If that weren't enough, there is also a personal issue involved here.  If Deity/God is the epitome of Love, Wisdom, Justice and Power (as most religions contend) then why hasn't It saw fit to allow us to understand our purpose relative to the ever changing nature of ourselves?  Because It hasn't, we remain vulnerable to our own questioning and hence to all who would deceive us.  Additionally, we're forced to wrestle with our doubt while supposedly facing the constant threat of terminal judgment by Him.  How we can be "justly" judged when we are precluded from confirming the 'truth' that would allow us to act responsibly is yet another Divine enigma.

Under mounting pressure from scientific evidence, the Catholic Church recently decided to take counter measures.  It did so by incorporating evolution into its concept of creation.  In this way it hopes to internalize future debate in order to moderate and otherwise silence it.  But even if the Church is successful, it still does not resolve the problems that evolution raises.

If reasoning had not been inherently compromised by a lack of sufficient logical insight we would not be in the dilemma we're in.  Instead, we would be able to confirm 'truth' and thereby understand why we should incorporate it into our lives.  If we then chose not to, it correctly follows that we could be "justly" held accountable for this decision.  However, if we can't understand the necessity that 'truth' demands, then we shouldn't be held accountable for ignoring its cause.  And to date, we have not been able to understand what constitutes 'truth,' because of the absence of 'certainty.'  As a result, we remain blind to how justice works.

Any of these logical inconsistencies could have spelled the demise of man's belief in Deity/God -- were there not an intuitive factor at work within us.  However, there is; and it is responsible for conjuring up the interim fix that has kept the initial debate about Deity/God alive.  It is called "faith" -- and it serves to bridge the gaps in our disassociated understanding of Deity/God.  Although it has undoubtedly provided solace for the less demanding, it too has proved unable to satisfy the demands of logic.  This is because faith's application is inherently flawed.  We know this to be true, because its application is not limited to the individual.  When faith is employed outside of the individual, as a binding agent for a group (church), it inevitably causes us to become vulnerable to the disparity in knowledge that naturally exists between us.  This in turn causes faith to be predisposed to give credence to "authoritative acceptance."  When that happens, authority is then able to promote ideas that compromise us in ways we never intended.  Hence faith makes us vulnerable to those who would purposely or inadvertently mislead us.

So, because faith is not guided and otherwise constrained by logical necessity, it was destined to cause real problems for mankind.  The Inquisition, the Crusades and the Holocaust are but a few stark reminders of the tragedy it is capable of promoting and thereafter sustaining.  Because of faith's predisposition to suppress common sense, some of the world's worst atrocities have wound up being carried out in the name of Deity/God.  Were faith anything other than "blind," this would have never happened.

To begin with, the acceptance or rejection of Deity/God is no longer optional, it is now logically mandatory.  This spells the demise of both atheism and agnosticism.  It also exacts a real cost upon the believer as well.  It does this by limiting reason's conceptualization of Deity/God to the temporal constraints that allow for our difference.  The importance of this cannot be overstated because it is within the framework of these limitations that our freewill arises.  Hence our mutual adherence to them is essential to freewill's continuance.  Both depend upon our ability to emulate the unity inherent in Deity/God's nature, since it alone enables the possibility from which our freedom springs.

We are able to partake in Deity/God's unity by co-opting its possibility in the form of the unification of self -- individually and collectively.  Doing so is what actually constitutes freewill's function.  Therefore, if we fail to understand the unity of which we are about, then our actions are destined to sequentially limit our access to freedom until death becomes our only option.  

Hence, this proof not only defines Deity/God (within time) and proves the necessity for His existence (within thought), but it also advances an understanding about Him that is central to the experience of ourselves -- since it inherently promotes the exercise of our freewill and the benefits that necessarily spring from its correct use.

So by manifesting Himself within the field of human knowing as 'certainty', Deity/God has now established the grounds for a "just" judgment for believer and non-believer alike -- one that is both immediate and undeniable.  These are essential elements to any final judgment; and an obvious indicator to its onset.  Moreover, this judgment does not violate either our freewill or Deity/God's previously declared commitment to love us.  It is this consideration that truly represents the benevolence of a Deity/God worthy of our worship.

