examine the Law of Gravity in just its basic operation, we observe that heavier objects sink whilst lighter substances rise. Whilst being obviously so, it is nevertheless important to stress this point. Thus, in the vast Structure of Creation, a material object will occupy a lower level or plane than a non-material, or spiritual, one, simply because the higher the Plane of Creation, the finer and lighter is the substance of which it is composed. The same principle will apply for the particular inhabitants of those respective Planes.

Therefore, only the Earth of the Material Plane is the home of blood and tissue. In this physical world we marvel in awe at the vast expanse that we see in the night sky. Astronomers speak of interstellar distances so incredibly immense that the human brain can scarcely even begin to comprehend such figures. We are reminded of the magnificence of such a work through the insights of the poets and philosophers in their attempts to understand our place in the universe:

A powerful question, indeed, and one that we should all ask of ourselves from time to time; for in the stupendous scale of things, it is vital to understand that the mind-numbing, incomprehensible immensity of just the physical universe alone can only be the smallest and lowest part of the whole of Creation. Our galaxy, on its own, contains billions of stars. The known universe, in turn, contains literally billions of such vast galaxies. The higher Spiritual Planes, by virtue of their far greater spiritually-expansive attributes, are therefore incomprehensibly and immeasurably far more immense.

If, then, our origin is out of The Spiritual, yet our earthly existence is obviously material, the only conclusion that we can logically draw here is that we must have both these aspects contained within us, i.e., the human being is both spiritual and physical. And that is so! Only on the Earth, however, can this duality be so utilised. Indeed, it is the only way that humankind can meaningfully exist here at all.

Thus, two “realities” necessary for earth-science. If that discipline is ever to really recognise and understand the “origins of man”, it needs to know man’s pertinent place in our overall journey of revelation. So we cannot solely be just a physical entity but must also necessarily possess a non-material inner animating core. It must surely be self-evident that physical matter cannot animate physical matter!

As a natural extrapolation of that human/spiritual reality-status, we must therefore naturally and inherently possess a separable entity within our material form. And that that is our actual life-force, the animating core, that is actually each one of us!

Earthly death, therefore, is little more than the separating out, the drawing apart, of the two, where also at this time the “spirit” should strive to free itself from the material part --- the body. The material shell then returns to the earthly components from whence it came in the normal process of decay that The Laws of Nature decree must take place. Hence the words of the Law: “Earth to earth, dust to dust” which we hear at funerals, but which only applies to the empty, discarded shell. (More on the two Death-Processes in later Discourses.) In the meantime, the “life-entry” process is simply outlined in The Book of Job in Fenton’s Bible, 10:9-12.

Accompanying the process of establishing the physical/spiritual connection is the requirement to locate relevant reference points pertaining to the respective origins of both those parts to man in order to gain the necessary understanding. To thereby learn why, in the development of man and transition to human, (us) the “spirit” was fixed last --- as Job states.

Therefore, of all the religious works that purport to have the Truth --– insofar as most Western peoples are concerned anyway --- the Bible is probably the best known and accepted by virtue of the fact that it is the one where the person of Jesus Christ is the key figure. Because of His particular Origin and pivotal role for humankind as documented in the Bible, we will therefore accept that especial Book --- at least among the so-called religious works --- as being more able to provide the answers we seek.

Thus, in one single, simple sentence from the Bible, both our physical and spiritual origins are actually clearly revealed. In its stupendously far-reaching yet stunning simplicity, it completely destroys the “great divide” that religion and science have constantly promoted and clung to. We ask why? The King James Version of Genesis, Chapter 2, Verse 7, states:

Here has lain one part of the answer for centuries, unnoticed, unseen perhaps, but clearly not at all understood.

Now, if this particular Scripture is thought about in purely literal terms or from solely the fundamentalist viewpoint of the “big three” of monotheism --- Islam, Christianity and Judaism --- a picture more or less naturally arises of The Creator, the Power of all that has ever existed, descending to earth and building the shape of a man out of its substance; the mud of it.

Reader, really try to get your logical head around this notion --- for it is the actual belief of hundreds of millions of otherwise intelligent people who, in those three “religions”; with their families and religious communities, live their everyday lives with this completely distorted, illogical rubbish.

