I Solved Religion

An Essay by Gregory Pontha Stancil

Objective: To demonstrate that religion is an entirely natural phenomenon by explaining the natural processes which animate the major aspects of religious systems, including God, the soul, morality, paradise, and spiritual phenomenon, amongst others.

Table of Contents
Solving The Old Testament & Other Religious Codices From Antiquity
A. Ancient Man & Unseen People (pgs. 7-11) B. Ancient Man & The Law Of Cause And Effect (pgs. 11-12) C. Modern Man & Natural Laws (pgs. 12-14) D. The Power Of Personal Experience (pgs. 15-22) E. The Genetic Soul & Survival (pgs. 22-29) F. The Creation Of The Unseen Person (pgs. 29-33) G. Morality Is Synonymous With Survival (pgs. 33-37) H. The Old Codex & Literalism (pgs. 37-45) I. The Formation Of Societies (pgs. 46-50)

Solving The New Testament & Spiritual Phenomenon

A. Aspects of Spiritual Phenomenon (pgs. 51-64) B. Revelation & Adaptation (pgs. 64-80) C. Understanding Covenant & Kingdom (pgs. 80-93) D. Religion Is A Language (pgs. 93-105) E. Paradise & The State of Non-Suffering (pgs. 105-109)

F. Five Categories of Spiritual Phenomenon (pgs. 110-120) G. The Reinterpretation Toolbox (pgs. 121-130) H. Jesus: So What Happened? (pgs. 130-136) I. Appendix (pgs. 137-140)
Copyright 2011. All Rights Reserved.

Essay Summary
Religion is about one thing: control. Mankind has always sought control over the natural phenomenon which determines his survival such as physical health, access to water, the growth of crops, availability of wildlife, weather patterns, and of course, death, amongst many others. Ancient man (correctly) perceived that natural phenomenon was caused by an entity which he could not see but as the natural laws which animate such phenomenon were invisible to him, he (incorrectly) projected that which he could see into the unseen, namely people. The natural phenomenon which the invisible people were perceived as causing were vital to ancient man as they provided the raw materials for the things he needed to survive, such as food, water, and shelter. As a result, he sought to bargain with the invisible people in the same manner which he bargained with visible people: by trading the goods which he possessed for the influence over natural phenomenon which he sought, even using fire to transform his portion of the transaction into the ethereal quality of his trading partners. The monotheistic systems which later developed simply consolidated the numerous invisible people into a single, supreme person, or God, and the spokespersons of these various religious traditions revealed the bargains offered by the supreme invisible person to a particular society to control natural circumstances on its behalf. The nexus between lack of control over natural phenomenon and/or circumstances and the projection of people into the invisible was a universal characteristic of all ancient societies and will always be a basic, human instinct. The difference, of course, was the bargains, and in each revelation, the personality of God was a personification of the characteristics ancient man esteemed and the commands of God were the actions best suited for its adherents survival, both of which were highly unique to the original circumstances facing the audience to which the revelations were addressed. When such bargains survived their original circumstances, the personality and commands of God, both of which were the traits (correctly) suited for its adherents survival in their original circumstances, were (incorrectly) projected as the only and/or eternal characteristics and commands of God, and thus, became sacred codices. Nevertheless, it is the very survival of such bargains which causes them to be immediately modified, as the characteristics and commands of God are always highly specific to the original circumstance, which no longer exists because the revelations own survival creates a new circumstance which the original revelation doesnt address. As a result, the personal characteristics of God are maintained but the interpretation of his commands is changed to best suit its adherents survival in the new circumstance, which creates yet another circumstance. This process of reinterpreting the commands of God to ensure survival in each circumstance, which directly causes another new circumstance, continues indefinitely, and over time, the faith and practice of later adherents have little in common with the faith and practice of the original adherents and major fissures appear between adherents whose contemporary circumstances differ from each other. By definition, when the accumulated modifications of a revelation outweigh the faith and practice of its origin, a new religious system is born, but this is only acknowledged when something which isnt gradual occurs, such as the introduction of a new codex or name for God. Simply put, religious systems, like all living things, begin to die as soon as they are born but give birth to modestly altered offspring in every new circumstance, and this gradualness allows a systems immediate descendants to retain its name, even as future progeny will eventually have little in common with its origins.

