Book of 2 Corinthians
Lorin Friesen, February 2019
This essay will examine 2 Corinthians from a cognitive perspective. As usual, we will be treating the biblical text book as a single, connected sequence and not as a collection of isolated verses. When one takes such an integrated approach, then one finds the same general prophetic sequence that appears to be present in the other New Testament books that have been analyzed in previous essays, which makes it possible to state with greater confidence that this is a valid prophetic sequence. (Note from 2022: I have put together a tentative prophetic timeline that lines up 2 Corinthians with other New Testament books.)
This does not mean that 2 Corinthians is only a book about prophecy that has no applicability to current society. That is because God seems to be guiding society through a process of cognitive development. Thus, each step in the prophetic sequence can also be viewed as a universal principle of cognition that applies at all times. This is an important concept that needs to be restated. I suggest that prophecy should not be viewed as a mysterious God stepping in in some incomprehensible manner to intervene in human society. Instead, prophecy should be interpreted as God guiding human society to apply rational cognitive principles in order to reach mental, spiritual, and societal wholeness.
2 Corinthians has a much more personal focus than the book of Revelation. Revelation describes God’s plan of history from a global perspective, looking at general events of history. 2 Corinthians, in contrast, focuses upon Paul the apostle taking the personal steps that are required to lay the foundation for the general events being described in Revelation. These two perspectives are related but not identical. On the one hand, Paul is an individual, and the path of an individual is quite different than the path of society. But on the other hand, Paul is an apostle, and an apostle follows a personal path that leads to a breakthrough in God’s relationship with humanity. Saying this more generally, God usually works in prophecy by leading some individual or small group through a breakthrough and then extending this breakthrough to the rest of society. Historically speaking, Paul the apostle came up with the breakthrough of theology which made it possible to extend God’s relationship with the Jews to the Gentile nations.
Thus, 2 Corinthians can be interpreted historically as Paul describing his struggle in spreading the gospel to the Gentiles. But it can also be interpreted prophetically as the struggle involved in translating the absolute truth of the Christian message into universal principles that apply to everyone.
This transition can be seen in the biblical text itself. As usual, I will be quoting from the NASB because I have found that this translation is usually closest to the original Greek. However, we will be finding numerous times that the NASB slightly mistranslates the Greek text in order to fit the current Christian mindset of absolute truth. We will also consistently find that the Greek text makes more sense when interpreted symbolically, cognitively, and prophetically than it does when viewed from the typical historical perspective.
For instance, chapters 8-9 are usually interpreted as a detailed description of one church giving money to another. But if one looks at the Greek text, one discovers a number of details that do not quite make sense if Paul is only talking about giving money. Paul himself was probably talking primarily about giving money. But it appears that the divine author behind Paul motivated him to describe this financial process in a manner that fits a deeper cognitive and prophetic process. This consistent, underlying cognitive and prophetic structure of the biblical text provides strong evidence that the Bible was ultimately written by a divine author who is guiding the course of history and who created people in his image.
This essay has a total length of about 340 pages. Therefore, it has been split up into two parts. The first part looks at chapters 1-6, while the second part examines chapters 7-13. This is also a natural division because the flavor of the second half of 2 Corinthians is more personal than the first half.
Table of Contents
Acts 18 Corinth and Partial Rebirth
1:1-3 Introduction
Picture The Big Picture
1:4-7 Tribulation
1:8-11 Despair in Asia
1:12-14 Boasting
1:15-16 Stretching Forward from ‘Asia’
1:17-24 Yes and No
2:1-4 Choosing Positive Motivation
2:5-1 Morality under Teacher Order
2:12-13 Preparing for a New Society
2:14 Theoretical Return of Jesus
2:15-16 Repelled by the Light
2:17 Misusing Spiritual Technology
3:1 A New Form of Academia?
3:2 Extending Spiritual Technology
3:3 Spiritual Science
3:4-5 A Society of Spiritual Technology
3:6 A New Covenant
3:7 Glory and Absolute Truth
3:8-12 Glory and the Spirit
3:13-17 Lifting the Veil
3:18 Spiritual R&D
Beast A Cognitive Reason for a Kingdom of the Beast
4:1-2 Spiritual Growth versus Spiritual Corruption
4:3-4 Covering the Good News
4:5-6 Responding to Suppression
4:7 Physical Vulnerability
4:8-9 Responding to the Backlash
4:10-11 Extending to the Physical Body
4:12-13 The Dilemma of the Legislator
4:14-15 The Beast is Defeated
4:16-18 Spiritual Growth in Mortal Bodies
5:1 Empowering Mortal Bodies
5:2-4 Testing New Bodies
5:5 A New Kind of Teacher Generality
5:6-9 A New Culture based upon New Bodies
5:10 Future Judgment
5:11-13 A New Kind of Conscience
5:14-15 A New Kind of Abstract Technical Thought
5:16-17 A Cosmic Watershed
5:18 A New Reconciliation
5:19-20 Ambassadors of Christ
5:21 Atonement
6:1-3 A Short Opportunity for Grace
6:4-5 A Process of Testing
6:6 Reconstruction
6:7 Starting a New Society
6:8-10 A Sequence of Contrasts
Bowls Seven Bowls of Wrath
6:11-13 Opening Up Emotionally
6:14-15 Coming Out from the World
6:16-18 A New Intimate Relationship between God and Humanity
Prophecy Prophecy Summary
Methodology
This essay will analyze the biblical book of 2 Corinthians using the same methodology that has been used to examine several other books of the New Testament. This method of biblical exegesis is similar to the methodology that has been used to analyze a number of other books and systems of thought, both religious and secular. The methodology is as follows:
1) Look at the meanings of the original words from the Greek text. The Bible was initially written in koine Greek and has been translated into other languages such as English. As usual, we will be referring to the biblical meanings that are provided by www.biblehub.com. This website currently comes up at the top of the list if one googles ‘2 Corinthians interlinear’.
2) Interpret the text from a cognitive perspective. The mind will always interpret information in the light of some paradigm. I have found that the Bible makes sense if it is interpreted from the viewpoint of ‘being transformed by the renewing of the mind’ (Romans 12:2). Biblical scholars often quote this verse when talking about the Bible but then apply it in a hand-waving manner. In contrast, we will be looking at the biblical text in a detailed manner using the theory of mental symmetry, a cognitive model that began as a list of seven ‘spiritual gifts’ mentioned in the passage that follows Romans 12:2.
3) View the entire book as a single extended sequence. Biblical scholars emphasize the need for examining verses within the context. This goes further by treating an entire book as a single extended sequence of steps. Putting this together with the previous point, the book of 2 Corinthians will be viewed as a description of a process of programming the mind, and thus programming society, which is composed of many interacting minds.
4) Include the meanings of all the names that are mentioned and interpret any of the physical objects as symbols using cognitively natural symbolism. For instance, the name Paul means ‘little’. This can be interpreted symbolically as an attitude of humility and service. This can also be seen personally in the life of Paul, who consistently chose to serve others in a humble manner rather than arrogantly demand personal reward. This illustrates a related point, which is that any symbolic interpretation should not contradict the surface meaning of the text but rather expand upon it.
A cognitively natural symbol is one that resonates with the structure of the mind. For instance, Mercy thought acquires experiences of pain and pleasure from the physical world and Perceiver thought organizes Mercy experiences into solid categories. Thus, a stone or rock is a cognitively natural symbol of Perceiver thought, because it is composed of physical matter that has been organized into a solid object. One can see this in the name Peter, which means rock, and the Biblical description of Peter is consistent with the behavior of a Perceiver person. Again one sees an intertwining of the literal and symbolic interpretations.
Meeting these four requirements is not trivial. Approximately 40% of the New Testament has been analyzed using this methodology (as of early 2019) and the essays have been posted to the mental symmetry website. Thus, it is now possible to state with some confidence that this is a valid methodology, and we will see in this essay that the same kind of analysis can be used with the book of 2 Corinthians.
I am not suggesting that it is wrong to interpret the Bible from a cultural perspective, in which one attempts to view the text through the eyes of someone living 2000 years ago in the Greco-Roman civilization. It is important to comprehend the culture of that time, in order to understand how biblical passages should be applied in a cross-cultural matter. However, the danger of such an approach is that it can explain the text away: ‘That applies to them and no longer applies to us.’ In contrast, I have found that a cognitive approach naturally extracts general principles from the text which can be applied to all cultures and all times.
As usual, all of the biblical quotations will be from the NASB, but we will also be looking extensively at the original Greek and I will be pointing out where the NASB is inconsistent with the original text. I have suggested that the mind always interprets information in the light of some paradigm. It became clear when going through 2 Corinthians that the translators of the NASB are also viewing the biblical text through the light of a paradigm, and that their paradigm is causing them to slightly mistranslate the original Greek. Testing a paradigm is difficult because one will always be examining some paradigm in the light of some other paradigm. However, I suggest that it is possible to evaluate paradigms on the basis of extent and clarity. In brief, how much can a paradigm explain and how clear is the explanation. A paradigm that views religious doctrine as distinct from secular thought has only limited explaining power. And a paradigm that causes a person to mistranslate the original text lacks clarity.
When the NASB adds words of explanation to the original Greek, it usually places these words in italics. I will indicate this by placing these words in [square brackets]. In addition, the NASB often adds footnotes to indicate a literal meaning. I will always be using these literal translations rather than the normal text.
This essay will be quoting extensively from the Greek definitions given on biblehub.com. I will do this by placing a hyperlink to the definition of the Greek word on the English word or phrase that the NASB uses to translate this Greek word. This will then be followed by a quote from the definition in single quotes. In order to avoid excessive punctuation, I will not be adding quotes to the hyperlinks, because a hyperlink already underlines the text. I will use double quotes whenever quoting directly from the NASB or from some other source.
For instance, the word translated affliction in 1:4 does not mean suffering but rather is ‘used of a narrow place that hems someone in, especially internal pressure that causes someone to feel confined’. The hyperlink on ‘affliction’ links to the definition of the Greek word ‘thlipsis’ which is translated as ‘affliction’ in the NASB. Notice how in this case the English translation is actually a slight mistranslation, because affliction gives the idea of suffering personal hardship, while being hemmed in may be uncomfortable but it does not necessarily mean that one is suffering pain or being persecuted. However, the English word ‘affliction’ is more consistent with an attitude of religious self-denial.
Corinth and Partial Rebirth (Acts 18)
We will begin by looking further at the word Corinth. Corinth means ‘which is satisfied; ornament; beauty’. The city of Corinth was infamous for its sensuous luxury: “Its wealth was so celebrated as to be proverbial; so were the vice and profligacy of its inhabitants.”
Christendom has struggled over the centuries with the juxtaposition portrayed by Paul living and preaching in Corinth. (Acts 18:11 says that Paul lived and preached in Corinth for a year and a half.) This juxtaposition is between the source of absolute truth and the results of absolute truth. Absolute truth describes a mindset which believes that facts are true because they are written in important books. For instance, ‘It must be true because it is written in the Bible, and the Bible is the word of God’. Or, ‘It must be true because Stephen Hawking wrote that it is true, and Hawking was a famous physicist’. (One can make a distinction between absolute truth and authority. Both regard people as the source of truth. However, authority gains its truth directly from the words of some living person, while with absolute truth the words of are recorded in some manner and this permanent record becomes regarded as the source of truth.) The problem arises when accurate general principles are taught as absolute truth, because people will do the right things for inadequate reasons. If such a situation continues, then this will eventually result in the kind of society portrayed by the city of Corinth, in which peripheral wealth is juxtaposed with subjective amorality.
Looking at this in more detail, on the one hand, the mind will only continue to believe absolute truth if the source of this truth is regarded as far more important in Mercy thought than personal identity. This means that fundamentalist belief in a holy book will naturally be accompanied by an attitude of personal self-denial. Going further, even if one analyzes a holy book by using rational thought to construct Teacher theories and these theories turn into TMNs, the book is still ultimately being regarded as holy because Mercy thought views the author of this book as a very important person. Saying this more specifically, peripheral TMNs may form as a result of studying the book, but the book will still be backed up by core MMNs of emotional status.
If the Teacher theories that one develops from studying a holy book actually describe ‘how things work’, then following these Teacher theories will lead to personal success, and a focus upon Teacher thought will naturally cause this success to be expressed in ways that bring pleasure to Teacher thought, which include luxury and beauty. Thus, Christendom will naturally find itself teaching the word of God while living in Corinth. This contradiction can be seen in the medieval Christian monks who lived personal lives of poverty within monasteries and church that were filled with beauty and wealth. It can also be seen in the culture of the United States, which juxtaposes the self-denial of fundamentalist Christian belief with the excessive prosperity of the modern consumer society.
The Christian who believes in absolute truth will condemn the secular world for its amoral pursuit of wealth, not realizing that people can only apply scriptural principles in real life by rebelling from an attitude of religious self-denial. And when secular individuals try to use rational thought to understand the moral principles that they are applying, religious believers will regard this as an attack upon absolute truth and respond by condemning secular thought. Going the other way, the secular world will condemn Christian believers in absolute truth for their blind faith, not realizing that the very content being taught as absolute truth laid the foundation for secular prosperity. And when religious believers try to impose moral standards upon secular society, this will be viewed as an attack upon secular freedom, when in fact it is actually an attempt to restore the foundations that make secular freedom and prosperity possible.
Acts 18:9-11 makes it clear that living and preaching in Corinth is actually consistent with the will of God: “And the Lord said to Paul in the night by a vision, ‘Do not be afraid any longer, but go on speaking and do not be silent; for I am with you, and no man will attack you in order to harm you, for I have many people in this city.’ And he settled there a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them.”
However, preaching and living in Corinth does not mean entering into the sensual excesses of Corinth. This is illustrated by the behavior of Paul in Corinth. Acts 18:2 says that Paul lived with a Jewish couple, implying that he remained within a religious culture. Verse 3 adds that Paul and Aquila carried out the trade of tent-making. Working at a trade means performing useful work rather than being caught up in luxury, while a tent is a temporary dwelling place, as opposed to a luxurious villa or townhouse. And verse 4 says that Paul “was reasoning in the synagogue every Sabbath and trying to persuade Jews and Greeks.” Thus, even though Paul lived in Corinth, he was guided by understanding rather than sensuality, and he did not regard the sensuality of Corinth as his permanent home, but rather worked in an occupation that treated personal wealth as temporary.
This same juxtaposition can be seen in the cliques that emerged in the Corinthian church, described in 1 Corinthians 3. Verse 4 describes one group in the church saying, ‘I am of Paul’ and another group saying, ‘I am of Apollos’. The name Apollos means ‘of Apollo’, and Apollo was the Greek God of truth and prophecy, healing, the sun and light, and music. Looking at this symbolically, one group is identifying with the humility of Paul, while the other group is focusing upon the magnificence, beauty, light, and blessing associated with Apollos. Verse 6 builds upon this symbolism by explaining that a foundation of ‘Paul’ will lead to an understanding of God in Teacher thought that results in personal blessings of truth, prophecy, healing, sunlight, and music: “I planted, Apollos watered, but God was causing the growth”. This progression can be seen in Acts 18, which starts by describing Paul founding the Corinthian church, and finishes by describing the preaching of Apollos in Corinth. It is interesting that when Apollos first arrives in Corinth, he is teaching an incomplete message and has to be corrected by the Jewish couple with whom Paul was staying (v.25-26).
Summarizing, a city of Corinth will naturally arise from a message of partial rebirth. Western civilization provides a graphic example of this principle. The Judeo-Christian mindset laid the foundation for scientific thought. Science has developed a rational Teacher understanding of how the natural world functions, and this understanding has been used to transform the physical world. However, this rebirth has been limited to the physical and the objective, while the subjective realm remains childish and un-transformed. This kind of limited rebirth happens naturally, because it is much easier to study the objective physical world than it is to study and make sense of the messy world of subjective emotions. The end result will be a physical environment of wealth, beauty, and elegance. Going further, the success of science and technology will cause people to regard absolute truth with its revered experts as obsolete and irrelevant. This will lead to a social atmosphere of moral decadence. A city of Corinth combines these two results because it juxtaposes physical elegance and prosperity with moral decadence and degradation.
Acts 18 explicitly states that the city of Corinth was characterized by this kind of split between subjective and objective. The Jews of the city take Paul to court over a subjective question of religion: “the Jews with one accord rose up against Paul and brought him before the judgment seat, saying, ‘This man persuades men to worship God contrary to the law’” (v.12-13). But the Roman proconsul refuses to listen to their case, saying that he only deals with objective matters and will not touch subjective issues of religion: “But when Paul was about to open his mouth, Gallio said to the Jews, ‘If it were a matter of wrong or of vicious crime, O Jews, it would be reasonable for me to put up with you; but if there are questions about words and names and your own law, look after it yourselves; I am unwilling to be a judge of these matters.’ And he drove them away from the judgment seat” (v.14-16).
Looking more closely at the two adjectives used by Gallio, the word wrong is derived from the word unrighteousness. Righteousness describes Server actions are guided by the TMN of a general understanding in Teacher thought. Thus, the government of Corinth had a concept of being guided by understanding in Teacher thought. The word crime is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘a careless action’, while vicious is the generic word for evil that emphasizes the inevitable agonies and misery that always go with evil. This combination conveys the concept that actions which are not structured will lead to bad results in Mercy thought. Using modern language, behavior is supposed to be structured and ordered in order to avoid the painful results of sloth and chaos. In a word, this describes a mindset of professionalism. However, this desire for professionalism does not extend to the subjective realm, because the Jewish mob responds by beating the ruler of the synagogue in front of the judgment seat and Gallio ignores what is happening.
This message of partial rebirth can also be seen in the initial message of Apollos, described at the end of Acts 18. Apollos was born in Alexandria, the city in Egypt where science almost came to birth. Apollos is described as ‘eloquent and gifted with learning’, which tells us that he excelled at rational understanding. He is also described as powerful in the written Scriptures. This implies that he knew how to use abstract technical thought to analyze structures of words. Verse 25 adds that he had been carefully instructed in the path of the Lord. This is a significant statement because science emerged when people started to study carefully how the natural world behaves. Apollos knew how to think rigorously about processes and behavior, and he also believed that these processes were not random but rather guided by the Lord. Verse 25 adds that Apollos “was speaking and teaching accurately”. The word translated accurately means ‘accurate because researched down to the finest detail, factually precise’. Stated cognitively, Apollos was teaching his listeners how to use abstract technical thought.
Apollos is also described as ‘fervent or boiling’ in the spirit. The word fervent only occurs one other time in the New Testament, where it is also combined with the word spirit. This other occurrence is in Romans 12:11 in the verse that appears to describe what the character of the Teacher person should be. (The list of ‘spiritual gifts’ is found in verses 6-8, and then verses 9-15 go through this same list again, describing desired character qualities for each spiritual gift. Thus, verse 9 talks about the Perceiver person, which appears first in the list in verse 6, verse 10 talks about the Server person, which appears second in the list in verse 7, and so on.) In other words, Apollos was being guided by the TMN of a general understanding in Teacher thought, because it appears that the spiritual realm interacts with the mind through mental networks.
Summarizing, all of these attributes describe the kind of abstract technical thought that is currently used within scientific academia. Apollos was applying these traits 1500 years before the birth of science, having grown up in the city where science almost came to birth.
However, like modern objective science, Apollos was also teaching a limited message of rebirth: “He was speaking and teaching accurately the things concerning Jesus, being acquainted only with the baptism of John” (v.25). The name Jesus means salvation. Similarly, science saves people in a limited manner through the partial transformation of modern technology. Baptism is a symbol of personal rebirth. Apollos “was acquainted only with the baptism of John”. Jesus explains the difference between his baptism and the baptism of John in Acts 1:5: “For John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit not many days from now.” Water represents Mercy experiences, and objective science attempts to clean its facts from subjective bias through the ‘water’ of raw, unfiltered empirical experience. Being baptized with the Holy Spirit goes much deeper, because this eliminates subjective bias by using a Teacher understanding of the character of God to fill Mercy thought with Platonic forms of ideal perfection, which then coalesce to form a mental concept of the Holy Spirit (which Plato referred to as the form of the Good). Saying this more simply, objective science can eliminate most subjective bias from factual information, but it leaves the MMNs of childish identity and culture intact. This partial baptism leads naturally to a city of Corinth because the rational understanding of the objective realm will make it possible to create elegant devices and beautiful buildings, which will then be ‘enjoyed’ using infantile mental networks of identity and culture. The total rebirth of Jesus, in contrast, transforms both objective thinking and subjective motivation.
Summarizing, it is important for Paul to come before Apollos and lay the foundation for Apollos. If Paul comes first then it is possible for the followers of Paul to correct the message of Apollos when Apollos arrives on the scene. Verse 26 describes the method by which one corrects an incomplete message of Apollos: “When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately.” First, one listens to what is being said. One does not turn away and denounce the message as false, which is how many evangelical Christians regard the incomplete message of science, refusing to listen to it but rather denouncing it as evil. Second, one does not ignore what is being said but rather responds actively and aggressively. The word translated took him aside means to ‘lay hold of with initiative, aggressively received, with strong personal interest’. Saying this another way, science tries to eliminate the subjective. One needs to respond to the incomplete message of science by adding the subjective. But one does not do this using emotional methods. Instead, one explains, a word that means ‘set forth, expound, explain’. One explains more accurately, the same word that was used to describe the teaching of Apollos in verse 15, which means ‘accurate because researched down to the finest detail’. And what one explains accurately is ‘the way of God’. One does not preach Perceiver truth but rather teaches Server sequences of ‘how things work’. Notice the difference between what Apollos taught and what Priscilla and Aquila clarified. Apollos taught ‘the way of the Lord’, implying submission to some set of Server sequences. This describes the specialized thinking of science, which is guided by how the natural world behaves—in some limited area. Priscilla and Aquila, in contrast, taught ‘the way of the God’. God is a universal being. Therefore, ‘teaching the way of the God’ means teaching universal principles of how everything behaves.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry attempts to correct the partial rebirth of science by following these steps. First, I have tried to listen to what science says, by studying many areas of scientific research. Second, I have added the subjective to the objective thinking of science, motivated by a strong personal desire to live in a more wholesome environment. Third, instead of responding emotionally to the inadequacies of science and technology, I use the theory of mental symmetry to explain what is happening. Fourth, I have done my best to bring this explanation up to the level of technical thought that is demanded by science. Fifth, even though I am a Perceiver person who thinks naturally in terms of truth and error, I have tried to go beyond this to focus upon universal Server sequences that describe ‘how things work’. I did not understand these deeper principles when I began my research. Instead, all I knew is that the biggest hurdle when attempting to understand the mind is not working out how the mind functions, but rather being able to handle the personal implications of one discovers. Using the language of Paul, I knew that it was important to ‘live as a Christian within the city of Corinth’.
We saw earlier that Paul lived with a Jewish couple and practiced tentmaking. Acts 18 adds that he eventually devoted himself to preaching full-time to the Jews: “But when Silas and Timothy came down from Macedonia, Paul began devoting himself completely to the word, solemnly testifying to the Jews that Jesus was the Christ” (v.5). Looking at this historically, Paul is trying to convince the Jews that Jesus is the promised Messiah. Looking at this cognitively, Paul is trying to take the religious mindset beyond a focus upon the finite person of Jesus to a general understanding of Christ as the incarnation of God.
But this eventually led to a dead-end, and Paul left the Jews and started talking to the Gentiles: “But when they resisted and blasphemed, he shook out his garments and said to them, ‘Your blood be on your own heads! I am clean. From now on I will go to the Gentiles.’ Then he left there and went to the house of a man named Titius Justus, a worshiper of God, whose house was next to the synagogue” (v.6-7).
The word resisted means ‘to reject the entire makeup of something, its whole arrangement’. In other words, what is being rejected is not just some specific points or the person of Paul. Instead it is the whole mindset of going beyond a Mercy fixation upon the person of Jesus to a Teacher understanding of the universal character of incarnation. The theory of mental symmetry often triggers a similar response in evangelical Christians because I am approaching Christian theology from the viewpoint of a paradigm in Teacher thought rather than basing it upon the Mercy status of the Bible and esteemed religious authorities.
Going further, the word blasphemed means ‘refusing to acknowledge good, worthy of respect; hence, to blaspheme which reverses moral values’. In other words, words in Teacher thought are being used to attack the validity and value of a general theory of God in Teacher thought. This is having a moral impact because it is preventing an understanding of the character of God from guiding personal activity.
Paul eventually responds by ‘shaking out his garments’. Shaking out is the same word used when Jesus tells his disciples in the Gospels to ‘shake the dust off from their shoes’ when a city does not respond to their message. Garments represent the ‘cloth’ of social interaction, because it is an integrated warp-and-woof that covers the body when people interact. Thus, shaking out the garments would mean eliminating a form of social interaction. Saying this more clearly, Paul has been in a caustic environment and he does not want to become the sort of person who interacts in this manner. Similarly, one of the main reasons that I step back from continuing to argue with people over doctrine is because I do not want to become an argumentative person. But if the Christian church is struggling for survival and one discovers a solution, then the only ethical response is to offer the solution and not to turn away. Similarly, when Paul is rejected by the Jews he responds that their blood is now upon their heads while he is clean. By rejecting his message, their errors have become explicit. They have gone beyond committing sins of ignorance to deliberately rejecting a concept of God. And Paul can bring mental closure to his childhood MMNs of religious culture because he has done his best to try to help. Paul then stops preaching to the Jews and turns to the Gentiles.
Similarly, I grew up in a conservative Mennonite household and still attend an evangelical church. I see evangelical Christianity struggling with the attitude of fundamentalism and I know that mental symmetry provides an answer. Therefore, I feel that it is my duty to try to share this answer. However, I have now come to the conclusion that following mental symmetry actually leads to a greater respect for the Bible, theology, eternal life, incarnation, and personal transformation than the attitude that I now see being exhibited by most ‘Bible believing Christians’—even by those who have studied at evangelical Christian seminaries.
This does not mean that Paul turns his back upon religious content. Instead, “he left there and went to the house of a man named Titius Justus, a worshiper of God, whose house was next to the synagogue” (v.7). The word translated next to is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘contiguous with, next door to’. Thus, Paul does not embrace the hedonism of Corinth but rather finds a secular home to live that is abutting the Jewish synagogue. Using modern language, he finds secular fields of thought that study topics such as transformation, morality, and religion. The name Titius (or Titus) means ‘pleasing’, while Justus means ‘just’. Symbolically speaking, Paul looks for secular content that is good for Mercy thought and moral in Perceiver thought.
Verse 8 says that after Paul made the transition from religious to secular, “Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.” The implication is that religious leaders may claim to follow religious experts, but they are actually convinced more by secular experts. Stated bluntly, if you want to make an impact, then translate the religious message into secular terms. You will then become successful within the secular community and leaders within the religious community will become convinced as well. The name Crispus means ‘crisp’, which implies clear thinking with well-defined categories. This type of clear-headed, crisp thinking will be converted by a secular version of the religious message.
Introduction 1:1-3
Turning now to the book of 2 Corinthians, one notices that the first two chapters focus almost totally upon Paul’s emotions. I suggest that this description makes cognitive sense if one views it as a description of the struggles that a ‘Paul’ would go through when attempting to live and preach in a ‘Corinth’. These are universal principles that apply generally, but they are especially applicable for today’s world in which Christianity itself is attempting to come to terms with the partial rebirth that has been accomplished by science through the industrial revolution, consumer revolution, and now computer revolution.
The introduction to 2 Corinthians is essentially the same as the introduction to 1 Corinthians: “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother” (v.1). 2 Corinthians refers to Timothy while 1 Corinthians mentions Sosthenes. Timothy means ‘valued of God’ while Sosthenes combines two words that mean ‘deliver out of danger and into safety’ and ‘make strong so as to be mobile’. Similarly, 1 Corinthians describes principles that will lay a solid foundation for a new way of thinking and behaving. 2 Corinthians focuses upon entering into this new system of value. Paul describes himself in both books as ‘an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God’. The word translated will means ‘a desire, often referring to God’s preferred will’. Stating this in cognitive language, Paul is delivering a new kind of message based in a more complete concept of incarnation that is an expression of a general, emotional concept of God in Teacher thought.
As I have mentioned in previous essays, concrete Contributor thought uses principles of cause-and-effect to improve some emotional bottom line in Mercy thought; abstract Contributor thought uses precise definitions to improve some general theory in Teacher thought. We will be referring to these two forms of Contributor-controlled thought as abstract technical thought and concrete technical thought. A concept of incarnation emerges when these two sides of Contributor thought become fully unified, making it possible for the Teacher theory of a concept of God to bring salvation to human individuals in Mercy thought. ‘Jesus’ refers to the finite human side of incarnation, while ‘Christ’ describes the universal divine side of incarnation. Thus, ‘Christ Jesus by the will of God’ would refer to an integrated concept of incarnation that is an expression of a universal concept of God in Teacher thought.
Both 1 and 2 Corinthians add the phrase “to the church of God which is at Corinth.” The word church means ‘an assembly, congregation’ and combines the two words ‘out from and to’ with ‘to call’. Stated cognitively, a group of people are being motivated by Teacher words to create a new society. Thus, a church obviously refers to people and not to the building, because one cannot ‘call out’ a building. Going further, I suggest that a religious group that forms for cultural reasons would also not qualify as a church because ‘calling out’ implies being drawn primarily by words in Teacher thought and not being attracted by experiences in Mercy thought. This does not mean that a church has only preaching and no worship, because a group of people is being called out to form a new social group. Instead, it means that the experiential component is an expression of the verbal component and not the other way around. This verbal source is emphasized by the phrase ‘church of the God’, because a concept of God is constructed out of words in Teacher thought. This church is being described as existing in Corinth, and we have already looked at the implications of living in Corinth.
(The word ‘God’ sometimes occurs by itself and sometimes is prefaced by the definite article: ‘the God’. Whenever the definite article is used in the Greek, then I will indicate this in English by referring to ‘the God’. ‘God’ would refer to some concept of God in Teacher thought, while ‘the God’ would describe a monotheistic concept of God based in a valid universal Teacher understanding. There are many ‘gods’ but there is only one ‘the God’. This does not mean that a ‘God’ is necessarily wrong but rather that it is incomplete—a partial concept based in some general understanding.)
Verse 1 concludes by including “all the saints who are throughout Achaia”. Achaia refers geographically to the larger region of Greece, and Achaia means ‘grief, trouble’. The word saint means ‘set apart by or for God’. The implication is that the message of 2 Corinthians has a wider application to any group that is trying to follow God in a general environment of grief or trouble. We will see in the latter part of 2 Corinthians that Paul specifically focuses his efforts upon this kind of church.
Verse 2 contains Paul’s standard introduction: “Grace to you and peace from God our Father and the Lord Jesus Christ.” 1 Corinthians opens with precisely the same phrase. Grace means ‘favorable towards, leaning towards to share benefit’, while peace means ‘wholeness, when all essential parts are joined together’. Cognitively speaking, a concept of God in Teacher thought will use Teacher emotions to motivate people and societies to function in an integrated manner ‘in which all essential parts are joined together’. This wholeness does not come by worshiping God in some mystical manner, but rather by viewing God as a Father and by combining the general Teacher theory of a concept of God with the integrated technical thinking of a concept of incarnation. Science does this to some extent because it uses the general Teacher theories of mathematics to describe natural processes and then uses integrated technical thought to translate mathematics into reality. This is described in detail in previous essays.
Verse 3 introduces the emotions of ‘mercies’ and ‘comfort’: “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, the Father of mercies and God of all comfort.” The word translated mercies means ‘deep feeling about someone’s difficulty or misfortune’. This expands upon the phrase ‘God our Father’ used in the previous verse. This is a significant statement because a concept of God is based in Teacher thought and Teacher emotions are normally quite different than Mercy emotions. This is especially true in a ‘city of Corinth’, because it juxtaposes objective wealth and beauty—an expression of Teacher emotions, with subjective hedonism and debauchery—an expression of childish Mercy emotions. A similar juxtaposition can be seen in current society, because we expect our gadgets to be flawless examples of Teacher order-within-complexity, while tending to condemn those who apply the same sort of logical thinking to subjective emotions and personal desires. Verse 3 describes the radical concept of Teacher thought caring deeply for personal inadequacies within Mercy thought. This is a radical concept because objective rational thought finds personal feeling childish and repulsive and tries to eliminate it from rational thought by remaining objective. It is also a radical concept for fundamentalism because absolute truth feels that believing God implies denying self. Finally, it is a radical concept for mysticism because mysticism generates a feeling of being united with God which cannot extend to the details of human difficulty or misfortune.
This contrast with mysticism can be seen in the next phrase ‘God of all comfort’. The word translated all means ‘each part of the totality’. This describes a universal concept that includes details, as opposed to the overgeneralization of mysticism which makes sweeping statements without including any details. The word comfort is closely related to the word comforter used to describe the Holy Spirit in John 14. It means ‘a personal exhortation that delivers the evidence that stands up in God’s court’. In a city of Corinth, the personal debauchery would not ‘stand up in the court’ of rigorous technical thought. A comforter helps Mercy identity in a manner that reflects the universal laws of God in Teacher thought.
This word ‘comfort’ is repeated three times in verse 4: “who comforts us in all our affliction so that we will be able to comfort those who are in any affliction with the comfort with which we ourselves are comforted by God.” When comfort comes to us from God in Teacher thought, then this same comfort can be applied by us to others in every situation, because a universal principle can, by definition, be applied universally. And it can be applied in a manner that does not show personal favoritism; we can comfort others in the same way that God comforted us. Using the language of Immanuel Kant, comfort from God takes the form of a categorical imperative, because it is possible to extend this same comfort to everyone.
We saw in Acts 19 that Paul made a transition in Corinth from a religious audience to a secular audience. Cognitively speaking, this kind of transition in a city of Corinth will naturally lead to a comforter. In the objective, Corinth follows Teacher order and structure, while in the subjective, behavior is free of rules. A similar juxtaposition exists in modern Western society. A secular person dares not extend the structure of objective thought to the subjective realm. That is because this will trigger deep feelings of personal inadequacy, because subjective childish impulses do not meet the high standards of professionalism demanded within the objective realm. However, if one follows God in a righteous manner in the subjective and then extends this to the objective, then one will realize that the objective professionalism is actually a partial illustration of personal transformation. This will lead in Mercy thought to the feeling that some universal person who represents objective structure is ‘coming alongside’ in order to state in a legally proper manner that one is behaving righteously. Using religious language, one will develop a mental concept of the Holy Spirit.
Saying this another way, following God in obedience to absolute truth will not necessarily lead to a feeling of righteousness, because one is doing the right things for inadequate reasons; one is still viewing God to some extent as an important person with Mercy status. When one moves to the secular realm, then one will start to think in terms of Teacher understanding and righteous behavior, because the secular realm thinks in terms of understanding, righteousness, and professionalism—at least within the objective. When one starts to interpret obedience to God in terms of a secular mindset of professionalism, then one will realize that one is actually being a professional Christian—professional not in the sense of meeting some human standard of thought and behavior, but rather in the sense of living up to God’s standards of thought and behavior.
The Big Picture
Moving on, the word translated affliction does not mean suffering but rather is ‘used of a narrow place that hems someone in, especially internal pressure that causes someone to feel confined’. This word is only used once in Revelation 4-22, when referring to The Great Tribulation in Revelation 7:14. I know that this term is traditionally used in evangelical circles to describe a coming seven-year period of great societal turmoil and torment. However, I suggest that a distinction needs to be made between ‘the great tribulation’ and the ‘kingdom of the Antichrist’. (The major New Testament prophetic passages have been analyzed in previous essays.) In brief, I suggest that the watershed event in Revelation occurs in Revelation 10, where a strong angel with one foot on the ‘land’ of rational thought and another foot upon the ‘sea’ of subjective emotion hands a small book to the author John and tells him to eat this book. A book represents an integrated theory in Teacher thought, because a book arranges many words into a structured package of sentences, paragraphs, and chapters. Thus, some human is acquiring an integrated theory that bridges the objective and the subjective. Before Revelation 10, the followers of God are all on the defensive being attacked by the world. The Great Tribulation of Revelation 7:14 is a period of narrowness and squeezing that happens within this context. The kingdom of the Beast is described in Revelation 13, which happens after the transition of Revelation 10-12. Similarly, 1 Thessalonians applies to the period of tribulation before this transition, while 2 Thessalonians talks about the Antichrist, who appears after this transition.
I suggest that a mindset of absolute truth will naturally misinterpret the word ‘tribulation’. On the one hand, if ‘truth’ is being revealed by some source with great emotional status, then the mind will only continue to believe this ‘truth’ if personal identity has a low emotional status compared to the emotional status of the source of ‘truth’. Therefore, following God will be associated with denying self, and a word such as tribulation will be interpreted in terms of self-denial for God. (I am putting the word ‘truth’ in single quotes when referring to emotional ‘truth’, because Perceiver thought is being overwhelmed by Mercy emotions and not actually evaluating truth.)
On the other hand, absolute truth is continually making a cognitive leap from the specific words of some specific book or specific author to universal pronouncements of absolute truth imposed upon everyone. (I am not putting the word truth in single quotes when talking about absolute truth, because Perceiver thought is functioning part of the time.)
This cognitive leap is illustrated by the joke of the person who opened the Bible at random in order to discover the will of God. The first verse he turned to was Matthew 27:5, which describes how Judas the betrayer of Jesus “went away and hanged himself”. Feeling confused, the person opened the Bible again at random and landed on Luke 10:37, where Jesus says, “go and do the same”. This story is obviously an exaggeration, but an attitude of absolute truth by its very nature will tend to make such leaps from specific statements to universal pronouncements without attempting to understand either the context or the underlying general principles.
But God is a universal being who speaks the language of universal principles. Therefore, if the Bible really is the Word of God, then it should be possible to translate the religious language of the Bible into universal principles that can be stated using secular language. Saying this another way, one should use Teacher thought to analyze and understand the character of God rather than use Mercy thought to submit to God with religious fervor. Going further, part of the squeezing is actually a byproduct of the Teacher thought that the secular world is using, because Teacher thought wants universal rules to apply without exception. Absolute religious truth is being squeezed out because it is being regarded as an exception to the universal principle of ‘applying scientific rational thought’. Thus, the Christian believer should regard this squeezing as God encouraging the fundamentalist believer to replace the attitude of absolute truth with a search for universal truth. Instead, the fundamentalist believer will instinctively regard the squeezing as a rejection of ‘truth’, and the more that society squeezes, the more absolute truth will use Mercy status and fervor to fight back by trying to impose its beliefs upon society. Saying this another way, the squeezing will be viewed as the power of Satan being exerted upon the church of God, and any suggestion that God himself is behind the squeezing will be rejected as anti-Christian.
Going further, a city of Corinth will naturally lead to a tribulation of squeezing because objective technical thought is being emphasized, and technical thought naturally specializes. One can see this squeezing in present society because most human activity has been subdivided into specializations. In order to work within some specialization one must go through several years of training and certification, and a person who is qualified to work in one specialization may not work in another specialization. (There is interdisciplinary research and collaboration in current society, but it does not happen naturally and the default is for each specialization to go its own way oblivious to what is being done within other specializations. Plus, the very idea of interdisciplinary work presupposes that knowledge should be subdivided into different disciplines.)
Similarly, the subjective realm is also subdivided into many little fiefdoms, each clamoring for attention and allegiance. Looking again at current society, at the level of Mercy experiences, advertising attempts to sway the consumer by implanting and manipulating MMNs of personal desire and culture, while at the level of Teacher theories, corporations attempt to manipulate governments into framing laws that favor them and disadvantage or exclude the competition. (I refer to this as ‘First World corruption’. Third World corruption, in contrast, functions at a Mercy level, trying to bribe specific officials in order to avoid submitting to Perceiver rules.)
Putting these factors together, anyone who wants to pursue rational thought will be squeezed into some technical specialization, those who hold onto absolute truth will be squeezed by the spread of scientific thought, those who want to pursue personal transformation will be drowned out by all the advertising that appeals to existing MMNs of identity and culture, while those who try to build an independent existence will be legislated away by First World corruption.
The kingdom of the Beast, in contrast, is a reaction to the integrated Teacher understanding developed in Revelation 10. Here the primary battle is within the subjective, between a kingdom of God based in the TMN of a universal understanding that rules over all MMNs of culture and identity, and the kingdom of the Beast, rooted in a semi-intelligent juxtaposition of culture, childishness, mysticism, and hero worship. That struggle will be the topic of 2 Corinthians 4.
Tribulation 1:4-7
Returning now to 2 Corinthians 1, the word tribulation (which means ‘internal pressure that causes someone to feel confined’) is mentioned twice in verse 4. I have mentioned that the comfort described in this verse is a universal comfort. Paraphrasing verses 3-4, the God of all comfort is comforting us in all our tribulation so that we can comfort others in every tribulation. The three italicized words ‘all’ and ‘every’ are the same word in Greek, which means ‘each part of a totality’. On the one hand, specialization is squeezing everybody into boxes, while on the other hand the comfort is breaking people out of their boxes, because the comfort that I receive in my specialization is a universal comfort from God that also applies to other people in their specializations.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry uses the analogies of normal thought to compare one specialization with another in order to discover universal principles of cognition. This comparison is only possible because the world has become divided into specializations. Posing this more clearly, why is it possible to use mental symmetry to compare disparate fields such as theology, psychology, neurology, and physics? Because each of these fields has developed into a separate technical specialization and these technical specializations seldom talk to each other. Thus, if many fields independently discover similar cognitive principles, then this provides strong evidence that these cognitive principles are universal. The squeezing makes the comfort of God both possible and necessary. Using an analogy, it is not possible to construct a building out of a lump of clay. But if one divides the clay into separate bricks and bakes each brick into a solid object, then one can construct a building out of solid bricks. Similarly, the tribulation of specialization subdivides human existence into distinct, solid bricks, making it possible to assemble these bricks into the structure of a general Teacher understanding.
Verse 5 talks about suffering and not squeezing, but Christ is suffering and not people: “For just as the sufferings of Christ are to us in abundance, so also our comfort is abundant through Christ.” The word translated sufferings means ‘the capacity to feel strong emotion… like agony, passion (ardent desire), suffering, etc.’ Thus, the focus is not upon experiencing pain but rather upon feeling strong emotion in general. Similarly, the word abundance means ‘exceed, go beyond the expected measure’. The phrase ‘to us’ is the literal meaning that is given a footnote to the NASB. Finally, Christ refers to the abstract divine side of incarnation. Putting this together, the divine side of incarnation is experiencing excessive and unexpected emotion which is being conveyed to personal identity.
Looking at this from a cognitive perspective, when one constructs a general Teacher theory by building bridges between one technical specialization and another, then abstract technical thought will experience stronger-than-expected emotions. As Thomas Kuhn has said, it is very difficult for technical specialists to undergo a paradigm shift. Building a universal understanding means going through a succession of paradigm shifts. For instance, I experience an emotional roller coaster every time that I use the theory of mental symmetry to study some system or book. First, learning about the system means going through a period of time of being a beginner in which one appears stupid in front of the technical experts. Second, analyzing the system means using the theory of mental symmetry to try to swallow some structure that mental symmetry may be incapable of digesting. Both of these steps are emotionally excessive for abstract technical thought.
The end result is that the emotions of Christ will be ‘to us’ in excessive amount; each time one goes through this process, one also experiences excessive comfort. Any form of interdisciplinary research will experience this emotional struggle and reward to some extent. However, extending the theory of mental symmetry has allowed me to experience this emotional roller coaster in a purer, more distilled form. Notice the precise difference between specialization and a concept of Christ-the-incarnation. Both use abstract technical thought, but a specialization limits this abstract technical thought to the restricted realm of some specific profession, guided emotionally by the limited Teacher theory of some paradigm. In contrast, a concept of Christ ties together many similar forms of abstract technical thought in order to construct a universal concept of God in Teacher thought.
Verse 6 describes two levels of interdisciplinary help: “But if we are afflicted, it is for your comfort and salvation; or if we are comforted, it is for your comfort.” As before, the word translated afflicted means ‘restricted to a narrow place’ and not ‘afflicted’. (I have included links to the meanings of the Greek words so that the reader can check to see what each word really means. Biblehub also has a good interlinear Bible from which one can access all of these meanings. For instance, the interlinear version for verse 6 can be found here. The interlinear version translates this word as ‘constricted’, which is more accurate than ‘afflicted’. To access the actual meaning, click on the Strong’s number above the word.) This states the general principle that being ‘restricted to a narrow place’ is a prerequisite for discovering the interdisciplinary help of God. Looking first at the second phrase, ‘if we are comforted, it is for your comfort’ would refer to some form of interdisciplinary research or activity. When one person or group finds ‘comfort’ by bridging specializations, then this can bring comfort to others as well.
Turning now to the first phrase, the average professional who is restricted to some specialization will not feel ‘restricted to a narrow place’, because each specialization will be implicitly guided by some limited paradigm or bottom line that emotionally channels thought and behavior within the limited realm of that specialization. The feeling of being restricted will emerge when one starts to do interdisciplinary research to the extent of developing and being guided by an interdisciplinary concept of God in Teacher thought. Following interdisciplinary research to the extent of feeling ‘restricted to a narrow place’ will lead to both comfort and salvation, because it will come up with a solution that goes beyond bridging one specialization with another to transcending the very concept of specializations. For instance, specializations have largely ceased to exist within my mind. Instead, I view most topics as merely some facet of a single general overarching topic. Such a universal Teacher understanding makes it possible to go beyond the underlying objective/subjective split that is inherent in a city of Corinth.
Because we currently live in a time of ‘great tribulation’ in which squeezing is so pervasive, breaking free of the shackles of specialization will be like peeling away the layers of an onion. Each successful integration will lead to some Teacher comfort and reveal some aspects of salvation, but one will then come face-to-face with the next layer of specialization. Thus, each step in the process of breaking free will emotionally raise the stakes. Teacher feelings of integration will increase, but so will the sense of being boxed in, because one will become increasingly aware of the pervasive specialization of modern society.
Verse 6 finishes by saying that transcending a city of Corinth requires remaining within a state of strong emotions: “which is effective in the patient enduring of the same sufferings which we also suffer”. Suffer and sufferings both come from the Greek word used in verse 5 to describe the sufferings of Christ, which means ‘the capacity and privilege of experiencing strong feeling’. The word translated patient enduring means ‘remaining under’. And effective means ‘energize, working in a situation which brings it from one stage to the next, like an electrical current energizing a wire, bringing it to a shining light bulb’. Looking at this cognitively, mental networks provide energy for the mind. When a mental network is being threatened, it will respond with a hyper-pain that exceeds normal emotional discomfort. A mind cannot exist without core mental networks. Therefore, if one wishes to change one’s core mental networks, then one must be faced emotionally with two different ways of functioning. If one consistently chooses over a period of time to follow one set of mental networks rather than another, then the new mental networks will gradually grow at the expense of the old ones, and these growing mental networks will provide an emotional energy that makes it possible to bring the mind from one stage to the next.
Saying this another way, a city of Corinth is divided into specializations each ruled by some paradigm, while being characterized by fragmentation, idolatry, and childishness in subjective thought. This juxtaposition provides an opportunity for constructing an integrated concept of God in Teacher thought. But this concept of God will only integrate the mind to the extent that a person chooses to remain within the condition of feeling squeezed, without succumbing to the system in some way. This is not easy, because it means facing non-stop strong emotions. But it is possible, because the negative emotion of continually feeling squeezed by society will be balanced by the emotional comfort of continuing to discover a more integrated and universal concept of God. Thus, one will find that there is always enough energy to take the next step.
Notice that verse 6 is more personal than verse 5. In verse 5 people were experiencing an emotional spillover from ‘the sufferings of Christ’—the squeezing of abstract technical thought into distinct specializations. In verse 6, people are being squeezed and people are directly experiencing strong emotions. Verse 5 describes interdisciplinary research, while verse 6 describes what it feels like to attempt to live in interdisciplinary manner.
This principle applies both to those who discover comfort and to those who apply comfort that is discovered by others: “and our hope for you is firmly grounded, knowing that as you are sharers of our sufferings, so also you are sharers of our comfort” (v.7). The word hope means ‘expectation of what is sure or certain’. Romans 8:24 explains that “hope that is seen is not hope”. Looking at this cognitively, hope is an internally generated image within Mercy thought that provides drive for Exhorter thought. These internally generated images are Platonic forms that naturally emerge when Teacher thought integrates various specializations.
This is illustrated by the following European joke: “Heaven is where the police are British, the cooks are French, the mechanics German, the lovers Italian and it’s all organised by the Swiss. Hell is where the chefs are British, the mechanics French, the lovers Swiss, the police German and it’s all organised by the Italians.” Notice how the concept of heaven comes from combining the various specializations in a manner that is integrated and elegant. That is what happens when interdisciplinary activity is guided by Teacher thought. In contrast, when interdisciplinary activity is guided by childish emotions in Mercy thought, then the same specializations will tend to combine in a way that produces hell rather than heaven.
This idea of heaven may sound at first glance like multiculturalism, but there is a critical difference. Multiculturalism tends to be guided by the Teacher overgeneralization that ‘we are all one’, leading to the feeling that peace and unity can be achieved simply by accepting everyone just as they are. However, notice in the joke that everyone is not being accepted just as they are. Instead, each culture is being compared with the mental concept of an ideal culture, and the good aspects of each culture are being integrated. In other words, what produces the ‘heaven’ is not multiculturalism but rather intelligent multiculturalism.
Going further, the word firmly grounded means ‘solid enough to walk on’. Thus, the hope is not just wishful thinking, but rather solid enough to hold the emotional weight of personal identity as it walks step-by-step towards integration. This solid hope is based upon a comparison of cause-and-effect. This comparison is brought out by the word as, which means ‘like as, even as, according as, in the same manner as’. The cause-and-effect is the principle that strong emotions will be followed by comfort; being troubled by fragmented society will be followed by the Teacher comfort of an interdisciplinary understanding. This does not mean that any strong emotions will always be followed by comfort. Instead, it is as others are partners in the strong emotions, that they will experience also the comfort. The word partner means ‘a participant who mutually belongs and shares fellowship’ and the adjective which is used here ‘focuses on the participant himself’. Thus, what matters is personally feeling strong emotions that are similar to those being felt by those who are constructing and following an integrated concept of God.
For instance, when I share some concept of mental symmetry and another person understands this concept, then there is no guarantee that this understanding will be followed by personal application. But when another person describes feeling deep emotions that are similar to what I have felt when going through the process of pursuing wholeness, then this gives me confidence that the other person will also acquire a more integrated concept of God. The word translated knowing in verse 7 means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. Thus, those who are pioneering the path of integration observe those who are following and come to the internal conclusion that they are following a similar path that will result in similar benefits.
Despair in Asia 1:8-11
Verse 8 introduces two new factors. The word brothers is used for the first time, which means literally ‘from the same womb’. In other words, when one continues to experience this depth of emotional transition, then one will eventually reach the level of feeling as if one is being reborn. And one will view others who are following a similar emotional path as ‘brethren’ who are being ‘birthed from the same womb’. (A similar feeling of meta-culture emerges within third culture kids.) Moving to the second new factor, verse 8 makes it clear that the squeezing is emotionally affecting people to the level of existence itself: “For we do not want you to be unaware, brethren, of our affliction which came to us in Asia, that we were burdened excessively, beyond our strength, so that we despaired even of life.”
The word despaired is only used twice in the New Testament, and it means ‘without passage, no way out… leaving someone in utter complete despair’. The other occurrence is in 2 Corinthians 4:8, where Paul talks about being ‘perplexed, but not despairing’. This describes the ultimate limit of being squeezed or boxed in, where the path has become so narrow that it is no longer possible to make any progress. This dead-end involves life itself, but the word for life is not physical life but rather refers to ‘both physical (present) and spiritual (particularly future) existence’. In other words, there is no way of living in society without selling one’s soul in some way. One is not necessarily being physically persecuted. Instead, every possible option must be avoided because it would do internal damage to MMNs of personal identity. If one only had to develop some technical specialization, then it would still be possible to have mental life in some fragment of existence. But professional skill is not sufficient when one lives in the city of Corinth. Instead, one must develop a professional skill and also allow personal identity to be ruled by some inferior paradigm or idolatrous bottom line.
I know what this feels like. For instance, when I graduated from high school I was able to play violin at a professional level. But having this professional skill was not enough. Instead, I had to become a member of the International Musician’s Union, a closed-shop union run from New York, which would tell me who I could play with, where I could play, and what I would charge. For various reasons I did not join, and as a result I never played another professional gig in the province of Saskatchewan where I was then living. I have experienced this kind of being boxed in to the extent of having no option left in several fields over the decades.
Continuing with the rest of the phrase, Paul says that “we were burdened excessively, beyond our strength, so that we despaired even of life” (v.8). The word burdened means ‘to burden, weigh down, depress’, and excessively means ‘superlatively, beyond measure’. The point is that mental networks of internal integrity and interdisciplinary understanding will eventually become viewed as a heavy burden which one no longer has the strength to bear. The average person in such a society can pursue some inferior goal in Mercy thought or submit to some limited paradigm in Teacher thought without feeling troubled. But when personal integrity and universal understanding turn to mental networks, then they will become heavy emotional burdens, because one must continually think and act in a way that preserves these mental networks without succumbing to the idolatries and specializations of society. Here too, I know from personal experience what this feels like.
Notice that this narrowness happens in Asia: “For we do not want you to be unaware, brethren, of our affliction which came to us in Asia” (v.8). As before, the word translated affliction means narrowness or squeezing. And the verb translated came to us means ‘to come into being, be born’. In other words, Paul is not experiencing some sudden crisis. Instead, the feeling of being boxed in has itself turned into a mental network that is growing over time and becoming a heavy burden that is too great to bear.
The word Asia refers to the part of Asia Minor which is now Western Turkey. The next few verses will describe Paul traveling from Asia to Greece. Historically speaking, Asia was ruled by absolute monarchs, while Greece was the birthplace of Western democracy and Western philosophy. This mindset continued into the Roman era: “Asia Minor was the home of emperor-worship, and nowhere did the new institution fit so well into the existing religious system.” Thus, moving from Asia to Greece would represent making a mental transition from absolute truth to universal truth. Instead of acquiring Perceiver truth from rulers with great emotional status, one is searching for Perceiver truth by looking for universal connections. Cognitively speaking, absolute truth is incapable of escaping the narrowmindedness of specialization, because absolute truth is itself narrow-minded—it is based in a collection of specific words written and spoken by specific esteemed authors. (However, absolute truth will be convinced that it is not narrow-minded, because Perceiver thought, the cognitive module that looks for truth, is being overwhelmed by Mercy thought, the cognitive module that deals with specific experiences.) The word translated unaware means to lack knowledge through personal experience. Paul wants his listeners to know through personal experience that ‘residing in Asia’ is a dead end with no way of escape. That is because the biggest step in acquiring an interdisciplinary understanding in Teacher thought is to recognize that truth is not based in personal authority. Saying this cognitively, truth that is based in MMNs of personal authority cannot be held together by the TMN of a general theory. This is not a theoretical point but rather a matter of knowledge acquired through personal experience. One must know in the depths of Mercy experience that Mercy status cannot act as a source of truth. That is because absolute truth is actually personal authority masquerading as truth. In order to let go of the mindset of absolute truth one meet must leave ‘Asia’ with its worship of personal authority.
This interpretation is consistent with verse 9: “Indeed, we had the sentence of death within ourselves so that we would not trust in ourselves, but in God who raises the dead.” The word sentence means ‘a judicial sentence’, which means that it is based in Perceiver facts and not in Mercy people. This judicial sentence is not coming from any external judge but rather is being generated ‘within ourselves’. Looking at this cognitively, when one uses Perceiver thought to compare one specialization with another, then the result in Teacher thought will be a general understanding. But the end result in Mercy thought will be an internal judicial sentence of death. In other words, the burden of verse 8 has turned into an internal judicial sentence of death. Saying this more personally, instead of trying to survive as an individual within the objective/subjective split by holding on to the burdens of personal integrity and integrated understanding, one has come to the conclusion that one needs to die to the entire system of an objective/subjective split. This conclusion may have emotional implications but it is not reached emotionally. Instead is being factually reinforced by every specialization that one observes. Everywhere one looks, one is forced to the same conclusion that ‘this does not work’; I cannot live in ‘Asia’.
The purpose of this internal sentence of death is “so that we would not trust in ourselves” (v.9). The word trust means ‘to persuade’. This is not blind faith, but rather a result of reasoned thought. Paul is saying that one should not build Perceiver truth upon people in Mercy thought. Using cognitive language, one should not follow a mindset of absolute truth. Instead one should trust “in God who raises the dead” (v.9). The word raises means ‘to wake, arouse, raise up’. Thus, being internally resurrected from death has an aspect of being woken up from sleep. Looking at this cognitively, absolute truth is acquired passively because Mercy status overwhelms Perceiver thought into blindly accepting ‘truth’ from experts. Similarly, a person who blindly obeys instructions is also being overwhelmed by Mercy status to perform Server actions. Escaping such a mindset means waking up internally and starting to think and act for oneself. Doing this requires the TMN of a mental concept of God that is sufficiently potent to override MMNs of status and authority. A similar ‘waking up’ happens when a student makes the transition from rote learning to critical thinking. The transition in verse 9 is similar but deeper because what is being woken up from the dead is identity itself and not just the ability to evaluate information.
Verse 10 emphasizes the extent of this transition: “who delivered us from so great a [peril of] death, and will deliver [us]” (The words in square brackets are in italics and are not in the original Greek.) The word so great means ‘so great, coming-of-age, reaching maximum size and potential’. And the preposition from actually means ‘out from among’. Thus, Paul was not being physically ‘delivered from so great a peril of death’ as the NASB suggests, but rather was delivered out from an environment of mental death. Going further, this deliverance out from death is not just extensive, but it is also related to coming-of-age and reaching personal potential. It is a major step in the process of growing up, becoming a responsible adult, and reaching one’s potential. The word delivered means ‘draw or pull to oneself, to rescue’. Saying this cognitively, being delivered by God means coming into personal contact with the TMN of a concept of God. One is not just being saved but rather being pulled close to God.
The phrase ‘and will deliver’ (‘us’ is not in the original Greek) shows an aspect of Teacher thought. Mercy thought thinks in terms of experiences while Teacher thought think in terms of sequences. When the focus is upon personal MMNs, then one will think in terms of experiences and people, as illustrated by the fact that the NASB adds ‘us’ to the phrase ‘and will deliver’. In contrast, Teacher thought will think in terms of general sequences. Thus, if God has delivered us out of a great death, then he ‘will deliver’. One can have confidence that the sequence will be repeated. Scientific law functions in a similar manner. For instance, if I let go of some object, then it will fall to the ground, and this sequence can be reliably repeated.
This difference in focus is even clearer in the final phrase of verse 10: The NASB says “He on whom we have set our hope. And He will yet deliver us.” The English translation has five personal pronouns: he, we, our, he, us. The original Greek has only one pronoun which could be translated either as ‘who’ or ‘which’ while all of the other pronouns are implied by the conjugation of the verbs. Instead, the Greek emphasizes that the sequence of delivering will continue. In other words, the hope is not being based in some person in Mercy thought but rather in the universality of some sequence in Teacher thought. Science understands this distinction. Most Christians do not, as illustrated by the NASB translation (I use the NASB because it is a mainstream translation that is—usually—closest to the original Greek.)
Verse 11 at first glance may appear to be super-spiritual but it is actually a technically accurate description of social interaction based upon a general Teacher understanding. “You also joining in helping us through your prayers, so that thanks may be given by many persons on our behalf for the favor bestowed on us through [the prayers of] many.” The word joining is a rare term that is only used once the New Testament, which combines ‘closely identified with’ and ‘cooperation’. Teacher thought wants order-within-complexity. Teacher thought feels good when many sequences function together in an integrated manner, similar to the way that all the parts of the machine function together. Such integrated functioning is a combination of ‘cooperation’ and ‘closely identified with’. Paul says that this joining is ‘of others on behalf of us’. Using the language of a machine, Paul is asking others to add their functioning to the general process that he is pioneering.
It may seem impersonal to compare Christian fellowship with a machine. But that is because science and technology are objective. Christianity that is based in Teacher understanding uses the same kind of thinking as science and technology but includes the subjective. This additional component is shown by the word prayer which means ‘heart-felt petition, arising out of deep personal need’. Thus, a more appropriate analogy would be medicine, because medicine treats the human body like a machine with parts that function together, but also recognizes that people with personal needs and emotions live within these physical bodies. Paul uses this analogy of the parts of a human body when discussing spiritual gifts in Romans 12.