That, however, is not the end of it; for then, what would effectively be a model of a mud-man is somehow instantly transformed into a living, breathing, walking, talking, internally-pulsating human being by the simple act of being “breathed into” in the literal sense.

This is the never-to-be-questioned, “created from dust”, belief of Islam! Of course, as we have incredulously noted; it is also the belief of millions more fundamentalist Christians and Orthodox Jews.

Is that really the method by which one could believe man was first formed? Can the religions not understand that that belief is, to begin and end with, so illogical and unworkable, so inane, as to be just plainly stupid?

The crudeness of such an idea is difficult to reconcile with a Creative-Force responsible for the Creation of the immensity of just the World of Matter alone, never mind the far Higher Realms spoken of in the very religious works of the “big three”, yet all of which have nonetheless still preached their “creation-notion” foolishness. With all that we have learned about our multi-faceted world today, is there any point in continuing to cling to such a preposterous idea?

Moreover, there is a major and insurmountable problem for literal fundamentalist thinking here in that the Bible correctly alludes to the fact that God cannot descend to the earth for it would be completely consumed by His Unconstrained Power. Immediately there is a contradiction, if we view it in a purely literal sense. Quite unequivocally, there can be no contradictions anywhere in the actual Creation process itself.

We should be very careful, therefore, not to apply any kind of heretical or blasphemous labels to an idea that may be markedly different to centuries-old religious dogma. We should, instead, objectively allow the intuitive inner reason the spiritual freedom to determine the true nature of what is proposed here. Perhaps a wider vista might then suddenly open up offering the spirit the potential to “soar” instead of being shackled by too rigid an interpretation that refuses to allow even the “possibility” of such a thing as “Evolutionary-Creation”.

Because of its far-reaching educational implications, not least for many of the scientific disciplines, the Education Department hired the famous criminal lawyer Clarence Darrow as their Defence Counsel, whilst a former US Secretary of State, William Jennings Bryan, appeared for the Prosecution. Clarence Darrow and his team argued for the scientific validity of Evolution and against the constitutionality of the Butler Act. According to anecdotal reports, and after both views were aired, the case hinged on one crucial question which Darrow addressed to the opposition. The question concerned the existence of dinosaurs and the time frame in which they lived.

Since their existence could not be denied, the challenge and case could not be upheld. Had fundamentalism won that day, the State Supreme Court would have had no option but to order schools to teach only “the ‘6-days-of-Creation’ belief”. The “Concept of Evolution” would then have been officially suppressed. The Butler Act remained on the State Statute books until 1967. Paradoxically, that court case need never have taken place simply because, as is our premise, the evolutionary process is actually part of the Creative process, and naturally so. Indeed, it could not possibly be anything other than a natural union.

Yet, even in this 21st century, the science of “biological anthropology” still persists with the totally incorrect belief that it is solely physical genetics that has determined the so-called “evolution” of “primate to human”. Researchers from the Broad Institute of MIT and Harvard have coined a new “anthropological term” --- the “human-chimp split”. Their basic hypothesis and time-frame is correct. An ancestral ape-species was the ancestor of the human race a very long time ago --- but only as the physical-form vessel, nothing more!

Science must recognise and learn to understand the huge and fundamental difference between that physical/material-form of vessel/body, and the animating life-force within it i.e., within every human being. Only with that essential knowledge as the primary foundation for any further research --- if it is deemed necessary –-- might the current, strong scientific emphasis on genetics and the human genome find its correct connection. Rather than constantly needing to change hypotheses, this particular branch of science might, instead, begin to build constant upon constant.

So, for the “big three”; if we revisit our previous Genesis quote from the King James Bible, Chapter 2 Verse 7, the amazing revelation of the “actual human/chimp split” may be discovered therein.

We have written that verse in bold because it contains the very process of how we came to be! Reader: If you are able to “get that”, therein lies the overarching answer to the most amazing evolutionary processes that, in the most natural and logical way, separated out the first human beings from their physical-form progenitors. Thus, the Bible described the real human/chimp split a very long time ago. And human science has not yet caught up with this fundamental Truth. The detail of this singularly-decisive event for humans more fully unfolds as we continue our journey, and clarifying explanations fill out the primary aspects.

