Space: The Final Frontier

The concept presented in our last installment, five “intervals” needed to completely secure or “house” one of them, and three “intervals” moving against two “intervals” as two “intervals” react against three “intervals” to accomplish this, is presented in Jesus’ equation of One. He says:

…five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three.

Preston Harold says:

To insure that these words be recognized as a mathematical formula, Jesus gives an explicit division of the household. He states it as: father against son, mother versus daughter, mother-in-law versus daughter-in-law. Only if the mother plays a dual role—that is, mother is also mother-in-law – can these six “factors” be reduced to five forces, the number of forces “at issue” in one’s household as given in the equation. And only if every family were four in number with one son married, and one daughter unmarried, could the words apply to life. Jesus spoke symbolically or poetically, but He spoke as a mathematician…


Jesus states the field formula so explicitly that His words bespeak a still “finer division” underlying the matrix. That is, he describes the forces at issue as: father versus son, and son versus father; mother versus daughter, and daughter versus mother; mother-in-law versus daughter-in-law, and daughter-in-law versus mother-in-law. His words give rise to twelve signs, eight negative, four positive, thereby “elaborating” the ratio of negative to positive force, presenting the concept that a still finer division of forces underlies the “field” – a force that involves “doubly stated double negatives” giving rise to a negative effect which is of positive value in life, an effect that sustains the division of the manifestly positive factors and/or measurable dimensions of one thing.

Harold goes on to explain how both negative and positive polarities are necessary for the manifestation of life:

This negative effect that is of value in life, but can be expressed by “nothing positive,” may be described only as Lao-tzu describes Tao:

We put thirty spokes together and call it a wheel;

But it is on the space where there is nothing that the utility of the wheel depends…

Therefore just as we take advantage of what is, we should recognize the utility of what is not.


This, Tao—Holy Ghost, zero, nothing explicable—has endless descriptions which yet cannot describe the nature of it:

There is something formless yet complete

That existed before heaven and earth.

How still! How empty!

Dependent on nothing, unchanging,

All pervading, unfailing.


Is it not space? Only by paradoxical exclamation points can the fullness of it in the universe be implied, so that “Tao never does; Yet through it all things are done.” Space may be seen as pre-existent unity and multiplicity at once, as continuous creation of positive value by means of the eternal presence of “nothing manifest” in which one and all have their being.

Until next time, peace.

The Resurrection of Damnation

When one hears and thinks of the word “resurrection,” one’s mind tends to immediately think of other concepts that surround and reinforce it; eternal life, God’s victory over death, glory, celebration. All of these thoughts usually congeal around a positive attitude. But what happens if we actually view the concept resurrection not just through Easter, but through the eyes, mind, and teaching of Jesus?

Marvel not at this: for the hour is coming in which all that are in the graves shall hear His voice and shall come forth; they that have done good unto the resurrection of life; and they that have done evil unto the resurrection of damnation. –John 5:28-29


From this statement of Jesus we can surmise that for some or many, resurrection may not be all it’s cut out to be. But who among us really believes that they will be part of the resurrection of “damnation?” We automatically assume that we are part of the “life” camp. Preston Harold may give us pause to question our certainties on this issue. He begins by giving us an excellent theology of inevitable sins within the context of life:

There is that in every person’s life that he knows to be damnable, knows to be corrupting… But all his sinning is not so easily bedamned, so wantonly forgot – nor can it be ceased, for there is not the will in him to have done with it at the time; even when what might be called “an episode of sin” is over, he cannot truly regret it – the experience has raised the level of his understanding and he would not possess less.  He can say of such sin only this: “I did it knowing it was wrong, but I cannot regret that I did it; I know now, however, that I could not bring myself to do this again because I know its cost to me and to others.” Such experience represents, in truth, a lesson learned.

But here is where the rubber hits the road. Harold goes deep:

But there are other deeds that even though they have brought new understanding, one must regret to the end of his life and in the very-depths of his being, saying of them, “god be merciful to me, a sinner,” as though to pray, “forgive me this terrible toll of life I have taken, toll of my own life and of another’s, for which I shall be bitterly sorry in every breath I draw now and forever.” Or he quickly represses and forgets the sin he cannot forgive himself – the sin that must await the resurrection of damnation.

…there are sins that blaspheme the preciousness of life itself – these are unforgivable because a man cannot bring himself to forgive himself: they sever his connection with his own Authority-Ego and still the voice of the ego-member in the world of selves, as Judas’ voice was stilled.


Jesus says…in part of a statement in itself contradictory: “I tell you, therefore, men will be forgiven any sin and blasphemy, but they will not be forgiven for blaspheming the Spirit. Whoever says a word against the Son of man will be forgiven, but whoever speaks against the holy Spirit will never be forgiven, neither in this world or the world to come.”