Undoubtedly, scripture holds many rich imaginings about Deity/God's return.  However, when considering them a little common sense is in order.  If Deity/God were to just materialize in our world -- in all His glory -- His presence would immediately destroy our ability to hold on to our own difference.  Preoccupation with the infinite has that effect.  Once our consciousness was dispersed our cause would inevitably be lost.  Hence Deity/God has need for something far more subtle, yet equally effective.  That something must be able to impose itself upon everyone in the same exact way, even as it yields the means by which one's intentionality is successfully clarified.  Without this clarification, we remain capable of claiming that our judgment is unjust.  Overcoming this objection is fundamental to the legitimate implementation of justice itself, a precursor to His return.

By entering into the world as 'certainty' Deity/God would successfully negates this liability.  In the process, It would also force the rewriting of the moral fabric by which the individual understands his /her option to experience freedom.  This impact upon morality is destined to impact upon the world of ethics as well; since ethics is necessarily grounded in the understanding of morality.  Hence the proof will also necessitate a rethinking of the constraints that allow for group identification and interaction.

Among the first to feel this impact will be the world's religions.  'Certainty' demands their immediate and incontestable unification.  It does this by necessarily dispensing with all doubt relative to the existence, nature, and necessity of Deity/God.  Hence difference in belief is no longer acceptable unless it's purely cosmetic.  Having been at odds for millennia, unification is destined to be a difficult obstacle to overcome.  Hatred and mistrust between sects run deep.  But, as I indicated in a recent letter to the head of the World Council of Churches:

"Anything less than unification cannot fulfill religion's God given custodial obligation to man; since it defeats construction of a moral /ethical imperative capable of overcoming the divisiveness that religion promotes in the affairs of man -- divisiveness that is now poised to destroy all mankind."

I then appealed for a cooperative effort to construct a mutually acceptable presentation to the World Council of Churches' assembly in Harare, Zimbabwe (Africa)  to proclaim the "immediate necessity for the unification of religion stemming from the entrance of 'certainty' into the field of human knowing." [see An Appeal to the WCC].  This same appeal was also sent to the heads of all the major religious organizations that comprise the World Council.  Other key interfaith groups were likewise included.  Unfortunately, this appeal fell on deaf ears.

Religion isn't the only one on the hook here.  This imperative to unify holds true for all other human disciplines as well, even though the specifics by which 'certainty' finds application within them varies.  In the world of science, it assumes to force as a new and undeniable understanding of 'time.'  Since 'time' is of singular importance to the conceptualization of reality as science perceives it, this new understanding is poised to have a significant impact upon science as well.  

Of greatest importance yet is the effect that 'certainty' is poised to have upon the interface between philosophy, theology and the sciences.  It is here that it is destined to force a rethinking of both the direction and application of technology.  This is crucial to the future survival of mankind.  At present, scientific disciplines are out of control, quantifying information and creating alternate realities at a pace that outstrips the individual's ability to understand their relevance.  The result has been cataclysmic.  See Cause for Urgency if you have not done so.

Without a unifying constraint upon these disciplines, it's only a matter of time before the disillusioned find a way to push some result past the point of control, thereby promoting the chaos intrinsic to our self-destruction.  Hence there is a need to implement this constraint with all haste.  Obviously the means to constrain our rush to knowledge cannot come from any predefined power base.  Economic and political forces in the world would be quick to prevent it.  Founded upon differing ideologies that have led to a history of conflict, it is only natural that they should see change as threatening to their status quo -- unless it can be otherwise justified.

This leaves only one place from which the impetus to constructive restraint can come.  It must come from within one's self.  In doing so however, it must have the ability to affect every human person in the same identical way -- irrespective of their prior affinity to believe.  Additionally, it must also promote this change with an immediacy capable of stemming our current rush to self destruction.

There is only one way to achieve all this, and it is by introducing 'certainty' to the current mindset of mankind.  It alone can demonstrate (to our reasoning process) the dynamics of a 'truth' capable of guaranteeing our continuance -- irrespective of where and when that continuance finds cause to be.  It does this by inherently promoting a "universal" understanding that is equally effective across all time and circumstance.  As such, it serves equally as well whether it is being used as justification to oneself, one's fellow man, or to Deity/God.  The arising of 'certainty' within the field of human knowing, at this critical juncture in time, suggests that Deity/God may very well be giving mankind one last chance to save itself, before It must necessarily intervene.

