2nd LOO Question: Creation

[Quantum]

Like in the other thread, i think i said all that is necessary to be said. there is no need to go back and reiterate, because someone is, despite having asked before, asking the same questions again, and adding new flavors to them in the process. thank you for your participation.

Thank you for yours as well unity. You fail to recognize that the new flavors added are the new contradictions you offer. As I've stated before, I believe you add much to B4th, this for two primary reasons. One is your ability to stretch concepts in interesting ways. The second is that you offer even to the most casual reader of the LOO, only remotely familiar with the material, the opportunity to refamiliarize themselves more with it enough so as to challenge your sometimes blatant contradictions to it and what Ra has shared. This as interestingly offers the student the ability to stay sharp. Were one to count the number of contradictions you offer, suffice it to say that they would be many. The most recent below appears in your previous post above:

this, pretty much lays the blame on the archetypes employed by this logos, rather than 'inefficient use of catalyst' by 'lazy laggards'.

I am Ra. The latter is more nearly correct. In each beginning there is the beginning from infinite strength. Free will acts as a catalyst. Beings begin to form the universes. Consciousness then begins to have the potential to experience. The potentials of experience are created as a part of intelligent energy and are fixed before experience begins.

However, there is always, due to free will acting infinitely upon the creation, a great variation in initial responses to intelligent energy’s potential. Thus almost immediately the foundations of the, shall we call it, hierarchical nature of beings begins to manifest as some portions of consciousness or awareness learn through experience in a much more efficient manner.

Once again the Ra quote against your quote of "this, pretty much lays the blame on the archetypes employed by this logos, rather than 'inefficient use of catalyst' by 'lazy laggards'" lays blame, if there is blame to lay, on the ability, or lack thereof, wholly on the part of "some portions of consciousness" , rather than at the feet of the Logos.

I too find myself often questioning God, but I don't think I've ever presumed to judge IT, much less lay blame at IT's door step. You contradict Ra and blame the Logos in one fell swoop.

I state again, I mean no harm, nor mean any foul. It is offered as an invitation to look at the many times 'you' offer this as well.

~ Q ~