What Jesus Really Meant

[davidsun]

Hello Everyone -

I would like to share the (just completed, pdf format, 23 pages) first chapter of my treatise, titled "What Jesus Really Meant" with readers who may be interested in it. Commentary, whether supportive or critical, is welcome as it would help guide my formulation of future chapters - three in all are planned.

Clicking on the link below will bring up a page at sendspace.com with a download button on it. You do not have to create and account and sign in to download the document - open with adobe reader or save to download folder options come up when the download button is clicked.

https://www.sendspace.com/file/nmb9hn

The document has embedded links. Clicking on my name on the title page will take you the home page of my website if you want more information about me.

Caveat: my take on Jesus and his world view is NON-traditional. If your views in said regards are in any way 'traditional', I suggest you read the following (excepted) opening paragraphs of the chapter before deciding whether or not to download it, to get a sense of what you may be getting into.

From his saying “This is my body� when breaking bread and “This is my blood� when pouring wine at what has since been referenced as The Last Supper with his disciples (see Matthew 26), it is clear that Jesus rationally grasped as well as mystically (that is, transpersonally) identified with the  Oneness of Creation. If what he meant to communicate by way of such  sayings had been truly apprehended, such utterances may indeed have been  foundational in establishing an ecologically sane, holistically Life-augmentative civilization.

That was not to be the case, however. Because the beliefs of most if not all of those around him at the time were hypnotically rooted in projections that God (to wit, the progenitive Source and Sustainer of Life) was a singular, supremely dictatorial ruler who had especially favored mankind by ‘giving’ them ‘dominion’ over all other earthly creatures (see Genesis 1:26-28), analogous to the way kings of old ‘granted’ lords of old the right to govern less powerful folk living in their territories (as long as said lords remained loyally subservient in relation to said kings, of course), the people around him simply did not register and so could not even begin to comprehend the implications of the fact that such sayings by Jesus actually referenced the matrixial interconnectedness and interdependency of all being.

Making matters worse, as they then also construed his references to being “the Son of God� literally, instead of ‘remembering’ the factuality of above-referenced Oneness of Being as they were directed to (in Luke 22), when would-be followers subsequently gathered together for a ceremonial meal of bread and wine (which observance later became ritualized as The Sacrament of Holy Communion), they just imagined and believed the bread and wine to be miraculously transformed (literally transubstantiated!) into the flesh and blood of Jesus himself* who they idolized and proceeded to worship and pledge allegiance to as the “King of kings and Lord of lords� (I Timothy 6:15‑16) heir of said ‘supreme’ God.

[davidsun]

Because the person with the chosen screen name of Divine Insight has, IMO, misperceived and so posted 'information' which mischaracterizes what my thesis (which revolves around Jesus' views) is really all about, and because such characterization may put others off from reading and making their own assessments themselves, let me post it in segments and invite comments (whether critical or supportive or just questioning) which specifically relate to exactly what's said in there from anyone interesting in discussion of what is actually said therein:
=============
From his saying “This is my body� when breaking bread and “This is my blood� when pouring wine at what has since been referenced as The Last Supper with his disciples (see Matthew 26), it is clear that Jesus rationally grasped as well as mystically (that is, transpersonally) identified with the Oneness of Creation. If what he meant to communicate by way of such sayings had been truly apprehended, such utterances may indeed have been foundational in establishing an ecologically sane, holistically Life-augmentative civilization.

That was not to be the case, however. Because the beliefs of most if not all of those around him at the time were hypnotically rooted in projections that God (to wit, the progenitive Source and Sustainer of Life) was a singular, supremely dictatorial ruler who had especially favored mankind by ‘giving’ them ‘dominion’ over all other earthly creatures (see Genesis 1:26-28), analogous to the way kings of old ‘granted’ lords of old the right to govern less powerful folk living in their territories (as long as said lords remained loyally subservient in relation to said kings, of course), the people around him simply did not register and so could not even begin to comprehend the implications of the fact that such sayings by Jesus actually referenced the matrixial interconnectedness and interdependency of all being.