The goal is to set up a social system composed of ‘many persons’. Teacher thought wants order-within-complexity. This requires the cooperation of many people, just as a machine requires the cooperation of many functioning parts. The word translated persons actually means ‘face, countenance, surface’. Thus the cooperation at this point is occurring at the level of verbal and nonverbal communication. People are interacting face-to-face.
This interaction is supposed to be ‘for the grace bestowed toward us through many’ (quoting from the Greek interlinear). The word grace bestowed means ‘the operation of grace… focusing on the end-result of the endowment of grace’ and this same word is used in Romans 12 and 1 Corinthians 12 when talking about spiritual gifts. Thus, a social system is being set up based upon spiritual gifts. Each person is being motivated by personal needs to develop personal abilities and skills, and this is leading to a system of social interaction. This is similar to the way that an economy results from many people helping each other by each doing what they do best.
The final phrase of verse 11 adds a factor that is often missing in an economy: ‘thanks may be given on behalf of us’. The word thanks has the same Greek root as the word ‘grace bestowed’ and means ‘acknowledging that God’s grace works well’. Saying this more clearly, Paul is pioneering some system in Teacher thought. People are coming to the system with personal needs. They are participating in the system by using their skills and abilities. The end result is a system that works well. People are thankful to be part of the Teacher order-within-complexity because it is working well. Saying this more simply, people do not feel exploited by the leadership but rather empowered.
Boasting 1:12-14
This transforms Paul’s attitude. In verse 8, he talked about despairing even of life. In verse 12 this is replaced by boasting: “for our proud confidence is this”. The word translated proud confidence is the noun form of a verb that means ‘living with head up high, i.e. boasting from a particular vantage point by having the right base of operation to deal successfully with a matter’. In other words, Paul is not boasting because of great personal status in Mercy thought, but rather because he is now part of a system of Teacher order-within-complexity that works.
The rest of verse 12 describes the basis for this boasting: “the testimony of our conscience, that in holiness and godly sincerity, not in fleshly wisdom but in the grace of God, we have conducted ourselves in the world, and especially toward you. The first factor is ‘the testimony of our conscience’. The word conscience means ‘joint-knowing’ and combines ‘together with’ with ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. Cognitively speaking, conscience is a function of Perceiver thought, which constructs conscience by searching Mercy experiences for repeated connections. Saying this another way, conscience could be described as a sense of moral cause-and-effect. Testimony usually comes from people. In this case, conscience is testifying. The average person views conscience as ‘the little voice in my head that warns me when I am doing wrong’. Paul, in contrast, is treating conscience as ‘the little voice in my head that confirms that I am doing right’. An attitude of absolute truth will naturally lead to a conscience that usually condemns, because the fundamental principle of absolute truth is that I am nothing compared to the source of truth. Saying this another way, living in ‘Asia’ means being emotionally driven by an attitude of Emperor worship. In contrast, Teacher understanding is based upon universal truth, and this will result in a conscience that approves when I am walking on the right path.
Verse 12 explicitly relates conscience to ‘walking on the right path’ because the rest of the verse compares two ways of ‘conducting ourselves in the world’. The word translated conducting ourselves means ‘to walk, of the manner of life and moral character, to conduct oneself, behave oneself’. This manner of life is happening ‘in the world’ and the word world refers to the structure of current physical existence. Looking at this cognitively, morality that is based in MMNs of personal status leads to an either-or situation: One either denies self in order to focus upon the source of truth, or one ignores the source of truth by pursuing selfish goals. In contrast, morality that is based in the TMN of a general understanding leads to a both-and relationship. Conscience tells me how I should conduct myself, but this behavior is done within the physical world with its personal desires. Saying this another way, most (and possibly all) sin involves taking some kind of shortcut to satisfy a legitimate personal need.
This is related to Kant’s categorical imperative. Verse 11 talked about the start of a social system in which everyone can benefit by following Teacher order. Kant’s categorical imperative says that it is morally good to behave in ways that can be universalized by Teacher thought. Kant insisted that one should follow only Teacher order and not be motivated by personal benefit in Mercy thought. In contrast, I suggest that following true Teacher order-within-complexity will also lead to personal benefits in Mercy thought, as demonstrated by the ‘thanks that are being given on behalf of us’.
We have seen that Paul is using conscience to compare two ways of behaving in the world. Let us look now at these two ways. The positive way is ‘in holiness and godly sincerity’. The word translated holiness means ‘singleness, without folds, like a piece of cloth unfolded’. Such simplicity is an expression of Teacher thought, because Teacher thought builds general theories by looking for order-within-complexity—a simple essence that summarizes many similar situations. A mind that is guided by the TMN of a general theory is simple; it is single without folds. In contrast, a mind that is driven by MMNs of personal status is complicated, because it is continually trying to balance the conflicting demands of many authorities. Being ‘without folds’ does not mean holding on to some Teacher overgeneralization that ignores the details, but rather integrating all the details in a smooth, elegant, and simple manner.
The word translated sincerity means ‘judged in the light of the sun’. A sun represents a general Teacher understanding that sheds light upon the earth of human existence. This describes a conscience that is guided by a universal Teacher understanding, a sense of morality that is related to Kant’s categorical imperative. Paul emphasizes that Teacher understanding is the source of conscience by saying that the holiness and sincerity is ‘of God’.
The negative way is ‘in fleshly wisdom’. The word wisdom means ‘skill, wisdom’. Thus, intelligent thought is being used. But this wisdom is fleshly, a word that means ‘fleshly, carnal, earthly’. Paul uses the term flesh several times in Romans 7-8 when comparing the flesh with the spirit. The flesh describes the structure and content that the mind acquires from living within a physical body within the physical world, the mindset of materialism and short-term physical gain that every child naturally develops—which provides the initial structure and motivation for the mind. This structure is based in MMNs of culture, personal authority, personal status, and physical desire. A mindset of absolute truth is incapable of escaping the flesh because absolute truth is also based in MMNs of personal status and personal authority. However, it is possible to transcend the flesh by following the TMN of an integrated concept of God.
This does not mean that the flesh is evil. Instead, one follows a TMN of God in order to save the flesh. Technology provides a partial illustration of this principle. Technical gadgets are not made out of magic stuff. Instead, they are fabricated out of physical matter. But this physical matter is purified in order to function in a simple manner, and then this purified physical matter is combined to form structures that express the light of general Teacher understanding. For instance, the starting point for a computer circuit is a silicon crystal of incredible purity with an atomic structure that is essentially free of folds or dislocations. A structure of astounding complexity is then etched and implanted upon a small flake of this ultrapure silicon crystal.
Paul finishes verse 12 by adding “and especially toward you”. The word especially means ‘extraordinarily, exceedingly; beyond expectation’. We see here the similarity between a technical gadget and a Christian economy. The way that the computer industry treats physical matter can legitimately be described as ‘beyond expectation’. For instance, semiconductor grade silicon is 99.9999999% pure. A computer chip currently places about 3,000,000,000 transistors on a silicon wafer the size of about one square centimeter. Both of these numbers are ‘extraordinarily, exceedingly beyond expectation’. Paul is saying that social interaction that is guided by Teacher understanding will have a similar quality.
I think I understand what verse 13 means because it reminds me of a principle that often seems to be violated in Christian theological books: “For we write nothing else to you than what you read and understand”. The word translated understand is used 44 times in the New Testament. It occurs three times in verses 13-14 and it is only translated as ‘understand’ by the NASB in these three occurrences. It actually means ‘experiential knowing through direct relationship’. This meaning can be seen in 1 Corinthians 13:12: “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face; now I know in part, but then I will know fully just as I also have been fully known.” The first ‘know’ is ginosko. This means experiential knowledge and comes from ‘seeing in a mirror dimly’. This is contrasted with ‘know fully’ and ‘fully known’; in both cases, Paul uses the verb epiginosko and relates this to seeing ‘face to face’. This same Greek verb epiginosko is used three times in 2 Corinthians 1:13-14.
The commentaries suggest that Paul is telling his readers that there is no hidden message in what he is writing. To some extent this is true, because Paul has just said in the previous verse that he is conducting himself towards them in simplicity. But we are also finding out in these essays that the entire New Testament, and possibly the whole Bible, appears to be conveying a detailed cognitive message. This cognitive message does not violate the surface meaning but it does expand upon it significantly.
Thus, if one takes this verb at face value, Paul is saying that he is only writing to them what they can know fully through personal experience. Theological books often violate this principle. For instance, I remember thumbing through a Bible dictionary which included many pictures of Israel. None of these pictures included any modern scenes. There were no cars in the pictures, only camels and donkeys. Palm trees abounded, while skyscrapers were absent. In other words, this Bible dictionary was visually excluding any modern reference that would make it possible for the reader to ‘know fully through personal experience’. I stumbled across another example in a recent book that was lent me by a friend, entitled Jesus the Lord according to Paul the Apostle (by Gordon Fee). Theologically speaking, the book is fine, and I learned a number of facts. The author’s central thesis is that Paul does not try to prove that Jesus is God but rather uses a belief that Jesus is God as his starting point. For instance, on page 139 Fee says, “As we have seen repeatedly throughout the study, so here Paul is presupposing rather than arguing for an understanding of Christ as acting on behalf of the Godhead. In the majority of cases these affirmations exist as something Paul argues from rather than for, since they frequently serve as the basis for what Paul will urge on these various communities of believers in their own settings, most often regarding some matter of Christian behavior.” I would agree with Fee’s conclusion, but the book that Fee has written does not agree with Fee’s conclusion because nowhere in the book are any of the statements of Paul connected with the personal experiences of today’s reader. Instead, Fee only mentions how readers of Paul’s letters 2000 years ago would apply Paul’s statements to their personal experiences. (Again, I should point out that theologically speaking, this book is well written. But it still illustrates a general attitude that is often present in theological works.)
This cognitive disconnect between theology and present personal experience is a natural byproduct of absolute truth. That is because absolute truth is based in a set of special experiences and people in Mercy thought which are regarded as different than normal experiences and people. This difference can be seen visually in the physical barrier that separates the ‘holy place’ of a traditional church building from the rest of the church. In contrast, universal truth describes connections that can be found universally, and if connections are truly universal, then this means that these connections can also be found in the personal experiences of the readers. That is why these essays continually give illustrations from modern life and current civilization, rather than referring to Bedouin tribesmen leading caravans of camels past palm trees. (Studying how people lived in biblical times is informative, and I recommend Manners and Customs of Bible Lands by Wight.)
Continuing with verse 13, Paul adds that “I hope you will understand until the end”. As before, the word translated understand means ‘experiential knowing through direct relationship’. It is interesting that this mistranslation, which is found in most English translations, itself illustrates the point. Theologians who translate the Bible generally think that an abstract understanding of the text is sufficient, and are not convinced that it is necessary to provide the reader with direct experiential knowing. Thus, when Paul talks about the need for direct experiential knowing, this is mistranslated as some form of abstract understanding. In contrast, Paul hopes that his audience will have direct experiential knowledge “until the end”. And the word end means ‘end goal, purpose, such as closure with all its results’. In other words, Paul is not just writing to convey some abstract concepts, but rather writing in order to help people reach the goal of a new society.
This does not mean that abstract understanding is wrong, because Paul is writing words and he specifically says in verse 13 that he is writing and that his audience is reading. Words are necessary, because escaping ‘Asia’ requires submitting to the TMN of a general understanding, and Teacher thought builds theories out of words. But the goal of this TMN of understanding is not merely to provide an understanding but rather to energize the reader to escape the dead-end of living within the ‘emperor worship’ of ‘Asia’. For instance, one can find many self-help books that are full of direct experiential knowledge. But very few of these practical books are held together by a general theory in Teacher thought that is sufficiently potent to escape ‘Asia’.
Verse 13 contains only one explicit pronoun, the ‘you’ in: “we write nothing else to you”. All of the other pronouns are implied by the verb conjugations. In other words, writing in such a manner that relates to the direct experiential knowledge of the audience is a general principle, but in order to apply this principle one must first know one’s target audience. One must know to which ‘you’ one is writing.
Paul describes this personal enabling in order to reach a new society in verse 14: “Just as you also partially did understand us, that we are your reason to be proud as you also are ours, in the day of our Lord Jesus.”
Verse 14 begins with the comparative as, which means ‘according to the manner in which, in the degree that, just as’. Thus, Paul is recognizing that this principle operates both ways. The readers are also learning about Paul’s direct experiential knowledge through his writing: “You also partially did understand us”. Here the only explicit pronoun is ‘us’ with ‘you’ implied. My experience is that this connection with direct experiential knowledge is unavoidable. In many cases, biblical passages only make sense to me because they resonate with my personal experience. If I did not have direct experiential knowledge, I would have no clue what that passage was trying to say. This relates to ‘the testimony of our conscience’ mentioned in verse 12. This internal testimony provides a sense of internal confidence which makes it possible to hold one’s head high. But it also provides a starting point for comprehending universal principles that go beyond the ‘wisdom of the flesh’.
For instance, the book of Hebrews appears to be describing a sequence of events that extends far beyond the present into the future. The book of Hebrews will not make sense if one approaches it from a mindset of materialism. But if one follows a cognitive path of reaching mental wholeness, then I have found that this direct experiential knowledge makes it possible to make sense of the strange text of the book of Hebrews.
Paul is pioneering a path to a new society, which is being followed by others. Thus, it makes sense that the readers only have a partial experiential knowledge of Paul. But the general principle still remains and this mutual experiential knowledge leads to a greater sense of confidence for both the writer and the reader: “We are your reason to be proud as you also are ours” (v.14). The word translated proud means ‘living with head up high’. And the word as is a stronger version of the comparison which began verse 14, which means ‘even as, just as’. Saying this another way, Paul is describing a community of colleagues who have confidence in each other because they know through direct experience that their colleagues are competent.
But this competence is ‘in the realm of’ a future society: “in the day of our Lord Jesus”. Many words have been written about the ‘day of the Lord’. The word translated day means primarily ‘the period from sunrise to sunset’. If a sun represents the light of a general Teacher understanding, then ‘the day of our Lord Jesus’ describes a future period of time that will be guided by a universal Teacher understanding of God and incarnation. The dawning of this day is described in Revelation 11:15-17: “The kingdom of the world has become the kingdom of our Lord and of His Christ; and He will reign forever and ever.” And the twenty-four elders, who sit on their thrones before God, fell on their faces and worshiped God, saying, ‘We give You thanks, O Lord God, the Almighty, who are and who were, because You have taken Your great power and have begun to reign.’” The Great Tribulation happens before this transition in Revelation 7, while the Antichrist and the beast happen after this in Revelation 13. This dawning is discussed in several other essays, as well as Darby’s doctrine of the Rapture.
The current situation before this ‘day’ could be compared to a group of individuals learning how to function and interrelate within a future democratic society while living under a communist government. They can gain confidence in each other while interacting within communism, but this confidence will become most apparent when communism falls and is replaced by a democracy. (This example resonates with my personal experience because I lived through the fall of communism. For a more current example, imagine having the freedom to interact as a community based upon personal skills and character without being controlled behind the scenes by some super-rich minority.)
Stretching Forward from ‘Asia’ 1:15-16
The next section talks about Paul wanting to visit Corinth again but not being able. It seems rather excessive for the Bible to devote so many verses to deciding whether or not to go on a visit, even if one takes into account the fact that travel was more difficult in Roman times. However, I have consistently found that these seemingly irrelevant details are actually quite significant when interpreted from a cognitive perspective. Saying this another way, it may be excessive for Paul to share his thoughts about traveling from Asia to Corinth, but this detail is very appropriate when one is traveling from ‘Asia’ to ‘Corinth’.
Paul sets the context in verse 15: “In this confidence I intended at first to come to you, so that you might have a second grace.” (I am using the literal translation given in a footnote.) The word confidence is a ‘noun derived from persuade, be persuaded’. Thus, the emerging glimmer of a new society has persuaded Paul to move beyond the mindset of ‘Asia’. Using cognitive language, the mutual interaction based upon personal development and skill has led to the conclusion that it is possible to live within a society that is not ruled by absolute truth with its sources of authority. Using a personal example, I currently attend a small church that was started by a group of people who left another church because of the authoritarian leadership style. This new group started on a voluntary basis and has now continued to function for several years with no paid staff. Instead, everyone takes turns carrying out the various responsibilities based upon personal development and skill. Organizationally speaking, this group has moved from the ‘Asia’ of being ruled by leaders with emotional status to the ‘Greece’ of democracy and specialized skill.
But notice how Paul views these two. He wants to come in order to give the Corinthian church ‘a second grace’. In other words, he is reaching out from an attitude of absolute truth to bring another blessing from God to the secular Corinthians. The confidence gained in verses 12-14 has convinced the mind that a new society based in universal truth can exist, but this confidence still exists within a deeper context of absolute truth. Using an analogy, I may come to the conclusion that I need to stop speaking English and start speaking another language, but as long as I am stating this conclusion in English, I have not made the transition to another language.
This hierarchy of mental networks is described in symbolic form in verse 16, where Paul describes his travel plans in more detail: “That is, to pass through you into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be helped on my journey to Judea.” (Again, I am using the alternate literal rendition.) Paul is not intending to stay in Corinth. Instead, he wants to pass through Corinth on the way to Macedonia, and then get help from Corinth in order to reach his final destination of Judea. The word Macedonia means tall or slim, while the word Judea is related to Judah which means praise. Physically speaking, this makes sense. Paul will take a boat to Corinth and travel from there by land to the highlands of Macedonia. He will then return by boat to the Jewish region of Judea. But a deeper meaning emerges when one examines this journey from a symbolic perspective.
The most obvious point is that Paul’s final destination is Judea, where the Jewish Temple with its praise was located. In other words, at the deepest level, Paul is still being emotionally guided by religious MMNs of adoration for God. My guess is that this was actually true of Paul and is not just a symbolic interpretation. One gains this impression from the description of Paul’s return to Jerusalem in Acts 21. Looking at this in more detail, Paul is warned in verse 11 that the Jews will bind him in Jerusalem and deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles. Paul responds in verse 13 that “I am ready not only to be bound, but even to die in Jerusalem for the name of the Lord Jesus.” Whether this response was appropriate or not, it is indicative of Paul’s core mental networks. He is being driven at a very deep level to go to the religious center of Judaism and follow Jesus in an attitude of self-denial. When he arrives in Jerusalem, he is convinced by the Jewish Christians (Christianity was still viewed as a branch of Judaism at this time) to carry out a religious vow in order to prove that he is sufficiently Jewish (v.21-25). But while he is in the temple at Jerusalem, Jews from Asia recognize him and accuse him of defiling the temple by bringing Greeks into the temple (v.27-28). This starts a riot, the Romans step in, Paul is imprisoned, Paul appeals to Caesar, and Paul eventually travels under guard to Rome. Summing up, Paul was driven by some deep emotional need to return to Jerusalem, convinced by the religious authorities in Jerusalem to submit to the absolute truth of Judaism in order to prove that he respected the religious culture of Judaism, accused by Jews of contaminating Jewish purity with his Greek friends, and finally imprisoned.
Paul describes the deep emotions that he has for his fellow Jews in Romans 9:1-3: “I am telling the truth in Christ, I am not lying, my conscience testifies with me in the Holy Spirit, that I have great sorrow and unceasing grief in my heart. For I could wish that I myself were accursed, separated from Christ for the sake of my brethren, my kinsmen according to the flesh” The word translated could wish means either wish or pray. Unceasing means ‘what happens regularly, without implying always or uninterruptedly’, while grief means ‘intense emotional pain’. In other words, Paul has developed new core mental networks of Christian belief and community, but his childhood mental networks of Jewish religion and culture remain intact under the surface and are still being regularly triggered.
For many years I have felt something similar. That is because I grew up in a conservative Mennonite family and attended church and Sunday school as a child. Therefore, I have found it natural to view mental symmetry as a way of bringing revival to the Christian church. But such an attitude is still thinking in terms of Christendom with its churches, religious meetings, and attitude of praising God. The ultimate goal is still to ‘return to Judea’ and prove that one is a good religious believer. However, this attitude has shifted in the last few years as a result of several factors that were not present in Paul’s time. First, we now live in a world of science and technology. Science should have existed in Paul’s day, but scientific thought did not quite emerge. Science and technology provide a partial illustration of what it means to live within a society that is ruled by TMNs of rational understanding. Paul had to look forward in his mind’s eye to something that was totally new. We only have to look forward to an extension of something that already exists. Second, Christianity is more internal than Judaism. A Jew follows God primarily by performing physical actions. Jewish religion may extend from external behavior to internal attitude, but the starting point for Christianity—especially Protestant Christianity—is an internal relationship with God. Similarly, Judaism views the kingdom of God primarily as a physical kingdom, while Christianity teaches that the kingdom of God is ultimately a spiritual kingdom. Thus, Paul was teaching something entirely new when he emphasized a path of internal transformation leading to a new kingdom that starts spiritually and invisibly. In contrast, when Christians today focus upon a physical kingdom of God imposed through societal status, government law, or physical force, this violates one of the basic premises of Christianity. Third, Christianity is more abstract than Judaism. Christianity is based in theology, and the very concept of theology was invented by Paul. (N.T. Wright makes this claim and I think that it is accurate.) In contrast, Judaism does not really have any theology. For instance, if one searches Wikipedia for Jewish theology it redirects to ‘Jewish philosophy’, which explains that ‘philosophy and Kabbalah are two common approaches to Jewish theology’. In contrast, there is a long and detailed Wikipedia article on Christian theology which links to many related articles. Therefore, when Christians focus upon spirituality rather than theology, then they are actually abandoning the very foundation of Christianity.
Applying this now to the theory of mental symmetry, it is possible to use mental symmetry to translate Christian theology into a theoretical form that is consistent with the TMNs of science and psychology. (I am not suggesting this as a hypothesis but rather reporting this as a fact.) First, connecting Christianity with the TMNs of scientific thought makes it possible to let go of MMNs of religious culture. Paul did not have that alternative but rather had to base Christianity upon a brand new TMN of theology—without getting any major help from other TMNs of society. Second, it is becoming obvious to me that mental symmetry now does a better job than current Christianity of promoting personal transformation in order to build a spiritual kingdom of God. This has become blindingly obvious by the way that American evangelical Christianity continues to support a president who is devoid of any Christian virtues. Third, it is also becoming obvious to me that mental symmetry leads to a higher concept of the Bible than most current theology. Bible-believing Christians used to attack me for building upon a theory of cognition rather than quoting from the Bible. I now find myself shocked at the lack of respect that many Christian pastors and teachers show for scripture. The end result is that I do not have to view my new mental networks as opposed to my childhood mental networks of Christian religion. Using the language of Paul, I do not have to wish that I might be accursed in order to save the Jews. Instead, I can view mental symmetry as a meta-theory that makes it possible to perform a better form of science and technology and live a better kind of Christianity.
With this in mind, let us return to 2 Corinthians 1. Verse 15 says that Paul wanted them to ‘have a second grace’. We now have a clear understanding of what this implies. Paul is still reaching down from the MMNs of Judaism to bring grace to the ‘benighted citizens’ of Corinth. I do not think that Paul was doing this consciously and Paul went much further than the Christian leaders in Jerusalem at extending beyond Judaism to the Gentiles. But Paul still felt driven to return to Judea, and when he did return to Jerusalem he allowed himself to be persuaded that he needed to prove his Jewishness.
Verse 16 provides a possible symbolic description of this path, but I present this as a tentative interpretation. Quoting this verse again, “That is, to pass through you into Macedonia, and again from Macedonia to come to you, and by you to be helped to my journey to Judea.” As I mentioned before, Macedonia means ‘tall or slim’. This is the opposite of the word Paul, which means ‘small’. The implication is that the objective/subjective split that exists in Corinth will make it possible for Paul to gain personal stature in the objective realm of ‘Greece’, which he can then translate into religious stature in Corinth which will give him standing in the religious center of Judea. This is a valid principle, because most religious scholars today who claim to believe in the Bible are actually swayed more by moral pronouncements made by secular experts. Thus, one can gain more credence with religious scholars by being recognized as an expert in the secular world. But if that really is the case, then why does one need to return to Judea?
Yes and No 1:17-24
Paul questions his motives in verse 17: “Therefore, I was not vacillating when I intended to do this, was I?” The word translated vacillating is only used once the New Testament and means ‘of little weight… used of levity and fickleness of mind’. Thus, the emphasis is not upon changing one’s mind but rather upon treating the subject with insufficient emotional gravity. Paul is saying that he is being guided by deep emotions; he is trying to satisfy core mental networks.
But when one applies deep emotions to a city of Corinth, then the result will be divided motives, because Corinth juxtaposes Teacher order in the objective with childish Mercy appetites in the subjective. Quoting the rest of verse 17, “Or what I purpose, do I purpose according to the flesh, so that with me there will be yes, yes and no, no [at the same time]?” (‘At the same time’ is not in the original Greek.) The word translated purpose means ‘to take counsel, deliberate’. It is used twice in verse 17 together with the related word intended which means ‘to plan with full resolve and determination’. Notice that Paul is purposing ‘according to the flesh’, and the word flesh describes the mental content that is related to living in a physical body in the physical world.
Putting this together, when Paul actually tries to live physically in Corinth, he finds himself responding with contrary feelings of application and prohibition: yes and no. On the one hand, the objective skills and expertise that are found in Corinth need to be applied personally. But on the other hand, one needs to refrain from participating in the immorality and amorality of Corinth. On the one hand, yes, one must be part of Corinth. But on the other hand, no, one must not be part of Corinth.
This may sound like a strange interpretation, but I have felt two similar opposing impulses fighting within me for years as I struggle to apply the theory of mental symmetry within today’s split society. On the one hand, mental symmetry insists that the objective realm of science and technology needs to be extended to the subjective realm. But on the other hand, the rules of conservative morality that I have followed since childhood insist with equal fervor that I must avoid the amorality of current society. And I know that these childhood rules must be respected because I continually see the painful consequences being suffered by those who violate these rules. The result is ‘yes, apply’ combined with ‘no, do not apply’. Notice that we are talking here about concrete application and not abstract theory. When dealing with Teacher understanding, then it is important to gain an understanding of all situations. But when it comes to living within Mercy thought, then one should use understanding to avoid situations that lead to long-term painful consequences. This combination can be seen in the day of atonement.
Paul describes the solution in verse 18: “But as God is faithful, our word to you is not yes and no.” A more literal translation would be ‘However, the God is faithful, that the logos of us to you was not yes and no’. ‘The God’ tells us that we are dealing with a single integrated concept of God in Teacher thought. Faithful is an adjective that is derived from the word that means ‘persuaded’. Thus, Paul is being persuaded by the TMN of an integrated concept of God. The apostle John uses the word ‘logos’ to describe Incarnation as the living Word of God in John 1:1: “In the beginning was the logos, and the logos was with God, and the logos was God.” Putting this together, Paul is being persuaded by the TMN of an integrated concept of God to share a technical message of incarnation that is free of internal contradiction. Similarly, I have found that resolving my contradictory feeling of ‘yes and no’ has required starting from the TMN of an integrated understanding of the character of God and then using technical thought to sort through all of the various details, guided by universal principles of moral cause-and-effect. This is very much a matter of being internally persuaded by ‘The God’, because one continually has to start from universal principles and then allow personal feelings to be persuaded by these universal principles.
This may sound like a lot of unnecessary mental work, but this thinking through all the moral details in the light of a general understanding is very effective for constructing an integrated concept of incarnation. Paul describes this result in verse 19: “For the Son of God, Christ Jesus, who was preached among you by us.” Christ refers to the divine side of Incarnation while Jesus refers to the human side. Thus, Paul is describing an integrated concept of incarnation. The original Greek structure emphasizes that the son Christ Jesus is of the God, indicating that one must start with a general understanding in Teacher thought.
In contrast, if one attempts to cut through the moral thicket of living in a Corinth using the moral guidelines of absolute truth, then the result will not be simplicity but rather a complexity of interlocking yes’s and no’s. The word preached means ‘to herald or proclaim; to preach or announce a message publicly and with conviction’. In other words, starting from a Teacher understanding does not mean being apologetic and tolerant. One still makes definite moral statements. But instead of using moral walls to divide experiences into good and bad, one shows how behavior lines up with universal sequences of cause-and-effect. (Concrete technical thought looks for cause-and-effect, and abstract technical thought will universalize these principles.)
The final phrase in verse 19 tells us that this unified message emerges over time. The NASB says that the message “was not yes and no, but is yes in Him. However, the two verbs translated ‘was’ and ‘is’ actually mean ‘did not become’ and ‘has become’. Thus instead of fragmenting into a hodgepodge of permissions and prohibitions, Paul’s message has coalesced into a positive path.
Paul adds that the message was preached “by me and Silvanus and Timothy”. Paul means ‘little’, Silvanus means ‘sylvan, or related to trees, while Timothy means ‘valued of God’. A tree is alive but it does not move. Instead it grows slowly over time and provides shade and shelter. Symbolically, this is probably related to social systems. Thus, these three people imply a mindset that combines humility, social growth, and eternal value. Saying this another way, what can I learn from others, how do social systems grow and develop, and what will really last? Put more succinctly, ‘Paul’ submits personal MMNs to the TMN of God, ‘Silvanus’ deals with TMNs that include personal MMNs, and ‘Timothy’ builds personal MMNs that are appreciated by a TMN of God. I have tried to follow these principles in my research.
This has led naturally to a study of prophecy, because principles that apply universally can also be used to predict the future. Verse 20 describes this extension into the future: “For as many as are the promises of God, in Him they are yes.” This translation reflects the original Greek fairly well. Prophecy is often viewed as God stepping in to stop what humans are doing, or God forcing humans to start doing something totally different. For instance, most evangelical Christians view The Great Tribulation as God saying a cosmic NO!!! to an evil world through a series of global cataclysms. But here the many promises of God are being described as ‘yes and not no’.
When one rethinks morality from a universal Teacher perspective, then one starts to see the future kingdom of God as a full blossoming of the ‘yes’ of God that one already understands and follows. Similarly, the Great White Throne is typically viewed as God saying an eternal NO!!! to created beings. But the Great White Throne appears to be an actual judgment and not just a universal condemnation. I often refer to science and technology as a partial illustration of the kingdom of God. That is because I think that the coming kingdom of God will be a fuller expression of the partial ‘yes’ that already exists within current society. I am not suggesting that hell does not exist. Instead, I suggest that people ultimately send themselves to hell, by building their minds upon childish and evil mental networks that are incompatible with the ‘yes’ of God. After all, how can a demon of hell be any worse than a political leader who sends millions of humans to die in misery and agony as cannon fodder?
Verse 20 continues, “Therefore also through Him is our amen to the glory of God through us.” This gives the impression that God is getting the glory, which is consistent with the attitude in Mercy thought that humans are nothing compared to God. If that were the case, then ‘God’ would be in the genitive case, but it is actually in the dative case, which means ‘to God’ rather than ‘of God’. And ‘to God’ is directly after ‘the amen’. Thus, my reading of the interlinear suggests that the phrase should be ‘Therefore also through him the amen to God moves toward glory through us’. The word amen means ‘so let it be’. The beginning of the verse described a new positive system of integrated morality emerging ‘in him’, with ‘him’ presumably referring to incarnation. This new system is based in the TMN of a concept of God and is being translated into human terms through incarnation. The second part of the verse goes the other way, with humans saying ‘carry out the plan’ to God through incarnation. This agreement from humans turns the passive system of morality into an active divine plan that can be carried out through people, a plan that will move toward glory. The word glory means ‘what evokes good opinion; that something has inherent, intrinsic worth’. (The exact meaning of ‘glory’ is discussed in more detail later on in the essay.)
Saying this more personally, when one has a general Teacher understanding of God’s ways and one attempts to live in a Corinth, then morally analyzing all the childish and immoral hedonism of Corinth will eventually lead to an internal Platonic form of how wonderful society could be if all the fragments of current society were re-arranged in a way that expresses the character of God. One will then feel driven to make current society more like this Platonic form. Using the example of the European joke about heaven and hell, if one lives in the European version of ‘hell’ and analyzes the various fragments of this ‘hell’, one will eventually realize that the same fragments rearranged could form ‘heaven’. (I put ‘heaven’ and ‘hell’ in quotes because a real heaven and hell would be more extreme than the versions being portrayed in the joke. However, the general principle still remains.)
Verses 21-22 describe this internal structure. Verse 21 describes what happens in Teacher and Server thought: “Now He who establishes us with you in Christ and anointed us is God.” The word translated establishes means ‘to walk where it is solid’. Server thought performs sequences of actions; it does the walking, both physically and metaphorically. Both Server thought and Perceiver thought are based in confidence. Server thought looks for sequences that are solid while Perceiver thought looks for connections that are solid. ‘Establishes’ means that there are solid sequences for Server thought. This Server stability is ‘with you’ and ‘into Christ’. (The preposition in means ‘into or unto’.) Thus, people are not acting alone but rather together. This corporate action is being integrated by Christ, the divine side of incarnation. Going further, the word anointed is very similar to the word Christ, which means ‘anointed one’. Thus, in the same way that Christ is the anointed one of God, so people are being anointed by God. (I suggest that a person becomes ‘anointed by God’ when Teacher thought treats this person as more general. This method of constructing a general theory will be discussed extensively in chapter 5.)
This may sound esoteric, but science functions in the same way. Science is based in exemplars. An exemplar is a Server sequence of steps that can be used to solve many similar problems. For instance, one learns in high school physics how to solve collision problems, such as one ball bouncing off another ball or two vehicles hitting one another. All collision problems are solved by going through a similar sequence of steps, and if one learns how to solve one collision problem, then this acts as an exemplar that makes it possible to solve other collision problems. This working with exemplars is an expression of abstract technical thought, and a mental concept of Christ emerges when abstract technical thought is guided by the TMN of a concept of God. Using religious language, when one learns a ‘way of God’ by going through some situation, then one will discover that God functions in similar ways in other situations, and these discoveries will build a concept of Christ in one’s mind, causing the mind to become anointed by God. Thus, in the same way that I can move through the physical world with confidence because I know that God has created the world to behave in predictable ways, so I can move through life with confidence because I know that God is guiding society in predictable ways and has also created human minds to behave in predictable ways.
Verse 22 describes what happens in Perceiver and Mercy thought: “Who also sealed us and gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge.” The word sealed ‘signifies ownership and the full security carried by the backing of the owner’. Ownership is determined by Perceiver thought, because Perceiver thought builds solid connections between experiences and objects. When an object is owned by some person, then Perceiver thought knows that there is a solid connection between that object and that person. A concept of the Spirit emerges when many Platonic forms coalesce within Mercy thought to create a form of the Good. The word heart refers to ‘the affective center of our being’. Thus, if a concept of the Spirit is forming within our hearts, then this means that a form of the Good is emerging within Mercy thought, because Mercy thought is ‘the affective center of our being’.
The spirit is described as a pledge, which means ‘a deposit or down payment which guarantees the balance’. Thus, the Platonic forms within Mercy thought are not disconnected from reality but rather portray what reality will become. This is an important distinction because studying the words of some holy book will cause Platonic forms of perfection to emerge within Mercy thought, but these Platonic forms will have nothing to do with current physical reality because they are being formed by words that are regarded as special and different from normal speech. Saying this more simply, absolute truth leads to Platonic forms of escapism, while universal truth leads to Platonic forms of promise. Going further, Platonic forms of the spirit may express themselves as dreams and imaginations of possibility, but one should not equate the spirit with imagination, because imagination can have many sources, while the Holy Spirit is based in a Teacher understanding of universal principles that portray the character of God.
Paul then turns in verse 23 to his personal feelings: “But I call God as witness to my soul, that to spare you I did not come again to Corinth.” Looking at this historically, Paul’s first letter to the Corinthians contains strong judgments concerning immorality in the church (1 Cor. 5). Paul is now staying away in order to avoid more strong words. This may be true, but I suggest that there is also a related cognitive interpretation, which is based more generically in the immorality that is found in a city of Corinth. The word soul refers to ‘the seat of affections and will, the self, a human person, an individual’. Stated cognitively, I suggest that the soul describes the internal structure that emerges when normal thought integrates mental networks with the specializations of technical thought. The word ‘soul’ is only used twice in 2 Corinthians. The other occurrence is in 12:15, where Paul says “I will most gladly spend and be expended for your souls.” In other words, Paul is willing to go to great lengths to help his followers to have minds that are fully integrated.
Thus, ‘calling God as witness to my soul’ would mean bringing integration to the fragments of the mind by appealing to a concept of God in Teacher thought. In other words, Paul is trying to hold his mind together by hanging on to a concept of God in Teacher thought rather than immersing himself within the fragmented childishness of a city of Corinth. We will see in just a moment that this interpretation is backed up by what Paul says at the beginning of chapter 2.
I know from personal experience that this is a valid interpretation. On the one hand, living within a Corinth forces a person to deal with moral issues that one would normally sweep under the rug and ignore. For instance, the typical conservative Christian would never discuss topics such as sexuality, gender identity, or homosexuality. However, because current society is wallowing in these issues, the church has no choice but to think about them. But on the other hand, when one has thought through the issues guided by an integrated understanding to the point of acquiring internal Platonic forms of how society could be, then there comes a point when one can no longer immerse oneself within the insanities of Corinth. And ‘insanities’ is the right word because one is internally clinging to a concept of God in Teacher thought in order to prevent one’s soul from fragmenting. Maneuvering within today’s society often feels like tiptoeing through an insane asylum trying not to offend the patients, and when one turns on the news one often gets the impression that the inmates have deposed the doctors and have taken control of the asylum. I am not suggesting that everyone in Western society is insane. The objective realm is guided by the extensive sanity of professional specializations. But when one starts re-thinking the subjective in the light of rational understanding, then it will increasingly feel as if one is living in an insane asylum.
Verse 24 describes the attitude that Paul is trying to maintain: “Not that we lord it over your faith, but are workers with you for your joy; for in your faith you are standing firm.” The word lord it over means ‘to exercise rights over one’s own property as an owner with full dominion’. In other words, Paul does not want to find himself in a situation where his need for mental integration causes him to control how others are following God. Instead, he wants to treat those who are following God in Corinth as fellow workers, which is a single word in the original Greek. The word translated joy is related to the word grace and actually means ‘joy because of grace’. Paul wants to view others as fellow partners who are also being guided by the positive emotion of following God’s integrated plan in Teacher thought. Instead of being emotionally driven to tell them how to behave, he wants them to acquire internal stability from their own faith.
I often find myself doing something similar. I know from experience that I will probably get frustrated if I probe too deeply into people’s lives. Therefore, I tend to interact with others at a surface level in order to avoid triggering feelings of potential fragmentation within my mind that would cause me to respond to others in a controlling manner.
Saying this more simply, when maintaining one’s sanity becomes a full-time occupation, then it is better to maintain some emotional distance from others. Using religious language, God does not hold others responsible for following the light that I have. God holds them responsible for following the light that they have. Therefore, if I have more light than others, then I must give others the freedom to follow God according to the light that they have, because if I try to force them to follow God according to the light that I have, then they will end up following me and not God.
Choosing Positive Motivation 2:1-4
Paul describes these sorts of feelings in some depth in the beginning of chapter 2. Starting with verse 1, “But I determined this for my own sake, that I would not come to you in sorrow again.” The word determined means ‘to separate or distinguish by making a judgment’. Thus, Paul is coming to a rational decision. This decision is for my own sake, which means ‘as pertaining to myself’. Paul does not want to come again to Corinth in sorrow, a word that means ‘heavy, heart-sorrow that brings a person down’. Looking at this historically, Paul was troubled by the blatant Corinthian immorality that had pervaded even the church (1 Cor. 5:1-2). Looking at this more generally, when one tries to follow a concept of God in a city of Corinth, one will find the subjective childishness and immorality to be deeply emotionally troubling. When one breaks through to a general understanding in Teacher thought, then one does not want to return to focusing emotionally in Mercy thought upon the inadequacies of subjective behavior.
Speaking from personal experience, I have found that I can continue to maintain a positive focus in today’s society as long as I continue to gain understanding in Teacher thought and develop personally in Mercy thought. But what happens when one has developed an integrated Teacher understanding and one is following it as completely as possible? Returning to Corinth then means facing pure sorrow, because there is no longer any Teacher growth or Mercy development to balance the Teacher and Mercy pain that comes from living within a society of subjective stupidity. Like Paul, one will decide for one’s own sake that it is better emotionally not to return to Corinth.
Moving on to verse 2, Paul says “For if I cause you sorrow, who then makes me glad but the one whom I made sorrowful?” The word glad means a ‘cheery state of mind because feeling the sense of victory’. Paul is looking at the situation in Corinth ‘with a cheery state of mind’ because he sees the growth that is happening. Similarly, when I think about today’s Western civilization, I try to focus upon the growth that is happening as a result of science and technology and I try to think positively about how much better it would be if this objective growth were extended to the subjective. In contrast, if one focuses upon the subjective problems and makes others ‘experience deep emotional pain’, then one is imposing emotional pain upon the very mental networks of society that currently provide a positive outlook.
This does not mean ignoring the problems and pretending that they do not exist. It also does not mean adopting an attitude of tolerance in which one uses Teacher overgeneralization to view everything and everyone as acceptable. Instead, it means viewing the same circumstances from a different perspective. One can choose either to focus in Mercy thought upon the painful experiences being generated by childish MMNs, or one can allow everything to be tied together by the TMN of a general understanding. The situation is the same; the underlying mental network is different.
Paul continues in verse 3: “This is the very thing I wrote you, so that when I came, I would not have sorrow from those who ought to make me rejoice.” In other words, Paul’s current emotional response is itself an expression of the Teacher understanding that Paul communicated with his audience previously using written words.
This is a significant point, because most modern theories cannot be successfully applied to their authors. For instance, I referred earlier to a book analyzing Paul’s attitude of Jesus. The main premise of this book is that Paul did not use logic to prove that Jesus was God, but rather used logic starting from the belief that Jesus is God. This is an interesting insight which I think is accurate. However, that is not what the author of the book does. Instead, the author uses logic to prove that Paul did not use logic to prove that Jesus is God. Saying this more clearly, the author is using careful logic to prove his point. What point is the author trying to prove? That Paul did not use careful logic to prove that Jesus is God, but rather started with the belief that Jesus is God and then used logic to describe the implications of this belief. Paul says several times that others should copy his example. For instance, 1 Corinthians 11 says: “Be imitators of me, just as I also am of Christ.” But the author is not following the example set by Paul. Instead, he is doing exactly what he says that Paul was not doing. Why? Probably because the author is following the example set by current secular academia. I should emphasize that this author is to be commended for actually writing a book on theology, because in most circles the very idea of theology is being rejected. But theology is not just an abstract pursuit. Instead, theology must by its very nature combine abstract thought with personal application, which means applying the theory to the author himself.
Going further, the methodology that I use with mental symmetry does follow the example set by Paul, because I am starting with an abstract concept of God and incarnation and then using logic to work out the implications of this belief. And I have found that those who are trained in academia tend to question what I am saying precisely because I am use this methodology. (Abstract physics uses a similar methodology by starting with some general system of mathematical equations and then using logic to work out the implications of these equations.)
Returning to 2 Corinthians, Paul is saying here that his current emotional response is not just consistent with his understanding in Teacher thought, but it is also consistent with the version of Teacher understanding that he conveyed in written form to his audience. Paul’s earlier writing was merely a theoretical statement being made in abstract thought. Paul is now experiencing in concrete thought the Mercy emotions that he earlier described as an abstract possibility. For instance, reading a travel guide about visiting some foreign country is quite different than actually visiting that foreign country, even if the book accurately describes what it feels like to visit that foreign country.
Verse 3 concludes with an additional concept: “having confidence in you all that my joy would be [the joy] of you all”. (As the NASB indicates, ‘the joy’ is not in the original Greek.) The word translated confidence here is not ‘solid enough to walk on’ but rather to ‘be persuaded of what is trustworthy’. Thus, Paul is referring here to Perceiver thought rather than Server thought. Paul wants Perceiver thought to focus upon universal principles because the word all is used twice, which means ‘each and every part of a totality’. The word rejoice in the beginning of the verse and the word joy here both have the sense of ‘joy because of grace’. This describes a positive emotion that comes from Teacher thought. Teacher thought feels good when a general principle applies universally without exceptions. Paul wants to experience this positive Teacher emotion without any exceptions marring the universal principles. Thus, he wants to have Perceiver confidence that his joy will be ‘of you all’.
This is cognitively significant, because exceptions in Perceiver thought will prevent the mind from fully committing to a general theory in Teacher thought. If one truly wishes to go beyond a city of Corinth, then one must fully commit to a Teacher understanding—without exception, and a city of Corinth will be filled with myriads of possible personal exceptions to the general rule, because most of the motivation within a city of Corinth is being provided by specific MMNs that claim to meet some special need in a unique and powerful manner. If one wants to know what this feels like, one simply has to watch advertising on television: “Your life will be full of light if you use our dish detergent.’ ‘All the girls will love you if you wear our cologne’.
In verse 4 Paul describes the attitude that he had when he was originally writing to those in Corinth: “For out of much affliction and anguish of heart I wrote to you with many tears.” The word affliction is the familiar word for squeezing or narrowness that we saw at the beginning of this essay. The word anguish has a similar meaning: ‘Something held together in close tension… causing someone to feel locked in or tightly pressed’. But Paul adds a word here which he did not use when originally describing this squeezing in 1:4. In chapter 1 Paul talked about he himself being squeezed. Here, Paul talks about his heart being squeezed. Earlier, Paul did not have an understanding in Teacher thought and so the squeezing caused him to ‘despair even of life’. His experiences in Corinth have helped him to construct an understanding in Teacher thought, making it possible for him to step back mentally and recognize that it was Mercy thought that was being squeezed. Teacher thought, in contrast, has been growing and developing in an interdisciplinary manner. This is cognitively significant, because it means that Paul is now viewing his Mercy pain from the stability of Teacher understanding rather than being immersed within his Mercy pain with no way of escape.
The word tears is only used twice in Paul’s epistles, and the other reference refers to the tears of Timothy. Cognitively speaking, a tear is a liquid that comes from the eyes. The eyes are related to Perceiver thought, because one uses one’s eyes to construct a mental map of the immediate environment, and Perceiver thought constructs mental maps. A liquid represents Mercy experiences. Thus, tears would represent Mercy experiences falling away as a result of Perceiver thought. This happens when grieving, a process that is accompanied by the shedding of tears. In grieving, one lets go of old Mercy experiences that are no longer consistent with current Perceiver facts. Paul says that he wrote to the Corinthians through many tears. Cognitively speaking, when one attempts to understand the subjective insanity of a city of Corinth, then there will be a combination of Teacher growth and Mercy release. In fact, it is the positive Teacher of growing understanding that makes it possible to handle the Mercy pain of letting go. I know this from personal experience. This process will involve both symbolic and literal tears.
Verse 4 finishes by describing Paul’s motives: “Not so that you would be made sorrowful, but that you might know the love which I have especially for you.” Paul does not want to use words in Teacher thought to convey his anguish in Mercy thought. Similarly, even though many of my essays and books have been motivated by deep anguish, I have tried not to convey a mindset of Mercy pain but rather one of Teacher understanding. The reason that I am mentioning the personal pain to such an extent in this essay is because it is described so clearly in the book of 2 Corinthians. Thus, even here my primary motive is to illustrate the cognitive order and structure that can be found in the book of 2 Corinthians.
Going further, the word ‘love’ is agape, which means a ‘love which centers in moral preference’, and ‘typically refers to divine love’. Saying this cognitively, one is sharing a general Teacher understanding of the subjective because one knows at a deep emotional level that following this moral guide will lead to personal and societal well-being. Using a simple medical example, this is like teaching principles of cleanliness and hygiene, knowing at a deep emotional level that submitting to these principles will promote physical well-being. This knowing at a deep emotional level is conveyed by the word know used in this verse, which means ‘to know, especially through personal experience’. Finally, the word especially means ‘beyond expectation, further than the upper limit’. Paul used the same word to describe his conduct toward the Corinthians in 1:12. Speaking from personal experience, I suspect that this is because a city of Corinth contains such a juxtaposition of intelligence and foolishness.
Similarly, my study of human cognition has focused upon Western civilization not so much because I am a white male Caucasian living in the West, but rather because Western civilization is such a juxtaposition of intelligence and foolishness. The progress that has been achieved in the objective is so incredible that it drives a person to try to answer why similar success has not been achieved in the subjective realm. The end result of this intellectual fascination is a deep love for Corinth.
Morality under Teacher Order 2:5-11
The next section describes how one should deal with moral shortcomings when building a new society in a city of Corinth. Paul begins by saying that one should recognize that individual problems affect everyone to some extent: “But if any has caused sorrow, he has caused sorrow not to me, but in some degree—in order not to say too much—to all of you” (v.5). The pronoun any is a generic pronoun that could refer either to someone or something. And Paul does not talk about breaking some set of rules but rather refers to ‘causing deep emotional pain’, using the same word that was used in verse 4. The presumption is that that objective understanding will cause people to feel bad when someone behaves in an unprofessional manner. This is definitely the case in today’s professional society. The problem is that today’s demand for professional behavior does not extend to the subjective realm. For instance, employees are expected to behave in a professional manner even when dealing with customers who behave childishly, because ‘the customer is always right’.
One can see a more complete desire for professional behavior in a hospital setting. My parents recently passed away and I had to take them to the hospital many times in their final years. I noticed that signs were prominently posted saying that unprofessional behavior would not be tolerated from anyone, including staff, patients, family, and visitors. My guess is that this fuller definition of professional behavior is the result of having to deal more fully with human emotions and weaknesses.
Paul continues by saying that those who behave unprofessionally (I am applying this term to both the objective and the subjective) do not bring strong negative emotions to him as the source of truth. With absolute truth, one sins against the source of truth. One tries to avoid incurring the displeasure of societal leaders. Universal truth does not work that way because it is not based in MMNs of authority.
Instead, unprofessional behavior brings strong negative emotions to everyone. Everyone is affected in some way, because unprofessionalism brings chaos to the general Teacher order. It messes up the system for everyone. When some person takes advantage of the system then everyone suffers. The word translated some degree means ‘part, portion, share’. Thus, someone who takes advantage of the system does not deeply hurt everyone directly. But the end result is a deep emotional hurt in which everyone takes a part. Everyone suffers to a little extent when the system has to be made more complicated in order to prevent people from abusing the system. Similarly, when some individual steals from the government, then everyone has to pay a little more taxes, and everyone has to suffer from a government system that becomes slightly more cumbersome.
Notice that this is a Teacher-based form of morality. That is why I use the term ‘unprofessional behavior’, because professional behavior is guided by a system of understanding in Teacher thought.
Verse 6 says that the response should also be guided by Teacher feelings: “Sufficient for such a one is this punishment which [was inflicted] by the majority.” The word punishment is only used once in noun form in the New Testament and means the ‘appropriate response necessary to turn someone in the right direction’. The NASB adds the words ‘was inflicted’ in italics but this is not in the original Greek. An attitude of absolute truth will naturally think that punishment has to be ‘inflicted’ by people in authority. But Paul is describing a new kind of society guided by Teacher understanding. The goal is not to use strong Mercy feelings to impose absolute truth upon Perceiver thought within the mind of the evildoer, but rather to restore the universality of Teacher order and structure. Therefore, Paul says that it is sufficient for the majority to correct the unprofessional individual so that he behaves in a manner that is consistent with the Teacher structure of society. In other words, when someone abuses the system, then it is sufficient for the rest of the people to show that person how to behave in such a way that does not abuse the system.
This type of gentle redirection is not sufficient in a city of Corinth—or in today’s Western society which is characterized by an objective/subjective split. That is because in both cases there is no concept of professionalism in the subjective. It is currently verboten in the West to analyze personal taste or personal preference. But if the subjective were ruled by a rational Teacher understanding the same way that the objective is currently ruled, then this type of gentle redirection would be sufficient.
And if objective Teacher understanding became extended to the subjective in current society, then I suggest that this type of gentle redirection would also be necessary. That is because the moral gap between objective brilliance and subjective stupidity is currently so large. We already expect our devices to function with flawless order and structure. If we expected people to think and behave at this same level of flawless order and structure, then the typical personal response would probably be despair.
Verse 7 talks about the danger of being overwhelmed by such feelings of despair: “So that on the contrary you should rather forgive and comfort him, otherwise such a one might be overwhelmed by excessive sorrow.” The word translated forgive is another variant of the word grace that means ‘freely give favor to grant forgiveness’. And comfort is the familiar word that we saw contrasted with narrowness and squeezing in chapter 1, which means ‘personally make a call’ and ‘refers to believers offering up evidence that stands up in God’s court’. Forgiveness by itself might convey the impression of an attitude of tolerance which overlooks all personal inadequacies in order to maintain an overgeneralized feeling of oneness in Teacher thought. But this positive emotion of acceptance from Teacher thought is being applied in a way that ‘stands up in God’s court’, and not in a tolerant manner which pretends that there is no such thing as a court of God.
Saying this more generally, mysticism uses Teacher overgeneralization and Mercy identification to create the feeling of being one with God. This feeling is generated by ignoring all content, and leads naturally to a feeling of tolerance which also ignores all content, guided by the Teacher feeling that ‘we are all one’. In contrast, incarnation translates general Teacher theories into specific Mercy experiences in a manner that includes all content. This idea of universality that includes content is conveyed by the Greek word all which ‘focuses on the parts making up the whole – viewing the whole in terms of the individual parts’.
The danger is that if Teacher understanding is not extended to the specific Mercy inadequacy, then one may be ‘overwhelmed by excessive sorrow’. The word sorrow means ‘heart-sorrow that brings a person down. Excessive means ‘beyond what is anticipated’. And overwhelmed actually means ‘to drink down, swallow down’. If liquid represents Mercy experiences, then this describes being personally inundated by unexpectedly strong emotional pain in Mercy thought.
Looking at this cognitively, Teacher theories can amplify Mercy emotions. For instance, suppose that I drop a cup and it shatters on the floor. That is an unpleasant Mercy experience. But now suppose that I respond by saying ‘You are so clumsy! You are always breaking things!’ I have now used Teacher thought to turn the unpleasant Mercy experience into a general Teacher theory. Looking at another variation of this, suppose that I scratch my ten-year-old used car. This will feel bad in Mercy thought but not that bad, because the car is no longer in pristine condition. But suppose that I scratch my brand-new car with its flawless shiny paint. That will feel much worse because the unpleasant Mercy experience is now occurring within a general context of universal Teacher order.
Similarly, when society becomes guided by a general concept of God in Teacher thought, then personal shortcomings will be emotionally magnified, like a scratch on a brand-new car. It is important to reach down with Teacher thought in a forgiving and comforting manner. Otherwise, the mind may respond by magnifying this unpleasant Mercy event into a universal character flaw.
For instance, suppose that I respond to some personal mistake by saying that ‘I always make a mistake’. In the short term, this will provide emotional comfort, because I now have a general Teacher theory that describes my personal experiences, which is the theory that ‘I always make mistakes’. But this will be devastating in the long-term. First, this type of theory sets Teacher thought against Mercy thought, because Teacher thought will only continue to feel good about its general theory as long as Mercy thought continues to experience personal failure. Second, my general theory is actually an overgeneralization which glosses over the facts. This kind of overgeneralized thinking will reinforce a general mindset of mysticism while suppressing the factual content that is needed to follow a rational understanding of incarnation.
The NASB translates verse 8 as “Wherefore I urge you to reaffirm [your] love for him.” This is not an accurate translation. The NASB adds ‘your’ in italics, giving the impression that the love comes from people. However, the verb translated reaffirm is the verb form of the noun that means ‘a person exercising absolute ownership rights; lord’. In other words, the lordship of agape love is supposed to extend into this person. A general Teacher theory is like a lord that rules over some domain, and agape love is a love of God that is based in Teacher thought. This Teacher love is supposed to rule over the situation. One sees this to some extent in the behavior of a professional person who is driven by Teacher emotions to continue behaving in a professional manner even when faced with unpleasant Mercy situations. I use the secular example of professionalism because most Christians have a semi-mystical view of God, and a mystical concept of God that transcends all of the content of human existence is incapable of impacting the content of human existence.
This emotion-with-content can also be seen at the beginning of the verse in the verb translated urge. This is actually the familiar verb ‘comfort’, which means ‘offering evidence that stands up in God’s court’. Thus, Paul is not trying to find some loophole in God’s law that makes it possible to love the individual. Instead, this call for love is itself an expression of God’s character and an aspect of God’s universal plan of salvation. Saying this more practically, this means providing a rational explanation for the problem, coming up with a rational plan to fix the problem, explaining the emotions that are being felt within the situation, and outlining the steps that are required to achieve further mental growth and integration. And this rational content is all placed within the general framework of a concept of God.
This combination of emotion-with-content does not occur with mysticism and scientific thought. Instead, science and technology ignore Mercy emotions by remaining objective and they ignore Teacher emotions by specializing. This emotional void is then filled by a God of mysticism that ignores all rational facts and sequences. Thus, one gains emotional comfort from a God of mysticism by ignoring all the evidence. (This may sound itself like a sweeping overgeneralization, but I have encountered it enough times within a rigorous academic setting to conclude that this is currently the dominant mindset. Respected professors really do use technical language to say that one must leap beyond rational thought and embrace mystical experience in order to fill an emotional void. And they really claim that this defines the essence of Christianity. Thus, I am not joking when I claim that mental symmetry now provides a better foundation for Christianity than the existing academic climate.)
Verse 9 conveys this idea of Teacher understanding ruling over Mercy identity: “For to this end also I wrote, so that I might know the proof of you, whether you are obedient in all things.” (I am using the literal translation provided in a footnote.) Paul conveyed these principles previously through the written word, telling us that the starting point is a rational understanding in Teacher thought. The ending point is being ‘obedient in all things’. The emphasis here is not upon submitting to some person in Mercy thought but rather upon following a universal theory in Teacher thought without exception.
This does not mean that one has to encounter every possible experience and then follow Teacher thought within that situation, because it is impossible for a finite person to experience every possible situation. Instead, it is sufficient for obedience to be tested in a few sufficiently intense situations, because if one follows understanding in a difficult situation, then one will also follow understanding in easier situations. Even if one occasionally violates understanding in these easier situations, the mental networks that were established from following understanding in the difficult situations will naturally reshape this disobedience into obedience. This testing is portrayed by the word proof, a noun form of a verb that means ‘put to the test to reveal what is good’. The dictionary adds that this ‘is done to demonstrate what is good’ and ‘does not focus on disproving something’. This testing is ‘so that I might know’, and the word used for know means experiential knowledge.
Saying this more simply, when a person goes through a difficult situation, one then learns through personal experience what that person is really like. When one is living in a city of Corinth, then this realization is often disappointing, because the veneer of professionalism cracks and one sees the un-regenerate person underneath. However, if Teacher understanding truly reigns, then these crises turn into opportunities for the TMN of a concept of God to rule more completely over personal identity.
Verse 10 describes another distinction between absolute truth and universal truth. Absolute truth is based in some source of authority in Mercy thought. Therefore, one sins against the authority and one is also forgiven by the authority. With universal truth, forgiveness is extended locally by one person to another. A similar distinction can be seen in the field of physics between Newtonian thinking and Einsteinian thinking.
Verse 10 says, “But one whom you forgive anything, I [forgive] also; for indeed what I have forgiven, if I have forgiven anything, I [did it] for your sakes in the presence of Christ.” (The words in square brackets are in italics and not in the original Greek.) The word forgive is used three times in this verse, and these are all the same word that was used back in verse 7 which means ‘to extend favor or grace’. In the first phrase, Paul says that he will not be the final arbiter of how Teacher understanding is applied. The Teacher person often falls into this trap, claiming to follow a general understanding in Teacher thought while personally retaining the right to decide how this understanding is interpreted and applied. Paul is affirming that if they apply Teacher understanding to some problem in Mercy thought, then he will go along with their application.
The phrase I also (‘forgive’ is not in the original) is a single word that means ‘and I’. In other words, their extending of grace does not have to be followed by Paul’s extending of grace, because that is another, more subtle, version of control in which one still maintains veto rights over the decisions of others. The simple word ‘and I’ indicates that Paul is accepting their decisions as legitimate.
The second part of this verse explains the reason for this attitude. Paul has not treated forgiveness as something that flows from himself; he has not viewed himself as the source of authority who is offended and who then responds with forgiveness. Instead, he was forgiving ‘for your sakes in the presence of Christ’. The word translated presence means ‘face, countenance’, and Christ refers to the divine, abstract side of incarnation. In other words, he is viewing forgiveness as an application of general principles in abstract technical thought. This does not mean ignoring the specific facts and saying in some overgeneralized fashion that ‘everything is okay’. Instead, it means that the ultimate basis for forgiveness is Teacher understanding and not Mercy authority.
