Freedom is the will to be responsible to ourselves. - Nietzsche
Empowerment versus Natural Law
Some that are initially exposed to the concept of primal creative
it disdainfully as "magic" that negates "natural law". What is being
proposed here in terms of empowerment is not a wish to dispose of natural law, because
that CONVENTION serves as a great, stable foundation for the forms, structures and activities in the
physical universe. Natural law is wondrous in its design and scope of
possible developments, and many scientists are continually amazed and compelled to study aspects
of it for a lifetime. It should be noted that the physical realm was
designed by the creator to work by inviolate law. However, the spiritual
realm was NOT designed, but is an extension of the purpose, values and
character of God, and works by principles.
Why would the Creator create something restrictive,
larger than himself, and then surrender to its dominance?
However, many materialists inadvertently think that nothing can suspend or
override physical law, and this is essentially a materialistic philosophy. Yet, if this were true, then we–including the very
creator of natural law–must surrender to it and must live throughout eternity under it,
live at the effect of it. Why, we may ask, would the creator agency ever do such a
thing as create a system that could control or oppress even itself?
It is a fallacy that "natural law" is ordinate or supreme because
intelligence and will ARE ordinate, and the way the universe works is
SUBORDINATE to this intelligence and will. Is not our concept of natural law
based on our current experience of it? Is not our experience and concept of
it limited or incomplete? Is not our concept of it ONLY an extraction based
on this current experience? We cannot arbitrarily override it; no one
can, but the agency that holds the power is not totally subject to its
dominion. This is easy to see if the material universe is a projection from
the collective mind. That mind in unison would be able to override it and even change it if that is so desired.
Another way to think about it is this: The software engineers may develop
a computer system that is impervious to change or interference by outsiders,
but may build a backdoor into it to change things if they so desire. And,
they can always override or replace it the same way that they installed it. We have no
business thinking that the creator of the universe is stupid, less capable
or has less foresight than we do! There is no larger-than-God
law, natural or otherwise, and thinking so is just a version of sin.
This elevation of natural law to being absolute or supreme also makes technology
and technological development–the incremental solving of problems to improve
life within natural law through techniques or technical machines and tools–the
answer to every material challenge, and thus also our ultimate process for progress,
ergo our salvation. Not a nice thought!
The author's vision put forth is that in a healed reality where we have
primal creative empowerment, we will rely upon and use natural law unless it is too
limiting and we are motivated to override it. Remember that for anything significant it will take the
agreement and probably the involvement of all the other human family members
affected. Constrained by common sense, we
will in freedom have great latitude to conform to OR override natural law.
It would seem that the overriding of natural law should never be capricious.
Every human being has a natural and legitimate desire for
empowerment, not being TOTALLY subject to nor the victim of natural law. It is the
thinking of this site that natural law is
not absolute, and it can even be changed if someone comes up with desirable
improvements and the empowered citizens of the universe agree to it.