About his Sonship:

Making matters worse, as they then also construed his references to being “the Son of God� literally, instead of ‘remembering’ the factuality of above-referenced Oneness of Being as they were directed to (in Luke 22), when would-be followers subsequently gathered together for a ceremonial meal of bread and wine (which observance later became ritualized as The Sacrament of Holy Communion), they just imagined and believed the bread and wine to be miraculously transformed (literally transubstantiated!) into the flesh and blood of Jesus himself* who they idolized and proceeded to worship and pledge allegiance to as the “King of kings and Lord of lords� (I Timothy 6:15-16) heir of said ‘supreme’ God.

[quote]Sidenote*: Though such belief and practice is generally, presently at least, simply accepted without significant thought, question or discussion as ‘normal’, it generated quite a bit of controversy when the movement now known as ‘Christianity’ was just getting started as a result of its connoting a kind of cannibalism. Presumably, what is called ‘magical thinking’ (nowadays) led members of the movement to suppose that such ingestion would result in their physically ‘absorbing’ Jesus’ spiritual characteristics and thereby attain personal ‘communion’ with him.[quote]

What anyone thinks Jesus really meant when he used such and related phrases and why he or she imagines he chose to speak of God as ‘the Father’ and himself as ‘the Son’ (of said Father) will, of course, depend on his or her personal apprehension and understanding of metaphysical realities and ‘sense’ of what the mind-and-heart sets of the people around Jesus were like at the time. My own conclusions in this regard, which I proffer for consideration and contemplation, are that he used ‘the Father’ to reference the progenitive Source (hence, ‘the Creator’) of all existential being, and ‘the Son’ to reference the totality of said Creator’s Creation (d/b/a Creativity), in other words the Entity of Life as It exists and continues to express Itself in Being. Picking up at the bottom of and continuing from

Why did he choose to do so? I think because the people around him were much more likely to meaningfully and emotionally relate to what such Father and Son ‘figures’ symbolically represented and, consequently, pragmatically understand the nature of the relationship between said existential realities to functionally be as a result of having personally experienced parents and the blessings as well as the vicissitudes of being familial offspring themselves, more so at least than if he had referenced and spoken about such realities in abstract philosophical terms.

Just imagine the silently questioning, “What the heck is this guy talking about?� blank stares that would be on the faces of people in a (hypothetical) movie crowd-scene wherein Deepak Chopra (one of today’s preeminent metaphysicians), after being science-fictionally transported back to Jesus’ time and setting, verbalized the same sorts of things that folks presently throng around him to hear: “Pure consciousness is your ground state and it is a field of infinite possibilities!� and “The field is organizing everything in creation: the movement of galaxies, the movement of stars, the rotation of the earth, the cycles of the seasons, the biological rhythms of our bodies, birds migrating at the right season to the right place, fish returning to their spawning grounds, the biological rhythms of nature as found in flowers, vegetation, and animals. It is literally a field of infinite organizing power. It can do an infinite number of things all at the same time and then correlate them with each other;� for instance.

And contrast this with what you imagine the people who were actually there (around Jesus) then must have thought and felt on hearing him preach things like: “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?� (Matthew 7:7-11)

Even in today’s world, I submit, those who haven’t intelligently grasped the implications of the postulates and research findings of Quantum Physics to the degree necessary to meaningfully comprehend the way in which such particle-wave, vibrating matter-energy concept based reality-paradigm ‘explains’ why and how and things ‘manifest’ – and, because only a small fraction of our population is capable of appreciating such abstractions, this references most folks on the planet at present – are much more likely to mentally and emotionally ‘groove’ with and consequently behaviorally operate in a positively functional, holistically co-relative manner using Jesus’ archetypal parent↔offspring schemata.

[Divine Insight]

From his saying “This is my body� when breaking bread and “This is my blood� when pouring wine at what has since been referenced as The Last Supper with his disciples (see Matthew 26), it is clear that Jesus rationally grasped as well as mystically (that is, transpersonally) identified with the Oneness of Creation. If what he meant to communicate by way of such sayings had been truly apprehended, such utterances may indeed have been foundational in establishing an ecologically sane, holistically Life-augmentative civilization.