This is done all the time in physics. The equations of physics are stated as general principles of abstract technical thought. These general equations are then applied to specific situations, leading mathematically to an extending of grace, because the mathematical equation shows how one can behave in a way that will be successful in the real world. Mathematical equations are not owned by any person, but rather describe general principles that can be applied by anyone. Therefore, if someone else applies a general equation of God’s grace to some specific situation, then Paul can agree with this application and say ‘and I’. (Physics violates this principle by naming most equations and measurements after famous physicists, giving the implicit impression that these equations depend in some way upon physicists. For instance, Newton’s laws of motion, Maxwell’s equations, Newtons of force, Maxwells of magnetic flux.)
Paul has emphasized the need for applying Teacher understanding in a positive manner to personal problems in Mercy thought. Verse 11 describes the alternative: “So that no advantage would be taken of us by Satan, for we are not ignorant of his schemes.” The word advantage means ‘lusting for what belongs to someone else’. Satan is a proper name, but it also means ‘adversary’. Looking at this cognitively, a mental foundation of cultural and personal MMNs naturally leads to an adversarial approach: ‘My culture is good; other cultures are bad’. ‘I win by making you lose’. Teacher understanding is being applied to inadequate cultural and personal MMNs. If this application of universal understanding is not done in a thorough and deliberate manner, then the adversarial attitude of childish MMNs will intrude. Like any mental network, these childish MMNs will attempt to impose their structure upon the environment when they are triggered. But this is ‘lusting for what belongs to someone else’, because the mind belongs to the TMN of a concept of God. If these childish MMNs are allowed to intrude, then this will create a satanic, adversarial environment.
The word schemes means ‘the mind, especially its final output… the result of the thinking’, and ignorant is the negative of ‘knowing through personal experience’. In other words, this is not some deep nefarious scheme of some evil genius. Instead, it is the natural result of a mindset that is based in childish MMNs, and the Corinthians know through personal experience what that is like, because such childish MMNs provide the primary motivation for a city of Corinth.
Preparing for a New Society 2:12-13
The final verses of chapter 2 describe another transition. The implication is that this new society based in Teacher understanding is starting to have an impact. As before, we will interpret Paul’s physical journey from a symbolic perspective based upon the meanings of the names.
Verse 12 describes Paul’s journey explicitly as a transition: “Now when I came to Troas for the gospel of Christ and when a door was opened for me in the Lord”. The name Troas means ‘penetrated’. The city of Troas is in the northwest of Asia Minor just across the Dardanelle Straits from Greece, and is historically related to the Trojans and the ancient city of Troy. The opening of the door implies a major transition. The name ‘penetrated’ also implies a transition into some new realm. Finally, the physical location of Troas in Asia just across the straits from Macedonia also implies a transition from one domain to another.
Troas is mentioned in Acts 16:9: “A vision appeared to Paul in the night: a man of Macedonia was standing and appealing to him, and saying, ‘Come over to Macedonia and help us.’” In the same way that Paul stayed in Corinth because of a vision, he left Asia to travel to Greece because of a vision he received in Troas. Thus, it is symbolically valid to view Paul’s journey from Troas to Macedonia as a major transition, because it was a major transition in the historical ministry of Paul. This spiritual invitation to go to Macedonia was preceded by a spiritual prohibition against remaining in Asia: “They passed through the Phrygian and Galatian region, having been forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia; and after they came to Mysia, they were trying to go into Bithynia, and the Spirit of Jesus did not permit them” (Acts 16:6-7). This essay has discussed at some length what it means cognitively to move from ‘Asia’ to ‘Greece’. Previously, Paul viewed Greece as an intermediate step on his journey of returning eventually to Judea; he saw secular success as a means to his ultimate goal of being accepted by the religious community. But since then a new form of society has started to emerge guided by Teacher understanding. When this new way of existing reaches a critical level, then one will feel spiritually driven to stop speaking in ‘Asia’ and make the transition to ‘Greece’.
It is interesting that Paul receives a double restriction. In verse 6, he is “forbidden by the Holy Spirit to speak the word in Asia”. This is a restriction upon speaking. Looking at this more personally, a concept of the Holy Spirit emerges when Platonic forms combine into a form of the Good. In contrast, Asia is characterized by the worship of authority. These two will struggle for motivation. Does one speak in order to gain the approval of society and become worshiped as an expert, or does one keep one’s mouth shut in order to pursue the internal Platonic forms of an ideal society? What is more important, living within a transformed world or gaining approval? What is better, having a successful career as a seminar speaker, or breaking through to a new form of spiritually enabled existence? I have faced this question many times during recent years, and have decided that it is better for me to keep my mouth shut. Besides, whenever I do open my mouth, I find that the audience usually stops listening fairly quickly.
The second restriction happens in verse 7 from the ‘spirit of Jesus’, and this restriction is upon behavior. The spirit of Jesus does not permit Paul to go into Bithynia. The word permit ‘implies misgiving that goes with the allowing – such as pointing to a lurking danger’. The name Bithynia means ‘violent precipitation’ or possibly ‘violent rushing’. Jesus of course means ‘salvation’. Speaking again from personal experience, I have had the gut feeling that if I attempt to apply the theory of mental symmetry to an environment of absolute truth and hero worship, then the result will not be salvation but rather a violent unleashing of core MMNs that will view any possible path of personal salvation as a threat to personal authority. I have experienced this sort of response just enough to have grave misgivings of following this path.
I should mention in passing that I interpret the term ‘spiritually driven’ as both cognitive and supernatural. As far as I can tell, the spiritual realm interacts with the mind through mental networks. Thus, core mental networks drive the mind in a purely cognitive manner, but it is also possible for spiritual beings (including demons, spirits, and the Holy Spirit) to empower these core mental networks. In my experience, it is difficult to tell exactly where mental networks stop and where spiritual empowering starts. And I have found that this ambiguity is actually mentally healthy, because it allows a person to be open to spirituality while remaining mentally grounded in solid principles of cognitive cause-and-effect. This ambiguity does not mean that there is no progress. Instead, I have found that pursuing a path of mental wholeness causes internal interaction with mental networks to gradually become more three-dimensional, while understanding the mind increasingly reveals the two-dimensional nature of most human social interaction.
Returning now to 2 Corinthians, Paul says in verse 13 that when he came to Troas, “I had no rest for my spirit, not finding Titus my brother; but taking my leave of them, I went on to Macedonia.” The word rest means ‘a loosening, relaxation’. This is different than the ‘despairing of life’ mentioned in 1:8. Previously, Paul’s core mental networks felt totally boxed in with no way of expressing themselves. Here, these core mental networks feel totally boxed in with no way of expressing themselves in the location of Asia. That is because the first part of chapter 2 described the development of a new set of societal mental networks, guided by Teacher understanding. As a result, Paul can no longer feel comfortable or relaxed within current society, but instead feels driven to live more fully in the new. This is like the person who spends some time in a foreign country and then returns home and finds that he now feels culture shock—within his home country.
I should point out here that we are dealing with two chronologies. There is the historical chronology described in the book of Acts, and there is the prophetic chronology based upon the order of the words in 2 Corinthians. The historical events are now being described in 2 Corinthians according to a different cognitive chronology. (We are assuming that Paul is being supernaturally guided in 2 Corinthians to portray a meaningful cognitive sequence of steps. I have found so far in my analysis of the New Testament that this hypothesis works. In other words, Paul’s statement in 2 Timothy 3:16 that ‘all Scripture is God-breathed’ actually has a rigorous meaning and is not just a doctrinal belief to which one verbally assents.) Going further, this cognitive sequence is not divorced from the actual events and feelings experienced by Paul. Instead, if one analyzes what Paul would have felt like in his situation, it is similar to the feelings that one experiences when going through the cognitive sequence. I do not think that Paul himself fully understood the cognitive sequence. But he did go through a series of events that was divinely shaped to feel like the more general cognitive sequence. And I do not think that extensive divine shaping was required because Paul was living during a historical period that was going through a version of this universal cognitive sequence.
Paul says in verse 13 that he did not ‘find Titus my brother’. We saw earlier that the name Titus means ‘pleasing’. This provides an additional detail which explains why Paul did not find rest for spirit. He could not find anything pleasing in his current environment. This resonates with my personal experience. On the one hand, extending the theory of mental symmetry makes it ever clearer within my mind how people and society could live. On the other hand, I find it increasingly difficult to find aspects of current society that are pleasing. The result is a spirit that cannot relax, which drives me to continue taking any step that would get me closer to making a transition from ‘Asia’ to ‘Greece’.
One might think that making such a transition is easy. But there is the problem of novelty. The new society is primarily a figment of the imagination which has never existed in reality—albeit based in a rational Teacher understanding of universal principles. In contrast, existing society may not bring pleasure, but it exists, and it is familiar. And mental networks find comfort in familiarity. Thus, part of preparing for this transmission means ‘taking my leave of them’, and the word taking my leave means ‘withdraw from, take leave of, renounce’.
Finally, Paul ‘went on to Macedonia’ (v.13). The word Macedonia means tall or slim. As I mentioned earlier, this is the opposite of Paul which means ‘small’. If Paul moves from small to tall, this implies that Paul is achieving societal stature. He is going from being rejected and boxed in to becoming famous and successful. This interpretation may seem like a stretch, but Paul says this explicitly in the next verse: “But thanks be to God, who always leads us in triumph in Christ” (v.14).
Theoretical Return of Jesus 2:14
The word triumph is only used twice in the New Testament and means ‘to display triumph openly; publicly exalting the victor who leads a victory procession’. The other occurrence is in Col. 2:15, which says that when Christ “had disarmed the rulers and authorities, He made a public display of them, having triumphed over them through Him.” A triumph definitely describes achieving societal stature. However, notice that Paul himself is not leading the triumph; he is not the victorious general. Instead, Paul is participating in a triumph led by God. This means that Paul could either be participating in this triumph as part of the victorious army or as a defeated captive. The fact that Paul is giving thanks to God strongly implies that he is part of the victorious army. (Many commentators suggest that Paul views himself as one of the defeated captives, an interpretation that is consistent with the worm theology that naturally results from an attitude of absolute truth.)
Looking at this cognitively, if God is leading a triumph and if a concept of God is based in a general Teacher understanding, then this means that the Teacher understanding of God that has been applied in a limited sense by a small group of individuals to prepare for a new society is now becoming obvious to the population at large. This interpretation is backed up by the rest of the verse. The triumph is described as being ‘in the Christ’, and Christ refers to the abstract, divine side of incarnation. In other words, what is being revealed is not just a general theory of God in Teacher thought, but rather a general theory that includes extensive technical details in abstract technical thought. Looking at this the other way, what is being revealed is not just the specific person of Jesus, but rather a general concept of incarnation which applies to many different areas.
Paul describes exactly this in the second half of verse 14: “and manifests through us the sweet aroma of the knowledge of Him in every place”. The word translated sweet aroma means simply ‘smell, odor’, and there is no additional word in the Greek which describes this odor as sweet. (In Eph. 5:2 and Phil. 4:18, the word ‘sweet’ is explicitly added to ‘aroma’.) The cognitive meaning of smell is easy to determine, because the sense of smell does not pass through the thalamus like the other four senses, but rather travels directly from the nose to the orbitofrontal cortex, the part of the brain which contains the core element of mental networks. Saying this more simply, smell triggers mental networks. In the previous verses, Paul was feeling spiritual unease because his core mental networks were not being satisfied; he felt like a stranger in Asia. These core mental networks are now being triggered, which means that something new is happening in the environment which is now triggering these core mental networks. What is being triggered is the ‘aroma of the knowledge of him’, him referring to Christ. The word used here for knowledge is again experiential knowledge. Saying this cognitively, the environment is triggering the mental networks behind the abstract technical thought of incarnation. Translating this into simpler language, Teacher thought is feeling good because facts from the environment are bringing to mind details of the general theory of God.
For instance, I recently presented a summary of mental symmetry at the Canadian CSCA Conference, which attempts to relate science and Christianity. I have presented papers at a number of conferences, but this one felt different. For the first time I did not feel like an outsider trying to butt in to the conversation and change the topic. Instead, it felt like most of the presenters were discussing principles that are aspects of the theory of mental symmetry. In other words, what others were saying was starting to ‘smell’ like mental symmetry.
I think that verse 14 is describing something similar but far more extensive. First, it says that ‘God always leads us in triumph in Christ’, and the word always means ‘at all times’. Second, this is happening ‘in every place’, and every means ‘each part of a totality’. These two phrases describe a universality that is extending within the Server dimension of time as well as the Perceiver dimension of space. Third, this knowledge is being made manifest, a word which means ‘make plain, in open view; to become apparent’. Finally, it is manifesting ‘through us’, which means that Paul himself is now able to express his core mental networks.
Verse 15 makes it clear that what is being revealed is not just technical details but rather the TMN of a concept of God: “For we are a fragrance of Christ to God among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing.” The word translated fragrance here does mean ‘sweet smell’ and not just aroma. This sweet smell is coming from ‘us’, it is ‘of Christ’, and it is ‘to the God’. Using cognitive language, the TMN of God in Teacher thought is encountering the ‘good smell’ of behavior that is consistent with general understanding, causing this Teacher mental network to be emotionally satisfied. This ‘good smell’ is coming from the personal MMNs of those who follow God.
Saying this more generally, a concept of God emerges when a general theory applies to personal identity. Personal identities are now behaving in a way that expresses the general theory, which is generating a pleasant feeling for the general theory. Paul adds that we are a sweet smell ‘of Christ’. In other words, people are not pursuing a mystical feeling of union with God, but rather behaving in a manner that is consistent with the abstract technical thinking of incarnation. The modern technological society provides a partial illustration of what this means. The laws of physics are general theories in Teacher thought. These general theories are applied to reality through the abstract technical thinking of mathematics. The gadgets and networks of modern technology are concrete expressions of the mathematical equations of physics. Using the language of Paul, the devices of modern technology are an application of the ‘Christ’ of mathematics, which expresses the ‘God’ of universal physical laws. This technology is being made manifest at all times and in all places.
Looking at the bigger picture, I suggest that this passage is describing what I referred to in other essays as ‘the theoretical return of Jesus’. This corresponds to the event which many evangelicals call ‘the rapture’. The standard evangelical interpretation is that Christians will be teleported to heaven in the rapture, allowing the antichrist to lead the world through the terrors of the Great Tribulation. This interpretation has several problems: First, it violates the principle which we have seen repeatedly in 2 Corinthians of focusing in a positive manner upon the kingdom of God. Instead, the rapture is portrayed as a time of schadenfreude for Christians as they enjoy the trauma of the tribulation from their comfortable seats in the viewing gallery of heaven. This mindset may be consistent with the behavior of John Darby who came up with the idea of the rapture, but it is not consistent with the idea of a God of love. Second, it confuses the tribulation with the kingdom of the beast and antichrist, and these are portrayed in the New Testament as different events with different characteristics. Third, the classic passage in 1 Thessalonians 4:13-18 contains a number of details which are not consistent with the idea of a rapture. Instead, this passage and related passages appear to be describing the unveiling of a universal Teacher understanding of God and incarnation—a theoretical return of Jesus. This transitional event is then followed by the start of what I call spiritual technology, which is basically technology with an extra spiritual dimension.
Thus, I suggest that today’s technological society really is a partial illustration of a future theoretical return of Jesus followed by a spread of spiritual technology. We will see in 2 Corinthians 3 that this is initially quite successful, but this initial success will be followed by the strong backlash portrayed in 2 Corinthians 4, which corresponds to the kingdom of the beast. However, instead of destroying this new movement, this backlash will force people to follow God more thoroughly in this new matter, similar to the way that Paul was both drawn to Macedonia and repelled from Asia. I suggested earlier that the sequence of 2 Corinthians makes cognitive sense. I am suggesting here that this sequence also makes prophetic sense. That is because prophecy does not describe God intervening in the world in some mysterious, incomprehensible manner. Instead, prophecy describes the process by which God encourages people and societies to develop cognitively.
Repelled by the Light 2:15-16
Continuing now with verse 15, Paul adds that this ‘sweet smell’ to God is happening both “among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing.” In order to understand how this can work, one must distinguish between Teacher emotion and Mercy emotion. A general theory makes Teacher thought feel good. But a single general theory can explain both pleasant and painful Mercy experiences. That is because Teacher thought thinks in terms of sequences while Mercy thought remembers experiences. Sequences that are similar can lead to radically different personal consequences. For instance, one can use the sequence of driving a car either to visit grandma or to drive off a cliff. This explains why verse 15 talks about those who are being saved and those who are perishing. In both cases, a sequence is being followed.
In a similar manner, the theory of mental symmetry can explain the path of cognitive development that needs to be followed to reach mental maturity. But this same theory can also explain what happens to the mind if one chooses to follow some other path that does not lead to mental wholeness. Likewise, one can construct a mental concept of God either by analyzing personal failures or by analyzing personal successes. In both cases, honest analysis will lead to an understanding of universal cognitive principles that illustrate the character of God. And in both cases, the focus is upon understanding the path that is being followed.
What normally happens is that those who choose to follow inadequate mental networks will use rationalization to construct a concept of God that is in the image of personal identity. For instance, the Greeks and Romans viewed the gods is merely more powerful versions of normal humans, with the same moral inadequacies and personal foibles as normal humans. Using cognitive language, MMNs of personal identity are imposing their structure upon the TMN of a concept of God. Christianity, in contrast, says that humans fall short of the perfection of God. Using cognitive language, MMNs of personal identity must submit to the TMN of a concept of God. Following a Christian path requires a mechanism of atonement (forgiveness for sin) that makes it emotionally possible to handle the personal pain of admitting that personal MMNs are deeply flawed and need to be transformed by the TMN of a concept of God.
Something has happened in verse 15 that is now limiting this typical rationalization, because a Teacher understanding of God is becoming apparent both “among those who are being saved and among those who are perishing”. The word perishing means ‘to be lost by experiencing a miserable end’ and ‘implies permanent destruction’. This means that the TMN of a concept of God is being acknowledged by people even if this shows people that they are following a personal path that leads to permanent destruction.
For instance, when I talk about the theory of mental symmetry to people, the average person will express an initial interest and then drop the subject and refuse to talk about it any more. Therefore, the ‘sweet smell’ of increasingly following the TMN of a concept of God may be apparent in my mind, but it is not apparent to others because they are refusing to smell my theory. And smell is an accurate description, because smell triggers mental networks, and what is being rejected by others is mental symmetry as a TMN (or Teacher mental network). In a similar manner, most of those who ‘are being saved’ think that a rational theory of the mind has nothing to do with personal salvation. Thus, they too are refusing to smell my theory. Verse 15 says that the average person will smell the theory. This recognition of Teacher thought already occurs in the objective realm, because almost everyone acknowledges that getting an education is a good thing, and modern society believes that abstract research can solve problems. But this is not currently the case in the subjective. This recognition of Teacher thought in the subjective would only happen if the TMN of a concept of God were to be revealed to society in a new and powerful manner, consistent with the concept of a ‘theoretical return of Jesus’.
Verse 16 reiterates verse 15 in stronger form: “to the one an aroma from death to death, to the other an aroma from life to life.” The word aroma means ‘smell, odor’, and it is clear that some are not experiencing a pleasant odor. In the previous verse, people were recognizing that the TMN of a concept of God exists, because they were being forced to acknowledge its presence in the minds and behavior of those who were following God. In verse 16 the ‘odor’ of this TMN is being felt more personally. This TMN is guiding those who are following a path of personal growth, providing ‘an aroma from life to life’. But this same TMN is predicting the end result of those who are following the path of mental fragmentation, providing ‘an aroma from death to death’. Something similar happens to a lesser extent with medicine, because medical knowledge can guide a person to have a healthier body, while the same medical knowledge can also predict which behaviors will lead to an unhealthy body.
Verse 16 finishes by asking “And who is adequate for these things?” The word adequate means ‘to reach to; hence, adequate, sufficient’. This focus on personal adequacy implies that a new higher standard of professionalism has emerged. In the same way that the rational Teacher theories of science create a desire to perform some specialization in a professional manner, so a general Teacher theory would motivate people to become more professional. And as before, I am using the word professional in a positive manner. One sees this to some extent in the desire to be a gentleman or act like a lady. Today’s definition of what it means to be a gentleman or a lady may be incomplete, but it still reflects a desire to be more professional as a human being. Cognitively speaking, this means behaving in a manner that reflects Teacher structure and order without allowing childish MMNs to be expressed in a crude manner.
This same word ‘adequate’ was used in 2:6 when talking about the majority correcting the direction of someone who causes sorrow. There too we saw a form of conscience that is based in professionalism—behaving in a manner that meets accepted standards of Teacher structure and order.
Misusing Spiritual Technology 2:17
Verse 17 describes a way of misusing Teacher understanding: “For we are not like many, peddling the word of God, but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God.” The word translated peddling is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘to act as an unscrupulous merchant, a huckster who profits for personal gain’.
One sees this illustrated by many televangelists. One can understand what is happening cognitively by comparing the medium with the message. The medium is provided by technology. Scientific understanding has been used to create technological communication devices that are networked in a manner that demonstrate extensive Teacher order: Video cameras translate pictures into electronic signals which are then spread to thousands of homes and then turned back into moving pictures on a television or computer screen. The message, in contrast, emphasizes Mercy thought: The speaker will use emotional language, talk about people in need, share moving stories, focus on the love of God, or talk about personal miracles that violate the laws of nature. Thus, the medium contradicts the message, because the message tends to focus on Mercy thought to the exclusion of Teacher thought, but this message is being transmitted on a medium that was developed by using scientific thought to focus upon Teacher thought to the exclusion of Mercy thought.
This contradiction is not limited to Christianity. Instead, it is a general characteristic of modern Western society. Teacher-based technology is used to design and produce new gadgets, and then Mercy-based marketing is used to sell these gadgets. In most cases, Teacher thought is the servant of Mercy thought. The bottom line for most companies that build and markets gadgets is not improving the Teacher order of society but rather the Mercy goal of getting rich. Similarly, many televangelists are also motivated by the bottom line of getting rich. (I am using the words ‘most’ and ‘many’ because there are exceptions.)
This contradiction is made possible by the split between objective and subjective. Science and technology limit themselves to the objective realm, creating an emotional vacuum in the subjective. The typical televangelist fills this vacuum with a religion based in MMNs of authority, tradition, and emotionally-moving personal experience, while most marketing fills this vacuum with advertising based in endorsement, cultural references, and emotionally appealing personal anecdotes. In both cases, the ultimate goal is personal gain in Mercy thought.
A similar juxtaposition would exist during the start of spiritual technology. I have suggested in previous essays that a theoretical return of Jesus would be followed by the advent of spiritual technology. I do not know exactly what spiritual technology is, because I am trying to look forward to something that does not yet exist. The basic premise is that if following Teacher thought in the objective leads to the benefits of technology, then following Teacher thought in the subjective should lead to similar benefits that are like technology but more personal and internal. Hence, spiritual technology. One can see this progression described in Hebrews 1-2. Hebrews 1 describes the triumph of a new understanding of God and Incarnation in Teacher thought. This is followed in Hebrews 2 by an outpouring of spiritual power. This new spiritual power appears to start by adding a spiritual component to existing technology. Hence the term spiritual technology, with technology being the noun and spiritual the adjective.
Such a starting point would be vulnerable to the peddling described in 2 Cor. 2:17. It would be natural for existing marketing and televangelism (along with various forms of entertainment) to promote spiritual technology as a new-and-improved version of technology, using the same methods of marketing motivated by personal gain. In a sense, marketing would turn into televangelism, because televangelism is basically marketing enabled by technology applied to spiritual topics.
Acts 8 describes something similar happening in the early days of Christianity. The new religion of Christianity was just starting to spread beyond Jerusalem into Samaria. Peter and John arrived from Jerusalem. They were laying their hands on new converts “and they were receiving the Holy Spirit. Now when Simon saw that the Spirit was bestowed through the laying on of the apostles’ hands, he offered them money, saying, ‘Give this authority to me as well, so that everyone on whom I lay my hands may receive the Holy Spirit.’ But Peter said to him, ‘May your silver perish with you, because you thought you could obtain the gift of God with money! You have no part or portion in this matter, for your heart is not right before God’” (Acts 8:17-21). Notice how Simon views spiritual power as a better tool for gaining personal wealth. Peter responds by telling Simon that the spiritual power comes from God, and that Simon’s heart (in Mercy thought) is not right before God (in Teacher thought).
This same response can be seen in 2 Cor. 2:17. What is being peddled is literally ‘the logos of the God’. ‘The God’ describes the TMN of a universal concept of God. ‘The logos’ refers to the abstract, divine side of incarnation, which is ‘of God’. Using cognitive language, the abstract technical thinking of incarnation is flowing from the TMN of a concept of God in Teacher thought. This combination describes what would be revealed in a theoretical return of Jesus. Verse 17 says that many will be peddling this revelation of divinity after the theoretical return of Jesus.
The second half of verse 17 describes the positive alternative: “but as from sincerity, but as from God, we speak in Christ in the sight of God”. The word translated sincerity means ‘judged in the light of the sun’. The sun represents a general theory in Teacher thought. Peddling is motivated by a desire for personal gain in Mercy thought. Sincerity means being judged by a universal understanding in Teacher thought. The next phrase ‘but as from God’ emphasizes that the source is a universal understanding of God in Teacher thought. The adverb translated in the sight of means ‘opposite, in front of, over against’. Thus, Paul is speaking in Christ opposite God. Again we see the combination of the abstract side of incarnation combined with a concept of God, the hallmark of a theoretical return of Jesus. But the direction is different. Christ, the abstract side of incarnation, is the foundation for generating words in Teacher thought that appear ‘opposite or in front of’ God. This is similar to the relationship that occurs in science between general laws and mathematical analysis. The abstract technical thinking of mathematical analysis can be used to develop the general laws of physics in Teacher thought. On the one hand, the mathematical analysis is an expression of general laws, but on the other hand, the general laws can be extended through mathematical analysis.
Before we continue I should talk briefly about personal gain. I do not want to convey the impression that following God means denying self. We saw at the beginning of 2 Corinthians 2 that the new society which is guided by Teacher thought leads to good personal results in Mercy thought. Similarly, spiritual technology would lead to many beneficial personal results in Mercy thought. However, if these beneficial results are to continue, then the Mercy benefits should always be viewed as an expression of the Teacher understanding. Teacher thought should never be made the servant of immature personal desires in Mercy thought. One can see this principle with the current relationship between technology and marketing. When marketing announces some new product, then technology eventually has to produce this product or else the company will fail. In the computer industry, this practice of marketing non-existing products is known as vaporware.
A New Form of Academia? 3:1
Chapter 3 begins with Paul asking himself this question. Is Teacher understanding being ruled by Mercy identity in his case? “Are we beginning to commend ourselves again?” (3:1) The word translated commend means ‘stand together, referring to facts lining up with each other to support or commend something’. Using cognitive language, is the TMN of a general theory being constructed out of MMNs of personal identity? A person who grows up in a technological society will naturally come to this conclusion. That is because almost everything comes through people: If I want medicine, I visit a pharmacist. If I want food, I go to a grocery store. If I want an electronic gadget, I go to the electronics department in some store and buy it from a salesperson. The obvious conclusion for such a person is that all apparent Teacher order is actually constructed out of people and is based upon their personal desires and biases. This is what deconstructionism teaches, because it claims that all apparent Teacher theories are merely universalizations of cultural MMNs masquerading as universal structures. I have read several books that adhere to this philosophy. The writers typically have degrees in the soft sciences, science and technology are seldom mentioned in these books, and one gains the impression that the authors are technologically illiterate.
I should emphasize that commending is better than pure personal status, because one is using Teacher thought to determine personal status rather than basing personal status purely upon Mercy emotions. Similarly, deconstructionism is better than pure hero worship, because even though deconstructionism says that Teacher theories are fake, it is still presenting a Teacher theory about fake Teacher theories. However, if commending continues—or if deconstructionism is pursued for long enough—then all that will remain is personal opinion imposed by personal status, which will be felt as a struggle between power and fear of power.
The word ‘again’ implies that an obsolete mindset is beginning to reappear. MMNs of personal authority determine truth and understanding when people believe in absolute truth. 2 Corinthians has described the process of replacing a mindset of absolute truth with universal truth. When technology reaches the consumer through people, then there will be a natural tendency for a mindset of absolute truth to reappear in the next generation, as illustrated by deconstructionism. My limited experience at various conferences suggests that deconstructionism tends to be embraced most enthusiastically by younger people who grew up in a modern technological society and therefore lack the common sense that is acquired through direct contact with physical nature.
Verse 1 continues: “Or do we need, as some, letters of commendation to you or from you?” The word translated letters means ‘a written message’. The word commendation is the adjectival form of the verb commend, which means ‘what stands together, referring to a coherent endorsement, or letter of commendation’. This adjective is only used once in the New Testament. Translating this into modern academic language, scholars are being evaluated by the number of papers that they have published. Looking at this comparison in more detail, the focus in both cases is upon the written word. Teacher words are normally ephemeral vibrations in the air. Writing words down gives stability to words, which are the basic building blocks of Teacher theories. Second, in both cases words are being used to construct general theories in Teacher thought. An academic paper is evaluated for its structure and coherence and not by the Mercy emotions that it triggers. Similarly, one is using Teacher thought when one looks for ‘a coherent endorsement that stands together’. Third, in both cases the same principle is being applied to everyone regardless of Mercy status. Academic papers are supposed to be evaluated impartially, without knowing the identity of the authors. Similarly, verse 1 describes letters of commendation being used both for communication ‘to you’ and ‘from you’. Fourth, in both cases these letters of commendation are not optional but required. Any scientific finding today that has not been published in some reputable journal will be naturally regarded as suspect. The underlying assumption is that the process of getting a paper published will eliminate MMNs of personal bias and ensure that the words are being guided only by Teacher understanding. This works—to some extent.
But lurking behind these requirements is a cognitive contradiction. A letter of commendation, or academic paper, exhibits all the qualities of rational Teacher thought. But it still exists within the realm of words, words are spoken by people, and the mind uses MMNs to represent people. This may sound like a trivial distinction, but I have struggled with this issue for several years. Looking at this in more detail, I have tried twice together with Angelina Van Dyke to publish a paper on mental symmetry. (These papers can be downloaded from my academia webpage, and they are being viewed by others.) The first time we submitted a paper to a fairly reputable journal and the response that we received was strong derision. The reviewer made it clear to us that we did not know how to think clearly. That is what happens when one uses normal thought to construct a theory and then submits this theory for evaluation to a system that uses technical thought. The second attempt was to a journal that was just starting up published by a Christian university which claimed to be bridging the field of TESOL with Christianity. We submitted this paper after giving a long presentation at the international Christian TESOL convention and becoming acquainted with the editor of this paper. Eventually, it became apparent that the idea of a general theory of Christianity was incompatible with the philosophy of the journal. This response made it apparent that the structure of publishing a paper may exhibit characteristics of Teacher thought, but underlying everything is the general assumption that MMNs of personal identity should not be ruled by the TMN of a general theory.
Thinking through such rejections led me to the conclusion that there is a deeper form of acceptance than academic acceptance. When one comes up with a new technological device, the ultimate test comes from reality and not from people. What ultimately matters is not publishing a paper about a gadget but rather building the gadget and having it work in the real world. Similarly, when the objective thinking of science is extended to the subjective, then the ultimate test is not gaining audience share but rather experiencing personal transformation. This is already true today. For instance, the theory of mental symmetry may not be widely known, but it has transformed my thinking and behavior. Similarly, others are experiencing personal transformation even if they do not use the language of mental symmetry because they are observing the same reality and coming up with similar principles. Going further, if a theoretical return of Jesus were to be followed by spiritual technology, then the ultimate test would not be getting a paper published but rather breaking through personally to some new spiritual enhancement of technology. And the ultimate requirement for participating in spiritual technology would not be using the language of metal symmetry but rather applying the principles of personal transformation.
Extending Spiritual Technology 3:2
Paul extends academic evaluation to the subjective in verse 2: “You are our letter, written in our hearts, known and read by all men.” Academia says, ‘you write the paper’. Paul says ‘you are the paper’. I have mentioned several times that if one wishes to understand the mind, then one must combine academic research with personal transformation. That is because the human mind is doing both the studying and being studied. It is possible to separate these two to some extent when studying the natural world because what is being studied functions independently of the human mind. This separation would no longer exist with spiritual technology, because the spiritual component that is added to the technology would be an expression of personal transformation. Saying this more carefully, the spiritual realm interacts with the human mind through mental networks. Presumably, with spiritual technology humans would use their core mental networks to channel spiritual ‘energy’ to physical devices.
I use the word ‘channeling’ deliberately, because I think that this kind of spiritual channeling is already happening to some extent, both as ‘gifts of the spirit’ and as spiritual channeling. The charismatic Christian may respond that we already live in such a time of spiritual technology, but if one takes a closer look at charismatic Christianity, one notices that very little Teacher understanding is present, and that the dispensers of spiritual power usually promise much more than they actually deliver. Charismatic Christianity is infamous for downplaying theology and promoting charlatans. I am not suggesting that Charismatic Christianity is devoid of spiritual power. Instead, I suggest that charismatic Christianity tends to treat spiritual power the way that electrical power was treated in the 18th and 19th centuries. First, before Volta invented the electric battery in 1800, there was no way of generating a steady source of electric power. Similarly, spiritual power usually seems to be exhibited in short outbursts that do not last over the long term. Second, electric power was used largely to shock people, partially because of the public spectacle that could be produced, and partially to deliver ‘magical cures’. Similarly, spiritual power is also used largely to shock people in public settings or promoted as a cure-all that will magically heal all spiritual ills.
Continuing with verse 2, the next phrase says ‘written in our hearts’. The word written means ‘to inscribe, to enter in a register’. This is a strange phrase because ‘heart’ refers to Mercy thought, while ‘inscribing’ implies using Teacher thought in some permanent manner. One sees this kind of juxtaposition in current academia. Academic thought may claim to be objective, but scientists give much more weight to statements made by officially accepted academic experts than to the identical words being spoken by normal people. However, this Mercy status is achieved through Teacher means. A person becomes a recognized academic expert by coming up with new Teacher theories and/or publishing papers in reputable journals. This juxtaposition can be seen most obviously in the scientific practice of naming quantities, measurements, and equations after famous scientists. For instance, the electric volt is named after Volta who invented the electric battery. Similarly, power is measured in watts, named after James Watt who invented the first practical steam engine. Verse 2 applies this idea of using Teacher order to determine Mercy status explicitly to the subjective. When a person becomes some ‘letter’ in Teacher thought, then this Teacher status is inscribed upon Mercy thought within the minds of others. (In other words, there might be a place within spiritual technology for naming equations and quantities after people because there would be a connection between personal transformation and spiritual power. However, this practice is inconsistent with current objective science and technology, because scientific law does not depend upon people.)
Verse 2 finishes by saying that this letter is then “known and read by all men”. As usual, the word known means ‘to know through personal experience’. Scientific research gives status to academic papers because they—supposedly—describe how things work. In other words, the writer of the paper is not creating truth but rather discovering truth. This is an important distinction, because truth that is created cannot be extended beyond the author and his followers, while truth that is discovered can be used by everyone independently of the author. For instance, the laws of some country only apply to the realm of that country, and they must be enforced by the government of that country. In contrast, the laws of nature apply everywhere and there is no need for them to be enforced because they already apply everywhere. Verse 2 describes a similar universalizing of spiritual truth. When one person makes a spiritual breakthrough, then all other people can have personal knowledge of this breakthrough in Mercy thought and read about this breakthrough in Teacher thought.
The word men refers generically to humanity, both male and female. As an aside, I do not subscribe to the political correctness of removing all gender references from speech, because male thought is not the same as female thought. But I also do not think that male thought is inherently superior to female thought. Instead, one of the goals of the theory of mental symmetry is to empower female thought by delivering the world from a mindset dominated by male technical thought. Such female empowering would occur literally with spiritual technology, because spiritual power would amplify the mental networks of female thought, empowering the technology that was developed using male technical thought. Paul has just said that becoming a letter of commendation is more important than sending or receiving letters of commendation. Similarly, spiritually empowering female thought is more important than altering language to respect female thought.
Moving on, I suggest that it is important to distinguish between being a source of spiritual power and making a personal breakthrough into the spiritual realm. The personal element seems to be essential, because these letters are being known and read ‘by all men’. But a person who is a source of power remains important in Mercy thought, and one accesses this power by going to that person. For instance, those who want to be healed in charismatic circles will typically attend the healing meetings of some charismatic faith healer. The underlying assumption is that one becomes healed by going to a special person with a special gift at a special event. In contrast, a person who makes a breakthrough into the spiritual realm opens a doorway which can then be accessed by other individuals without having to go through that person in Mercy thought. This distinction is conveyed scripturally by the difference between appealing to some person and calling on a name. Appealing to some person focuses upon that individual in Mercy thought. In contrast, calling on a name, such as the name of Jesus, focuses upon the generic skill or general law that has been opened by that individual.
For instance, suppose that parliament passes a new social assistant package. One does not have to appeal directly to a member of Parliament (or congressmen or senator in the case of United States) in order to receive the benefits of this package. Instead, one accesses this social assistance by contacting a government office and calling upon the name of that legislation. Similarly, if some medical doctor pioneers a new surgical procedure, then one does not have to go to that doctor to get the new procedure. Instead, this procedure can be learned by other doctors who will also become capable of carrying out this procedure. The personal element is still present, but it is being ‘known and read by all men’.
A law can only be discovered if some realm governed by natural law already exists. In a similar way, a breakthrough into the spiritual realm can only occur if a spiritual realm exists into which one can break. Verse 3 describes this background requirement. It begins, “Being manifested that you are a letter of Christ”. The word translated manifested means to ‘make clear, visible, manifest, make known’, and the same verb was used in 2:14 when talking about the triumph of God in Christ. I suggested that 2:14 refers to what I call the theoretical return of Jesus. In 3:3 what is being manifested is that ‘you are a letter of Christ’. Christ refers to the abstract side of incarnation. Thus, when people are becoming letters of commendation, the content of these letters is not random. Instead, the content is an expression of the abstract technical thinking of incarnation. Similarly, when people publish scientific papers, the content of these papers is not random. Instead, the content is an expression of the abstract technical thinking that is used to understand natural processes. Saying this another way, people are adding to the body of knowledge, and this is a single, coherent body. This is also reflected in the grammar. The verb ‘you are’ is in the plural, while the word ‘letter’ is in the singular. Thus, many people are combining to form a single, integrated written text.
These previous paragraphs may be confusing because I am trying to describe a form of thinking which does not exist at present. Current science and technology tend to minimize the personal element, while current Charismatic Christianity tends to minimize rational understanding. Spiritual technology would combine these two into a single integrated package. Personal transformation would be required to make a spiritual breakthrough, but this breakthrough would then express itself in a manner that was like science and technology. One already sees this to some extent with current technology. New gadgets are invented by individuals or small groups, but once they are invented they can then be mass-produced for many people to use.
Spiritual Science 3:3
The next phrase explains the role that is played by Paul and other humans in this process: “cared for by us’ (v.3). The word cared for is the verb form for the noun deacon, which means ‘to serve, minister’. This tells us that human leaders still play a role. But they are not acting as sources of truth in Mercy thought but rather performing Server actions. Something similar happens with science, because those who are in charge of some field of science maintain the methodology—the set of Server actions and sequences—that is required to evaluate new information. However, again one sees a subjective twist. Methodology describes a set of objective sequences that one must go through in order to maintain the system. Verse 3, in contrast talks about serving people. The goal is not to serve the system so that it continues to function but rather to serve people so that they remain personally capable.
My gut feeling is that spiritual technology would totally undermine existing concepts of prayer. On the one hand, in areas where a breakthrough has been achieved, the answer to prayer would come too quickly with too much force, leading to questions such as ‘Do I really want this prayer to be answered?’ ‘Am I personally capable of handling an answer to this prayer?’ Something similar happens with modern technology. If a device has been invented, then one simply has to go to a store to purchase it. But once one has purchased a new gadget, then one has to learn how to use this gadget. On the other hand, in areas where no breakthrough has occurred, gaining an answer to prayer would involve too much personal commitment, leading to questions such as ‘Am I willing to pay the personal price to find an answer to this prayer? Would an answer this prayer disturb my current lifestyle?’ Again, one can see something similar with modern technology, because inventing a new gadget takes time and commitment. It is much easier to say ‘Someone should do something about this’ and then move on to other areas.
The next phrase in verse 3 brings this contrast out more clearly: “written not with ink but with the Spirit of the living God”. The word translated written is the same strengthened form of the verb ‘write’ that was used in verse 2 which means ‘to inscribe, to enter in a register’. The word ink is only used three times in the New Testament and is derived from the adjective for the color black. Looking at this literally, the current academic publishing system is based very much in ink. What really matters for the career of the typical scientist is not coming up with new ideas or getting ideas to pass peer review but rather getting papers published within high quality journals. One might think that this is an overstatement, but the emphasis that is placed upon being ‘inscribed with ink’ can be seen by the stranglehold that the academic press industry has upon most of the scientific community. For instance, according to a 2012 article, Harvard University pays about $3.5 million a year subscribing to academic journals, and it typically costs $30-$40 to purchase a single article from a publisher such as Elsevier or Springer. (Another site claims that Harvard University was actually paying $16 million dollars a year.) Academic publishers charge such outrageous prices despite getting most of their services for free: The articles are written by scientists usually paid by the government. The articles are peer-reviewed by scientists for free. The articles are submitted for publication in a form that requires very little editing. And most publishing can now be done electronically over the Internet. Thus, the only real service that an academic publisher still provides is ‘inscribing with ink’—producing an academically and administratively approved record of the words of an academic paper. Alternative open access journals are now growing, but they lack the prestige of the established journals. Using the language of Paul, they do a poorer job of ‘inscribing with ink’.
Looking at ‘ink’ metaphorically, ink leaves a permanent mark on a writing surface. The word ‘ink’ in Greek comes from the color black, implying that ink darkens or covers a surface. Similarly, the process of academic publishing is not liberating. It leaves a mark on people; it darkens their thinking with inscribed words; it places a straitjacket upon normal speech. That is my gut feeling after having read thousands of academic papers over the decades on neurology and psychology. It is important to evaluate people’s words and theories. The average Christian may talk about building personal life upon the word of God as revealed in the Bible, but it is the academic community that really knows what it means to build one’s life upon the written word. Words that are published in academic papers mean something and are remembered. Most of the words that are spoken by preachers mean nothing and are immediately forgotten. But the process of publishing papers is still like inscribing living human thought with dead black ink.
Verse 3 describes the new alternative, which is being inscribed “with the Spirit of the living God”. I have described previously in this essay how a concept of the Holy Spirit forms. Restating how this works, Teacher thought comes up with general theories that describe the idealized essence of some set of Perceiver facts. This Teacher understanding then leads indirectly to the internal image of a Platonic form in Mercy thought, which is an imaginary picture of the idealized essence of some set of Perceiver facts. For instance, when one imagines a circle, one thinks of a perfect circle that is more ideal than any circle in real life, but which also summarizes the essence of all circles in real life. Going further, when Teacher thought comes up with a universal theory, then this indirectly interconnects all Platonic forms within Mercy thought, leading to what Plato called the form of the Good, or a concept of the Holy Spirit.
The goal of academic publishing is to ensure that speech adheres to some standard of perfection in Teacher thought and is not corrupted by subjective MMNs in Mercy thought. Platonic forms automatically perform this function, because they present Mercy thought with ideals that are based in the perfection of Teacher thought. I am not suggesting that Teacher thought can instantly come up with ultimate perfection. However, whenever Teacher thought comes up with a theory, it will be more perfect than the facts of reality, which will drive Mercy thought in the direction of increasing perfection. This idea of being more perfect than reality is cognitively similar to the principle in special relativity that light always travels at the speed of light, regardless of the speed of the observer.
‘Inscribing with ink’ imposes Teacher perfection upon Mercy thought by placing the mind within a straitjacket. Platonic forms of the Spirit attract Mercy thought to the light of Teacher perfection. In both cases there is an inscribing of words, but as Paul will say three verses later, “the letter kills, but the spirit gives life”.
This contrast is emphasized by the phrase ‘Spirit of the living God’. Studying the written words of textbooks, academic papers, or the Bible can lead to the TMN of a general theory or concept of God. But even if this general theory turns into a Teacher mental network and starts to drive the mind, it is not really alive. That is because it is rooted in a limited, fixed, and unalterable set of written words. This living deadness is an inevitable byproduct of building upon absolute truth. Universal truth, in contrast, leads to the concept of a living God, and it also generates Platonic forms that are alive. This distinction has become apparent to me as I have used the theory of mental symmetry to analyze the Bible. Studying the Bible from a fundamentalist perspective is like analyzing some picture. A picture contains only limited details and it only provides a finite window. One does not know what was happening just to the left of the picture or just to the right. Using the theory of mental symmetry provides the same doctrinal analysis of the picture itself, but one can also use the theory to zoom in on details that are not contained within the picture and extrapolate beyond the edges of the picture. Theoretically speaking, this is liberating, and it leads to the spirit of a living God. Saying this another way, because of the theory of mental symmetry, I no longer view theology as analyzing an ancient book. Instead I see it as opening a door into an entire, living, spiritual realm.
The advent of spiritual technology would cause the same kind of transition to occur within scientific thought. Scientific research is currently a study of dead natural processes. God created the universe to behave in a certain fashion, and the universe continues to behave this way without exception. This repeatability is important for building confidence in scientific law, but it also means that there is only so much to discover in the natural world. Two hundred years ago, individual scientists working in simple laboratories could observe normal life and come up with earthshaking discoveries. Today, most scientific discoveries are being made by groups of scientists using specialized equipment to observe extreme forms of matter that do not occur in normal life. The end result is the mental concept of a dead God who created the universe at some time in the past and has done nothing since then. Spiritual technology would transform this into the concept of a living God, because it would become possible for people to make spiritual breakthroughs that would modify the dead laws of nature. Existing scientific research would also have to include the component of life within its theories, because living people would be able to use spiritual life channeled through living mental networks to adjust these theories in living ways.
This contrast is emphasized by the final phrase of verse 3: “not on tablets of stone but on tablets of hearts of flesh.” (I am using the alternate literal translation given by the NASB.) The word tablet is only used three times in the New Testament. Two of these three occurrences are found in this one phrase in verse 3. (The other occurrence is in Hebrews 9:4 which talks about the ‘tables of the covenant’.) It means ‘anything flat and broad; a tablet, flat surface’. Mathematically, a flat surface implies linearity. Technical thought requires linearity. For instance, calculus solves problems involving curves by transforming these curves into a succession of infinitesimal straight-line segments. More generally, it appears that technical thought can only analyze a problem by transforming it into some form of ‘flat surface’. This ‘flattening’ can be seen physically with modern gadgets and modern cities, which replace the irregular curves of life with the flat surfaces of boxes and buildings and city blocks.
Verse 3 contrasts two ways of generating this linearity. The first way is through tablets of stone. Stone is solid. Stone represents solid Perceiver facts, because Perceiver thought examines Mercy experiences for solid connections that do not change. This describes the process of objective thought, which flattens surfaces by eliminating all of the subjective Mercy experiences in order to come up with ‘just the facts, ma’am’. This method may work, but who wants to live in a concrete jungle with its hard, flat surfaces?
The second way is ‘on tablets of hearts of flesh’. As a footnote in the NASB states, the actual Greek word is not human but rather flesh, which is used by Paul to describe the carnal nature. Cognitively speaking, the flesh describes the mental content that is acquired from growing up and living within physical reality. Going further, hearts refers to the mental networks of Mercy thought. The physical body imposes experiences of pain and pleasure upon Mercy thought, filling Mercy thought with mental networks. Thus, ‘hearts of flesh’ refers to the childish sinful nature that needs to be transformed through the Christian process of personal transformation. If the living God is inscribing regularity and flatness upon ‘hearts of flesh’, then this means that the process of personal transformation is reprogramming the very core of the fleshly sinful nature. This could only happen if the physical world and the physical bodies started to become affected by a Teacher understanding of God. This is currently only true to a limited extent. One can use a rational concept of God in Teacher thought to reprogram the mind, and how one thinks will have an impact upon one’s physical health. But if one attempts to go further than this, then one very quickly hits a literal brick wall.
A Society of Spiritual Technology 3:4-5
Using a concept that was developed in previous essays, matter currently rules over mind in the physical universe. One can use the mind to understand how matter behaves, and one can rearrange matter so that this behavior produces desired results, but one cannot use the mind to control matter. My general hypothesis is that the current universe is like a set of mental training wheels which are supposed to teach people how to think and act independently in a rational manner. When people have reached a sufficient level of mental maturity, then God will start to alter reality so that mind can begin to rule over matter. This flipping from matter-over-mind to mind-over-matter is described in 2 Corinthians 5:16-19. Like a watershed at the top of a mountain, the immediate impact of such a flipping would be fairly minimal, but the long-term impact would be literally cosmic. Cognitively speaking, it is only possible for God to ‘inscribe on tablets of hearts of flesh’ if human minds start to acquire the ability to influence matter. This type of mindset would naturally emerge if spiritual technology spread to many aspects of society. At this early stage, matter would still rule over mind, but mind would have acquired the ability to adjust matter, and this ability would have spread sufficiently to create a society in which people use minds to adjust matter.
In a similar manner, when computers were first invented, then only large agencies, such as governments, universities, or corporations, had access to computers. Today, the average person carries with him an advanced computer that is continually connected to the World Wide Web. This ubiquity of computers has caused a fundamental shift in the way that people interact socially. Similarly, I suggest that the ubiquity of spiritual technology would lead to a fundamental shift in the way that people interact with reality. People now spend a lot of time interacting with each other socially within virtual environments generated by computers. Similarly, the widespread use of spiritual technology would lead to a new form of personal existence within virtual realities, and this weakening of the link between the mind and physical matter would make it possible for God to inscribe upon hearts of flesh.
The unchanging natural processes of the physical world currently provide the mind with stability. The depths of this stability can be illustrated by the sense of instability that one experiences in an earthquake, because the physical ground that is supposed to be solid stops being solid. Verse 4 describes a new source of confidence: “Such confidence we have through Christ toward God.” The pronoun such means that verse 4 is referring to the inscribing described in verse 3. The word confidence means ‘persuasion; used of human confidence… but more commonly of Spirit- produced persuasion’. With tablets of stone, the Perceiver confidence comes from looking for what is solid in the Mercy realm of experiences. Persuasion, in contrast, is a more abstract form of Perceiver confidence that comes from Teacher understanding. This persuasion is literally ‘through Christ toward the God’. ‘Through Christ’ means that one is using abstract technical thought. ‘Toward the God’ means using abstract technical thought to connect with the concept of a universal God in Teacher thought. Using abstract technical thought is not enough. Instead one must use technical thought to reach a universal concept of God in Teacher thought. Science does this by using the technical thinking of mathematics to connect with the universal laws of nature. When dealing with the subjective realm of people, then one uses abstract technical thought to connect with universal laws of cognition, the way that we are attempting to do in this essay. This does not mean that the physical laws of nature become obsolete. Instead, one places the laws of physics within a general framework of universal cognitive principles, which I have attempted to do in my previous essay.
Saying this more simply, if it started to become possible for people to adjust the laws of nature, then one would have to find a source of stability in people. This cannot be found in culture or personal authority, but it can be found in the structure of the human mind. The theory of mental symmetry has now been developed to the extent where it could provide this kind of stability.
Finding stability in a concept of God may give the impression that one is building upon one’s own mind. Verse 5 clarifies that this is not the case: “Not that we are adequate in ourselves to consider anything as [coming] from ourselves, but our adequacy is from God.” (‘Coming’ is not in the original Greek.) The preposition translated in actually means ‘from, away from’. And adequate is the same word that we interpreted in 2:6 and 2:16 as meeting some professional standard. Using cognitive language, one does not use one’s own mind as a starting point for meeting professional standards. The word consider means to ‘reason to a logical conclusion’. Thus, one is not feeling personally inadequate or saying that one is personally inadequate. Instead, one is using rational technical thought to come to the logical conclusion that one cannot satisfy expected standards of professionalism by starting in the mind.
This may sound like a rather esoteric conclusion, but postmodern science commits precisely such an error. I have mentioned that deconstructionism dismisses Perceiver facts, Server sequences, and Teacher theories as merely cultural artifacts imposed upon the population by some dominant minority. When everything becomes questioned then the one thing that remains is ‘how we behave’. That is because Server thought has a method of gaining confidence which Perceiver thought does not. Perceiver thought can gain confidence in facts by seeing connections repeated. Similarly, Server thought can gain confidence in sequences by seeing sequences being repeated in the external world. But Server thought can also gain confidence in sequences by choosing to use the physical body to repeat some sequence of actions, which one does whenever practicing some skill. The end result is that when some scientific field questions everything in a deconstructionist manner, then what remains after all the dust has settled is Server confidence based in how the people of that field behave. Saying this another way, what survives is methodology. When methodology is the only thing that survives, then a group is reasoning to the logical conclusion that it is possible to find professional adequacy by starting from a group of people. This group-think is shown by the pronouns in verse 5 which are all in the plural: ‘we’, ‘ourselves’, ‘ourselves’, ‘our’. If questioning absolute truth causes a professional field to find stability and adequacy in the methodology of ‘how we behave’, then one can conclude that a similar but stronger effect would occur if the laws of nature themselves began to become unstable. A government bureaucracy provides a partial illustration of what this would feel like.
Verse 5 finishes by describing the alternative, which is that our adequacy is literally ‘out from the God’. I have suggested that a concept of God emerges when a sufficiently general Teacher theory impacts personal identity. Constructing a mental concept of God is not an easy task, because one must actually find a general theory that is capable of explaining many aspects of personal identity. If one wishes to construct a general theory that rules over all of personal identity and extends to the rest of existence, then there appears to be only one alternative, and everything else is either a translation of this one theory or a subset. This uniqueness of a universal theory means that one is not building upon one’s own mind but rather upon an understanding of how God has made things work.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry appears to be the only theory that is capable of explaining cognition, theology, and psychology, as well as extending to the realm of physics. This does not mean that other theories are wrong or that the Bible is incorrect. Instead, it means that one can use mental symmetry as an umbrella theory or meta-theory to connect and translate between other general theories. For example, one can use the theory of mental symmetry to translate between scientific thought and Christian theology. Mental symmetry may be a theory that resides within the mind, but this does not make the mind the source of mental symmetry. Instead, mental symmetry provides the mind with stability only to the extent that mental symmetry is capable of explaining how God has made things work.
Similarly, if the theory of mental symmetry was largely developed by the person of Lorin Friesen, this does not make Lorin Friesen a personal source of stability. Instead, Lorin discovered this theory by being guided through divine providence and by paying a heavy personal price. Similarly, anyone who learns about mental symmetry will only find it a source of mental symmetry to the extent that they recognize the hand of divine providence and are willing to pay a heavy personal price.
Looking at this from a different perspective, the theory of mental symmetry by itself is not sufficient to create a mental concept of God. Instead, the theory of mental symmetry uses the analogies of normal thought to build connections between various specializations of technical thought and various mental networks. It is this combination of technical thought plus mental networks tied together by normal thought that generates an adequate concept of God. Western society has split into an objective segment that uses technical thought and a subjective segment that emphasizes mental networks. This split has continued for centuries without using normal thought to connect these two major fragments. A meta-theory such as mental symmetry is very effective in such an environment at assembling a mental concept of God. Using an analogy, this is like the situation in which King David stockpiled the raw material for building the temple while his son Solomon assembled this material into the temple (1 Chr. 22). Similarly, the theory of mental symmetry has been used to assemble mental material that has been gathered for centuries.
A New Covenant 3:6
Verse 6 begins by describing the relationship between personal identity and a concept of God: “Who also made us adequate as servants of the new covenant”.
The noun translated servants means ‘waiter, servant; then of anyone who performs any service’, and is transliterated into English as ‘deacon’. The verb form of this noun was used in verse 2. In verse 2 people were being served, while in verse 6 a new covenant is being served. The word new means ‘new in quality… because not found exactly like this before’, while a covenant is a ‘set-agreement having complete terms determined by the initiating party, which also are fully affirmed by the one entering the agreement’. Saying this more simply, a new system of interaction between God and people is emerging, which has not been seen before. The standard Christian interpretation is that this new covenant refers to Christianity, and there is some truth to the statement, because the death and resurrection of Jesus did open the door to a new relationship between God and humanity. But if one compares the attributes of Christianity with the new covenant described in Hebrews 8, then one notices that current Christianity is actually more similar to the old covenant than it is to the new covenant. Saying this another way, Christian theology makes many statements which are then followed by the proviso that ‘This is currently true in the heavenly realm, it is not yet true in reality.’ Hebrews 3 is describing a future time when these ‘heavenly doctrines’ will start to become true in reality.
The transition from serving people in verse 2 to serving a covenant in verse 6 provides a clue as to what is happening. I mentioned in a previous paragraph that the theory of mental symmetry can be used as a meta-theory to tie together various technical specializations and mental networks in order to assemble an adequate concept of God. Similarly, in verse 2, specific people are making spiritual breakthroughs in specific areas. By verse 6, these various specific breakthroughs have begun to coalesce sufficiently to start revealing the outlines of a new system of interaction between God and humanity. Using secular language, a new kind of economy is starting to emerge.
This new system is itself guided by a Teacher concept of God, as shown by the word ‘adequate’. The word translated adequate is the verb form of the noun ‘adequate’ that was used twice in verse 5. The three words adequate as an adjective, adequacy as a noun, and adequate as a verb are used a total of five times in the book of 2 Corinthians. Three of these occurrences are in verses 5-6 of chapter 3, and the other two occurrences were back in chapter 2. This implies that it will be important to follow standards of professionalism during this period, and that the need for personal professionalism will not be as critical after this time has passed—because new ways of maintaining excellence will emerge. One can see why this would be the case. Specific humans are breaking through at the experiential level to discover new facets of spiritual technology. If this is to result in a new relationship between God and people, then these spiritual breakthroughs need to be guided by Teacher feelings of professionalism and assembling these spiritual breakthroughs also needs to be guided by Teacher feelings of professionalism. Using the analogy of building the temple, building material needs to be gathered that is appropriate for building a temple to God, and this material needs to be assembled in a way that constructs a temple of God.
This progression is the opposite of what one sees in postmodernism. Postmodernism questions the idea of a covenant of natural law between God and man, questions the idea of searching the world for universal principles, and then replaces this with professionalism ‘from ourselves’. In chapter 3, people are recognizing that the professionalism does not come from a group of people but rather comes from a concept of God in Teacher thought. This is then expressed in verse 2 as making spiritual breakthroughs in a professional manner guided by God, and then expanded into a new spiritual covenant assembled in a professional manner guided by God.
The second half of verse 6 compares this new spiritual covenant with the old covenant that is based in written text: “not of [the] letter but of [the] Spirit; for the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”. (‘The’ is not in the original Greek.) The word letter means ‘that which is drawn or written, i.e. a letter’. This would include the holy books of religions and the published papers and textbooks of science. Notice that the emphasis is not upon whether one approaches words with blind faith or through rational analysis. In addition, some specific letter is not being compared with some specific spirit. Rather, the emphasis is upon the use of words itself. The very idea of academic and religious publishing is being called into question. The alternative is a new medium of spirit. And the word ‘medium’ is illuminating because it can describe either the media of the printed word or refer to a medium who is acting as a channel to the spiritual realm. The medium of printed media is currently more reliable, because one can base written facts in empirical evidence from the physical world, and the physical world is ruled by universal natural laws that reflect the universal character of God in Teacher thought. But if it became possible for humans to achieve spiritual breakthroughs through which natural law could be adjusted, then the medium of printed media would no longer be reliable. Instead, one would have to turn to spiritual mediums to understand what is happening.
This needs explaining, because Leviticus 19:31 specifically forbids the use of spiritual mediums. Two words are used in that verse: A medium means ‘a bottle made from animal skin, a necromancer’. A necromancer is a person who contacts the dead. The assumption is that dead people have special knowledge. A familiar spirit comes from the verb ‘know’ and describes someone who is ‘a knowing one, acquainted with secrets of unseen world’. The assumption here is that some person has a special gift of accessing spiritual realm. In both cases, the assumption is that people with special gifts have an inside connection to knowledge from the spiritual realm.
