There is no ‘God the Supreme Being’, only ‘Heaven the Supreme Being’, or ‘Heaven the Holy Soul’; for being is a condition of soul, not of ego, spirit, or will, and being is only supreme, call it joyfully or blissfully so, when it is the condition of metaphysical soul, as of soul per se, which is the chief if not only aspect or attribute of metaphysics.


If Heaven the Holy Soul’s condition of supreme beingfulness has a consciousness, it is like the light surrounding the inner flame of the soul’s burning, and, in metaphysics, such a light, or consciousness, is apt to be superconscious.


Such superconsciousness is aware, to a metaphysical degree, of the soul’s being, and is effectively one with the joy of perfect self-harmony.  You can call this metaphysical type of consciousness God or godly, but it is so much an aspect of the soul as to be inseparable from it insofar as it is the soul’s conscious self-awareness of itself and not an independent entity like ego, spirit or will, which far from pertaining to the elemental wavicle context in question is either at a molecular wavicle, molecular particle, or elemental particle remove from it, like, in subatomic terms, neutrons, electrons, and protons from photons. 


Such a consciousness of the soul’s beingful condition would not exist without the soul, since it is the soul which gives rise to it and not vice versa.  God or godliness does not exist, to repeat, independently of Heaven or heavenliness but as its conscious self-realization, and therefore any concept of God that fails to address the soul as, in effect, its Maker … is delusory or just plain wrong, a kind of non-metaphysical misnomer.


There is no God independent of Heaven, no superconsciousness except in relation to the superfeeling of soulful joy or, rather, joyful soul.  Therefore God does not exist in will, spirit, or ego, which is to say, metachemically, chemically, or physically, but only Devil (the Mother), woman (the mother), or man (the son) hyped as God – as in all or most traditional religions, which tend to worship God as a kind of wilful or spiritual or intellectual thing-in-itself independently of the emotional thinglessness which is heavenly soul and, more particularly in this context, the superconscious self-awareness of that soul’s condition of supreme being.


For supreme being, to repeat, attaches to Heaven, the condition of metaphysical soul, and is not an attribute of the consciousness of that being, even though you cannot have a knowledge of such beingful supremacy without a godly consciousness, which we have termed superconscious and deem to be the self-reflecting aspect of joyful soul, the faculty of such a soul that is conscious of itself as joy or bliss or heaven and has no existence outside of that consciousness.


Thus ‘God in Heaven’ is no understatement, even if the concept of God applied to contexts independent of soulful self-awareness happens to be an overstatement, as and when the concept becomes associated, through ‘bovaryized religions’, with metachemical doing or chemical giving or physical taking to the detriment if not exclusion of metaphysical being, to which it properly attaches as the aforementioned superconscious self-awareness of the condition of supreme being.


It is for this reason that, although it rejects all erroneous concepts of God and therefore all the ‘bovaryized religions’, Social Theocracy, the ideological front of Social Transcendentalism, is not atheist; for a disbelief in God per se, in the metaphysical consciousness of soul, would necessarily preclude one’s acceptance of Heaven, and it would be a strange religion indeed that believed in neither God nor Heaven, truth nor joy, superconsciousness nor superfeeling, or, worse, thought that you could have Heaven without God, much as if one could be expected to know what soul was without the consciousness proper to it, which both confirms and experiences the essential condition.


Therefore the true centre of truth is indeed joy, and the conscious recognition or realization of joy is truth, which is thereby vindicated not as a separate entity but as an integral aspect of metaphysics and, hence, soul.


Heaven without God would be akin to a flame without a light, and although it often transpires that ‘the blind lead the blind’, as people’s demagogues over ignorant masses, it cannot be said that they will lead them to Heaven if they persist in denying God, but only to a hell, purgatory, or earth of their own devising.


The God, or modes of so-called god, I deny was never God in the first place, but a wilful, spiritual, or intellectual substitute for God and, more importantly, Heaven attendant upon a want of religious direction and insight proportionate to the extent to which science, politics, or economics took precedence over religion, resulting in the false, or ‘bovaryized’, religions to which we have become only too accustomed, including fundamentalist, pantheist, and humanist manifestations thereof.


