Consciousness is the foundation

What is missing from an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God? Boundaries.

What does an omnipotent, omniscient, omnipresent God lack if he limits himself? The possibility of not taking responsibility.

These two statements cry out for explanation. But they also form the basis for a thought experiment that attempts to explain the world.

Let’s just start.

In the beginning, God withdrew to create something that did not exist before: boundaries, limits, restrictions.

He spoke creation into that limitation. He was the giver, and the limitation was the receiver, reflecting like a mirror.

Why would God want something that is limited and reflects like a mirror? Then why do we look in the mirror?

A mirror gives us a limited image of ourselves. Instead of a three-dimensional image, we see one limited to two dimensions, and yet we learn something about ourselves when we look at ourselves in the mirror.

God gets new perspectives of Himself when He looks at us.

But what are we if not the substance of God? Are we, as we tend to say, a creation out of nothing, a creatio ex nihilo? Rather, God took from himself and created out of himself.

God is love, and creation exists because the parts of creation attract each other. This is true on all levels, from the subatomic to the celestial.

God is relationship. But relationship exists only when there is diversity. Separation is also observed at all levels.

Unity and individualization are the basic principles, and consciousness is the building material. They are wonderfully represented in the Trinity of God, which includes God, Jesus, the Holy Spirit, and us. The Trinity is the quadrinity of diversity.

So we are God, who looks at himself billions of times and thus knows himself better.

But not only we. Every part of creation is a reflection of God. Metaphorically, this is clear to us when we speak of the Holy Spirit as a dove or wine, and of Jesus as bread.

Let us come to the second statement.

God, as the omnipotent, omniscient, and omnipresent Creator, must ultimately take responsibility for the actions of His children. If we are the reflection of God, then there is no way around responsibility.

The question of suffering in this world can only have God as its source, even if only indirectly. He created us this way and foresaw what we would do. And He could have prevented it.

Let’s assume that God saw history as it unfolded as the best way to have fellowship with as many of us as possible in eternity.

Either He could have found a way without all the suffering, or He is not omnipotent. It is as simple as that.

I have often wondered why God allowed Jesus to die such a horrible death. The only answer that has seemed somewhat satisfactory to me is that God himself died that death. Otherwise, it would not be the greatest expression of love, for “Greater love has no one than this, that one lay down his life for his friends. (John 15:13)

Suffering is an expression of love when one suffers for another. But if, as we saw above, we are God looking back on Himself, then God suffers and we suffer in Him and as Him.

God takes all the responsibility because He suffers Himself. He does not just suffer with us. He suffers. Period. If compassion were the highest expression of love, the verse would read: Greater love has no one than this, to lay down one’s life with one’s friends.

Like Jesus on the cross, unaware of the true circumstances and ourselves, we cry out, “My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?

But why is God doing all this?

How could He be omniscient if He did not have this awareness and experience of suffering? If He did not have these perspectives of Himself that are perceived as external?

How could He be omnipotent if He had not experienced suffering?

How could he be omnipresent if he did not occupy the space that exists outside of himself, even if he had to create it first?

How could he be love if he did not dualistically separate and then reunite through attraction without mixing?

Posted

in

by