Hebrews 3 is describing something quite different, because the spiritual interaction is occurring after the theoretical return of Jesus, which would ensure that the spiritual interaction happens within the Teacher framework of an empowered concept of God and incarnation. Looking at this personally, I am not currently banging on the door to the spiritual realm trying to kick it open. Instead, I am trying to do the theoretical and personal homework that is required to lay a proper foundation so that God can open the door through the theoretical return of Jesus. Going further, any person in the future who made a breakthrough to the spiritual realm would not become a source of truth or power—they would not become a medium or a familiar spirit. Instead, any breakthrough would open a door that would become available to anyone who was willing to pay the price in character development.
Looking at this another way, verse 6 is describing a new covenant, and new means something that has not existed before. One can see why professionalism would be essential during this stage, because spiritual contact has to be transformed from its current chaotic, Mercy-based form into a form that expresses a concept of God in Teacher thought. A similar transition happened after the birth of science when the chaos of alchemy was transformed into the rational structure of chemistry.
A similar kind of transition also happened during the physical life and ministry of Jesus. One does not find the concept of an evil spirit in the Old Testament. Instead, one finds spirits behaving in a chaotic manner that is not sharply divided into good and evil. In contrast, the Gospels describe Jesus interacting extensively with the spiritual realm, which then became divided into good spirits and evil spirits.
Verse 6 finishes by describing the motivation for making a transition from letter to spirit: “For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life”. The word translated gives life means to ‘make that which was dead to live, cause to live, quicken’. I have suggested in previous essays that the theoretical return of Jesus will be followed by the advent of spiritual technology. Spiritual technology would add a spiritual component to existing technology. Here we are seeing something similar that goes further, because spiritual power is giving life and not just enhancing some machine. This extension from enhancing gadgets to ‘making that which was dead to live’ would open the door to a new covenant between people and God. Saying this more simply, why does a person ultimately have a covenant with God? Because a person lives in a mortal body that will fall apart and die. Therefore, a covenant with God is needed to ‘make that which was dead to live’, because human technology cannot do this. Stated more generally, a covenant with God deals with matters of life and death.
This principle already functions a cognitive level. Written legislation can never deal with all the possibilities of life. Therefore, life can either be squeezed out by forcing people to live within the limited realm of some set of written rules and procedures, or life can be stifled by continually coming up with new rules to cover the creative ways that living people find to work around the existing rules. Both of these alternatives can be seen in today’s society. People are squeezed into professional specializations, and governmental law has grown into a monstrosity of legislations that even a lawyer cannot know adequately. Both of these options kill mental life. The alternative is to replace the walls of written legislation with the values of the spirit. Instead of being restricted by a set of walls one is attracted by the perfection of the Platonic forms of the spirit.
Glory and Absolute Truth 3:7
One might think that I am putting more into these verses than they actually say, but the next paragraph explicitly talks about the spiritual realm impinging upon physical reality in a new and awe-inspiring manner.
Verse 7 describes the awe-inspiring manner in which Jewish law was revealed: “But if the ministry of death, in letters engraved on stones, came with glory, so that the sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was”. The word ministry is the familiar word which means ‘service, ministry’. But this is a ‘ministry of death’, and the word death can refer either to physical or spiritual death. Interpreting this literally, the biblical account of the revealing of the Jewish law was accompanied by many incidents in which groups of people were slain by God, and it was followed by the invasion of Canaan in which Israel was supposed to wipe out all of the existing inhabitants.
Before we continue, I need to make a comment about the word ‘glory’. According to the biblehub.com Bible dictionary, the word glory means ‘what evokes good opinion; that something has inherent, intrinsic worth’. That is what the Greek word ‘doxa’ means in classical Greek. But as the Wikipedia article—and other sources—point out, “The word doxa picked up a new meaning between the 3rd and 1st centuries BC when the Septuagint translated the Hebrew word for ‘glory’ (כבוד, kavod) as doxa.” This new meaning can be summarized as ‘an external manifestation of God’s inherent character’. For instance, glory is mentioned several times in 2 Corinthians, and it typically describes a visible brightness or splendor that conveys the power and character of God. The New Testament meaning of ‘glory’ is discussed in a paper entitled Translating Glory in the New Testament by Euan Fry. Quoting from this paper, “There are three main components or aspects of the meaning of the word glory as it is used in the New Testament to refer to the glory of God or the glory of Christ. They are: 1. Brightness or splendor; 2. Great power and strength; 3. Majesty and honour. These three components may all be considered part of the whole meaning of the word glory.” Notice that the third meaning is similar to the classical Greek meaning.
I emphasize this distinction because there is cognitively a major difference between ‘what evokes good opinion’ and ‘brightness, splendor, power, strength, and majesty’. If something evokes good opinion, this means that it has acquired emotional status within Mercy thought. But that is merely a matter of personal opinion which says nothing about the object or person itself. In contrast, ‘brightness, splendor, power, strength, and majesty’ tell us that the object or person has inherent qualities which are expressing themselves through some sort of physical manifestation. For instance, when Moses came down from Mt. Sinai with ‘glory on his face’, this does not mean that others were complimenting him about his face. Instead, his face shone. Some aspect of the inherent character and power of God was expressing itself physically through the face of Moses. Similarly, when a person glorifies God, then I suggest that this goes beyond merely lifting one’s hands and saying ‘Praise the Lord’. After all, it is also possible to lift one’s hand and say ‘Heil Hitler’. Both are merely matters of personal opinion. Instead, I suggest that a person glorifies God by behaving in a manner that expresses the inherent character of God. In some way, one is seeing the invisible God reflected visibly in the behavior of that person. That is the meaning of ‘glory’ which I have been using in my essays. Of course, if a person reflects the character of God, then that person will probably evoke a good opinion in the minds of others. But the good opinion is the result while the manifestation of God’s character is the cause.
Continuing now with 2 Corinthians, the spiritual death can be seen in the method by which this covenant was revealed. The word letters is the same word that was used in verse 6, and verse 6 clarified that ‘the letter kills’. Cognitively speaking, a system based upon written text will always squeeze and/or stifle mental life. Going further, the word engraved is only used once in the New Testament and is stronger than the word ‘inscribed’ used in the beginning of chapter 3. ‘Inscribed’ intensifies the verb ‘to write’, while ‘engraved’ intensifies a word that means ‘the mark of a blow, impression, stamp made by a die’. This engraving is happening upon stones. Looking at this cognitively, emotionally potent Mercy experiences are being used to overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ that a specific set of words comes from God. Saying this more bluntly, God is revealing absolute truth to a group of people by emotionally branding their minds with divine spectacle. A more literal translation would be that the ministry of death is ‘having been engraved on stones in letters’. Similarly, solid absolute truth can be created by revealing it to some generation through the application of excessive emotional experiences, and then having the succeeding generations recover cognitively from this emotional branding. The next generations will then look back and conclude that absolute truth ‘had been engraved on stones in letters’ to their forefathers who are now viewed as the source of absolute truth. Saying this another way, absolute truth always looks back at some set of the founding fathers who are the source of this truth, and these founding fathers will only become a solid source of truth if they are utterly emotionally overwhelmed into ‘knowing’ absolute Perceiver ‘truth’. This may sound like strong language, but it is an accurate description of the experiences of the Israelites in the wilderness as described in the Pentateuch. They got zapped by God again and again. Why did God use such a method? Because God was jump-starting absolute truth in a tribal age that thought in terms of myths and magic.
This method of revelation can be seen in the next phrase of verse 7, which says that this ministry of death ‘came with glory’. This is not a good translation because the word translated came actually means ‘to become, and signifies a change of condition, state or place’, while the word with actually means ‘in, inside, within, in the realm of’. And we have just seen that glory ‘literally means what provokes good opinion, i.e. that something has inherent, intrinsic worth’ but actually extends beyond this to describe an external manifestation of internal worth. Putting this together, the ministry of death came into being in the realm of God revealing his intrinsic, inherent worth. Glory did not come along with the tablets. Instead, the glory of God created the emotional context within which absolute written truth came into being. In other words, the glory of God was the starting point and absolute truth was the result of that divine glory. People from later generations, like king David, could look back and construct the TMN of a concept of God by studying that absolute truth, but for the first generations the challenge was laying a foundation for absolute truth.
One can also interpret the phrase ‘in letters engraved on stones’ literally as referring to the actual stone tablets on which the Ten Commandments were engraved. But this cannot be the only interpretation because chiseling letters into blocks of stone is not sufficient to start a ministry. Instead, this physical chiseling has to be reinforced by extensive cognitive chiseling.
The word ‘ministry’ is also significant because God did not tell the Jews what to believe in Perceiver thought but rather what to do in Server thought. Even today, Judaism is primarily a religion of doing, and Jews use the word halacha, which means ‘behaving, going, or walking’, to describe Jewish law.
Exodus 34:29 says that Moses’ face shone when he came down from the mountain with the two tablets of stone. Thus, verse 7 describes a visible glory that is mentioned in the physical story of Moses. Verse 7 emphasizes that this visible glory appeared on the face of Moses. People “could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face”. One uses the face to communicate verbally and nonverbally. Thus, a glowing face would represent a verbal communication that is being enhanced by non-verbal Mercy emotions.
Exodus 34:29-34 describes the various stages by which absolute truth is revealed: 1) The verbal communication of some personal source of truth is enhanced through the use of Mercy emotions. This happens in verse 29 with the glowing face of Moses. 2) This Mercy status of the personal source of truth causes an emotional response of awe and fear in the minds of the listener. This is mentioned in verse 30. 3) The source of truth then speaks words within this atmosphere of Mercy awe. That happens in verse 31. 4) This absolute truth is then applied to MMNs of personal identity as a commandment from God to people, which happens in verse 32. 5) The Mercy status of the source of truth is then preserved by separating the source of truth from normal experiences through some wall of holiness. That happens in verse 33. 6) The Mercy status of the source of truth is also rejuvenated by connecting the source of truth with God. That is described in verse 34.
Returning to 2 Corinthians 3, verse 7 also describes the mindset of those who believe in absolute truth: “The sons of Israel could not look intently at the face of Moses because of the glory of his face, fading as it was.” Notice that this is describing the response of the ‘sons of Israel’, the followers of Moses who were the recipients of revealed absolute truth. The word look intently means ‘to fix one’s eyes on some object continually and intensely’. The eyes are related to Perceiver thought scanning Mercy experiences for facts. One visually scans the immediate surroundings in order to build up a mental map of the local environment. If the followers cannot keep their eyes fixated on the face of Moses, this means that Perceiver thought is being overwhelmed by the emotional intensity of the experience of looking at the face of Moses. Saying this more generally, a person who does not maintain eye contact is probably experiencing emotional discomfort. Verse 7 says that this emotional discomfort was being caused by the glory on the face of Moses. Similarly, a mind that is ruled by absolute truth will lack the ability to directly evaluate or focus upon the source of truth. In the extreme, this leads to worm theology, the deep feeling that I am nothing compared to the source of truth. But this attitude is not stable and will eventually fade away. The word translated fading means to ‘make idle or inactive, make of no effect’. Saying this cognitively, the emotional status of the source of truth will gradually fade within the minds of the believer. Going the other way, acting and thinking for myself will increase my emotional status relative to the emotional status of my source of truth. Eventually, these two effects will cause Perceiver thought to wake up from its attitude of blind faith and start to question the words of the source of absolute truth. This process may take several generations to occur, but it will eventually happen. A similar waking up from blind faith happens within the mind of the typical teenager who loses respect for the emotional status of his parents and starts to question what was revealed to him as a child.
Glory and the Spirit 3:8-12
Verse 8 then turns to the glory associated with the ministry of the Spirit: “How will the ministry of the Spirit fail to be even more with glory?” Verse 7 describes the ministry of death ‘coming into being’ in glory, which then fades away. In verse 8, the ministry of the Spirit ‘is’ in glory. With the spirit, the glory continues and is not just a transient glory that exhibits itself at the very beginning. For instance, the typical evangelical Christian views the miracles of the New Testament as a temporary glory that happened at the beginning of Christianity in order to establish the church but no longer happens in the present. This describes a glory of coming into being that fades away, implying that current Christianity is only a partial expression of the new covenant. In contrast, science is now able to produce technological wonders that continue and do not fade away. Going further, the glory of Moses was limited to a shining face, but no such limitation is mentioned with the glory of the Spirit. Similarly, absolute revealed truth will assert that some holy book was revealed in a glorious manner to some source of truth in the past. The universal truth of science, in contrast, is capable of generating many kinds of technological glory which are not limited to the ‘face’.
Now let us apply this to some future time in which spiritual technology expands to the point of restoring life. If the idea of spiritual technology sounds strange to the typical reader today, imagine how strange the experience of spiritual technology would feel to the typical future believer in absolute truth. (I do not think that everyone living within spiritual technology would have to be an engineer. Instead, what would be required from everyone is a modicum of technical understanding combined with substantial personal transformation. Anyone who tried to use spiritual technology without meeting these requirements would be ‘playing with fire’ and would probably get burnt.) I am certain that many future fundamentalist Christians would be quoting Matthew 24:24: “For false Christs and false prophets will arise and will show great signs and wonders, so as to mislead, if possible, even the elect.” They would then cling to their fundamentalist faith and be convinced that spiritual technology must be ‘of the devil’. I suggest this because many fundamentalist Christians are already reacting in this kind of manner to normal science and technology. (And this also describes how Ellen White responded to the science and technology of her day even though she herself predicted that Jesus had started doing something new in the heavenly realm.)
But notice the underlying, implicit assumption. The average fundamentalist believer is convinced that God only worked supernaturally in the past and that he no longer intervenes supernaturally in the present. The typical fundamentalist believer may pray fervently for God to intervene, but if God ever were to intervene in a substantial manner, then this would violate the basic premise of absolute truth which is that God intervened in the past when revealing absolute truth. This attitude is illustrated by what the typical fundamentalist Christian thinks about UFOs. Every Christian book on UFOs that I have seen so far concludes that all UFOs are evil and that all aliens are demons. I agree that many UFOs are evil and that many aliens are demons, but Colossians 1:13-20 also clearly states that the salvation plan of Jesus extends beyond the human realm to supernatural beings.
The point is that the founders of absolute truth did not believe in absolute truth. Instead, they were emotionally overwhelmed by experiencing the glory of God. The real source of absolute truth was overwhelming supernatural experience. (Similarly, many of the writings of the early Christians convey the impression of being emotionally overwhelmed by the experience of Jesus coming down to earth. This is illustrated by the deeply emotional rituals of the Orthodox Christian church, which has preserved the practices and attitudes of the early church.) If absolute truth was originally revealed through potent supernatural experiences, then it makes sense that a more lasting revelation of the Spirit would result in long-term potent supernatural experiences.
Rationally speaking, this is a logical conclusion, but it violates the attitude of blind faith which is emotionally convinced that the source of absolute truth is more important in Mercy thought than personal identity. Thus, it is fine to believe that God revealed his glory to the original writers of absolute truth because Mercy thought is convinced that they were worthy. But it feels wrong for God to reveal his glory to us because Mercy thought is convinced that we are not worthy. One might think that this statement is contradicted by all of the Christian wealth-and-prosperity preachers who are convinced that God wants to bless us. However, it is important to place this within a social context. Today’s wealth-and-prosperity gospel occurs within a social climate which does not even realize that it is possible for a concept of God in Teacher thought to rule over personal identity in Mercy thought. 2 Corinthians 3, in contrast, is happening within a society that has just experienced the unprecedented revealing of a concept of God and incarnation.
Verse 9 describes another contrast: “For if the ministry of condemnation has glory, much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory.” The word condemnation means ‘the sentence of condemnation handed down after someone is found decidedly guilty’. Absolute truth is naturally a ministry of condemnation because the basic premise is that personal identity is nothing compared to the source of truth. In other words, not only is truth being explicitly revealed, but the attitude that ‘I am unworthy of God and truth’ is also being implicitly conveyed. Despite this underlying atmosphere of personal condemnation, there is still glory.
In contrast, “much more does the ministry of righteousness abound in glory”. Righteousness describes Server actions that are guided by the TMN of a concept of God. One constructs a concept of God in Teacher thought by looking for universal principles of how things work, because these universal principles reveal the character of God. When this Teacher understanding turns into a Teacher mental network, then like any mental network, it will drive a person to behave in a manner that is consistent with this understanding. This emotional drive to behave in a manner that is consistent with the character of God is righteousness.
The word abound means ‘go beyond the expected measure’. If one finds some glory in the origins of a mindset which thinks that God is everything and I am nothing, then certainly one will find that glory abounds in a mindset which naturally behaves in a way that reflects the character of God. Using technology as a partial example, if craftsmen were able to come up with amazing devices before the birth of science when people felt threatened by the power of nature, then it makes sense that modern technology, which is guided by an understanding of the laws of nature, will abound in amazing devices. This comparison makes obvious sense when one thinks in terms of technology. But when one applies the same reasoning to the subjective and to the religious, then one has to contend with deeper feelings. It may be fine to talk about being righteous, but an attitude of absolute truth will feel that it is too presumptuous to actually believe that one can be righteous and experience the benefits of being righteous.
I am not suggesting that it is possible to achieve sinlessness. Humans will always be finite creatures with partial knowledge who make mistakes. But it is possible to change the fundamental direction of the mind from being guided by childish MMNs to being directed righteously by the TMN of a concept of God—and experience the personal benefits of this change in motivation. This change has already happened in the objective as a result of science and technology. Saying this another way, righteousness functions at the emotional level of mental networks and not as a set of rigorous rules within technical thought.
Verse 10 concludes that the marvels of the past will eventually seem like nothing compared to the marvels of the present: “For indeed what had glory, in this case has no glory because of the glory that surpasses it.” The grammar in this sentence is a little complicated. One is looking back at what ‘has been made glorious’ and one is concluding that this was not really glorified because of the surpassing glory of the present. For instance, the typical modern city is filled with structures that totally overshadow even the wonders of the ancient world. Similarly, the typical iPhone 5 of 2014 is more powerful than a Cray-2 supercomputer, which was the world’s fastest computer in the late 1980s.
There is also a progression of adjectives in verses 8-10. In verse 8, the ministry of the Spirit has more glory, a simple comparative that means more or better. This is replaced in verse 9 with ‘much more’, and the word abounds is added, which means ‘go beyond the expected measure’. Verse 10 uses the word surpassing, which means ‘to throw over or beyond’. One can see this progression with modern technology. Initially, people viewed technology as a better way of doing existing tasks. For instance, a steam engine could work better than a horse because it had more ‘horsepower’. The initial technology was not that efficient. But as this technology became refined, it became possible to do tasks far better than they could have been done before. For instance, the automobile began as a horseless carriage which replaced a carriage drawn by a horse. But as the automobile became refined it became capable of performing tasks that vastly exceeded the capabilities of a horse-drawn carriage.
The final transition occurs when people start ‘throwing over or beyond’, because the progress is now leaving the ground of common sense and moving through the air of Teacher theory. This is when radical glory emerges which is so new and different that it would not have entered into the imagination of a person from the past. Scientific research has now entered this stage, because science is now making discoveries that violate common sense. (For instance, quantum entanglement does not make sense, because measuring a property of one particle in one location is instantaneously determining the property of another particle in a totally different location. Einstein called it ‘spooky action at a distance’.) But these nonsensical discoveries can be rationally analyzed and understood through the use of mathematics. When this final transition occurs then the glory of the past will fade into insignificance because one is no longer viewing the present as a better way of doing the past; one is no longer using Mercy thought to compare the experiences the past with the experiences of the present. Instead, one is using Teacher thought to leap to a new kind of Mercy experience which is totally different than the Mercy experiences of the past.
This type of transition is illustrated by the way that we are analyzing the Bible in these essays. The type of analysis that we are using is different than what one normally finds in a book of theology. That is because my analysis has taken an indirect route through Teacher theory. The theory of mental symmetry began with a list of spiritual gifts in Romans 12. It then turned into a cognitive theory in Teacher thought, and this Teacher theory is now being used to analyze the Bible.
Verse 11 finishes with a simple comparison: “For if that which fades away was through glory, much more that which remains is in glory.” (As a footnote in the NASB points out, the ‘with’ should actually be translated ‘through’.) Absolute truth has to be created through glory, because it is the glory that mesmerizes Perceiver thought into believing the absolute truth. But absolute truth by its very nature fades away, the same word that was used in verse 7 to describe the fading of the glory of the Moses’ face. Applying universal truth, in contrast, ‘remains in glory’. This final stage of remaining in glory is partially illustrated by the modern technological society, because applying science through technology has been replaced by the cycle of research and development, which comes up with new products that make the old appear obsolete. We now expect to live within the continual technological glory of the consumer society. If this can happen with objective science and technology, something similar but even more powerful should be possible if this objective thinking is extended to the subjective.
Verses 7-11 have been talking about glory, which implies visible results. However, verse 12 talks about having ‘such a hope’, and hope describes an internal vision that is not seen: “Therefore having such a hope, we use great boldness in speech.” It may seem strange to describe visible results as a basis for invisible hope, but one sees precisely this combination in modern society. Because science leads to such amazing technological results, people have the internal vision that pursuing science will lead to better technology. Hope provides motivation for Exhorter thought, which drives the mind. Today’s technological geek is driven by the hope that the future will generate a cornucopia of new-and-improved gadgets.
Verse 12 continues by saying that because of his hope, “we use great boldness in speech.” The translators are assuming that one is preaching boldly about Christianity, but the original Greek conveys a somewhat different meaning. The word translated boldness in speech is a single Greek word that means ‘a proverb or statement quoted with resolve’. And the word great actually means ‘much in number, and emphasizes the quantity involved’. Finally, the verb use means ‘to use, make use of, deal with’. This verb is used 11 times in the New Testament, and this is the only time this verb is applied to words or speech. Instead, this phrase conveys the idea that many are using ‘statements quoted with resolve’ as some sort of tool. This describes what happens in modern scientific research and development. The laws of physics are being used as tools to develop new-and-improved gadgets. The scientific researcher holds on to some mathematical statements about the natural world. This mathematical statement is then used to guide technological development in the hope of generating new visual glory. This process of going through research in order to develop some new-and-improved products is being done by many different individuals, organizations, and corporations. If that is the case with normal technology, then it makes sense that a similar process would occur with spiritual technology.
Lifting the Veil 3:13-17
Verse 13 adds that this changes the concept of holiness: “and are not like Moses, who used to put a veil over his face so that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away.” The word like means ‘even as, just as’ and indicates that an analogical comparison is being made. The name Moses comes from the Hebrew word that means ‘to draw’, and Exodus 2:10 explains that Pharaoh’s daughter gave him the name “because I drew him out of the water”. Thus, Moses symbolizes a system of belief that is drawn from the water of Mercy experiences. In other words, Moses is symbolically the source of absolute truth, because absolute truth is drawn out of the water of Mercy experiences. (The name Moses is interpreted in this fashion in the essay on the book of Hebrews, which talks a lot about Moses.) This symbolic meaning is consistent with the real Moses, who was the primary historical source of Jewish absolute truth.
The word veil, which means ‘veil or covering’, is used as a noun four times in verses 3-16, and it does not appear in noun form anywhere else in the New Testament. Looking at this cognitively, people and objects that are associated in Mercy thought with the source of absolute truth have to be hidden from normal experiences by some kind of veil or covering. One sees this kind of covering literally in a temple or church in which some sort of physical barrier prevents the common person from intruding into the ‘holy place’. One sees something similar with the attitude of absolute truth, because core religious doctrines will be mentally covered by a veil of mystery. I often encounter this veil when discussing theological concepts with religious people. I have found that it is possible to use the theory of mental symmetry to provide a rational explanation for all Christian doctrines. However, when I try to discuss Christian doctrine in a rational manner with Christians, I usually find that rational thought can be used until some mental barrier is reached beyond which rational thought is replaced by a covering of mystery. Saying this more simply, the average Christian is convinced that core Christian doctrines are a mystery and will forever remain a mystery.
Verse 13 adds that the reason for the veil is “So that the sons of Israel would not look intently at the end of what was fading away.” Notice exactly what is being said. The looking intently is not happening right away but rather during the fading away. This intense looking is being done by the believers in absolute truth. And they are looking intently into the telos, or ‘end-goal or purpose’, of the fading away. Looking at this cognitively, as long as absolute truth is backed up by sufficient Mercy emotions, there will be no critical thinking because Perceiver thought is being overwhelmed by the strong Mercy feelings. The critical thinking will happen when the Mercy feelings of holiness fade sufficiently to allow Perceiver thought to function. The mind will then fixate upon this fading holiness, because the Mercy experiences may not have sufficient emotional strength to mesmerize Perceiver thought but they still have sufficient potency to attract the attention of the mind. This will lead to teleological thinking, which assumes that the ultimate purpose is to reach some goal or telos in Mercy thought.
For instance, one can see this type of thinking illustrated by a new field of research known as the cognitive science of religion. I have analyzed most of the findings of this field and they fit well into the theory of mental symmetry. This field studies primarily MMNs of holiness and ritual, and most researchers in this field either downplay or ignore theology. This is a recent field because religious feelings of holiness have now diminished to the point where science can study these feelings in a reasonably objective manner. Thus, the cognitive science of religion could be summarized as ‘looking intently at the end of what is fading away’. Christianity has tended to respond to such critical analysis by hiding the core doctrines of Christianity behind a veil, essentially putting a veil over the face of Moses. One can see this response in Christian fundamentalism, which has responded to the questioning of Christian liberalism by withdrawing from mainstream denominations in order to preach the absolute truth of the Bible in churches and schools that are separate from the ‘apostate majority’.
Verse 14 describes the result of responding in a fundamentalist manner: “But their minds were hardened”. The word mind means ‘the result of thinking, i.e. the personal verdict that comes out of using the mind’. The word hardened means ‘harden, render callus, petrify’. Notice that it is the mind that is becoming hardened and not the heart. Using modern colloquial language, thinking is becoming set in stone. One can understand this cognitively by looking at the nature of absolute truth. I have mentioned that absolute truth has its source in potent emotional experiences. For the succeeding generations, absolute truth turns into a set of assumed beliefs that people hold in common but do not really discuss. For such a mindset, significant thought is possible, because the thinking has not hardened. The hardening of thought happens when absolute truth begins to be questioned and people choose to continue believing in absolute truth.
This means that it is not possible to turn back the clock of postmodernism and return to the previous era in which the average Western citizen accepted the absolute truth of Christianity and the Bible. Instead, any attempt to return to the previous era will harden the mind, because the previous era assumed that the absolute truth of the Bible was valid while today’s fundamentalist is asserting that the absolute truth of the Bible is valid.
This juxtaposition of worldviews as well as its solution is described in the rest of verse 14: “for until this very day at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted.”
Notice the juxtaposition. On the one hand this event is occurring ‘until this very day’, while on the other hand, people are reading an old covenant. This would apply to the fundamentalist living in a liberal world, who responds to the liberalism by looking back at the words of some holy book that describes the relationship between God and man.
Verses 14-16 are traditionally interpreted as saying that the Jews rejected Jesus as their Messiah and that they continue to do so in the present. However, that interpretation appears to be inconsistent with the original Greek. The word translated until means ‘as far as, up to, until’, which means that it continues until a certain point and then stops, and the more detailed definitions and examples also convey the idea of lasting until a certain time and then ending. Thus, verse 14 is really saying that the sons of Israel had hardened minds until the present, but now this hardness is gone. Similarly, the adverb to in verse 15 means ‘until, as far as, up to, as much as, until’ and is specifically described as ‘a particle marking a limit’, which means one reaches a certain point and then stops.
Returning now to verse 14, we have already looked at the hardening of minds that happens to the fundamentalist in a ‘post-truth environment’. Verse 14 says that this hardness continues ‘until this very day’. The word day means ‘a day, the period from sunrise to sunset’, while word translated this very means ‘today, now’. Thus a more literal translation would be ‘until today’s period from sunrise to sunset’. Thus, Paul is referring to the period of time of 2 Corinthians 3, in which spiritual technology exists after a theoretical return of Jesus. This matches the symbolic meaning, because there is a sun in the sky during ‘the period from sunrise to sunset’, and a sun represents the light of a general Teacher understanding.
The rest of the phrase describes the mindset of fundamentalism with its focus upon revealed written truth: “at the reading of the old covenant the same veil remains unlifted”. The word unlifted is simply the negative of the word ‘veil’. Thus, the veil is remaining not unveiled. In other words, the mindset of absolute truth remains unchanged.
But “it is being removed in Christ”. (I have added the word ‘being’ to more accurately reflect the tense of the Greek verb.) The word removed means ‘to make completely inoperative or to put out of use’. Thus, the veil is not being eliminated, but rather rendered ineffective. And Christ refers to the abstract side of incarnation.
Putting this all together, when people use the abstract technical thinking of incarnation within a general context of rational Teacher understanding, then the fundamentalist mindset may survive, but it will gradually lose its effect. For instance, I mentioned previously the difficulty of trying to discuss the theory of mental symmetry with fundamentalist Christians because of the veil within their minds. However, I can now discuss much more with such individuals that I could twenty years ago. That is because the Teacher understanding of psychology has extended into realms that used to be considered religious. The veil of fundamentalism is still there, but to some extent it has been rendered ineffective.
In a similar manner, Jewish mysticism and nationalism during the time of Paul veiled their minds from accepting Jesus as their Messiah, and also prevented Judaism from discovering the universal truth of science. (I know that this is a sweeping statement, so I have included some links.) The scientific revolution has caused this veil to become ineffective in the objective realm, as shown by how many Jews have won Nobel prizes, and also by the number of technical startup firms that exist in Israel. But this veil remains effective in the subjective realm, because the general Teacher understanding of science does not extend into the subjective. This veil is not automatically removed for all Jews (or fundamentalist believers of any religion). Instead, it is removed for those who are ‘in Christ’; the veil becomes rendered ineffective as a fundamentalist believer learns to use abstract technical thought.
Summarizing, verse 14 appears to be describing a general cognitive principle that applies whenever absolute truth exists within a society of growing universal truth. This principle can be seen today in both Jewish and Christian thought, and I suggest that it would apply more fully to a future society in which people would be holding on to absolute truth within an environment of growing spiritual technology.
The word for reading in verse 14 means ‘reading; public reading (of the law and prophets in synagogue or church)’. In other words, the old covenant is being read in a religious setting in the presence of religious leaders. When this is combined with the covering of regarding the essence of God as a mystery, then this will lead to a form of religious self-deception. People will claim to have a covenant with God, but how can one have a covenant with a person who is ultimately a mystery? A covenant assumes a specific set of rules and guidelines while a mystery means that there cannot be any specific rules or guidelines. Therefore, this missing content will be provided by religious leaders who claim to speak for God, who will interpret the mysteries of God into language that can be understood by the average person. What makes this possible is the public reading of the holy book in a religious place. People will think that God, religious leaders, and the holy book belong together because they repeatedly occur together in the physical world, and this physical connection will be emotionally backed up by the Mercy experiences led by religious leaders that happen within the holy place.
I am not suggesting that it is wrong to have church services or that it is wrong to read the Bible in a church setting. But it is dangerous to do so when there is a mental veil, because the leadership will naturally acquire an aura of having a special connection to absolute truth and they will naturally become viewed as the experts who can interpret the mysteries of absolute truth to the congregation. This danger will be minimized if a distinction is not made between clergy and laity and if the emphasis is upon understanding the Bible and not upon regarding it as an incomprehensible mystery.
The solution is to replace this external system with an internal concept of incarnation within abstract technical thought. It will then gradually become obvious that the interaction between God and man should really be guided by universal principles in abstract technical thought that describe how God behaves. This may sound like a simple answer, but it is not, because a ‘covenant with God as interpreted by religious leaders’ is a very powerful interlocking emotional system, backed up by strong feelings of eternal reward and punishment. Feelings of religious self-denial will naturally cause the laity to feel that they are unworthy to interpret the words of the holy book, and that this book needs to be interpreted properly by religious experts who are much holier and closer to God than they are. (This kind of religious mindset is discussed in more detail in another essay. And the Protestant Reformation was at least partially a reaction against this kind of mindset.) Therefore, this system will tend to continue ‘until the day’ when a rational concept of God and incarnation becomes widely known. 2 Corinthians 3 appears to be describing such a future period of time when Teacher understanding will include both the objective and the subjective. In such an environment, it would be possible for a veil of fundamentalism to become rendered totally ineffective, to the extent that a person is using abstract technical thought.
One can understand what this means by looking at current technology. The average consumer views technological gadgets as super-tools that make it easier to reach goals in Mercy thought. These super-tools are viewed as being driven by some ‘magic sauce’ known as technology. This type of mindset may use concrete technical thought, but it is not using abstract technical thought. That is because abstract technical thought replaces the ‘magic sauce’ with a technical understanding of general principles being applied in a rational and rigorous manner. If this type of mindset exists today when using inanimate objects with visible technical components, then it would probably exist in a much stronger form in a future society in which inanimate technical objects became imbued with some form of spiritual life. And I am not talking about some form of trans-humanism in which people implant technology into their physical bodies. That is dehumanizing because it makes humans more machine-like. Spiritual technology would be humanizing because it would add a spiritual component to technology, forcing people to use technology within a moral framework.
Verse 14 talks about abstract thought: Minds are being hardened. A covenant between people and God in abstract thought is being read. The veil is being rendered ineffective in Christ, the abstract side of incarnation. This happens during a day, a period of time illuminated by the sun of an abstract understanding. Verses 15-16 talk about concrete thought. First, the veil is over the heart and not over the mind. Second, the focus is upon the Lord rather than upon Christ. Third, Moses is being read rather than a covenant.
Looking at this in more detail, verse 15 says “But to this day whenever Moses is read, a veil lies over their heart”. The name Moses means ‘drawn from the water’ and water represents Mercy experiences. If one is reading from Moses, then this refers to the mindset of absolute truth, which approaches a written text with an attitude of absolute truth which is ‘drawn from the water’ of Mercy thought. Verse 14 talked about ‘the reading of the old covenant’. Verse 15, in contrast, refers to ‘whenever Moses is read’. Thus, the focus is not upon a public reading but rather upon individuals reading the absolute truth of the holy book, which might occur either publicly or privately.
When this happens, then ‘a veil lies over their heart’. The verb lies means ‘to be laid, lie’. Verse 14 talked about the veil remaining but did not say where this veil was located. Verse 15 gives the location of this veil: it lies over the heart. Stated cognitively, Mercy thought is making a separation between sacred and secular experiences, and this is leading to a mental covering which is causing the mind to become hardened.
Verse 16 describes the solution: “but whenever a person turns to the Lord, the veil is taken away.” The word translated turns means ‘to turn, to return’. And the verb taken away means ‘completely separate, remove totally, leave behind entirely’. In verse 14, the veil was made ineffective but it still remained present. In verse 16 the veil is being taken away.
Looking at this more generally, verses 15-16 can only happen after verse 14. Verse 14 places the system of ‘bondage to religious leaders in the name of God’ within an abstract technical understanding of incarnation. This can only happen within a general context of a rational understanding of God and incarnation. But the underlying mindset of absolute truth still remains; believers still approach the holy book personally with an attitude of absolute truth. The solution is to submit to the concept of Christ that was developed in verse 14. This replaces blind faith with submission to abstract technical thought. If one continues to do this, then the underlying mindset of absolute truth will be taken away.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry began as a secular study of personality and psychology. This system may have started as a list of spiritual gifts in Romans 12, but my brother transformed this into an analysis of secular biographies, while I helped my brother, guided by what I knew from electrical engineering. This created a general mental context of rational thought within the realm of the subjective. My attention eventually turned to religious topics, because Christian doctrines kept appearing naturally as I was studying mental symmetry. This gradually led to a new understanding of God and incarnation. My childhood mindset of absolute truth remained intact, but this new understanding rendered these childhood beliefs and fears inactive. However, I have noticed that this childhood system of absolute truth is becoming gradually eaten away as I take the next step of submitting personally to my new understanding of God and incarnation and allowing it to be my Lord.
When one follows such a path, one will often wonder if one is following the real God or being misled by some concept of God. It is important to realize that this same question exists when one is following absolute truth—but it will not be asked. Instead, one will assume that one is following the real God when one is actually following the concept of God that is being taught by the religious leaders that one respects. If this were not the case, then why are there so many different Christian denominations, each convinced that it is teaching the ‘right’ concept of God and incarnation? It is much better to be consciously aware that there may be a discrepancy between the real God and one’s concept of God and take steps to examine and minimize this discrepancy, than to blindly follow absolute truth as interpreted by some group of religious experts.
Verse 17 describes the final transition from Lord to Spirit: “Now the Lord is the Spirit, and where the Spirit of the Lord is, there is liberty.” The first step is to recognize that Lord is Spirit. Speaking from personal experience, it is natural to feel that one’s childhood system of ‘churchianity’ is dealing with the real spiritual world, while a rational understanding of God and incarnation deals only with cognition. But churchianity is actually an external system composed of religious books, religious places, religious people, and religious events, and this external system is firmly rooted in experiences from the physical world. In contrast, cognitive transformation addresses core mental networks, and the spiritual realm interacts with the physical realm through mental networks. Therefore it is ‘the Lord’ that is Spirit and not churchianity with its ‘public reading of the law and prophets in synagogue or church’. Consistent with this, I have felt increasingly in the last few years that I am interacting with the spiritual realm as a result of pursuing mental symmetry, and this sensation of spiritual interaction is now stronger than any ‘spiritual’ feelings that I sensed within churchianity. Thus, my mind has gradually been making the connection that Lord is Spirit. Saying this more completely, I have been led to the Spirit by following a path of submitting personally to a concept of God and incarnation that was developed in an environment of using rational thought in the subjective. It should be emphasized that saying this is easy. Experiencing this at the core of one’s being is much harder.
Going further, the word translated liberty means ‘freedom, liberty, especially: a state of freedom from slavery’. And the word translated where specifically refers to physical location. Finally, ‘Spirit of the Lord’ would mean focusing upon the Spirit that lies behind submission to the Lord. Putting this together, there is freedom from slavery in every physical location where one makes the mental transition from Lord to Spirit.
Looking at this cognitively, the theoretical return of Jesus began with a rational understanding of God and incarnation in Teacher thought. It has descended all the way down to Mercy thought. It now needs to be extended to all experiences within Mercy thought, which means applying it to every physical context of Mercy experiences. This is like the person who grows up in poverty, becomes rich and successful as an adult, and then returns to his childhood neighborhood riding in a limousine and revisiting all the locations in which he lived as a child. Cognitively speaking, it may not be necessary to physically visit every physical location, but one must mentally revisit every experiential context within Mercy thought, and this will definitely include significant physical revisiting. The result of this revisiting is freedom from the slavery of emotional bondage to absolute truth. Speaking again from personal experience, when I started thinking about mental symmetry several decades ago, I had a gut feeling that there were evil spiritual beings to my left and to my right and that I would remain safe as long as I continued to walk a narrow path straight ahead. The sensation that I have now is completely different. Instead, I feel increasingly surrounded by spiritual beings that are overflowing with intelligence, integrity, personal respect, joy, spontaneity, fun—and teasing.
Spiritual R&D 3:18
This does not lead to a self-satisfied state of resting upon one’s laurels. Instead, verse 18 says that it leads to the new system of research and development that was mentioned a few paragraphs earlier: “But we all, with unveiled face, beholding as in a mirror the glory of the Lord, are being transformed into the same image from glory to glory, just as from the Lord, the Spirit.” The word unveiled is the same word that was found back in verse 14 when it talked about the veil remaining in place. This verb is now in the past: ‘having been unveiled’. And this state of having been unveiled applies to ‘we all’. Thus, the mindset of absolute truth has been eliminated from the general population. If one wants to know what it would feel like to live in a post-absolute truth society, one simply has to look around at what it feels like to live within the current post-Christian society. The difference is that science and technology have caused people to question absolute truth without providing an alternative within the subjective. Therefore, society is now starting to experience a backlash against scientific thought which is attempting to reintroduce absolute truth. But we have already seen that it is not possible to turn back the clock and return to the absolute truth of the past. Instead, attempts to return to fundamentalism are merely leading society towards dictatorship and tribalism. Similarly, future society would also experience a backlash, but this future backlash would be more extreme because Teacher understanding would apply to all of existence and not just to the objective realm. That backlash will be described in chapter 4, which is referred to in other passages as the kingdom of the beast or the kingdom of the Antichrist. But that backlash is still to come. Before that happens, society will enter a golden era of spiritual research and development, similar to the way that Western civilization has experienced decades of technological growth which is now starting to become threatened for various reasons.
Continuing with verse 18, one notices two limitations. The first limitation is that the unveiling is limited to the face. Saying this cognitively, absolute truth has been eliminated from the subjective realm. The personal realm of mental networks is now ruled by a rational understanding of God and incarnation. But the rest of the body remains veiled. That is because spiritual is still an adjective being applied to the noun of technology. People are still living within a universe of matter-over-mind that is governed by natural law, and these natural laws are being modified by spiritual power channeled through people. Saying this another way, the structure of the physical universe is still providing a ‘safety net’ that would limit any harmful effects of using spiritual technology in an unwise matter.
The second limitation is that people are viewing the glory of the Lord indirectly. The word translated beholding as in a mirror is only used once the New Testament and means ‘to reflect as a mirror’. There were no glass mirrors in the Roman era. Instead, mirrors were made out of polished metal and reflected a picture dimly. This contrast between seeing dimly in a mirror and seeing face-to-face is mentioned in 1 Corinthians 13:12, which appears to be describing a transition that goes beyond what is happening in 2 Cor. 3:18.
However, verse 18 definitely describes something that goes further than the research and development of today. Today’s world of technical gadgets reflects ‘as in a mirror’ the glory of submitting to the lordship of science. And this is causing society to be transformed into this same image from one glory of technology to another glory of technology. As was mentioned previously, these external results lead to internal drive because following science always leads to a new glory that makes existing glory outdated and obsolete. For instance, research does not stop when a new computer is developed. Instead, using this new computer makes it apparent that even greater results could be achieved if one continued to use research to come up with an even better computer. The end result is a transformation from glory to glory.
The word transformation means ‘transformed after being with; transfigured’ and is the source of the English word metamorphosis. This same word is used in Matt. 17:2 and Mark 9:2 to describe the transfiguration of Jesus. The technological change that has happened in the 20th and now 21st centuries can legitimately be described as going beyond transformation to metamorphosis. But people have not been transformed. In verse 18, people are being transfigured through a process of metamorphosis, which means that the research and development of today will extend to include the subjective. The word image means ‘mirror-like representation, referring to what is very close in resemblance’. Using cognitive language, reality will become increasingly like Platonic forms of perfection. Using a simple example, the Platonic form of a circle is more perfectly round than any object in real life. However, today’s typical modern home is filled with round objects, such as plates, CDs, and balls, which are more perfectly round than any of the round objects that existed 200 years ago.
I do not know exactly what this entails, just as it would have been difficult for someone living 200 years ago to predict the technology of today. The best that I can do is try to explain what it would be like by pointing to a similar process. When Jesus spoke to Nicodemus 2000 years ago he could not even do that, but instead had to tell Nicodemus that “I have spoken to you of earthly things and you do not believe; how then will you believe I speak of heavenly things?” (John 3:12). Thanks to science and technology, we can now at least speak of earthly things and people will both believe and see.
This is followed by the phrase “just as from the Lord, the Spirit”. The word just as means ‘even as, just as’. This means that the metamorphosis ‘from glory into glory’ will function like ‘from the Lord, the Spirit’, the transition that was described in verse 17. That transition moved away from submitting to abstract thought to looking at the spirit behind this obedience. One can understand what this means by looking at how people interact with computers. Progress does not come from those who treat computers as a lord to be obeyed: ‘Tell me which buttons to press’. ‘Say that again slowly so that I can write down the steps that I have to take’. Instead, progress is driven by those who go beyond following instructions to understanding the internal spirit. This mental transition from physically following instructions to building an internal image of perfection makes it possible for the cycle of research and development to continue. A similar principle would apply to the future. There would be consumers of spiritual technology and there would also be inventors of spiritual technology who became inventors by going ‘from lord to spirit’.
A Cognitive Reason for a Kingdom of the Beast
I have mentioned that there will be a backlash to the new society of spiritual technology described in chapter 3. One can decipher the nature of this backlash by looking at two key phrases in verses 2 and 4 of chapter 4. Verse 2 talks about ‘walking in craftiness’. The word craftiness means ‘unscrupulous cunning that stops at nothing to achieve a selfish goal’. This describes behavior that is ruled by childish MMNs. Verse 4 refers to ‘the god of this age’. A concept of God emerges when a general theory in Teacher thought applies to personal identity. A ‘god of this age’ is a general understanding of a universe such as ours in which matter rules over mind. What matters in our universe is physical reality, the goal is to build physical kingdoms, and one controls people through physical means.
These two principles describe the ruling mindset of most kingdoms throughout history. Leaders, driven by childish emotions of pride, fear, hedonism, and status used physical means to build vast kingdoms and control hordes of people. And most of these leaders have maintained power by appealing to childish emotions in their followers.
Modern technology has upset this balance. World War I was the first major war driven by modern technology. It started like any other typical war of history, driven by war-mongering childish minds. But technology made it possible to kill people with a new efficiency and on a new scale. Ultimately, World War I became a war of materiel, in which the entire economies of belligerent nations were commandeered in order to produce weapons. This changed the nature of the war from a struggle between various tribal, personal, and cultural MMNs to a battle between the MMNs of humanity and the TMN of science and technology—a battle between flesh and steel.
Moving forward, World War II ended with the development of the atomic bomb. For the first time, the TMNs of science and technology made it possible to build weapons that would wipe out all life on earth. This meant that a limitation had to be placed upon childish MMNs. The superpowers could no longer fight open wars but rather had to fight proxy wars and wage a Cold War.
Natural law places an even stronger restriction upon extending war into space. When some object or person is blown up on earth, then all of the pieces fall to the ground. This does not happen in space. Instead, when any object in earth orbit is blown up, then all of the pieces continue to orbit the Earth at an orbital velocity of around 30,000 kilometers per hour. A fleck of paint traveling at this speed has sufficient kinetic energy to gouge holes in the windows of the space station. And the windows on the space shuttle had to be replaced 45 times because of impacts from space debris. If earth orbit contained enough debris, then any satellite that was sent up into space would immediately get hit by some of this debris—creating more debris. Ultimately, humans would become trapped on earth for centuries, unable to send anything into space or travel into space. This predicament of runaway space debris is known as the Kessler syndrome.
This means that one dare not start a shooting war in Earth orbit. As far as I know, satellites have been deliberately blown up only three times so far, twice by the Americans in 1985 and 2008, and once by the Chinese in 2007. In terms of creating space debris, the Chinese test was the worst, creating 3,438 pieces of trackable orbital debris. Summarizing, when one moves from earth to space, then the TMNs of natural law place even greater restrictions upon childish MMNs. One can no longer fight even small wars because any form of hostility would lead to disastrous consequences for everyone. Thus, the idea of setting up a military Space Force is insane.
Looking at one more example, political leaders are now trying to turn the Internet into a combat zone driven by childish MMNs of nationalism, greed, and dictatorship. However, the Internet is by nature driven by universal Teacher laws. A computer program does not distinguish between one person and another. Computers are by their very nature devoid of childish MMNs and instead are inexorably controlled by the Teacher structures of their architecture and their programs. Political leaders with childish minds continue to think that it is possible to get computers to do something for ‘us’ and not for ‘them’. But whenever it becomes possible for a computer to do something for one group of people, then it automatically becomes possible for that computer to do the same thing for everyone. For instance, if some government agency is given a secret backdoor to a computer program, then that backdoor is potentially open to everyone, including criminal forces and opposing governments. With space debris, the laws of nature make it impossible to fight a war. With computers and the Internet, the inherent Teacher structure makes it impossible to even continue thinking in terms of tribal MMNs.
I suggest that something similar but even more extensive would happen in the case of spiritual technology. As usual, leaders with great egos and childish minds would view spiritual technology as a new-and-improved way of fighting wars, building earthly kingdoms, and suppressing populations. But unlike normal technology, spiritual technology would require a mindset transformed by the TMN of a rational concept of God. Therefore, the very use of spiritual technology would bring spiritual powers to bear upon personal identity. Saying this more simply, a demonic human mind who dares to use spiritual technology would succeed in opening the door to personal interaction with demons. And when humans interact with real demons, then the ultimate result is hell—real hell. When human leaders succeed in creating a hell-on-earth, then this will force those who are following God to extend spiritual technology to the essence of life and death itself. The end result is that the hell-on-earth will eventually implode upon itself, while the extension of God-fearing spiritual technology will lead to the birth of heaven-on-earth. (This is just a birth. The new heavens and earth come much later in Revelation 21.) I suggest that Revelation 13, 2 Thessalonians 2, and 1 John 4 are all referring to this future temporary kingdom of the beast that will be enabled by the rise of spiritual technology.
One final point. The problem is neither technology nor spiritual technology. Technology may be amoral, but it is guided by the rational TMNs of science and thus leads people to a mindset that is compatible with morality. We saw this illustrated in the previous paragraphs. Going further, spiritual technology would be explicitly moral, because it would be enabled by submitting MMNs of personal identity to the TMN of a rational concept of God. The real limitation is the current system of mind-over-matter, in which people live in physical bodies in a physical universe that is governed by natural law. God had to create such a system of matter-over-mind in order to force people and societies to learn how to submit to rational thought. But growing up in a physical body in a physical universe leads inevitably to a mind that is controlled by childish MMNs. And living in a physical universe in which matter rules over mind leads inevitably to a naturalistic mindset of building physical kingdoms and using physical force to control people. Spiritual technology would initially exacerbate this problem, because people would view technology as the noun and spiritual as the adjective; they would use spirituality as a way of extending physical kingdoms and enhancing physical force. But this embracing of spiritual power for the purpose of building physical kingdoms and controlling physical populations would be self-defeating. Going further, those who respond to this satanic spiritual power (Satan means ‘adversary’) by following spiritual technology with personal integrity and fear of God will succeed in providing the seed for a new universe in which God can make spiritual the noun and technology the adjective.
Spiritual Growth versus Spiritual Corruption 4:1-2
Now that we have a big picture let us turn to chapter 4 and look at the details. Paul begins by focusing upon the positive benefits: “Therefore, since we have this ministry, as we received mercy, we do not lose heart” (v.1). The word ministry is the same ‘deacon’ word that was seen several times in chapter 3, which emphasizes Server actions. More generally, one applies a general Teacher understanding through Server actions. Using religious language, one behaves in the righteous manner of allowing the TMN of a general understanding to emotionally guide Server actions. Using scientific language, one learns and applies the exemplars of science, which are Server sequences of actions that represent many similar Server sequences because they express general mathematical laws in Teacher thought.
Verse 1 itself says that one should think in terms of righteousness and exemplars. That is because the word translated as means ‘according to the manner in which, in the degree that, just as, as’.
Two ways of responding are being compared in verse 1: ‘receiving mercy’ and ‘not losing heart’. Each of those two is a single word in the original Greek. Receiving mercy means ‘to have pity or mercy on, to show mercy’, while losing heart means ‘to be negatively influenced with the outcome of experiencing inner weariness’. The previous chapter has described the process by which following a rational Teacher understanding of God leads eventually to beneficial results for personal identity in Mercy thought. This same process is supposed to be used to keep personal identity going in Mercy thought without falling apart. In other words, the process of achieving beneficial results for Mercy identity should be viewed as an exemplar to follow when maintaining energy for Mercy identity.
Colossians 2:6 says something similar: “As you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him”. Colossians 2 has a similar context, because verse 6 is preceded by a passage that talks about ‘gaining a true knowledge of God’s mystery, Christ’ and is followed by a warning against being taken ‘captive through philosophy and empty deception, according to the tradition of men’.
Verse 2 compares two ways of responding within this new atmosphere of spiritual technology. The first path is “but we have renounced the things hidden because of shame”. The word renounce is only used once in the New Testament and means to ‘renounce, disown, forbid, refuse’. Hidden means ‘hidden, concealed, secret’, while shame means ‘shame, shamefacedness, shameful deeds’. The Greek text is more literally, ‘but have renounced the hidden of the shame’. Thus, the focus is not upon vowing not to do shameful deeds, but rather upon renouncing the general attitude of hiding things because of shame. This is an important distinction, because one usually vows not to do shameful deeds because one is living in a social context in which people hide their shame. The Greek implies that this general social context of people hiding their shame is being renounced.
We saw in the previous chapter that absolute truth leads to a form of veiled thinking that ultimately regards the nature of God as a hidden mystery. When a rational understanding of God and incarnation finally succeeds in overcoming absolute truth (and mysticism), then the removal of the veil in Teacher thought will lead to the imposition of a veil in Mercy thought. Using the language of Freud, people will develop an id. They will become ashamed of their childish MMNs which fail to meet the standard of a rational concept of God, and they will respond by hiding these childish MMNs.
It is vital, especially at this point, for those who are following God to renounce this gut response of hiding personal inadequacies. First, this will bring peace to Mercy thought. Rational Teacher understanding already rules over most of Mercy thought, and it will have become obvious that following rational Teacher understanding is beneficial for Mercy thought, in the same way that it is obvious in today’s society that following science and technology leads to consumer gadgets that are helpful and entertaining. Therefore, it will make sense to allow Teacher understanding to rule over all of Mercy thought. Second, this personal openness will also shine the light of Teacher understanding on childish leaders who are being driven by their ids to misuse spiritual technology in order to enslave the population. One can see this principle illustrated by today’s surveillance society. One can limit the surveillance that is being carried out by governments and corporations by shedding light upon these hidden practices. More generally, open journalism can help to limit corporate and government abuse. Third, following a path of personal openness would open the door to more spiritual technology, and this spiritual technology would make it possible to overcome the spiritual technology of childish leaders. This third option would only become available after the theoretical return of Jesus and the introduction of spiritual technology. And this third option would tip the balance of power away from childish leaders to the mature followers of God who are walking in humility. One can see this shift in power in the book of Revelation, because before chapter 10, the followers of God are on the defensive against the system of the world, while after chapter 12, the followers of God go on the offensive and the system of the world is on the defensive.
The second path in verse 2 is “walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God”. The word walking means ‘walk… conduct my life, live’. In other words, it goes beyond actions to a way of life. And we have already seen that craftiness means ‘unscrupulous cunning that stops at nothing to achieve a selfish goal’. Putting this together, people are not just expressing childish MMNs, but rather have developed a complete way of life whose ultimate purpose is to express childish MMNs without limitation. One can see this distinction, for instance, between using a weapon to kill someone and constructing an entire military-industrial complex whose ultimate purpose is to design and build weapons that kill people. The first is merely a childish MMN expressing itself freely. The second is an entire system of Teacher order based upon childish MMNs expressing themselves freely. The entertainment industry is another example, because it is also an entire system of Teacher order designed to pamper the childish MMNs of the consumer. I am not suggesting that everyone in these industries is totally evil and that there is nothing good in these industries. Rather, both are illustrations of making a concept of God in Teacher thought the servant of childish identity in Mercy thought.
I suggested in chapter 10 of Natural Cognitive Theology that this combination describes ‘blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’. Looking at this more carefully, one is following Teacher understanding enough to build Platonic forms of the Spirit. But one is then making this partial concept of the Holy Spirit a servant of childish MMNs and backing up these childish MMNs with a system of Teacher order. It is this system that commits ‘blasphemy against the Holy Spirit’. For instance, the military-industrial complex insists that rational Teacher understanding be used to design weapons but also insists with equal fervor that this rational understanding be submitted to a system of military conflict based upon childish tribalism. When children throw stones at each other, this is not blasphemy against the Holy Spirit. But when adults use rational thought to design high-tech weapons to throw at each other like little children—and then declare that this juxtaposition is good and proper, then that declaration qualifies as blasphemy against the Holy Spirit.
This misuse of Teacher thought is seen in the second phrase ‘adulterating the word of God’. The word adulterating means ‘to lure or snare by using bait—holding out the worm and concealing the hook’. What is being adulterated is literally ‘the logos of the God’—the rational concept of God and incarnation that has been revealed in the theoretical return of Jesus. People are claiming to follow this revelation of divinity, but in fact they are practicing bait and switch. When one enters the system, one realizes that childish MMNs are ultimately in charge.
For instance, the military-industrial complex produces weapons of incredible order-within-complexity that are amazing examples of the universal laws of nature created by God. But if one looks beyond the bait to the hook, one sees violence and death. The real purpose of this incredible order-within-complexity is to destroy order-within-complexity, both living and inanimate. What remains after a battle is not order-within-complexity but rather smoldering wrecks surrounded by dead and dying humans. That is bait and switch. Similarly, the entertainment industry creates gadgets with amazing electronic order-within-complexity. What kind of entertainment is typically conveyed by these incredible devices? Action movies in which order-within-complexity blown up; drama in which people experience the painful consequences of pursuing childish MMNs; fantasy which pretends that one does not have to submit to the laws of science; and childish escapism which pretends that one is not governed by cognitive principles of sowing-and-reaping. Again, one sees a bait and switch of ‘the logos of the God’. If this is true with today’s technology, imagine what could be produced with spiritual technology. If everyone today wants to watch the latest movies in high-definition video with surround sound, imagine how future audiences would be attracted to watching—or participating in—the latest virtual reality in a spiritually enhanced environment.
Verse 2 finishes by saying what one should do: “but by the manifestation of truth commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God.” ‘Manifestation of the truth’ is a strange phrase. (‘The’ is explicitly in the original Greek’.) Manifestation means ‘a manifestation, disclosure; a coming to light’. This noun is only used twice in the New Testament, but it occurs 49 times as a verb. Titus 1:3 is the only other passage which talks about ‘the knowledge of the truth’ being revealed. In all other cases, what is being revealed is usually some person or possibly some set of actions, but not ‘the truth’. This is cognitively significant, because Perceiver thought deals with truth, and Perceiver thought in the human mind is incapable of revealing anything. One can use Server thought to reveal actions or righteousness because Server thought can express itself through physical movement. But Perceiver thought is locked within the mind and cannot express itself directly through any human means. However, Perceiver thought could express itself directly through supernatural means.
Saying this more generally, my hypothesis is that the supernatural realm (which appears to be different than the spiritual realm) is the mirror image of the physical realm. The relationship between the physical and the supernatural is like the relationship between particle and wave that occurs in physics. Thus, humans in the physical realm use Server thought to control matter through physical action, while angels, living in the supernatural realm, would use Perceiver thought to control their environment through a manifestation of truth. In verse 2 what is being manifested is not just any truth but rather the truth.
This truth is being manifested in order to ‘commend ourselves to every man’s conscience’. The word commend was seen in 3:1 and means ‘stand together, referring to facts lining up with each other to support or commend something’. Philosophy describes two primary ways of evaluating truth: The correspondence theory of truth evaluates truth by how accurately it describes or corresponds with physical reality. The coherence theory of truth says that facts must be consistent with one another and fit coherently within a general system of understanding. If spiritual technology made it possible to adjust the facts of nature, then truth would no longer correspond with physical reality. But it would still be possible to evaluate truth through coherence: Are the facts consistent with each other and do they fit together into a coherent package? The word translated ‘commend’ is specifically referring to coherence. The word conscience also relates to coherence, because it combines the word ‘together with’ with the word ‘to know, see’. Thus, conscience actually means ‘joint-knowing’. For instance, this essay is attempting to present a coherent theory of 2 Corinthians, which itself fits into a coherent interpretation of the Bible, which itself fits into a coherent model of human cognition. Thus, I am appealing to conscience.
Going further, the appealing is to ‘every man’s conscience’, and every ‘focuses on the parts of making up the whole—viewing the whole in terms of the individual parts’. Thus, Paul is not just appealing to the conscience of some respected person, instead he is appealing to the consciences of all humans. Obviously, a finite individual cannot appeal to the conscience of every single human being. But the general principle still remains, which is that looking for coherence is not a one person job. Instead, each cognitive style and each specialization has a different window into coherence, and if one wants to find out what really fits together, then one needs to look through these various windows in order to get the whole picture. For instance, during the last few years I have been extending the theory of mental symmetry by examining many systems from many different fields in order to build a coherent concept of cognitive truth.
When one is appealing to ‘every man’s conscience’, then this is actually an implicit form of correspondence. That is because each cognitive style and each specialization has a different window into the functioning of the same mental structure. Thus, including many different viewpoints will ensure that the resulting structure will correspond to ‘how the mind works’. For instance, whenever I use mental symmetry to examine another system, I find that I gain a more accurate understanding of how the mind works. Notice that this is different than following consensus. Consensus averages the opinions of different people and groups. Including many different viewpoints, in contrast, is like assembling a jigsaw puzzle. Each viewpoint adds another piece to the puzzle.
