Response to a Facebook Posting

This is the posting:  

"Now. There is, and this will certainly seem a contradiction in terms, there is nonbeing. It is a state, not of nothingness in your terms, but a state in which probabilities and possibilities are known, anticipated, but blocked from all expression. Dimly, through what you would call a history, hardly remembered, there was such a state. It was a state of agony in which the powers of creativity and existence were known, but the ways to produce them were not known. This is the lesson that All That Is had to learn, and that could not be taught. This is the agony from which creativity originally was drawn, and its reflection is still seen." ~ Seth/Jane Roberts (Session 426)

This is my response

It includes a response to another person's posting - one alleging that there's no intrinsic purpose to our existence, and believing one exists is a delusion.  The poster's name was changed for this posting.  

Non-being – not of nothingness? In language and in math, a double negative becomes a positive. So, in this case, non-being is in fact a form of being.

If expression aka manifestation is blocked, how can probabilities/possibilities be known? Is it truly possible to know the nature of anything that doesn't exist?

If something is blocked, something must be blocking it. Who/what was doing the blocking and for what reason?

Powers of creativity/existence known, but ways to produce them were not... What need was there to produce them if they already existed (known)?

Is creativity drawn from agony or joy? Are we so unlike our Origin that our creativity is derived from an opposing Energy?

It was suggested to me that Consciousness exists in physical form because She desired to know what it was like to not know what would happen next. That we each are focal points of Consciousness, and often can't anticipate the future, that indeed seems to be the case.

I don't think it was a problem for Consciousness to manifest energy and matter (actually the same thing). I think Consciousness pre-existed “natural laws,” hence anything could happen, including formation of a physical universe, and do so without any trace of agony.

I once thought that after shedding our physical bodies, we'd have access to all knowledge. I still think that may be possible, but I'm not convinced that it happens in all cases. When Heart intuition clashes with the counsel of ethereal beings who are helping authors write books, I suspect that those beings are still in the process of evolving, rather than already fully evolved. I think it's more likely true that physical and non-physical beings can learn from each other.

Pete, if you're still paying attention, whether it's your ego or fatalistic beliefs, your misery is still an option rather than an inevitable reality. Do you think a more compassionate method of introspection might help? Being on Facebook is not evidence of feeling futility. Delusion and purpose may be married within your mind, but the association is not required. Consciousness chose a purpose and humans can also choose one, absolutely free of delusion.

I'm convinced there is an overarching purpose to existence, common to the Divine, physical and non-physical beings. When I was six, I heard it like this, “so we can die and be happy with God in Heaven.” When I think about it, that sounds a bit spooky, but maybe the concept had an innocent beginning, yet there was nothing innocent about the way I was subjected to the teaching.

There remains the big WHY? My response is: Love seeks to share. What fun would it be to be a single point of Consciousness, with no other manifestation of Being.

We can each discover or invent our own story of how Consciousness blossomed into All there Is, but our purpose – should we decide to accept it is to share Love.