Divine Truth: Where Does It Lie?

Truth is an odd concept, pondered over by philosophers for millennia. Some consider truth to be a property of knowledge. Others suggest that truth isn’t “out there” for us to discover; instead, it’s created. Other camps still believe that truth isn’t really objective: it’s just a way of speaking. All of these schools of thought share a beginning with Socrates, though philosophy stretches further back than him.

However, when modified by “divine,” truth becomes an even more vexing concept, but it isn’t a concept without precedent. Still, isn’t truth self-evident? Aren’t these philosophers simply pontificating as most academics do? Well, yes and no.
We may intuitively know what is true, but it’s difficult to spell out our intuition. In spelling it out, however, we may realize our intuition isn’t correct.

In any case, let’s begin with the man who continues to prompt serious inquiries into the nature of truth: René Descartes.

Descartes, Doubts, and Demons.

René Descartes (pronounced day-cart) was a French philosopher and mathematician who was born near the end of the 16th century. He’s known by many as the father of modern philosophy due to his contributions to rationalism, knowledge, and, perhaps most importantly, truth. Before Descartes, philosophy was dominated by discussions of divinity, metaphysics, and more. Descartes redirected philosophy’s focus to the nature of truth and knowledge. In particular, Descartes asked “how are we sure that what we think or know is true?”

To understand what Descartes is saying, consider when you’re looking at a table with a green ball on top of it. If I asked you “what’s on the table?” you’d reply with “there’s a green ball on the table.” Now, consider what you’ve said. When you say “there’s a green ball on the table,” you seem to be saying that “it is true that there is a green ball on the table.” Descartes would ask “how do you know that it is true that there is a green ball on the table?”

Suppose you were hallucinating and seeing the green ball. Descartes’ point is that there’s no way you can know for certain that in fact there is a green ball on the table. He suggests that there is an evil demon or some malevolent metaphysical entity that attempts to deceive us into thinking this. His argument pivots on a distinction between the world as it is and the world as it is given to us by our senses.

However, Descartes recognizes that there are some things that we can’t doubt. The most popular of these putatively unassailable facts is captured by his renowned aphorism “Cogito, ergo sum,” or “I think, therefore I am.” What Descartes means to convey by this pithy observation is that while we can doubt our thoughts, we can’t doubt that we are having thoughts. To use the green-ball example, we can doubt whether there’s actually a green ball on the table. However, we can’t doubt that it looks like there’s a green ball on the table, regardless of whether we’re hallucinating or not.

Since Descartes is sure that, at the very least, he is thinking, he’s also sure that there is in fact a “he” that is thinking. Descartes then introduces the dictum that “something cannot come out of nothing.” As a result, Descartes concludes that if he exists, then there must be something else out of which he came. Descartes terms this something God. There is much more depth and nuance to Descartes’ argument, but knowing how he arrives at the existence of something beyond us is sufficient.

Extraterrestrials and False Channeling

Descartes seemed convinced that there is at least something out there that is greater than and, more importantly, connected to us. This leaves two questions: what is this being’s nature and how does it interact with us.

Descartes concluded that this being is the ultimate entity, as it would need power over all demons that attempt to deceive us. This entails that the being is most knowledgeable and good. Based on the being’s existence, Descartes further concluded that we can trust our experiences. So, we can at least say that this being is ultimately good and knowledgeable.

If you’re acquainted with the Creator and extraterrestrials, then you can see how Descartes’ argument suits our purpose. His argument was couched in the verbiage of his time. We can, in a sense, translate his argument for our purposes. In particular, replacing the word “God” with “Creator” and “evil demon” with “extraterrestrial.” The relationship between the two is now clearer.

The Creator’s existence guarantees that extraterrestrials cannot wholly deceive us. This doesn’t mean that extraterrestrials cannot, at least, partially deceive us. Consider the case of false channeling. A false channeler is one who is putatively channeling the Creator’s wisdom. In reality, however, this may just be Anunnaki psychics. In response, we should adopt Descartes’ philosophical attitude: that of doubt and questioning. The best way to distinguish between genuine and false wisdom is that false wisdom can’t withstand interrogation or a process of doubt. Eventually, it will crumble, and you’ll break free.

However, false wisdom is only one of the obstacles in the pursuit of divine truth. It’s important to note that, according to Descartes’ argument, the Creator has instilled the potential to connect with the divine realm. It’s up to us to actualize that potential, and that involves overcoming the hurdles set before us. One hurdle is that of false channeling. Another hurdle is your channeling education. This process needs to be slow, and it can also be painful. The process involves introspection and reflection on how you feel. Without reflection, or an advanced energy treatment, you’re vulnerable to the whims of the dark beings.

To begin your journey towards the divine truth, ask the Creator a question. Additionally, if you feel vulnerable to or overcome by dark forces, consult Karl Mollison for divine healing services to return to the correct path.