It is to be hoped that in the more enlightened and properly religious future, such falsehoods will be done away with, consigned, as we say, to ‘the rubbish bin of history’, but only in the event of a majority mandate for religious sovereignty resulting from the paradoxical utilization – preferably with church backing - of the political process in countries with the right kind of (church-hegemonic) axial preconditions for any such eventuality, such as Eire and, hopefully, France and other traditionally or predominantly Catholic nations.


Social Theocracy, the ideological front of Social Transcendentalism, will have to establish itself in all such countries as the movement standing for true religious progress, even the resurrection of church-hegemonic values (duly transformed), and hence the possibility of a genuinely radical alternative to the democratic and largely capitalistic status quo.  It must engage with society as a politico-religious ideology with specific objectives, principally the achievement of the necessary majority mandate from the electorate without which it will be unable to fully ‘set up shop and do business’ as business needs to be done if the current types of secular society are to be overhauled by one which, characterized by religious sovereignty, will be akin, even in its inceptive manifestation, to ‘Kingdom Come’, a kingdom not of this world but headed, in its otherworldly values, for a much superior world in which, with due superhuman and/or suprahuman social engineering, the realization of supreme being will be the leading aspiration, the raison d’ętre of all that is best in the movement, whilst all that is worst in it – and there will necessarily have to be a pseudo-metachemical corollary of metaphysics – is reserved for those earmarked, largely through gender, for a species of supreme or, rather, primal pseudo-doing, the bound somatic corollary, in pseudo-metachemistry, of the free psychic supremacy of the metaphysical.


Be not deceived! A society resembling ‘Kingdom Come’ cannot come to pass unless there is a sharply-defined distinction between ‘the Saved’ and the ‘Counter-Damned’, the male metaphysical and the pseudo-female pseudo-metachemical, the former delivered from pseudo-physics and the latter from chemistry at the ‘mass catholic’ southwest point of what I am wont to term the intercardinal axial compass, wherein feminine females are equivocally hegemonic over pseudo-masculine males, like water over pseudo-vegetation, or purgatory over pseudo-earth, or even volume over pseudo-mass, in what is one of the two principal manifestations of the world (the other, of course, being axially irrelevant in physics over pseudo-chemistry).


Lest I become too technical, it is the pseudo-physical ‘last’ who will become metaphysical ‘first’ and the chemical ‘first’ whose correlative destiny is to become pseudo-metachemical ‘last’.  For that is the only way that ‘Kingdom Come’ can succeed, that is, by having a full complement of metaphysical and pseudo-metachemical factors at the northeast point of the intercardinal axial compass on properly church-hegemonic terms in a structure which is non-reductionist and non-utopian in character but, for that reason, very much a viable concern.


Now, ultimately, when it gets properly up and running along what I have in the past described, with good reason, as substance-motivated communally cyborgistic lines, it will be the true communism of Social Theocracy which, pledged to the service of Social Transcendentalism, will expose the communism of Social Democracy for the economic and class-reductionist falsehood that it patently is and always was.


There is no proletarian humanism about Social Theocracy but, rather, an unequivocal endorsement of ‘man overcoming’ in conjunction with ‘world overcoming’ such that will lead not to a new kind of man but to the superman and, for the religiously sovereign, the suprahuman cyborgistic communes whose raison d’ętre, at any rate in relation to the metaphysical, will be the truthful realization of joy, as of the supreme being to the exclusion, barring pseudo-metachemical pseudo-hatred of free soma, of all else. 


Only thus will Paradise truly reign, as of the godly heavenliness over the pseudo-devilish pseudo-hell for all Eternity and Pseudo-Infinity, and ultimately not on earth but in the space-centre apotheosis of true evolutionary progress and counter-devolutionary counter-regression that, with the avoidance of utopian reductionism, will truly signify the culmination of ‘Kingdom Come’ in the gender-differentiated two-tier structure of ‘the Celestial City’ wherein a place for the pseudo-Vanity Fair of the pseudo-metachemical will continue to exist a plane down, as it were, from the metaphysical and their divine entitlement to heavenly bliss.