No one disputes the right of the self indulgent to destroy themselves.  What they don't have is the right to destroy the innocent in the balance.  Technology has now given them this capability and it runs counter to the foundational guarantee of continuance inherent in the idea of self realization.  This causes it to be a fundamental abuse of not only our freedom but a direct affront to what we understand to be Deity/God's nature --  a fact that no one can any longer deny due to the emergence of 'certainty.'

Unfortunately, organized religion has proved unable to assume its rightful role in this equation, because it is beset with far too many ideas that are stuck in another time.  Still, it is understandable why they have remained overly cautious about change.  Without 'certainty' to point the way, it has been impossible to determine what is right.  At best, you only wind up exchanging one questionable idea for another; and, this waffling undermines the confidence of existent and prospective believers.  Philosophy has proved this to be true beyond any shadow of a doubt.  Because of its constant vacillation, regarding what constitutes truth, it has lost its credibility and hence prominence within the academic community.

Before the popularization of knowledge, few questioned anything.  Those who did were quickly silenced by existing authority.  With the spread of education things became more tenuous.  People soon came to expect change, because education inherently promoted its value.  Unable to compete with the progress demonstrated by other avenues of thought, religion withdrew into censorship.  There in the mystery of not-knowing, with fear as its main ally, it found the means to continue to impose its will.  In the process it reinvented itself around the miracle.  Coupled with the emotional fervor that miracles evoke, these instances of aberration have successfully persuaded undisciplined minds to condone ignorance for thousands of years.

How miracles occur, why they occur, and who or what is responsible for them are all things that we cannot qualify, since we are inherently inclined to see everything that exceeds our temporal limitations in the same exact way.  Even when bona fide, miracles have little to do with promoting the logical bridge between faith and reason that is required to liberate our freewill.  Hence, they cannot help us in the struggle to take responsibility for ourselves.  Because of this, they should not be promoted beyond the actual circumstance that gives rise to their occurrence. 

So that all understand -- my intent here is not to try and place blame.  In most cases, traditional efforts to characterize Deity/God and our responsibilities to Him were as good as those living at the time were capable of making them.  What they are not, is adequate to the time in which we now live.  We are rapidly approaching a cataclysmic showdown of incalculable proportions, one that we were not even capable of imagining only a short time ago.  It calls for a new understanding that factors in the possibility for the end of all sentient life on earth.  The very existence of this threat indicates that life was not self determined as evolution suggests, since it does not contain the means by which to ensure its own continuance.  Only by merging with that which is self-determined (Deity/God) is this guarantee instated.  To do that we must have access to 'certainty.'

Hence all belief's, consciously or unconsciously, employ a slightly different twist to qualify Deity/God by way of power.  As a result, the world has and continues to live with the idea that Deity/God condones the use of power to achieve the good.  The problem with this conclusion is that the idea of what constitutes the good varies widely throughout the world.

The result is a schism that prevents the world's religions from coming together long enough to raise a moral standard capable of possibly altering the future destruction of mankind.  Instead, they remain embroiled in a controversy over whose interpretation of Deity/God is more correct.  The inability to logically determine an answer to this question is what then allows each to continue to justify their difference.

To overcome this impasse, so that they might work together toward  trying to resolve the world's current crisis, their leadership must come to understand that there are specific limitations that constrain mankind's ability to think.  It is these limitations that are shared by everyone similarly -- irrespective of their race, color, creed or current persuasion.  More importantly, it is only within the framework of these limitations that a universal representation of Deity/God is possible.  This is what is needed and this is what 'certainty' brings to the table.

It alone provides access to the ultimate characterization of freedom that a reflective process bounded by limitation can conceive.  As such, it is a tangible manifestation of possibility itself -- or Deity/God in time.  Unlike man's prior imaginings of what Deity/God must be like, this one shows us that It is NOT the unconstrained possibility that we previously thought.  Instead we now know that It is self constrained within time, finding expression by way of unity.  This fact causes unity to be of singular importance to us.