A Synthesis for "The Laws Of Our Creator"

I provide a synthesis of views pertaining to the thread “The Laws of Our Creator” found here. www.abovetopsecret.com...

First, I want to thank the diverse views that have contributed to this topic. Without the diversity, there most likely would not be the motion of discussion and eventual expansion of awareness.

Thread Creator Starchild23, Creator, according to your conceptualization, needs more clarification. From what you have conceptualized so far in your lifespan, can you clarify the following aspects? What is the spatial geographic context in which these laws or miracles whatever occurred?

For example, I am questioning the scale. Biblical stories published as children’s stories will have transferred the idea through illustrations in young absorbing minds, that the Creator is an entity that can be conceptualized as an old bearded man inhabiting another dimension reminiscent of the one shown in the new Thor movie.

Furthermore, this old bearded man created the Earth and walked with the first sapient ape, Adam. The Biblical stories, in essence, have reduced the scale to a creation story of our Earth.
So what is the nature of our Creator?
Is it spirit or is it matter?
What is our relationship to what people have called spirit?
What is our relationship to matter (basically everything we can observe and instrumentally sense)?
What is the relationship between laws (miracles, processes, rhythms, relationship between relationships, or whatever) and matter?
What if we read between the lines of what we see?
What if, soon, we will have the technology to actually measure between the lines of what we see?

BeforeTheHangmansNoose conceptualizes Creator as the whole universe, or perhaps this could be conceptualized as the omniverse (given the number of hypotheses and theories derived from mathematics)?
In other words, the Creator is the Omniverse. Could you possibly be conceptualizing the Omniverse as a clockwork containing other clockworks such as universes?

However, Starchild23, has brought to question his purpose. How should we come to this awareness? Well how did the sapient apes do it in the past?
We have archaeological material recording their relationship with each other and all other matter, but how difficult is it in understanding these relationships?
How difficult is it to understand our relationship with each other and all now?

Starchild23 need not worry because there are many concepts that have arisen through Eco diversity to choose from and help him guide his way.
Among such views, there is midicon’s. This person simply states that you have no purpose.
Could it be that purposes are defined by relationships?

charles1952 is not understanding the spatial geographic context that Starchild23 has conceptualized.
Maybe I can be of some service, or maybe not. I’m just a person transferring information received from another unit after all. Well from what I’ve received from the cloud of relationships surrounding me, a single context has been dichotomized (separated in 2). Is this the true nature of knowledge and awareness? (think tree of knowledge of good and evil, to know that there exists the notion of “better” and “worse”). Could it be that the spatial context is expanded to and limited to a plane of light and dark, brightness and the void?

charles1952 conceptualization of the Creator’s nature ascribes this entity as being omnipresent, that is “Present everywhere simultaneously.” The usage of this term suggests that the Creator resides in all of the material and non-material here, then and then, in a continuum.

MrDesolate suggests a dichotomy of the concepts of “religion” and “science.” This cyberspace node even provides scripture supporting this claim. The scripture which is quoted, however, interprets the material conceptualized as the sapient ape as lacking in spiritual intelligence, or what may be called, a relationship with everything in existence. I do not know if this is true or not. It could be both. I don’t know. The relationship between MrDesolate’s dichotomization and the scripture can be inferred that natural man is a product of science and the Spirit of God is a product of religion.

This raises the question, what was the rhythm and intention of the first religion? Was it driven at first by communication, harmonics, and chants that served the purpose of solidifying the relationship between the matter surrounding the sapient ape’s cloud of awareness?

occrest provides the traditional interpretive view of ancient cultural text with fortunate references to scripture provided. Thank you for providing more scriptures. This is certainly helpful in determining from what relationships you derived your information input and output from.

Occrest speaks for mankind. We have always been searching for the Tree of Life evident from the mirroring of Jewish thought in their texts. Was that not found already in the very beginning? According to the scriptures you provided, and thank you for that, yes we did.

So is mankind trying to re-discover it? Did not mankind take anything away from the Tree of Life when they first found it and ate from it? Is this not the awareness we have today? That is, the awareness which is the ability to call another node fatter than us or richer than us.

Meanwhile, there is the entity known as ButtUglyToad. This entity's conceptualization of THE ONE LAW OF THE TRUE CREATOR is simply the question mark symbol. Brilliant! The answer becomes the question.

cry93, this entity realizes dichotomy, and that seems to be it. Good job!

ImaFungi’s suggests “another” creation story according to ancient text. This story is reminiscent of that movie “Clash of the Titans,” where Liam Neeson is among this pantheon overlooking an amphitheater with Earth on the stage. ImaFungi also suggests that there is an inner conflict within, that is to transcend from mortal into immortal via machine. This is among one of my favorite topics of discussion because a certain computer game (Deus Ex) introduced me to the idea of transhumanism. Thank you ImaFungi

God from a machine or “deus ex machina”

In response to ImaFungi, the ButtUglyToad node sticks to a persona of light cultural wittiness by referencing popular philosophical movies like The Matrix.

But oh no! ImaFungi is lured into this relationship with the ButtUglyToad node. ImaFungi receives and transmits back a series of answers or suggestions with a question mark symbol at the end of each answer or suggestion.
I have this question for you, is the diversity of matter evidence for life in motion?

Akragon suggests dichotomization.

ButtUglyToad makes another suggestion. Panspermia basically. This planet was seeded.

I have a question relevant to what cannot be seen. Is a philosophical law even possible? Wouldn’t that be like trying to contain water in a cage built for a rabbit? Why even make the non-material a law in the first place?

Akragon makes a sexual gesture on the internet by transferring data that symbolizes the sexual act of licking. To understand this, we must understand the relationship between this node and the node that it is in relation to, ButtUglyToad. Perhaps these 2 sapient apes desire to portray themselves as Toad and Feline locked in eternal sexual embrace. Beautiful!

ImaFungi brings up the continuum of relationships that cause other relationships, etc.

BeforeTheHangmansNoose node shows up again in this diagram. This node suggests the ancient text is a lie. But I must ask, in what sense is it a lie? What is true really? Does the process have to be true in order to reach truths? What makes the process of recording information less true than observing the matter surrounding us?

ButtUglyToad node explodes its load in the form of cryptic text. This entity that is grand enough to speak for all of us sapient ape nodes by suggesting that all of us have a unique soul. Furthermore, all of the souls are tied to galaxies. This node is also aware of what perfection and time and collective consciousness is! In addition ImaFungi gets linked into a relationship of common understanding of "spatial verses" with ButtUglyToad. ButtUglyToad helps ImaFungi understand with the aid of a Youtube video. Thank you!

CaptainNemo provides a simple yet mysterious view. This node suggests that "Elohim" are our creators and that we carry their wounds.

I question the etymological origins of the word "Elohim".

These are the diverse views for The Laws of Our Creator. Now I will provide questions relevant to the thread topic “Laws of Our Creator” before I finish this synthesis.

What is the nature of relationships between every piece of particle?

What is a natural law essentially?

How many entities, particles, or whatever, does a law have command over?