Question concerning the above speculation:

If Jesus was understood to be preaching pantheism instead of being viewed as the miraculous virgin-born Son of God, why should we think that anyone would have cared what Jesus meant.

In other words, without the virgin-birth story and the claims of God speaking from the clouds proclaiming Jesus to be his Son, and without John's condemnation of anyone who does not believe in Jesus as the "Son of God", what would have cause society in general to give a hoot about what Jesus might have meant?

You seem to be implying in the above, that if Jesus would have been understood to have been supporting a holistic or pantheistic worldview, that then this worldview would have taken root and become the spiritual worldview of western culture.

But why is there any reason to think that this would be the case?

Isn't that a legitimate question concerning your speculations about Jesus?

That was not to be the case, however. Because the beliefs of most if not all of those around him at the time were hypnotically rooted in projections that God (to wit, the progenitive Source and Sustainer of Life) was a singular, supremely dictatorial ruler who had especially favored mankind by ‘giving’ them ‘dominion’ over all other earthly creatures (see Genesis 1:26-28), analogous to the way kings of old ‘granted’ lords of old the right to govern less powerful folk living in their territories (as long as said lords remained loyally subservient in relation to said kings, of course), the people around him simply did not register and so could not even begin to comprehend the implications of the fact that such sayings by Jesus actually referenced the matrixial interconnectedness and interdependency of all being.

And what about the point that if Jesus wasn't portrayed as the Son of Yahweh who was sent by God to offer salvation to those who accept him and damnation to those who reject him, we most likely would have never heard of Jesus at all.

You seem to be assuming that Jesus would have been a cultural superstar no matter what people believed about him.

About his Sonship:

Making matters worse, as they then also construed his references to being “the Son of God� literally, instead of ‘remembering’ the factuality of above-referenced Oneness of Being as they were directed to (in Luke 22), when would-be followers subsequently gathered together for a ceremonial meal of bread and wine (which observance later became ritualized as The Sacrament of Holy Communion), they just imagined and believed the bread and wine to be miraculously transformed (literally transubstantiated!) into the flesh and blood of Jesus himself* who they idolized and proceeded to worship and pledge allegiance to as the “King of kings and Lord of lords� (I Timothy 6:15-16) heir of said ‘supreme’ God.

Again, why were they placing Jesus on such a high pedestal?

Precisely because they did believe that he was the Son of God.

And again, had it not been for this belief we would most likely have never heard of Jesus at all. Much less be living in a culture that had been influenced for centuries by "Christianity".

Keep in mind that it was Christianity the dominated western culture, not Jesus.

Sidenote*: Though such belief and practice is generally, presently at least, simply accepted without significant thought, question or discussion as ‘normal’, it generated quite a bit of controversy when the movement now known as ‘Christianity’ was just getting started as a result of its connoting a kind of cannibalism. Presumably, what is called ‘magical thinking’ (nowadays) led members of the movement to suppose that such ingestion would result in their physically ‘absorbing’ Jesus’ spiritual characteristics and thereby attain personal ‘communion’ with him.

And this is totally irrelevant to my point. We wouldn't have ever heard of Jesus, and Jesus would have absolutely no influence on western culture had it not been for the claims made by Christianity that Jesus was the wrongfully crucified "Son of God" who supposedly sacrificed his life to pay for our salvation.

In short, it was never Jesus that impressed people. It has always been the rumors about Jesus being the supposed Son of God that held such an impression on western culture. Therefore a Jesus who "really meant" what you claim would have been insignificant.

What anyone thinks Jesus really meant when he used such and related phrases and why he or she imagines he chose to speak of God as ‘the Father’ and himself as ‘the Son’ (of said Father) will, of course, depend on his or her personal apprehension and understanding of metaphysical realities and ‘sense’ of what the mind-and-heart sets of the people around Jesus were like at the time. My own conclusions in this regard, which I proffer for consideration and contemplation, are that he used ‘the Father’ to reference the progenitive Source (hence, ‘the Creator’) of all existential being, and ‘the Son’ to reference the totality of said Creator’s Creation (d/b/a Creativity), in other words the Entity of Life as It exists and continues to express Itself in Being. Picking up at the bottom of and continuing from.