Despite the incredible nature of what has been revealed here, it is still only a part of the complete process --- albeit a stupendous one for human beings --- for that “forming” (Islam’s “fashioning”) applies only to us here in the World of Matter. A far greater revelation has been present in the Bible since its inception. It is called: The “First” Creation. We know of only one Bible translator who “got it right”: --- Fenton --- whom we will quote shortly.

That greater revelation is in The Book of Genesis, most relevantly, of course, in Chapter 1. Verse 26 therein states:
   “And God said, Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.”

Verse 27 continues:
“So God created man in his own image, in the image of God created He him; male and female created He them.”

Those two primary quotes from The Book of Genesis (KJV) reveal, very clearly, what ‘Science’ and ‘Theology’ have not only not understood, but missed completely; the second part of the answer. And that is:

That there are two separate “Creations of man”.

Thus, in Chapter 1, we have both male and female beings created, but not out of the “dust of the ground”.

Conversely, in Chapter 2, (our first quote) we initially have only man being formed, but from the “dust of the ground”. (Later, after a plea for company, the Bible narrative describes the first woman as being fashioned from a rib of the first earth-man.)

All this, however, took place AFTER the First Creation of “man” i.e., male and female. Is there a contradiction here? No there is not!

For the actual Creation-Process, correctly described in Fenton’s Book of Genesis, has simply never been understood --- neither by science, nor by religion. The “few” who have recognised The All-Truth, however, do know.

This terrible degree of non-understanding has seeded the assumption that the whole “Creation of Man” all had to have taken place in the physical/material environment of the Earth. Such an assumption would be perfectly valid if we were only and solely physical substance. Since we are not, then other realities obviously need to be considered.

So, from the standpoint of Christian, Islamic and Jewish thinking, the acceptance of a single Creation-concept for the formation of man is regarded as the norm. Yet the orthodox Bible, from which the Christian Church takes its teachings and spiritual substance, clearly states otherwise. Anyone can pick up almost any Bible and find the same for themselves. So, what should we make of this?

What we should not fear to undertake is a keenly searching examination of a possibly contentious religious issue whereby the deepest and most wonderful revelations are missed. Moreover, it should be exactly the role of the Church in the first instance to fearlessly seek out the Truth, and to immediately discard any untruths discovered. That would be the right thing to do. With bold courage and spiritual certainty, that is what we do here!

At this point in our search for answers, it is imperative to have the Bible that comes closest to providing what we now know to be the correct interpretations to the answers we seek. You have read about it and the author in a number of places thus far. It is not accepted as being “church-standard” but is, nevertheless, the only one that, in concert with Hegel’s Dialectic Process, reconciles Creation and Evolution perfectly. What Fenton has correctly recognised in spiritual clarity and now written down will not be found in either the Koran or the Torah.

Now, reader: A short but necessary digression to bring you a few facts about the author of the Bible from which stems the correct interpretation of Creation.

In 1853 Ferrar Fenton resolved to study the Bible in its original languages and to re-translate it completely into English. Fifty years later he had accomplished his task of translating the complete Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments from the original Hebrew, Chaldee and Greek.
   As you now know, whilst the general thrust of the recognised story of Genesis is obviously still present, there are seemingly small but extremely significant changes to some passages; changes which throw a whole new slant on some strongly entrenched beliefs. Throughout his work he explains translation errors, mainly in the Greek and Latin versions, by showing where and how they occurred. Most importantly, however, the “small changes” he identifies allow for a vast expansion of perception regarding the clarification of the problem of interpreting the time taken for the Creation-process, not to mention the whole concept of our relationship with The Creator.
   Ferrar Fenton’s intuitive insight into a more logical and correct explanation of the seven days of Creation resulting from his re-translation of the Bible may well signal a note of warning to purveyors of the status quo and to more recent Bible translators whose own efforts may have been clouded by religious preferences rather than a purely objective and logical analysis. For the purposes of this discussion, if --- and we use the word if only in terms of this essay being viewed as nothing more than an interesting hypothesis by some readers --- if his re-translation of the Creation part of Genesis is correct, it might be wise to carefully consider whether this man’s ordained spiritual purpose was to help bring clarification to those Christian Churches and Bible translators who still hold to the literal view of seven earth days for the Creation process.
   Fenton’s re-translation of Genesis in this case clearly offers a more stupendously-correct interpretation, given its ability to accommodate both the viewpoints of scientific evolution and a Creation-process in a logical scenario and time-frame.

