Volume 6, Issue 3, page 5

Writer Quotes "Our Sweet Father's" Version of Creation -- and Claims
Great Teachers of the Past Have Confessed to Him Their Errors

«qGG~ Siea{e ?flaK in EaIcrthz„

By JACOB APSEL and "LITTLE ONE"

IT HAS BEEN said that a gentleman
is one who disagrees without being disagreeable. %hat I am going to outline will bring plenty
of disagreement, but I do hope
it will be kept on a level of questions pro
and con for the purpose of pursuing truth. What
I have to say is not theory or theorizing, nor
does it depend on Bibles or any other books.

We enjoy personal and intimate communication, both audible and visible, with Our Sweet
Father Your Creator and Mine. In the last two
years, "Little One" and I have spoken to several hundred residents of the Heaven World.
Just now, I left this writing table to ask
Little One, who is watching T-V, "Tell me,
Little One, how many people do you see in the
Heaven World at this time?" Her answer surprised even me: "I could count all night. Have
you ever seen a parade?"
In the past, to check the verity of God's
statement that He is God (my 18 years of atheism is a grounding that dares everything), I
checked the statements of more than 100 in the
Heaven World. each attesting to the legitimacy
of the other, many of whom are high stellar
lights of the past. (If I were to mention
names, it would only tighten the already
stretched credulity of the reader). In each
case, alI of the above attested that He who
declared that He is God, IS God!
Many who have become greatly disturbed with
us for daring to accept what we see as well as
hear are themselves grounded in belief based
on theory, or the authority of a Bible; some
on a voice, or voices only heard and at best
by blurred vision of one of the Heaven World
entities. We, by this time, have visible contact with thousands.

If my account of God is too simple or amazing, or contradicts most accepted beliefs, I
have no apologies to make -- for I as relating
what God told us and what He has taught us.

God Our Sweet Father and Creator always
existed. Space always existed. God chose an
outer form to function in rather than to function as a multiple Something-or-Other as described in " Bhagavad Gita" by Prince Arjuna
when Lord Krishna revealed himself in all His
glory. The form Our Sweet Father uses is the
Form in which He made man!
Being alone is dull, even for a God, so He
decided to create. He first created substance
with which to create! Heaven and Earth were
the first two spheres He created, followed by
a Sun and the Moon. The account of creation in
six days of 24 hours each is correct.

Now, for a short evaluation: If we admit of
a God at all, we must admit that He could make
just a ball called Earth in six days, or even
six hours. Also, He could use or function in a
form of man. Again, if we admit at all that
there is a God, and admit that of necessity a
God could create. then we must admit that He
could first create substance with which.to create (pantheism is not true), and if it pleased
Him, He could add planets, suns, solar systems,
galaxies, and universes at His pleasure.

Creation was completed on Earth after establishing the vegetable, animal, and human
kingdoms. The quotation in the Bible where God
said, "Let us make man in our image and likeness", was said to Lord Krishna, the only other God in existence. Lord Krishna came forward
to see what was happening when the rumblings
of creation attracted Him. Then the only two
Gods in existence saw each other for the first
time. Lord Krishna remained to assist and to
co-operate, but tho He is co-equal in power
and capable of creating, too, there is only
one Creator. When Lord Krishna appeared on the
scene, He was in the form of man -- a tall, dark
Hindu. That is why "In the form of God created
He him" is correct -- the Hebrew word "btselem"
correctly interpreted is gestalt, or form, and
not image; elohiw is Gods -- el is singular for
God. The Hebrew reads btselem elohim -- in the
form of Gods created He him.

The important reason for adhering to the
exact interpretation is because we are only
like God in form or contour ; not in spirit. A
false interpretation led to afalse evaluation.
We have built a case here for proving that we
are potential Gods. This is not so. Not even
God can create a God, for that which is created can be uncreated. That which is born must
die. Man's body is born and will die. The Buddha, Jesus, and others were all created and
are human. Their spiritual elevation is possible for even the lowliest to attain. A human
being, carnate or discarnate, is still a human
being. The highest human attainment is the 4th
degree of Integration, full enlightenment,
Buddhahood, Christ consciousness -- but never
Godhood. There never were more than two Gods
mentioned, there never can be more. To be sure,
it is very complimentary to accept the belief
that we are potential Gods, but it should be
clear that a God can neither be created nor
uncreated. There are entities which are a part
of God -- not just potential Gods. Our Sweet
Father and Creator, knowing man's capacity for
getting himself into difficulties from which
he cannot extricate himself, has delegated
parts, or sparks, of Himself, endowed with His
consciousness and further endowed with His
mind. These triume Godheads, commonly known as
Monads, or E's, when properly appealed to are
known to smooth the most turbulent conditions.
`E" never was and never will be a human being.
A human being never was and never will ce a
God.

To return to creation: So everything was
created and operated by Our Creator. Giving
everything complete and constant attention
soon became burdensome, even to a God, particularly so because of man's thankless and disruptive behavior. After almost destroying all
of His created work during the Flood, God de