And so let's assume you are right.

This would only mean that Jesus wasn't the virgin-born Son of God confirmed to be the Son of God by God himself speaking from the clouds, etc. etc. etc.

In other words, all you are saying is that Christianity has it all wrong, and Jesus might have been doing more than a human who basically believed in pantheism. But there would be no reason to think that he knew that this philosophy was true anymore than any other human.

Why did he choose to do so? I think because the people around him were much more likely to meaningfully and emotionally relate to what such Father and Son ‘figures’ symbolically represented and, consequently, pragmatically understand the nature of the relationship between said existential realities to functionally be as a result of having personally experienced parents and the blessings as well as the vicissitudes of being familial offspring themselves, more so at least than if he had referenced and spoken about such realities in abstract philosophical terms.

Again, that's fine. So you've explained Jesus' motivation to try to preach his pantheistic philosophy within the context of the traditional religious beliefs of his culture. That actually makes PERFECT SENSE.

But once again, this would then leave Jesus as being nothing more than just another mortal human voicing his opinions on philosophy. He's no longer the "Son of God" sent by God for any special purpose. You've rejected that notion remember?

Just imagine the silently questioning, “What the heck is this guy talking about?� blank stares that would be on the faces of people in a (hypothetical) movie crowd-scene wherein Deepak Chopra (one of today’s preeminent metaphysicians), after being science-fictionally transported back to Jesus’ time and setting, verbalized the same sorts of things that folks presently throng around him to hear: “Pure consciousness is your ground state and it is a field of infinite possibilities!� and “The field is organizing everything in creation: the movement of galaxies, the movement of stars, the rotation of the earth, the cycles of the seasons, the biological rhythms of our bodies, birds migrating at the right season to the right place, fish returning to their spawning grounds, the biological rhythms of nature as found in flowers, vegetation, and animals. It is literally a field of infinite organizing power. It can do an infinite number of things all at the same time and then correlate them with each other;� for instance.

Exactly right. You speculation about Jesus reduces Jesus to being nothing more than an earlier version of Deepak Chopra. Just a human voicing his opinions on what he thinks he sees in this world.

Isn't this what I've already stated?

And contrast this with what you imagine the people who were actually there (around Jesus) then must have thought and felt on hearing him preach things like: “Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you: For every one that asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened. Or what man is there of you, whom if his son ask bread, will he give him a stone? Or if he ask a fish, will he give him a serpent? If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give good things to them that ask him?� (Matthew 7:7-11)

But we actually know that wishful thinking and simply "asking" for things doesn't make them magically happen.

So you've come to a place where your theory sinks like rock and doesn't match reality at all.

Even in today’s world, I submit, those who haven’t intelligently grasped the implications of the postulates and research findings of Quantum Physics to the degree necessary to meaningfully comprehend the way in which such particle-wave, vibrating matter-energy concept based reality-paradigm ‘explains’ why and how and things ‘manifest’ – and, because only a small fraction of our population is capable of appreciating such abstractions, this references most folks on the planet at present – are much more likely to mentally and emotionally ‘groove’ with and consequently behaviorally operate in a positively functional, holistically co-relative manner using Jesus’ archetypal parent↔offspring schemata.

So where in Quantum Physics is there an equation that says that whatever you seek, knock, or ask for, it will be done?

Pointing to Quantum Physics hardly supports the things that Jesus is said to have preached.