In the modern era, every natural phenomenon which has been investigated has unveiled an invisible law as its cause, not an invisible person. Nevertheless, modern man continues to attribute both the formation and initiation of natural laws to that which he, like ancient man, is more familiar with, namely, (invisible) people, until he is able to fully control a particular law himself. Upon gaining control of a natural phenomenon (such as bacterial infections), the notion of it being caused and/or initiated by an invisible person is abandoned, and as invisible laws are being unveiled and harnessed at exponential rates, mankind is slowly transitioning from the era of religion, which unreliably influences perceived invisible people, to the era of technology, which consistently influences actual invisible laws. Within the next two centuries, nearly every natural phenomenon (on earth) which affects mans survival, including death itself, will be harnessed, and there will be little left to attribute to invisible people, which will result in the termination of such bargaining by virtue of its irrelevance, at least in the societies which can afford such technology, which will actually be the minority of the human populous at such a time. The universe is a system of natural laws and religion was mans first systematic attempt to control that which determined his survival. As such, the relationship between faith and reason is not one of reconciliation, but translation, as religion is a universal language (with numerous dialects) which describes, simplifies, and attempts to control natural laws which are perceived as spiritual because they were invisible to ancient man. Despite mankinds instinctive habit of projecting that which he is most familiar with into the invisible, laws are smarter than people, even when they are personified by a supreme invisible person whose commands are the actions best suited for your survival.

Essay Outline
1. Having never witnessed an effect caused by anything but visible people on his local level, ancient man logically deduced that people were also responsible for large (telescopic) and small (microscopic) phenomenon which had no visible cause, but as he could not see these people (or causes), he perceived such phenomenon were caused by invisible people. 2. Ancient man divided these invisible people into two groups, good and evil, based upon the effect each natural phenomenon had upon his ability to survive. As societies formed, ancient man consolidated the invisible people into a single, supreme good person, or God, in direct reection of the one king who ruled over many people on his local level. 3. The personality of the supreme good person was a personication of the characteristics ancient man held in esteem and the commands were a reection of the actions and prohibitions his society needed to survive, both of which were highly unique to the societies contemporary circumstances. As the supreme good person was not visibly objective, it was necessary to codify the ascriptions to protect the collage and commandments from modication by other societies which needed a different set of traits to ensure survival in their differing circumstances. 4. By codifying the collage and commands, ancient man inadvertently preserved an emergency survival guide for a specic society facing a specic set of circumstances. As the circumstances facing societies changed over time, the necessary actions and prohibitions needed to ensure survival also changed. The competing demands of adhering to the authorized revelation yet responding to the challenge of circumstances which differ from the original has always been solved by reinterpreting the commands. 5. The masters objective, like that of the old codex, was survival, but in light of the overwhelming might of Rome and faced with intense persecution by religious authorities, he portrayed survival as beginning at death (or eternal survival), not birth (natural survival). As eternal survival was his aim, the master repudiated the actions and prohibitions best suited for natural survival due to its temporary nature and characterized rejection of the desires of the body and society as the currency of their eternal counterparts. Ultimately, the difference between two systems is always a single trait. Christianity began as a sect of Judaism which (initially) possessed a solitary tenet which differed from the mainstream Judaism of its time, or eternal survival in lieu of natural survival, illustrated by the portrayal of Jesus, the spiritual savior of his physical tribe. 6. The masters commands, though commonly thought of as a moral code, were a literal representation of his followers actions (at the time the gospels were written) attached to spiritual promises and functioned as an encouragement to persevere, not as a code of conduct. His commands are only perceived as a moral code to those who encounter them in circumstances which differ from the original. The churchs elevated status in society has always been a result of adhering to personal and societal norms, not obedience to the commands of the master, as submission to the tenets of eternal survival would cause circumstances which approximate the original to continue indenitely. The systems survival and prevailing popularity, in light of unchanging commands interacting with ever-changing societies, is evidence of it being most adaptable, not most true, as those who embrace the unchanging norms of the eternal body and society are rendered obsolete (in this life) and those who adapt the masters commands

