The nature of false beliefs and delusions is that they hold to a mental view of reality that has to ignore some of the evidence since they have no self-consistent proof for those inner explanatory experiences and there always exists a hope that they are false in competition with the desires that they may hold truth - so they are never fully satisfying as explanations and the discontent experienced in those trying to live a lie gives away to them that they are still looking for a more satisfactory explanation. False theories and philosophies show up in people as they inflict them with discontented stresses, tensions, energy-blockages, and other judgements to incite them to re-evaluate, re-think and research their ideas and preconceptions. So false beliefs are acts of ignorance towards one's own experiences - inner, outer, visible and invisible. If we develop false beliefs, we are choosing a mentality of distraction from what we can't explain, and our resulting explanations have to ignore the influence of those things we are finding hard to accept - those things that cause us discontent. In short then - if the distraction eliminates the problem then get distracted but if there is any remaining degree of discontent keep the mind open to need to adjust the working theory....



Each and every experience is a self-evident sensory experience of material - perhaps of colour, or time duration, sense of order, relative spatial arrangement or ontological abstracting of what might be involved in what is yet to be revealed etc... and so although other experiences may also imply an experience's existence - yet - each experience is also simply its own witness - it can manifest as its own proof of what it is and so it is at this level that acceptance is required - what sense to be gained or lost by denying your present state of mind? Evidence ideas: if truly atheist what you mean by pursuing argument about God's existence unless you are finding the imagining of Divine concepts and interesting hole in your experience that you hope would be good to fill? Well, if Divine topics of debate are good for you why then if the words are empty of experience in your life? Why not adapt the word 'God' for instance to mean 'cherries' if thats what appeals to you - so the true atheist was debating cherries with the theologian who thought the athiest actually shared their idea of what God meant and was referring to God as, err God...

However the imagination, has the capacity to construct and assign more than one appreciation or interpretation to a particular primary level self-evident experience - by mentally creative linking to other elements of primary level experience - and these appreciative or interpretive linkings are also self-evidently apparent in the thinker. So its not just - 'does God mean cherries?' but, if not, then perhaps although God or cherries may seem unwelcome it remains that the ideas networked around the issue of discussion provide pleasurable exercise for the mind.

And, so some of the issues here in the network of associated mental/sensory experiences is that all associations/interpretations are for conveying a variety of relationally distinguishable appreciating connections of the basic irreduceable raw distinct disconnected uncompared set of elemental experiences and so then the interpretations become associated also with linguistic entities - encodings...

The meaning of words are understood by local agreement to associate self-evident things with other patterns of self-evident experience - one experience is agreed to be used to convey information about the other experience through use of the imagination and/or other realms of memory/forgetting. Along with the logically-deciphered linguistics of a communication there may be a direct impartation of a being's perceptions to those they are communicating with - that which is unencoded as in original form.

Contradictions may arise because people are trying to communicate imagined interpretations for experiences they have, yet about which they don't have the understanding (successful assumption of a commonality in the use of coding forms in their attempts at linguistic communication) to explain the meanings accurately using the locally conventional language to communicate it to others.

Falsity and deceptions are unsatisfying interpretations of our experience - in that they have the associated witness that they are not true for our destiny - these interpretations will not be remembered as claimed AND we found imagining that they would be displeasurable. Also may be irrelevant to any further use anticipated for the receiver - perhaps they cannot be used in a pleasurable and prevailingly successful way - so they even seem untradeable for something that is... and so we need to beware that we are not lacking in hope by reason of ourselves or some other in regard to a deception seeming unprofitable for the future. Simply put: You can tell a lie because it (partly) offends you and/or the liar. If a lie is meant well it may not be received well (and the converse)....

By this direction to admit what is self-evident we may also apprehend, perceive and observe that there is a supreme God Who is the direct proof of Her/His Own existence - as well as indirectly via code language, interpretation and pleasureable frabrications that are received as pleasurable, hopeful etc... - witnessed to through the sensible things by their agreement with the translucent/invisible conceptions and observations within each being which are perceived in each one as their own para-debateable base elemental witnesses and the syntheses of thought connections relating the elements into the mental association network.

....Eventually the happiest experience of God comes to one and all...

The plan She delights in, is to pay each fairly for their pleasurable activity and sufferings. This is how She attracts followers away from their rebellious denials of the good truths we all encounter as directly perceptible, even whilst they may remain mainly as invisible null-constructs in our thoughts and feelings... Some are content with an enriched universe while others are happiest with their simpler reward.

The supreme Empress Who prevails over all others in eternity and has to secure perfect eternal contentedness along with everyone else evidences Her Good Being and kingdom 'within' us - the subjective realm of the mind - and 'without' us in the objective realm of the unconscious elements of the mind. People can sense within them the presence of the One whose plans cannot fail - the plan we all subscribe to - to win perfectly idea eternal contentment. People can sense within them that She is always good. People can sense within them that She always tells the truth. People can sense within them that She is the only ideally good hope for complete freedom.

Such things can be certified in each being as we have the mental ingredients to quickly scan eternity for necessary evidence either supporting or contrary to each proposition that we test with our minds. The Lord offers Her contented happiness and consolation to all and eventually all come to accept the witness of our Lord's promise of universal personal success which is always in us..

back to homepage