Goofy Theory that is Keeping Me Awake at Night

When we talk about cell replication, the process of our bodies’ growth and renewal, people generally speak of it in terms of mitosis, or actual replication like the “splitting” of cells in a fertilized egg. But the renewal of the cells in our body – a complete renewal that goes in about a 7 year cycle – isn’t replication, it’s replacement. The cells are copied, not replicated, by incoming and organized sub-atomic particles. Cancer is blamed on poor replication – that is, an incomplete or “wrong” replication of the original cell, much like copying a videotape. If you make a copy of a videotape, the copy is degraded. If you make a copy of the copy, it’s even more degraded. And so on and so on and so on. Only some of the body's renewal is achieved by the mitotic cell cycle.

BUT… the process isn’t replication, it’s replacement. So the body is replacing the existing cells with the information from those cells. Our bodies, the way we understand them, could function perfectly for at least 180 years… and that is probably a gross underestimation. The body’s degeneration is blamed on this degraded replication process. The process itself is blamed. And that is fundamentally flawed. The process of cell replacement is perfect – it is the cells that are being replaced that aren’t.

So, logic dictates that as sub-atomic particles coalesce for cell replacement, the only information that is available is the cell itself. If the cell that is being replaced is degraded or damaged, the energy coalescing to replace it does not know that, it only knows the configuration present to copy. The process of replication is degraded because the original cell is damaged, not because the process has failed.

So, how do we damage the cells? What do we do that changes who we are at a sub-atomic and (more globally) cellular level? Surely the toxins of our daily living have an impact: the foods we eat, the synthetic properties of some of those foods, medicines, smoking, alcohol, carbon monoxide, etc etc etc. But understanding also that our bodies are not the solid matter that we perceive, but a chaotic conglomeration of particles that are somehow held together by a specific-to-you electromagnetic field through which all cellular communication is established, don’t we also damage our cells with stress? Anger? Negativity of all kinds, especially if it is constant and pervasive? And where does that come from?

Stress… anger… negative self-talk… feelings of oppression… sadness… injustice… suffering, etc. These are all products of our intellect, of our consciousness of ourselves as separate entities and “thinking” things. We feel a feeling and we label it, nurse it, analyze it, deconstruct it. The same with feelings of elation, joy, tenderness, loyalty, protectiveness. These feelings have names because we gave them names. They have sense because we’ve constructed a sense about them – if only to be able to communicate that feeling to others in a way we hope they will understand. AS “thinking things,” have we ever stopped to wonder where these feelings – just the plain, unlabeled, unanalyzed feelings – come from? How are they generated? What is they’re purpose? Because we don’t “think” these things, we feel them. And then we “think” about them, give them names, and compare experiences.

If our choices are the product of our “intellect,” this “gift” of free will that is often attributed to God, what are emotions the product of? Philosophers for ages have discussed the “mind/body problem,” in that we have sense AND reference of and to our bodies, but neither for our minds, except for the basic concept of “I am.” And despite complete cellular replacement every 7 years or so, we continue to have the sense of “I AM” as a continuous stream of being, even as the energy of our bodies changes to something completely new in a cycle that ends only with the death of the body. And when that electromagnetic information ceases to be exchanged within the body, does it also cease to be exchanged between the thing we have sense of as “I AM” and the relative energy that confirms it? The Laws of Thermodynamics shout a resounding NO.

So, it stands to reason that there is something about us that is not our bodies and something else about us that is not our minds. There is no doubt in my “mind” (haha) that when my body ceases to exchange energy information between its systems, my brain – the thing that we posit contains our central computer and thus the “IAM” part of us – will cease exchanging information as well, as it is the central part of that system indeed. But the energy that compels me to know I AM I forever, throughout a life in which all cellular information is replaced several times, must be in direct systemic exchange with a similar and relative energy. An exchange that would continue regardless of the communication shutdown in the shrouded and particular systems of this coalescence of cells that I call my body. Could this direct systemic energy exchange between the field that dictates my particular energy and whatever relative field that confirms it be the Soul? And could this constant resonation from the relative energy be the source of what we call “emotion,” which, for the purposes of this theorizing would then be held as the electromagnetic and subatomic system of… God?

Systemic Memory Theory says…. Maybe?

So, if emotion is the voice of our “soul,” that connection to the relative system outside the system- of- the- body configuration, and we rely on our “minds” to dissect this emotion, respond to this emotion, label this emotion, deconstruct this emotion, dislike this emotion, avoid this emotion, expect this emotion, make choices in relation to this emotion… then aren’t we arrogantly using our dubious power of discrimination (choice) to subvert, muffle, second-guess, and overanalyze our connection with the Divine? Aren’t we then torturing ourselves with the curse of “free will,” when in fact, that sense of “free will” is only a by-product of an inferior and almost completely unrelated system? And when we do that… aren’t we then killing our personal system? Damaging the cells? Poisoning ourselves?

Soooo… that what’s brings me to the question: What if your Soul’s voice was the ONLY voice you heard? What if you had no choice but to listen and obey? What if you realized that the intellect you rely on for “choices” is only allowing you to second guess the voice of your soul and thus, kill it?

They say that God made the angels first, and they were made only to praise and serve him. The Morning Star was angered (impossible if the creation story is right, but whatever) with God for creating humans, who had free will and could choose to praise God ( or not), and choose many other things as well. Lucifer had it backward. WE are not the blessed ones, because we have the choice to hear our Souls… or not. It seem to me that the systemic connection from “I AM” to the relative and ultimately containing field is constant, unending, irrefutable, and is the True Source, the Divine, the Universal Mud, whatever you want to call it. We do the Great System a grand disservice by failing to nurture the connection, and using the excuse of “free will” for the death of our souls.

In other words: We kill ourselves with “what if?” We kill ourselves with fear. We kill ourselves with denial. We kill ourselves with the belief that we are less than perfect. We kill ourselves with the belief that we are separate, alone, entities unto ourselves and nothing else. WE kill ourselves with the overuse of the inferior system (mind) of the body’s configuration rather than nurturing that system with the energy of the connection to the Source.

I can’t get it out of my head: What if your Soul’s voice was the only voice you heard?