Book Two Chapter Six

SIX

More toward the Spirit

Man, whether he likes it or not, is a hybrid. God took man from the dust, a wholly corporeal being, and made an angel/man hybrid (a living soul). Why? I believe that it is through this hybrid that a spiritual God will realize Himself into a corporeal plane. This section will explore that which is more toward the spirit, for we have to ask the greater question: what, exactly, is being reworked? I will consider all of corporeality as the context.

Within those boundaries, I seek the elements to be altered. I seek the building blocks of the new, improved habitat. I’ve said, ‘you can’t just throw a fish in a bowl’. Let us say that God is the big fish. If He must realize Himself into a new habitat by way of reverse-engineering the present element, that prerequisite, for example, becomes the realization of earth into water. As He gouges out a new ocean, all earth must become the element most acquiescent to that transition.

Think of all the symbolism involved in this concept. For one, a fish was the symbol of the apostle’s office. It was water that was used to represent cleansing of the earthly man and his elevation into ‘something more’. Also, ‘ocean’ and ‘sea’ are symbols for the inhabitants of earth. To consider the transition presupposes the transitional. In other words, there is a mechanism by which transition occurs, and therefore a common ground and point of comparison. For instance, can spiritual be compared to corporeal? Can man be compared to God?

See Genesis 6:3, “And the Lord said, My spirit shall not always strive with man, for that he also is flesh: yet his days shall be an hundred and twenty years.”

Does this verse only say that man is a physical/spiritual hybrid, or does it say more? Does it suggest that God, Who is a spirit, has some kind of a body? I have suggested that a spiritual God will make for Himself a real presence in the reality we already know and understand. For the purposes of this study, we will set the common ground for transition and realization as a ‘proper mix of ingredients’. Not just the one or the other, but a combination of both by a particular recipe. I say ‘recipe’ because too many eggs turn a custard into an omelet.

See the recipe at work in Matthew 10:20, “For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your Father which speaketh in you.”

See the transitional recipe in Mark 4:41, “And they feared exceedingly, and said one to another, What manner of man is this, that even the wind and the sea obey Him?”

We assume that God, and therefore spirit, is in a state of ‘arriving’. Spirit, a recorded constituent element in the overall make-up of man, is in a state of ‘becoming’. From that, we have the sure assumption that the spirit in man is in a state of flux; that the spirit in man alternates between growth and attrition, between, let us say, a category five and a category four.

That the spirit in man is not always the same: see Luke 9:55, “But He turned, and rebuked them, and said, ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.”

In the overall scheme of things, what shall befall the man or the woman of spiritual inclination? While it may not be unequivocally asserted that the ‘seeker’ always ‘finds’, I dare say that in the final analysis the ‘seeker’ will be ‘found’. I base that on one of man’s corporeal constants: that both sides of an equation will be equal.

I confirm that with Matthew 10:32, “Whosoever therefore shall confess Me before men, him will I confess also before My Father which is in heaven.”

Lest we forget the focus of this present study, allow me the small luxury of reminding you about the ‘spiritual/corporeal handshake’. Something is happening in Heaven, and it bears directly on what is happening here.

We saw that in the above-cited verse, and we see it again, and more plainly I think, in Matthew 18:18, “Verily I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven: and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.”

See also Matthew 16:19, “I will give unto thee the keys of the Kingdom of Heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in Heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in Heaven.”

Please note the word “keys” in the verse above. The word of God is filled to the brim with keys. It only takes common sense to know that physical keys open physical doors and that spiritual keys open spiritual doors. Mental keys open doors of the mind. What kind of keys open the doors of possibility? When you look closely at the Bible, you see more than authority telling you what to do - you see that you are being told how things work. You are being given a glimpse into Universal Spiritual Mechanics: USMs.

Consider Mark 11:25, “When ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any: that your Father also which is in Heaven may forgive you your trespasses.”

Note that the word “also” speaks of similarities. Something is happening in Heaven that is similar

to something happening in your mental endeavors. See, too, that the word “may” strongly indicates

cause and effect, in other words, the process won’t work unless you make it work. Matthew 10:32 has already been cited. The main message of the verse was Christ’s confession of believers before the Father. We have previously considered the notion of a body for God.

We consider that again, here, in Luke 12:8 & 9, “Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess Me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: But he that denieth Me before men shall be denied before the angels of God.”

We see that the main message of this verse is Christ’s confession of believers before, not the Father so much as the angels of the Father. Can this be more than a simple difference of the writer’s choice in wording? Can this be more than a mere discrepancy? I want to ask you to consider this - that the two verses are identical; that “the angels of God” and “My Father” are one and the same. God works through many vehicles. The seeker looks at a car but knows that man is the driver. A seeker looks at the body but knows that the brain is the pilot.

We look at the corporeal brain and determine that the mind steers it; we look at man and determine that the angelic other leads the dance. Why not consider, then, that each angel’s mind is an intrusion of God into a vehicle - that through all, and all down the line, God works all in all? Yes, God works through many vehicles, and angels can be hands: or, in other words, A rose by any other name.

See Psalms 37:24, “Though he fall, he shall not be utterly cast down: for the Lord upholdeth him with His hand.”

Compare to Psalms 91:11 & 12, “For He shall give His angels charge over thee, to keep thee in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou dash thy foot against a stone.”

It stands to reason that if we may be attached to an angelic counterpart, we may sometimes be found in their office, for if God may call on angels to be His hands, He may most certainly draft a man into service.

See 2 Corinthians 7:6, “Nevertheless God, that comforteth those that are cast down, comforted us by the coming of Titus.”

It might be that while God is working through our angelic others, those angels are working through us. Since both sides of the coin are spun at once, we know that our own works travel a reverse path. How much, then, and how real an effect do our actions have on our counterparts?

Proverbs 6:32, may give a frightening indication, “But whoso committeth adultery with a woman lacketh understanding: he that doeth it destroyeth his own soul.”

Are we killing our Heavenly counterparts?

Read Luke 16:23, “And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.”

I want to ask at this point are “in hell” and “in torments” poetic equalities? In other words, are they the same thing? Here, I return to the fulcrum theory. Had the rich man’s angelic other been well off at one point? Did the actions of the rich man, on this plane, cause attrition on the other? Are the actions we take for granted in our lives the tools by which a great gulf is formed and made impassable? One thing stands out in this story: that is that the final state of both men is the opposite of their worldly state. Since we know that the crossbar on a scale can tilt in only two orientations, it becomes easy to trace a direct line from the corporeal state of the rich man to the spiritual state of the rich man.

Likewise, with Lazarus, there is a straight line from humility to glory. This parable suggests a spiritual hell rather than a physical hell. Our general concept of hell involves a physical body, with a soul in tow, tormented by flame. Indeed, the rich man’s lament is of flames - but, what if we have misunderstood; what if the ‘flame’ is the torment of separation? The rich man had strangled his angelic other, and so had nothing to carry into the spiritual realm but his corporeality, the structures, and foundations of which were all left on the previous plane. Is there an indication that corporeal man is, or at least should be, aware of the direct line touched upon in the last paragraph? I think so.

Read Luke 18:13, “And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast, saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.”