Another case for why there is so much conflict in the both in the bible and this world, and this one is geometric. We’re taught that we should put ourselves in the other man’s shoes and see things from their perspective when conflicts arise but more often than not we choose to take an opposite point of view just for the sake of argument. Why don’t we all just get along?

First off, if we really did put ourselves in the other man’s shoes, we’d be them. A huge part of this gig here is to achieve maximum individuality, agreeing with everyone around you is counterproductive to that process. Disagreement creates separation, agreeing creates cohesion so the game of suffering requires a very complex strategy to play at the level we’re currently playing at.

I’ll cut to the chase here, it’s about putting yourself in as many different positions as possible in order to see things from as many different angles as possible. At some point, you’ll be using all of those angles to change your world and the more you have the better your chance of success. Now mathematically there are two ways of doing that, putting yourself in the other man’s shoes or putting up an argument. They’ll both give you an angle, but one generates power and increases individuality and the other doesn’t.

This is also a case for long suffering because what you’re doing is mental geometry, you’re taking a 180 degree opposite point of view so you need to stick with it until you’ve gathered all your angles. If you switch to agreeing with everyone halfway thru because you can’t handle the conflict you’ll only gather half the angles you need to see the whole. If that doesn’t make total sense, think it thru and it will.

I can look at this world and see that we have mastered the art of conflict and suffering. It’s certainly not pretty on the surface, but it has generated the knowledge and power we need to wrest a universe of worlds from the clutches of the gods. When we experience pain and suffering it’s because we’re looking at what we’re doing from those angles, “going to heaven” is simply doing a 180 in the way we look at exactly the same thing. We haven’t gone anywhere because there is no “where” outside of being in a different state of mind. Going thru hell to get to heaven or the ascension reincarnation cycle then is nothing more than mental geometry, a flip flopping of the angles we use to view what’s going on.

In the resurrection process we need to use angles from both sides so to speak, in an effort to see the whole of what is going on. That means instead of “dying” in the traditional sense where you would abandon all the bad angles in favor of the good ones (essentially leaving the “man” to die and becoming one with your god) you keep and use both sets of angles to see the whole from a balanced perspective (the “man” does not physically die, but opens his mind to the “heavenly” angles, transmuting both god and man back into a whole human being).

Part of the reason we are still engaged in the ascension cycle is because it has been cleverly disguised as resurrection by a priesthood loyal to a pantheon of gods instead of the people they are supposed to represent. You can see the confusion as they both look like becoming one with your god, but in practice and results obtained they are clearly very different. We’re going to be talking a lot more about gods, men, and the priesthood soon, because without that knowledge it is impossible to understand what we’re doing here and why we’re doing it.