So I don't see the parallel there.

~~~~~

Please note: I've addressed precisely the issues that you brought up.

[bluethread]

Again, I must say that Yeshua's references to the bread and the cup are not metaphysical at all, but are merely applications of long standing Pesach symbols to Himself. That said, even if I were to accept a metaphysical message, I do not see how you make the leap to ecology.

[Divine Insight]

Again, I must say that Yeshua's references to the bread and the cup are not metaphysical at all, but are merely applications of long standing Pesach symbols to Himself. That said, even if I were to accept a metaphysical message, I do not see how you make the leap to ecology.

I can't say what Davidsun meant, but I think the idea is that Jesus was basically saying that the physical universe is his "body". And the idea is that he supports a pantheistic (or holistic) view of reality. In this way he's basically saying that the entire world should be treated with the same respect as you would give to anyone. And that translates to being ecologically minded then.

I don't deny this potential "philosophy" from Jesus. Jesus also said that whatever we do to the least of our our brethren we do to him. That too is a pantheistic view. In other words, in pantheism everyone is a manifestation of God. Therefore everyone is Jesus, and Jesus is everyone. And it also follows from this that "I and the Father are One", and this is true for everyone, not just Jesus.

Not sure if this is what Davidsun means, but these are common things that Jesus taught that are often pointed to by pantheists, eastern mystics, and those who believe that Jesus was teaching a holistic nature of reality.

To say that "I and the Father are One" is similar to saying the Buddhist phrase "Tat T'vam Asi" meaning "You are that". You are the mysterious entity that you call "God". Or at least you are one of the many manifestations of it. That's pantheism in short.

And of course in Pantheism then so is a squirrel, a tree, even a river or a rock. Thus pantheism clearly supports ecology (i.e. treating nature herself as divine)

[davidsun]

Please note: I've addressed precisely the issues that you brought up.

Yes, you did and that is appreciated.

So where in Quantum Physics is there an equation that says that whatever you seek, knock, or ask for, it will be done? Pointing to Quantum Physics hardly supports the things that Jesus is said to have preached.

My understanding is that one of the axioms (which is supported by some evidence) is the act of 'observation' (IOW, the action of the 'observer') actually 'collapses' the wave function of a probability wave (cloud?) which contains an infinite number of possibly probability states, into the 'one' that is experienced. To me (though probably not to you) this kind of 'maps' in a one-to-one fashion with with "whatever you seek, knock, or ask for, it will be done," There is a whole 'school' of 'thought' built around the premise of there being a "Law of Attraction" which explores this theme. See, for example, https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes ... ther_Hicks

I can't answer all your questions so am just given you a 'heads up' on where you might begin to explore and find your own answers to the above one.

Best wishes on your journey -

[davidsun]

... I can't say what Davidsun meant, but I think the idea is that Jesus was basically saying that the physical universe is his "body". And the idea is that he supports a pantheistic (or holistic) view of reality. In this way he's basically saying that the entire world should be treated with the same respect as you would give to anyone. And that translates to being ecologically minded then.

I don't deny this potential "philosophy" from Jesus. Jesus also said that whatever we do to the least of our our brethren we do to him. That too is a pantheistic view. In other words, in pantheism everyone is a manifestation of God. Therefore everyone is Jesus, and Jesus is everyone. And it also follows from this that "I and the Father are One", and this is true for everyone, not just Jesus.

Not sure if this is what Davidsun means, but these are common things that Jesus taught that are often pointed to by pantheists, eastern mystics, and those who believe that Jesus was teaching a holistic nature of reality.

To say that "I and the Father are One" is similar to saying the Buddhist phrase "Tat T'vam Asi" meaning "You are that". You are the mysterious entity that you call "God". Or at least you are one of the many manifestations of it. That's pantheism in short.

And of course in Pantheism then so is a squirrel, a tree, even a river or a rock. Thus pantheism clearly supports ecology (i.e. treating nature herself as divine)

Yes, that is what I mean - and then some!

[davidsun]

There is a whole 'school' of 'thought' built around the premise of there being a "Law of Attraction" which explores this theme. See, for example, https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes ... ther_Hicks

One of the 'generic' ideas/phrases associated with this school of thought is "The Power of Positive Thinking" (albeit 'Negative' thinking is power-full too, IMO). The 'wave-function' of Life can be 'collapsed' in 'negative' ways as well, IOW.