First, Jesus says man will be forgiven any sin and blasphemy. Then, any is contradicted – man is not forgiven for blaspheming the holy Spirit. Is the holy Spirit not life itself? Who can live without in some way at some time cursing or reviling life? Is true repentance of no account? What, exactly is the mortal sin?

It is this question we explore in the next installment. Until then, peace.

The Resonance of Life


To begin our next post, we must follow Preston Harold as he takes us through the different definitions of resonance:

To the physicist, resonance means the phenomenon shown by a vibrating system which responds with maximum amplitude under the action of a harmonic force; this occurs when the frequency of the applied force is the same as a natural frequency of the vibrating body.

To the electric engineer, resonance means the state of adjustment of a circuit permitting a maximum flow of current when an electromotive force of a particular frequency is impressed.

To the chemist, resonance means the phenomenon shown by a molecule to which two or more structures, differing only in the disposition of electrons, can be assigned. Its effect is to increase stability.

To the musician, resonance means the intensification and enriching of tone by supplementary vibrations.

How does resonance work within the human being? Harold continues…

Thus, in psychic parallel each man’s existence is an only-discrete state, a particular adjustment he is making wherein he is coming to be resonant with life – as the word applies to manifesting the maximum amplitude possible to his natural frequency which, like one’s frequencies, permits two or more structures of consciousness in order to effect increased stability and allow a maximum flow of life’s current to pass through, thus intensifying and enriching his sense of being until he can make of his life a satisfaction in being sufficient to keep it in consciousness everlastingly.


But how long does it take for us to “make our lives satisfactory enough to want to keep them in consciousness everlastingly,” i.e. to overcome death?

To show the reason for man’s successes and failures in his attempts to make himself resonant, an image may be fashioned of Mach’s view, which fascinated Einstein: “what inertial resistance counteracts is not acceleration as such but acceleration with respect to the masses of other bodies existing in the world.” Poetically translated into psychic parallel, one might say that ALL, the Holy Ghost, restricts evolution’s pace, as well as the individual’s pace, to the progress made by the least one in his experiencing of solitariness as he “adjusts his circuit” to permit a maximum flow of truth through his being – so that first, last, poised, or rushing, none shall be first, last, or lost in space, but each shall become as One, the resonator operative throughout life that conscience merely introduces.

So we are all in this together, all the way down to “the least of these.” We will only rise as high as our humility will allow us. “If you wanna kiss the sky better learn how to kneel.” Thanks, Bono. Until next time, peace.

The Holy Spirit and “Space”


To continue our discussion of the parallels between “space” and the Holy Ghost, Preston Harold invokes Einstein, Sufism, and Jesus.

Einstein proposed that each three-dimensional portion of space “always contains a total electrical charge whose size is represented by a whole number,” despite the fact that its electrical density disappears everywhere. Thus, one might say that space “holds” the charge, but is not itself that which it holds.

All of creation is the “charge” which space holds. We all exist within space’s “confines.” Theologically we may say along with the Apostle Paul, as he quoted Epimenides at the Areopagus, “For in him we live and move and have our being.” Another viewpoint would be Paul Tillich’s concept of God as “the ground of our being.” Space certainly is the “ground” of our being. How about these words from St. Patrick’s breastplate:



…Christ within me, Christ behind me, Christ before me, Christ beside me, Christ beneath me, Christ above me.

Sounds like a perfect description of space, doesn’t it? Preston Harold continues:

Each person involves and is held in being by space. If there is a “divine Absolute,” space is the only “manifestation” of it that man knows. Sufism teaches that: “Each human soul is a particle of the diving Absolute, and the mystic aims at a complete union with the Divine. This union is attained in the knowledge that he himself is the ultimate Reality which he seeks. But the individual self is completely annihilated in this higher Self…” The difference between Jesus’ teaching and Sufism is that Jesus saw that creation, space, Holy Ghost of God, is that ultimate reality which cannot be undone, so that He insists upon the “study of and,” of the organization and arrangement of energy within it. He saw that God as Father lives in a centering of power in one’s, and in the transferring of the power inherent in “ultimate Reality” to consciousness of God in one’s being: i.e., Christ-consciousness. “I” am conscious of God as the set of the power in “my” being, and as the rest possible to life. This borders on Sufism:

I stood on the edge of things, as on a circle inscribed

But time’s revolutions have borne me into the still centre.


But Jesus saw that the individual self is not annihilated as time bears one to union with the center and seat of his being, that is, to rest or death. One’s life is harvested, his soul and “charge” renewed, and time’s revolutions bear him again to “the edge of things.” But to what end? Can one find a clue in the realm of physics?

Knowing Harold, I’ll bet we can! We’ll continue in our next post exploring more of what Einstein has to say on the matter. Until then, peace.


