Here is the alternative. Imagine that ALL that exists is an interweaving of energies and forces. Creation is simply the matrix in which all these energies and forces are gathered. Certain specific collections of energies/forces have unusually high importance in maintaining the order of creation--These we refer to as Neteru.

Comment : This has a suspiciously New Age flavor to it. Is this an attempt to convert the House membership through the co-opting of House doctrine? Certainly, this would not be the first time that the New Age movement had written its notions into the lore of another culture. Consider the now notorious abuses of both Native American and Celtic traditions which became fashionable during the 1990s and late 1980s, in New Age literature. One will have ample historical justification for skepticism, when notions which sound so reminiscent of the New Age, are attributed to the native traditions of Africa.

I would also question whether this theory would be especially relevant even were it true. We are made of collections of atoms (which in turn are made of subatomic particles), the behavior of which may be described using Quantum Mechanics. Does it follow that an understanding of Quantum Mechanics will be especially useful, in the interpretation of history or literature? By knowing Physics, does one know man?

Obviously not.

While a study of the realm the gods or the netjeru inhabit would no doubt be fascinating, were it possible for us, the question I must ask here is a familar one. How could we ever test our theories? By noting the reactions of the gods (or netjeru, as your faith will incline you) to our holding prospective hypotheses as beliefs? This would seem unpromising.

How does the 'researcher' turn a willfully blind eye to his own uncertainty, without losing his objectivity to the extent that he succeeds, and the genuineness of his faith to the extent that he fails? If the gods may perceive our thoughts so clearly that they are drawn to us, because of our theoretical notions regarding them, how could they fail to notice something so basic, as the anxiety that comes from the feeling that one is living a lie? Is one to imagine that one can fool the lords of creation into mistaking play acting for genuine conviction as one tries to pass off a wild guess, as if it were genuine knowledge? What a low estimate some must have of divine intelligence, to embrace such insincerity as part of their plan to grow closer to the Divine.

Even if, inexplicably, we were to succeed in creating this illusion, having fooled the gods, how could we escape the the fact that we had fooled ourselves? Confronted with our own initial uncertainties, we would, under this plan, have gone into denial about them. Having put ourselves into that frame of mind, would we be truly honest with ourselves as we interpreted the results, or would we have preconditioned ourselves to ignore that which looked unfavorable?

Conversely, once the 'experimenter' ceases his initial test of this 'new theory', and returns to his initial belief system for yet another comparison, his memory of earlier feelings having become clouded by the passage of time, how unbiased will his test be? If the netjeru do have some human-like characteristics, and the worshipper alienates his 'parent' through his neglect and through his denial of the parent's personhood, he will likely encounter a diminished relationship when he returns for a comparison, while his relationship with whichever entity chose to relate to him on the terms he set before would still be fresh and true. Thus, perversely, the proposed methodology will favor a positive result, should Leah's hypothesis be false.

Such perverse consequences will invalidate any research methodology, as any statistician or experimentalist will tell you. One needn't even postulate the existence of malevolent beings who will delight in leading the worshipper astray, by masquerading as the worshipper's 'parent' during the trial period, as some religions would. Were deities, or aspects of deity, so numerous that almost any intensely felt prayer likely to be answered, albeit not necessarily as well as it might be, owing to the chance similarity between one's mental image, and some third entity one hadn't thought of at the time, this would be enough to lead to the perverse results described above. Such a possibility scarcely seems inconceivable, if one starts by presuming a religion which named its deities, or aspects of deity, by the thousands.

"Yes", an apologist for Leah's position might say, you've found a new netjer, and what's wrong with that?" And if one blindfolds oneself, and goes out in the world to seduce the first woman who will have one, in the hope that it will turn out to be one's wife, one will end up up with somebody, but will it necessarily be somebody that one should want? Relationships of any sort, only manage to be relationships, when one sees the other as being irreplacable. To periodically forget that, would be to repeatedly snuff out each new relationship as it took on life. We wouldn't do that with our casual friendships. How, then, could we contemplate treating our far more serious relationships with those we worship, so casually?

To approach this from the theologically subjectivist perspective, as the House of Netjer does, one may be helping to give life to a 'Name', but are you sure that this 'Name' is your 'parent', who you are meant to be with? Either from a theologically objectivist or subjectivist point of view, we are left with the uncomfortable question of just how much real knowledge would be gained, through an experiment of the sort proposed, and how much would be lost to the worshipper, perhaps forever.

Question : "Aren't you being inconsistent, here? What is being described sounds an awful lot like what you advocate on your own homepage!"

... Answer : click here

Beyond these concerns of perverse results, and relationship between man and God, one finds oneself confronted with an even more fundamental concern about the methodology.

Why would the Divine feel closer to us, as a result of such knowledge? We know that we live in a world made up of atoms, but do we sense the atoms? Were others, not of our world, to try to understand us by focusing on this aspect of our existence, would this effort take them more deeply into the subjective world of our experiences, or out of it?

If, on the contrary, the answer to our previous question is, that the gods or netjeru wouldn't care, then how will Leah's proposed experiment in soul searching manage to work? Face it. Belief is not something like a new car, which one can drive around the block. It comes to us legitimately because we are open to it, not because we seek it, trying to impose a form on it. True knowledge does not come through an act of will, but rather in a moment in which we surrender our will, to our judgement.

Click here to continue.