Assembling a jigsaw puzzle assumes that there is a big picture. It assumes that one is placing the different viewpoints into a general framework, as opposed to consensus which tries to blend the pieces together in the absence of any framework. The presence of a ‘big picture’ or general framework is seen in the next phrase which says that a search for coherence needs to be done ‘in the sight of God’. This is literally ‘before the face of the God’. Saying this cognitively, one searches for coherence guided by the TMN of a concept of God. Notice how this is precisely the opposite of those who are ‘walking in craftiness and adulterating the word of God’. They are treating a TMN of God as the servant of childish identity in Mercy thought and pretending to follow God while actually following childish identity. In contrast, ‘commending ourselves to every man’s conscience in the sight of God’ starts with personal human integrity and then places everyone’s standard of personal integrity under the umbrella of a God of integrity in Teacher thought. This same kind of interaction happened during the early stages of science, because individual researchers each tried to gain a coherent understanding of some aspect of physical reality and then these researchers collaborated to help construct a coherent rational understanding of the physical universe. Present-day science still claims to do this, but much of the actual research has become buried by the methodology of academia—especially in the soft sciences. If such cooperative, collaborative honesty was required to replace superstition with a rational understanding of the physical universe, one could see that a similar kind of cooperative, collaborative honesty would be required to replace spiritual ‘walking in craftiness’ in the future.
Covering the Good News 4:3-4
Verse 3 looks beyond the obvious problem to the deeper, underlying problem: “And even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in those who are perishing.” (As the NASB points out, the word ‘to’ is literally ‘in’.) The word gospel means ‘good news’. This word has been used once before in 2 Corinthians, in 2:12, where Paul ‘came to Troas for the gospel of Christ’ and ‘a door was opened for me in the Lord’. That passage was portraying a personal breakthrough into a new way of viewing truth which is no longer based in the self-denial of absolute truth but rather the liberation of universal principles. When one learns that such a transition is possible, then that is good news. Similarly, in verse 3, ‘our gospel’ is being veiled. The spread of spiritual technology should be exceedingly good news, because one could start to cure physical problems that until now were incurable. But this good news is being concealed by those who are using spiritual technology to pursue wealth and power. For instance, the modern consumer society started in about the 1880s, because that is when technological gadgets started to be used within people’s homes. These labor-saving devices were good news. But then World War I came along and covered up this good news by commandeering all of the factories in order to make weapons of destruction.
But where exactly is the good news being covered? It is covered ‘in those who are perishing’. The ‘manifestation of truth’ is now visible to anybody who is capable of noticing. People can all see the spiritual technology. But what do the childish leaders see when they look at this spiritual technology? They see a new-and-better way of oppressing the population and fighting the enemy. That is because the good news is covered within their own minds. However, spiritual technology is not like normal technology. One can use normal technology while remaining personally immature. But those who used spiritual technology to further childish aims would find themselves coming face-to-face with the spirit driving that spiritual technology.
The word perishing means to ‘fully destroy, cutting off entirely’. Thus, at first glance it will appear as if those who are in power have found an even better way of oppressing the population. But, in fact, the corrupt individual who uses spiritual technology will ensure his own destruction, because he is using a weapon that can only be wielded successfully by a mind that is righteous and pure, and anyone who wields such a weapon without being righteous and pure will be destroyed by the weapon. This may sound like an overstatement, but it is already true to a certain extent in aspects of current society. For instance, the Kessler syndrome makes it clear that outer space will be denied to humanity if humans treat space in a tribalistic and warlike manner.
Verse 3 also applies to today’s typical UFO researcher. Many researchers think that evil government powers are hiding the good news of spiritual technology from the human population in order to pursue war and global domination. But even if secret government agencies are contacting alien species, I would not want to interact with any aliens cooperating with humans who are ‘walking in craftiness or adulterating the word of God’. Going further, the typical UFO researcher also thinks that mysticism is the best way of contacting aliens. For instance, I recently attended a local UFO conference at which several top-level UFO researchers spoke. One of the speakers addressed the spiritual side of UFOs and preached mysticism rooted in snake symbolism. (Yes, literally.) But we have already seen that mysticism lies at the root of the problem and cannot be part of the solution.
In contrast, a theoretical return of Jesus would enable a form of spiritual technology that would be full of good news. In such an environment, the average person would not have to beg the military to disclose their secrets or attempt to contact inhuman aliens through mysticism. Instead, the door would open to a spiritual world of righteousness, making it possible for the humble follower of God to successfully resist and overcome the spiritually charged power of the oppressive state. In fact, any attempt by oppressive leaders to misuse spiritual technology would lead to greater spiritual torment for these leaders and make them more vulnerable to those who were applying spiritual technology with personal integrity in a God-fearing manner.
Verse 4 explains the nature of the veil that exists within the minds of those who are misusing power: “In whose case the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God.” The first phrase is a poor translation and is more accurately ‘in whom the god of the age’. In other words, one is dealing with a faulty mental concept of God, an inadequate paradigm of ‘how things work’. Thomas Kuhn suggested that when a person adopts a new paradigm, he literally begins to see things in the environment that he did not see before. It is not that these things were physically invisible and now appear, but rather that the mind starts taking notice of them. Verse 4 is describing this kind of mental effect. The word age means ‘an age, era, time-span, characterized by a specific quality’. Thus a ‘god of the age’ would describe a general Teacher theory based in the assumptions of matter-over-mind. Saying this more specifically, leaders have always built physical kingdoms and used physical force and propaganda to control the population. Both leaders and followers will assume that this method of functioning will continue to exist, because this system has created the TMN of a concept of god within people’s minds which is imposing itself upon their thought and behavior.
The verb translated blinded means ‘to blind, to make blind’ and is derived from a verb that means ‘having a cloudy perspective… blowing smoke which causes spiritual blindness, i.e. experiencing clouded vision’. In other words, the facts may be present within these people’s minds, but they are not being seen clearly, because the ‘smoke’ of a Teacher paradigm is causing the facts to be blurred, minimized, and ignored. This smoke is clouding ‘the minds of the unbelieving’. The word mind means ‘the personal verdict comes out of using the mind’, while unbelieving means ‘not faithful because unpersuaded’. Thus, these individuals are coming to faulty conclusions because they are unwilling to be persuaded to allow their existing paradigm to be changed. Cognitively speaking, this describes how the TMN of an inadequate paradigm biases thought. Such an individual is devoid of curiosity. Instead, he retreats internally to the castle of his limited paradigm, mentally pulls up the drawbridge, and ignores any facts that contradict the paradigm. Everyone follows a paradigm that biases thought. This is inevitable. Therefore, one has to evaluate paradigms indirectly, and one of the signs of an inadequate paradigm is a lack of curiosity.
For instance, one sees this mental effect with government and the Internet. Government officials and legislators keep thinking that the Internet can be treated like normal physical reality. But the Internet does not function like normal physical reality, and the Internet is not just a collection of physical objects within physical reality. Instead, it is an entire world of information that is guided by its own set of rules. However, the typical legislator is mentally blinded by ‘the god of the age’ to keep treating the Internet like normal reality. Similarly, the spiritual technology of the future may begin as a way of enhancing existing technology, but it will actually be something much greater, which is a doorway into an entirely new world with its own set of rules.
The rest of verse 4 describes the nature of this new world: “so that they might not see the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God”. This is not the best translation, because it implies that the light exists out there and that these people are not seeing this light. But ‘they’ is not in the original text. Instead, a more literal translation would be ‘so that would not beam forth the illumination of the glory of the Christ, who is image of the God’. The word beam forth is only used once in the New Testament. It is a verb form of a noun that is also only used once in the New Testament, which means ‘brightness, daylight, dawn’ and is used in Acts 20:11 to describe a literal rising of the sun. The word illumination is used twice in the New Testament, once in this verse and the other time two verses later. It means ‘light itself, the embodiment of the source of the illumination’. Putting this together, the dawn of a new age of light is being blocked by the unbelieving who are mentally locked into their paradigm of existing reality.
This reminds me of a concept that I have read several times in UFO literature for which I cannot find the source. The general idea is that humans can prevent aliens from appearing openly in physical reality as long as enough humans refuse to believe that aliens exist. A similar principle is described in Mark 6:5-6 when Jesus visits his home town: “And He could do no miracle there except that He laid His hands on a few sick people and healed them. And He wondered at their unbelief.” In essence, one is dealing with a form of the classic double slit experiment of physics. Physics has discovered that a beam of light or electrons can appear either as a particle or as a wave. If one looks for the presence of a particle, then it will behave like a particle, but if one looks for a wave, then it will behave like a wave. My hypothesis is that a similar sort of duality exists between the angelic and human realms. In essence, if enough people are looking for physical reality and not the supernatural then what society will see is physical reality and not the supernatural.
What is being blocked by the unpersuaded is ‘the glory of the Christ, who is image of the God’. The word image means ‘what is very close in resemblance, like a high-definition projection’. Christ refers to the abstract side of incarnation, while ‘the God’ refers to a universal concept of God in Teacher thought. This combination has been revealed at an abstract level during the abstract return of Jesus. It is now starting to be revealed at the concrete level of ‘glory’. In other words, the spiritual technology that emerged as a result of the abstract return of Jesus has now coalesced to the extent that it is creating a new environment that is a ‘high definition projection’ of the character of God and incarnation. Something similar, but not as extensive, is happening today with the Internet revolution, because the Internet has pervaded physical life to such an extent that physical reality itself is starting to resemble a version of the Internet. For instance, as of 2016, shoppers in the United States were doing more shopping on the Internet than in physical stores, and Amazon, the largest e-tailer, is now selling seven times as much as Walmart.
One final point. It could be that this future blocking is the first stage of the backlash against spiritual technology. Something similar happened with belief in UFOs. There was an initial outburst of interest in the 1950s, and then this quickly became suppressed as the implications began to set in, and since then any serious discussion of aliens or UFOs has been ridiculed and ostracized. (And much of the discussion about aliens and UFOs deserves to be ridiculed and ostracized. However, this official policy of ridicule is now starting to change.) Similarly, it is possible that future society would start to recognize the implications of spiritual technology and respond by trying to slam shut the door between physical reality and other realms. This is how a society often behaves to the introduction of any disruptive technology, because the new technology threatens existing TMNs of societal order, and mental networks respond with extreme emotion when their existence is threatened. Spiritual technology would be the ultimate form of disruptive technology because it would threaten the Teacher paradigm of physical existence itself. This explains why science ridicules the possibility of UFOs with such vigor. It also explains why many UFO researchers insist upon interpreting aliens as physical visitors from other physical planets in the physical universe. However, what researchers actually encounter when delving into the realm of UFOs is not primarily advanced technology but rather what is referred to as high strangeness. And high strangeness is mentally threatening if one cannot fit it into the TMN of some rational explanation of existence. (This high strangeness does appear to fit into the theory of mental symmetry.)
Responding to Suppression 4:5-6
Verse 5 points out how one responds to this societal suppression: “For we do not preach ourselves but Christ Jesus as Lord, and ourselves as your bond-servants for Jesus’ sake.” The word proclaim means ‘to preach or announce a message publicly and with conviction’. This verb is quite common in the Gospels, but it has only been used once before in 2 Corinthians. This was back in 1:19 where Paul was trying to preach a consistent positive message of ‘yes’ to the Corinthians and not a mixed message of ‘yes and no’. Here too society is responding to spiritual technology with a mixture of yes and no, and the followers of God are trying to preach a consistent positive ‘yes’ of ‘good news’. Saying this more generally, the method of preaching is most effective when one can use words to refer to something that everybody knows is true. For instance, hell fire preaching was effective in the 18th century, because everyone knew from personal experience that injury or death was just around the corner.
Verses 3-4 clarified that the real problem is mental. People are mentally blocking the light of God and incarnation from shining out into society, because they are clinging in Teacher thought to an inadequate paradigm. There is no point in reasoning with these people because they are unwilling to be persuaded. Using the language of Thomas Kuhn, one cannot use logic to prove that one paradigm is better than another paradigm, because every system of logic is based upon some paradigm. Using an analogy, there is no rational, objective way of evaluating a mental set of eyeglasses, because whenever one evaluates some set of eyeglasses, one is viewing those eyeglasses through some other set of eyeglasses. However, mental symmetry suggests that eyeglasses—or paradigms—can be evaluated through clarity and extent of vision. A better paradigm will allow a person to see more of reality with greater clarity. The eyeglasses of ‘the god of this age’ are inferior because they are preventing people from seeing clearly the new realm of spiritual technology.
Thus, what is needed is proclaiming or preaching. People need to be told the new paradigm, because people are now trying to hold on to their existing, inadequate paradigm in the face of new spiritual reality. Saying this another way, interaction with others will need to be at the level of a Teacher paradigm rather than at the level of specific Perceiver facts and rigorous logic. The spread of spiritual technology would create a new set of Perceiver facts, and people would be looking for a new Teacher paradigm to explain these Perceiver facts. I have seen a similar shift happen with mental symmetry. People are more receptive to the theory of mental symmetry today than they were twenty years ago. This is not because I have used logic and facts to try to persuade people of the theory. Instead, the questioning of absolute truth combined with the spread of technology has created a new set of Perceiver facts, and people are starting to look for a paradigm that can explain these new facts.
Paul emphasizes that this is not ‘proclaiming ourselves’. This is a significant statement. Those who are ‘walking and craftiness and adulterating the word of God’ will be ‘proclaiming ourselves’ because they will be attempting to place the new spiritual technology within the traditional paradigm of empire building and us-versus-them. For instance, a common theme in UFO books is that the existence of UFOs has been suppressed by governments because each government wants to use alien technology to gain a strategic military advantage over other countries. Whether this statement is true or not, it is an example of ‘proclaiming ourselves’.
Instead, Paul is proclaiming ‘Christ Jesus Lord’, and these three words in the original Greek are in that order and all three words are in the accusative case without any added ‘the’s, signifying a three-part integrated approach to incarnation. It starts with Christ, the abstract side of incarnation. This is combined with Jesus, the concrete side of incarnation, and the name Jesus means salvation. To this is added Lord, which means that one submits personally to this system of personal salvation based in the incarnation of God. That is the message being preached.
Continuing with verse 5, the word translated bond-servant means ‘someone who belongs to another; a bond-slave, without any ownership rights of their own’, and this is the only time that this word is used in 2 Corinthians. Paul adds that this is ‘for Jesus’ sake’. In other words, the struggle at this point is not introducing a new concept of Christ in abstract thought but rather conveying the good news that Christ is actually Jesus who came to save people. If the aliens and UFOs that people are currently talking about actually appeared within physical reality, then that would not be good news, because they have not come to save people. I am not suggesting that they are all evil demons, but rather that they embody a mixed message of human salvation. This same kind of mixed message was spread when the Western powers colonized the rest of the world. There was some salvation but this was also mixed with domination and exploitation. It was a mixture of God-and-country and not a pure message of God and glory-through-incarnation.
Paul’s idea of being a slave to others contrasts with the existing leadership which is attempting to enslave the population. I suspect that many who are following God at this point would be tempted to leave humanity and start a new society on Mars or the moon. (This is not so far-fetched, because SpaceX is currently developing a rocket that will be capable of transporting human colonists to Mars.) After all, many of the Pilgrim fathers (as well as my Mennonite ancestors) responded to systematic persecution by leaving existing society and moving to a new world. Setting up a new spiritually-enhanced society on Mars might be a good idea because people with physical needs tend to pray more, and the initial settlers on Mars would have many physical needs. But this must not be the primary response. Those who are following God at this point must not view themselves as owners of their own destiny but rather as being ‘bond-servants for the sake of Jesus’. That is because spiritual technology is now capable of permanently defeating the system of the beast. But this lasting victory will only happen if people stick around for the sake of personal salvation, or in other words, for Jesus.
Verse 6 opens by emphasizing that this message of salvation extends far beyond ‘you in your small corner and I in mine’: “For God, who said, ‘Light shall shine out of darkness’, is the One who has shone...” A more literal translation would be, ‘for it is the God, the having said...’ In other words, the original proclamation comes from a universal being in Teacher thought, and what humans are pronouncing is merely a repetition of this universal proclamation. Speaking from personal experience, my work in mental symmetry has been largely motivated by an underlying gut feeling that I am not just developing my own theory, but rather being prodded by a universal being to develop a sufficiently adequate concept of God. One major reason for this gut feeling is that I keep finding that doors of opportunity open just wide enough for me to gain a new facet of understanding and then close, leaving me with no option but to do more research in order to increase the generality of mental symmetry.
What is this universal proclamation of God? ‘Out of darkness light shall shine’. (In the original Greek, the phrase ‘out of darkness’ comes first.) Light is mentioned twice in this phrase. The word light means ‘light, a source of light, radiance’, and the word shine means ‘shine, give light’.
Looking at this historically, the Christian church has usually grown in periods of persecution while becoming complacent in prosperity. When everything is going fine, then there is no need to look for a better solution; the indirect twilight of existing society provides sufficient illumination. But when everything goes dark, then one has to search for another source of illumination. For instance, the phrase lux lucet in tenebris (light glows in the darkness) was the motto of the Waldensians, a group of proto-Protestants that appeared in the 1170s in northern Italy and was persecuted fiercely by the Catholic Church.
Verse 6 then continues to describe where this shining happens: “the one who has shone in our hearts”. Using cognitive language, Mercy thought has become illuminated internally with blindingly brilliant Platonic forms. The content of these Platonic forms is described in the rest of verse 6: “(toward) the Light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Christ”. (The NASB uses the phrase to give, but the Greek word actually means ‘motion towards to interface with’.) Platonic forms are idealistic images within Mercy thought, providing a motivation for personal identity to head toward these Platonic forms. This phrase describes the good news of personal salvation from God’s perspective.
Interpreting this cognitively, Teacher thought feels good when a general theory is expressed in specific situations; this brings glory to the general theory. Thus, God is glorified when people in society behave in a manner that reflects the character of God. This desire for glory is communicated to Mercy thought through Platonic forms. Thus, instead of just following God in a righteous manner, one also heads in Mercy thought toward the Platonic forms of experientially knowing the light of the glory of God.
For instance, one learns science by doing and solving problems of science. These exemplars lead to a righteousness in which one does Server sequences of science in a way that reflects the Teacher understanding of science. But science does not stop there. Instead, science leads to technology, and the goal of technology is—hopefully—to improve human life. Those who have experienced the benefits of modern technology experientially know what it means to be driven internally by the Platonic forms of new-and-improved gadgets. Of course, technology is an imperfect illustration, because technology is objective and can also be used to destroy or enslave human life and not improve it. Spiritual technology, in contrast, would be inherently moral, and could ultimately be used only to improve human life.
Turning to the final phrase in verse 6, this glory of God is ‘in the face of Christ’. The Greek here is uncertain and could be ‘Jesus Christ’ rather than ‘Christ’. In either case, the attention is turning back from Jesus to Christ.
The underlying implication is that all of the individual expressions of spiritual technology are now starting to integrate with a concept of God and incarnation. People are beginning to realize that all of these spiritual enhancements to gadgets are actually tiny glimpses into an integrated relationship with God. If Christ represents the abstract side of incarnation, then ‘in the face of Christ’ means that people are coming face-to-face with a theology of God and incarnation; they are starting to grasp the general divine equations that lie behind all the specific spiritual functions.
Physical Vulnerability 4:7
This is when the backlash gets severe and the kingdom of the beast tries to assert its dominance. That is because the struggle has now reached the level of a universal understanding in Teacher thought. The next few verses are rather strong. But one also sees in the next section that this attempted persecution is never completely successful.
Verse 7 describes the general predicament: “But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves.” The word treasure means ‘a storehouse for precious things’. Earthen means ‘made of clay, earthen’ and is only used twice in the New Testament. Looking at the big picture, it is currently possible to become internally ‘transformed by the renewing of the mind’. Spiritual technology would make it possible to express this mental transformation through spiritual power, because only those who were personally transformed would be able to use spiritual technology successfully. But a person who is expressing spiritual power would still be trapped within a mortal, vulnerable, physical body. This juxtaposition can be described as ‘treasure in earthen vessels’. One can already see this kind of juxtaposition with old people who have vibrant spirits, but this contrast would become especially apparent in an environment of spiritual technology.
Noticing this contrast indicates a major paradigm shift. The life cycle of birth, growth, maturity, old age, and death is currently accepted as normal and inevitable. This flow-of-life is one of the major doctrines of the god of this age. Verse 4 described a population that was mentally blinded by the paradigm of living this natural flow-of-life within natural bodies within a natural universe. For such a person, spiritual is the adjective and technology the noun. However, if one made a paradigm shift and actually started to think in terms of spiritual life, then physical mortality would be seen as the exception to the rule. Spiritual would be the noun and technology would be the adjective. One would notice that the treasure is in earthen vessels, rather than thinking that normal aging people are being assisted by spiritual help. It is quite possible that spiritual technology would already have medicinal benefits by this point, just as normal technology can be used to improve medicine. But in both cases, people are still living in mortal bodies. (Verse 7 talks about earthen vessels rather than physical bodies, but verse 10 specifically refers twice to the physical body.)
The purpose of having ‘treasure in earthen vessels’ is “so that the surpassing greatness of the power will be of God and not from ourselves”. The word surpassing means ‘a throwing beyond, excess, superiority’. The Greek is more literally ‘the surpassing of the power’. The word power can refer to either natural or supernatural power, but it is not the same as strength, because strength describes Server ability while power is related more to Perceiver thought. In other words, the goal is a transformation of the spiritual technology that has existed until now. So far, spiritual technology has been extended and increased. Now it will go through a quantum leap, in a ‘throwing beyond’ that leaves the ground of human existence and travels through the air of Teacher thought. This throwing-beyond-ness is ‘of the God’. Using cognitive language, all personal transformation occurs when personal identity in Mercy thought submits to a general concept of God in Teacher thought and then becomes reborn in a new form within Mercy thought. This happens to a certain extent when a person enrolls in a school, becomes a student and then graduates with an education. This same process of personal transformation is now being applied to the treasure of spiritual technology.
Verse 7 contrasts ‘of the God’ with ‘out from us’. Spiritual technology is already coming ‘out from us’—out from the ‘treasure that is in the earthen vessels’. The natural tendency will be to think that this is good enough. But it is not sufficient, because spiritual is still an adjective being used to modify the noun of technology; the spirit is still the servant of the flesh. Thus, a backlash from society is needed to push the followers of God through this ‘throwing beyond’. In a similar manner, I have often felt that my understanding of mental symmetry is sufficient. But I keep getting pushed to develop it in new directions, and after each new step, I look back and see that this step was necessary.
Responding to the Backlash 4:8-9
Verses 8-9 contain a series of close disasters, where one comes to the edge but does not fall over. The first contrast is “afflicted in every way, but not crushed”. The verb afflicted means ‘make narrow by pressure’ and is related to the squeezing of tribulation discussed earlier in the essay. This squeezing is ‘in every way’, which describes an environment of squeezing. The word crushed means ‘to restrict, keep in a closed space’. Thus, the backlash against spiritual technology will initially appear like the squeezing of specialization that occurred earlier before the theoretical return of Jesus. That is because spiritual technology is adding a spiritual dimension to technology by including MMNs of personal identity guided by the TMN of a concept of God. The easiest way to avoid this would be through objectivity and specialization. Objectivity ignores MMNs of identity while specialization ignores the ‘forest’ of a general theory in Teacher thought by focusing upon some tree within that forest. However, this method of squeezing would no longer work, because spiritual technology would make it possible to escape from this ‘closed space’.
The second contrast is “perplexed, but not despairing”. The word perplexed means ‘to be at a loss, be perplexed’. Despairing is a stronger version of this verb which means ‘to be utterly at a loss… without exit’. Here one sees the impact of the theoretical return of Jesus. When one has a general understanding of God and incarnation in Teacher thought, then whenever one reaches an impasse in concrete thought, one can use abstract thought to come up with a new alternative. This already happens to some extent with science and technology, because we expect that physical problems in the world can be solved by using research to come up with some new form of technology. Using the language of Paul, whenever we are at a loss or perplexed, we are not utterly at a loss without an exit.
The third contrast is “persecuted, but not forsaken”. Persecute means to ‘aggressively chase, like a hunter pursuing a catch’. Forsaken means ‘leave in the lurch, abandon’. The first contrast made it impossible to express spiritual technology within current society because life was being squeezed, the second contrast made it impossible to follow existing solutions. The third contrast chases people out of existing society, turning them into refugees. But the theoretical return of Jesus opened the door to the non-physical, and those who become refugees from physical society will be able to turn to the non-physical for help.
The final contrast is “struck down, but not destroyed”. Struck down means ‘to throw to the ground, prostrate’. Destroyed means ‘cause to be lost and utterly perish by experiencing a miserable end’. If personal transformation comes from being ‘thrown through the air’ of Teacher thought, then the final stage of transformation is to ‘land on the ground’. When one is living within the ‘air’ of Teacher thought then it is easy to remain within abstract thought and never return back to the ground of concrete existence. One sees this symbolically in the contrast between Jacob and Esau, because Jacob ‘wrestled with the angel’ in order to receive a birthright in the real world, while Esau ‘sold his birthright’ for a meal of intellectual food. This temptation to remain in the air of Teacher thought would be especially strong if concrete existence were ruled by the kingdom of the beast.
This final contrast gives the impression that those who are following God will be forced to make this final transition by being ‘thrown to the ground’. This means that the kingdom of the beast will eventually invade the spiritual realm of Teacher thought and forcibly remove those who are following God. This extension of the kingdom of the beast into the spiritual realm can be seen in Revelation 13:13-15. Similarly, 2 Thessalonians 2:4 talks about the antichrist setting up a new religion. I am not sure exactly what this means, but Revelation and 2 Thessalonians both talk clearly about the kingdom of the beast going beyond the purely physical to the spiritual.
However, this ‘throwing to the ground’ does not lead to permanent destruction. It may be possible to understand what is happening by looking at the opposite. As far as I can tell, current UFO research is following a path where ‘throwing to the ground’ would lead to permanent destruction. Looking at this in more detail, it is possible to pursue supernatural power in a manner that does not involve human existence. For instance, UFO websites suggest that one can contact aliens telepathically by emptying one’s mind of all human content and then focusing upon ‘them’ in a mystical fashion. This method works because one is emptying one’s mind of any human content that an inhuman alien would find uncomfortable. But it is also dangerous because it is like forgetting about being a human and then entering a cage of tigers. Tigers do not care about preserving humanity. If a human entering a cage of tigers does not think about human self-preservation, the tigers certainly will not. Similarly, if a human enters the realm of aliens without thinking about human self-preservation, the aliens certainly will not because they are aliens and not humans. Consistent with this, the vast majority of alien stories say that aliens go to great lengths to prevent humans from acting as humans, either through paralysis or sleep, whenever interacting with them closely. If humans wanted to interact with aliens while staying awake, they would have to adopt an alien mindset. I suggest that a professional army has an alien mindset.
Looking at the situation with the military in more detail, human identity is based in MMNs of personal experience. By symmetry, it appears that angelic/alien identity is based in the TMN of some ‘name’. (Names are significant in the angelic realm, and the word angel means ‘messenger’, which implies some personal message.) A human who becomes a professional acquires the angel-like identity of some name, such as ‘neurologist’ or ‘banker’. A professional soldier is triply alien, because having a profession implies an angelic-like identity, following orders within a structure of military rank implies an angel-like environment, while being a soldier implies being willing to destroy or sacrifice human identity. Thus, it makes cognitive sense that aliens would feel reasonably comfortable in the presence of professional human soldiers. Is the military really cooperating with aliens? I do not know. But I do know that I would not want to cooperate with any aliens who find the military comfortable.
When one interacts with the supernatural in such a human-denying manner, then being cast down to the ground of humanity would mean the loss of supernatural power, which would expose the physical vulnerability of any individual with spiritual power. Current supernatural power must be experiencing this limitation, because for decades it has lurked in the shadows fearful of being exposed by the light of human reality. Saying this another way, being cast down to the ground would destroy the spiritual treasure leaving exposed the human vessels of clay. But when one follows God with personal integrity, then being cast down to the earth of mortal human existence would not mean losing access to the power of spirit. One may be thrown down, but one is not destroyed. Instead, this is when the power of God can truly transform human mortal existence. Any method of accessing the supernatural that requires letting go of human thought would be vulnerable to a form of supernatural power that could function within normal human existence.
(The previous paragraph refers to both the supernatural and the spiritual. As far as I can tell, these two are different but related. The supernatural appears to be a mirror-image of the natural, based upon Teacher sequences rather than Mercy experiences. However, it appears that one cannot move directly between natural and supernatural. Instead, one has to go from one to the other through the spiritual. Therefore, one of the by-products of encountering the spiritual would be to contact the supernatural. This is reflected in the term spiritual technology. Technology uses the same kind of Teacher-based mindset that appears to be natural for mirror-image supernatural aliens. But if one wants to add a supernatural component to human technology, then one has to go through the spiritual realm. The type of supernatural that one contacts will depend upon the kind of spirit that one is pursuing. For instance, pursuing a spirit of denying humanity would contact supernatural beings who do not care about humanity.)
Extending to the Physical Body 4:10-11
Verse 10 describes this extension to physical existence: “Always carrying about in the body the dying of Jesus, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body.” The word body is used twice and refers specifically to ‘the physical body’. On the one hand, the dying of Jesus is in the physical body while on the other hand the life of Jesus is also in the physical body. Verse 10 cannot be referring to physical death, because one cannot do anything after one is physically killed. In contrast, the dying of Jesus is being ‘carried around’ ‘at all times’. This also cannot be referring to the historical Jesus dying again, because the dying of Jesus is being carried about ‘in the body’, implying that other bodies are experiencing this dying. The historical Jesus died once, and does not have to die again. Therefore, this verse must be describing something cognitive or spiritual that is happening which is being experienced at the level of the physical body.
Looking at this cognitively, a concept of Jesus, which means salvation, is the concrete side of incarnation, which uses concrete technical thought to come up with principles of sowing-and-reaping, or cause-and-effect. If Jesus is dying, then these godly principles of sowing-and-reaping are not working. This would be a major catastrophe for the typical motivational speaker who emphasizes spiritual principles of sowing-and-reaping. Going further, these principles of sowing-and-reaping are not just failing occasionally but rather at all times within every context. This is important, because the primary characteristic of the physical body is that it is inescapable. One carries it around at all times. Therefore, if the power of incarnation is to extend to the realm of the physical body then one must experience a failure of existing cause-and-effect that is as extensive as the pervasiveness of the physical body.
This pervasiveness of failure is ‘so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our body’. The word life can refer either to physical or spiritual life. And this is specifically the life of Jesus, which means that a new system of cause-and-effect is coming into birth. This new cause-and-effect is being manifested in physical bodies. this can already happen to a small extent today. Hebrews 4 appears to be describing a much fuller expression happening in the future under spiritual technology.
One can see a partial illustration of this transition currently in the introduction of new technology. Traditional cause-and-effect thinks in terms of manual labor. For instance, I use a shovel to dig a hole. Science and technology have come up with new ways of performing the same cause-and-effect, such as using a mechanical digger to dig a hole. But in order to make the transition from the old cause-and-effect to the new cause-and-effect, one has to be given a reason not to use the old. If the old is good enough then one will not drop it in favor of the new. The new life of God and incarnation now extends to the concrete realm. It would be easy to embrace this new life when dealing with things and gadgets. It would be much harder to adopt the new life when dealing with one’s own physical body.
This process of physical transformation becomes personal in verse 11: “For we who live are constantly being delivered over to death for Jesus’ sake, so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh.” The word constantly means ‘always, unceasingly, perpetually’. In the original Greek, this is the first word of a sentence and it is followed by a logical conjunction that builds upon this word.
As with verse 10, this verse cannot be referring to physical death because the people are described as ‘we who live’. But we who live are being ‘delivered over to death’. The word deliver means ‘to deliver over with a sense of close personal involvement’, and is used in the Gospels to describe Judas betraying Jesus. This is happening ‘for Jesus’ sake’. In verse 10 people were carrying around the ‘dying of Jesus’. In verse 11, people themselves are being betrayed to death for the sake of Jesus. I am not sure exactly what this means, but Revelation 13 gives the impression that there is a supernatural component.
Looking at this purely from a cognitive perspective, I have found that when the theory of mental symmetry turns into a mental network within the mind of some person, the typical (though not universal) response is to try to kill that mental network, which can be done over time by ensuring that the mental network is never discussed or triggered again. That is because the theory of mental symmetry is personally threatening; it insists that personal identity needs to go through a process of salvation. And because I am personally associated with mental symmetry, then I get blacklisted as well. It is currently possible for me to avoid much of this blacklisting by making sure that I never talk about mental symmetry. (I can talk about most of the concepts of mental symmetry, but I have to translate these concepts into language that makes it appear that I am not describing a general theory of cognition.) However, if mental symmetry expressed itself physically through my body, then people would only be able to suppress mental symmetry by suppressing me. Verse 11 appears to be describing this sort of response.
But this is not the end. Instead, this is “so that the life of Jesus also may be manifested in our mortal flesh”. Flesh means ‘flesh, body, human nature’. Paul uses this word when comparing the flesh with the spirit in Romans. Cognitively speaking, the flesh describes the mental content that one acquires from growing up in a physical body in the physical world. The adjective mortal means ‘mortal, subject to death’ and is used six times in the New Testament. This is the only time that ‘mortal’ is combined with ‘flesh’.
I have been suggesting in these paragraphs that spiritual technology will reach the point of affecting the physical body itself, and that the worldview of mortal human existence is itself being questioned. This is made explicit in verse 11, because ‘the life of Jesus’ is being ‘manifested in our mortal flesh’. The typical Christian reads phrases such as these and instinctively spiritualizes them into insignificance. That is because the typical modern Christian also subscribes implicitly to the worldview of natural existence. Christians may talk about the resurrection life of Jesus, but a lifetime of living in a human body makes it clear to everyone that this is usually mere talk. In essence, the average Christian is like Martha in John 11:24 who believed doctrinally that there would eventually be a physical resurrection but also knew that this resurrection would never occur in the present. In 2 Corinthians 4:11, this fundamental assumption of natural existence is being directly challenged. I think that 4:11 is describing something that is much smaller than the final resurrection mentioned in Revelation 20. However, it does appear that people are experiencing sufficient resurrection life in 4:11 to challenge the underlying assumptions of materialism.
Summarizing verses 7-10, society seems to be inadvertently propelling a group of people through the three stages of personal transformation. They are being squeezed out of existing society, driven by confusion to build a better understanding in Teacher thought, chased into following this understanding in righteousness, and then cast down to the ground of being reborn in personal identity.
One might think that this kind of treatment is rather excessive, but it appears that this level of motivation is required to transform the core mental networks acquired from living within a mortal body. I should point out in passing that John Darby’s doctrine of a rapture of the church followed by a tribulation of unbelievers would be cognitively inadequate. If one wishes to overcome a spiritual enemy, then one must reach a level of spiritual maturity that goes beyond the spiritual level of one’s adversary.
The fatal flaw in current UFO interactions appears to be pursuing interaction with the supernatural realm by suppressing physical human existence. The standard evangelical doctrine of a pre-tribulation rapture suffers from the same fatal flaw because it says that Christians will be taken away from flawed earth to a perfect heaven. This too is a version of pursuing interaction with the supernatural realm by suppressing physical human existence. However, I am not suggesting that the followers of God will have to suffer the persecution of the kingdom of the beast unaided. Instead, I suggest that the current Great Tribulation, or time of squeezing, will be followed by a theoretical return of Jesus through which a rational understanding of God and incarnation becomes widely known, and this will then be applied during a period of spiritual technology. The kingdom of the beast will then happen within this context, forcing the followers of God to practice more fully a mode of existence that is already being implemented. (Matthew 24:21 describes a great tribulation which happens before the theoretical return of Jesus in 24:29. This implies that we (in 2019) are currently somewhere between the tribulation of 24:9 and the great tribulation of 24:21. That is because the current world squeezes the life out of people by forcing them to live within narrow, technical specializations.)
The Dilemma of the Legislator 4:12-13
People have been the enemy in the previous section, and the struggle has been against a larger society that refuses to follow God. The enemy now changes to physical mortal existence itself. And the focus turns from enduring death to starting to experience life. The implication is that the kingdom of the beast will eventually be overthrown.
Verses 12-15 address a critical issue that has to be addressed whenever laws come from people. This is not currently a problem with natural law, because matter rules over mind independently of what minds think or say. For instance, I can say whatever I like about the law of gravity but it applies regardless of what I say or whatever my level of personal maturity. In other words, scientists discover natural laws and do not create them. However, if spiritual technology developed to the point where technology was the adjective and spirit the noun, then people would become creators of natural laws. This transition point has just been reached because spiritual power is now influencing human mortal existence itself. Therefore, the situation would be more like that faced by a legislator. How does a legislator who is the source of a law also become a citizen who enjoys the benefits of this law? (This same question is addressed in 1 Corinthians 15 and will be the primary topic of the second half of 2 Corinthians.) Legislators today are tempted to regard themselves as above the law and think that laws are meant for other people and not for them. In other words, many legislators assume that human laws are artificial restrictions that are meant to stop other people from using force to control their neighbors as well as prevent other people from taking more than their share of the world’s natural resources. These legislators also think that they should have the right to use force to control their neighbors and they should take more than their share of the world’s resources. But all of this assumes that nothing can be done about human mortal existence. If one could extend and improve mortal life by submitting to spiritual laws, then it would become a matter of physical life and death for legislators to ensure that they were not above the law but rather fellow citizens who lived under the law. Stated more bluntly, why should a legislator submit to a law that he has made which limits his ability to exploit others? However, it does make sense for a legislator to submit to a law that he has made if this law could improve the physical, mortal life of the legislator.
Verse 12 introduces the underlying problem: “So death works in us, but life in you.” The word works means ‘energize, working in a situation which brings it from one stage to the next’. In other words, Paul the leader is finding that his followers are starting to experience life but he is still being energized by death. He is in the predicament of the legislator who is discovering that his laws work for others but they do not yet apply to himself.
Verse 13 describes the solution. What is required is internal content guided by understanding: “But having the same spirit of faith”. The word faith means to ‘be persuaded’. And the spiritual realm interacts with the mind through mental networks. A spirit of faith would mean being driven by mental networks that are persuaded by understanding. Saying this cognitively, MMNs of personal identity are willing to be persuaded by the TMN of an understanding. The legislator who regards himself as above the law does precisely the opposite, because he places his MMNs of personal identity above any TMN of understanding. The laws are subject to him; he is not subject to the laws. This attitude is backed up by a spirit of superiority: the legislator who is above the law regards himself as a member of a special group of people who are entitled to rule others. Similarity, a willingness to be persuaded is also backed up by a spirit of humility—a spirit of ‘Paul’.
Such a spirit of faith comes more easily to a citizen who is not a legislator, because citizens know that they must submit to the law or experience the consequences. That is why verse 13 refers to ‘having the same spirit of faith’. Paul said in the previous sentence that ‘death works in us, but life in you’. Therefore, Paul the leader needs to exhibit the same spirit of faith that is causing life to work within his followers. The legislator has to go through an extra step that a citizen does not have to take.
The next phrase describes how this functions: “According to what is written, I believed, therefore I spoke” (v.13). The tense of the verb ‘what is written’ is actually ‘having been written’. Looking at this cognitively, the Server action of writing gives stability to Teacher words. This is a general cognitive principle, because Teacher thought by itself is unstable, and Teacher thought acquires stability when Teacher words are backed up by solid Server sequences. Similarly, when a law that is spoken into existence by some legislator becomes written, it then acquires a permanence and stability that it did not have when it was merely words being debated and discussed.
Once a law acquires this stability in Server thought, it then becomes possible to become persuaded by the law, and this persuasion can guide words in Teacher thought. This progression is seen in the phrase “I believed, therefore I spoke”. For the legislator who regards himself above the law, writing a law down does not give it any stability, because his MMNs of superiority and greed are still the source of Teacher words. Such a legislator instinctively and inevitably lies and rationalizes whenever he opens his mouth. He has no other option, because his job as a legislator makes him a source of general law in Teacher thought. But if written law acquires stability, and if one becomes persuaded by this written law before opening one’s mouth, then this provides a cognitive alternative to being a corrupt legislator.
One sees this principle in mathematics. All mathematical equations and operations were invented by mathematicians. But once a mathematical function was created, it then became regarded as a sequence to be followed in Server thought. Mathematicians then allowed their manipulation of mathematics to be persuaded by these sequences of ‘how one is supposed to do mathematics’. Even though the equations and operations of mathematics were originally spoken into existence by mathematicians, mathematicians do not speak equations and operations at random.
It is difficult for today’s typical legislator to follow this principle of writing, believing, and then speaking’. First, most of the laws that are being passed today are too long to be read by legislators. If a legislator never reads some potential law, then that law cannot acquire the mental stability of having been written within the mind of the legislator. Second, many of the laws that are being passed today are too complicated to be understood by legislators. How can one become persuaded by a law that one does not understand? Third, the typical legislator is continually being bombarded by a media that wants legislators to speak. Thus, the legislator is continually being tempted to open his mouth before he has read the words and been persuaded by the ideas.
Verse 13 finishes by describing ‘believing and then speaking’ as a general principle: “We also believe, therefore we also speak”. This mentally transforms absolute truth into universal truth. When a legislator creates a law, then he is acting as a source of absolute truth. But if the legislator treats the law that he has created in a law-abiding fashion, and then uses this same attitude in the rest of his life, then this universality turns the absolute truth into universal truth.
For instance, most of the recent work on the theory of mental symmetry has been done by myself. (This theory was originally developed by my older brother Lane and me, but I have done most of the recent work on my own, with some collaboration from others.) Thus, it is easy for me to regard myself as the source of mental symmetry. I have found that I can escape this mindset by writing my ideas down in essays and then posting these essays on a website for everyone to see. Even if only a few people view my website, the act of writing and posting gives stability to my words and forces me to follow consistent, logical reasoning. Instead of viewing mental symmetry as a theory within my own head, I can view it as something that exists in solid form out there. In addition, I have found that it is vital to analyze what others have written and accept what makes sense, before opening my mouth. This extends the principle of ‘be persuaded and then speak’. Instead of merely spouting off my own personal opinions, I can verbally share ideas with others that I know to be universally true, because I have discovered that many others are saying similar things. This means that it is actually cognitively healthy for me when I cannot talk directly about mental symmetry but rather have to translate the concepts of mental symmetry into language used by others. Such translation forces me to follow the principle of ‘we also believe, therefore we also speak’.
This principle of ‘being persuaded and then speaking’ also applies to those who currently preach from the Bible. It is important to believe the words before talking about them. Otherwise, one may talk strongly in order to believe, or think that the end goal is to talk to others about the words of the Bible, or even become a cynic who preaches from the Bible in order to become rich and famous.
The Beast is Defeated 4:14-15
Verse 14 presents the personal motivation for following such an approach: “Knowing that He who raised the Lord Jesus will raise us also with Jesus and will present us with you.” The word for knowing that Paul has primarily used so far in 2 Corinthians refers to ‘knowing through personal experience’. The word for knowing in verse 14 is a different word which means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. This verb has only been used once so far in 2 Corinthians (in 1:7) but occurs five times in chapters 4-5. If knowing is coming from seeing, then something must exist within the physical world that can be known. The rest of the verse tells us what now exists within the physical world: the raising of the Lord Jesus. Verse 10 talked about physically carrying about the dying of Jesus so that the life of Jesus should also be physically manifested. Verse 14 refers to the raising of Jesus as something that has happened in the past. And Jesus is referred to as Lord Jesus, which means that people are now submitting to Jesus. In other words, the kingdom of the beast has been defeated and Jesus has won. Similarly, Revelation 13 which talks about the kingdom of the beast, is followed by Revelation 14 which describes a victorious group of people accompanying ‘the Lamb’ and angels proclaiming judgment on those who have submitted to the beast.
Jesus is mentioned twice in verse 14 while Christ is not mentioned. Jesus describes the concrete personal side of incarnation who brings salvation to personal identity. I suggested earlier that this component of personal salvation is largely missing in current stories of alien interaction, and presumably would also be missing in the kingdom of the beast. Consistent with this, Revelation 13 only talks about people being persecuted, oppressed and restricted. In verse 4, the beast is able to make war, and war kills people. In verse 7 the beast is given authority over every tribe, tongue, and nation. In verse 10 people are being killed or led into captivity. In verse 15 those who do not worship the image of the beast are being killed. And in verse 16 freedom of commerce is being restricted. There is no personal salvation here, only personal damnation. Revelation 13 may give the impression that the beast is running roughshod over those who are following God. However, this passage also states six times that authority and power is being given or granted to the beast, which makes it clear that the beast is not ultimately in charge but actually functioning under the jurisdiction of a higher power.
Verse 14 finishes by describing the belief of Paul the leader. He believes that he too will be ‘raised with Jesus’. This raising will occur within the context of a group of followers: “and will present us with you”. The verb present means ‘to place beside, to present, stand by, appear’ and with means ‘with, together with’. Thus, the emphasis is upon being a member of a group. Looking at this cognitively, Paul-the-leader is making a transition to Paul-the-member-of-a-group in order to experience the personal benefits of what he has pioneered as Paul-the-leader.
In verse 15, Paul takes on the attitude of a public servant: “For all things are for your sakes”. Now that Paul is a member of the group, he can continue to practice his leadership for the sake of this group. Instead of viewing himself in Mercy thought as the source of law who is above other people, he can view himself in Mercy thought as a person who is working on behalf of his group. The words ‘public servant’ and ‘prime minister’ convey this attitude well, but in many cases this is only a label that is not backed up by reality. However, if people gained the ability to alter natural laws in any appreciable way, then leaders would have to be public servants and prime ministers in order to experience the personal benefits of their leadership.
The rest of verse 15 describes this indirect relationship more explicitly: “so that the grace which is being multiplied through the many may cause the giving of thanks to abound to the glory of God.” (This is the literal translation given in a footnote.) ‘So that’ tells us that Paul is regarding himself as a public servant in order to follow this indirect relationship. Grace means ‘leaning towards to share benefit’ and ‘is preeminently used of the Lord’s favor’. The adjective many means ‘greater in quantity… greater in number’. The verb translated multiplied comes from this same adjective and means ‘to super abound, to make to abound’. Putting this together, grace from God is increasing as it goes through a larger number of people. Saying this another way, as the words of the leaders turn into a movement that is followed by many people, this movement gains access to God in Teacher thought. In other words, the pronouncements of leaders from above are being transformed into a grassroots movement. This transition is seen as significant even in today’s political society, and leaders will often try to imitate a grassroots movement by astroturfing.
The final phrase of verse 15 says that when a transition is made to a grassroots movement, then this “may cause the giving of thanks to abound to the glory of God”. The word giving of thanks is the noun form of the verb from which we get the word Eucharist, which combines the two Greek words ‘good’ and ‘grace’ and thus means ‘literally, thankful for God’s good grace’. (The word Eucharist is now used to refer to communion because 1 Corinthians 11:24 says that Jesus ‘gave thanks’ when breaking the bread.) The word abound means ‘exceed, go beyond the expected measure’. Saying this another way, instead of focusing upon Paul the leader, followers are recognizing God as the source, and this focus upon God is happening to an unexpected degree.
The NASB connects these two phrases with ‘so that’, giving the impression that the multiplying of grace is leading to the increasing of thanks. But that is not what the original Greek says. When followed by the genitive case, the Greek connecting word that is used means ‘through, throughout, by the instrumentality of’. Thus, people are receiving more grace from God through focusing their thankfulness upon God rather than upon Paul the leader. And the final phrase specifically says that God is being glorified: “to the glory of God”.
Summarizing, a more literal rendition of this verse would be ‘For all things are for the sake of you, so that the grace having increased in amount through more and more thanksgiving being unexpectedly given to the glory of God’. In this case, the KJV gives a better translation: “For all things are for your sakes, that the abundant grace might through the thanksgiving of many redound to the glory of God.” The Cambridge commentary on this verse suggests that it can be interpreted in one of three ways. Based on my limited knowledge of Greek, the interpretation that we have just discussed seems to be most faithful to the original text, but if one approaches this verse from an attitude of religious self-denial without understanding how the mind works, then that interpretation will not make sense.
Paul begins verse 16 with the same phrase that was used in verse 1: “Therefore we do not lose heart”. The word lose heart means ‘to be negatively influenced with the outcome of experiencing inner weariness’. The implication in both cases is that Mercy thought feels like giving up but positive personal results are being experienced. Speaking from personal experience, I have continued working on the theory of mental symmetry far longer than I thought I ever could. I have found that I can continue to handle underlying feelings of despair as long as I continue to make some progress. However, when the progress ever stops, then it becomes rather overwhelming.
Spiritual Growth in Mortal Bodies 4:16-18
Verse 16 then introduces a new distinction that we have not yet seen: “though our outer man is decaying, yet our inner [man] is being renewed day by day.” (The second ‘man’ is not in the original Greek.) I have mentioned that current alien interaction pursues the supernatural by suppressing the natural. Similarly, science studies the natural world by suppressing subjective thought, while absolute truth pursues God by denying self. Verse 16 describes something quite different, which is supernatural growth in the presence of natural identity. There is an outer man and an inner, and they are alongside one another. These two are heading in opposite directions. The word decaying means ‘utterly corrupt; becoming thoroughly disabled all the way through’. In contrast, renewed means ‘to renew by moving from one stage to a higher’. This word is only used twice in the New Testament and apparently cannot be found in any secular papyri. This renewing from one stage to a higher is emphasized by the phrase ‘day by day’, which implies that it is happening one step at a time. To some extent this verse already applies to the individual who is currently following a path of personal transformation. Within matter-over-mind, one can become cognitively transformed, but the decay of the physical body can only be postponed and not reversed.
A similar, but far greater, contrast would exist after the kingdom of the beast had been overcome. On the one hand, spiritual technology would now extend to the level of the physical body. But on the other hand, this extended spiritual technology would still be happening within a general context of matter-over-mind. Today’s technological society is currently going through the reverse process. Technology has now developed to the point of invading people’s internal thoughts and private actions. But a small vestige of subjective identity still remains that has not yet been claimed by technology. We are almost machines ruled by artificial intelligence, but not yet quite. But it is this remaining fragment of personal identity that keeps everything going. If we became total machines, then there would no longer be any reason to do anything.
Verse 17 describes the same principle operating the other way: “For momentary, light affliction is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison.”
The word affliction (thlipsis) has been encountered many times in this book and means ‘internal pressure that causes someone to feel confined’. Thus, people with their newly expanded spiritual powers are feeling confined by their mortal bodies. This squeezing is described as light and momentary. Light means ‘of little weight; easily managed because easy to bear’. And momentary means ‘present, immediate, for the moment’. The physical body deals with the present. One can use the mind to escape to the future or to focus upon the faraway, but thinking about the present immediate moment means coming face-to-face with the physical body and its sensations and abilities.
As a Perceiver person, I am quite aware of the squeezing of the physical body. That is because Perceiver thought has no way of directly expressing itself through the physical body. Therefore, focusing upon my physical body in the present moment means letting go in Perceiver thought and allowing subconscious modules to guide my mind. Perceiver thought thinks in terms of objects, but I cannot create an object using my body. Instead I have to assemble an object step-by-step using Server thought. Perceiver thought builds the big picture, but I cannot convey a big picture to other people using my physical body, because all they can hear or see is my immediate words and actions in the present. The end result is that I as a Perceiver person feel squeezed and confined by my physical body. I probably feel this more strongly than the typical Perceiver person because I spent so much time using Perceiver thought to work with abstract concepts. In contrast, Server thought can express itself directly through the physical body by translating sequences of thought into sequences of action. The end result is that many Server persons do not develop their minds to its full potential. Instead, they spend most of their lives living in the present with the physical body and they fall apart emotionally when there is no longer anything that can be done in the present with the physical body. Thus, being squeezed by the physical body may be frustrating but it also forces a person to develop higher modes of thought.
A similar principle is at work in verse 17, because the manageable squeezing in the present ‘is producing for us an eternal weight of glory far beyond all comparison’.
Notice that this is a deeper level of frustration than what was experienced during the kingdom of the beast. During that period, those who were following God were being restricted, confused, chased, and cast down. All of those difficulties have now been overcome. But what remains is a deeper problem at the level of personal existence itself. Simply existing within a mortal physical body feels confining, even if there is enough spiritual technology to ensure that this body continues to function properly.
The phrase ‘far beyond all comparison’ is a combination of three Greek words. The first word means ‘a throwing beyond, access, superiority’ and this Greek word is the origin of the English word hyperbole. This same word occurred back in verse 7 where we interpreted it as traveling through the air of Teacher thought in order to make a quantum leap in Mercy thought. However, this word is used twice in verse 17 connected by a preposition that means ‘to or into, indicating the point reached or entered’. Thus, the phrase is literally ‘a throwing beyond into a throwing beyond’ or ‘hyperbole into hyperbole’. I suggest that this is not mere poetic hyperbole, or Paul breaking into praise-and-worship. Instead, it describes the function of a meta-theory. A meta-theory is a theory that explains more specific theories. Following a theory in Teacher thought makes it possible to ‘throw beyond’ the plodding of incremental progress. Following a meta-theory in Teacher thought makes it possible to throw beyond the ‘throwing beyond’ of following some more specific Teacher theory. Instead of becoming transformed in some region, one is becoming transformed in a whole class of areas.
For instance, mental symmetry began as a theory of personality, but it has expanded to become a meta-theory of cognition that applies to many diverse fields of thought. When one follows a path of personal transformation guided by a meta-theory of mental symmetry, then progress in one area automatically translates to progress in many related areas. Instead of merely going beyond personal development into the ‘throwing beyond’ of personal transformation, one is following a throwing beyond into a throwing beyond of personal transformation at a generic level. This may sound rather metaphysical but it basically means that transformation in one area will have a spillover effect that will lead to improvement in related areas.
Why would living within a mortal body have such a profound transformative impact? Because it ensures that humanity is preserved. Mortal bodies feel, they are vulnerable, they have limitations, they get hungry, they go to the bathroom. This may be uncomfortable but it also makes us human. The concept of embodiment has become popular in psychology, but it tends to be viewed as going from the body to the mind: my body influences how I think. There is truth to this, but it also describes the essence of the childish mind which acquires its content from living in a physical body. Personal transformation, in contrast, starts with Teacher understanding, extends this to Platonic forms of the spirit, and then reaches out to include the physical body. The direction is from spirit to body and not from body to spirit. Similarly, the Sequence of prophecy that we have been examining starts with the theoretical return of Jesus, extends to spiritual technology, and then reaches out to include the mortal body.
Applying spiritual technology to the physical body would be quite different than applying normal technology to the physical body. Normal technology is an expression of technical thought which ignores personal feelings in Mercy thought. Spiritual technology, in contrast, would combine technical thinking with the mental networks of the spirit, addressing both the mechanical needs of the physical body as well as the spiritual needs of internal identity. This can already be seen to some extent with the current mortal body. It is a kind of machine that can be treated to some extent by medicine. But it is also a living machine that feels, breathes, and pumps blood—which cannot be turned off. Thus, what the mortal body really needs is not the trans-humanism of technology but rather the super-humanism of spiritual technology.
There is also a cognitive benefit to being trapped within a mortal body. This relates to what is known on the Internet as ELI5, which stands for ‘explain it like I am five years old’. Living in a mortal body by itself is not necessarily transformative, just as thinking like a five-year-old is not that great. Instead the transformative power comes from having to squeeze all of this spiritual power and technology through the narrow container of mortal existence. Similarly, in an ELI5, one takes some complex subject and boils it down to its simplified essence to the point where it is capable of being comprehended by the mind of a five-year-old. This simplification can only be done if one really understands a topic well. And when every topic has to be comprehended to this level of working out basic, underlying, simple principles, then one starts thinking at the level of a meta-theory, because one starts to see similarities between one theory and another. Similarly, if all spiritual power would have to be squeezed through the finite limited container of mortal existence, then this would also force a person to reduce all of these spiritual breakthroughs to their fundamental essence, causing personal transformation to start functioning at the meta-level. I know what this means at the cognitive level, because whenever I examine some field, I reduce it to the essential level of interacting cognitive modules: which cognitive modules are being emphasized by this field, which cognitive modules are being suppressed, and how are these cognitive modules interacting? When one does this with a number of fields, then it becomes obvious how these fields relate to one another.
Verse 17 continues by saying that this “is producing for us an eternal weight of glory”. The word producing means ‘effect by labor, achieve, work out, bring about’. This implies that the labor of physical action is present but that something more is being achieved. For instance, the person who uses a mechanical tool is still using Server thought to guide the physical body to perform physical action, but this physical action is being amplified by the power of the tool. Similarly, existence within the physical body is being amplified by spiritual power.
Eternal means ‘agelong, eternal’ and is being contrasted with temporary squeezing. Similarly, weight means ‘a weight; real substance that carries personal and eternal significance’, and contrasts with the light squeezing. Finally, glory contrasts with the outer man, because glory is an external expression of the character of God, while the outer man is the external expression of human mortal existence. This gives the impression that something new and amazing is coming into being alongside the old and the decrepit. I often saw this kind of urban renewal when living in Asia, because a brand new apartment complex would be constructed in the midst of an old neighborhood, leading to a vivid contrast between the old and the new. In America, the old is gradually transformed into the new, while in Europe, the old tends to be preserved and made new. In Asia, the brand-new is plopped down in the middle of the ancient, and when I lived there one could often step from the 21st century to the 19th century by walking across a street. (I am not suggesting that this is the best form of urban renewal, but it does provide an illustration of verse 17.)
Verse 18 finishes by describing the focus of attention: “we look not at the things which are seen, but at the things which are not seen; for the things which are seen are temporal, but the things which are not seen are eternal.” The verb looking means ‘regard attentively, take heed, contemplate’, while seen means ‘to see something physical, with spiritual results—perception’. In other words, the focus of attention goes beyond what can be seen with the physical eyes to what cannot be seen physically. This does not mean that the physical world is evil, but rather that it is temporary, which means ‘for a season, temporary’. In contrast, the unseen is described as eternal.
Cognitively speaking, this is like the contrast between Platonic forms and goals within Mercy thought, but it goes further. For instance, Protestant Christendom makes a distinction between the invisible church and specific churches. The invisible church is the Platonic form of a perfect church that emerges in Mercy thought when one uses Teacher thought to work out the ideal essence of many specific churches. This perfect church is invisible and does not exist anywhere. Instead, only real churches exist and every real church falls short of the Platonic form of the ideal, invisible church. But the Platonic form of the invisible church shapes the goals that are pursued by a real church, driving people to make a real church more like the Platonic form of the invisible church.
This contrast between Platonic forms and concrete goals happens within Mercy thought. In verse 18, something similar is happening in Server thought between the temporary and the eternal. I have mentioned that Server persons often do not reach their full potential because Server thought can express itself through physical action. There is no need to develop all of the mind if one can express conscious thought through the physical body and allow the physical environment to substitute for mental content. In verse 18, Server thought (and thus Server persons) would be reaching its full potential, because physical existence with its physical actions is accompanied by spiritual power. Cognitively speaking, Server thought would need help from the rest of the mind to be able to handle all of this extra spiritual power within the container of mortal human existence. With Platonic forms, internal images of perfection shape goals within Mercy thought. Here one is dealing at the level of exemplars, where eternal sequences are embodied within physical actions.
Saying this another way, Server transformation can lead to greater changes than Perceiver transformation because Server thought is closer to Teacher thought. One can see from the diagram of mental symmetry that the progression from universal understanding in Teacher thought to specific experience in Mercy thought is: Teacher → Server → Contributor → Perceiver → Mercy. For instance, a Perceiver person is naturally good at checking facts. When Perceiver thought finds a mistake in some general Teacher theory, then Teacher thought has to respond by restricting the domain of this theory. However, if a Perceiver person starts to think in terms of Server sequences and cause-and-effect, then Perceiver thought can affect Teacher theories at the more general level of how-things-work. The Perceiver person can function at this higher level if Contributor thought within the mind of the Perceiver person connects Perceiver facts with Server sequences. This happened within my mind as studying personality made it possible for me to describe human thought more precisely and studying how human personality develops taught me cognitive principles of sowing-and-reaping.