The Holy Spirit


In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth.  The earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters. –Genesis 1:1-2

We firmly believe and simply confess that there is only one true God … the Creator of all things visible and invisible, spiritual and corporeal; who from the very beginning of time by His omnipotent power created out of nothing [de nihilo condidit] both the spiritual beings and the corporeal. –Fourth Lateran Council of 1215

Rudolf Steiner, speaking of ethereal or ‘negative’ spaces in regard to the understanding of the laws of living processes, uses the idea of “nothingness” – ein Nichts – and he brings together with this concept the word chaos…[Chaos] used in it’s ancient sense – the Greek word Xaos…describes a region empty of formed matter, but ready to receive new, living growth or development, such as is to be found in a seed or any other germinating process….An embryo is actually such a receptive, ethereal space – a realm of empty nothingness into which new formative process can work… -Olive Whicher, “The Heart of the Matter”

To attempt to explain the Holy Ghost is to attempt image building of something altogether different from any manifestation. To try to say what “it” is not, is to say that the “Holy Ghost” is not the precise opposite of everything in manifestation, but is different from and equal to it because “it” empowers, contains, and is the all-pervading medium. The only “thing” one can liken to “it” is space – that of space which is not its fields, is not energy, but is the “manifestation of nothing,” paradoxical as this statement is, that allows energy’s manifestations to operate within it and matter to exist in it in discrete state. It both encompasses and involves energy’s dual nature that gives rise to the trinity in being: negative, positive, neutral. -Preston Harold, “The Shining Stranger”


Hopefully one can see the parallels contained within these four citations. The concept of the Holy Spirit seems to leave many of us bereft of a hard and fast definition. How does one hold onto “spirit?” Once you try and grasp it, it slips right through your fingers. Preston Harold concurs:

A scientist would be as hard put to explain what space itself is as a theologian is to explain what the Holy Ghost is – both can only discuss what takes place through it….The all-pervading space that contains Einstein’s motionless ether may be likened to the Holy Ghost of God, a priori, that which cannot itself be examined because the ether, motionless, stands between it and all manifestation within it. The ether alone as the seat of the electromagnetic fields may be likened to the being of God, the Father, one’s refuge, that allows him to “Be still and know…” The Son may be likened to the elementary particle, endowed with the “electric charge”: I will be. Jesus speaks of the Son ‘sitting on the right hand of the power,” and His teaching points to the Father as the seat of the power that is being given over to the Son.

We will continue discussing the relationship between the Holy Spirit and space in our next installment. Until then, peace.

Thicker Than Water


“Blood is a very special juice.” – Goethe

“The life of the body is in it’s blood.” – Leviticus 17:11

Blood. Doc Martin vomits at the sight of it. People swear oaths by it. What is it that is so powerful about this fluid? I remember the first time I ever bled. I must have been about 3 years old. There was an exacto knife on a shelf of our basement. Curiosity got the best of me, wondering what this shiny point was at one end of this stick-like thing. I put my thumb on it to get a sense of it. There was a strange pain. Looking at my thumb, a deep red fluid started pouring out from it. It was terrifying! Something told me that this was my very life escaping my body. I screamed at the top of my lungs while my mother came rushing down the stairs to see what was the matter. After a trip to the hospital to get stitched up I slowly realized everything was going to be o.k. I was going to live. Whew! I still bear the scar from this incident on my right thumb to this day. Talk about a learning experience!

In his “What is Life?,” Erwin Schrodinger says that living organisms feed upon negative entropy to compensate the entropy increase they produce by living, and that while living matter doesn’t elude the laws of physics, it is very likely to involve other laws of physics not yet known. But once these laws have been revealed they will form just as integral a part of this science as the former.


Preston Harold says

In blood, the organic and inorganic realms are yoked. Hemoglobin, the blood protein, “can be split into two substances, heme and globin. While the latter is a simple protein, the former is not protein at all, but an iron-containing substance, with none of the properties ordinarily associated with protein. In hemoglobin, this nonprotein portion is tightly joined to the protein. Hemoglobin is, therefore, a conjugated protein…” (Asimov, “The Genetic Code”) Poetically speaking, at some point in creation, prime “stuff” that was iron-substance must command prime “stuff” that was simple protein to “partake of my substance” (or vice versa) in order to have life, in order for hemoglobin to be.

The word protein means: of first importance. Jesus’ teaching points to man’s psychic makeup that parallels the makeup of blood. This is to say, God is no longer a “simple protein,” God is now a “conjugated protein” in the enjoinment of Father and Son, the Holy Spirit the matrix in which they have their being. Jesus’ blood is shed, is given, that a new testament, a new statement, of this truth may come into being: God as The Absolute is no more, Father and Son are as a one-to-one correspondence.

Jesus likens the relationship of the makeup of our blood to the makeup of the very being of God. So in giving us His blood, He gives us “very God of very God.” What more “Biotheology” does Jesus have to reveal to us? We will continue to probe this thread in our next installment. Until then, peace.