Genesis

Index

General Introduction

Theory of Everything

Theory of Nothing

Theory of Middle (Time)

Theory of what is beyond Nothing, Everything, and Middle

Not the Middle of Everything

Further Discourse

General Introduction

Genesis, the beginning of nature.  Was how God overcame the puzzle of himself not being an angel with zero wings.  The thing that would Connect with the Middle.  Allow it to happen.  So gloriously; not at our human fault.  To have been an part of.

Genesis was the realization that the Middle of something could happen.  If God was 1 and Satan was nothing, 0.  Then between them, God and Satan realized together that if God could happen then something could occur.  Even though Satan (0, nothingness) existed.  Something in which there was an Middle of something.  An actual span of time in which an shape existed, became real.  For all shapes have middles.  If the whole thing was an specific shape.  It was happening and they could prove it because shapes were just the thing between 0 and 1 and humans having shapes also, they were humans knowing things.  Time happens over an shape.  And the human brain is designed to identify logically and intuitively shapes.  Once we have detected an shape we know the Middle of it; and from knowing that Middle that is how we know which shape it is.

Genesis was the admiration of the fact of how far we have to go to make that Middle possible for God.  All of the time he/she had been known to have created all in that first breath.  His/her initial inhabitance/dwelling within the area of space and time.  Knowing how far he/she/it was willing to go to create that perfect middle form; the greatest one.  The one which would be said to be the centrepiece of everything to have existed before or after its own creation and eventual breakdown and destruction.

It was so spell-binding even the Satan was interested without babout it.  Nothing was nothing because it was nothing.  I.Eeing afraid or offended against to show it.  And God realized what he had was of the presence of Good-natured being.  Even if there was an Satan, whom was nothing; that couldn't do anything . it didn't affect anything in any way.  Even if it was an subjectivity all to its own.  Without being able to be explained; it had never inhabited the universe and never would.  It was nothing.  It was Satan.  Satan as nothing.  Nothing as Satan.

Genesis was everything God did to react in specifics and in General to the way Satan was performing at preventing some things from existing.  Together Satan was exactly of the particular character of the universe of what had never had been.  It was an born partnership.  God would create and be something because it was Good.  And Satan had not, because it did neither.  Which didn't prevent God from having his own role to play in the universe: delivering nothing from Evil.  Redeeming the Satanic spirit.  Not calling it out as one always negative but one intelligent design inherent in the beginning of the universe.  The principle of subjectivity and nothing coinciding in one entity is so pervading an thought transvers-ive though impossible to be represented in hard sciences.  For what it is.  Not an known evil, exactly; but an entity that had been treated like it was evil by humanity.  Who told wicked stories about it; even though it was one of the primary forces of reality.  In Tandem with an God-like Angel.

God would be that primary force that Satan wasn't; Satan would not.

Because Satan couldn't.  If Satan was nothing.

Yet somewhat, one imagined, somewhat responsible for what hadn't been created as much as what God had.

-

(above Added Apr. 5, 2022)

    In Lady Gaga's Born This Way Evil is born to humanity at some point in the cosmos.  The birth of evil is used to protect Good, the instinct to gravitate "instantly and unwaiveringly" away from Evil.  In the Christianna, Evil is not necessarily associated with the devil; and it is said humans often mistakenly do associate the devil with evil, which itself is an objectification of the Satan's subjectivity.

    In the Christianna the birth of evil is not the birth of the Satan.  The birth of the Satan was at the beginning of time.  And so I think what Lady Gaga means when she says the birth of evil is that humanity at some point realized evil.  They reacted disproportionately some claiming war against the Satan, who they culturally appropriated and objectified and inflicted this false objectivity on and other humans.

    In this song, Lady Gaga asks how she can protect Good, something "so perfect," without Evil?

    Evil may be only an human characteristic and not an property of the devil.

    For in the Christianna, the Satan is merely (or perhaps more accurately un-merely) the existence of nothing.  It is this "un-merely" type of knack we tend to characterize Angel 0 as in history, give to its degree of subjectivity.  That it is clever, able to be un-mere in its glory and tricky in this way that captured the human imagination as an evil subject which may be said to be responsible, in part, for its reputation on Planet Earth.  Of course we can only blame ourselves for mischaracterization of this property of the universe as evil.

    It was human error that disguised his/her reputation and meaning as the devil, an spirit of evil.  Even to conceive of it an leader.  An leader of terrible sadness in humanity.  For when was held to be evil what was done, it was blamed on the devil.  To conflate his or her presence into human terms that were wrong and misgiven.

