God or the gods does/do not become, mortals become by experiencing the revealing of the god as the presencing of what presences, which as such is always the presencing of the future.; to say we are futural as oriented towards it is the same as saying we are oriented towards the god, which is as (ex)change, in which the god passes and presences as World and Earth, or more precisely as their self-same difference in revealing and concealing, and thus simultaneously the past as World-Self.
Event is the abyssal ground of the ecstases of time: future, past, and their jointure as presencing. Event opens World as revealing and Earth as concealing/protecting. As such event is the event of World-Self.
Event appropriates the site or place of presencing at which future reveals its occurrence as Self and thus as World, and is protected/concealed by Self as past, as World-Self itself, thus appropriating earth to world in their specific difference, mortal to god, past to future, in the now-here that we ourselves are. The “present” is only the past perfect, things viewed as present-at-hand as they have been, as re-presented. But things ‘are’ insofar as they recur, and thus are determined by Be-ing as (ex)change. Only Event occurs, things are things insofar as they recur (or fail to) from moment to moment as the self-same, and as different thus reveal (ex)change as such. In anticipation and its fulfillment/unfulfillment we are oriented towards the god, the future, and recollectively retain it as past, the Self in both its individual and shared sense. In this stretching from recollection to anticipation we can be ontological in the sense of experiencing the (ex)change that determines, and thus things as determinate. Each jointure of the event is eternal, the eyeblink, yet each is a different eternity. The god, the future, isn’t simply eternal, the god is all eternities, each as its own momentary appropriating event, and thus eternity itself is a mode of the temporal. The god and the mortal are oriented toward one another: the mortal is the place where the event of the god’s passing occurs, where things that recur are determined by being and experienced as determinate in the jointure of god and mortal, world and self, future and past. The ‘present’ is fictional, there is only the presencing of the god in the event which conjoins future to past. The ‘moment’ of presencing, which we determine as the present, is the time-space, the now-here, that we ourselves experience as the clearing in which beings can be.
History as history of World-Self is always mythos or narrative. To think history philosophically means to think historiology historically. This is not a simple tautology, since historiology itself has a history, and the only appropriate, or philosophical, way to think the historiological is through that history. History as concerning the past, rather than the past perfect as what has been retained, is protected, concealed, and therefore always speculative; hence Hegel’s thinking is simultaneously and necessarily historical and speculative. The historiological is rational because rationality is historiological and both arise together as intertwined from non-rational history and historical non-rationality, and this historicality is not merely the historiology of the rational, but the proper history of understanding. There can be no logistikon, no measure of experiencing that which presences, without the pharmakon by which experiencing is made habitual, so that we are not overwhelmed by each moment in its pure momentousness.
Without experiencing Event, Ereignis, the revelation of revealing itself and thus the understanding of understanding, we can neither understand historically nor understand history as the history of understanding. The basis of history is the future as destining, the future as the god, which through presencing at the site mortals provide, becomes history as passing.
Only from within the experience of Ereignis can we begin such a history of understanding as a destining in which we become not simply mortal, but fully human, and thus fully divine, since in the event god and mortal, reality and Self, are not separate. In the event the god passes in mortal projection and are exchanged anew. Reality presences from the future, as such is always future as the god, yet we are reality as projected potential, and thus in being fully human as the place of presencing, we are simultaneously the god actualized as the sheltering of what presences, revealing its Self as World, which is simultaneously our Self. Things in their self-insistent recurrence are determined anew by each evental jointure of future and past, each moment, god and mortal, revealing and concealing as (ex)change of the self-same. \
Development is increase in the probability of recurrence of the self-same, arising from self-insistence as drive, and increase in complexity of what is self-same and can recur. Development itself became evolutionary, which means simultaneously shared, and became societal, which means simultaneously individuated. Development has its telos in the revealing of what presences as such, a revealing which is a Self revealing of the god, not in the sense of the revealing of a pre-existing being but revealing itself as the shared Self which we are. In understanding not merely the Self and reality as adult reflexive self-consciousness, but the Self as reality, the future as such becomes questionable in its specific difference, a question which can only be experienced as the passing of the last god.
The metaphysics of presence as the present, as that which is present-at-hand by having-been, is both mytho-logical and logo-mythical, or onto-theo-logical. Heidegger’s destruktion of metaphysics is simultaneously a recovery of beginning itself in Western thinking, a beginning that is already the culmination of a non-historiological history of a pre-rational logos, experienced from the perspective of the post-rational arising from the failure of the rational itself in Kant As recovery of beginning it is an other beginning, one that recovers what was not retained in the first beginning.
This experience is itself a historical event, an experience of Hegel, Holderlin and Schelling. It is the self-same (and thereby) different event as those occurring in the lives of Marx, Nietsche and Heidegger, among others. While all understood understanding arises in this event, since it is precisely the revelation of revealing as what is understood and how it is understood, Heidegger and possibly Nietzsche understood the event as such, as appropriating, enowning mortal to god as past to future, as Ereignis, out of which the ecstases of temporality arise, the mortal as the site, the place, of the arising of temporality, and thus a topology of Being. This appropriating event exposes not only the difference but the jointure of future and past, god and mortal, and the site in which they are conjoined, allowing the leap into Da-sein as that site, a leap by which we become fully human and fully divine. The leap is the leap into the mystery, the unknowable beyond the horizon of the future, the god as it gods. If we dare the leap we land on (ab)ground, that upon which we always stood, but experience it as such for the first time. The leap is both recollective and anticipatory, anticipating the future as the passing of the god, in which it passes into recollection, concealing and preserving it. The act of understanding is that of experiencing the difference in each recurrence of the self-same as the presencing of the thing.
Idolatry consists in representing the god by substituting and substantializing means of exchange, the god as Janus, for exchange itself, the god proper, as Chaos, the futural horizon, which in its concealed presencing passes into the World-Self which recollects, shelters and preserves.
Christianity preserved both the god of exchange and its idolatry as currency by retaining and concealing both. It has the truth without understanding the truth. (Ex)change as granting, in love, in care, in concern, is that truth.