Preferred Perception

to create reality is life's purpose – lessons from Nowheim

I Am That I Am

 

That was allegedly the answer when Moses asked for God’s name. At least that’s how the Hebrew phrase has been translated. I don’t really need a name for god. Understanding god as the creator of everything, I might just as well call him “source”. But that makes it sound like there is a separation between creator and creation, like when a manufacturer ships his product out. Most people will probably agree that the creator is omniscient and omnipotent. To also be omnipresent, he has to be the creator as well as the creation. He has to be an expression of himself to be all that is.

“I am that I am” almost sounds like an evasive answer. It may mean something different to everybody. But I’d like to interpret it as all including, non-fractured, absolute: all that is. I have also seen the translation “I will be what I will be”. It obviously already is what it is, and it will be what it becomes, implying that it evolves and expands. Does that mean it was not yesterday what it is today? Mustn’t all that is include all possibilities whether they have manifested or not? I don’t know, but it’s fun to speculate.

Wait a minute. What, then, are we?

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.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