Examples of this higher level of transformation are not easy to find in current society, because we focus so intensely upon the temporal and the physical. However, Elon Musk provides a partial illustration. As an individual, he is somewhat erratic, but he is also driven by a desire to look beyond the temporary to the permanent while continuing to live within physical reality. For instance, we all know that the world cannot continue using oil. Oil reserves will eventually be used up while burning oil causes pollution and global warming. We may argue over how long the present system can continue to function, but we all agree that the current system is temporary and not permanent. Elon Musk is coming up with a more permanent solution by developing electric cars and grid-sized batteries. As of 2018, the Tesla model 3 ranked number five in sales of passenger cars being sold in the United States. Similarly, SpaceX, another Elon Musk company, now launches more commercial satellites into orbit than all other companies combined. Elon Musk’s ultimate goal is to build a human colony on Mars in order to take humanity past its temporary home of the earth in order to give it a more permanent presence in the universe. Elon’s aims may be incomplete, but both Tesla and SpaceX illustrate the disruptive and transformative effect of looking beyond the temporary to the permanent while continuing to live within the physical body.
A Platonic form is an idealization of reality. Following a Platonic form leads to ‘the throwing beyond’ of personal transformation guided by Teacher understanding. Thinking in terms of eternal versus temporary goes further because it is no longer shackled by an idealization of reality. This leads to a pursuing of not just an idealization of reality but rather an invisible realm that transcends reality. Similarly, the solutions of Elon Musk are so disruptive because they are completely outside the box. For instance, no one before had tried to land a 100 foot rocket on a landing platform the size of a football field in the middle of the ocean. Similarly, those who drive a Tesla car for the first time typically describe it as a totally new experience that makes normal gas-powered cars feel obsolete. In other words, transforming Server thought through temporary-versus-permanent leads to disruptive meta-transformations that could be described as ‘throwing beyond into throwing beyond’.
Pursuing transformation at a Server-Teacher level does not mean that Perceiver facts and Mercy emotions are ignored. The human body is a physical object that has to stay in one piece which reacts with pain when subjected to abnormal forces. When the mortal human body is involved in transformation, then these physical limitations of location, integrity, and potential pain must be taken into account. But instead of becoming the driving force, they become the constraints which ensure that every step in the path of transformation remains humanly doable. One can see this when comparing a rocket that carries cargo with a rocket that carries human beings. In both cases, the rocket is traveling at inhuman speeds through an environment that is hostile to life. But a human-rated rocket carries within it a cocoon of human safety and it never subjects its human passengers to forces that are greater than what they can bear.
Current science and math do not follow this principle of pursuing Server level transformation while preserving the Perceiver facts and Mercy feelings of humanity. Instead, objective science starts by cleansing its facts of any subjective feelings before it focuses on the Server sequences of ‘how things work’. Math then goes one step further, eliminating Perceiver facts about human reality by generalizing from the physical case. For instance, math will generalize from the three dimensions of reality to the multi-dimensional case, which is impossible to visualize. Science and math are powerful, but they do not carry mortal human existence with them as they ascend into abstraction.
Verse 16 says that the inner is being ‘renewed day by day’. This principle applies literally when following a process of personal transformation in the physical body, because the physical brain and the physical body have to recover from the thoughts and actions of the day through sleep. One can only make so much progress in one day before becoming exhausted and having to go to sleep. This principle would still apply to some future period of time because progress is still happening within mortal, physical bodies. But there is also an additional symbolic meaning that emerges whenever a society goes through disruptive change. The word day means literally ‘the period from sunrise to sunset’. Symbolically, this represents a period of time that is illuminated by the ‘sun’ of some general theory in Teacher thought. ‘Renewed day by day’ implies that society is going through a series of disruptive changes, and that each set of disruptive changes is leading to the dawn of a new general paradigm of society, in which people live out the implications of these disruptive changes before eventually being hit by another series of disruptive changes. This is another symptom of meta-transformation, because each meta-leap involves a whole set of more specific societal leaps. I should add that disruptive change by itself is not enough. The goal should be to achieve greater mental and societal wholeness and well-being. Reaching this goal will require disruptive change, but going through disruptive change does not automatically mean that one is heading in the direction of greater wholeness and well-being.
Empowering Mortal Bodies 5:1
Chapter 5 begins by viewing the human body from a new perspective: “For we know that if our earthly house of the tent is torn down, we have a building from God, a house not made with hands, eternal in the heavens” (v.1) (This uses the literal phrase mentioned in a footnote.)
Paul has contrasted the temporal with the eternal. This contrast is now applied to the physical body itself. The word tent is only used twice in the New Testament: here, and three verses later. It means ‘tent’ and it is a variation of the normal word for tent that refers figuratively to the body. A tent is a temporary living place, a house that can be torn down and moved. A tent can be quite comfortable, but it is not permanent. This impermanent tent is contrasted with an eternal house. A house is also a living place but it is permanent.
Notice also the implicit paradigm shift. At the end of chapter 4, new life was being experienced within the mortal human body, which means that new life is the adjective while mortality is the noun. In 5:1, this mortal human body is being viewed as a temporary house with a more permanent alternative. But it was the juxtaposition of mortal body with new life that made such an alternative mentally feasible. That is because a person will only be emotionally willing to replace one body with a better alternative if the new body performs every fundamental function of the old body in a new-and-improved manner.
This comparing of the new and the old is suggested by the first word of the verse which is ‘know’. This version of know means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. The physical body is the source of empirical evidence; it provides the seeing that becomes knowing. Thus, the new and old bodies are being compared empirically. People can see with their eyes that a valid, more permanent, alternative exists to the mortal body.
This paradigm shift can also be seen in the way that Paul refers to the physical body. The references to mortal flesh in chapter 4 convey the idea that my personal identity in Mercy thought is vulnerable to physical attack. A house is one step removed. Being homeless is bad, but it is not as bad as my mortal flesh being damaged. Instead of being inseparably linked to the mortal body, the real me now lives within the mortal body. I know to some extent what this means, because working with the theory of mental symmetry and following a path of cognitive transformation has developed a new mental sense of identity, which recognizes that I live within a physical body but also feels distinct from my physical body. Therefore, I find it natural to believe that I will continue to live as a disembodied soul after death. Using psychological language, I view myself as a mind that is currently embodied. My mind acquired its initial content from the body but I am now capable of conceiving of myself apart from my body.
The word earthly is only used once in the book of 2 Corinthians and means ‘on the earth, belonging to the earth’. In contrast, the new house is ‘in the heavens’. This is the first time that the word heaven has been used in 2 Corinthians, and it will be repeated in the next verse. Again one sees an implicit paradigm shift. Instead of thinking of earthly existence being modified by spiritual power and spiritual technology, two different realms of existence are being compared: ‘on the earth’ and ‘in the heavens’.
The word torn down means ‘breakup, overthrow, destroy’. In verse 1, the earthly body is not being attacked by people or being destroyed by natural disaster. Instead the hypothetical situation of the earthly body being destroyed is being addressed. If one takes a permanent perspective, then one can see that the earthly body is doing fine at the present, but a time will come when it will be destroyed. I know from personal experience that this can provide a strong motivation. I have experienced long-term physical problems such as tendinitis, but I have experienced very little physical pain. Instead, I have been strongly motivated by the knowledge that my body will eventually fall apart in old age. Using the language of 2 Corinthians, we have a house, but it is a tent.
Looking now at the new home, the English word ‘building’ does not give the impression of a structure within which a person would live, but the Greek word is an expansion of the word for house which means ‘a building or edifice serving as a home’ and it refers both to the act of building and a building itself. The earthly building is described as ‘our earthly house of the tent’. The new alternative is described as ‘a building from God, a house not made with hands’. Teacher thought thinks in terms of processes and order-within-complexity. Thus, when one receives a ‘building from God’, it is an edifice which carries within it the processes of building a structure.
For instance, before the scientific era, a home was basically a passive structure composed of walls and a roof. A modern home, in contrast, contains laborsaving devices and provides the water, sewer, and electrical power that are needed to make human life function. That is because a modern home is embedded with the technology that comes from the general Teacher theories of science. Similarly, a ‘building from God’ would also be embedded with the spiritual technology that comes from a general concept of God in Teacher thought.
This ‘building from God’ is also a ‘house not made with hands’. The word translated not made with hands means literally ‘not made with hands’, and is found three times in the New Testament. While the word ‘made with hands’ can be found in secular Greek writings, the word ‘not made with hands’ has not been found in either secular Greek or in the Greek Septuagint. Thus, Paul is using a word that would be incomprehensible to the pre-scientific mindset of his era, because in that era, everything was handmade. Machines existed, but Roman technology “was largely based on a system of crafts” and was used in a society dominated by slave labor and not guided by a general understanding of the laws of nature. Similarly, some spiritual power exists within present society, but we live in an era dominated by materialism which is not guided by an integrated concept of God in Teacher thought. To us, the idea of a physical body ‘not made with hands’ is inconceivable. We may understand the words, but we have no idea what they mean. I also do not know what this means physically, but I do know what it means to live internally within a personal identity that is ‘not made with hands’ because it is an expression of a general Teacher understanding of ‘how the mind works’. This kind of identity is capable of living within physical reality, but it is guided by an entirely different set of core mental networks which view physical existence as an application or illustration of general understanding.
This Teacher source is emphasized by the final phrase “eternal in the heavens”. As I have mentioned, this is the first time that the word ‘heaven’ or ‘heavens’ is used in 2 Corinthians. My hypothesis is that heaven is an aspect of the supernatural realm that has been made compatible with human existence. This would mean adding spatial locations because humans exist within physical space. This hypothesis can be seen in John 14:1-4 where Jesus says that he is going to his Father’s house in order to prepare a place for his disciples. The word place is a general word which refers to the Perceiver facts of space and objects. (Heaven also probably contains a strong spiritual component, because it appears that one must enter the spiritual to move between the natural and the supernatural.)
One sees here the importance of applying Server transformation in a manner that includes human mortality. As far as I can tell, the supernatural (or angelic) realm is based upon Server sequences. This is the mirror image of the human realm which is based upon Perceiver objects. Thus, when one thinks in terms of Server transformation, one is actually entering the realm of the supernatural. And when this includes human mortal identity, then one is preparing a place within this Server realm that is compatible with human existence. This human-compatible region of the supernatural would be heaven, as opposed to human-incompatible regions of the supernatural, which would be experienced as hell. This interpretation is consistent with Matthew 25:41 which describes hell as an “eternal fire which has been prepared for the devil and his angels”. Matthew 25:41 and John 14:2 use the same Greek verb prepare which means ‘ready because the necessary preparations are done’. (Thus, trying to contact aliens through mysticism is actually laying the foundation for hell—real hell. This does not mean that every UFO alien is a demon, just as every human soldier is not a butcher. But the method of mystical contact leads in the direction of hell. Similarly, a human soldier is a member of an army and the ultimate purpose of an army is to kill people.)
Testing New Bodies 5:2-4
Moving on to verse 2, “For indeed in this [house] we groan, longing to be clothed with our dwelling from heaven.” The NASB adds the word ‘house’, implying that it is unpleasant to live within a mortal body. But ‘house’ is not in the original Greek. Instead, the unpleasantness comes from the stress of living within the mortal alongside the eternal. This may sound like a subtle distinction, but it distinguishes the path of suffering from the path of patience. Suffering happens when I am forced to face unpleasantness and I want to get back to normal. Patience happens when I live within normal alongside something that is better than normal. 2 Corinthians 5 is talking about patience, not suffering. This forward-looking attitude is emphasized by the verb groan, which means ‘to groan because of pressure being exerted forward, like the forward pressure of childbirth’.
The word dwelling is only used twice in the New Testament. It comes from the word that means ‘inhabitant’ and is related to the word for house. It appears to be a more personalized version of the word ‘house’, because it focuses less upon the building itself and more upon the person living in the building. One can also see a transition in the pronouns. Verse 1 described the earthly body as ‘the house of us’, while saying that ‘we have’ a heavenly house. ‘Of us’ is more personal than ‘we have’, and ‘the’ is specific while ‘a’ is generic. (This distinction between ‘the’ and ‘a’ is in the original Greek.) Thus, personal identity has become somewhat distanced from the old but the new is still seen as an alternative that one owns, like an extra car that sits in the garage which is not yet being driven. In verse 2, the new is described as ‘the dwelling of us’. The word dwelling is more personal than house, ‘of us’ is now being applied to the new instead of the old, and ‘the’ is now being used with the new. The new alternative is also closer. In verse 1 it is ‘in the heavens’, while in verse 2 it is ‘out from heaven’.
Verse 2 finishes by talking about ‘wanting to be clothed’ with this new dwelling. The word wanting means ‘long for, especially as it is fitting or apt’. This verb illustrates an important aspect that is not present in escapism. For instance, I used to go into video arcades in order to see the latest video technology. On average, about one third of the games were first-person shooters. I remember entering one arcade and seeing a teenager shooting at everything that was moving on the screen. I watched for a while and then commented that I was glad that reality was not that nasty. The teenager grunted in agreement. I then asked, “So why are you filling your mind with something you do not want?” The teenager turned and glared, and I walked away. Similarly, most alternate reality today portrays an environment in which people would not really want to live. In contrast, longing describes a desire for something that is fitting or apt, something in which people really would want to live.
Finally, the word ‘clothed’ is an intensified version of the normal word used only twice in the New Testament, here in verse 2, and two verses later. The verb ‘wanting’ added ‘fitting’ to the normal verb for ‘long for’. Similarly, the verb clothed adds the same ‘on, fitting’ to the normal verb for ‘clothe’. Thus, in both cases the emphasis is upon adopting an alternative that is appropriate rather than upon escaping existing reality.
Going further, being clothed is more personal than being an inhabitant of a house. One lives within a house, but wears clothes. A house protects the body, while clothes cover the body. One leaves home to interact with the larger society and then returns home, but one continues to wear clothes even when leaving a home. This longer-term, more intimate relationship with clothes means that it is important to find clothes that are appropriate and comfortable before one commits to putting them on.
In verse 3, the emphasis shifts from finding clothes that are fitting to finding clothes that will stay on: “inasmuch as we, having put it on, will not be found naked”. The word translated having put it on means ‘to clothe or be clothed with, in the sense of sinking into a garment’ and is in the past tense. The word naked can mean stark-naked but usually means ‘wearing only the under-garment’. Finally, found means ‘learn, discover, especially after searching’. My guess is that this ‘new clothing from heaven’ ends up becoming somewhat like a spacesuit that covers and protects the mortal body. When one dons a spacesuit, one will search carefully to ensure that one does not end up unclothed.
This interpretation is reinforced by verse 4: “For indeed while we are in this tent, we groan, being burdened”. The word tent is the same variant of the normal word for tent which means ‘a tent, figuratively for the body’. It is only used twice in the New Testament, here and three verses earlier, while the normal word for tent is used 20 times in the New Testament. This is important because otherwise one would have a bad case of mixed metaphors, because verse 4 talks both about being in a tent and being clothed. It would not make sense to view the clothing as a kind of spacesuit that went on over the tent of the mortal body if the normal word for tent was being used. But this interpretation does make sense if a special word for tent is used that represents a temporary body. The English phrase ‘while we are in this tent’ gives the impression that one is currently living in a mortal body and looking forward to a future time when one can discard the mortal body and put on a permanent eternal body. But the word ‘while’ does not seem to be in the original Greek. Instead, the Greek refers to ‘the being in the tent’.
Being in this mortal state leads to two emotions. First, we groan, which means ‘to groan because of the pressure being exerted forward, like the forward pressure of childbirth’. This verb is used six times in the New Testament but only twice in 2 Corinthians, here and two verses earlier. Second, being burdened means ‘to weigh down’. This is the verb form of the noun weight that was used a few verses earlier in 4:17 which compared the light squeezing of the present with an eternal weight of glory. Both of these are cognitively interesting. Groaning combines the squeezing seen earlier with heading towards a goal. The squeezing described earlier in 2 Corinthians did lead people towards a goal, but those who were being squeezed did not realize at the time that this was happening. Here, the squeezing is being accompanied by a conscious awareness of the goal to which the squeezing is pushing. ‘Burden’ is an ambiguous word, because being burdened is usually something unpleasant, but five verses earlier, this word burden was used to describe something of eternal weight. The point is that something of great value is also a burden. For instance, when I was younger I had an opportunity to buy a very old valuable violin at a reasonable price—which I did not do. (An old collector was selling off his instruments, and if I remember correctly, he had a Guadagnini, Guarneri, and Amati for sale.) Such a violin would be worth several hundred thousand dollars today. But having such a violin of great value would also have been a burden, because I would have been playing on a valuable antique and carrying this fragile antique around with me. Thus, one can view the groaning and the burdening either as something unpleasant or as a preparation for learning how to handle properly an eternal weight of glory.
The underlying motivation is “because we do not want to be unclothed but to be clothed” (v.4). Using the analogy of the violin, the violin that I currently have sounds quite good but I would love to be able to play on a beautiful antique violin. However, in both cases, I am putting on something valuable in order to make beautiful music. (For a professional musician, it feels as if one is ‘putting on’ an instrument and not just playing it.) Using another analogy, one is still putting on a very valuable spacesuit in order to protect the mortal body.
This coexistence of mortal and eternal is shown in the final phrase of the verse: “so that what is mortal will be swallowed up by life”. The word mortal means ‘subject to death’ and was used back in 4:11. The word life refers to both physical and spiritual life. This word has been used several times in 2 Corinthians but this is the last time that it will be used in this book. The word life indicates a further step in the development of a new body. It began as a building, became a home, and then turned into clothing. Now it is seen as life. The verb swallowed up means ‘to drink down’. It is used twice in 2 Corinthians and was previously used in 2:7 to describe being swallowed up by excessive grief. Water represents Mercy experiences. In 2:7 the goal was to avoid being immersed in Mercy experiences of sorrow and condemnation. Here, the goal is for mortality to be immersed within experiences of life. Using the space suit analogy, the goal is to spend so much time within the space suit that one forgets that one has a vulnerable body. Or using the violin analogy, the goal is to identify with the experiences of making beautiful music on a valuable instrument.
This is different than normal escapism. Escapism tries to identify with pleasant experiences while suppressing facts about my physical reality and my physical surroundings. This happens, for instance, when I sit in an easy chair in front of a television, ignore my body, and identify with what is being portrayed before me in living sound and color. In contrast, one is actively living within eternal life while continuing to live in the body and take care of the body.
A mindset of absolute truth will think that focusing upon God means denying the physical body, and that focusing upon the physical body means denying God. Verse 5 emphasizes that this is both/and and not either/or. God wants people to learn how to live within eternal bodies: “Now He who prepared us for this very purpose is God, who gave to us the Spirit as a pledge.” The word prepared means ‘work down to the end-point, to an exact, definite conclusion’. In other words, God in Teacher thought wants personal identity in Mercy thought to be transformed. And this is not just something to which God grudgingly acquiesces but rather the goal to which God is heading. When one focuses upon the personal development of permanent, fitting, spiritual life, one is not heading away from God, but rather moving towards the very goal that God wants to achieve.
A New Kind of Teacher Generality 5:5
Looking at this cognitively, Teacher generality can be achieved in two primary ways. One way is to use Server thought and Perceiver thought to look for sequences and connections that are repeated in the environment. Teacher thought then comes up with a universal theory that describes the simplified essence of all these repeated sequences and connections. If one views a universal Teacher theory as a general theory of everything, then focusing upon personal identity is, by definition, turning one’s back upon God, because one is ignoring everything in order to focus upon some specific, finite person within this everything. However, it is also possible to build Teacher generality by making a finite person more eternal.
Looking at this in more detail, a Teacher theory is like a monarch that rules over some domain. Teacher thought comes up with a general theory by picking some ‘person off the street’, promoting this person to be the ruler, and then seeing how long this commoner-made-monarch survives. Saying this another way, Teacher thought comes up with a theory by postulating some simple verbal explanation and then trying to concentrate on this verbal explanation as specific situations flow by within the mind. For instance, the diagram of mental symmetry is a simple verbal explanation that was originally hypothesized to describe how the seven cognitive modules function and interact within the mind. This diagram turned into a universal theory within my mind as I discovered that it was possible to examine many different fields while continuing to hold on to the diagram of mental symmetry. Saying this another way, the commoner-made-monarch continued to be able to function as a monarch even as I explored many different fields of thought and behavior.
The fitting, testing, and wearing of a new potential body that has been described so far in verse 5 corresponds to this second method of coming up with a universal Teacher theory, because people are promoting various spiritual powers into the ‘monarch’ of a personal clothing and then seeing how well this potential body performs within the experiences of life. This focus upon personal survivability can also be seen in Hebrews 7 which talks about a new priesthood being based upon the ‘power of an indestructible life’ of Jesus. (v.16). This kind of testing would only happen if one is trying to wear spiritual power as a potential new body while continuing to inhabit a mortal body. Similarly, the integrity and permanence of a space suit is tested only because a space suit is needed to cover and protect a person within a fragile human body.
Verse 5 finishes by saying that God “gave to us the Spirit as a pledge”. The word pledge means an ‘advance payment that guarantees the rest will be given’. This word is used twice in 2 Corinthians. The first time was back in 1:22. There the ‘no’ of absolute truth was trying to be reconciled with the ‘yes’ of universal truth. In that passage it said that the ‘yes’ comes from God who ‘gave us the Spirit in our hearts as a pledge’. In 1:22 the Spirit was being given ‘in our hearts’ which implies that the change was limited to the internal realm of Mercy thought. In 5:5 the Spirit is being given ‘to us’ within the context of testing a new physical body. In both cases the Spirit is being described as a down payment, but the down payment in 5:5 goes further than the down payment in 1:22.
Looking at this cognitively, ‘the Spirit’ describes Platonic forms of ideal, eternal perfection that emerge within Mercy thought as a result of a concept of God in Teacher thought. In 1:22 Paul is emphasizing that God wants personal identity in Mercy thought to become like these images of ideal perfection. In 5:5 Paul is emphasizing that God wants the physical body to become like the internal images of ideal perfection. In both cases the Spirit is not an escapist alternate reality, but rather a down-payment for personal existence.
Before we continue, let us step back for a quick reality check. It may seem unreasonable to talk about some future human society trying on alternate physical identities. But to a certain extent people within current society are doing precisely this, because the average person spends a significant portion of time living within the alternate reality of online personae, using computers and the Internet to conduct ever increasing aspects of daily life. This happens now because normal technology has developed to the point of using computers to simulate human minds, and these computer-generated artificial minds have become ubiquitous. Therefore, it is reasonable to predict that something similar but greater in extent would happen if spiritual technology developed to the point of simulating human bodies and these spiritually-generated artificial bodies became ubiquitous. This may sound scary, but someone living two hundred years ago probably would have viewed the powerful tools and machines of current society with similar apprehension.
One final point. I have read in UFO literature the claim that some aliens do not normally live within humanoid bodies but rather put on these bodies like clothes when they want to visit the physical realm. I have also read that some aliens tend to be a mixture of machine and human. (There are also other aliens who appear to live more permanently within human-like bodies.) Similarly, trans-humanism attempts to increase human powers by embedding technology within the human body. This is similar to what is being described in 2 Corinthians 5, because in both cases the goal is to enhance the physical mortal body, but I suggest that there is also a critical difference. Both trans-humanism and alien visitors are trying to enhance the body using technology that was originally developed by suppressing Mercy identity. (I assume that this is the case with the alien visitors because one is told to contact such aliens by mentally suppressing human identity.) Clothing oneself with an inhuman body would be the ultimate dehumanizing act, and I would be terrified of the damage that this would do to one’s soul and spirit. This explains why chapter 5 begins by searching for potential identities from heaven which would fit human identity on earth. In addition, the next verses talk about extensive soul-searching and finish with a warning of eternal judgment.
A New Culture based upon New Bodies 5:6-9
The word translated at home is only used three times in the New Testament and all three of these occurrences are in the next four verses. It means ‘to be in one’s own country… people bonded together by a particular identity’. The word absent from is also used only three times in the New Testament, and is also found only in the next four verses. It does not mean ‘absent’ in a general sense, but rather is the opposite of ‘at home’. Thus, two different cultures are being compared in verses 6-9. In brief, these verses address the question of which group of people one feels at home with.
Verse 6 describes the contrast: “Therefore, being always of good courage, and knowing that while we are at home in the body we are absent from the Lord.” Here ‘at home’ in the body is contrasted with ‘absent from’ the Lord. The word body (soma) refers to ‘the physical body’ and is different than the words for life (zoe), flesh (sarx) or mortal (thneton). This is the second verse in the book of 2 Corinthians in which this word has appeared. It was used twice in 4:10 when talking about carrying about the dying and life of Jesus in the body. It will now be used three times in the next five verses. Moving on, ‘the Lord’ describes an attitude of viewing God and/or Jesus Christ as a master to whom one submits. This tells us which two cultures are being compared. One culture is focusing upon living within the physical body while the other culture focuses upon submitting to the lordship of God and Jesus. Verse 6 says that these are being viewed as distinct cultures. (As with verse 4, the word ‘while’ is not in the original Greek.) The word knowing means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’ which means that one is dealing with empirical evidence from the physical world.
One can understand what is happening cognitively by referring to the two ways of building Teacher generality that were just discussed. Viewing Teacher generality as a universal theory that governs everything will lead to a culture of viewing God as Lord: These are the universal laws; I submit myself personally to these laws. Viewing Teacher generality as a search for personal permanence will lead to a culture of being in the body. Verse 6 does not treat these as two equal alternatives but rather says that being at home with the culture of living in the body will mean being absent from the culture of submitting to the Lord. In other words, searching for a lasting personal identity will lead to a culture of people who are searching for lasting personal identity. These people will feel at home with one another, but they will also feel as if they are betraying the culture of submitting to the universal laws of God in Teacher thought.
In a similar manner, I have been developing the theory of mental symmetry for so long that applying mental symmetry in real life would feel to parts of my mind like rebelling from God. That is because mental networks have developed within my mind as a result of my research. And these mental networks associate ‘doing research’ with ‘following God’. These feelings may not be logical but they do exist and they have to be addressed.
The typical Christian who pursues personal prosperity struggles—at least for a while—with similar feelings, because becoming part of the culture of seeking personal prosperity will feel like abandoning the culture of following God through self-denial. I am not suggesting that one should become immersed within today’s consumer society or that it is always appropriate to seek personal prosperity. However, when one lives in a society that is reasonably godly, then it is appropriate to settle down and build a new home. The kingdom of the beast has just been defeated in 2 Corinthians 4. It is now appropriate for the victors to settle down and build new homes.
Verse 6 is traditionally interpreted as Paul’s ambivalence over going to heaven to experience his eternal reward versus staying on earth in order to help others. There may be some truth to this interpretation because Paul would have experienced a kind of internal conflict between two sets of mental networks that is similar to the conflict that was just discussed. However, this interpretation assumes that the primary attitude in heaven is one of submission to God in worship and service, as described in Revelation 4-5, and it also assumes that mortal human existence is incapable of directly experiencing divine perfection. And these assumptions would have been valid in the time of Paul.
For instance, Berkhof, a reformed theologian, states this second assumption especially clearly. In his words, “It is impossible to understand how a part of the old earth and of sinful humanity can exist alongside of a part of the new earth and of a humanity that is glorified. How can perfect saints in glorified bodies have communion with sinners in the flesh? How can glorified saints live in this sin-laden atmosphere and amid scenes of death and decay? How can the Lord of glory, the glorified Christ, establish His throne on earth as long as it has not yet been renewed?” Berkhof naturally reaches this conclusion because he uses Teacher overgeneralization to come up with a concept of God that transcends all human content. Such a concept of God cannot survive any contact with facts. A mindset of absolute truth will also think that following God means denying the physical body in order to submit to the lordship of God.
Verse 6 begins by saying that one should be ‘always of good courage’. The word be of good courage means ‘to show courage or boldness’, and always ‘means at all times’. In other words, walking this path of seeking personal permanence requires an attitude of courage, both internally and externally. This admonition to ‘be always of good courage’ is introduced by a ‘therefore’ which means that this courage is not based upon thin air or personal conviction but rather by a desire to find a permanent clothing that can swallow up mortal life. Applying this to today’s consumer society, one should not build a home in order to ‘keep up with the Joneses’, ‘buy the latest gadgets’, or submit to a mindset of idolatry, but rather to learn through practice what it means to live for the long-term.
Verse 7 is quite short: “For we walk by faith, not by sight”. The word walk means ‘conduct my life, live’. And the word by is more accurately ‘through’. Finally, sight means ‘visible form, shape, appearance’ and is the noun form of the verb that means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’, which was used in verse 6. Putting this together, in verse 6 one knows through visible evidence that choosing to be at home with those who are seeking a better physical body means not being at home with those who are submitting to universal truth. Verse 7 clarifies that seeking a more permanent physical body does not mean being driven by a materialistic physical mindset. Instead, one is still walking through life with an attitude of being persuaded by understanding (faith means ‘persuaded’).
‘By faith’ and ‘by sight’ give the impression that these two attitudes are being tacked onto normal life in some peripheral manner. ‘Through faith’ and ‘through sight’ indicate that one is approaching existence with one of two different mindsets. One is either living within physical reality while viewing this physical reality as an expression of understanding, or one is living within physical reality and also adopting a mindset of materialism.
This may sound like a rather backwards interpretation, because the average person views walking by faith as turning one’s back upon materialism and the physical body. But I know from personal experience what this means. When one builds a concept of God by searching for universal principles and then follows this concept of God in righteousness, then it takes significant faith to descend back down to physical reality. It is much easier to remain in the realm of abstract thought. One has to believe that the idealism of following God in abstract thought will not be besmirched by contact with physical reality. (For Berkhof, such a descent back down to physical reality was inconceivable.)
Verse 8 says that the natural tendency will be to continue thinking in terms of universal understanding rather than personal permanence: “We are of good courage, I say, and prefer rather to be absent from the body and to be at home with the Lord.” The word prefer means ‘to think well of, to be well-pleased’. What is being preferred is ‘feeling at home with those who follow a universal understanding of God’ as opposed to ‘feeling at home with those who live in the body’. Given such mixed emotions, one tendency would be to pull back and withdraw. But verse 8 begins by saying that “we are of good courage”, and courage means ‘to show boldness’.
Speaking again from personal experience, when one tries to complete the three stages of personal transformation by going beyond the second stage of righteousness to the third stage of rebirth, it will tend to feel right to continue following God in righteousness and it will not feel right to seek a personal reward. Saying this symbolically, the three stages of personal transformation are represented by Abraham → Isaac → Jacob. Jacob will have to seek his birthright by wrestling with an angel.
Again, this may sound like a backwards interpretation, but verses 9-10 make it clear which path needs to be followed. Verse 9 says, “Therefore we also have as our ambition, whether at home or absent, to be pleasing to Him. The word translated have as our ambition is used three times in the New Testament and means ‘pursuing or devoting oneself to what has great personal value’. Thus, one resolves this internal conflict by rephrasing the question. One is seeking a more permanent body not because one is no longer focusing upon God but rather because one is seeking great personal value. This principle of seeking personal value applies both to ‘at home’ and to ‘away from home’, because the conjunction whether has the idea of both-and. Saying this another way, ‘seeking personal value’ is a deeper principle that is more fundamental than the two mindsets of ‘following God as Lord’ or ‘seeking a more permanent body’.
That is because the ultimate goal is ‘to be pleasing to Him’. The word pleasing means ‘well-pleasing because fully acceptable’. This is slightly different than the word prefer used in verse 8 which means ‘to think well of, to be well-pleased’. This phrase explicitly includes the verb to be, which was last used in verse 4 to talk about ‘being in the tent’. In other words, the ultimate goal is not just to please God or to follow what one thinks is right but rather to be well-pleasing and fully acceptable to God. This principle applies when one is pursuing a general understanding, because pursuing an understanding in Teacher thought has to be accompanied by following a path of personal transformation in Mercy thought; one has to become the kind of person who is capable of understanding the character of God.
Similarly, when one is seeking a more permanent physical body, one is also attempting to become the kind of person that pleases God, because Teacher thought appreciates the order-within-complexity of a human ‘machine’ that continues to function smoothly in an integrated manner. (I put the word ‘machine’ in quotes because current machines are built out of impersonal technology. It would be dehumanizing to attempt to live within such a mechanistic body. However, one is dealing here with a spiritual body that is ‘not made by hands’, and the general principle that Teacher thought loves order-within-complexity would still apply.)
Looking at this more generally, God creates an environment in which humans can prosper. But individual humans are still responsible for seeking lasting, personal value within this environment. And if humans seek true, lasting, personal value, then this will result in the kind of order-within-complexity that God appreciates.
Future Judgment 5:10
Verse 10 then points out that God will eventually judge what people do ‘in the body’: “For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may be recompensed for the things through the body, according to what he has done, whether good or bad.” (I am using the literal translation given in the footnote.) The word translated judgment seat is bema, which means ‘a platform to which someone walked up to receive judgment’. (The Great White Throne and Bema are discussed in a previous essay.) The word translated appear means ‘to make visible, make clear’. Before means ‘in front, before the face’. Notice that this judgment seat is ‘of Christ’, and Christ refers to the abstract side of incarnation which uses abstract technical thought. Using the analogy of a machine, abstract technical thought constructs machines with well-defined parts that function together in a smooth manner, guided by Teacher feelings of order-within-complexity. Putting this together, every person will ultimately come face-to-face with the abstract technical thinking of Incarnation, who will look within the human machine to see how the parts function together. This will happen at some future time of judgment. I should clarify that judging whether humans come up to God’s standard of order and structure is different than Acts 17:29, where Paul warns against bringing a concept of God down to human standards of order and structure.
Continuing, the word each one means ‘each individual unit viewed distinctly’. Recompense means ‘receive what has belonged to myself but has been lost, or else promised but kept back’. It only occurs once in the book of 2 Corinthians. The phrase ‘the things through the body’ is the literal translation given in the footnote, which accurately reflects the original Greek. And the word body is the same word that was used in verses 7-8 as a contrast to ‘the Lord’. Thus, living in the body may appear at present to be different than following the Lord, but eventually these two will come together because the Lord will judge according to ‘the things through the body’.
I should emphasize that ‘through the body’ is not the same as ‘salvation by works’. Salvation-by-works performs Server actions in concrete thought in order to receive some concrete reward. It looks merely at behavior and does not go beyond behavior to underlying motivation. Through-the-body recognizes that internal transformation has to express itself in a manner that respects human vulnerability and the physical environment.
Abstract technical thought wants a well-oiled machine. For Christ, this is necessary but not sufficient. That is because incarnation adds Mercy feelings of personal identity and Teacher feelings of righteousness to abstract technical thought. Using an analogy, building a spaceship is not enough. Instead what is needed is a spaceship that is capable of preserving human life, which travels in a manner that does not destroy human life. This can only be done ‘through the body’: The person designing and building the spaceship has to travel himself in the spaceship as a vulnerable passenger. Christ is currently withholding part of the reward and allowing human vulnerability to continue in order to ensure that people are forced to construct ‘spaceships’ that are human-rated.
For instance, the TU-95 is a Russian strategic bomber which first flew in 1952 and will probably continue flying in the Russian Air Force until 2040. It has the distinction of being one of the loudest military aircraft in existence, because it is driven by eight contra-rotating propellers whose tips move faster than the speed of sound. Crews generally suffer hearing loss even if wearing earplugs. In addition, “The early versions of this bomber lacked comfort for their crews. They had a dank and dingy interior and there was neither a toilet nor a galley in the aircraft. Though the living conditions on the bomber were unsatisfactory, the crews would often take two 10-hour mission trips a week to ensure combat readiness.” This is an illustration of a well-oiled machine that does not care about its human occupants, designed by a Communist regime that did not care about its human citizens.
Going further, this future judgment will be an individual judgment that will be applied to ‘each individual unit viewed distinctly’. Continuing with the space ship analogy, the goal is not just to design a series of space ships that are capable of carrying humans. That may be important, but that is not the emphasis of verse 10. Instead, each individual will be judged individually according to the spaceship that he designed for himself as a finite human living in a mortal body. This puts the beginning of chapter 5 into perspective. We started the chapter by talking about people testing potential bodies to see what would fit and what would last. Verse 10 makes it clear why this testing should not be viewed as a video game in which one escapes from reality and pretends to be some superhero. Eventually, one will be rewarded with the potential body that one has developed while living in the mortal body. Saying this more clearly, my understanding is that people will still be living in mortal bodies that decay and eventually die (though they will probably last longer than at present). But people will be testing out potential bodies while continuing to live within their decaying, mortal bodies. This testing will develop the mental structure that will be required to live in resurrected bodies when the resurrection of the bodies happens in the future. This implies that if one spends one’s time in virtual reality shooting everything that moves, one will be given the reward of a Terminator body. I would not want to spend eternity trapped in a cold, unfeeling body designed to destroy life.
Verse 10 finishes by saying that this future judgment will be “according to what he has done, whether good or bad”. The word good means ‘intrinsically good, good in nature, good whether it be seen to be so or not’. Bad means ‘worthless, wicked, base’. Both of these terms refer to intrinsic qualities. In other words, while one is in the body, does one pursue intrinsic goodness or intrinsic worthlessness? This relates strongly to the ‘ambition’ of verse 9 which ‘refers to pursuing what has great personal value’. For instance, there is nothing intrinsically good in acting like a Terminator. Instead, the very concept of being a Terminator is worthless and wicked. One can reach this conclusion simply by looking at the expression on the face of the Terminator as shown on the theatrical release poster. (I do not know if Arnold Schwarzenegger, the actor who portrayed the Terminator, is worthless as a person. But his personal life as described in Wikipedia is rather worthless and devoid of intrinsic goodness.) Unfortunately, this movie is not an isolated example. Instead, this same personal essence of base worthlessness pervades many if not most action movies. Similarly, if people in a future society gained the freedom to put on supernatural identities, some of these individuals would respond by becoming worthless and wicked rather than pursuing intrinsic goodness. Obviously, such personal specimens of worthlessness who attack what is intrinsically good would find it abhorrent to live within the presence of a God of value and inherent goodness and would have to flee from the presence of God to live within a self-created hell.
A New Kind of Conscience 5:11-13
Verse 11 moves back from future judgment to the context of testing potential bodies: “Therefore, knowing the fear of the Lord, we persuade men.” The word knowing here is ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. And this is the first time that the word fear has been used in 2 Corinthians, which means ‘flee, remove oneself and hence to avoid because of dread’.
In verses 6-9, ‘in the body’ was contrasted with ‘the Lord’, and a choice was made to follow ‘in the body’ rather than ‘the Lord’. In verse 11, ‘the Lord’ reappears in strengthened form. This new concept of ‘the Lord’ is based in physical evidence and leads to avoidance prompted by negative emotions. I think I know what this means. Mental symmetry is a new way of building a general theory that is based upon personal mental wholeness. The beginning of this chapter has talked about building, testing, and evaluating potential physical bodies. I have been doing the mental equivalent, which is building, testing, and evaluating potential personal identities. I have been doing this in a social environment in which people emphasize the free will to explore alternate identities. Similarly, verses 6-9 talked about being part of a social environment in which people have the free will to explore alternate physical bodies. When one lives in such a social environment of lifestyle experimentation, then one is surrounded with empirical evidence that illustrates principles of moral cause-and-effect. Everywhere one looks, one sees what happens when people choose certain lifestyles. The end result is a deep fear of the Lord which expresses itself in emotionally driven avoidance: ‘I don’t want to go there because I don’t want to become like that person’. Or ‘I am so glad I avoided their path because they are not experiencing good consequences’.
Verse 11 says that the response is that “we persuade men”. And the word persuade is related to the word faith. I too have been trying to ‘persuade men’ with books and numerous essays.
Verse 10 talked about appearing before the judgment seat in the future. This same verb, which means ‘to make it visible, make clear’ is used in verse 11 in the perfect tense which indicates something happening in the past which continues to the present. Thus, Paul now lives in a state of feeling visible to God. Something similar has happened within my mind. A mental concept of God emerges when a sufficiently general theory applies to personal identity. Studying universal principles of personal cause-and-effect has caused such a general theory to form within my mind which has turned into a TMN that imposes its structure upon my thinking and my behavior. As a result, I live in a continual state of feeling open before God. This light can be temporarily dimmed by focusing upon details but it cannot be shut off. And at this point, I do not think that I would want to shut if off.
Moving further, I have found that the average person does not like the feeling of having the TMN of some general theory impose itself upon their personal life. Therefore, when the theory of mental symmetry threatens to turn into a TMN, then the average person will stop thinking and talking about mental symmetry. Saying this more bluntly, the average person does not want an understanding of universal principles of cognitive sowing-and-reaping to turn into a conscience in their minds.
Paul describes this in the second half of verse 11: “and I hope that we are made manifest also in your consciences”. This is not the best translation because ‘we’ is not found in the original Greek. ‘Manifest’ is used twice in this verse. The first time says that ‘we having been made manifest to God’, which describes a conscience of personal cause-and-effect forming within the mind of Paul. The second time ‘manifest’ is in the infinitive: ‘to have been made manifest’. There is no ‘we’ this time. Thus, a more literal translation would be ‘I hope now also in your consciences to have been made manifest’. Thus, Paul is hoping that the same kind of conscience that has formed within his own mind will also form within the minds of his listeners. Similarly, when I talk about mental symmetry to people my hope is that they will develop the same kind of conscience that has formed within my mind. In my case, this kind of conscience does form within the minds of some listeners, but this is fairly rare. That is because the average person today can refuse to talk about the subject and allow the mind to continue being blinded by the god of this age. In a future society of 2 Corinthians 5, this would be much more difficult, because there would no longer be an objective realm of science and technology within which one could hide oneself from thinking about personal cause-and-consequence.
Verse 12 emphasizes that having a conscience based in personal cause-and-effect does not mean returning to MMNs of personal and/or academic status: “We are not again commending ourselves to you”. The word commending means ‘facts lining up with each other to support or commend something’. This phrase ‘commending ourselves’ was last seen in 4:2 as a positive alternative to ‘walking in craftiness and falsifying the word of God’. The goal there was to submit MMNs of personal identity to the TMN of a concept of God. Doing this is good. However, it assumes an underlying foundation of submitting personal identity to a universal theory within Teacher thought. And this way of forming Teacher generality is now itself being questioned.
When one bases a general Teacher theory in lasting personal identity, then a new way of viewing personal identity emerges, which Paul describes in the next phrase of verse 12: “giving you an occasion to be proud of us”. The word proud is the noun form of a verb which means ‘living with head up high; boasting from a particular vantage point by having the right base of operation to deal successfully’. In other words, in the same way that being surrounded by many people who are making bad choices will build a conscience that warns what one should avoid, so making good choices will lead to a self-confidence based upon knowing which paths will lead to lasting personal benefits.
The purpose of this confidence is “So that you will have [an answer] for those who take pride in appearance and not in heart” (v.12). (As the NASB indicates, ‘an answer’ is not in the original.) ‘An answer’ assumes that one is communicating with people at the level of words. At this point, the communication is happening primarily at a far deeper level of example and counterexample. That is because general Teacher understanding has moved beyond the realm of words to the realm of personal identities. Words are no longer the primary building blocks for Teacher thought. Instead, people are. This does not mean building upon the personal status of people in Mercy thought as is done in current society, but rather building upon the personal integrity of people in Teacher thought. Saying this more simply, the basic building block for Teacher thought is now shalom, a word which means ‘completeness, soundness, welfare, peace’.
This new personal basis can be seen in the two alternatives. The word pride is the same word that was used in the beginning of the verse, which means ‘living with head up high’. The first alternative is ‘pride in appearance’. The word appearance means ‘face, countenance, surface’. Thus, people are finding self-confidence in Mercy appearance. One sees this partially illustrated today by individuals who are ‘coming out of the closet’, because they are displaying their lifestyle ‘in your face’ so that they can ‘live with head up high’. The other alternative is finding self-confidence ‘in heart’, and the word heart refers to internal Mercy identity. Stated more simply, the choice is between looking adequate and being adequate, between a public persona of confidence and an internal identity of confidence.
Verse 13 is rather strange, but it makes sense in the context of moving from Teacher generality based in universal principles to Teacher generality based in lasting personal identity. Reviewing these two options, the first constructs a general theory by looking for Server sequences that appear everywhere, similar to the way that science observes the natural processes of the physical universe. The second proposes a general theory by taking some ‘citizen’ off the streets, promoting that ‘person’ to be monarch, and then seeing how long that person survives as monarch.
This second method actually describes most accurately how Teacher thought functions, and when one gets to the level of theoretical physics, then this describes how physics functions. The theoretical physicist will pull some general equation out of the air guided by reasonableness, and then see how well this equation explains what is known about the physical world. (This describes almost verbatim what I read in a textbook on quantum field theory.) I should point out that the second method builds upon the first method. The first method constructs a general understanding by observing the environment. The knowledge that is gained using the first method is then used to evaluate possible theories when using the second method. Saying this another way, the study of natural processes that is done by normal physics makes it possible to do theoretical physics. Theoretical physics evaluates potential theories based upon how well they can explain the facts that were discovered using normal physics. Applying this to mental symmetry, I have been testing the theory of mental symmetry by using it to explain facts that have been discovered in areas such as psychology, neurology, and Christian transformation.
Turning now to verse 13, Paul says “For if we were beside ourselves, it is for God; if we are of sound mind, it is for you.” (As a footnote points out, the first verb is actually ‘were’ and not ‘are’.) The word translated beside ourselves means ‘beside oneself, showing someone as flabbergasted or completely stupefied’. In other passages it is translated as ‘amazed’. The word translated sound mind means ‘safety minded; having a sober outlook that reflects true balance’. The original Greek uses only seven words, comparing ‘if beside-ourselves to-God’ with ‘if sober-minded for-you’. As far as I can tell, when ‘beside ourselves’ is followed by the dative, then this dative indicates what is causing the amazement. This implies that God is causing the feeling of amazement.
I think I know from personal experience what this verse is describing. For many years I pursued the theory of mental symmetry without studying the Bible in detail. The result was a mental concept of God in Teacher thought based in universal principles of personal wholeness and integrity, the kind of concept of God that would emerge when one is pursuing lasting personal identity. When I started studying the Bible from this cognitive perspective, then the concept of God that formed within my mind continually caused me to be amazed. Stated simply, my mind kept being blown by the implications of what I was reading. The biblical text was making sense, and it resonated with my pursuit of personal wholeness. In fact, I am getting somewhat freaked out right now at the idea that this verse is describing my sense of amazement. I imagine that a future society would experience something similar but more intense.
That brings us to the second phrase ‘if sober-minded for-you’. Somehow, these amazing insights in Teacher thought have to be conveyed to an audience using normal language that sounds reasonable. I do not know which is harder, struggling to cope internally with a stream of mind-blowing ideas, or struggling to communicate these ideas in ways that other people can comprehend. For instance, I was recently asked to lead a study on the book of Hebrews, and the essay on Hebrews is the end result of that request. As I started to realize what Hebrews was saying, I mentioned several times to the person who had asked me to talk about Hebrews that I did not know what was harder: trying to decipher the strange book of Hebrews, or trying to communicate what I had discovered using normal language. I eventually succeeded in analyzing Hebrews but failed in my attempt to communicate this adequately.
A New Kind of Abstract Technical Thought 5:14-15
In verse 14, the focus shifts from God to Christ: “For the love of Christ controls us...” The word love is agape, which means ‘love which centers in moral preference’. Saying this cognitively, one is driven by personal Mercy feelings to treat other people in a manner which Teacher thought predicts will be best for them. This goes beyond tough love to intelligent love. Christ refers to the divine side of incarnation, and an image of Christ is rooted in abstract technical thought. Precise definitions form the mental building blocks for abstract technical thought. For instance, if one compares this essay on 2 Corinthians with the one I wrote on 1 Corinthians two years ago, it is obvious that this essay uses more abstract technical thought. The precise meanings of the Greek words of the original biblical text are examined in more detail, and I also give more precise definitions to the terms of mental symmetry. Using the language of 2 Corinthians, my mental focus has shifted from God to Christ.
The word controls means ‘to hold together, to hold fast’. (Notice another precise definition, a hallmark of abstract technical thought.) Putting this together, abstract technical thought is always emotionally motivated by some paradigm in Teacher thought. Thomas Kuhn described this in his analysis of paradigms and paradigm shifts. Cognitively speaking, using abstract technical thought guided by some paradigm means being held together internally by the love of abstract technical thought. One is not just pursuing a Teacher understanding in some vague and non-rigorous manner. Instead, one is adding careful details to the general Teacher understanding. And when one does this with a Teacher understanding of the character of God, motivated by a desire to transform Mercy identity, then this love of abstract technical thought will ‘center in moral preference’. The emotional drive of a paradigm will expand to become a love that centers in moral preference. This love will be a Teacher emotion, but this Teacher emotion will lead in the direction of long-term benefits for personal identity in Mercy thought.
Verse 14 continues by saying that this leads to a deeper understanding of substitutionary atonement: “having concluded this, that one died for all, therefore all died”. The word concluded means ‘to pick out or choose by separating’. This is a natural outcome of using abstract technical thought, because precise definitions of words will separate one concept from another, making it easier to choose. The phrase ‘one died for all’ accurately reflects the original Greek. However, the word all which is used twice in this verse ‘means all in the sense of each part that applies’. Thus, the death of incarnation is not being treated as universal in some vague, overgeneralized manner but rather in a technical sense in which it accurately applies to all of the details.
Using cognitive language, constructing a universal theory of cognition will change the focus from thinking about the death of Jesus to the death of Christ. Thinking in terms of the death of Jesus means focusing upon the physical crucifixion of the historical Jesus who lived in Judea 2000 years ago. Thinking in terms of the death of Christ means focusing upon the falling apart and reintegrating of a concept of incarnation within people’s minds. The death of Christ does not contradict the death of Jesus but rather universalizes the specific events of the life and death of Jesus. (A previous essay examines the life and death of Jesus as described in the Gospel of John from a cognitive perspective.) This leads to the general Teacher theory that ‘one died for all’. In other words, when technical thought is rebuilt upon a foundation of lasting personal integrity, then everything starts to fit together. It all makes sense.
Speaking from personal experience, I have been told more than once by experts within academia that I do not know how to think properly. In other words, I am not using technical thought in the ‘proper’ way. However, as I have continued to develop the theory of mental symmetry, I have gradually realized that I am using technical thought the right way—for studying the mind. Going further, if one takes this method of technical thought that is appropriate for studying the mind and applies it to the Bible, then Scripture makes mind-blowing sense. And one can also come up with what appears to be a universal meta-theory of everything. Finally, the very concept of abstract technical thought becomes transformed. It is generally believed today that ‘the Bible is not a science textbook’, because the Bible does not use the kind of technical thought that science uses to understand the universe. But if one develops a form of technical thought that is based upon pursuing lasting mental wholeness, then the Bible ends up being a detailed textbook, as we have been seeing in these essays, and technical thought itself becomes the method by which one constructs a mental concept of incarnation.
Applying this to verse 14, one loves Christ, the abstract side of incarnation, by recognizing that the existing scientific system of abstract technical thought itself needs to fall apart and die. When this system of academic thought dies, then this will affect all of current society, because the professionalism of abstract technical thought currently pervades all aspects of society. Saying this more personally, I have found that I cannot teach mental symmetry within current academic, business, or theological settings, because mental symmetry questions the fundamental assumptions and priorities of current academic, business, and theological thought. This does not mean that existing science and business are wrong, but rather that they are incomplete and built upon inadequate assumptions.
I am not suggesting that the death of Jesus-the-man on a cross 2000 years ago was incomplete. Jesus has died once and does not need to die again. But Jesus is the human side of Jesus Christ the God-man. The specific physical death of Jesus-the-man needs to be universalized to become the universal death of Christ-the-God. (This is discussed in much greater detail in the essay on the Gospel of John.)
This rebirth of Christ transforms abstract technical thought into interconnected personal existence headed by Jesus Christ the incarnation. That is mentioned in verse 15: “and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.” The word living is used twice in this verse, and it refers to both natural and spiritual life. Verse 15 says that technical thought does not remain dead. Instead, it becomes reborn in a form that has two primary characteristics: 1) People no longer live for themselves but rather live in an interconnected manner. 2) Death-and-resurrection becomes a central tenet of technical thought. In the original Greek, two forms of living are contrasted: ‘to themselves’ and ‘to the for them having-died and having-been-raised-again’.
Looking at this cognitively, the first characteristic describes abstract technical thought guided by Teacher understanding. Science acquires facts by observing how the physical universe behaves and then places these facts within a general Teacher paradigm in an interconnected manner. Incarnation goes beyond this by placing people within a general Teacher paradigm of God in an interconnected manner. The second characteristic describes concrete technical thought guided by personal cause-and-effect. Concrete technical thought naturally thinks in terms of cause-and-effect or sowing-and-reaping. The ultimate personal sowing-and-reaping is death-and-resurrection and Paul uses sowing-and-reaping to illustrate death-and-resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:42-44.
Summarizing, it is natural to use technical thought to come up with general Teacher theories when studying how the physical universe behaves. If one wishes to understand the physical world, one must use mathematics, and mathematical reasoning is an example of abstract technical thought. (I am not saying this in a hand-waving manner, because mathematical manipulation corresponds in detail with the functioning of abstract technical thought.) If Teacher thought becomes redefined from constructing universal Teacher theories to looking for lasting personal integrity, then one will initially think that this has nothing to do with technical thought, because personal identity is currently determined by mental networks, while scientific thought currently avoids the emotions of personal identity when constructing its general theories. But technical thought will eventually become reborn in a manner that includes—and transforms—personal identity and is guided by an integrated concept of God.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry started as a study of people, focusing upon subjective mental networks, and using a form of thought that seemed wrong to those who work within current academia. However, mental symmetry has now developed a new form of technical thought which includes theology and personal transformation as key components, and which views existing academic thought as an incomplete way of using the mind. One might think that this cognitive explanation has nothing to do with ‘asking Jesus to come into your heart and forgive your sins’, but I suggest that this is because technical thought is currently being used in an incomplete manner. If technical thought becomes reborn, then it becomes apparent that ‘learning to think rationally’ and ‘asking Jesus to come into your heart’ are actually two sides of the same coin—two ways of describing the same general cognitive principles. More specifically, if technical thought becomes reborn in personal form, then learning to use technical thought is mentally equivalent to forming an internal relationship between personal identity and a mental concept of incarnation.
I know from personal experience that the average academic reader will feel at a gut level that the previous paragraphs lack intellectual rigor, while the typical religious reader will feel—also at a gut level—that this explanation is insufficiently reverential. Both will agree that it is also unnecessarily complicated. That is because I am using a form of technical thought that is different than the form of technical thought being used today, one which places current technical thought and current mental networks within a framework of the analogies and patterns of normal thought. If this describes how people today respond to a new form of thought based in personal wholeness and integrity, then it makes sense that people in the future would respond in a similar manner to a new form of existence based in personal wholeness and integrity.
A Cosmic Watershed 5:16-17
Verse 16 describes the shift in thinking that we have just discussed. “Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know [Him in this way] no longer.” (The words in square brackets are in italics and are not in the original Greek.) In brief, the first phrase refers to empirical evidence, while the second phrase looks at ‘Jesus in your heart’. The word recognize means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. It has been used several times in the last few verses but will not reappear until 2 Corinthians 9. The adjective translated no one does not refer only to people but rather means ‘no one, nothing at all’ and it ‘shuts the door objectively and leaves no exceptions’. This is the first time that this adjective has been used in 2 Corinthians. And the word flesh means ‘flesh, body, human nature’ and refers to the mental programming that is acquired from living within in a physical body in a physical world.
Putting this together, the first phrase says that materialistic thinking that is based in empirical evidence will stop being used—totally, without exception. One can see why this would be the case by looking at the current situation with photographic evidence. It is now possible to use computer technology to produce fake photos that look real. When one can no longer distinguish real pictures from fake pictures, then a picture is no longer proof of reality, and one can no longer rely upon empirical evidence. Similarly, verse 16 appears to be describing a future time when one can no longer distinguish between physical reality and spiritually generated reality. When this point is reached, then the whole idea of empirical evidence has to be thrown out the window.
The second phrase uses a different verb for known, which means ‘to know through personal experience’. This form of knowing is applied to Christ: ‘even though we have experientially known Christ according to the flesh’. This phrase describes the method by which Christianity currently constructs a concept of incarnation. The starting point is the gospel story of the life of Jesus in the flesh. This is then translated into experiential knowing by forming a personal relationship with Jesus: Jesus who lived historically in the flesh becomes Jesus who lives within my heart. This internal concept of Jesus is then generalized to form a mental concept of incarnation by asking ‘What would Jesus do?’ in various situations.
Verse 16 finishes by saying that knowing through personal experience will no longer be used in general. That is because this method of knowing has been superseded by a new concept of incarnation. Instead of starting in Mercy thought with the historical Jesus, one can begin with an abstract concept of Christ the incarnation, and when this is the starting point for viewing incarnation, then it becomes the starting point for viewing everything, because incarnation is now a mental concept of a universal being who rules over everything and everyone.
This does not mean that all scientific thought will end and that people will no longer ask Jesus into their hearts. Instead, it means that these will no longer be the starting point for knowing. For exampessay on the Gospel of John.)
This rebirth of Christ transforms abstract technical thought into interconnected personal existence headed by Jesus Christ the incarnation. That is mentioned in verse 15: “and He died for all, so that they who live might no longer live for themselves, but for Him who died and rose again on their behalf.” The word living is used twice in this verse, and it refers to both natural and spiritual life. Verse 15 says that technical thought does not remain dead. Instead, it becomes reborn in a form that has two primary characteristics: 1) People no longer live for themselves but rather live in an interconnected manner. 2) Death-and-resurrection becomes a central tenet of technical thought. In the original Greek, two forms of living are contrasted: ‘to themselves’ and ‘to the for them having-died and having-been-raised-again’.
Looking at this cognitively, the first characteristic describes abstract technical thought guided by Teacher understanding. Science acquires facts by observing how the physical universe behaves and then places these facts within a general Teacher paradigm in an interconnected manner. Incarnation goes beyond this by placing people within a general Teacher paradigm of God in an interconnected manner. The second characteristic describes concrete technical thought guided by personal cause-and-effect. Concrete technical thought naturally thinks in terms of cause-and-effect or sowing-and-reaping. The ultimate personal sowing-and-reaping is death-and-resurrection and Paul uses sowing-and-reaping to illustrate death-and-resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:42-44.
Summarizing, it is natural to use technical thought to come up with general Teacher theories when studying how the physical universe behaves. If one wishes to understand the physical world, one must use mathematics, and mathematical reasoning is an example of abstract technical thought. (I am not saying this in a hand-waving manner, because mathematical manipulation corresponds in detail with the functioning of abstract technical thought.) If Teacher thought becomes redefined from constructing universal Teacher theories to looking for lasting personal integrity, then one will initially think that this has nothing to do with technical thought, because personal identity is currently determined by mental networks, while scientific thought currently avoids the emotions of personal identity when constructing its general theories. But technical thought will eventually become reborn in a manner that includes—and transforms—personal identity and is guided by an integrated concept of God.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry started as a study of people, focusing upon subjective mental networks, and using a form of thought that seemed wrong to those who work within current academia. However, mental symmetry has now developed a new form of technical thought which includes theology and personal transformation as key components, and which views existing academic thought as an incomplete way of using the mind. One might think that this cognitive explanation has nothing to do with ‘asking Jesus to come into your heart and forgive your sins’, but I suggest that this is because technical thought is currently being used in an incomplete manner. If technical thought becomes reborn, then it becomes apparent that ‘learning to think rationally’ and ‘asking Jesus to come into your heart’ are actually two sides of the same coin—two ways of describing the same general cognitive principles. More specifically, if technical thought becomes reborn in personal form, then learning to use technical thought is mentally equivalent to forming an internal relationship between personal identity and a mental concept of incarnation.
I know from personal experience that the average academic reader will feel at a gut level that the previous paragraphs lack intellectual rigor, while the typical religious reader will feel—also at a gut level—that this explanation is insufficiently reverential. Both will agree that it is also unnecessarily complicated. That is because I am using a form of technical thought that is different than the form of technical thought being used today, one which places current technical thought and current mental networks within a framework of the analogies and patterns of normal thought. If this describes how people today respond to a new form of thought based in personal wholeness and integrity, then it makes sense that people in the future would respond in a similar manner to a new form of existence based in personal wholeness and integrity.
