A random concurrence of coincidences…

10:15 PM, Wednesday February 9th: someone interviewed on the tele during a talk show makes reference to the 2012 US elections and other tidbits.

While he, as standard practice, does not look directly at the camera during the entire interview, at one fleeting instance however, right after he utters the phrase “…divine providence…” he does look at the camera dead on. I find it odd.

10:17: I retire to read a couple chapters from Neale Walsch’s 2nd volume of the trilogy Conversations with God, in which he records his dialogue with God and shares it with us.

I pick up reading where God talks about Time, and tells Neale that our notion of a linear and horizontal time is flawed. That time is only in the present or pre-sent, all wrapped in one vertical axis. All instances can be experienced in this moment. Past and future are illusions.

11:11: I feel that I’ve read enough, look at my iPhone and notice that it’s 11:11. I close the book.

11:13: I walk into the tele parlor and catch the rerun of the earlier interview with the same guest speaker right as he says “…divine providence…” and looks fleetingly at the camera. Hmm, rather interesting to say the least.

11:14: I change the channel and land on the Science Channel. A documentary filmmaker is tracking the source of the GPS system and ends up in Colorado in a maximum security Air Force base where the entire GPS satellite constellation is controlled.

The captain on duty providing the tour states that while the constellation is healthy and robust, there are periodic corrections they have to routinely perform to account for difference in time speed between here on Earth and 12,000 miles out in space where the satellites hover.

This is highly significant as it serves as proof that our perception of time as a linear continuum is evidently indeed flawed, somewhat substantiating Einstein’s glimpses into divinity, um relativity?

With our discovery of quantum physics, the path of spiritual and scientific perceptions have converged, opening a more aware and elevated state of being where we are affirmed in a co-creative asynchronous simultaneouum.  Where we are our own guardian angels, reflecting divine providence in our own divinity.

The more we explore, the clearer the face of God do we see in our own reflections…  The warmth and grace and embracing love of the multiverse shelters us if only our eyes were open to see…

God Bless
-IAT

Bob jabs at Sarah while Barry incurs whiplash form his teleprompters…

Meanwhile we, the overtaxed serfs, skate on a bed of thin ice with a demon’s hive beneath our feet!

Of puppet masters and puppets and captive audiences hark and heed anew,

And taste the bittersweet blood dew, to let fortune reveal thy fate’s sinew… adieu!

politics and tweeter and war and architecture and mass media and pop-culture and life and a whole lot of swirling mush of mess, and you get a cloud to decipher string theory and walk through walls, oh my…

.

.

The world has grown old

And tired, and soon will fold.

.

Where once stood men who were bold

Now whisper catacombs filled with corpses and mold.

.

We used to be warm with dreams of fires where stories were told

But now shiver in ashes and gray skies and nothing but cold.

.

To what daemon have we our precious souls so carelessly sold

When once we were heroes made so valiantly of gold?

.

Yet, how tender as all the school kids across town cheered, behold!

When the snow monster over our jeweled city rolled.

.

-IAT

Okay okay, so okay…  I mean how dense!

How does one penetrate an obtuse obstinate and oblivious “obo” with a fresh breath of the obvious if she is so obnoxiously obfuscated in her observations…  Ewwww!

Susan Jacoby obviates transcendence with her immanent profundity and expertise and wisdom.  She writes:

“Atheists deny the possibility of “transcendent” experience. They can’t see beyond the material world. This stereotype is partially true, but it all depends on what you mean by transcendent. If the concept is understood, as it is by many religious believers, as an experience that goes beyond and defies the usual limits of nature [Whoa!! "USUAL" limits of nature?!!!  Um, where do you get off on that bit of garnish?  Won't you please define each of those pretty little words you just used, I'd like to know... -IAT] –including time, space, and the flesh-and-blood essence of human beings, then atheists do not accept the transcendent. But if the word is understood as something that pushes us beyond our everyday experience–that enables us to scale previously unknown heights of love, creativity, or wonder at what other members of our species have created, how could any man or woman of reason deny the possibility? We simply believe that such experience lie within, not outside of, nature.”  Etc…