There have been many proponents of this, but a historically 'classic' one was Norman Vincent Peale who wrote a book with this title.
See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Power ... e_Thinking

[Divine Insight]

Please note: I've addressed precisely the issues that you brought up.

Yes, you did and that is appreciated.

So where in Quantum Physics is there an equation that says that whatever you seek, knock, or ask for, it will be done? Pointing to Quantum Physics hardly supports the things that Jesus is said to have preached.

My understanding is that one of the axioms (which is supported by some evidence) is the act of 'observation' (IOW, the action of the 'observer') actually 'collapses' the wave function of a probability wave (cloud?) which contains an infinite number of possibly probability states, into the 'one' that is experienced. To me (though probably not to you) this kind of 'maps' in a one-to-one fashion with with "whatever you seek, knock, or ask for, it will be done," There is a whole 'school' of 'thought' built around the premise of there being a "Law of Attraction" which explores this theme. See, for example, https://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes ... ther_Hicks

I can't answer all your questions so am just given you a 'heads up' on where you might begin to explore and find your own answers to the above one.

Best wishes on your journey -

I've been studying quantum mechanics since I was a teen. I find it very it to be interesting. So I have been looking into it and hardly need any advice on where to begin to explore it.

The fact is that even an observer-created reality does not support the idea that we can actually choose, or even consciously affect how a quantum wave function might collapse. There are currently three basic interpretations of quantum mechanics.

1. The Copenhagen Interpretation
2. The Hidden Variables or "Pilot Wave" Interpretation
3. The Many Worlds Interpretation.

There currently are no other interpretations and it is believed that all attempts at creating a fourth interpretation will most likely result in just being reducible to one of these three.

Let's look at each one individually.

1. The Copenhagen Interpretation

Ultimately the Copenhagen Interpretation basically says that the collapse of the wave function truly is just random. And that's all that can be known about it. So the Copenhagen Interpretation doesn't really offer much support for a consciously observer-created universe. If the observer influences the collapse of the wave function at all the influence is basically predetermined by all the unknowable variable leading up to the observation. (see Chaos Theory). By the way, Chaos theory doesn't say anything about quantum mechanics, but can be applicable due to the number of parameters involved.

In any case the Copenhagen Interpretation doesn't really offer much in the way of any "purposeful" observer creation.

2. The Hidden Variables or "Pilot Wave" Interpretation

This theory requires that we allow for faster-than-light "Pilot Waves" that guide the collapse of the wave function. This theory, and this theory alone allow for a possible observer-created world. However, in practice the idea of an observer created world becomes extremely problematic in general since all observers must be taken into consideration. Therefore any events the would have an effect on more than one observer, would be "observer-created" by all the observers who are influenced by the event. Therefore this would hardly lead to any individual having much control over anything in reality unless they live a very sheltered life that is insulated from all other observers. And even then the idea that an observer is creating reality due to their actual desires is highly in question. They could actually be creating reality because of their fears, and by imagination all manner of potential failures or horrors. So yes, a very consistent and positive imagination and thoughts would be required to be sure.

However, this is no evidence at this time that indicates that observers actually have any control at all over quantum experiments and the collapse of the wave function. The wave function statistic always show a purely random result. And this is necessary for the probabilities to work out correctly as predicted by Quantum Mechanics.

In other words, if the experimenters could influence the wave function collapse they could change the probability curve of the results from what is predicted. And no one has ever been able to do that. And yes, many experiments have been done along those lines with no positive results for the observer-created theory.

3. The Many Worlds Interpretation.

The Many Worlds interpretation is a bit more difficult to understand. In the Many Worlds interpretation all possible wave function collapses actually occur, they just occur in parallel universes. So to suggest that an observer is creating their own reality would require that you pick a specific observer and just follow that observer as he or she travels through the many worlds. But the problem here is that each individual observer continually splits so every observer would then necessarily be "Creating" every possible outcome. That hardly helps the observer-created paradigm.

