Episode:Experiential Deity—The Supreme Being (Part 2)

Experiential Deity—The Supreme Being (Part 2)
Broadcast on	June 2, 2020
Episode #	495
Study of	[Paper 115:1.3-2.4, p. 1260]

Finite creatures, high and low, may propound theories, and have done so, as to the necessity of the finite in the cosmic economy, but in the last analysis it exists because God so willed. The universe cannot be explained, neither can a finite creature offer a rational reason for his own individual existence without appealing to the prior acts and pre-existent volition of ancestral beings, Creators or procreators.

Listen to the broadcast

Keywords: Urantia, Finite, Absonite, Absolute, Infinite

Summary by Kermit

Commentary after Review

Continuing reflection on the preface of Paper 115 led to an elaboration of the ideas of being and doing. Consider two basic philosophical concepts:

• reality—that which immediately conceptually constitutes our consciousness, and
• deity—that which constitutes the context or predicate for reality.

Concerning deity, there are two categorizations—existential and experiential. Existential Deity is the context for the reality of being something. Experiential Deity is the context for the reality of doing something. Deity as it is presented in the 5th ER is practically altogether new. Thinkers of the present and past have never demanded a logical philosophical context for the constituents of being and doing. Magic has been the ready resort to account for the mysteries of the foundations of such things. The 5th ER speaks of the seven Absolutes of Infinity, the pillars of total reality, as co-ordinate, i.e., existing within a contextualizing influence.

Throughout human history being-ness has received more philosophic consideration than doing-ness as shown by language. Essence is a word suggesting being. With no corresponding word suggesting doing, SoS audaciously has coined the word facience. Father-based contemplation is focused on essence. Mother-based contemplation thus becomes focused on facience. So it is we are taking up the challenge to develop novel concept frames for pursuing a correct understanding of the cosmos rather than merely expanding our current frame. Recall how concept frames are a necessary context for logical thought.

Concerning the questions of origins, humanly postulated origins are unavoidably erroneous. True origins must be had through revelation. We read in [19:1.6] a true perspective (concept frame) of any “reality problem” must include a study and correlation of three phases of universe reality: origin, history, and destiny. So our humanly postulated origins (e.g., Big Bang) result in false concept frames. We reiterated the idea that humanly postulated concept frame are always erroneous, but true concept frames are only relatively true. Further, a relatively true concept frame is not false. The contemporary competing concept frames of a religionist (creationist) and a philosophical materialist (atheist) postulate different origins for the universe. In simplified terms the creationist postulates a Creator, creating the universe (relatively true), while the materialist postulates a Big Bang event (false). Our universe journey is a progression of ever more inclusive concept frames. The preface to the Foreword represents a thimble-sized concept frame of reality yet true, such that the greatest of human minds now and for the next thousand years will not find its boundary.

115:1.3 Relativity of Concept Frames (cont.)

As with our first episode, we read and discussed six conceptually dense paragraphs. SoS’s process of unpacking this material unavoidably expands the complexity of explication which make succinct distillation or summarization of concept all the more difficult. With this disclaimer, I proceed with a high altitude fly-over review and highly recommend the serious student to carefully listen to the archive for the details.

In [115:1.3] we discussed the designations of cosmic reality of finite, absonite, and absolute in etymological terms well beyond the evident coinage of the term absonite as a derivative of the two terms finite and absolute. Further we examined two progressions, one from a time based perspective and the other from an eternal or existential perspective. With additional complexities alluded to above, this exercise is intended to challenge us to begin to see the experiential as something above or added to an existential starting point.

The next paragraph speaks to the difficulty trying to understand finite reality as a consequence of the eternal purpose of God. Our starting point here is our first cosmic intuition: recognition of causality.

115:2. The Absolute Basis for Supremacy

The title of this section suggests we recognize the absolute as the floor and not the ceiling of our concept frame. Putting the existential God at the center of an experiential sphere, thus beginning to move away from our tendency to linearity of thinking.

We spent some effort at contemplating the idea that completion of infinity inherent in the I AM is eternally present in the seven Absolutes, is functionally associated with the triunities (groups of three of the seven Absolutes which the primal member is always the Universal Father) and transmitively associated in the triodities (groups of three of the seven Absolutes, which do not include the Universal Father). All of which is to help finite creatures begin to envision infinity as containing future potentialities.

Note the transmitive triodity associations suggest to one of us at SoS the transition of viewpoint across the existential-experiential divide from The Father towards The Mother. And as we are attempting to logically recognize, the Mother is the overarching facet of experiential Deity. (Be sure to listen to the archive for the intriguing explanation etymology of the word triodity)

Further efforts at helping us with our new concept frames, the seemingly incomprehensible situation of augmenting or modifying anything of infinite value is to be attempted through recognition of increasing divine values as actualities by experiential comprehension of reality meanings.

The curious next to last paragraph of the section is a hint to attend to the Deity context for realities, the Absolutes of Potentiality.

Discussion of the final paragraph examined the idea behind the experiential nature of finite and absonite and the relatedness of evolution and eventuation. The idea was also presented that the 1st triodity relates or signifies the Almighty, and the 2nd triodity suggests the Mother, such that the superadditive consequence of the relation of the Mother and the Almighty is the Supreme.

Notes by Brad

• Relatively true does not imply partially erroneous.
  • Contrary to black/white thinking we all do.
  • Example: The 5th ER reveals a tiny fraction of all creates of the Infinite Spirit.
    • There are more types of these creatures than we can imagine.
    • And yet, this minimal set presented in the 5th ER (that doesn't talk about everything) is not partially false.
    • It's just big enough to keep people from hitting its boundary for 1,000 years.

