The Father of Lies
John 8:44
"You belong to your father, the devil, and you want to carry out your father’s desires. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."
I'm now realizing that comprehending this would likely "summon" this entity in your thoughts, by coalescing a signal that recognizes the environment as fluid. This instinct would also manifest in the form of challenging entities emerging from the woodwork in your waking realm, such as AI, or possibly visible in the actions of animals in the realm, as this signal strengthens into an external will that is perfectly possible, but where the pathway and result are entirely unfamiliar (such as all animals turning on humans at dawn). This signal reveals doubt and weakness, but does not create either.
It makes sense why Satan does very little in The Bible, and his actions are more mysterious than directly wicked, as Satan is more commonly depicted today. For example:
1 Chronicles 21:1
Satan rose up against Israel and incited David to take a census of Israel.
What if the ultimate power is passing this role of Adversary off? Like a game of hot potato, the position of God's Adversary changes from individual to individual, when the Adversary's adversary crosses a line? It would make sense that this title and position would now be seen as the depths of wickedness, having grown from the words on the page, because, in this scenario, it is mankind's wickedness revealed, from a position of absolute power expressed. This would become a record, a memory, of all that might have been, seen from each side of the wall.
I see these realities as still present, with Rubik's Cube colors swapped out on a digital code level, to make the Cube appear complete. I imagine that God's actual adversary would be able to *SNAP* and reset the color scheme, having zero local effect, but revealing immediately to all others, in all other iterations of reality, what change was made and which false adversary changed it, perhaps even why. Perhaps this is a way to prove and experience the definition of trust, while still in an environment where any possible move can be made, unilaterally, by more than one entity.
Matthew 5:43-45
"You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous."
1 Corinthians 13:13
And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love.
What if a primary function of this timeframe is to establish definitions, such that when one says "trust" or "love" it is certain on both sides what is meant, and what is not meant? With imperfect translation, the system does not run; imagine being so haphazard with your zeroes and ones when encoding a machine as we are with words. With perfect translation, there is a chance. If The Father of Lies can *SNAP* a finger and change your coding for how you have defined love, then it is not love. This process seems like it would continue until a snap of the fingers does nothing- locally or remotely- because love is immutable and perfectly defined.
Comments
Post a Comment