So, yes, I've done far more than merely "begin" this journey. I've taken it to its bitter end based on all known theories and experiments, and thus far the Copenhagen interpretation appears to have the best explanation yet. And even if the Hidden Variables interpretation were true, it would hardly support an observer-created reality in any meaningful way concerning individual observers. Although it could potentially support an observer-created reality concerning the totality of all observers. However, that hardly fits in with what either Jesus or Deepak Chopra preach.

And of course, the Many Worlds interpretations demands that all outcomes are realized. So that hardly supports an observer created reality either.

So, basically I've been there and done that.

Always looking for NEW information, but I haven't heard of any lately.

[davidsun]

Always looking for NEW information, but I haven't heard of any lately.

I guess you'll just have to trundle along the same ol', same ol' way then.

[davidsun]

Always looking for NEW information, but I haven't heard of any lately.

I guess you'll just have to trundle along the same ol' way with the same ol' mind-n-heart set then.

What Divine Insight has presented are just the theories and views of Scientists who are into certain mathematical-equation supported theories. As I present and (will) get around to contextually presenting (here), later on in my chapter:

"It is important that one remain aware of the fact that the terms Love and Joy, both individually and together, designate spiritual phenomena. Different kinds and degrees of Love and Joy can’t actually be quantitatively measured and compared, as may be done when dealing with different frequencies and intensities of electromagnetic waves, for instance. Love and Joy related experiences and expressions therefore can’t really be processed in either simple (2x + 2x = 4x or 8x – 5x = 3x, for example) or complex (∑f(x) →X, for  example) mathematical terms. Subjective discernment and contextual decision-making as to what will and won’t best serve to augment your and/or others’ experience and expression of Love and Joy is always necessary. As in the case of Jesus’ Father↔Son paradigm, this multi-modal ‘computer’ platform running a Love and Joy ‘program’ model is only an ideational device which, by prompting you to pay attention to and continue to learn more about the determinative aspects of the flow of various kinds of  Love and Joy, may help you to personally become more aware of and so be able to more functionally ‘surf’ what’s going on in and around you at any given point in Life augmenting directions.

"Besides, a formulaic approach to issues pertaining to Love and Joy won’t work even as a means of approximation because the human condition is complicated to the point of convolution by the fact that ... etc., etc., etc."

For anyone really interested in possibly 'new' (to them) 'information' along the lines of Quantum Theory, here are a couple of links to videos presenting and discussing research findings by Scientists associated with The Institute for Noetic Sciences (www.noetic.org):





And's here a link to one of Deepak Chopras videos (he's 'into' a perspective which jives wth Quatum Theory, and consider to be a one of the more preeminent metaphysicians in this regard by many, though of course not by everyone!):



And here's a link to 'video' which presents a radio-program interview with Dr. Joe Dispenza (a pre-eminent presenter of info on 'Healing') on "The Healing Power of Thought Alone" which jives with the 'observer' having the 'power' to 'collapse' the 'wave function' of Life in desired ways theory which I have personally found quite convincing:



For those who'e never heard of him, here's his bio (copied from http://www.bloomberg.com/research/stock ... =117574225):

Dr. Joe Dispenza is a current Member of Advisory Board at The Integrity Institute, Inc. He holds a Bachelor of Science degree with an emphasis in Neuroscience. Over the last 10 years, Dr. Dispenza has lectured in over 17 different countries on six continents educating people about the role and function of the human brain. He has taught thousands of people how to re-program their thinking through scientifically proven neuro-physiologic principles. As a result, this information has taught many individuals to reach their specific goals and visions by eliminating self-destructive habits. His approach, taught in a very simple method, creates a bridge between true human potential and the latest scientific theories of neuroplasticity. The premise of his work is founded in his total conviction that every person on this planet has within them, the latent potential of greatness and true unlimited abilities. His new book, Evolve Your Brain: The Science of Changing Your Mind connects the subjects of thought and consciousness with the brain, the mind, and the body. The book explores “the biology of change.� He also sits as an invited editorial advisor of Explore Magazine. And he was one of the scientists, researchers, and teachers featured in the award winning film, “What the BLEEP Do We Know!?"