A Cosmic Watershed 5:16-17
Verse 16 describes the shift in thinking that we have just discussed. “Therefore from now on we recognize no one according to the flesh; even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, yet now we know [Him in this way] no longer.” (The words in square brackets are in italics and are not in the original Greek.) In brief, the first phrase refers to empirical evidence, while the second phrase looks at ‘Jesus in your heart’. The word recognize means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’. It has been used several times in the last few verses but will not reappear until 2 Corinthians 9. The adjective translated no one does not refer only to people but rather means ‘no one, nothing at all’ and it ‘shuts the door objectively and leaves no exceptions’. This is the first time that this adjective has been used in 2 Corinthians. And the word flesh means ‘flesh, body, human nature’ and refers to the mental programming that is acquired from living within in a physical body in a physical world.
Putting this together, the first phrase says that materialistic thinking that is based in empirical evidence will stop being used—totally, without exception. One can see why this would be the case by looking at the current situation with photographic evidence. It is now possible to use computer technology to produce fake photos that look real. When one can no longer distinguish real pictures from fake pictures, then a picture is no longer proof of reality, and one can no longer rely upon empirical evidence. Similarly, verse 16 appears to be describing a future time when one can no longer distinguish between physical reality and spiritually generated reality. When this point is reached, then the whole idea of empirical evidence has to be thrown out the window.
The second phrase uses a different verb for known, which means ‘to know through personal experience’. This form of knowing is applied to Christ: ‘even though we have experientially known Christ according to the flesh’. This phrase describes the method by which Christianity currently constructs a concept of incarnation. The starting point is the gospel story of the life of Jesus in the flesh. This is then translated into experiential knowing by forming a personal relationship with Jesus: Jesus who lived historically in the flesh becomes Jesus who lives within my heart. This internal concept of Jesus is then generalized to form a mental concept of incarnation by asking ‘What would Jesus do?’ in various situations.
Verse 16 finishes by saying that knowing through personal experience will no longer be used in general. That is because this method of knowing has been superseded by a new concept of incarnation. Instead of starting in Mercy thought with the historical Jesus, one can begin with an abstract concept of Christ the incarnation, and when this is the starting point for viewing incarnation, then it becomes the starting point for viewing everything, because incarnation is now a mental concept of a universal being who rules over everything and everyone.
This does not mean that all scientific thought will end and that people will no longer ask Jesus into their hearts. Instead, it means that these will no longer be the starting point for knowing. For example, the theory of mental symmetry does not build upon empirical evidence but instead starts with a general theory in Teacher thought. But this does not mean that mental symmetry ignores empirical evidence. Instead, physical evidence is used to test the theory. Similarly, the theory of mental symmetry does not build upon the Bible and its description of the historical Jesus. But this does not mean that mental symmetry ignores the Bible or the historical Jesus. Instead, the Bible is used extensively to check the theory and to throw light upon a mental concept of incarnation. I suggest that something similar but far more extensive would happen in the future. (Whenever one suggests that the future will be similar to some aspect of the present, this is using the analogical thinking of normal thought.)
Starting with a mental concept of incarnation may sound anti-Christian, but many supposedly Bible-believing Christians have a mental concept of Jesus that is a figment of the imagination which has very little in common with the Jesus described in the Gospels. Thus, I suggest that starting explicitly with a mental concept of incarnation actually leads to a concept of Jesus that is more consistent with the Jesus of the Gospels.
Verse 17 may be the most widely quoted verse of 2 Corinthians: “Therefore if anyone is in Christ, there is a new creation; the old things passed away; behold, new things have come” (I am using the alternate translation given in a footnote.) This verse is typically used to prove that a person becomes totally new when becoming a Christian. After all, everyone knows from personal experience that when one becomes a Christian, then the world does not change. Therefore, the NASB says that ‘he is a new creature’. But the alternate rendering is more consistent with the original Greek. The pronoun anyone actually means ‘anyone, someone, a certain one or thing’. It usually refers to people in the New Testament, but also refers to things. The word in means ‘in the realm or sphere of’. The word translated creature means ‘creation out of nothing’. It is used 19 times in the New Testament and usually translated as ‘creation’ and not ‘creature’. Finally, the word new means ‘new in quality… because not found exactly like this before’. Putting this together, a more literal translation would be ‘If anything is in the realm of Christ, there is new creation’.
Continuing, old means ‘original or primeval’. Passed away means ‘pass by, pass away, passed out of sight; rendered void’. Behold is a verb that comes from a noun that means ‘outward appearance or shape; what is physically seen’. New is the same ‘new in quality’ used in the previous phrase. And have come means ‘to come into being’.
Putting this all together, the visible realm of physical reality is no longer what it used to be. Instead, something that has never been seen before has come into existence. But this is not for everyone. Instead this newness of physical reality only exists for those who are within the realm of Christ. For them there is a new creation. (Other people will probably be mentally trying to cling to the fixed physical reality of the past, and this mental dogmatism will succeed in keeping physical reality stable—for a while. This is similar to the way that the fundamentalist today is trying to cling to the absolute truth of the past.) The previous paragraphs have talked about a new concept of Christ. Verse 17 describes the practical, concrete results of submitting to this new concept of Christ. Everything changes.
The person who asks Jesus into his heart may experience this to a small extent, but verse 17 is describing something far larger and more extensive than anything that has been experienced so far. Applying this verse only to the internal transformation that happens when a person becomes a Christian reduces the creator of the universe to the level of a pop psychologist. And I do not mean to belittle pop psychology, because these days one often finds more wisdom in self-help books than one hears coming out of the mouths of seminary trained theologians.
Verse 16 mentioned two ways of knowing that have been superseded: objective knowing through empirical evidence and subjective knowing through having a personal encounter with Jesus. Verse 18 describes what replaces this. The source is now a concept of God in Teacher thought: “Now all [these] things are from God”. The NASB adds the word ‘these’ in italics to give the impression that God is giving some specific set of gifts. But the original Greek refers simply to all things, and the word translated all things ‘means all in the sense of each and every part that applies’. Thus, this is not just an overgeneralized statement to which one responds by lifting one’s hands and exclaiming ‘Praise Jesus!’ Instead, it is a newness from God that applies to all aspects of existence.
I know what this feels like at the cognitive level, because the theory of mental symmetry has created a concept of God in my mind that has grown to become capable of explaining virtually everything. This theory is always at the back of my mind guiding my thinking and my actions. If that happens when one develops a universal theory of personal wholeness, one can imagine that something similar but much greater would happen if Teacher thought no longer was guided by the universal laws of nature but rather by the person of incarnation.
A New Reconciliation 5:18
The next phrase in verse 18 describes the new relationship between God and humanity that emerges when Teacher thought is based upon the person of incarnation: ‘who reconciled us to himself through Christ’. The word reconciled is used six times in the New Testament, and three of these times are in verses 18-20. It means ‘decisively change, as when two parties reconcile when coming or changing to the same position’. Looking at this cognitively, a concept of God is based in a general theory in Teacher thought, while personal identity is based in specific experiences in Mercy thought. These two do not think the same way because general theories are not the same as specific experiences. Despite what mysticism asserts, I am not the universe.
There is an aspect of reconciliation when a person feels forgiven by God, because God and personal identity are now on speaking terms. However, a mindset of absolute truth is incapable of becoming truly reconciled with God. That is because absolute truth feels that following God implies denying self and that pursuing self implies denying God. This type of either/or relationship is, by definition, not reconciliation. If Teacher thought and Mercy thought are to become truly reconciled, then they must both be simultaneously following the same path. This ‘coming to the same position’ happens when Teacher generality becomes redefined.
We have talked about this before, but I would like to review what it means because it is an important transition. We will start by looking at Hebrews 7 which also talks about this transition. It says there that “another priest arises according to the likeness of Melchizedek, who has become such not on the basis of a law of physical requirement, but according to the power of an indestructible life” (v.15-16). The name Melchizedek means ‘righteous king’. Righteousness is action that is guided by a concept of God in Teacher thought. Thus, the focus is upon following Teacher understanding. More literally, the Greek says that this new priesthood ‘has not come into existence according to a law of a commandment of the flesh’. Flesh refers to the mental content that is acquired from living in the physical body in the physical world. The physical world imposes commandments upon the flesh, and the concept of natural law comes into existence from this source of living inescapably within the physical world. This leads to the idea of personal identity in Mercy thought being ruled by general laws in Teacher thought, and technical thought is then used to work out the nature of these universal laws. This description would also apply to Jewish law, because most of these laws tell the Jews what they should do. These two are cognitive related, because following Jewish law makes it easier to study and apply natural law, as illustrated by the number of Jews that have received Nobel prizes and the number of technical start-ups that exist in Israel.
Instead, this new priesthood is “according to the power of an indestructible life”. The word indestructible is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘indissoluble, that cannot be broken up’. This describes a lasting personal identity. Teacher thought is no longer looking for a simple statement that can explain many different situations but rather continuing to focus upon some person because of the lasting personal integrity of that individual.
This new focus of Teacher thought leads to a deeper reconciliation because both Teacher and Mercy thoughts are now thinking in terms of people. Teacher thought is thinking in terms of a person that lasts, while Mercy thought is thinking in terms of a person that can help. Incarnation is the person who combines these two characteristics. A machine provides a partial illustration of how this works. A machine is a physical illustration of technical thought, because it is constructed out of parts that are precisely defined and constructed which perform definite functions. Similarly, abstract technical thought is based upon precise definitions while concrete technical thought works with definite functions of cause-and-effect. Teacher thought can find pleasure in studying the universal laws of nature. But Teacher thought can also find pleasure in the order-within-complexity of a machine.
The same machine can be viewed from either a Teacher or a Mercy perspective. Teacher thought looks at the integrated structure of the machine, as illustrated by the viewpoint of a mechanic. Mercy thought views this same machine as a tool, as illustrated by the viewpoint of the consumer. When Teacher thought studies the laws of nature, then Teacher thought and Mercy thought have different agendas. Those who pursue Teacher thought will congregate within the halls of academia, while those who pursue Mercy thought will live at home and interact with friends. However, when Teacher thought focuses upon machines, then Teacher and Mercy thought become reconciled because they now have common interests. Teacher thought likes machines because of their order-within-complexity while Mercy thought likes the same machines because they can make personal life more pleasant. This reconciliation is only possible because technical thought is being used to construct machines. Looking at this further, Teacher thought wants a machine that will continue to function in an integrated manner without falling apart. Using the language of Hebrews, Teacher thought wants an indestructible life. Mercy thought wants a machine that will help me and make personal life more comfortable. Using religious language, Mercy thought wants a savior. Saying this most generally, a machine is an expression of technical thought, while a concept of incarnation is based in technical thought. Thus, incarnation could be viewed as the personalization of machines in general.
Continuing with this analogy, Mercy thought does not need indestructible machines as long as personal identity lives within an environment governed by immutable laws. But if the natural environment ever became unstable, then Mercy thought would demand indestructible machines in order to preserve personal life. For instance, it is unpleasant when my car breaks down, but it is not usually life-threatening. However, if I lived in a war zone or lived on the moon, it would then become imperative that my vehicle not break down. Mercy and Teacher thought would now be totally reconciled, because both would be emotionally driven by the same desire for indestructible machines. Stated most generally, both would want an indestructible incarnation. If it became possible to use spiritual technology to alter the laws of nature, then physical existence would become like living in a war zone or living on the moon, and people would really look for security in the indestructible life of incarnation.
Verse 18 concludes by saying that those who are in Christ will need to show others this new way of existence: “And gave us the ministry of reconciliation”. The word ministry means ‘active service’ and refers to Server actions rather than Perceiver beliefs. Saying this another way, those who are in Christ will need to show others how to function in a way that is compatible with how things now work. Using the analogy of a vehicle, those who are using abstract technical thought to assemble vehicles that last need to show the average consumer how to think and behave in terms of lasting machines: ‘Do not keep your foot on the brakes, because you will wear out the brake pads’. ‘Do not turn too suddenly or you will tip the vehicle’. ‘Slow down when you are driving on ice’. With current technology, this reconciliation is partially external and partially internal. A mechanic can sell the consumer a car that will continue to function. The consumer then needs to learn how to drive this car in a manner that will preserve its functioning. With spiritual technology the process would be much more personal, because the consumer would be putting on a new set of spiritual clothes and not just purchasing a vehicle.
Ambassadors of Christ 5:19-20
Verse 19 describes a new way of looking at sin and God, based upon the concept of reconciliation: “God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and having placed in us the word of reconciliation” (I am using the literal translation from a footnote.) The word ‘world’ is cosmos, which means ‘an ordered system, like the universe, creation; the world’. This would describe the natural order of the universe. This is the second time that this word has been used in 2 Corinthians. The first time was in 1:12, where Paul talked about conducting himself in the world in the grace of God and not in fleshly wisdom. In other words, Paul was living in the physical universe but being guided by a concept of God in Teacher thought and not by a materialistic mindset. Here, the structure of the universe is being reconciled with the character of God; what Paul was preparing for in 1:12 is now starting to become real. The word trespasses means ‘fall away after being close beside’. And counting means ‘compute, take into account, reckon’. Putting this together, people are living in a natural system which initially reflects the character of God but then drifts away. God is ignoring this drifting away in order to make the world system consistent with his character through incarnation.
Applying this to what we have just discussed, people who live in the natural universe governed by Teacher order are using personal powers to create a lawless environment that lacks Teacher order. This already happens today because societies naturally create systems of government that ignore natural laws, guided by rulers who manipulate people and are ignorant of natural law. Presumably, people who acquired supernatural powers would tend to do the same—but to a greater extent. God does not step in today to judge such societies and verse 19 says that God will not intervene in the future. That is because God is pursuing a bigger goal, which is ‘reconciling the world to himself’. God wants to move beyond the system of universal laws in Teacher thought to a system based in the indestructible character of incarnation. Therefore, God is not using technical thought in the present regime to judge people for refusing to submit to the rules.
For instance, whenever I try to share the theory of mental symmetry in any significant way, God seems to shut the door. This is difficult to take from a personal viewpoint because so many people in society blatantly violate cognitive principles. It is also difficult to handle from a theological perspective: On the one hand, the theory of mental symmetry seems deeply consistent with biblical content, and the cognitive structure within in the Bible makes it obvious that it has a superhuman author. But on the other hand, one repeatedly gains the impression that the divine author of the Bible does not care that people are violating the principles of the Bible. It is gradually dawning on me that God appears to be pursuing a bigger goal. His primary goal is not for me to talk about mental symmetry but rather for me to understand and apply mental symmetry to the extent that I break through to a new form of personal existence.
These two different approaches can actually be seen in the NASB translation. The end of verse 19 says that we have ‘the word of reconciliation’. The word translated word is ‘the logos’, with the definite article. This appears to refer to Christ the living word, the logos who was with God and who is God. (John 1:1). But how has this living word of incarnation been given to people? The NASB says that ‘he has committed to us the word’. This implies that God has spoken some important words to people which these people need to speak to others. However, as a footnote in the NASB points out, the literal translation is ‘having placed in us the word’, which implies that the purpose of the word is not to talk about it but rather to embody it. The logos has not just been committed to us. Rather, it has been placed in us. Similarly, the ultimate purpose of the theory of mental symmetry is not to talk about it but rather to embody it.
And how does God get a person to embody his words? By ensuring that they cannot talk about these words but rather have to live these words in an environment of people who violate these words and will not listen to these words. I am not suggesting that it is wrong to talk about Christianity. But I do suggest that it is dangerous to talk about aspects of Christianity which one does not embody. As Jesus says in the Sermon on the Mount, first take the beam out of your own eye and then you will see clearly to be able to take the splinter of your neighbor’s eye (John 6:42). Notice that embodiment still starts with words. One uses words to build an understanding in Teacher thought and then submits personal identity to these words in Mercy thought. But the primary path is from words to my heart rather than from words through my mouth to other people’s ears.
Why does God want people to embody his words? Because he can then build a new system of Teacher understanding based in personal character, centered upon the indestructible personal life of incarnation. Using the language of verse 19, God can reconcile the world to himself in Christ.
Verse 20 describes the followers of Christ as ambassadors: “Therefore, we are ambassadors for Christ.” The word ambassador is only used twice in the New Testament and means ‘to be the elder, to take precedence and hence act as an ambassador’. The other occurrence is in Ephesians 6:20 where the older Paul in prison describes himself as ‘an ambassador in chains’. ‘Ambassadors for Christ’ would thus describe people who are spreading a message of embodying truth after they themselves embody truth.
Verse 20 continues, “as though God were making an appeal through us”. The word as though means ‘as, like as, even as’ which means that a pattern is being followed. One is not just parroting words but rather following a similar process. The word appeal means ‘make a call from being close-up and personal’ and is the same word that is used in noun form to describe the Holy Spirit in John 14-16. Thus, in the same way that the Holy Spirit translates the words of God and Christ into experiential form, so an ambassador is embodying the words of God in Christ. Therefore, the appeal is not ‘from us’ or ‘by us’ but rather ‘through us’.
This appeal has selfish motives: “we beg you on behalf of Christ” (v.20). The word translated beg means ‘having deep personal need, to be in want… hence, to make urgent appeal’. In other words, the underlying motivation is not some kind of religious self-denial. Instead, those who follow God in an embodying way deeply need others to follow this same path. That is because people are finite, and each finite being can only embody one specific aspect of the message of God. This would be like a small group of professional specialists living within a third world country begging their neighbors to become professionals so that they can together create the comforts of a modern civilization. I know that it is currently politically incorrect to suggest that Western civilization is superior to third world societies (and Western civilization does lack the Mercy heart that is usually present in third world societies), but there is a reason why so many people from the third world will go to extreme lengths to leave the corruption and poverty of their own societies and try to emigrate to some Western country. The benefits of Western civilization come from the application of technical thought. Similarly, the begging in verse 20 is ‘on behalf of Christ’.
The message that is being shared is ‘Be reconciled to God’. The word reconciled was discussed previously. This verb is used only three times in the book of 2 Corinthians: verse 18, verse 19, and here in verse 20. (Similarly, the noun reconciliation is used twice in 2 Corinthians: in verse 18 and in verse 19.) A concept of God emerges when a sufficiently general Teacher theory applies to personal identity. ‘Be reconciled to God’ means to acquire a personal character that is consistent with a concept of God in Teacher thought. On the one hand, this means submitting personal identity in Mercy thought to God in Teacher thought. On the other hand, this means transforming Teacher thought to think in terms of lasting personal integrity. Applying this to a professional living in a third world country, the first aspect would mean pursuing rational understanding and the rule of law rather than being ruled by superstition, personal status, cultural prejudice, and personal corruption. The second aspect would mean not pursuing understanding in some abstract manner that remains separate from reality, but rather embodying rational understanding through professional expertise that finds joy in fixing real problems in the real world.
Atonement 5:21
Verse 21 is typically quoted—out of context—to teach the doctrine of substitutionary punishment: “He made Him who knew no sin to be sin on our behalf, so that we might become the righteousness of God in Him.” Substitutionary punishment teaches that punishment from God was transferred from humans to Jesus: God punished Jesus for my sins. Unfortunately, the mind does not work that way. Sin is not an object that can be transferred from one person to another. That is because sin is an expression of a sin nature, a set of inadequate core mental networks that drive a person to behave in a sinful manner. This childish identity has to be torn down and rebuilt through a process of dying to self. Similarly, one cannot commit a sin, confess this sin to God, and then instantly and permanently escape all consequences of this sin. Sin means violating how things work, and when one violates how things work then one experiences consequences, because that is how things work.
It is possible to use emotional Mercy experiences to create the feeling of sin being forgiven. If some person with great emotional status states that my sins are forgiven, or if I lay my hands on a sacrificial animal in some ritual of great emotional significance, then the Mercy emotions will overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ that my sin has been forgiven or transferred. Thus, the Levitical descriptions of animal sacrifice would be effective for a tribal group of people who think in terms of emotional ‘knowing’. Looking at this more generally, if one examines the various doctrines of atonement from a cognitive perspective, one notices that these doctrines themselves follow Piaget’s stages of cognitive development. Therefore, one can determine the level of cognitive development at which a person is morally functioning by the doctrine of atonement which that person finds meaningful. This is not necessarily the doctrine of atonement to which a person verbally confesses, but rather the doctrine of atonement which a person finds emotionally effective.
The goal of personal transformation is to submit MMNs of personal identity to the TMN of a general understanding of the character of God. This goal remains the same when Teacher thought is redefined. The only difference is that the Teacher understanding of the character of God is now embodied in the indestructible person of Incarnation rather than expressed universally in the environment. Verse 19 emphasizes this equivalence, saying that ‘God was in Christ reconciling the world to himself’.
There is a doctrine of atonement that is consistent with personal identity being ruled by Teacher thought. This is the doctrine of justification, which means being declared righteous. Notice the verbal component of declaration. In brief, justification means being transferred from one domain to another domain in Teacher thought, a concept that is specifically stated in Colossians 1:13. Justification could be viewed as enrolling in God’s school of character transformation. When one officially becomes a student, one is transferred into the domain of being a student, and one is now viewed in Teacher thought as an example of ‘student’ rather than as an illustration of ‘ignorant person’. One may be only a beginning student who is still largely ignorant, but one still has the status of student. However, this method of atonement will only continue to function if the status of being called a student is followed by the process of remaining a student and becoming educated. Using theological language, the justification of being called righteous by God must be followed by the sanctification of becoming righteous. Enrolling in God’s school can happen in a moment, while passing classes in this school takes much longer.
Turning now to verse 21, one gains the initial impression that this is describing substitutionary punishment. But this interpretation does not fit the context. Verses 16-17 have just said that one no longer knows anything according to the flesh, and a doctrine of substitutionary punishment will only work cognitively if one ‘knows according to the flesh’. In contrast, anyone who has struggled to follow the path of spiritual transformation knows through deep experience that spiritual character is not acquired in an instant. The only way to acquire or transfer spiritual power in an instant is through a form of spirit possession, in which some being from the spiritual realm inhabits and empowers a person’s mental networks. However, even in this case the mental networks that are being inhabited still have to be constructed over time, and if one opens oneself up to the spiritual realm without first being internally transformed, then one will probably become possessed—or at least troubled—by demons and evil spirits.
The NASB translates the first phrase of verse 21 as “He made him who knew no sin [to be] sin on our behalf”. But the words [to be] are in italics which means that they are not in the original Greek. ‘To be’ implies that incarnation became sinful, consistent with the idea of substitutionary punishment. However, a more literal translation would be ‘the one not having known sin, for us sin he made’. The word known means ‘to know through personal experience’. And the word made means to ‘make, do’. ‘Being’ describes mental networks of identity in Mercy thought, while ‘doing or making’ involves Server actions. Sin means ‘missing the mark’ and originally meant shooting an arrow at a target and missing. Putting this together, Incarnation had no personal experience of sin. Jesus had never ‘missed the mark’. But God intervened in the human world of physical actions to ensure that Jesus would miss the mark. God did this ‘for us’. God did this to Jesus ‘so that we might become the righteousness of God in him’.
This does not say that punishment was transferred but rather emphasizes righteousness. And it does not say that righteousness is being declared but rather that we are becoming righteous. Righteousness describes action that is guided by a Teacher concept of God. Becoming righteous means acquiring a character of naturally behaving in a manner that is consistent with the TMN of a concept of God. Verse 21 describes this righteous character as being ‘of God in him’. In terms of the two ways of constructing a Teacher theory, this says that one learns about the character of God in Teacher thought through the indestructible life of Incarnation.
I know a little bit through personal experience what this verse means. Due to a combination of stubbornness, idealism, and circumstances, I have managed so far in life not to make any major wrong decisions. When faced with major issues, I have consistently chosen to follow what I understood about God and conscience. I am not claiming in any way, shape, or form to be perfect, and I have sinned in innumerable ways. But when it comes to the major choices, I can honestly look back and state with a clear conscience that I have chosen to follow God, sometimes at great personal cost. Thus, to this extent I do not have a personal experience of sin. If one behaves in such a way that is consistent with ‘how things work’, then one should experience personal success. I have not. Instead, one potential personal success after another has fizzled out and hit a dead end, to the point where I have concluded that God is against me. When one consistently experiences disapproval and failure, then the only positive option that remains is to be guided by a concept of God in Teacher thought. And if one consistently chooses to follow God in major issues, then this is emotionally possible, because personal identity in Mercy thought has not become estranged from a concept of God in Teacher thought through any major acts of personal rebellion against God. Going further, I have also found consistently over the years that the path of gaining and applying understanding has always remained open. The end result has been the development of a cognitive theory that describes in technical detail the path of becoming the righteousness of God. Saying this more simply, it appears that God has consistently shut the door for me as an individual in order to prod me into walking a higher path that could benefit others. Using an analogy, God kept me in school.
When Jesus was on earth, he went through this same kind of process—but far more intensely, because he really was sinless. One can see in the Gospels that Jesus tries one method after another to reach his audience and consistently fails. This failure was not because Jesus was doing something wrong. Jesus did not experientially know sin and did not become sin. But he was made sin in order to open a new path to God for humanity. This can be seen in Jesus’ cry from the cross ‘My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?’ Jesus is not saying that he feels sinful or that he feels condemned by God for being sinful. Instead, he feels forsaken by God, a word which means ‘leave in the lurch, abandon’.
Saying this more simply, how does one get a person who is doing everything right to follow a higher path? One places this person in an environment of idiots and rebels who will do everything in their power to block the person who is doing everything right. Doing everything right will make it possible for this person to discover a higher strategy, while being blocked by others will force this person to pursue this higher strategy. The biblical story of Job provides an illustration of this principle.
One final point. Notice that one is dealing here with two conflicting concepts of God. Which one is the real God? For instance, in my case is it the God who manipulates circumstances to ensure that I repeatedly experience failure, or is it the God who keeps guiding me to gain greater understanding? Whenever the mind contains conflicting mental networks, then free will becomes possible. Logic suggests that free will becomes maximal when one is struggling with contradictory concepts of God, because one must then choose between general concepts with major implications.
The only answer I can come up with is to believe that the real—real—God is the one who is working behind the scenes to create contradictory concepts of God in order to maximize free will. This real, real God works within space and time but must ultimately transcend space and time. That is because one has to look beyond space and time to mentally postulate the existence of such a real, real God when one is continually faced with two contradictory concepts of God which both appear to be based in the reality of space and time. Notice that this is quite different cognitively than doctrinally asserting that God transcends space and time. That is talk, and talk is cheap. Instead, one is trying to reconcile two different concepts of God at a deep gut level, and crying out for help at this deep gut level for salvation to a God who transcends space and time.
A Short Opportunity for Grace 6:1-3
Chapter 6 opens by describing a new form of Teacher structure based upon people cooperating with one another: “And working together [with Him], we also urge you not to receive the grace of God in vain”. The word translated working together means ‘cooperate with, work together’ and is the same verb that is used in Romans 8:28 to say that God causes all things to ‘work together’ for good. The word translated urge is the same verb that was used in 5:20, which has both legal and personal overtones, and is used in noun form in John 14-16 to describe the work of the Holy Spirit. The NASB adds the phrase ‘with Him’ in italics, but that is not in the original Greek. This implies that the attention is now turning from Christ the Incarnation to God in Teacher thought and the Holy Spirit in Mercy thought. In other words, when God in Teacher thought becomes reconciled with humanity in Mercy thought, then it becomes possible to emphasize simultaneously God the Father and God the Holy Spirit. That is not the case today, because Christian people and groups usually emphasize God the Father at the cost of ignoring God the Holy Spirit or focus upon God the Holy Spirit while ignoring God the Father.
One sees this attitude in the phrase ‘receive the grace of God’. The verb receive means ‘to receive in a welcoming, receptive way’. This implies an emotional openness within Mercy thought. What is being openly received is ‘the grace of the God’. Grace is one of several similar words, and it means ‘leaning towards to share benefit’. And ‘the God’ (‘the’ is in the original Greek) describes a monotheistic concept of God in Teacher thought. Thus, God in Teacher thought is leaning towards, while people in Mercy thought are openly welcoming. Putting this all together, verse 1 describes Teacher and Mercy thought cooperating at the group level and also at the individual level.
The warning is not to receive the grace of God ‘in vain’, and vain means ‘empty, void; amounting to zero’. In mysticism, personal identity in Mercy thought connects directly with a concept of God in Teacher thought in a way that is ‘empty and void’. Thus, verse 1 warns that one should not return to the earlier mindset of mysticism: do not interact directly with God in a manner that is devoid of content. In addition, familiarity breeds contempt. If God were to become reconciled with humanity, there would be a tendency to treat God as ‘my buddy’, similar to the way that many Christians in today’s consumer society view God.
Verse 2 emphasizes that this reconciliation between God and man should be viewed as an opportunity for receiving long-promised help from God. Similarly, today’s consumer society must not be reduced to the level of purchasing trinkets made in third world factories, but rather be viewed as an opportunity for eliminating the physical suffering that humans have endured for millennia.
Verse 2 refers to both the Teacher side and the Mercy side: “For He says, ‘At the acceptable time I listened to you, and on the day of salvation I helped you.’” Looking first at the Teacher side, the word time means ‘fitting season, season, opportunity’. Similarly, acceptable means ‘what is received favorably’. Listened is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘really listened, with suitable attentive hearing’. Saying this cognitively, Teacher thought thinks in terms of sequences, and God has now reached a point in the divine sequence where he is really open to listening to people.
Turning now to the Mercy side, the word day means primarily ‘the period from sunrise to sunset’ and represents some period of time that is lit by the sun of a general Teacher understanding. This is a ‘day of salvation’, or a day of Jesus, because Jesus means salvation. Going further, the word helped means ‘to deliver help, quickly responding to an urgent need’. Thus, not only is God listening carefully, but he is delivering help.
At the end of chapter 5, God was directly intervening to cause the perfect lifestyle of incarnation to fail. Now at the beginning of chapter 6, God is directly intervening to reward humanity.
Verse 2 finishes by emphasizing that this time of receiving direct help from God is now, because the word ‘now’ is used twice. This is only the second verse in 2 Corinthians in which this adverb now has appeared. It was used twice in 5:16 to describe a new way of looking at incarnation and it is used twice here in verse 2 to describe the help of God. This is emphasized with two uses of the verb behold, which means ‘See! Hello! Behold! Look!’ (and the ‘!’s are in the definition).
The first ‘Behold! Now...’ repeats the word time which means ‘fitting season’, and describes this time of opportunity as acceptable. This is not the same ‘acceptable’ that was used earlier in verse 2, but rather is a doubly strengthened version of receive used in verse 1, with ‘well’ and toward’ added onto ‘receive’ leading to the meaning ‘well received, acceptable, welcome’. This version of acceptable is only used twice in 2 Corinthians, here and two chapters later in 8:12. The second ‘Behold! Now...’ repeats the phrase ‘day of salvation’ used earlier in the verse. Looking at this cognitively, verse 2 has both a Teacher side and a Mercy side. The Mercy side ‘day of salvation’ is merely repeated, but the Teacher side is strengthened as if to point out that Teacher thought really is trying to help Mercy thought at this point.
One can see why this emphasis is needed because of what happened before and what will happen immediately after. Before, doors were being shut by God in order to ensure that a higher destination was reached. Immediately after, a backlash will occur from the world. In essence, God is providing both a carrot and a stick at this point. The ‘carrot’ is the door that is now open—the day of salvation. The ‘stick’ is the response that will be received from the world when this door is opened. Looking at this from the perspective of Teacher thought, God in Teacher thought has been creating local disorder in order to push incarnation through to a higher level of functioning. Teacher thought hates disorder. Once this higher level has been achieved, then Teacher thought will be emotionally driven to restore local order by helping people.
Verse 3 says that it is very important at this point not to block the open door: “Giving no cause for offense in anything, so that the ministry will not be discredited.” The NASB sounds rather mild, but the original Greek is much more striking. A more literal translation of the start of verse 3 is ‘Nothing before no one placing an obstacle’. The adjective nothing means ‘no one, nothing – literally, not even one’. And ‘no one’ is actually the same strong adjective. Thus, ‘not even one’ obstacle should be placed before ‘not even one’ person. The noun obstacle means ‘cause of stumbling, offense, shock’. It is used several times in verb form but this is the only time in the New Testament that it is found as a noun. Summarizing, verse 3 is saying that ‘not even one’ person should put ‘not even one’ stumbling block in front of the door that God has now opened. This gives the strong impression that it is very important at this point in time for as many people to run through this door as quickly as possible. It also gives the impression that many will feel hesitant and try to block the door as something new, dangerous, evil, or heretical.
One can understand what might be happening by looking at other cases of Mercy thought coming into close contact with Teacher thought in a new manner. Looking first at a cognitive example, I have already mentioned the response that I have commonly received from people when sharing the theory of mental symmetry with them for the first time. Initially, they show great interest. But when a person continues to think about some theory, then this theory will turn into a TMN, and it will start to actively impose its structure upon the mind. At this point a choice must be made. If the theory of mental symmetry is allowed to continue ‘living’ within the mind, then it will gradually but inexorably swallow up the mind, placing all personal thought and behavior within its structure. But if this theory is immediately suppressed and not discussed any further, then it is possible to abort this mental life.
For instance, the modern wave of UFOs began in the 1950s after World War II. As far as I can, tell aliens and angels both come from a mirror-image universe that is based in Teacher thought. For a brief period of time in the 1950s, UFO reports were openly discussed in the news, and then various groups slammed the door shut and they have done everything in their power since then to discredit the idea of non-human life. I am not suggesting that all UFOs stories are valid. But even if all of these stories are false, one can still state with certainty that the possibility of encountering non-human life was openly entertained for only a brief period before government, military, media, corporations and academia all conspired to ensure that this topic was never discussed again in a serious manner. Only now, fifty years later, is this ridicule starting to tone down.
If so many people have responded with such vehement denial to this partial example of living Teacher thought coming into close contact with living Mercy thought, one can imagine that the response of the world to a reconciliation of God and humanity would be similar but much stronger. The end of chapter 5 says that God blocked these incomplete connections in order to build a more complete reconciliation between God and man. Once God has decided that the connection is sufficiently complete and allows the door to be opened, then people need to step out of the way and make sure that they do not block this door.
Looking briefly at the larger picture, the previous backlash came from the kingdom of the beast. I suggest that the coming backlash in chapter 6 corresponds to the seven bowls of wrath. Cognitively speaking, the seven bowls of wrath bring an end to mysticism by turning up the heat on the emotional relationship between God and humans. Ultimately, this heat becomes so strong that it is no longer possible to practice mysticism. Revelation 16 uses such symbolism to describe the seven bowls of wrath. (This idea of the seven bowls of wrath overwhelming feelings of mysticism became clear to me after I wrote the original essay on Revelation 16. This idea will be discussed in a few paragraphs.)
The end of verse 3 says that ‘the ministry will not be discredited’. The word discredited is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘disgraced because found blemished’. The word ministry is the familiar word which means ‘service, ministry’ from which we get the English word ‘deacon’. The beginning of verse 4 describes the alternative because it starts with a ‘but’ and uses the same word ministry in noun form: “But in everything commending ourselves as ministers of God”. (‘Ministers’ is given as an alternative translation in a footnote.)
The verb commending has been seen several times in 2 Corinthians and refers ‘to facts lining up with each other to support or commend something’. The last occurrence was in 5:12 which said that ‘we are not again commending ourselves’. Verse 4, in contrast, says precisely the opposite: ‘in everything commending ourselves’. And everything means ‘all in the sense of each and every part that applies’. Thus, not only does verse 4 seem at first glance to contradict the previous reference to ‘not again commending ourselves’, but it contradicts it totally by adding ‘in everything’. Why?
The explanation can be found in the transformation that happened at the end of chapter 5: In 5:11-15 a new way of using Teacher thought was being developed. In 5:16-17, this new way of thinking led to a huge paradigm shift. And in 5:18-21, this paradigm shift made it possible for Teacher thought and Mercy thought to become reconciled. In this new form of integrated thought, people in Mercy thought form the building blocks for structure in Teacher thought.
Returning now to chapter 6, the verb ‘commending’ describes Teacher order-within-complexity, because many elements are lining up with each other to support something. Teacher thought wants general theories to apply universally without exception. Therefore, this commending is happening in everything. And ‘commending ourselves’ tells us that people now form the basic building blocks for Teacher thought. Finally, ‘as ministers of God’ makes it clear that this is being guided by an integrated understanding of God in Teacher thought. This type of thinking could not happen back in 5:12 because people there were ‘beside themselves’ for God—they were being amazed by new discoveries in Teacher thought. If you
A general Teacher theory will only survive if it is constructed out of solid building material. If Teacher thought is now constructing general theories out of the ‘living stones’ of people, then people need to provide solid building material. This explains the verb discredited at the end of verse 3, which means ‘disgraced because found blemished’.
In both phrases, the emphasis is upon ‘ministry’ which involves Server actions. This is important because Teacher thought works with sequences; Teacher understanding is ultimately based in ‘how things work’. When Teacher thought builds a theory upon people, then what will matter is ‘how people work’. Using the analogy of a machine, the parts of a machine do not just sit there passively but rather function together. Therefore, Teacher thought will assemble a theory of people based upon how people function. One sees this to some extent today with professional specialization.
A Process of Testing 6:4-5
Verses 1-3 provide the context for the extensive list of difficulties mentioned in verses 4-10. In simple terms, verses 4-10 describe the process by which God shapes and tests his ‘living stones’ to ensure that they provide quality building material for Teacher thought. We will look first at verses 4-7, which can be subdivided into the five stages of limitation, revolution, fasting, goodness, and power.
The first phrase summarizes the overall attitude: “in much endurance” (v.4). Endurance means ‘remaining under’. In simple terms, this means sticking with the process and not trying to run away. The word endurance is used 32 times in the New Testament, and it is combined twice with the word ‘all’, But this is the only time that ‘endurance’ is combined with ‘much’. The word much means ‘much in number and emphasizes the quantity involved’. Thus, the emphasis is not so much upon the intensity of endurance that is required but rather upon the fact that one has to endure in so many ways. This attitude of ‘remaining under’ is emphasized by the preposition ‘in’ which precedes the next seventeen words and phrases, as accurately translated by the NASB. The next nine nouns are also in the plural: afflictions, hardships, and so on. The tense then shifts in verse 6 from the plural to the singular and the final eight ‘in’s all precede a noun that is in the singular: purity, knowledge, and so on. This shift in tense is also accompanied by a shift in focus. In the first nine ‘in’s the environment is active and people are responding to this environment. Because the environment is not guided by an integrated Teacher understanding, it behaves in a fragmented, pluralistic manner. In the final eight ‘in’s, people become active and the environment is now responding. This active behavior is in the singular because it is being guided by an integrated concept of God in Teacher thought.
We will be interpreting this long list as a cognitive progression. Notice as we go through this list how each trait sets the stage for the next trait.
The first three are “in afflictions, in hardships, in distresses” (v.4). The word afflictions means ‘internal pressure that causes someone to feel confined’. This word was seen several times at the beginning of 2 Corinthians, and the same word is used to describe ‘the Great Tribulation’ in Revelation 7:14. In other words, this new cycle of backlash will initially appear to be like the time of societal squeezing that happened before a general understanding was developed in Teacher thought. Looking at this cognitively, the technical thinking of today’s society ignores subjective Mercy feelings by remaining objective and it ignores Teacher feelings of generality by specializing. This leaves an emotional hole that is filled through various ways, such as entertainment, religion, or family. In the beginning of chapter 6 God in Teacher thought has become connected with people in Mercy thought in a new and intimate manner. The initial response of society at large will be to apply the familiar coping mechanism of objective specialization, in essence returning to the ‘squeezing’ of the past. But this will no longer work because Teacher and Mercy thought are now being guided by a new and living interaction which is incapable of being squeezed out of existence.
That will lead to the second step of hardships, which means ‘a compelling need requiring immediate action in a pressing situation’. The ‘squeezing’ of objective technical specialization works when one lives in physical bodies within a physical universe thatYou operates independently of human thought. I can ignore my subjective feelings if my physical body reliably fills Mercy thought with experiences of pain and pleasure. And I can ignore universal order if the physical universe reliably functions in an integrated manner. But this would no longer be the case in a future society with spiritual technology and spiritually enhanced physical bodies. Instead, adopting a mindset of objective specialization would lead to ‘compelling needs requiring immediate action’.
For instance, one can see this to a certain extent when ‘the computers go down’. When this happens at a typical store, then nothing can be bought, because all the purchases go through the computer system. Many stores, services, and industries have become so dependent upon an integrated computer network that they cease to function when the computers fail. Looking at this cognitively, humans have changed the physical environment to produce the Teacher structure of an integrated system of communication and transportation. This integrated system must be maintained, and when it ceases functioning, then this creates ‘compelling needs requiring immediate action’. This type of vulnerability does not exist in third world countries, because they can continue functioning in a state of semi-chaos held together by the pre-existing natural order of the physical world.
This leads to the third step, which is a different kind of squeezing: “In distresses” (v.3). The word distress combines two Greek words which mean ‘narrow, confined’ and ‘space, territory, area’, resulting in the definition ‘narrowness of space’. This word is used four times in the New Testament, twice in Romans, and twice in 2 Corinthians: here, and in 12:10. Looking at this cognitively, Perceiver thought deals with ‘space, territory, area’ while Server thought deals with actions and sequences. The ‘squeezing’ of today’s specialization has a strong Server component. Many Server actions are only permitted to be performed by professional specialists, and a professional is only allowed to do the actions of that profession. For instance, if one wishes to fly an airplane then one must get a pilot’s license, and a pilot is only allowed to fly an airplane and may not pilot a ship. If one wishes to pilot a ship then one must go through a different process of becoming a professional specialist. ‘Narrowness of space’ implies that Perceiver thought is being limited but not Server thought. Again one can see this to some extent in today’s interconnected society. On the one hand, physical space remains fragmented and limited through concepts of private property, restricted access, and nationality. But on the other hand, there is also a recognition that international networks of connectivity have to continue functioning; When it comes to Server thought and ‘how things work’, then things have to work together in an integrated manner if one wishes to avoid creating ‘compelling needs requiring immediate action’.
The next three nouns describe a society that is in turmoil. Instead of merely squeezing people in a passive manner, people are being actively suppressed and attacked. The first step is “in beatings” (v.4). The word beating means ‘blow, wound’ and comes from the verb that means ‘to strike’. Today’s technological society can compartmentalize between maintaining the Teacher order of worldwide networks and facing personal issues in Mercy thought. This type of compartmentalization would no longer be possible with spiritual technology because Teacher-driven technology would be modified by Mercy-driven personal maturity. Going further, this compartmentalization would become meaningless in a society in which Teacher structure and Mercy identities became intertwined. Instead, maintaining order in Teacher thought would mean facing people in Mercy thought.
When one comes face-to-face with unwanted individuals, then the traditional response is violence. The word ‘beating’ gives the impression of physical violence occurring as a gut-level response. This word does not describe institutional force or organized government brutality but rather being annoyed with one’s neighbor and responding by lashing out with physical force. Using current technology as a partial illustration, today’s integrated systems have to be constructed and maintained by technicians. But these technicians can usually work out of sight after hours keeping their mouths shut and their opinions to themselves. This would no longer be possible if Teacher structure were built directly upon people. A technician would then have to maintain Teacher order by striding to the front of the room and imposing his personal character upon the social and physical environment. That type of personal imposition would lead naturally to blows.
The next step is “in imprisonments”. This word means ‘a watching, keeping guard; a guard, prison; imprisonment’. It is usually translated ‘prison’ but sometimes translated ‘keeping watch’. This term makes sense in terms of our hypothetical technician. If the technician has to make a public incantation to keep things working, then one can still escort the technician under guard and force him and his partners to live behind walls away from society. A similar progression can be seen in modern society. Governments used to be able to suppress dissension through the use of physical force. But we now live in a global community in which the average person has access to worldwide information. Saying this cognitively, personal identities in Mercy thought have become intertwined with the Teacher structure of global telecommunications. Using physical force to solve problems is no longer an option when incidents of police brutality—or other forms of physical violence—are liable to be videoed on smart phones and uploaded to YouTube for the whole world to see. One then has to pursue the less violent option of imprisoning people within and behind walls.
This leads to the next step of tumults, which means ‘disturbance, upheaval, revolution, almost anarchy’. One can see why this step might follow by looking at how modern technological society responds to beatings and imprisonments. In many cases the result is mass protests and at times the fall of the existing, oppressive regime. That is because the average individual can use personal access to global telecommunications to coordinate with other protestors and transform small rallies into huge demonstrations. Looking at this more generally, the protesters are often able to use modern technology to coordinate better than the regime against which they are protesting. That is because the protesters are often more familiar with using modern technology than those who are in power.
Applying this to the future time of chapter 6, if people formed the building blocks for Teacher structure, then restricting and walling off people would lead to structural chaos. Using the technician analogy, this would be like imprisoning all the technicians who keep the system running. Eventually everything would fall apart. Using the language of chapter 6, if the ‘ministers of God’ really were ministers of God in the full sense of the word, then imprisoning these ministers would cause the structure of God in Teacher thought to start crumbling.
Before we go on, notice that all these steps are still happening as an inevitable result of ‘how things work’. However, this is an underlying cognitive ‘how people and minds work’ that only becomes fully obvious and inescapable when one is no longer subject to natural laws of how the universe works. This shows the need for ‘much endurance’, because one has to remain within each step long enough for the natural cognitive consequences to work themselves out.
Reconstruction 6:6
The next set of three steps indicates a transition from passive to active. Now that the existing system is crumbling, a new replacement system needs to be set up. That involves the next noun which is labors, which means ‘toil, labor, laborious toil, involving weariness and fatigue’. For instance, for several years I taught at an international school in Korea. I discovered that what really tires a person out is not the teaching itself but rather the emotional encounters that happen while one is teaching. Each emotional crisis is draining. Something similar but more intense would happen if one attempted to construct Teacher order out of the ‘living stones’ of people with personal feelings. Saying this another way, the previous step was societal chaos. Teacher order is going to have to be brought to this chaos, similar to the way that a school teacher has to bring order to a group of chaotic childish minds. And that is emotionally draining.
The next step is sleeplessness. This word is only used twice in the New Testament: here, and in 11:27. Looking at this cognitively, sleeplessness can come externally from endless work or it can come internally from a mind that continues to work without shutting down for the night. For instance, many of the ideas of mental symmetry have come to me in the middle of the night. I have woken up, usually at about 3 AM, and then had to write down my ideas before being able to fall back to sleep. I suspect that the initial stages of building a new Teacher structure out of people would involve many sleepless nights, for a variety of reasons.
This is followed by the next step of hunger. This word actually means ‘fasting, a fast’, and often refers to the Day of Atonement when every Jew fasts the entire day. (Even today, most Jews will fast for a 24-hour period during the Day of Atonement, which means eating and drinking nothing, not even water.) Fasting has a significant cognitive effect, because one is choosing not to fulfill mental networks based upon physical need. The mind is naturally lazy and will try to satisfy mental networks in the easiest way possible. If the mind is to start functioning at a higher level, then it must be temporarily prevented from functioning at a lower level. Fasting is a way of encouraging the mind to function at a higher level. Summarizing, fasting does not have any inherent magical or spiritual properties. But it is a way of prodding the mind to follow a higher strategy. The fasting that is mentioned in verse 5 probably goes beyond physical fasting and would refer more generically to ‘fasting’ from personal pleasure in the current system.
This property of fasting can be seen in 2 Corinthians 6 because the nature of the nouns now changes, and the remaining words describe the higher strategy that emerges as a result of the fasting. These nouns have the common characteristic of describing traits that emerge when Teacher thought and Mercy thought combine in a close fashion.
The first trait is purity (v.6). This word is used only twice in noun form in the New Testament, both times in 2 Corinthians, and it means ‘purity, even in inner makeup, i.e. real integrity’. Teacher thought hates exceptions to the rule. Purity describes something that is all the same substance without exception. When Teacher thought constructs general theories out of people in Mercy thought, then Teacher thought will drive Mercy identities to be pure—to be totally one substance without any exceptions. Saying this another way, it has become popular in postmodern circles to say that personal identity is too complicated to be described by any single theory. Cognitively speaking, this means that Teacher thought cannot come up with a theory that explains Mercy identity. This is precisely the opposite of purity, because purity says that all of Mercy identity falls within a Teacher theory without exception. Purity is related to integrity, because when everything is the same, then Perceiver thought will notice the common connections and Server thought will notice the common sequences. The end result is a combination of purity and integrity, because Perceiver and Server knowledge about self will give stability to self.
I should emphasize that purity means harmony and not unison. With unison, all mental networks ‘sing’ the same note and are basically carbon copies of one another. This happens when one dominant mental network imposes itself upon the entire mind. In contrast, harmony means that all mental networks are ‘singing’ related notes. They are not identical with each other but they are all heading in the same general direction. Teacher thought wants order-within-complexity. Unison does not generate order-within-complexity because there is order but not complexity. Harmony does have order-within-complexity.
The second trait is knowledge, which means ‘experiential knowledge’. A different word for knowledge, which means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’ has been used several times in chapters 4-5 (and will appear again in chapter 9). Here, the word experiential knowledge is being. Experiential knowledge is often associated with absolute truth. One has some defining emotional experience which then mesmerizes Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ what is true. But there is another kind of experiential knowledge that emerges as a result of purity and integrity. When I am consistently the same kind of person, then Perceiver and Server thought will construct a self-image about personal identity, and I will know what kind of person I am and how I behave.
When personal identity has this kind of purity and integrity, then Teacher thought can trust Mercy thought to come up with accurate facts. This is not the case in today’s world which splits between subjective and objective. Scientific thought does not trust subjective feelings, but rather attempts to cleanse all knowledge of the ‘contamination’ of personal bias. This is generally a valid conclusion because when subjective emotions take over some academic field, then rational thought usually goes out the window. But when personal identity becomes pure, then Teacher thought really can trust Mercy thought, and will view Mercy identity as another way of encapsulating a general theory: one can either comprehend a theory or one can personify a theory. When a theory is personified, then this provides a different perspective on the same understanding, and this ability to view the same structure from two radically different viewpoints is very useful for ‘thinking outside of the box’. Looking at this from the Mercy viewpoint, if personal identity personifies a general Teacher understanding, then this gives identity both the freedom and ability to express this understanding in many different specific wayw, similar to the way that a good science teacher can explain general concepts using many different analogies and illustrations.
The third trait is patience, which means ‘long passion, i.e. waiting sufficient time before expressing anger’. It is the opposite of short-tempered. Anger is an emotional outburst that is triggered when some mental network wants to express itself, feels suppressed, and responds by expressing itself forcefully. Mental networks will naturally become suppressed in a mind that is complicated, because core mental networks will be pointing in different directions. However, when the mind reaches the purity of shalom (which means ‘completeness, soundness, welfare, peace’), then all mental networks point in the same direction. Going further, when experiential knowledge is added, then mental networks will function within a grid of solid Perceiver facts and Server sequences. This combination produces a mind that can handle a lot of emotional pressure before blowing up. First, purity ensures that there is no pre-existing mental conflict waiting to be triggered. Second, experiential knowledge ties the various mental networks together allowing them to support each other in periods of stress.
The previous three traits described personal character. The next three traits describe interaction between people. The general principle is that people have to become mature before they can interact in a mature fashion. This is the opposite of what is generally assumed today, because today’s society tries to make people mature by forcing them to interact in mature ways.
The first trait is kindness (v.6), which means ‘well-fit for use, for what is really needed; kindness that is also serviceable’. This word is used several times in the New Testament but only once in 2 Corinthians. It is a combination term that expresses simultaneously Teacher emotion and Mercy emotion. Teacher emotion thinks in terms of function and usefulness; Mercy emotion is kind to people. This trait combines these two with ‘kindness that is also serviceable’.
The second trait is “in the Holy Spirit” (v.6). One often thinks of the Holy Spirit as pure Mercy thought, and charismatic Christians who emphasize the Holy Spirit typically focus much more upon Mercy experience than upon Teacher understanding. But a concept of the Holy Spirit is really an image of God that emerges within Mercy thought as an indirect result of a Teacher understanding of God. Saying this more theologically, the Holy Spirit is the third person of the Trinity and not the first person. Using cognitive language, Platonic forms emerge in Mercy thought when Teacher thought works out the simplified essence of Perceiver facts, indirectly creating imaginary images of simplified perfection in Mercy thought. When Teacher thought combines these various simplified essences into a more general theory, then this indirectly causes Platonic forms to combine within Mercy thought to produce what Plato called the form of the Good. Thus, a concept of the Holy Spirit is more accurately an image of divine universality that emerges within Mercy thought as a result of a universal concept of God in Teacher thought.
One finds the same kind of cognitive combination in the description of the Holy Spirit given in John 16: “But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak; and He will disclose to you what is to come. He will glorify Me, for He will take of Mine and will disclose it to you. All things that the Father has are Mine; therefore I said that He takes of Mine and will disclose it to you” (16:13-15). ‘He will not speak on His own initiative’ tells us that the Holy Spirit is an expression of another person of the Trinity. ‘Whatever He hears, He will speak’ clarifies that the Holy Spirit is an indirect expression of God the Father in Teacher thought, because Teacher thought works with words. ‘He will disclose to you what is to come’ indicates that the Holy Spirit goes beyond existing Mercy experiences to what-could-be. And ‘He will glorify Me’ combined with ‘all things that the Father has are Mine’ indicates that the Holy Spirit acquires a knowledge of what-could-be by applying the thinking of God the Father and incarnation to the concrete realm of Mercy experiences.
Comparing the first and second traits, kindness interacts at an individual level, while the Holy Spirit is a universal concept of deity. Thus, in the same way that a concept of the Holy Spirit is composed of many interacting Platonic forms, so ‘in the Holy Spirit’ would be a universalization of many individual examples of ‘in kindness’.
The third trait is “in genuine love” (v.6). The word for love is agape, which means ‘love which centers in moral preference’. Here too one finds a combination of Teacher and Mercy thought. Love is an expression of Mercy thought, and the Mercy person is constantly talking about love. But agape love is a form of love that expresses the character of God in Teacher thought. This agape love is described as genuine, which means ‘sincere behavior free from hidden agendas—literally, without hypocrisy’. Human love is usually full of hidden agendas, because Mercy thought in the average person is ruled by many competing MMNs, each vying for control. The only way to remove these hidden agendas is to place all MMNs within a mental concept of the Holy Spirit. Saying this cognitively, MMNs within Mercy thought become guided by the eternal values of Platonic forms which themselves are integrated by the TMN of a universal concept of God. Saying this another way, all personal and societal goals become shaped by the eternal values of the Holy Spirit.
Starting a New Society 6:7
Moving on, the next three phrases go on the offensive. The foundation has been laid for a new society based in integrated Teacher and Mercy thought, because people are now naturally interacting in a manner that expresses the character of God. The next three stages describe this new society being spread to the larger world. The first phrase is “in the word of truth” (v.7). ‘Word’ in this verse is logos, which we are interpreting as referring to Jesus Christ the living word. The word truth means ‘true to fact… reality as the opposite of illusion’.
When one is attempting to make sense of a mixture of Teacher theories and Mercy people, the first weapon is to uncover any illusion by speaking a living word that describe reality. Stated most simply, one simply states common sense. This may sound obvious, but common sense has become a rare commodity in today’s post-Christian and post-modern world. That is because a search for truth has been replaced by the promoting and demoting of cultural and lifestyle MMNs. And deconstructionism teaches that whatever appears to be a general Teacher theory is merely the opinions of some dominant group that has managed to impose its views upon the rest of the society. If deconstructionism can ignore science and technology while inhabiting a physical universe governed by science and living in a technological society surrounded by modern conveniences, one can imagine that an attitude of uber-deconstructionism that would rear its head if Teacher theory really were built upon people and Mercy thought. (I have read several books that promote deconstructionism and they all ignore science and technology.)
But any future mindset of uber-deconstructionism would also be doomed to failure precisely because an independent science and technology would no longer exist. It is easy to preach a doctrine of power politics in a comfortable air-conditioned classroom that is maintained by technicians who function behind the scenes guided by laws of nature that apply invisibly. But if the Teacher structure of the physical environment depended upon people in Mercy thought, then preaching that Teacher theory is merely an illusion imposed by Mercy authorities would cause the order of the local environment to start crumbling. The air conditioning would stop working; the chairs would fall apart; the floor would no longer be solid. In order to get things functioning again, a technician would have to be summoned and he would have to publicly override the attitude of power politics with rational thought. Using the language of verse 7, people would be begging for a ‘logos of reality’ in order to keep things going.
This may sound like a fantasy, but it already happens to some extent in current society. For instance, communism thought that workers could achieve instant prosperity by taking over the factories. But when all the capitalists were removed from power, then the result was not prosperity but rather chaos and terror. The factories stopped working and the economy sputtered to a halt. The oppression of the capitalist regime turned into the terror of the Communist regime. A similar result generally occurred when African colonies gained independence and replaced the ‘oppressive white overlords’ with local leaders. Order turned into chaos and colonial suppression turned into tribal dictatorship.
Summarizing, the ‘word of truth’ would become a powerful weapon in a society in which Teacher and Mercy thought became intertwined. But one would not have to impose this weapon. Instead, people would request ‘the word of truth’ in order to save themselves from personal chaos. Truth already has power today, but people can mentally ignore truth for a while by relying upon the implicit truth of physical reality. This would no longer be possible in the future society of chapter 6.
The second phrase is “in the power of God” (v.7). The word power can refer either to natural or to supernatural power. The original Greek does not have any definite articles and is simply ‘in power God’ with ‘of’ being implied by ‘God’ being in the genitive case. The previous phrase had the same grammatical structure, being simply ‘in word truth’. When the definite article is specifically used, such as ‘the God’ or ‘the logos’, then this appears to refer to a monotheistic concept of God or incarnation. But the absence of a definite article implies that a concept of God and incarnation is being gradually reconstructed. Saying this cognitively, Teacher thought has constructed a theory that is general enough to create a concept of God but has not yet formed a universal theory that leads to the concept of a single monotheistic God.
This may sound like minor quibbling, but constructing a concept of God is not the same as proclaiming the existence of God. A mindset of absolute truth will proclaim that God exists. Today’s post-Christian society no longer believes in absolute Christian truth. However, I have found that it is possible to rebuild a concept of God upon a foundation of universal principles of cognitive cause-and-effect, and that this concept of God is actually the same as the God described in the Bible. But it took decades of research for my understanding of universal cognitive principles to develop to the extent of creating an adequate concept of God. If the spread of modern technology today has led to a deconstructionism that has caused current concepts of God to crumble, one can imagine how the uber-deconstructionism of the future would impact peoples’ concepts of God.
Verse 7 began with the ‘logos of real truth’. One can point out in today’s post-truth world that real truth still exists even when one starts with people. Reality does not deconstruct into the illusion of personal opinion. Instead, there are real principles of sowing-and-reaping that apply to the mind. Eventually, if enough of these cognitive principles are acquired, then a concept of God will start to emerge, and this concept of God will have power over the mind because it is based in universal principles of cognitive cause-and-effect that cannot be escaped. Now imagine living in a future society in which the Teacher structure for physical existence was built out of the ‘living stones’ of people. The average person would conclude that everything was now a matter of personal opinion. But in fact, everything would now depend upon cognitive principles of cause-and-effect, leading eventually to a powerful concept of God.
The third phrase is “by the weapons of righteousness for the right hand and the left” (v.7). The preposition here is no longer ‘in’ but rather by, which means ‘through, throughout, by the instrumentality of’ when it is followed by the genitive. Thus, this final phrase tells how the power of God is applied. The word weapons means ‘tool, implement, weapon’. It is used twice in 2 Corinthians: here, and in 10:4, where it says that ‘the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh’. These weapons are described as being ‘of righteousness’. Righteousness refers to Server actions guided by the TMN of a concept of God in Teacher thought.
Looking at this cognitively, I mentioned earlier in the essay that righteousness is naturally more powerful than truth. Looking at the diagram of mental symmetry, the path from Teacher universality to Mercy specifics goes Teacher → Server → Contributor → Perceiver → Mercy. (The more direct path from Teacher → Exhorter → Mercy is in gray, which indicates that it operates at the vague level of intuition.) Pointing out truth in Perceiver thought is necessary, but this can only point out exceptions to the general theory in Teacher thought. Using the technician analogy, a system of postmodern thought may have to occasionally ask for technical assistance and even recognize the existence of technicians, but it can still preach a theory of power politics in a social system of postmodernism. Saying this another way, Perceiver truth can limit the domain of some Teacher theory but, as Thomas Kuhn pointed out, it usually takes many facts to overturn a single theory. However, suppose that one intervenes at the level of Server sequences. One is now directly altering the source of stability for Teacher thought. Instead of merely pointing out facts, one is changing ‘how we do things’. Going further, when ‘how we do things’ is changed to line up with ‘how things work’, then the results can be astounding.