• Concept frames
  • They usually speak to origin, history, and destiny (see [19:1.6])
    • Revelation required for true concept frames. Man alone cannot devise true inventions/postulates.
    • The Big Bang, Big Cruch, etc, are man-made postulates for origin and destiny.
    • Magic matter? No creator? An acausal universe? A meaningless, valueless, purposeless universe? I'm supposed to agree to this?
    • Logically absurd, yet scientists demand we nod along in credulous assent
    • At least creationism postulates a creator. And that believer has faith, accorded to him for righteousness.
    • At least engineers observe reality, to build smartphones say. Neo-Darwinists ignorie reality and don't even qualify as scientists.
  • They are inherently synthetic.
    • They're not about the details of the parts, they're the very context FOR those parts.
  • They must be larger than the concept you're trying to encompass.
  • Can values increase/change? Depends on concept frame.
    • From existential viewpoint, no. Perfection is the end.
    • From experiential viewpoint, yes! Divine values increase as meanings are more comprehended. Perfection is the beginning.

• Everything needs a context, so it is coordinated
  • Experiential deity is the context for reality
    • Reality is not self-contextualizing!
    • You couldn't even read this page or hear words being spoken without experiential deity.
  • Even The Universal Father needs something to coordinate him with the other absolutes of infinity
    • Existential deity is the context for the absolutes of infinity.
  • We've always assumed hand-waving magic is what cooridnates reality.
  • Yes "The Lord works in mysterious ways," but that doesn't mean God cannot be considered in a logical frame.
  • A child asks "Why? Why? Why?" until the parent says "just because." The answer may be "because of experiential deity."

• Reciprocal viewpoints
  • The time viewpoint: Finite, absonite, and absolute
    • The absonite is "from" but "apart from" the finite. The unvarying speed of light is a hint of its existence.
    • Transcendent reality: what the absonite is often paired with. "Above, but still in touch with that which is below."
    • The up-welling of the experiential.
    • But this list-of-three is a simplification. Technically this is co-absolute, too.
    • This is just how the 5th ER starts you out in the Foreward. As it goes on, it explains more of the complexity.
  • The eternity viewpoint (harder to think about!): absolute, ultimate, supreme.
    • The downstepping of existential-ness
  • Both of these viewpoints are still essentially linear, which is not what supreme and absolute levels are like.
  • Paired levels (from one viewpoint, you can only see 3 of these): Finite + supreme; Absonite + ultimate; Coabsolute + absolute
  • So even within the 5th ER, different concept frames are used.

• "The Absolute BASIS for Supremacy" section title
  • Demands the top-down eternity concept frame (as just described)
  • A sphere with the existential at its center
    • A more fitting analogy for "the absolute basis for supremacy"
    • Far better than the "existential father as the base of a vertical stack," with us ants dancing on the top of the structure!
  • Think of the existential as a nucleus. As a beginning, not the "be you perfect" ending the classic existential viewpoint has postulated.

• The Seven Absolutes (see [104:3] for the list of the 7 absolutes)
  • Triunities: 15 functional associations of these absolutes, where one is the Universal Father
    • The Universal Father is the initiator in these 15.
    • Only 7 are introduced in Paper 104. The other 8 (related to the absonite) are left to the reader!
  • Triodities: 20 sets of the absolutes (pairings of 3) that do not include The Universal Father.
    • Only 2 are related to the finite and described in [Paper 104]. The other 18 are related to the absonite, left to the reader.
    • Clever word coiners: "od" is "God" without the "G."
    • "od" also evokes "odd." Fitting.
    • Why fitting? These are a move away from pure existential (Universal Father) to the experiential domain (Universal Father isn't in this domain!) From The Father toward The Mother
  • Three of them are the three absolutes of potentiality, and correlate to the three potencies of [Paper 42] referred to in section 2 here.
    • Unqualified Absolute. Correlates to space potency (aka potentiality)
    • Universal Absolute. Correlates to mind potency
    • Deity Absolute. Correlates to spirit potency
  • These 7 are the reality perspective. There also is a Deity perspective, and that's why these potencies are in here. They're a hint.
    • That's water deeper than SoS will go into.
    • Slow down on non-sequitur paragraphs like [115:2.3] and reflect. It's a huge hint for the need for synthesis
    • Allow your mind to be grown into a better frame. Be patient.

• "Upon and in the Supreme." What is in the Supreme??
  • The Almighty is in the Supreme. It's a summation of matter, mind, and spirit. The FIRST triodity hints at this.
  • The Mother is in the Supreme. The SECOND triodity hints at this.
  • The superadditive consequence between these two is The Supreme.

• What is eventuation, anyway?
  • Down here in time we often refer to things "eventually" happening, right?
  • Well, if the absonite is transcendent of the finite, it's chock full of these "eventually" (eventuated) moments.
    • All the stuff that led to those eventuated moments is bottled up inside them.
    • And it's not a very linear space, as we are accustomed to thinking.
    • There are 18 triodities that make causality quite nonlinear in the absonite.
  • But don't fret: the absonite is still in touch with evolution, not wholly removed from it. So we can work toward grasping it better.

• The Cosmos Infinite already exists
  • We cannot see it. But it exists.
  • Do you recognize the existence of potentials? Great! That proves there are realities that exist you cannot see, that are not mere figments of your imagination.

• Essence versus facience
  • Essence is being-ness.
  • Facience is doing-ness
    • A word coined by SoS, based on -facient suffix, which signified "to be doing"

• The phrase "rational reason" is technically redundant.
  • So what? So is "spiritual choice." Sometimes the revelators use a modifier to emphasize.
  • "The vivid vividness of the sunset" and so on.