Without question, then, 

since we reside in neither 

side, we must live in

 

 the synthesis between both. 

Purgatory’s the only 

 

other clear option. 

My perception, therefore, is 

that heaven, hell and 

 

purgatory are levels 

of conditions of being.

 

I no longer use, 

with any frequency, ‘good’ 

or ‘bad’ with any 

 

accuracy for moral 

judgements. More often I muse 

 

on the correctness 

or incorrectness of acts 

employed by humans, 

 

accounting for their reasons, 

when assessing behavior. 

 

Yet, there’s a major 

immense defense against my 

moral assessments. 

I lack omniscience as does 

every other human. 

 

Some such humans who 

seek total obedience 

speak with absolute 

 

secular and/or sacred 

authority bequeathed by 

 

some higher power 

sheathed by any who’d refute 

their final judgements. 

 

As consequence I’m content 

to keep my council private.

 

I must pilot my 

own course to be a zealot 

or a hermit, but 

 

I can’t be static in a 

dynamic reality. 

 

I must always choose. 

The first order of business 

is not what to choose, 

 

but how to choose, correctly. 

“What standard shall I abide?” 

 

first rides upon: “How 

should I choose a good standard 

which anchors that choice?”

Conundrum and Dilemma ! ! 

The chart of Reality’s 

 

Complexity gives 

insight that might right your ship’s 

course through rough water. 

 

The thesis/antithesis 

juxtaposition conjures 

 

the choice between two 

systems in which to anchor 

the course upon which 

 

to traverse your journey toward 

Earth’s last ride in your black hearse. 

 

With great certainty, 

I choose a fate anchored to 

the Uncaused Cause of 

 

the First Cause which pauses me 

to reflect upon what that 

 

exact choice entails. 

Lacking omniscience leaves me 

adrift once again. 

 

I am anchored to what I 

can’t completely, truly know. 

Enter the rising 

of institutionalized 

religions’ holy 

 

castes of men, women, prophets 

who audit our choices. 

 

Take note: scientists 

missed inclusion in the mist 

of wonder workers. 

 

Even worst, all scientists 

resist lack of any proof 

 

when making statements 

about definitive truth. 

Hence, a great divide 

 

would ensue to hide the fact 

that all language encodes and 

 

decodes all human 

perceptions, speculations, 

decrees and reprieves. 

Therefore, unfortunately, 

I must rely on my self, 

 

my soul, to know what 

I should bestow upon the 

Uncaused Cause of the 

 

First Cause’s natural core. 

My ship is stabilizing 

 

by realizing 

my belief that the Thesis 

sources creation, 

 

not utter devastation, 

and my faith that I’m correct 

 

that I should reject 

the Antithesis without 

a hint of regret. 

 

My ship’s now on course toward the 

source of my creation with 

 

satisfaction that 

the Creator can be known 

by what is shown through 

 

evolution’s slow progress. 

In conclusion, it is true 

 

I lack omniscience, 

BUT, I have intelligence, 

diligence, and a 

learned conscientiousness that 

are fine characteristics 

 

bequeath by my source, 

the Great Creator, whose force 

brought forth the state of 

 

being purified by real 

concrete learning infused through 

 

experiencing 

tangible consequences 

from the choices made 

 

via exercising one’s 

free will’s function to fulfill 

 

our creator’s 

natural tendency to 

instill the power 

 

to improve that behooves us 

to choose to learn that will turn 

 

one’s naïveté 

into more penetrating 

comprehension that’s 

 

more genuine acceptance 

and appreciation of 

 

creation’s order 

be it random, precise, tense, 

bedlam or placid.