One can see how this works by looking at physical weapons. For most of human history, the way of conducting warfare remained fundamentally unchanged: One hit an opponent with a club, slashed at him with a sword, lobbed a spear at him, or shot him with an arrow. Most changes occurred at the level of Perceiver objects, such as forging harder and sharper swords, throwing bigger stones, or shooting arrows faster and further. But modern technology utterly transformed the ‘how we do things’ of war. This technological transformation was most apparent in World War I. (I am writing this paragraph almost exactly 100 years after the end of World War I.) Most modern weapons were invented or first used on a mass scale during this war: the airplane, the submarine, the tank, the telephone, the radio, the machine gun, and the artillery barrage. This introduction of new technology also transformed the way that war was conducted, because any army that did not adapt to the new form of warfare would lose on the battlefield. Saying this more concisely, technology changes ‘how we do things’ to be consistent with a scientific understanding of ‘how the natural world works’. When modern technology was used to make weapons, then ‘how we do war’ became massively transformed. World War I eventually turned into a war of matériel, and the Allies eventually won this war because they had larger economies that could produce more weapons than the Central Powers.
The weapons of modern technology are a combination of righteousness and barbarism. On the one hand, a modern high-tech weapon obeys the laws of nature with extreme righteousness and precision. But on the other hand, these supreme examples of Teacher order and structure are designed to destroy the Teacher order and structure of buildings and humans. Spiritual technology would extend technology into the subjective, while building Teacher order upon people would make the subjective side of technology inescapable.
This idea of technology as a weapon already functions to some extent in today’s consumer society. For instance, we now live in an interconnected world in which many if not most activities are now conducted via the Internet rather than face-to-face. Using the Internet is convenient, but this technological convenience is only available to those who know how to use computers. Thus, the Internet is both a blessing and a curse. It is a blessing to those who know how to think rationally but a curse to those who are technically challenged.
Looking at this from a larger scale, the Internet as a whole is either a blessing or a curse depending upon the maturity of the society that uses this Internet. The same Internet can either enable people to cooperate intelligently, or else facilitate the rise of tribal groups with irrational, xenophobic biases. Similarly, the same Internet that makes commerce and communication so convenient also makes it much easier for governments and corporations to spy on citizens and consumers. The problem today is that governments and corporations think that they can control the Internet the same way that they control physical resources. And because the Internet is ultimately constructed out of physical devices, the rational structure of the Internet will continue to function even when one fills this rational structure with irrational comments.
Notice the inherent cognitive contradictions. One is disseminating ‘fake news’ through an Internet that performs extensive error-correcting to detect and eliminate any false information. Similarly, one is looking for general patterns on the Internet by sharing information, guided by the underlying premise that human society should be separated into national fiefdoms which do not interact in a general manner but rather hide information from each other. Going further, one is demanding electronic backdoors that work for ‘us’ and not ‘them’ on a network of computers that carries out general instructions that make no distinction between ‘us’ and ‘them’. In today’s technical society, these inherent contradictions are frustrating. However, if Teacher order itself was constructed out of people, then such inherent contradictions would be overwhelming. The Internet would cease to work for individuals who tried to spread fake news. Those who pursued nationalistic goals would find themselves incapable of gathering general patterns. And computers would stop networking for those who demanded electronic backdoors. It is possible that the Internet will be replaced by some totally new form of technology in the future. But I suggest that the general principle would still remain, which is that systems of Teacher structure would only be available to those whose minds were ruled by Teacher structure.
Verse 7 adds that these weapons of righteousness are ‘for the right hand and the left’. I have found that Biblical references to left and right hands or feet make neurological sense. The left side of the body is controlled by the right brain, and vice versa. Righteousness involves an interaction between Server thought and Teacher thought which are both left hemisphere (or right body) strategies. However, Contributor thought builds specific connections between Perceiver facts and Server sequences, making it possible to view righteousness from a Perceiver perspective. This is important for me as a Perceiver person, because it means that I am also capable of using weapons of righteousness. One can see this in these essays. On the one hand, I am connecting facts the way a normal Perceiver person would do. But on the other hand, these Perceiver facts emphasize ‘how things work’. This explains why verse 7 says ‘for the right hand and for the left’. Righteousness starts with the right hand, but it can also be extended to the left hand; it is based in Server thought but can also be extended to Perceiver thought.
A Sequence of Contrasts 6:8-10
We now come to a sequence of nine contrasts. Free will becomes maximized when the mind contains contradicting core mental networks. Thus, these contrasts can be viewed as a way of maximizing free will.
The first contrast is ‘through glory and dishonor’ (v.8). (The preposition translated ‘by’ is more accurately ‘through’.) The word glory ‘literally means what evokes good opinion, i.e. that something has inherent, intrinsic worth’. (I suggested earlier in the essay that glory is more accurately an external expression of internal character.) The alternative is dishonor, which means ‘perceived as without recognized value or worth’. This contrast describes a struggle over which external objects and experiences are worthless and which have inherent worth. Evangelical Christianity has struggled with precisely this question, especially during the recent progression from Christendom to post-Christianity. For instance, is rock music worthless or is it a worthy form of worship that gives glory to God? Is one giving glory to God when one studies psychology or should the field of psychology be regarded as a worthless substitute for biblical Christianity? Do religious rituals give glory to God or should they be rejected as worthless? Should dancing be rejected from the church as worthless or does it give glory to God? It is often not possible to answer these question adequately in today’s society because modern society is itself a juxtaposition of childishness and rational thought. Thus, in some cases the new does not give glory to God while in other cases the new has more intrinsic worth than the old.
My guess is that in a future society of 2 Corinthians 6, this question of glory versus worthlessness would extend significantly beyond the controversies mentioned in this paragraph, but it would also be easier to determine what had value and what was worthless. The point is that people would have to think deeply about all kinds of value, including religious, moral, and eternal value, as well as economic value. And this would not just be a theoretical argument but rather involve real people and real experiences.
The preposition ‘through’ implies that these questions of value and worthlessness will have to be settled to some extent before it is possible to move on to the next stage. This makes cognitive sense, because before one can head toward some goal, one first has to establish what is a worthy goal and what is not.
The second contrast is ‘through evil report and good report’ (v.8) (using same preposition ‘through’ as with the first phrase). The word translated evil report is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘evil report, defamation, words of ill omen’. The word translated good report is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘commendation, good report, praise’. Combining this with the previous contrast, personal judgments of value and worthlessness in Mercy thought will be backed up by words of praise and condemnation in Teacher thought. This is inevitable when Mercy thought is closely linked to Teacher thought. Something similar happens in today’s networked society because personal feelings in Mercy thought naturally spill over into Teacher words of praise and condemnation expressed on the Internet.
The first two contrasts use the preposition ‘through’. The next seven use the preposition as, which means ‘as, like as’. Looking at this cognitively, the first two stages will set the groundwork for the next seven. The first two will establish who and what will be regarded as good and evil by society. The remaining stages will use comparisons to refer back to these prototypes defined during the first two stages: ‘You are being like that evil person there’. Or ‘We are following the good example of our hero’.
The third contrast is ‘as deceivers and yet true’. Deceiver means ‘wandering, leading astray, a deceiver’. True means ‘true, as it accords with fact and reality… literally, what can’t be hidden’. The idea of ‘leading astray’ means that one is going beyond words to actions. One is no longer merely talking about what is good and evil but rather following examples of what one regards as good while regarding as deceptive other paths that claim to be good. For instance, I have often asked myself if mental symmetry is leading me to self-deception, because the theory of mental symmetry has caused me to walk a different path than the society around me. When one is walking a lonely path, then it is important to make sure that one is not being led astray or deceived. I have found that the best way of resolving this question is to look at what is true. How do things really work? How does the mind actually function? Which principles of cause-and-effect are truly inescapable? What is the real reality?
Much of my struggle has been the result of using Teacher thought in a different way than the average person. My bottom line has been to understand the mind and then use this understanding to pursue mental wholeness and personal integrity. This type of thinking will lead a person in a different direction than most of current society, causing a person to ask at a deep level if they are being deceived. But this type of thinking also makes it much easier to determine what really is true.
The next contrast is ‘as unknown yet well-known’. The word unknown means ‘ignorant of a person, thing, or fact, sometimes with the idea of willful ignorance’. The word well-known means ‘to know exactly, to recognize’. Both of these are built upon the word for experiential knowing. This kind of ambivalent knowing naturally emerges when dealing with unpleasant facts. On the one hand, these facts are true and cannot be ignored. But on the other hand, following these facts will lead a person away from the path of current society. For instance, mental symmetry is currently at this intermediate state of being unknown yet somewhat well-known. On the one hand, the theory of mental symmetry has been developed to the point of being a legitimate theory that can no longer be rejected out of hand. And people are increasingly teaching principles that are consistent with mental symmetry. And in some circles I have gained the reputation of being a legitimate researcher. But on the other hand, the curiosity is usually not there. The average person does not want to know more because of the implications. In today’s era of science and technology, it is still possible to largely ignore an uncomfortable theory of cognition. In the future, cognitive principles would be impossible to ignore, which implies that there would be a much stronger juxtaposition of ‘unknown yet well-known’.
When a person is in such a situation then motivation becomes a prime question. Is one pursuing some project merely to get people to follow, or is one pursuing this project because of the inherent benefits that it promises? For instance, am I pursuing mental symmetry because I want people to believe in my theory, or because I believe that following mental symmetry will eventually lead to a spiritual breakthrough for me—and others? This is the question that I have been recently facing. On the one hand, when one is living in a purely technological world, it takes faith—or is it self-deception?—to believe that spiritual power will ever display itself. On the other hand, when one book of the New Testament after another talks—in detail—about the coming of a new and more spiritual world, then the idea of spiritual technology becomes reasonable as one explores the various aspects that are discussed in books such as 2 Corinthians. For a future society, the existence of spiritual technology would no longer be a question. But the stakes would also be much higher and one would no longer have the luxury of continuing to study in semi-obscurity.
The next contrast is ‘as dying yet behold, we live’. The word dying ‘focuses on the separation that goes with the dying off’. And the word for live is the familiar word that refers to both natural and spiritual life. This life is unexpected because it is preceded by a behold! Connecting this with the previous point, it is difficult to continue functioning in a state of being ‘unknown yet well-known’, especially when coupled with the underlying suspicion of leading people astray.
In fact, people will respond in such a manner precisely because it is an effective way to get rid of an unwanted mental network. Attacking a mental network does not get rid of it, especially if this mental network is backed up by some elements of truth. When one attacks some mental network, then one is actually acknowledging its existence. Instead, a much better approach is to trigger this unwanted mental network as seldom as possible, acknowledging its existence only to the extent that is necessary. Like Gollum in The Lord of the Rings, the unwanted mental network is supposed to ‘leave now and never come back!’
I know to some extent what it feels like to be ostracized in this fashion, because I have found repeatedly that when the theory of mental symmetry starts to turn into a TMN within the mind of some listener, then the usual response is to drop the subject like a hot potato, hoping that the unwanted TMN will ‘leave now and never come back!’ One can see this idea of ‘leave now and never come back!’ in the word ‘dying’, which ‘focuses on the separation that goes with the dying off’.
Moving on, I have also found to my surprise that I continue to have enough energy to keep working on the theory of mental symmetry. Notice that the ‘Behold!’ is being applied to ‘life’. In other words, this is not a question of using rational thought or discovering facts but rather a matter of finding enough personal energy to continue going. Stated bluntly, how does one continue living within a mental network that everyone is trying to kill off? The answer is related to righteousness. In simple terms, a mental network will take ownership of any behavior that motivates. In most cases it is difficult to determine exactly which mental network is motivating behavior. However, if one applies a mental network in a social environment in which others are doing their best not to trigger this mental network, then one can know for certain that this mental network is motivating behavior.
One can abuse this cognitive mechanism to some extent, stubbornly following some conspiracy theory or other strange idea which everyone else ignores or condemns as unreasonable. But most conspiracy theories and religious cults are maintained by a small group of fervent believers who support each other socially through MMNs of mutual approval. In contrast, if one is following a mental network that is consistent with universal truth, then one will continually stumble across examples of this universal truth which will give renewed life to the metal network. Going further, if the mental network that one is following is consistent with universal principles of cognition, then simply thinking about the mental network—or thinking about how others respond to the mental network—will reveal these universal cognitive principles at play, giving renewed life to the mental network.
I know through decades of personal experience that one will repeatedly encounter this surprising renewal of life when continuing to work on the theory of mental symmetry. If this principle applies when working with a theory about the mind, it should apply with even greater power when building a Teacher understanding of existence upon human minds as described in 2 Corinthians 6.
The next contrast is “as punished yet not put to death” (v.9). The word punished actually refers to ‘a child under development with strict training’, and the NASB gives an alternate translation of ‘disciplined’. The word put to death simply means ‘put to death’ without having any extra connotations of being separated. This is a strange combination of words, but I think I know what it is saying. In essence, other people will expect you to grow up: ‘Why do you continue with such childish idealism? Why don’t you grow up, get a career, and raise a family? Eventually you will have to stop living in your fantasy world and start facing reality.’ That is usually as far as it goes, because it is currently considered taboo to make judgmental statements about someone else’s lifestyle. But in a future society there would be no such limits, which means that the members of society at large would take it upon themselves to teach a ‘deceived childish mind’ how to grow up and live in society.
Looking at the other side of the contrast, I also experience a kind of respect at a distance, in which people recognize that I am devoting my life to some positive goal. This goal may be regarded as hopelessly idealistic, but pursuing this goal also leads to interesting insights which others find helpful and unusual. Again, I suspect that something similar but stronger would apply to the future. One would not totally eliminate a child-like idealism that is managing to come up with interesting and beneficial results.
The next contrast is easy to decipher: ‘as sorrowful yet always rejoicing’. The word sorrowful means ‘to experience deep, emotional pain’. Rejoicing means ‘glad for grace’ and describes ‘delight in God’s grace’. Looking at this cognitively, ‘sorrowful’ is describing pain in Mercy thought, while ‘rejoicing’ describes the Teacher pleasure that comes from following a concept of God. This rejoicing occurs always, which means ‘always, unceasingly, perpetually; on every occasion’. This describes what it feels like to be motivated by the mental concept of a monotheistic God. Using cognitive language, the concept of a monotheistic God comes from a universal theory in Teacher thought. If a theory in Teacher thought truly is universal, then it will be triggered at all times, and every situation that is experienced will be viewed as an expression of this universal theory.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry has now been developed to the extent of being a potential meta-theory of everything. Everywhere I go, no matter how badly I feel as an individual, this theory happily explains what is happening, emotionally reinforcing my idealism. In fact, I no longer have to try to be idealistic. It now comes naturally. And when I do get frustrated or lose my cool, it never lasts, but rather become swallowed up emotionally by the theory of mental symmetry which carefully analyzes why I got frustrated or lost my cool.
The next contrast is “as poor yet making many rich” (v.10). The word poor means ‘deeply destitute, completely lacking resources… helpless as a beggar’. And making rich means ‘to make rich, cause to abound in, enrich’. This may appear at first glance to be talking about some form of religious self-denial, but it does not say that one is destitute, but rather that one is like being destitute. And the result of being like destitute is to bring riches to many others. This combination makes sense as a follow-on to the previous contrast. The previous step described continually growing in Teacher thought while being externally frustrated in the realm of Mercy experiences. When one follows Teacher thought in an environment which is not applying this understanding, then one must continually avoid committing personally to any systems in the environment.
One could refer to this as interacting with others on a contract basis. The end result is that one will feel destitute and lacking in resources in the present environment. For instance, I currently make most of my money from tutoring math and physics. I could get a regular job with a regular income but I do not feel free to do so because I sense that this would damage my ability to develop mental symmetry. That is because the mind can only serve one master. If I wish to continue working with mental symmetry, then I have to submit to mental symmetry, which means not submitting to other systems or organizations. This does not mean that I do not interact with others, but rather that I interact with society on a case-by-case basis trying to avoid any inappropriate emotional or organizational commitments.
The benefit is that I am able to continue expanding the theory of mental symmetry. This is already enriching some other people, and I am posting my material on the web in the hope that it will enrich many others. As with the previous contrast, I suggest that something similar but much stronger would be happening in the future, because one would not just be developing and applying a new theory of cognition but rather developing and applying a new theory of existence.
The last contrast repeats the previous contrast at a more objective level: “As having nothing yet possessing all things” (v.10). The word nothing means ‘no one, nothing – literally, not even one’. Having is a simple word that means ‘have, hold, possess’. Possessing is a stronger version of having which means ‘take possession of, lay hold of’. And all things ‘means all in the sense of each and every part that applies’. Two kinds of ownership are being compared in this phrase. ‘Having’ describes owning some object, while ‘possessing’ describes the mental skill and ability to use an object. For instance, if I buy a computer and put it on my desk, then I have a computer. But if I do not know how to use a computer, then I do not possess the computer. It does not really belong to me.
When one focuses upon becoming mentally and spiritually whole, then this does not mean blocking off physical reality. I mentioned earlier that those who teach deconstructionism usually ignore the existence of science and technology, assuming that nameless, invisible technicians will keep things running. This dichotomy does not happen when one pursues mental wholeness because God has constructed the physical universe to be compatible with a mind that is whole. I am not saying this in a hand-waving manner, because I just finished an essay that examines physics from a cognitive perspective. Thus, when one becomes mentally whole, one finds that one naturally thinks in a manner that makes it easy to acquire the skill and knowledge that is needed to use objects. (Looking at this historically, science came to birth in a Judeo-Christian society; a Christian mindset made it possible to discover science.) Using the language of verse 10, one discovers that one possesses all things. But one does not have a house that is full of things because one is following a higher master and not trying to get rich in the current society.
If this principle is already true in the current physical universe which functions independently of human thought, then I imagine that it would be even more true in a future realm in which human thought had the ability to modify natural laws.
Seven Bowls of Wrath
That brings us to the end of the comparisons. I have suggested that the previous list of troubles in 4:7-12 corresponds to the kingdom of the beast. I suggest that the list which we have just examined corresponds to the seven bowls of wrath described in Revelation 16. Chapter 6 of 2 Corinthians describes what it feels like to go through this process as a follower of God while Revelation 16 describes what this process feels like as a rebel from God. The rebel experiences this as the end of existing civilization while the follower experiences it as the development of a new civilization.
Revelation 16:8-9 says that people will be scorched by the heat of the sun, and verse 10 adds that the throne of the beast will be plunged into darkness. Verse 12 talks about the Euphrates river drying up. My hypothesis is that the kingdom of the beast is ultimately based in mysticism, which forms a direct emotional connection between me in Mercy thought and God in Teacher thought. Mysticism actually works because it does not work. Saying this in more detail, the reason that a person can emotionally handle feeling one with God is because we live in a physical universe that keeps people separate from God. If God in Teacher thought built Teacher structure upon people in Mercy thought, then there would no longer be any inherent separation between me and God, because Teacher thought and Mercy thought would now be intertwined. We have analyzed the beginning of 2 Corinthians 6 from this perspective.
Intertwining Teacher thought and Mercy thought at this level would overload mysticism and cause it to blow a fuse. Using the language of Revelation 16, a sun represents a general theory that gives light to the earth of human existence. If the sun becomes too bright, then this means that a concept of God in Teacher thought is too close to personal identity in Mercy thought. One can tell that this is the case because the people in verse 9 are responding to the intense heat by cursing the name of God. This is followed by verse 10 which describes the throne of the beast being plunged into darkness, indicating that the method of mysticism will stop working. This is replaced by a growing concept of a God of content: In verse 9, people curse the name of God, while in verse 11 they curse the ‘God of heaven’. ‘Name’ implies knowable content in Teacher thought, while ‘heaven’ describes a home within a realm of Teacher thought.
Going further, verse 15 appears initially like a strange aside that does not fit the context: “Blessed is the one who stays awake and keeps his clothes, so that he will not walk about naked and men will not see a shame.” In fact, the NASB actually puts this verse in parentheses, implying that it does not fit the context. However, it does make sense in the context of overcoming mysticism. Clothes represent the fabric of personal social interaction. Mysticism identifies directly with God without wearing any mental clothes of rational thought. Saying this another way, it unifies me with God by putting the mind to sleep.
Verse 15 warns about hidden mysticism being publicly exposed. This is a significant warning because I keep finding that supposedly rational theologians are actually practicing mysticism under the surface. Verses 13-14 talk about three unclean spirits coming out of the mouths of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet to war against God. Looking at this cognitively, when core mental networks are threatened, then they will respond like a cornered animal and lash out. This is not a rational response but rather a gut-level reaction that cannot be controlled. Thus, when the existence of mysticism itself is threatened, then there will be a gut-level revulsion against God, and those who practice secret mysticism will find themselves driven to support their mysticism by ‘coming out of the closet’.
Verse 16 then says that the followers of the beast are gathered together in a place called Har-Magedon. ‘Har’ means ‘mountain’ while ‘Magedon’ means ‘place of crowds’. A mountain is a more pragmatic version of a sun, because one can see a mountain from surrounding locations and one can see the ‘big picture’ from the top of a mountain. Thus, one sees a combining of Teacher and Mercy thought. People who use mysticism to combine Teacher thought with Mercy thought are gathering together in a ‘place of crowds’ in order to form the pragmatic Teacher theory of a mountain.
The word Har-Magedon only appears once in the New Testament and is typically viewed as the ultimate battle at the end of the world. But as Wikipedia points out, verse 16 does not talk about any battle but rather refers to a gathering together. Verses 18-21 describe great calamity, but this happens not at Armageddon but rather in ‘the great city’ and ‘the cities of the nations’.
The gathering at Armageddon makes sense if one understands cognitively how mysticism works. Mysticism is based in Teacher overgeneralization—sweeping statements that ignore the facts. Mysticism can survive rational content as long as one asserts that God transcends all rational thought. That is because Teacher emotion is based in generality. As long as an overgeneralized concept of God is regarded as more general than all rational content, one can practice mysticism while continuing to live and think rationally in the real world. Mysticism is intensely emotional. I have never experienced feelings of mysticism, but it must be strongly emotional because mystics use glowing language to describe the ecstasy of mysticism. Such strong emotional experiences would lead to the formation of potent core mental networks.
Now suppose that God and humanity really did come close together. Pretending that God and man are one would then overload the mind, as described in Revelation 16. But those who practice mysticism would be driven by core mental networks to try to preserve their mysticism. They would do so by gathering together with like-minded individuals in order to form a culture of mysticism, demonstrating by their social oneness the ‘reality’ of cosmic oneness. Mysticism would then be shifted from a vague theory that lies above everything to a specific culture that resides in a specific location. One can see a partial illustration of this in monks gathering in mountaintop monasteries to practice mysticism. Instead of viewing mysticism as transcendent over all knowledge, mysticism would become merely some specialized form of knowledge. That summarizes the cognitive process. If God started to build Teacher theory upon people in Mercy thought, then cognitive and physical would become interrelated. Thus, this cognitive process would probably be combined with some sort of physical process. One might imagine mystic monks meditating in mountain monasteries marshalling marvelous manifestations, as depicted in many fantasy movies about monks. These depictions—together with my alliteration—may initially give the impression that mystical power is harmless fun, but one can see the inherent soul-devouring nature in the way that movies and television shows about the supernatural have become darker and nastier over the years, to the point where I can no longer watch them.
Opening Up Emotionally 6:11-13
Returning now to 2 Corinthians, verses 11-13 describe the need to open up emotionally. Paul begins by describing his own emotional openness: “Our mouth has spoken freely to you, O Corinthians, our heart is opened wide.” This is the only time in both letters to the Corinthians that Paul actually mentions the word Corinthians. The name Corinth occurs three times at the beginning of these two letters, but this is the only use of ‘Corinthians’.
The context provides a possible explanation. I suggested at the beginning of this essay that Corinth represents a culture which juxtaposes objective wealth and excellence with subjective lawlessness. When one lives in such an environment, one cannot open one’s heart to the world because it is morally depraved. This objective skill and knowledge has been extending into the subjective realm for the first five chapters, but society is still guided by a subjective core of irrational thought. This subjective core has finally been overthrown through the process described in the preceding verses. And we have just looked at a similar process of overthrowing the irrational subjective core in Revelation 16. This makes it possible to open one’s heart to the environment, because the core of the environment is no longer sick. Opening one’s heart sounds like an easy step, but I know from personal experience that it would be a hard transition, because I have spent decades trying to protect my heart from society.
Looking now at verse 11 in more detail, Paul begins by saying that “Our mouth is open to you, O Corinthians”. (This is the literal translation given in a footnote.) Looking at this cognitively, there has been emotional openness at the level of words and Teacher understanding. Similarly, I have found that the theory of mental symmetry allows me to be open to everything in Teacher thought, because mental symmetry seems to be capable of explaining and swallowing up everything that it encounters.
Verse 11 continues, “our heart is opened wide”. This is not a good translation because the word translated opened wide actually means “enlarge, make broad”. In contrast, the word translated open at the beginning of the verse really does mean ‘to open’. Looking at this cognitively, Teacher and Mercy thought are responding in a different manner. Teacher thought is open, pulling in words and ideas from the environment. Mercy thought, in contrast, is enlarged or expanded. In other words, stepping back emotionally in Mercy thought from the social environment of Corinth has not caused Mercy thought to shrivel up. Instead, Mercy thought has become emotionally expanded and enlarged through the development of Teacher understanding. Speaking from personal experience, even though I protect my heart from others, I have not shut down Mercy thought with its feelings. On the contrary, I find that pursuing mental symmetry has actually increased my emotional sensitivity. My heart has expanded.
Verse 12 addresses the Corinthians: “You are not restrained in us, but you are restrained in your own inward parts.” (This is the alternate translation from the footnotes.) The word restrained means to ‘keep someone in a tight place’. It is used three times in the New Testament and two of these occurrences are in this verse. The preposition in means ‘in the realm of’. In other words, Paul is saying that the message that he is teaching is not responsible for putting his followers into a box. Applying this to my personal experience, even though living ‘in the realm of’ the theory of mental symmetry has ‘kept me in a tight place’, this theory is not responsible for boxing me in. Looking at this more generally, when one steps back from the world in order to follow God, God is not responsible for the feeling of being ‘kept in a tight place’. Instead, it was necessary to stay in a tight place in order to avoid being ruined by a corrupt social environment.
Continuing, the word inward parts means ‘the internal organs; figuratively gut-level compassion’. The KJV translates this word as ‘bowels’. Stating this cognitively, the followers have been stepping back emotionally from society for so long that this has turned into a gut-level response. Neurologically speaking, deep-seated emotions will express themselves at a gut level. I know what this feels like, because the idea of being emotionally open to society feels wrong at a gut level.
Verse 13 tells the Corinthians how they should respond: “Now in a like exchange – I speak as to children – open wide [to us] also.” (‘To us’ is in italics and is not in the original Greek.) The word translated exchange is only used twice in the New Testament and means ‘proportionate reward; matching compensation’. And the word translated open wide actually means ‘enlarge, make broad’. Putting this together, Paul is not telling the Corinthians to open up emotionally to their environment, but rather to become emotionally free, and to regard this emotional freedom as a reward for the previous emotional limitation. This is important, because one does not just decide in Mercy thought to become emotionally expanded. The mind does not work that way. Instead, this emotional enlarging is being based upon principles of cause-and-effect. The emotional enlarging is a ‘proportionate reward’ for the previous emotional narrowness. This may sound strange, but I am starting to learn experientially what this means. Using the language of Galatians 6:8, one is starting to reap from the spirit. One is growing emotionally driven by the spirit as a result of having followed principles of sowing-and-reaping.
This idea of allowing Mercy thought to become enlarged is brought out by the phrase “I speak as to children”. The word children means ‘a child living in willing dependence’. A child explores the world openly but is dependent upon parents for help and protection. Similarly, Mercy thought is becoming enlarged but it is doing so in ‘willing dependence’ to principles of cause-and-effect. This may sound like a subtle distinction, but there is a huge difference between choosing to go out and explore the world like a rebellious teenager, and being given permission to go out and explore the world.
Coming Out from the World 6:14-15
This theme of going out to explore the world is described in the rest of chapter 6. Verse 14 sets the tone: “Do not be unequally yoked with unbelievers”. (This is the literal translation given in a footnote.)
This phrase is typically interpreted as a prohibition against Christians marrying non-Christians. I think that is a valid interpretation. Cognitively speaking, the goal of marriage is to integrate male thought with female thought. This becomes difficult to do when these two forms of thought are guided by different core mental networks.
However, a larger interpretation is suggested if one looks at the context. The foundation has just been laid for a new Teacher societal structure based upon people in Mercy thought. It is now time to leave the existing society and start this new society. And at this point the word society is probably too limited. What one is really looking at is probably the start of a new civilization. And even the word civilization may be too limited. The scale of what is about to happen is suggested by the parallel passage in Revelation.
I have suggested that the bowls of wrath in Revelation 16 correspond to the progression described in 2 Corinthians 6:4-10. Revelation 17 compares the system of Babylon to a prostitute, while Revelation 18 talks about the fall of Babylon. Just before Babylon is destroyed, a warning is given which sounds very much like the verse that we are examining in 2 Corinthians: “I heard another voice from heaven, saying, ‘Come out of her, my people, so that you will not participate in her sins and receive of her plagues’” (Rev. 18:4). A similar warning can be seen in verse 17 of 2 Corinthians 6: “‘Therefore, come out from their midst and be separate,’ says the Lord. ‘And do not touch what is unclean.’” Both of these verses use the same Greek word translated come out. This is a fairly common verb, but I cannot find any other instances in the New Testament where a group of people is specifically being ordered to ‘come out’ of existing society. Thus, it is reasonable that these two passages are related.
Returning now to 2 Corinthians 6:14, if this verse is applied primarily to Christians marrying non-Christians, then the verbs would be in the singular, because one believer is marrying one unbeliever. But the words are in the plural: one should not become—in plural—unequally yoked together—in plural—with unbelievers—in plural. (Unfortunately, modern English grammar does not distinguish between you—singular and you—plural. The archaic English of the KJV is useful here because ‘ye’ means plural while ‘thou’ means singular.) Going further, the word unequally yoked together is only used once in the New Testament. It joins the word ‘another of a different kind’ with the word ‘a yoke, joining to a single plow’. A literal example of this would be placing an ox and a donkey under the same yoke, and this precise combination is forbidden in Deuteronomy 22:10. The reason for this is that different animals pull in different ways. Thus, yoking two different kinds of animals together would be cruel to both of them.
Verse 14 warns against being unequally yoked with unbelievers, and unbelievers means ‘not faithful because unpersuaded’. Thus, the contrast is between work that is being persuaded by understanding and work that is not. Looking at this more generally, the focus of the beginning of the chapter was upon building the understanding of a new society. When one is building an understanding then it is important to learn from everyone, both good and evil, because one can learn universal principles of cognition from observing both those who follow these principles and those who violate these principles. Saying this another way, if one is building a universal understanding in Teacher thought, then one needs to observe all situations. Therefore, the beginning of the chapter did not contain any instructions to ‘come out and be separate’.
The situation changes when going from building an understanding to applying this understanding. That is because humans are finite creatures who live within specific Mercy experiences. One does not live within all experiences but rather avoids painful experiences and pursues pleasant ones. Therefore, it is important to come out and be separate. Saying this another way, Teacher thought becomes healthy by gaining a general understanding of everything, while Mercy thought becomes healthy by avoiding long-term personal pain. The list of descriptions at the beginning of chapter formed a natural sequence. Verses 14-16 also describe a sequence of application. The first step in growing food is to prepare some ground for seed by plowing. A person who is being persuaded by understanding will prepare the ground in a different manner than a person who is not being persuaded. Yoking implies some sort of partnership. The first step in applying an understanding is to partner with those who believe in applying understanding—who are willing to be persuaded.
The next phrase extends this contrast: “for what partnership have righteousness and lawlessness” (v.14). The word partnership is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘a close relation between partners, i.e. people sharing something held in common’. This confirms that ‘being yoked’ should be interpreted in terms of partnership. This would include marriage, because marriage is a form of close partnership, but it would also extend to include other forms of partnership. Going further, if 2 Corinthians 6 describes a future time in which Teacher understanding is being built upon people in Mercy thought, then being a partner with someone would go far beyond simply cooperating in some sort of business venture. Instead, one would be interacting with other individuals to build a new form of reality.
Righteousness describes behavior that is guided by Teacher understanding. Lawlessness, in contrast, means ‘without law’, and this is the only time that this word is used in 2 Corinthians. These are quite different, implying that a polarization has occurred and that the middle ground has disappeared. A similar sort of polarization exists within current society. On the one hand, deconstructionism preaches a post-truth doctrine of lawlessness, insisting that all apparent Teacher theories and Perceiver facts are merely personal opinions being amplified by emotional status. This goes beyond questioning some laws or proposing a new set of laws to insisting that the very concept of law does not exist. On the other hand, science and technology practice righteousness. This righteousness may be limited to actions that are consistent with the universal laws of nature, but it is a form of objective righteousness. The center ground of a common set of absolute truths or social conventions has become hollowed out, leading to a stark contrast between the lawlessness of postmodern thought and the righteousness of science and technology. I suggest that a similar but much greater dichotomy would emerge in the future.
Notice that both lawlessness and righteousness go beyond an objective focus upon rules and regulations. Lawlessness follows MMNs of personal desire free of any rules and regulations, while righteousness follows the TMN of a concept of God that encapsulates more specific rules and regulations. Saying this another way, neither are following the letter of the law. Lawlessness rejects the letter of the law, while righteousness follows the spirit of the law. Righteousness versus lawlessness goes beyond belief versus unbelief. Belief involves thinking and mindset, while righteousness and lawlessness describe behavior that is being motivated by thinking and mindset.
Verse 14 finishes by asking “what fellowship has light with darkness?” The word fellowship is the common word koinonia which means ‘what is shared in common as the basis of fellowship’. The word light means ‘light, a source of light, radiance’. The focus here is not upon some ‘sun’ of general understanding but rather upon the more basic concept of being open. This is contrasted with darkness, which means ‘darkness, either physical or moral’.
The contrast of ‘righteousness and lawlessness’ is connected in the Greek with the preposition ‘and’, implying that two kinds of mindsets are existing side-by-side. With light and darkness, the preposition changes to with, which does not really mean ‘with’ but actually means ‘motion towards to interface with’. Thus, a more literal translation would be ‘what fellowship light moving towards darkness’. The point is that light is invasive. Darkness is not an independent entity but rather the absence of light. Light by its very existence will displace darkness.
In other words, a distinction between righteousness and lawlessness will eventually lead to a deeper distinction between light and darkness, and the very existence of light will destroy any possibility of fellowship because light by its very nature moves toward darkness. One can see this happening today, because lawlessness used to be seen as a way of practicing an open lifestyle free of bondage to rules, while righteousness used to be viewed as a restrictive form of thinking. However, over the long-term lawlessness has turned into darkness; it is now difficult in many areas of lawlessness simply to determine the facts. Lawlessness begins by saying that rules do not exist, but this turns into an environment in which facts themselves do not exist. ‘All truth is fake’ turns into ‘all news is fake’, and when all news is fake, then there is no such thing as news. Instead all that remains is darkness. In contrast, righteousness compares one situation with another in order to determine ‘how things work’. This leads in the direction of light, because if one wishes to see how things work, then one must observe honestly and carefully. These two cannot co-exist, because darkness will feel threatened by the very existence of honest and careful thinking.
Verse 15 personalizes this distinction: “Or what harmony has Christ with Belial”. The word harmony is used once in noun form in the New Testament. The English word ‘symphony’ comes from this Greek word, and means ‘voicing the same opinion because like-minded’. This relates to the comparison made earlier between unison, harmony, and cacophony. With unison, everyone is singing exactly the same note. With Acacophony, everyone is singing their own tune and these tunes do not fit together. With harmony, people are singing different tunes, but these tunes fit together because they are similar. This illustrated by the various instruments of an orchestra when playing a symphony. Righteousness leads naturally to harmony, because righteousness is described in general terms, like the variables of some mathematical equation. The general processes of righteousness can be fulfilled in many different specific ways. Similarly, the mathematical equations of physics can also be applied to many different specific situations.
This concept of following general mathematical equations relates to the word Christ, because both emphasize abstract technical thought. A concept of incarnation emerges when abstract technical thought becomes integrated with concrete technical thought within the mind. Christ describes the abstract, divine side of incarnation. Similarly, the general mathematical equations of physics are interpreted by abstract technical thought.
Putting this all together, belief builds an understanding of God in Teacher thought, making righteousness possible. Righteousness acts in a way that is guided by this Teacher understanding. When righteousness is combined with light, then this adds many technical details to the righteousness, leading to a concept of Christ. Stepping ahead to verse 16, the end result is a temple of God—a system of general understanding in which God can live.
Christ is compared with Belial. This name is only used once in the New Testament, but it occurs several times in the Old Testament. It means ‘a worthless, lawless fellow’. Looking at this cognitively, in the same way that light expands righteousness to form the concept of Christ, so darkness expands lawlessness to lead to the Platonic form of Belial. One is no longer simply walking in darkness, but rather following the ideal of a worthless, lawless person. This may sound like a contradiction but it illustrates how Teacher thought functions. Teacher thought comes up with simple statements that apply to many situations. If a person consistently behaves in a lawless manner, then Teacher thought will come up with a general theory of lawlessness to explain this behavior. This general theory will then lead indirectly in Mercy thought to the Platonic form of ideal lawlessness. Logically speaking, this is a contradiction. But this ideal lawlessness will be portrayed in a positive manner as someone who honestly embraces all Mercy experiences, both good and evil. One can see this to some extent in the concept of Realpolitik. Compare this with the mindset of righteousness which follows the light of a universal Teacher understanding in order to avoid evil and pursue good in Mercy thought.
The preposition in the original Greek that is translated with, is again ‘motion towards’. In other words, Christ will naturally move towards Belial, because Christ is based upon a universal understanding of God in Teacher thought. Thus, Christ will morally analyze the behavior of Belial in order to gain a fuller understanding—so that evil can be avoided and good pursued with greater intelligence. This moral analysis will reveal the worthlessness of Belial, which means that Belial will feel condemned by the very existence of Christ.
Lawlessness and worthlessness are naturally connected, because one needs laws to determine worth: Laws are Perceiver facts that apply to personal situations in Mercy thought; personal worth is determined by using Perceiver facts to compare personal situations in Mercy thought. If there are no Perceiver facts, then the very concept of worth becomes meaningless, and if there is no worth then there is no reason to move from lesser worth to greater worth, because worth does not exist. For instance, why should a person go to school and get educated if all education is merely a matter of personal opinion? But if no one gets educated, then people will remain immature, childish, couch potatoes. Saying this bluntly, a post-truth mindset leads ultimately to a society of slobs and rednecks, who revel in their ignorance. I know that it is politically incorrect to make such a bald statement, but it illustrates what it feels like when Christ moves toward Belial. The very existence of Christ reveals Belial as lawlessness and worthlessness.
Verse 15 finishes by asking, “What part has a believer with an unbeliever?” (This is the literal translation given in a footnote.) The word part means ‘a part, portion’. The contrast here is between believer and unbeliever, similar to the contrast in the beginning of verse 14. Except here the word unbelief is merely the negative of the word belief. Both of these words refer to faithfulness based in persuasion. The preposition translated with here does not mean ‘towards’ but rather ‘with, in company with’. Thus, a more literal translation would be ‘What portion to a believer in company with an unbeliever?’ Putting this into the context, those who follow rational thought will eventually find themselves excluded from a society that is not willing to be persuaded.
This puts the instruction to ‘come out from their midst and be separate’ in a different light. Those who follow God are not deciding arbitrarily to turn their backs on the rest of society. Instead, they are being systematically excluded from playing any role within society, giving them no other option except to leave and form a new society.
But being excluded from existing society will open up a new relationship with God, which is described in verse 16: “What agreement has [the] temple of God with idols?” The noun agreement is used once in the New Testament, and means ‘to deposit together, hence to agree with’. It is also used once as a verb in Luke 23:51 which says that Joseph of Arimathea was a member of the Sanhedrin who had not ‘agreed’ to their plan to crucify Jesus.
On the one side is ‘a temple of God’ (‘the’ is not in the original Greek). The word temple refers to ‘that part of the temple where God himself resides’. This word is only used twice in 2 Corinthians, both times in this verse. On the other side, the word idol means ‘an image, i.e. for worship’, and this is the only time that this word is used in 2 Corinthians. Cognitively speaking, an idol is a core MMN based upon some physical object or experience. The preposition with is the same as the previous phrase which means ‘with, in company with’. Therefore, a more literal rendition would be ‘What agreement a temple of God in company with idols?’ In other words, a temple of God cannot be part of a consensus in an environment of idols. Instead, a temple of God will be excluded from any consensus by a society of idols because people will think that the temple is using the ‘wrong’ kind of thinking. And the religious language of ‘temple’ and ‘idols’ indicates that this exclusion will be stated using moral language; a temple of God will be rejected by an idolatrous society as morally wrong. For instance, the reference to ‘slobs and rednecks’ in a previous paragraph may have sounded offensive, but much stronger language will be used the other way by idolatrous society to condemn followers of God.
In the previous phrase, the conflict was at the level of thinking. Rational thought was being excluded from an environment that did not believe in being persuaded. In this phrase, the conflict is at the level of a concept of God and morality. Those who follow God are being organizationally and legislatively excluded from an environment of idolatry.
For instance, in 2018, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that Trinity Western University would not be allowed to open a school of Law. The official reason given was that it is “it is proportionate and reasonable to limit religious rights in order to ensure open access for LGBT students”. That is because TWU students must sign a “mandatory covenant [that] binds students to a strict code of conduct that includes abstinence from sex outside of heterosexual marriage. The majority judgment said the covenant would deter LGBT students from attending the proposed law school, and those who did attend would be at risk of significant harm.” In other words, the very existence of a Christian school of Law threatens potential students who are mentally driven by MMNs of sexual preference. Since then, TWU has dropped the mandatory covenant, but I do not know if this will make any difference. I suspect that it will not. Even though this conflict is happening officially within a court of law over a school of law, the underlying struggle does not involve law. Instead, those who follow Christianity are being legislatively excluded from an environment of idolatry. LGBT qualifies as idolatry because core MMNs are being defined by the physical experiences of sex. (Mental symmetry suggests that a distinction can be made between male and female thought, and that this internal interaction is more fundamental than any physical relationship between male and female bodies.)
This example of a Christian law school versus the LGBT community is fairly blatant. In most cases, the contrast today between a temple of God and idolatry tends to be somewhat blurred. That is because today’s temple of God usually contains some elements of absolute truth, which is ultimately based in idolizing the words of some holy book. Similarly, today’s idolatry of building core MMNs upon physical experiences is often accompanied by the empirical scientific thought of building rational TMNs upon physical experiences. In a future society, absolute truth would be replaced with spiritual power, while we saw a few verses earlier that the spread of spiritual technology would lead to the end of empirical evidence. This would lead to a stark contrast between ‘a temple of God’ and ‘idols’.
The next phrase describes the consciousness of a new society emerging: “For we are [the] temple of [the] living God.” (‘The’ is not in the original Greek.) This is the second time that the phrase ‘living God’ has been used in 2 Corinthians. (The first time was in 3:3 which talked about the Spirit of the living God.) Cognitively speaking, something becomes alive when it turns into a mental network. So far, chapter 6 has been a contrast between believers and unbelievers, similar to the state of Cold War that existed between America and the Soviet Union after WWII. People have been regarding belief as the opposite of unbelief. In verse 16 a new consciousness emerges of being a temple of God, because the abstract reference to ‘a temple of God’ is followed by the subjective realization that ‘we are a temple of God’. This realization is emphasized by the order of the words in the Greek which places ‘living’ at the end of the phrase: ‘for we are a temple of God—living’.
This is a significant conclusion because it comes at the end of a long process of rebuilding a Teacher concept of God upon people in Mercy thought. When Teacher thought redefines generality, then this means rebuilding general Teacher understanding from the ground up. For instance, the theory of mental symmetry has been used to reformulate Christian theology from a Teacher theory based in the absolute truth of the Bible to a Teacher theory based in mental wholeness. I thought that this reformulation was finished when the core doctrines of Christianity could be explained cognitively. But that is not enough. Instead, one then has to go through the New Testament verse by verse in the original Greek in order to eliminate all of the assumptions that are based in absolute truth. Only now, after having gone through about 40% of the New Testament, is a new comprehensive concept of God and Christianity finally starting to become truly alive within my mind. Thomas Kuhn mentions something similar, saying that all the textbooks have to be rewritten when there is a scientific paradigm shift. This rethinking of all the details is the final stage of a paradigm shift. Similarly, in many countries today the paradigm shift of post-Christianity has reached this final stage of eliminating all remaining traces of Christian thought.
Mental networks naturally form an emotional hierarchy with core mental networks imposing their structure on lesser mental networks. A mental network becomes truly alive when it is able to express itself freely without being restricted by other mental networks. Rethinking all of the details is a major aspect of giving life to the TMN of some new paradigm or concept of God. Before this is done, the new Teacher theory has to express itself cautiously in order to avoid being limited by some Perceiver fact related to the old paradigm or concept of God. For instance, this happens when there is a political revolution, because the new regime will usually walk softly until it has had a chance to consolidate power by removing all vestiges of the old regime.
Similarly, I no longer fear that I will encounter a Christian doctrine that violates a cognitive interpretation of Christianity, because I have now examined most of the verses in the New Testament upon which these major doctrines are based. (While I have not gone through the entire New Testament in detail, I have focused on the books and passages that are most difficult to understand, as well as looking at a more general level at most of the rest of the New Testament.)
I should also emphasize—and I hope that this has become clear by now in this essay—that I am not teaching a new form of Christianity. However, there are two exceptions: The first involves mysticism. I think that it is possible for finite humans to gain an adequate comprehension of the fundamental characteristics of the nature of God. Not complete, but adequate and ever-growing. The second involves prophecy. I think that the evangelical Christian concept of a rapture followed by God pummeling the earth in a tribulation is flawed. In both cases, I have tried to support my suggestions with extensive cognitive and biblical analysis. Thus, the doctrinal shift that I am suggesting could be compared to the shift from Newtonian physics to Einsteinian physics. Even though Newtonian physics has been superseded by the theories of Einstein, it is still taught in school as being approximately correct. And as long as one is dealing with the experiences of normal life, it gives answers that are close enough. Einsteinian physics is needed when dealing with very fast velocities or very heavy masses (and quantum mechanics is needed when dealing with very small objects). Similarly, classic Christian doctrine is close enough when living normal life. But something more accurate is needed when dealing with extreme situations.
Returning to verse 16, the attention now turns to God talking: “just as the God said” (Here there is a ‘the’ which the NASB does not include which I have added.) The word just as means ‘according to the manner in which’, which indicates that one thing is similar to another. A new concept of a God has been reconstructed upon a foundation of people in Mercy thought. There is now a realization that this concept of a God is the same as the concept of God that comes from Teacher thought. This may sound like quibbling, but I know from personal experience that it is a huge cognitive leap to suggest that a concept of God that forms from following mental symmetry is the same as the concept of God being described in Christianity. One has to compare many details and look at the Bible in considerable detail before being willing to venture such a statement. In my case, I can now state with considerable certainty that the concept of God that comes from mental symmetry is significantly more biblical than the concept of God being taught in most seminaries.
A New Intimate Relationship between God and Humanity 6:16-18
I suggested earlier that chapter 6 is describing a new form of intimate relationship between God in Teacher thought and people in Mercy thought. This is explicitly described at the end of chapter 6. Verse 16 begins with God saying, “I will dwell in them and walk among them”. The word translated dwell is an intensified version of ‘make a home’ which means ‘to inhabit as one’s personal residence’. It is only used once in 2 Corinthians. This ‘inhabiting’ is described as being ‘in the realm of them’. The word translated walk among them is only used once in the New Testament and means ‘to walk about in or among’. Saying this cognitively, Teacher thought is finding order-within-complexity in the realm of people, and Teacher thought is functioning within this realm of people. This clearly emphasizes a new relationship between God in Teacher thought and people in Mercy thought.
The next phrase specifically describes this new relationship as God building Teacher thought out of a group of people in Mercy thought: “And I will be their God, and they shall be my people.” The word people, which means ‘a people’ is quite common in the New Testament but this is the only time it is used in 2 Corinthians.
So many groups have claimed over the millennia to be ‘the people of God’ that this phrase has lost all meaning. But notice that this passage begins with ‘just as God said’. Some group of people is not claiming to be ‘the people of God’. Instead, God is saying that some people will be the people of God. The initiative is coming from God in Teacher thought rather than from people in Mercy thought.
Looking at this cognitively, one can become ‘the people of God’ either by bringing God down to the level of human tribalism or by bringing people up to the level of divine order-within-complexity. Looking at the first option of bringing God down to the level of tribalism, the Jews claim to be the people of God, and the Bible backs up this claim. But for the average Jew this is interpreted to mean that God will protect Jewish culture and Jewish tribalism. This makes God in Teacher thought the servant of Jewish tribal MMNs in Mercy thought. Christian groups have often exhibited a similar mindset.
A striking illustration can be found in the belt buckles used by many German soldiers in World War I. Written on the belt buckle was the phrase ‘Gott mit uns’, which means ‘God with us’. The most blatant example of this German ownership of God can be seen in the coat of arms which Prussia adopted in 1933 which portrayed a militaristic eagle emblazoned with a swastika on its chest underneath a banner that read ‘Gott mit uns’. Of course, the Germans are not the only ethnic or religious group to claim to be the people of God. Most world powers have done so over the millennia. For instance, one can see this same kind of ownership of God in the bumper sticker or T-shirt that reads ‘pro-life, pro-God, pro-gun, American’. (One would think that pro-life is the opposite of pro-gun, but when Teacher thought becomes the servant of tribal MMNs, then logical contradictions become the norm.)
The other option is to bring people up to the level of divine order-within-complexity. Looking again at the Jews as an example, one can see that God has used the Jewish people throughout history to bring many cognitive and social advances to human society. For instance, during the Middle Ages the Jews acted as ‘a light to the nations’ by being invited into countries in order to jump-start the economy and then being booted out once this task had been accomplished. This was not pleasant for the Jews as a tribe. Instead, God allowed the Jewish tribe to be treated terribly by others in order to bring the Jewish tribe cognitively up to the divine level of order-within-complexity. Saying this simply, if one really is the people of God, then this is both a promise and a threat. One will either further the plan of God willingly and intelligently, or else painfully and implicitly.
The beginning of 2 Corinthians 6 can be interpreted as God bringing a group of believers up to the level of functioning at the divine level of Teacher order-within-complexity. This group of people then becomes the people of God in the sense of providing structure for existence, similar to the way that the universal laws of physics now provide structure for existence. One can see a partial illustration of how this would work in the current naming practice used in physics. Most equations, laws of physics, and units of measurement in physics are named after the person who first discovered this principle. For instance, there are Newton’s law of motion, Newtons of force, Pascals of pressure, Bernoulli’s equation of fluid flow, the Heisenberg uncertainty principle, and so on. In the case of physics, these names only indicate the people who discovered these laws. (And I suggest that this practice of naming laws after physicists violates the so-called Copernican principle.) Chapter 6 seems to be describing a future society in which God will actually base universal laws upon people who reach the cognitive and spiritual level of embodying these laws. I suggest that this is what it would ultimately mean to bring a group of believers up to the level of functioning at God’s level of Teacher thought. I know that this interpretation has many implications, but I suggest that most of these implications can be analyzed by asking two simple questions: 1) How does God think and how do humans think? 2) Is God being brought down to the level of human thought or are humans being brought up to the level of divine thought?
Verse 17 describes humans being brought up to the level of divine thought. The first step is to leave the human realm of tribal and childish MMNs: “‘Therefore, come out from their midst and be separate,’ says the Lord.” As I mentioned earlier, this verse and Revelation 18:4 are the only two verses in the New Testament that specifically instruct a group of people to come out of society. However, this coming out is not the kind of ‘coming out’ that one typically sees when some group of people claim to be the people of God.
First, verse 17 begins with a therefore. This means that the starting point is verse 16. God is deciding to choose some people and the people are then responding by coming out. Saying this cognitively, the primary motivation comes from being attracted to God in Teacher thought and not from being repulsed by other people in Mercy thought. The goal is not to be different than others but rather to follow God.
Second, this coming out is ‘from their midst’. Thus, people are not separating themselves from society in the hope of being chosen by God. Instead, they are living within the midst of society until being called out by God. This is significant because separating myself from others will emphasize MMNs of culture and tribalism, while living within the midst of society will emphasize TMNs of general understanding.
Third, this coming out is prompted by technical thought. The Lord is saying to people to come out. This title Lord was last used in 5:11. Paul consistently uses the title Lord to refer to Christ and not to God. The implication is that a new form of technical thought is emerging based upon this new form of relationship between God in Teacher thought and people in Mercy thought. This is a significant point which needs some explaining. In the current universe the progression is from technical thought to mental networks. Science and technology use technical thought to analyze and control the physical universe. Western civilization is currently facing the challenge of extending this technical thought to include the emotional realms of personal identity and a concept of God. If God were to rebuild Teacher thought upon people in Mercy thought, then the order would be reversed. The starting point would be mental networks and the challenge would be to extend this to technical thought. Making this transition would not be trivial. For instance, if one examines current practices of magick from a cognitive perspective, one sees that technical thinking is being almost overwhelmed by a heavy emphasis upon mental networks.
The key principle, I suggest, is the relationship between Teacher thought and Mercy thought. For instance, Wikipedia explains that “Crowley defined Magick as ‘the science and art of causing change to occur in conformity with will.” In other words, I assert my will and God submits to me. This attitude of me imposing my will upon God and others is clearly illustrated by the life of Crowley. In contrast, chapter 6 is describing a process of God exerting his will and inviting humans to be part of the divine will.
Fourth, the word be separate means ‘to mark off by boundaries from, set apart’. This is a Perceiver definition and not a Mercy attitude. People are not building walls to separate themselves from others because they feel that they are superior to others. Instead, people are recognizing that they have become different than others. Saying this more personally, there are many areas in which others know more than I do, have better skills than I do, and are more mature than I am. Anyone who attempts to do interdisciplinary research will become repeatedly aware of such personal inadequacies. In order to become an expert in today’s world, one must specialize. If one wishes to compare many fields, then one has to be satisfied with being barely competent in each field, which generally means being looked down upon by the real experts. Thus, I cannot regard myself as ‘better than others’. But I have come to the conclusion that I am different than others. The way that I think and behave is different than the way that other people think and behave. In order to interact with others in a meaningful manner, I have to translate my thinking into a form that is comprehensible to others. Being separate recognizes this difference. It gives up trying to be ‘like the others’ and accepts that following God will make one different than the average individual.
Verse 17 continues, “and do not touch what is unclean”. The word touch means ‘to modify or change by touching’. Unclean means ‘not pure because mixed’. Looking at this cognitively, we saw in verse 6 that Teacher thought wants purity. Something is pure when it is entirely the same thing without exception. This purity makes it possible to be summarized by a simple statement in Teacher thought. Impurity is complicated; it cannot be described by simple statements in Teacher thought. Restating this phrase more simply, do not go out and try to change people and groups that have mixed motives. That is because interacting with such groups will bring the pure down to the level of the impure. This instruction is hard to follow because the desire to fix others is very strong.
This negative command is followed by a positive command: “and I will welcome you”. This word welcome is an intensified form that is only used once in the New Testament, which means ‘to receive or welcome in a personal, heartfelt way’. In other words, the goal of not touching impurity is not to be holier-than-thou in Mercy thought but rather to become emotionally acceptable to God in Teacher thought. God wants purity. Purity does not mean stupidity, naivety, or obsession. Rather, it means that everything within the mind is pointing in the same direction; it means that one is the same kind of person in all situations and in all contexts.
This new relationship is described in verse 18: “and I will be a father to you, and you shall be sons and daughters to me.” The original Greek uses the preposition for twice. This is not included in the English translation because it is not grammatically correct. This preposition means ‘motion into which, implying penetration to a particular purpose or result’. More literally, the Greek says ‘I will be to you for a father, and you will be to me for sons and daughters’. In other words, the goal of being welcomed by God is not just to have a warm, fuzzy, religious feelings but rather to enter into a new kind of family relationship with God.
This idea of being part of the family of God is claimed so often that, like the phrase ‘people of God’, it has lost all meaning. But I suggest that one again needs to distinguish between bringing God down to human concepts of family or bringing people up to God’s concept of a family. In this case, people are being brought up to God’s standard because God being ‘for a father’ is preceded by people submitting to God’s standard of purity.
Going further, this is the only time in 2 Corinthians that daughter is mentioned. I do not think that this is because God is a male chauvinist, because the word translated ‘man’ is actually a generic word that means humankind, both male and female. Instead, the explicit mention of both sons and daughters tells us that when God builds Teacher order upon people, then both male and female thought are required. Male thought emphasizes technical thought while female thought focuses upon mental networks.
I mentioned earlier that today’s technological society naturally emphasizes technical thought while downplaying mental networks. Using the language of gender, academia thinks that male thought is superior to female thought. In response, women’s studies try to reinterpret everything using exclusively the female language of mental networks. God, in contrast, wants both male technical thought and female mental networks to function together in an integrated manner. He wants both sons and daughters. In a scientific society, the challenge is to add female thought to male thought, because one must use male technical thought to decipher the physical universe. In the future society of 2 Corinthians 6, the challenge would be to add male thought to female thought, because the starting point for physical existence would be mental networks rather than technical thought.
Verse 18 finishes with “says the Lord Almighty”. The word almighty means ‘unrestricted power exercising absolute dominion’. It is used nine times in the book of Revelation, and only once in the rest of the New Testament, here in verse 18. This statement of exercising absolute dominion is combined with the title ‘Lord’. This gives the strong impression that God is using divine power to create a new order of existence in Teacher thought based upon a family of ‘sons and daughters’. This goes far beyond some immature Christian believer claiming to be part of the ‘family of God’. It is true that one becomes transferred into the kingdom of God when becoming a Christian, which could be compared to becoming enrolled in God’s school of character development. But what is being described here is not just enrolling in God’s school, or even God establishing a school, but rather God instituting a new order of existence.
Prophecy Summary
Those who write about biblical prophecy tend to focus upon timelines and numbers, indicating the use of technical thought. However, technical thought, by its very nature, is limited to some limited ‘game’ with its rules, measuring standards, and restricted playing field. God, in contrast, seems to function at the more fundamental level of mental networks, playing paradigms and cultural mental networks against another in order to shape the course of history.
This means that one cannot summarize God’s entire plan of history with a single timeline. And it also means that one cannot come up with a single timeline that totally correlates the prophetic sequences that are found in the various books of the New Testament. This does not mean that correlation is not possible. There is definitely a single timeline when looking at events that affect everyone. And the following table attempts to correlate the sequence described in the book of Revelation with the first six chapters of 2 Corinthians.
This type of correlation becomes more difficult when the text focuses upon what is happening within some specific group of people, because one then has to determine whether this group is leading the way for the rest of society or responding passively to something which is being developed by some other group. That describes the situation with the second half of 2 Corinthians.
A similar principle applies when analyzing history. For instance, one can definitely talk about an Industrial Revolution. But when exactly did this revolution take place? It began in England but then spread to Europe, America, and eventually the rest of the world. Thus, if one focuses upon the development of the Industrial Revolution in Britain with its emphasis upon individual progress, then the timeline would be slightly different than the course of events in France with its more centralized system of research and development.
|
2 Corinthians |
Revelation |
|
1:4 Tribulation |
7:14 Great Tribulation |
|
1:8 Despair in Asia |
8:3 Seven Trumpets |
|
1:15 Moving from absolute to universal truth |
10:1 Angel and the little book |
|
2:14 Theoretical return of Jesus |
11:15 Kingdom of God and Christ |
|
3:1 Extending spiritual technology |
12:1 War in heaven and Satan thrown down |
|
4:1 Kingdom of the beast |
13:1 Kingdom of the beast |
|
5:1 Empowering mortal bodies |
14:1-5 Followers of the lamb |
|
5:17 Cosmic watershed to mind-over-matter |
14:6-13 Three angels |
|
6:1 Short period of grace |
15:1 Sea of glass |
|
6:4 Period of testing |
16:1 Bowls of wrath |
|
6:17 Coming out to a new society |
18:4 Come out from Babylon |
The rest of the essay is in another file: