Thanks to each of you. It means so much to me to have this place, to find you people, to have these thoughts, and have someone to share them with.

I feel inside myself that each of you who've responded are people who 'get it', and so I start my post this morning with a feeling of gratitude that people like you in the world exist, to help me not feel so lost, bewildered and alone, and I feel, at the same time, a great sadness, for so many ' not knowing', who search in every corner, in every cranny, to find this proof of God and Gods' love, never really seeing it completely, or comprehending it totally, when the proof of God is always standing right before our eyes, out in the open, in every molecule, every manifestation of physical reality, and full and complete in every thought and emotion we have, if only we allow ourselves to be open to it.

What struck me about your post Michelea is how the new science is postulating that the universe 'was' even before our current understanding that it 'began' starting with the big bang. That isn't impossible for me to wrap my head around. In my vision, it would be a space where matter collected first, before there was an ignition of that matter. I enjoy the exercise of travelling back in 'time' to what happened before the moment of origin we've all accepted as the beginning of the beginning. 'Time', to me, must be as Thunder Bow described it. It doesn't really exist, it's only a point on a scale we use to demarc certain events as being separate from the action of other events in the scale. In that way of understanding, this means that matter collected, ignited, expanded, then re-collected, ignited and expanded, over and over in a never ending cycle of continuous explosions. It means that, as science proves, energy is never lost, only recycled.

Did you read the comments at the end of the article Out There? I began to and then was interrupted and haven't gone back yet to finish. It was interesting the conversation that went back and forth between the author and one reader. It was kind of cute, if that's the word I mean, to see that, even amongst the great and educated teachers of esoterics, ordinary and normal emotions come into play in the discussions. It seemed to be a back and forth between what scientists have theorized and spiritual leaders have attempted to define. One quote, in the comments, particularly caught my attention:

" When Jung was asked whether he believed in God he replied, “I know. I don’t have to believe; I know.” "

Thunder Bow, I always appreciate your input. Our personal beliefs are not so very far apart and I've often noticed overlaps. I very much like your view on time and spheres and points. To me, even 'points' do not exist, there are merely positions on the arc of time where, for a fraction of our awareness, our energy rests at a place in consciousness. I know your belief system includes the element of energy as an an expansively powerful force.