MB> So, are our problems of history really an intellectual problem to be
 MB> solved by consciousness?  This is what I would call a mistake.  To
 MB> understand the _meaning_ of God is an intuitive undertaking, not an
 MB> intellectual one.
   I would have to ask you, Mark, to explain what it is you mean by the 
bove.
Honestly, it is incomprehensible to me.  History is man's understanding of
what IS (including how it got that way) and there IS no single meaning 
eidos)
only several configurations according to crystalizations of various
hierophanic events as experienced in consciousness as dominating "epochs."  
f
course, this occurs in consciousness.  Where else COULD it occur.  I can't
fathom what you mean by something being "solved by consciousness."  The
experience of tension in man's existence as existence in what Plato called 
he
metaxy (in-between the divine and the human) is well documented as is the
differentiations of the symbols generated by such tension over epochs of the
past occuring in various parts of the world.  Attempts to "solve" the problem
of what constitutes the totality of reality is PRECISELY what results in the
various "philosophical SYSTEMS" which have proven to be illusory and wrong.
"History" only makes sense when it INCLUDES the open course of the future but
it is transacted NOT BEFORE THAT FUTURE but before God in the sense of 
before
the totality of reality, eternity, or whatever symbol seems most suitable as
long as it means the same thing.  Use the Platonic symbol of the "epikeina" 
f
you prefer or the Anaxamandrian symbol of the "boundless" (aperion).  
Sincerely, 
                                     Frank
                                                                              
                                                       
--- PPoint 2.05
---------------