Paradox

Just observed something -

The surest means of protection is destruction. The only way to ensure certain death is to prolong life - in an oxygen chamber, if need be.

Hence, the only sure way to ensure that God continues to exist is to destroy God. (The surest way to kill mankind is to seek immortality). That way, once God no longer exists, then one will begin to deal with the premise that the self exists. To seek anything further, one will need to look beyond the self. This process will lead on to an answer, which cannot manifest itself to those who are grappling with the initial premise.

If the answer is presented to those who are yet to come to terms with objective reality, there will be a violent revolt. Keeping the answer around will ensure an unstable equilibrium. Once the answer disappears from sight, then the responsibility of evolution will rest squarely on the shoulders of the self - which is good. As one moves from being in an outward - seeking to a self - sufficient to an outward - giving state, the answer may present itself again. By which time, the answer may not be needed at all. After all, God helps those who help themselves.

This is a curious paradox.

Yet, this paradox must exist to ensure that our ecosystem is stable and continues to survive. Which brings me to a second observation - a logically consistent system must have at its core an unprovable, inconsistent, paradoxical supposition.