The following comparative passages are taken from Ferrar Fenton’s “The Holy Bible in Modern English”. This remarkable Work heads the very first Chapter in The Book of Genesis with the words:

The First Creation of the Universe by God = Elohim.

---

THE FIRST CREATION --- Closest to GOD

This is clearly an exceptionally significant statement, and a radical departure from orthodox thinking in that Fenton identifies a First Creation. In a comparison of the relevant Verses, it is patently clear that a complete and fundamental misinterpretation of Genesis regarding the Creation of man has entrenched itself in our thinking for the last two thousand odd years. And to the point, unfortunately, where we are now too afraid to even question this as just a possibility, thereby completely missing what is our rightful and ordained heritage --– the actual “Truth of our Origins”. So, let us take the next steps boldly and examine, from Fenton’s Bible, the two “Creations of man” in its correct sequence. The comparative Verse 26 in Chapter 1 is preceded by the heading:

---

Creation of Man under the Shadow of God.

“GOD then said, “Let Us make men under Our Shadow, as Our Representatives.”
Verse 27 continues:
“So GOD created men under HIS own Shadow, creating them in the Shadow of God, and constituting them male and female.”

The actively-promoted notion by scholars and leaders of the three monotheistic religions that human beings -- having transited through the earthly death-process -- rise forthwith to ‘heaven’ to be in the very immediate presence of The Creator, in brutally-logical terms simply beggars belief. How do they envision their God: Just as some kind of greater and stronger ‘spiritual’ or ‘spiritualised’ human being? How foolish!

If we take the reality of just our earth and Solar System as the simplest example of showing the sheer inanity of such a belief: It is powered by a small sun, yet is so strong and bright that its light will cause immediate blindness if we look directly at it. And that is a very small sun out of billions in just our galaxy alone. Our galaxy, as incomprehensibly immense as it is, is just one of billions in our universe in the Material Creation. (There is yet far more, the extent and form of which we explain in a later Discourse.)

Let’s reinforce our actual place in that completely incomprehensible immensity. Even though mind-blowing in thought alone, it is still just the Material World only. By virtue of its materiality, therefore, it must inherently be, and is: The smallest and lowest part of the entire Creations!

A life lived in a faith-belief doctrine that teaches a close and convenient relationship with a Power and Force that not only Created the vastness of the material Universes, but also the far greater Eternal Realms; at death is forced into the shattering recognition that we are not “Created” in the image of God at all. And, therefore, cannot ever be in His immediate Presence. The Bible states it very clearly. The Koran, however, does not!

To reinforce this Truth, an appropriate quote from John 1, Verse 18 of, respectively: The King James Bible and Fenton’s Bible notes:

“No man hath seen God at any time.”

“No one has ever yet seen God;”

An obvious, naturally-occurring, and vast, demarcating, “beyond-measure gulf” --- between GOD and earth-man --- is there for all to read, which we elucidate in the following Section: The “Subsequent” Creation for Earth-man

---

“SUBSEQUENT CREATION” AND EARTH MAN

Now, very significantly, Verse 7 in Chapter 2 in Fenton’s Bible is also preceded by a relevant heading:

The Formation of Man from the Dust of the Ground by the Ever-Living God

Thus, we have clear and unequivocal clarification of a huge and fundamental difference; the first as an immediate Creation, --- in relative proximity to The Creator: The second as simply a forming --- very far from The Creator. The actual Verse (some emphases mine) regarding the forming of man reads:

“The EVER-LIVING GOD afterwards formed Man from the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the life of animals; BUT MAN BECAME A LIFE-CONTAINING SOUL.”

The last phrase of that Bible sentence should be marked well because it provides the actual key to a true understanding of this whole question of our origins. Significantly, it is printed in bold capitals in Fenton’s Work. To state once more in reinforcement; the most significant aspect is the clear and unequivocal difference between the first happening; with man –-- both “male and female” --- being directly created. And then, in stark contrast, much later in the second phase, man being only formed --- and from out of the “dust of the ground”.

The same relative Scriptures, moreover, appear in the same respective places in both the King James Bible and Fenton’s, as it does in most.

There, for you, Islam, in its incomparable logic, is the true meaning of “creation of man” and “forming of man”. Christianity and Judaism; you, too, also need to grab this reality with both “religious hands”, and bring about a timely transformation from religiosity to Truth within your “faiths”.

So: Thus far we have basically established that man is both a spiritual being and a physical one. And, moreover, note that only here on the earth can these “two parts to man” co-jointly exist as a single, completely whole and integrated entity. What has not been explored yet is how they are co-joined. Again, the Bible holds the key. Since the complete process naturally implies that there had to be a beginning for man and his earthly home, this is so stated.

Let’s take a slight digression here to look at Rudolf Steiner’s perception of the various “parts to man”. Steiner’s life and work can be seen as more or less the culmination of the long human journey in its “search” to attempt to understand who and what man really is --- to understand his complete “make up”. There was and still is the great divide between science and religion/spirituality; that will probably never change. On the religious side, Steiner added more to the basic Judaeo-Christian tradition of just physical body and spirit as being the “primary parts to man” by correctly understanding that there had to be more. And there is!

In the long line of mystics, religious “scholars”, Church “leaders”, spiritualists and even charlatans, Steiner came closest to itemising the different parts of us that make up the complete “human entity” --- whilst we are alive on earth!

With the Proclamation of The All-Truth in the earlier years of the 20^th century, Steiner’s sterling attempt to seed a greater awareness about the human entity in mainstream thinking prior to the arrival of Imanuel sees him and his amazing legacy as perhaps the last in a long line of such thought stretching back millennia that ultimately prepared the way and the steps leading to the Final Truth. From “Rudolf Steiner, The Man and His Vision” by Colin Wilson.

Chapter Seven: The Building of the Temple, pages 126-127.

“The year 1904 also saw publication of the first of Steiner’s major ‘occult’ works, Theosophy --- An Introduction to the Super-sensible Knowledge of the World and the Destination of Man. In the opening chapter he explains that man is a threefold being, consisting of body, soul and spirit --- not a twofold being consisting of body and soul, as Christianity has always taught. Body is wholly material; spirit is wholly ‘immaterial’. Soul is the bridge between them, the part of man whose business is to acquire and digest experience for the spirit --- it might be regarded as a kind of spiritual stomach. Man acquires a different soul with every incarnation. Steiner’s final arrangement of the components of a human being is as follows: (1) Physical body, (2) Etheric body (or Life-body, (3) Astral body. (4) Ego, (5) Spirit self (which is the transmuted etheric body), and (7) Spirit man (the transmuted physical body).

Whilst Steiner was an incredibly perceptive human being in many areas, he did not, could not, arrive at the Truth of all the “parts to man”. We note he identifies 7 “bodies” that make up his perception of what we are. Despite his amazing abilities and insights overall, he is only partially correct here. His designation of “spirit” in numbers 5, Spirit self, (which is the transmuted etheric body), and 7, “Spirit man” (the transmuted physical body), is especially incorrect. (The later Discourse on The First Death will identify and explain the complete human entity, and the function of each “body within”.)

Now: Let’s return once more to “Sophie’s World” and on page 8 join her as she struggles to make sense of a concept that we may never be capable of grasping in its “living reality”. That struggle to fully understand is due to the vast natural gulf existing between the Creative Power of all that exists, and us -– the lower formed entity that is man. Such a notion is simply beyond our ability to even remotely comprehend.

“They had learned at school that God created the world. Sophie tried to console herself with the thought that this was probably the best solution to the whole problem. But then she started to think again. She could accept that God had created space, but what about God Himself? Had He created Himself out of nothing? Again there was something deep down inside her that protested. Even though God could create all kinds of things, He could hardly create Himself before He had a “Self” to create with. So there was only one possibility left: God had always existed.” (Emphases mine.)

Via this simple mechanism of logical elimination Sophie has hit on the only credible answer to the question --- assuming, of course, that one accepts the belief of a Creator in the first place. Therefore, from the unequivocal acceptance of that premise --- and that is the standpoint from which this Book is written --- in order to have Planes of Creation to “fill the void”, including the material worlds of the observable universe, there had to be set in motion a “Creation-process” to bring this about.

Hence, through the stupendous and humanly-incomprehensible process of Creation, driven by the Power of The Creator in the Divine Ordination and Command, “Let There Be Light”, the Creation-process of the forming of all the worlds in all the various planes began. As the lowest and therefore last precipitation of all the levels in Creation --- and under the outworking of The Spiritual Laws of Creation, particularly The Law of Spiritual Gravity -- the vastness of the material universes also came to be. And all of that contained within just that lower immensity, our earthly home. Thus the “void” was filled.

Because of the sheer impossibility of ever being able to picture or understand what is for human beings an inconceivable process anyway --- for what words in the many languages of the world could one possibly use to even attempt to describe it --- what kind of earthly example could we employ to try to illustrate how the separation between the respective Planes of Creation occurred? If we are able to arrive at some small degree of comprehension of at least the mechanics of the process and thus why this demarcation was necessary, we can gift to ourselves a large measure of inner awareness of our true place in Creation. That kind of recognition should also help in the understanding of what our spiritual purpose and thus our actual reason for being really is.

Reader: If you lock yourself into the following explanations, they will present a picture that should give you some small measure of understanding of at least the “form of Creation”. The scope and scale is, however, very obviously an entirely different matter.

Right, reader: We have illustrated the Creation-process with a very basic but nonetheless best-example analogy of “how it works”. The main points of the Creation-process can thus be roughly likened to that which occurs every hour of the day throughout the world in the numerous oil refineries of the petrochemical industry. That process is called distillation.

It takes place in a “distillation column” whereby heat-generated crude petroleum vapour rises inside a tall metal column. At specific heights within the column, the vapour condenses to form various liquid petroleum products. Each different distillate will form itself from the condensing vapour at its appropriate condensing level as it cools. This will be determined by the weight and consistency of the particular distillate being condensed from the vapour at that level. The distilled product at each level will thus precisely configure itself to its own specific type of material substance, and at its specific temperature.

Particular terms in the previous paragraph have been highlighted in bold italics to help explain certain points that we will now outline. The explanations given here show the inviolable nature of one of the key Laws of Creation: The Spiritual Law of Gravity. Whilst this one example is earth-orientated i.e., operating from below upwards, the process of Creation naturally works from the Highest Heights downward to the material worlds, but obviously still subject to that Law of Spiritual Gravity.

Despite the clear fact that we will never be able to even remotely understand this stupendous event –-- for even a combined distillation of the most ennobled aspects of all the world’s languages could not ever begin to offer a summary of words sufficient enough for the process --– we should nevertheless strive to achieve at least some small insight. Even a diagrammatical picture in the mind would be of value, for that is better than having no picture at all.

In the actual Creation process, then, we might perhaps envisage something approximating an unfathomably vast, white-hot mass of “downwards- moving” substance suffused with the stupendous Power of: —

THE DIVINE

— immense enough to eventually form the humanly-incomprehensible extent of just The Worlds of Matter. And that is after --- the far greater FIRST CREATION, then that of The Higher Realms subsequently following. All of this “what” --- (there are no words that can describe it) --- driven from the immediate proximity of The Light and Power of THE CREATOR under the aegis of HIS Creation-Words:

“LET THERE BE LIGHT!”

Because of the obviously immense power and pressure in closest proximity to GOD, only the strongest and Purest Beings could come to immediate consciousness there in the Planes of their sphere of activity – i.e., closest to HIM. Thus, at heights we could never comprehend, and certainly never ever reach in our spiritual form, occurred:

---

Back Next

THE BOOK