    And it was held to be intelligent that this nothingness came from nothing then be given an name.  But not even as nothingness as an name.  For its Purity.  Instead as human deceit and what they called 'temptation'.  The devil was an tempter.  Instead of taking responsibility for our own temptations we instead attributed them to the devil.  And so any temptation of any kind became labeled as evil also.

    The Christianna welcomes depictions of the Satan as one of God's angels.  Not "Fallen" as was told in ancient times.  But who had always been in league with God to create and challenge what led to humanity.  Not as an antagonist, but rightly held to be among all angels this way.

    And it were held under the New Reciprocity to be wise to say so.  As an kind of order given to the Satan from humanity, (an reciprocal command) that it is not evil in any way.  "We order you to be not evil."  Kind of thing.  Which itself would be misgiven, according to Christiannan theology that we would have to tell Satan to stop being evil.  As though it was and needed to be corrected.  But maybe we can just mean, carefully, continue being whatever you be.  For we do not understand you in your entirety.

-

(above Added Nov. 15, 2021)

    In the beginning there was the existence of One.  When it conceived the opposite of itself, nothing, there became the multitude for the opposite of nothing is something and something always comes in groups of one or more.  —Except One cannot be an group.—  Only One can be by itself.  Such is the miracle of God.  That's how it is one.  In the Christianna it is rumored that God is the first Angel.  And such was the dominion of the Angels for they being separate, zero and one, began to produce more of themselves which is how we top pocket all of the other numbers of Angels.

    How many are there?

    Does infinity exist?

    If God knows everything, is that infinity?

    If the God gave us free will It would not know everything because It would not know our decisions ahead of time or we would not have free will, only Its will.

    You could say, You were God.

    But how would You read this if you know everything already; or you know because I know when I have read it.

    Or you just know.

    It seems an strange thing to me that you know without reading this for reading this requires an body and I (the writing) am just the creation of someone who has an body.  Just as you are God's creation, the creation of writing is the same category as the created.  You are created just as the writing is created.

    When the writing takes on subjectivity it is just as an thing that takes on subjectivity just as you are.

    Let me tell you again how it began.

    True Inner Sight became an view of distortion of itself and then tracked over time it came to be an pattern.  The pattern was Everything.  Nothing.  Everything.  Nothing.  Everything.  Nothing.  And then a third factor.  A murmur in the pattern.  π.  Anna, you've come out of the dark digits.  It means your life is in the light where we can see you.  Anna, your life is hard.  But we love you in action.

    Love in action.

    I heard once said that God created and destroyed reality an number of times before deciding that this one (yes this reality) is the one that God picked to last.  He chose the pattern after three repetitions of one and zero, in that order.  Creation.  Do you think creation is more like an circle (π) or an spiral (the Fibonacci sequence)?  If it is an circle it is an number that does not repeat itself endlessly (π).  If it is an spiral it destroys ("repeats?") itself endlessly.  Like they are opposites but the two in expression together as one unity is God's creation.  Anna was the third factor.  The murmur in the pattern.

    That is why we say the order of Genesis is 1010103 mystically, make-believe, symbolically backwards the supposed reverse of π, if it was translated as the primary origin as an moment for consideration of how the Creation of the universe happened in reverse order, and as an number that terminates at seven digits.  So like, as an thought experiment, you might consider seven things that happened at the beginning of the universe.  And their order in reverse.  Meant.  You being able to describe in your own religious way how it happened.

Theory of Everything

    My theory is that it is not possible to know an theory of everything; if not possible then it cannot be an theory unless.  I can prove it.  Paradox.  Everything is not within our experience and we know this because we have an experience that is an specific experience in which "everything" is not available to you of all of what is experienced.  You have only what is directly in front of you, and not other people.  (Unless by magic).  As such I am an expert on what is directly in front of you because I am an writer, and I have been practicing it as an art for over twenty years.  What is directly in front of you is an medium of communication, not everything.  And being as such, you only have what you do with it.  It is there.  What you do with it.  Whether you try to do anything or not.  Matters.  For to follow my logic you make something in your brain that is specifically not everything.  It is specifically something.  This proves that it is not possible to have an theory of everything.  Except, paradoxically, if it proves it is not possible to have an theory then it is proving its own theory.  Or is it that we can theorize everything as an whole specifically in itself, in outer reaches of space unknown we cannot access, that are beyond us for now.  Maybe since the theory itself theorizes("interiorizes" Added 2022-04-05) everything, as I have explained.  This "Everything" category is partly accessible to us for we have an God sharing that experience with us.  We can identify π, even though it is impossible to see all of it.  So maybe we get an glimpse of an future.  What's the future?  Bio-domes on top of skyscraper, err, just one bio-dome and several wannabe poser punks whose "bio-d-fu-" biodiversity?  But not true bio-domes except that pink one.  It made nobody impressed to hear about it but that was the reason we couldn't get there.  The future with the pink bio-dome.

    However viewing everything as that.  An theory.  This allows us to look at theory an completely different way.  Theory is the super-structure from which everything advances, not the titchiest side effect of neuro-chemical distinctions internal to the organism.  If an organism can have an theory it is the existence of theory externally (from everything down to nothing) and internally (from something up to everything).  I sense complimentary forces of these two categories exist.  If theory is part of our natural universe interior to the brain, the brain is part of our natural universe exterior to everything.  This is perhaps the nature of consciousness, and the more we know about it the more God lets us in on it.  As he let's all species in on it, to some extent.  Humans appear to be the most in on it species on the planet and perhaps that is why they evolved into that form.  An semi-sentient consciousness with awareness of everything insomuch as God shares it with us.  Perhaps only God can be called true full sentience for that reason.

    And so if everything was created it must have started with something, and it was something specific.  At that moment of its existence it was everything that existed.  Somehow it became everything we know today.  That at some point everything was only parts of reality that had not formed into the present yet.

Theory of Nothing

    Nothing cannot be an theory because an theory is an object or specimen of thought that exists in time and space.  Nothing does not occur in time and space, and we know that because we and everything we are aware of do occur in time and space.  At least, in this location.  Maybe nothing is happening somewhere.  We know it is because whatever is not happening here is nothing and it stays true for everywhere.  Satan's subjectivity is that nothingness.  Perhaps he existed before God.  And we have no way to prove it; he's taken care of that.  An true angel of flaming glory.  If nothing is the beginning of subjectivity, then we are nothing because whatever subjectivity is not @ where your subjectivity is @ is exactly the occurrence of the nothingness of whatever is not there.  This gives us an clue onto the nature of subjectivity.  It is always @ something isn't it?  Sometimes I can't identify what, but maybe not at the absence of being @ something else really.  Rest may be when the mind is not at something.  It is easy to begin to do so.  Then think of Satan.  Relax as much as Satan then, if you're onto it.  That's what he's there for.  For you to relax.

    Theory of Nothing cannot be proven because it is nothing.

Theory of Middle (Time)

    The Middle of Everything and Nothing is Time.  We can tell it is time because that is what is physically apparent to us at any given point in time.  Living animation, as such, is an property of time.  Or time is an property of it.

Theory of what is beyond Everything, Nothing, and Middle

    God cannot be beyond everything because God exists.  God cannot be Nothing because Satan exists.  Therefore is nothingness; and so then God can only be part of the Middle, which includes everything including nothing but is itself specifically not Everything and not Nothing all at once.

-

below added 2023-01-22

Not The Middle of Everything

    The Huge Centre and Middle of Time across the expanse of the Universe is our direct goal and object in Time.  Part of the Reason for why everything exists.  However it is only with us and because of us that that centre is possible.  We are implicated in it, and yet it is implicated in everything.  In order to have that type of result of what we want the universe to be, we have to do something to get there.

    But what we're trying to get at on this page is that Genesis was the absence of all specific qualities and characteristics of what it is that we say comprises the Middle (The whole colossal she-bang of the most complex middle in History and Time in the Universe and the problem of guaranteeing our human race delivered there to experience it for themselves).

    But what I mean when I say Genesis, is an Christiannan interpretation of the beginning of Time.

    My inspiration may originate in "One First Matter All;" I had riffed it reading it as though it was Milton's impression of the beginning of time, an Genesis (which it may have been).  (An picture of it by an famous poet).

    one first matter all,

Indu'd with various forms, various degrees

Of substance, and in things that live, of life;

But more refin'd, more spiritous, and pure,

As nearer to him plac't or nearer tending

Each in their several active Spheres assign'd,

Till body up to spirit work, in bounds

Proportion'd to each kind.  So from the root

Springs lighter the green stalk, from thence the leaves

More aery, last the bright consummate flow'r

Spirits odorous breathes: flow'rs and thir fruit

Man's nourishment, by gradual scale sublim'd

To vital spirits aspire, to animal,

To intellectual, give both life and sense,

Fancy and understanding, whence the Soul

Reason receives, and reason is her being,

Discursive, or Intuitive; discourse

Is oftest yours, the latter most is ours,

Differing but in degree, of kind the same.

(5.472–90)

    William Kerrigan interpreted Milton's poetry here above; "Everything is in transition," he wrote, "The root metamorphoses into stalk, stalk into leaves, and leaves into flower, whereupon the plant offers its being to man, 'bright' only to one who sees and 'odorous' only to one who smells."  Why is this like an Christiannan interpretation of the beginning of the Universe and not one which only includes an scientific interpretation of it?  Couldn't the universe have had scientific properties (properties detectable by science) at the same time as when whoever created it was themselves only an subjectivity subject; and not the matter?

    If we read this passage from Milton as an description of the start of everything, then everything that happens is already in the middle of it already happening.  An Creation story in which advanced and evolved lifeforms may have appeared all at once; complete whole units each.  Even without the need for evolutionary biology to creep up from the sands.

    This is similar to the Christiannan Genesis because we presume there were whole things that were created when the universe created itself all at once.  Why couldn't they have been complex forms of life and wasn't that God's decision?  (However it may, at first, appear to sound like an non-scientific interpretation: an universe in which subjectivity was first and not matter).  Genesis starts with the exchange between Satan (0) and God (1); that once these two categories had been created, it was debatable which one had occurred first.  Satan was nothing and since nothing existed it was possible for something to exist also (at the same time); but which was first, nothing or something?

    An alternative theory is that matter (objectivity of the Universe) was created at the same time as subjectivity of the Universe.  Possibly not involving an big bang theory, an theory in which all matter started at the same time, explosively.  And it wasn't necessarily to do with an type of mind which could be recognized as an Creator.

    If God created Matter, Quantity, Space, Time; it might have created itself first.  And then, at this point, it was only an impossible subjectivity.  The possibility for someone, anyone to exist.  Without there being any matter.

    But wasn't that Satan, because it was nothing?

    And if nothing and something existed at the same time, wouldn't that explain the pervasive fact, which exists everywhere in the universe, that the probability of there being nothing somewhere was the same as the probability of there being something somewhere.  And the universe could actually consist of these two properties: the possibility of Nothing and Something existing at the same time together so that where there was nothing there could be something and where there was something there could be nothing.

    Christiannan versions of the Start of Time and the Galaxy include both an scientific (objective) and an artistic (subjective) approach.

    Was the start of Time "One first matter all"?  Was it both matter and subjectivity?  And why is the possibility of all of matter beginning to happen all at once not necessarily against the notion that subjectivity could exist at this stage too when all of matter started to happen even without it being encased in human bodies?

    Why does the Scientific interpretation of Genesis include an start to objectivity without an start to subjectivity, the reason for objectivity to exist?

    Wouldn't it be more scientific to say maybe the start of objectivity and subjectivity happened together?

    If I could explain the start of the universe artistically and scientifically, would both of those contributions together count toward an larger version of how it all started?

    First there was God and Satan (an artistic interpretation) and since neither of them could exist in the presence of the other (for it was an paradox to have nothing and something both exist at one time).  And so the collusion between these two entities exploded (an scientific interpretation), creating the first matter.

    Since it was possible for both something and nothing to exist in one universe, it was possible for all matter as it exists (whether it is not there or it is there) to exist based on the premise that wherever it wasn't that's not where it is.

    In Les Arbitres, the primal beginning is self.  And why self is always the beginning of consciousness because we wake up like that.  Perhaps the start of the universe was God waking up like that.  First being aware of him/her/itself and then turning attention outward onto what is happening other than what is interior to me.

    Maybe the start of the universe, which as an Christiannan I think started with both Satan and God, was God waking up from an kind of sleep.  The sleep that although the Satan was nothing, he was only an Angel.  And not the most powerful One.  Why, there couldn't be an universe looked after by Satan, just an Angel and not an God!  It was God's initial act of defiance (defiance of Satan, nothingness (Angelic-ly)) which created the universe.

below added 2023-08-01

Further Discourse

    Nothing at the beginning of universe is just the process by which the universe undergoes becoming that shape with an middle it is when it includes every part of it.  

    Which it is destined to become.

    In some ways everything we do we were meant to do, as humans; and it is all leading up to us learning more about ourselves and our place in the universe.  The beginning of the universe is the interaction between zero and one, when everything between them includes an middle (and since every shape has an middle also we may infer the Largest middle at the centre of time and all things).  That started with zero because subjectivity was always superior to objectivity.  If you put zero and one opposite one another, everything that would happen between them was an shape, an specific calculation of the recognition of an object.  And that was why the universe itself had this particular characteristic.  An whole Middle in Time that hadn't happened yet.  And if humans had the opportunity to get there they had to take it.  It was the reason for everything.  So much pleasure.  More pleasure all at once than had ever happened before.  Genesis to an Christiannan was really about the hypothetical exchange between God and Satan at the beginning of the universe by which they contrasted one another in some special way in order to comprise an whole universe of infinite varieties of things.  And they may in fact be the only reason why reality and everything exists.  Therefore do not think of the Satan as an evil character; but one who has only tricked you to think so.  The ability to have subjectivity without the presence of any objectivity in any known universe.  And how can any evil thing come from the ability to start an whole universe?  For just by being direct opposites with God; one is rewarded to this status.  An whole contrasting figure than God; something who would do exactly nothing like what God does.

    The Middle of Time was not created by that first interaction between Satan and God.  But it was made possible; and so everything that happened over any span of time from the beginning to the end of the universe was part of that Middle.  If humans one day accomplish the feat of having lived long enough to reach the Biggest Event of Occurrence in all the known universe; it will be because they took advantage of logic in figuring out time in order to see that shapes have an middle, and an human brain is suited to finding an middle among all things; including thoughts and ideas and the universe.  The possibility of an Middle event occurring at some point in time is quite likely because the universe has an specific shape.  It hasn't happened yet, and yet it is bound to happen in this known shape and version of the universe.  An Middle event.  An time to all things.  Something to which we can measure every other point in time relative to its nature.  Something between 0 and 1.  This is why binary code (0 and 1) is the code of the universe.  Some things God decides.  Some things Satan decides.  Perhaps an better way to say this, however, for the Satan is that some things Satan decides for God.  And you can't take that away or take back from him/her because he/she is already nothing.  Reality is just an interaction that exists between God and Satan as forces of Creation and Destruction.  And we exist over time because we ourselves are shapes.  Shapes with knowledge of being shapes.  An sentient intellect which implies an shape in its logical form.  And I always tell myself one thing shapes are good at being at is an interior.  If an intellectual form of knowledge existed within an interior subject, logically it was because it was an shape.  If every shape or object could be an number between 0 and 1, what numbers would they be and why?

    And if all of time itself could be expressed, in this relationship between 1 and 0.  What did it imply about the Middle between them?  That each object was not entirely one thing itself?  Only with God can anything be whole.  That every thing that exists is only part of him/her/it somehow; the other half to it being God?  And without it not any thing that exists between being zero and one.  All of reality exists within an continuum somewhere between the existence of zero (Satan) and one (God).  And every thing that exists other than them is an number between zero and one.

    When everything began existing because of Satan and God, everything that was created existed between Satan and God in time.  And therefore occurrence of Satan may be the beginning of the universe where the occurrence of God may be the end.  And everything that happens between the beginning and the end is really an endless tumult between Satan and God that affects all things.  The Middle is there because it is implied in the beginning, at the moment of the Creation between Satan and God.  Everything that happened after the moment of nothing happening, because of God, was happening.  And it occurred in such an way, an shape.  The whole shape of its Time was created, and all points in the tapestry turn toward its centre; an Middle moment in time that was so excellent and large-scale it hadn't happened yet.  And humans had to get there.  It was the ultimate reward for existing in the universe.  Calibrated by God and other lifeforms themselves.  The whole purpose for existing was to make sure people (our people, our humans) get there.  Even if we don't know whether it is truly going to happen or when it is happening or where.  But didn't we ourselves have to be responsible for it happening to an certain extent?  We couldn't just master survival and then wait around in the universe for generations.  We had to try to be part of the whole picture: all of the universe that takes up all of the space yet we're here beside it somehow, answering the question of why have an reason to live‽  It is because our actions are rewarded by the eventual middle of everything.  Which has already started (though maybe not what it is, in its final form at the centre of the universe).    The Middle of Everything comprises, of course, everything.  Some properties of the beginning of the universe are the properties the Middle of the Universe carries with it.  Genesis, then, at its deepest level is about the Middle, and why what are associated with it the first things to have happened.  The Great Beginning began because of the Great Middle.  And it provided an purpose.  An Justice to all things.

    It was the reason for everything to exist.  All the hardships.  There would be so much pleasure created in that moment all of what was good and happy forever in the universe would far outweigh the bad.  And that was what we were going toward.  And that was we were going toward because of God.

    But, you may ask me, how do we know the universe hasn't reached its middle in time yet?

    And my answer is that we just know.  We know the universe hasn't reached its middle yet because it is damn cold and hard to find anybody.  The middle of the universe will be so gloriously and glamorously warm we will know once it's occurring.  And we just know it's not happening right now.

    That's my best guess, anyway.  You can't know everything is my philosophy.

    Maybe it's true that the middle of the universe hasn't happened yet and we can tell because all we have is this big sad blue rock to live on.  In the middle of nowhere.  And the Middle of the universe will be so glorious and fine we will know it is happening because we will be there; and all of this appears to my imagination because it is within the realm of what is possible to hope for.  I know the universe will be better at its Middle; because this isn't it.  As far as I know, we haven't reached the Middle of this universe yet because we don't really have that many achievements as an species: the kind of achievements that are worthy of the Middle and its bigness.  Achievements that are the best kinds of things happening culturally in the whole universe.  Between the different races of people who come from all corners of the universe.  The Middle is so big and amazing we can hardly imagine what it is at this point in the beginning of our universe.  And humans are so blessed to share in this beginning of the present universe with God (relativistically, according to the size and shape of the whole universe in time).  But in order to secure our presence at the Middle of the Universe we have an long way to go.

    It's just that I feel, when I reflect on the size and shape of the universe, we haven't met the middle yet.  And it's obvious because there is so much suffering in the world.  Genesis is about the Middle because the Beginning and the seeds of the Middle were created at the same time.  Which means it is possible to develop so far into the universe that there will be almost no suffering and the Middle will be the least amount of suffering that has ever happened in the universe.  Genesis, according to an Christiannan, is about the beginning of that Middle in how it all started in those first few moments of the creation and the first passing of time.  Christiannans say that Genesis was the creation of the Middle because it was the creation of the potential for our universe to reach that middle.  Genesis is the creation of the possibility of that middle at the beginning of the universe.  Everything that has ever existed was associated with that Middle somehow, and we must judge everything relative to it in order to fully understand the beginning and the end, and how it happened and how it will happen.  The first moments of time are linked inseparably to its Middle, and everything that was designed about the universe in order for it to be able to reach that middle was inherent in the beginning of the universe.

below added 2023-08-14

    For this reason, the Christiannan Genisis is also partly about the Middle of Time as well as the End of Time because some properties about its existence were inherent at the Beginning, and it is said in the Christianna that they will last until the end.  These "properties" as far as I am concerned can in fact be real moral figures, God's subjectivity when mixed with Satan's, the properties of physical space an matter being separate, and everything else in existence to have its own place also.  Genesis, as far as it relates to the Middle and the End, is about those properties that came into existence at the beginning of the universe that will last until its end.  And in this way Genesis in the Christianna relates to the Middle and the End, however oversimplifying it for purpose we just consider the definition of Genesis to be the Beginning, and only tell about how that went down although to some extent being related to both the Middle (especially) and the End.

    Limiting my account of genesis to the beginning, then, to that effect it may be as I have written before.  The beginning of the universe began as an binary contrast between the concepts of 0 and 1 as they would exist everywhere in the known universe because of God, and possibly to some extent Satan.  At earlier times as such I defined 0 and 1 as, conceptually, the nature of Satan and God.  That Satan was not in fact an devil or an evil spirit but another miracle, the angel with 0 wings who could nonetheless fly without God's help.  The universe began as the conflict between two subjectivities who appeared to contrast and complement one another.  Satan, the possibility that nothing is the subjectivity of Satan, and so every instance of nothing happening is actually subjective.  As in, possesses its own subjectivity.  This is however only one way of look at the universe.  When it started, there was also God (1) the most miraculous angel, even that above Satan; who was an enigma.  And in fact reality came out of the conflict that ensued including all of the orders of angels.  There was nothing.  On the other hand there was something.  But there was also nothing (Satan is an picky eater).  Then again, on the other hand, there was something.  (And since it turned out for both of them to be true).  There was nothing.  And there was also something.  They could mutually exist.  And as such, the emotional universe started.  All of it began.  Including Time and Radioactivity and Properties Of Matter.  It was only God's and Satan's presence at first but it lead to all dimensions to expand.  Pi and the Fibonnaci spiral were created not long after.  The ability of the universe for such an thing to exist.  Water was imagined out of the vacuuum it created.  Many of these things I have already named that were created in that order ARE themselves properties that will be around until the end of the universe, passing through its Middle at the most glorious party that ever existed.  But all we need to care about is what they mattered now.  How could we tell where we are in the whole wide universe and on what condition are we on with God when there is so much space and when we are so little‽  And what did it matter, an human existence?  Why did God care in the whole wide known universe about what an human thought‽

    Well, from what it looks like, we are somewhere beyond what was the beginning of the universe.  Nobody can remember being created at the beginning of time (resurrected by God in that moment).  And perhaps it was more likely that God had an exact plan for the primate ancestors of humans for them to develop to become like an human in that instant.  In which God would intervene.  After all that work was done.  It was deserved, and God would intervene in order to mutate these ancestors into humans.  Proving intelligent design; humans would have to be such and such an genetic ancestor in order for an human to occur and the odds are an million to one an human would occur.  Unless God had an hand in it somehow, and that everything that had developed in the universe up until that point had been part of God's plan & design all along.  Humans were the eventuality of both the willpower and guile of humans and God combined.  We coalesce at an certain point in the fossil history seemingly out of nowhere; there are however many developmental stages found in the fossil record.  And where we point of reference coming out of nowhere matters.  The only way an human could occur, in one interpretation, was that they (whoever) had appeased God.  And of course I like to think an human soul had an hand in it as well: that in the moment of creating an new species the human soul also had an hand in what kind of features evolved from their ancestors.  It was probably scientifically bogus; and couldn't be explained scientifically (yet).  That humans and God somehow made an deal about the creation of the first human.  That it would have both the properties decided by God and the properties decided by the human soul, whatever gender it happens to be.  Unless, one presumed the properties an human chose were disobeyed by God sometimes (but God would have to be fair about it) and so God wouldn't disallow all of the properties they wanted in an species.  But this is what we call anthropocentric (human-centred) because it places all other species on Planet Earth as lower species who hadn't appeased God as much.  Were humans really just territorial monsters who only had each other's backs and not those of other species?  Didn't we deserve that status, having begun to master the art of how our species will survive out in space, and harvest interplanetary resources?  Like no other species that had come before on Planet Earth.  Or was it better to say we shared an biosphere with many populations of which depended on one another, in naturally essential symbiosis?

    In any case it is safe to say we have tracked the record of human evolution to an highly developed extent.  There is no answer given for why it happened then and why.  And we are meant to believe such an thing could occur naturally through scientifically explainable circumstances but if subjectivity occurred first in the universe how could science stand up and attend to and explain what are the physical properties of matter when they enter into existence after the deity?  How can science detect God and what is it for, the detection of God?  If the universe is composed of God and Satan, 0's and 1's, wouldn't it be impossible to detect anything‽  How could matter exist if it was only the subjective experience of an god?  What power did science have to detect anything from it?

    And I pose this criticism of science truly because I care about and love science so; and if I could offer my perspective onto how well they were doing, I would do it because I respected them.

    Physical measurable properties were just the consciousness of God's mind happening in space evenly and equal to, perhaps in some ways more than others, Satan.  And the only reason anything was measurable was that fact because everything existed between 0 and 1 somehow.  But that didn't explain all the other angels of the universe and how they interacted with actual physical space and matter.  Physical measurable properties were just the consciousness of Satan happening in space also.  And it could only be this way.  And so it had to happen between them.  The physical measurable properties of Satan were nothing; and so if an property or properties could be detect that were not there was just as important for what kind of properties were there because of God's side of thing.  Being 1.  Being the fashion of all things after that property, of being an actual grand and central 1 of the centre of all being.  By being one thing myself.  I am part of the one that is the master painting of the composure of everything.  Physical measurable properties were just something somewhere between 0 and 1.  Satan and God.  And they could summon them back or summon them all away at any moment at will if they wanted to.  This is why the observation and measurement of the universe need an perspective both on the Satan and on God and what they meant.  In order to achieve the highest criticism of their occupational discipline.  They couldn't detect the beginning of time because they weren't looking at it.  All they cared about was how physical matter could exist in the universe when they couldn't conceive of an whole personality behind it and how and what it meant for an person to be the subjectivity of the existence of the entire universe.  Someone who could control the observable phenomena and measurements at any time.  Even if an Scientist said it was true, that didn't mean it was true to God.  But there were, I suspected, some smart Scientists who knew all of the criticisms of their field and had already integrated an conclusion and decision about what it meant to be observing to be observing an scientific phenomenon that had to be exact.  Yes, they must have concluded long ago: I am observing something that is in (mathematically) existence between 0 and 1; and all form and sense of logic of their creation are an binary code between these two numbers, central figures of human morality.  Just combinations of Satan and God (what was and wasn't there physically, existing as one thing at an time).  If physical properties couldn't be measured because of subjectivity, then maybe we had to adjust which subjectivities we were focused on.  Satan can actually be an exacting friend.  God wasn't necessarily at an difference with Satan over that as an dispute.  They could both rock our world.

