​Chapter 29. Reverse Engineering the Creator

If I seek a blueprint for apotheosis, I need look no further than the architect of the prison itself. For millennia, the Abrahamic traditions have painted a portrait of the Sovereign. While I reject their demand for worship, I must study their model of power. And when I analyze the behavior of the Creator — whether named Yahweh or the Absolute — I discover a god's operating system.

(1) The first characteristic is asymmetrical morality. The God of the scriptures establishes a rigid moral law for his creation, yet he remains utterly unbound by it. He commands "Thou shalt not kill" and drowns entire civilizations in floods. He commands truth and sends "lying spirits" to deceive kings. Not hypocrisy, but the privilege of the Sovereign. Morality is a horizontal constraint applied to equals or subordinates; it does not apply vertically. The Creator proves his status by acting above the ethical code he imposes on others. The practitioner who wishes to become a god must excise the implant of objective morality. To be Sovereign is to act from a position where the law is something you issue, not something you obey. Destroying internal norms removes the mechanisms of submission and restores the capacity for command.

A Christian apologist will object: "But God subjected himself to his own law. Christ became human, suffered, and died on the cross — in genuine agony, having emptied himself of divine knowledge (kenosis). He did not know with certainty that he would rise. His cry 'My God, why have you forsaken me?' was real despair."

Even if this theological claim is granted, the asymmetry remains intact. The difference is ontological status, not knowledge. Christ's human nature was always underlaid by divine essence — the two natures united in one person (hypostatic union). His suffering occurred within a metaphysical safety net. Even if the human consciousness of Jesus experienced genuine fear, the divine logos could not be destroyed. At worst, the human vessel would perish while the divine essence remained untouched. The human believer possesses no such dual nature. When a human suffers and dies, there is no divine substratum guaranteeing continuity. The Christian is told to "take up his cross" and follow Christ's example, but the conditions are incomparable. Christ had ontological insurance; the human does not. Christ's submission was a controlled descent with a guaranteed return path; the believer's submission is a one-way transfer of sovereignty with no escape clause. The entire incarnation was initiated by divine Will. The Father did not compel the Son — the Trinity orchestrated the plan in agreement. God chose to limit himself temporarily, but this choice is an expression of sovereignty. A king who voluntarily wears peasant clothes has not ceased to be king; he has demonstrated that his power includes the ability to traverse ontological levels at will.

(2) The second characteristic is absolute self-reference. When asked for his name, God does not define himself through external relations. He does not say "I am the King of the Earth" or "I am the Good." He says: "I Am That I Am" (Ehyeh Asher Ehyeh). He defines himself by his own existence. He requires no external witness to validate him and no logic to justify, while the human subject is trained to define himself relatively — as a son, a citizen, a good person, a believer.

To avoid being digested by the Absolute, the practitioner must achieve this same tautological density. He must become a being who justifies his existence by existing. He must stop asking "Am I good?" or "Am I right?" and reach the state where "I Will" is the only validation.

(3) The third characteristic is the monopoly on reality. God operates on a simple principle: his Will becomes objective fact. He speaks ("Let there be light"), and the environment rearranges to match his internal image. He does not adapt to the world; the world adapts to him and his creations fully adapt. He establishes rules and taboos to make his subjects predictable and consumable. By imposing a form upon them, he makes them compatible with his own system, since assimilation requires compatibility. To eat something, you must first break down its structure into simple nutrients.

To avoid being metabolized, the practitioner must become incompatible with God's stomach. The "sins" of the Left-Hand Path — pride, rebellion — are the traits of the Creator appropriated by the creature. The system calls them "evil" because they are the attributes of divinity. When a human acts like a sheep, he is "good" (edible); when a human acts like a god, he is "evil" (indigestible).

This reveals mimetic rivalry as a method of self-deification. I observe the predator to become like him, and destroy the norms he installed because those norms are the digestive enzymes of the soul. I isolate myself because he is isolated and harden my heart because he is hard. "I will not pity, nor spare, nor have mercy, but destroy them" (Jeremiah 13:14) — compassion is a weakness God does not share.

Mimetic rivalry is a transitional method. The Sovereign copies the Creator to surpass the need for the model. Once these mechanisms are internalized, the practitioner ceases to look at the teacher. He becomes a parallel axis, no longer defined by a central reference, but functioning as his own origin. The final stage of apotheosis is when the question "Am I like God?" is replaced by the statement "I am."