“THE ABSOLUTE WORLD vs. THE RELATIVE WORLD”

Of course there’s not really two different worlds, this is just two different ways of perceiving reality.

The relative world is the name we’ve given the universe as we perceive it from our egocentric point of view. Most of us haven’t completely outgrown the childish notion that, “I am the center of the universe.”

Ask yourself the following questions. Is it hot, or is it cold? Does it exist in the past or the future? Is it big or is it small? Is it significant or insignificant? These are all relative questions, that cannot be answered unless we first ask, relative to what?

And the answer is quite often, relative to me. We call things hot because they burn us, and we call things cold because they give us the chills, we say the past and the future are relative to now, which always just happens to be right here where we are in time. We call an elephant big and a mouse small because the elephant is bigger than we are, and a mouse is smaller than we are. The Sun is signifiant, even though it is over 93 million miles away, because we need it to survive, Pluto on the other hand is relatively insignificant, because we don’t think we need it. In the relative world, things are perceived egocentrically, as if we were the absolute observer.  We arbitrarily label and categorize each person place and thing, and then we usually stamp a monetary or moral value on it. The value is determined by various things like, supply and demand, practical usefulness, it’s glitter, how well it’s been advertised, and by the trends of popular opinion.

We use these categories and labels to save us the time and trouble it takes to get to know each person, place, or thing, personally and intimately.

We say, “Oh, I know him, he’s a Carpenter or he’s a Pastor, or that Baseball player,” or some less flattering label we stick on them.
On the other hand in the absolute world each and every thing is observed all by it self, as if it were the entire universe, and nothing else existed. This eliminates comparisons, competition, and judgment.  In the absolute world a person, place, or thing, cannot be judged as, large or small, good or bad, or hot or cold, – – – because it just is.

 

So when it comes to the relative world versus the absolute world, the answer is YES.

True reality is; reality as God created it, as he perceives it to be, and as it relates to him. In other words, the way God, the Absolute Himself, created it, and relates to it, is the way it is. Everything is relative, but only as it relates to the Absolute Himself.

Albert Einstein came up with the theory of relativity, and I’m not going to argue with his mathematics, but this much I do know, no matter how good your math is, if you leave one item off of your grocery list the total will be incorrect.
Albert said, “Everything is relative to the observer, and there is no absolute time.” I’m afraid Mister Einstein left God, The Absolute, off of his grocery list, and besides that I think God knows what time it is.
 Matthew 24:36, “But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no not the angels of heaven, but
my Father only.”
Now consider this; I believe God relates to each one of us absolutely, as if we were the only person in His universe, because God is Love, and that’s the most loving way for Him to relate.
Recall with me the touching scene in the movie Avatar, as the lovers draw close looking
deeply into one another’s eyes, and Neytiri says, “I see you, Jake Sooley.”
And he responds; “And I see YOU, Neytiri.”
When two people are in love,  they live in their own private bubble, and relate to
their loved one as the only one in the universe.
 Possiblly an even better example is the word ‘Grok.’

Grok is a word coined by Robert A. Heinlein for his 1961 science-fiction novel, “Stranger in a Strange Land, where it is defined as follows:

Grok means to understand so thoroughly that the observer becomes a part of the observed—to merge, blend, intermarry, lose identity in group experience. It means almost everything that we mean by religion, philosophy, and science—and it means as little to us (because of our Earthling assumptions) as color means to a blind man.

The Oxford English Dictionary defines to grok as “to understand intuitively or by empathy; to establish rapport with” and “to empathize or communicate sympathetically (with); also, to experience enjoyment”. I realize this can sound impractical in the 21st century, but we can begin by seeing each person as a unique child of God with unsurpassable worth,  and then remaining present, and giveing them our full attention, for the time we have to share.

 

Next; “CALVINISM vs. ARMINIANISM”

 e-mail,  vancecycles@yahoo.com
June 4, 2015

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *