‍

The Tree of Knowledge and the Only Way to Love God.

When a person such as Deepak Chopra tells the world that ‘Creating your own reality is the richest gift you received at birth’ he is sharing what he believes.

Not what is true from the perspective of life itself.

It is something he says.

Something he believes.

And something on which he has decided to educate ‘the world’.

He is telling us we are free to design or create whatever life we wish for ourselves. And that our capacity to do this is ‘the richest’ gift we have received.

He ‘knows’ it. So, it must be true.

He is stating it as fact.

However, I would ask Chopra, from whom were we offered this gift? Who, apart from him and others like him -those who said similar things – confirmed or ordained we were free to create whatever reality we desired or wanted for ourselves?

There is no doubt, to a certain extent, we can create or work towards creating individually desirable realities.

Of course, we can.

But whatever we make of our collective individual realities will define the reality the greater life we belong to must experience.

Whatever we become collectively, from each of our individual realities to whatever we are as one –our world - will be Life’s to suffer or enjoy.

Which means it will be God’s to suffer or enjoy.

Now, while Chopra’s claims are opinionated and speculative, what I have stated is fact.

Chopra is a smart man – or so he would have us believe.

So, I am sure he would agree with me when I say that our collective realities – let’s call them ‘the world’ - have meant the reality we have forced Life itself to endure has been horrific.

One of exploitation and abuse.

Abuse which has been physical, energetic and psychological.

He, and the world at large, would also be aware that the ‘knowledge’ or wisdom Chopra has been sharing with the world, has not come from God.

What God has told us – the ‘knowledge’ God has shared with us through his Word in its various forms - sits in complete contradiction to the teachings Chopra and others like him have been delivering to the world.

God told ‘the world’ that each one of us must create a reality that emulated and embodied the teachings and example of Jesus.

That was God’s Word.

That was the ‘knowledge’ God gave us.

Jesus was ‘the way’ of life we were all to live.

And this knowledge – this instruction – applied to every human being who would ever live.

No one was left out.

And very few have been denied access to this knowledge.

God also warned that choosing an alternative reality to the one embodied by Jesus would condemn any person who did so to a legacy of eternal guilt.

Sounds severe, doesn’t it?

Eternal guilt.

But guilt of what?

Through Jesus, and his other various messengers, God made the instructions we required to live as he expected us to live, as simple and clear as could be.

So simple and clear a child could understand them.

And this simplicity and clarity was critical.

Yes, through Jesus we were told that creating any reality which sat outside the way of life lived and taught by him – the way of conditional expression – was non-consensual in the eyes of God.

Chopra educated the world that we were free to design whatever reality we wanted. And that this was a gift.

God, however, told us creating a reality which mirrored that embodied by Jesus, was to be our gift to life.

Our gift to him.

By doing this, we too, would become the bread of life.

As opposed to an abuser of life.

Doing this, in God’s eyes, was the only acceptable way of saying, ‘Thank you for my existence and life. I will repay your gift to me by being what you need me to be. I will put conditions on my expression and demands so I become what you need me to be.Not what I want to be. And certainly not what the world and its worldly ‘princes’ say I can be.’

Chopra told us we could design whatever life we wanted or desired for ourselves.

God told us we must design the type of life he has asked us to design.

Chopra’s ‘education’ was the pathway to the betrayal of God and condemnation.

Jesus’ ‘education’ the pathway to innocence.

In God’s eyes, we could design whatever life we wanted.

But if we choose to design a reality God does not consent to, we will be tagged with eternal guilt.

Meaning, once we choose to reject or betray God, if God turns out to be real, that rejection and betrayal will not be forgotten.

And it cannot be overturned.

What Chopra offers is ‘worldly knowledge’.

He shares what he thinks is true.

He shares what he ‘knows’.

But he does not know God – or life – as God knows himself.

If I wrote a book explaining to the world how Deepak Chopra could be best understood he would probably wonder who the hell I thought I was.

As would the world.

And it would be worse still, if my misrepresentation of him was wrong, and instead of keeping his life sacred, led to his being abused and exploited in ways he did not consent to or permit.

But in a ‘world’ that values fame and being seen as smart, the temptation to leave a personal legacy, or become the one educating the world on what one might think life is all about, has proven far too great.

Many can’t help themselves.

They will even alter the knowledge and ‘truth’ they share should the social and cultural trends of the day deem what they had been teaching, irrelevant or incorrect.

For many it has become a case of, ‘I will sell whatever the world is wanting or willing to buy. Just as long as I get to be loud, relevant and on trend!’

But God told us to reject any knowledge that had not come from him.

Let’s call that ‘knowledge’ - the knowledge God dismissed as worthless - worldly knowledge.

Worldly knowledge comes from those who do not understand the truth about life and existence, but just can’t help telling us what they think.

They have presented themselves as experts on something they do not understand.

Many such people won’t even think for themselves. They will just parrot the things they have heard from others.  

Knowledge from God, on the other hand, comes from the life these people do not understand in the first instance, and have neither the right nor jurisdiction to represent in the second.

An 11-year-old boy I was mentoring once said something to me every human being alive should consider.

‘If someone does not have an in-depth understanding of something, why would they give their opinion on it.’

So wise.

So true.

Of anything.

But God, even for many of the faithful, is not real.

If he was real, in the sense of being ‘really’ real, no one who loved God and believed loving him required honouring him as sacred, would flood the world with their opinions on him.

They just would not do it.

But this our world does in spades.

‘I do not know God, he has not revealed the truth about himself to me personally, and I do not have his blessing to represent him, but I will explain him to you. When it comes to God, despite not knowing him, I know him better than himself. If you want insight into God, it is me you should come to.’

Yes, this is the way of those with a worldly faith.

In fact, there is an online writing platform known as Medium which has made itself the contemporary home for this type of desecration of God.

There, people, many who call themselves faithful and who claim to love God, are jumping over one another to educate the world about who or what they think God really is.

Not what God has told them he is.

But what they say he is.

They are not offering God’s Word.

They are offering their own personal ‘word’ – their opinion – on God.

Something God has made clear is an act of non-consensual abuse against him.

And something even Jesus said he would never do.

But we move on.

Just as Chopra claimed sovereignty over life, as if he understood life better than God or Jesus, anyone who sprouted the idea that we should build self-serving personal brands or live out loud by throwing our ‘personal truths’ at the world, were only sharing their personal ‘knowledge’.

Worldly knowledge.

Not knowledge from God.

Just as Deepak Chopra encouraged humanity to build self-serving and self-centred lives that were abusive to God, so too did these people tell us to contribute to, and participate in, a world founded on boastfulness and self-promotion.

Also non-consensual expressions in the eyes of God.

I should point out here, the foundational difference between self-centred living and life-centred living.

Self-centred living is the process of creating whatever life we desire for ourselves.

Personal legacy, greatness and creating whatever we want for ourselves lies at the heart of self-centred living.

Life-centred living, on the other hand - also known as conditional expression - is the process of designing the life God asked us to design, as demonstrated and exemplified by Jesus.

Life-centred living - or conditional expression - can also be called God-centred living.

When someone living with conditional expression does something in service of life, they do not promote it.

For them the act is selfless.

It is for life.

For God.

It is an act of great purity and love carried out to honour life. Not to portray to the world the idea they are a great servant of life.

Worldly praise and legacy have no value to one who truly seeks to honour God and hold life sacred through their being.

By indulging the concept of the personal brand, we turned human lives – the cellular components of God’s life - into products.

Our sacred gift of life became something to market, promote and sell.

We had to pit our ‘knowledge’ and ‘truth’ against the ‘knowledge’ and ‘truths’ being shared by others.

We had to get the world’s attention by having others believe the world should follow our approach to life.

And value and believe in the things we valued and believed.

We created the influencer.

People who educated and influenced the world on what they thought it should be.

And on how they thought we should live.

All worldly knowledge.

We began putting our faith in people who claimed to understand and explain a life that was never theirs to explain.

They told us what they believed life was about. Not how life understood itself. And not what life needed or wanted for itself.

They placed themselves in the position of ‘god’ over life.

But God was already God over life.

Because God is ‘the life’.

And, when it comes to ‘knowledge’ about how we should live, from God’s perspective, which is life’s perspective, nothing has changed.

His Word, the knowledge he deemed we needed to know and understand when it comes to how we should live, remains consistent and unchanging.

It has remained impervious to any worldly trends - no matter how popular or widespread they have become – and this has been true throughout history.

God has been unwaveringly clear on what he expects of us since the beginning of time.

His Word, in the beginning, is his Word today.

No matter what the worldly educators have told us at any point in history.

‘Honour my Word and instructions to keep my life sacred, or you will be condemned.’

And later, ‘Are you not sure how to interpret my Word and instructions? Well, I offer you Jesus. He will tell you how to understand me as I want to be understood. He will tell you how to live out my Word. Listen to no other ‘influencer’, no matter what they offer you. For whatever it is, is of no value to life because it is of no value to me! Jesus will show you the way. He is the answer to your questions because he is my answer to your questions – he is My Word brought to life!’

And what of those flaunting their bodies and brands while encouraging others to do the same?

They too, are telling the‘world’ how they think we should live and the things they believe we should value.

Has obsessing over ourselves and our bodies helped life?

Does God want teenagers cutting and hating themselves because they don’t believe their bodies and faces stack up to those on display?

Does he want 11 and 12-year-old children sharing intimate pictures of their bodies with others because this has become a social and cultural ‘trend’?

Does he want children feeling inadequate, anxious and depressed, many ending their lives because ‘the world’ won’t gift them the ‘reality’ – to use Chopra’s word – they desire most deeply for themselves?

It is not within the jurisdiction of Chopra and others like him to tell others how they should live. Or what they should value.

Nor to establish what represents consensual human expression and behaviour in the eyes of life.

What they share is worldly ‘knowledge’.

What they share is what they believe life is about.

But they are not life.

When people do this and present it as fact, as if what they are saying is true, then what they share becomes a textbook misrepresentation.

A lie.

It is the contemporary world’s gaslighting of God.

And what of the world’s‘ knowledge’ of God?

There is no shortage of people who will tell the world what God is or isn’t.

Or how best to ‘know’ him.

Many have built fame and fortune by making themselves an ‘expert’ on God and then showcasing their take on God – their opinions - for all the world to see.

Many, in the eyes of the world, would be nobody were it not for the authority they have claimed over God.

Take Medium writer Dan Foster for example.

He has made a name for himself writing about God.

He shares his opinions on God and educates his followers of the ‘god’ he believes in. And when educating them gives his god the qualities he believes his god should have.

No one who loved God would wish him to be what they want him to be.

Foster speaks of love and faith and tells the world what it takes to be like Jesus. All while permitting himself the liberty of dishonouring both God and Jesus through his life and expression.

His god, and to many like him, is incorporeal.

In one article he warned his readers that by thinking differently to him, or believing something different from him, meant one was in danger of confusing the creator with creation.

Does he know God?

Did God tell him explicitly that this was the case?

If so, what words did he use?

And at what time did he speak them?

And if he hasn’t, if Foster is not certain of the true nature of God, what gives him the right to educate the world on his idea of God?

This is a worldly permission Foster has granted himself. Not something he does with God’s blessing.

Where does Foster’s actions leave him and his Backyard Church – his publishing community on Medium – if God’s own revelation reveals something different?

Where does that leave his followers who have clapped, praised and embraced the ‘knowledge’ he shared about God?

‘Knowledge’ that has not come from God, but from his own idea as to what God should be.

Did God not warn the world about following those who do not know him, but who still chose to honour themselves through their exploitations of him?

If God testifies that his true nature is something different to the ‘knowledge’ Foster has been spreading, what is it that Foster loved?

What is it he had faith in?

What is it that his followers loved?

And what did they believe in?

Should God’s own Word and testimony contradict the word of Foster, both he and those who have embraced him will be found to have placed their faith in him.

Not in God.

And not only that, but Foster will also have made his false god an idea that God himself must compete with when he speaks for himself.

Jesus asked for watchfulness.

Not for the trumpeting of our individual takes on God.

What Foster has done is to contradict the Word and instructions of Jesus. Which means he has contradicted the Word and instructions of God.

One member of Foster’s‘ congregation’ wrote he was ‘on point’ when it came to God.

Really?

How so?

Did God confirm that?

Or is it just that Foster’s god has all the credentials his followers think a god they can love and believe in should have.

Anyone who says Foster is ‘on point’ when it comes to God would only say this because his opinion validates their opinion.

But Jesus did not warn us to be watchful for a time when Dan Foster revealed his opinion on the true nature of God.

He asked us to be watchful for a time when God was going to reveal it himself.

One who truly believed inJesus, and one who sought only to prove their trust is in him, would say:

‘I will not believe anything I hear about God that comes from the lips of those who use and exploit God to honour themselves. For I am watchful and waiting for the time when God will reveal himself. Until then I will remain faithful by being what God has asked me to be, by living a life of conditional expression. That is what God has asked of me. And it is in God that I trust. Not those who would honour themselves by using his name.’

Sadly, for Foster and his followers, and for Chopra and others like him, God has chosen to speak for himself.

He has honoured the Word of Jesus by revealing his true nature to the world – just as Jesus said he would.

And anyone who listens to the things Dan Foster has to say about God is in danger of thinking God is incorporeal.

That God is not of physical form.

Foster would have his disciples believe God cannot experience suffering and abuse.

And yet God has claimed he is the life we belong to.

The life that is being raped and abused by our world.

It is God’s direct Word and testimony that:

‘You are the cells of my body!’

‘I am the life. Make no mistake, I am the life!’

And ‘I am the abused!’

Foster’s god needs Foster to represent him.

God does not.

The knowledge Foster trumpets to the world about God is his.

The knowledge I share with the world about God is God's.

The life Deepak Chopra and others have told us to do with as we please, is God’s.

It was never their place to exploit God’s life by explaining the liberties and ‘gifts’ they believed we were free to extract from life.

They offered God’s life up for the taking. They pimped out God’s life saying, ‘Do what you want with it. Create what you want. That is life’s great gift to you!’

But it wasn’t.

God – or Life – through his own Word and the life of Jesus, had already spoken for himself.

He has always been speaking for himself.

Since the beginning of time.

Our first lesson, when God handed over to us the keys to his life, was this – ‘Do not bite into the worldly knowledge that will be offered to you by the worldly princes. Should you do that, I will suffer.’

He also went on to make it perfectly clear that should we choose to embrace his or life’s betrayers, then we would be guilty of betraying God ourselves.

The only knowledge we were to follow – the only knowledge that ever counted or holds any value – was that which came from God.

God, through his Word in all its forms, was always establishing his own laws of consent when it comes to his body.

I asked earlier, of what are we guilty should we reject the Word of God, and instead embrace the wisdom of the worldly.

Well, now you know.

Now, the world knows.

Anyone who rejected God’s Word, as interpreted by Jesus, is guilty of the non-consensual abuse of God.

And the obscene world we created can also now be known as the single greatest act of non-consensual abuse against life in the history of life.

God did not consent to the creation of a world such as the one we have created.

He did not consent to it because it was his life that was going to be raped and violated when we inevitably did what we have done.

Foster’s god does not exist.

He never did.

Whatever god Foster worships and represents is false – rendered obsolete by God himself.

But like Chopra, his decision to represent something he did not know and understand has contributed directly to the suffering and abuse being experienced by God.

And he has made it more difficult for God’s own wisdom, when it comes to himself, to be heard, in his greatest hour of need.

Foster has positioned himself between God and the ears of those who make up the life that belongs to him.

In his attempts to be ‘god’ over God, he has placed himself in God’s firing line.

Just as Chopra and others like him have done.

Chopra told us the riches gift we have received was our capacity to create whatever life we desired for ourselves.

But God told us our lives themselves are our richest gift.

Lives we have been blessed with because of God.

Because he exists.

Because he is ‘the life’.

To create whatever reality, or life, we desire for ourselves we must exploit and abuse life without consent.

Which means we must exploit and abuse God.

We must take liberties with God’s body and life which he has made clear since the beginning of time were never ours to take.

God has blessed each of us with life, he expected our conditional expression in return.

To live as Jesus taught us –to become what Life or God asked us to become – was to be our gift to God.

Living with conditional expression is the only way one can prove their love for God.

It is the only way of life God permits us to live.

Because it is God – or life –who suffers when we don’t.

I will finish by sharing the direct Word and testimony of God.

These Words belong to Life because they belong to God – and they appear in the book, 22 Days of God and the Fight for Life.

‘Never forget, the suffering you use to doubt me is the suffering that proves you never believed me in the first place.

Your lack of belief, and your lack of faith came at a great cost to me.

It is not faith and belief I have experienced at the hands of the world you created. It is your lack of faith and belief.

Here I am!

Real, and visible. Standing before the world of abuse saying, “I am the life! You belong to me. And the suffering I have experienced has been inflicted on me by your world!'

p.36-37 - 22 Days of God | Day 3

And so it is.

Amen.

‍

The original piece where measured the 'word' of Deepak Chopra against God's own Word and testimony:

The Ability to Create Our Own Reality Was No Gift!

‍

Read '22 Days of God and the Fight for Life'

‍