    If science was going truly to measure the properties of the universe, it needed an wide variety of explanations and possibilities about what was imminently occurring to us (an existence within the property of space and time which may only exist within the mind of its deity, and all of nature owed its allegiance to that).  Including the criticism that, since they were unable to measure subjectivity it must be of an different property of matter at some level.  Which didn't necessarily obey or disobey the laws of physics exactly.  Everything in existence was just an sequence of binary numbers, aspects of an physical thing that did and did not exist as an physical code for what it looked like and how it had formed.  And we all knew the criticism that Scientists would say, that if you can't measure something it isn't there.  But what if you can't measure something because it is of your nature to have its own mind and something beyond what maybe your own can suggest?  And why even the wording of this previous sentence seems to suggest something about its logic.  It is your nature to have its own mind when we consider either 'it' in this sentence to refer to God: God is of your nature as an human because you are only possible because it has its own mind.  But I also mean to suggest Satan is of your nature as an human being because there are just some things which are not happening in the universe, and if we count them all together and this unity created is actually the sum of nothing: an subjectivity which defies existence as we know it in this physical universe on the physical plane.  And the whole universe as it exists right now is really only an binary sequence somewhere between 0 and 1: all of the properties it doesn't have combined with the properties it does.  This will aid us onto our understanding of Satan as an empathetic creature.  It needs to be what it is for God because if it wasn't, then God would never accomplish anything worth creating.  And the start of the universe is an mystery for this reason.  We don't know all of the properties of Satan because Satan is nothing; and we can't and we never will.  Unless that subjectivity lets us in on its mysterious nature somehow: but how even would that be possible?  Communion between angels and humans was always an tricky business.  Nobody readily believed all that was said of their nature.

    And who could blame us?  We could only see how we had formed around the universe, and not how the universe formed around us.  As was God's will.  Or what appeared to be.

    Genesis, according to the Christiannan, was the story of the creation of 1 and 0, or how they created each other in the natural order of the universe.  Satan couldn't be as powerful as God because he/she/it was nothing.  If there couldn't be nothing, there had to be something; and if there had to be nothing there couldn't be something.  They checked and contrasted one and the other as they did battle.  All things that had been created out of the vacuum of that initial moment were the result.  Every one thing was an sequence of numbers indicating what it was and what it wasn't.  And the reason we know this is true is that we seem to know as humans, logically, that before there was something there was nothing.  And the universe came into existence at some point.  Therefore we know that 0 had to have existed before 1; and when the universe came into existence it was all one thing that came into existence (the sacred sequence began) all at one time.  And all humans known this intuitively because, maybe, we know we are at 2 as an species in the universe right now, encoded binary sequences ourselves; we know that in order to have something you have to start with having nothing.  And we just know this applies to genesis because it makes natural sense to us as Christiannans.  0, the angel with zero wings, was Satan and must have existed before God; however was the glory of God (1) to have made an exact difference between itself and with nothing physically real yet possessing an subjectivity so.  If all of what wasn't happening in the universe possessed its own subjectivity as well, as much as with all of what was happening which altogether and in unity had its own subjectivity also.  The subjectivity of something happening: and all of physical properties that exist could exist with God's own mind as part of the one thing that all is said to be in existence.

    And so then, how is one able to measure that?  As an Scientist?

    And this is the particular skepticism of Science I arrived at.  Not to be against science in general or scientists; but being able to provide criticism for them out of the utmost respect I had for their practice & the philosophy which appeared to go along with it.

    There are many aspects of the conclusions we might come to to investigate.

    Such as, if the Christiannan says, that everything in existence is in total 1 thing, then all of that thing is also the subjectivity and creativity of God.  Unlike Satan, who possesses no objectivity, and yet it is possible somehow for him or her or they to have subjectivity, God possesses all objectivity because all things that exist are what he/she/they is made out of.  And so we would be assuming everything that exists in the universe, in total, is God; and is part of what God is made out of.  There is an set of things and people and places that are ones, individuals in themselves, and yet all of them together make up the Great Cosmic 1 somehow.  Even though they are seemingly disconnected from one anothers' existence.  Because that's what individuality is.  They are all part of the same universe and must be connected by it somehow or they wouldn't both exist; and that's God, maybe.

    And so whatever opinion we land on, we can thank God more than Satan for the world existing; or maybe it's an dangerous presumption for you to assume so.

    If two things exist and yet they are parts of an larger thing together which is one thing itself.  Then they (the two smaller things) are still connected via the larger 1 thing itself.  

    It's basic religious principle to an honest man.  We don't know that one and the other are always connected somehow in this universe.  Is an joke that we tell each other.  As religious people.  Because we do know that.  Everything that exists is part of 1 reciprocal figure and may be God.  Therefore everything that exists must be connected to him/her/they somehow.  The disconnection between us, or between all individual things is merely an illusion and we all go back to God somehow.

    The first moments were about that disconnection between Satan and God.  Satan had 0 wings and God had 1.  And they could both fly.  They were both angels.  But God disagreed about the disconnection between them, calling it only an property of Satan and not an real thing.