to their contemporary circumstances succeed (in this life) and pass on their modications to the next generation. 7. As the churchs circumstances have changed continuously throughout its history, the actions and prohibitions needed to survive as a system have also changed. The church has not only survived, but also thrived and dominated by offering eternal survival through the maintenance of the characteristics of the supreme good person but seek natural survival in whichever circumstance it has been promulgated by continuously reinterpreting his commands, which are the expression of his abstract personality traits in real situations. It is the extreme demands of eternal survival, or at least perceived as extreme in circumstances which differ from the original, which makes this system most adaptable, as its commands are perceived as impossible, and therefore, are interpreted symbolically, and are then adapted to the norms of whichever culture it resides in. As a result of the vast gulf in societal circumstances and cultural tenets, modern believers can only be described as practicing a humanistic philosophy loosely related to Christianity. 8. Spiritual phenomenon has always been the systems justification for reinterpreting its own codices, beginning with the alteration of the messiahs identity as a military hero and king to a spiritual savior, further illustrated in the new codex by the acceptance of Gentiles into the plan for salvation, rejection of Jewish religious law, and the resetting of expectations in regards to the return of the master. Nevertheless, such modifications did not end in the era of the new codex, but continued, unabated, to this very day, absorbing new traits best suited for natural survival in every circumstance, and as a result of the numerous hands, cultures, and eras it has passed through, morphing in each to ensure its survival, cannot be defined as anything except an entirely new religious system, or Modern Christianity. Each of the major subdivisions of this system have adapted to their differing circumstances and absorbed the beliefs and practices best suited to winning the competition for money, power, and people in the cultures in which they have resided, thus creating four distinct species, or Catholicism, Orthodox, Anglicanism, and Protestantism, which share the same genus of Judaism plus eternal survival, or Original Christianity. 9. The entire spectrum of spiritual phenomenon and experience is 100% natural, both in origin and manifestation, and can be categorized in ve distinct, yet uid and interacting divisions. The majority of said phenomenon is regularly experienced in secular contexts but are perceived as spiritual in religious settings simply because they are portrayed as spiritual, largely with the assistance of clean words (or religious lingo), which arent used in other contexts. Other aspects of spiritual phenomenon are kinks in the physical body which are not understood in any context, and thus, are perceived as spiritual by default because of their unusual nature. The majority of spiritual experiences, such as the presence and/or anointing of God, is animated by the emission of natural energy by the human body which can be measured and proven as entirely natural with equipment from a typical electronic store. As it is invisible (to the naked eye) but tangible, this system has always personied natural energy as a spirit and its effects, such as (temporary) healings and other gifts of the spirit, are portrayed as actions wrought by God. Despite the claims of both religious adherents and skeptics, spiritual phenomenon is very real but also very natural. 10. Religion is a universal language and the same natural process gave rise to different dialects of this shared tongue being spoken in every society which has ever formed. Religion reduced very complex

natural processes into simple concepts such as good and evil, and was essential to ancient man, as survival cares what you do, not what you call it. Religion was also ancient mans rst systematic attempt to control the natural phenomenon which determined his prospects for survival, albeit via attempts to inuence perceived invisible people, and was a forerunner of modern science, which harnesses actual invisible laws.

*There is one and only one rule when reading I SOLVED RELIGION: Read the entire essay.

Solving The Old Testament & Other Religious Codices From Antiquity
A. Ancient Man & Unseen People
As a child, ancient mans ignorance was plentiful. This author will refer to this man as Abraham, not in reference to a specific individual but as a representation of all ancient men. Imagine him. Clothed in skins and carrying a spear in hand, he is now considered an elder in his tribe due to recently turning twenty-two years old, as the average life span of males at the time is in the mid-twenties due to starvation, war, and disease. He has several wives, not because he is a womanizer, rather because the number of warriors in his tribe will determine whether or not they survive due to constant warfare. Picture his life in your mind: the tent which houses his family, the animals he hunts, the fire which provides heat and warmth, his preferred wifes embrace, and the pride that fills his heart at the sight of one of his many children. His body is scarred from many battles but he does not consider them disfigurements to be hidden but trophies of past triumphs to be proudly displayed. As he returns home, he smiles as he sees his preferred wife throwing another piece of wood upon an already raging fire. She embraces him as he approaches, relieved that he has returned safely, and searches his body for wounds that she will treat as he eats dinner. As he eats, she rubs the wound on his arm with leaves she gathered during the day but pauses at the sound of a wail from the tent. Abraham nods at her and she rushes into the tent, as their infant child is now awake and is probably hungry too. As she enters the tent, he is is startled as someone approaches from behind, wrapping him in a massive embrace, which causes him to drop his plate of food. He angrily turns around only to burst into a fit of laugher at the sight of his younger brother, who is dressed in colorful array for the victory celebration they will have as soon as the sun sets. As his brother runs off to help prepare for the celebration and scare more people along the way, Abraham leans over to collect the food which he spilled on the ground and his hand feels something that he knows wasnt on his plate. As he lifts the object, he sees that it is a bracelet made of smooth rocks that are found along the river near his village; he immediately grows suspicious at its presence near his tent, as he has never seen any of his wives wearing such an ornament, and he wonders how it got near his tent. Perhaps a woman dropped it on the ground as she was visiting one of my wives he thinks, or maybe one of my wives went to the river today to make an ornament for one of the kids. Even worse, he thinks, Maybe its a gift from another man for one of my wives, perhaps even my preferred wife, who is very beautiful. But he immediately dismisses this thought as no man in his tribe would be so foolish as to give a gift to one of his wives, least of all his preferred wife. Maybe its a gift for one of my daughters, he decides. He then tucks the bracelet into his pouch and decides to investigate the matter after he finishes his dinner. Why does Abraham become suspicious about the bracelet? Because he knows that someone made it and left it near his tent. He does not have to see the person who made this particular bracelet to know that someone made it. Why? Because he has seen other people make similar bracelets; as a result, he knows there is always a person behind the making of such bracelets, even if he did not see the person who made this particular bracelet nor witness the bracelet being left near his tent. But bracelets arent the only thing that he has seen someone make. Upon returning home, he saw his wife making a fire. Even if she were

in the tent or away from home, he would know that the fire before him was made by his wife. If he were wandering in the forest and came across a fire, he would not have to see a person by the fire to know it was made by someone. Why? Because people make bracelets. People make fires. He has seen people do both things. There were a lot of things around him that were made by people, such as the skins that we wore, the pouch across his chest, the tent in which his family lived, and the food that he ate. He knows these things were made by people because he has seen people make each of them. Sometimes, he made things himself, such as his spear. Now, imagine you walk into a massive factory. As you enter, you look to your right and see a group of people making hats, shoes, and belts. You walk closer to this group to inspect their work and see them using various materials from a large table to assemble the products. Then, they invite you over to the table and you work alongside them, assisting in the production of hats, shoes, and belts. But as the group stops for a short break, you look to the left-hand side of the factory and see rows of shelves, upon which socks, shirts, and jeans are stacked. Unlike the right-hand side of the factory, which is full of people making hats, shoes, and belts, you do not see anyone on the left-hand side of the factory. Nevertheless, it would only be logical to think that someone made the socks, shirts, and jeans on the left-hand side of the factory, even if you did not see the people who made them. Why? Because youve never seen anything but a person make something. Even if a machine is making something, you know there is a person who made the machine, which in turn makes things. In this same way, there were many things that Abraham had seen people make but these things were only a small fraction of all the things he saw. He saw people make bracelets, fires, pouches, tents, food, and spears but he also saw grass, rain, trees, mountains, animals, plants, and everything else that surrounded him. He did not see the people who made these things. Why? Because everything else around him was already made when he became aware of himself and his surroundings. And just like the bracelet, which he knew was made by someone even if he did not see the actual person making it, he knew that everything else, such as the grass, rain, trees, mountains, animals and plants, were made by a person, even if he did not see the actual person making it. Why? Because he had never seen anything but a person make something. Even more, ancient man wasnt aware that anything but a person could make something. Put yourself in Abrahams shoes. See the world through his eyes. Imagine that you have awaken from a 100 year sleep and you stumble out onto the sidewalk of a busy metropolitan area and the entire street is buzzing with activity. On this street, you see two things: things like you, or other people, and thinks not like you, or everything else. As you survey this scene, everything else, such as the sidewalk, traffic lights, buildings, and cars, have already been made and are in place all around you when you awaken. You dont have to see the people who made them to know people made these things. Why? Because youve never seen anything but a person make something. In this same way, when ancient man became aware of himself and his surroundings, everything was already made, such as the trees, plants, animals, rivers, mountains, and the sun and moon. In the exact same fashion that you would know that everything in a metropolitan area was made by people, even if you did not see the people make them, Abraham knew that everything around him was made by people, even if he did not see the people who made them. If you were to present a plant before a small child and ask, How was this made? how would it respond? With the name of a person. Why? Because people are all they know; their entire world consists of people and other things. People are the cause of everything to a small child because they are not aware of any other causes. This mentality is the same as that of Abraham; in fact, this is still the mentality of the vast majority of people in modern times, especially when it comes to large natural phenomenon. For instance, such people attribute the creation of the universe to a person, namely God,

because they cannot imagine anything but a person being able to cause the formation of the world. They were not present at the beginning of the universe to witness a person making it but are absolutely convinced that God created the world. Why? Because people make things; you do not have to witness the person making it to know this. This is the mindset of modern man; this was also the mindset of ancient man. Abraham knows that there is a person behind everything around him. For some things, such as the bracelet, fire, pouch, tent, food, and spear, he has seen people make these things but he has never seen the people who made the grass, rain, trees, mountains, animals, and plants. Nevertheless, he knows they were made by people because he has never seen something made by anything but a person. He isnt even aware that anything can be made by something other than a person. Where are these people? he wonders. He has never seen these people but he knows they exist because he can see what they made. Perhaps they dropped these things like the person who dropped the bracelet, he thinks or maybe they sent them from afar like my enemy shot an arrow from afar. Maybe they made these things then left them like the unattended fire I found in the forest, or perhaps they run away quickly just like my brother startled me then ran away he wonders. But he does know these people exist because he has seen what they made, just like he knows that a fire he stumbles across in the forest was made by someone, even if he doesnt see the person who made the fire. But why did these people make these things? Abraham questions. He knows why people made the things he had seen made. His wife made the fire to cook the food. She made the food to feed him. His enemy made an arrow in order to kill him. He made a spear to kill his enemy. He made a pouch to carry things. He made a tent to house himself and his family. His brother made a colorful outfit in order to amuse him and celebrate their vicoty. And although he has not figured out why someone left the bracelet, he knows that someone made it and he intends on figuring out why someone left it by his tent. But why did people make these other things? he asks again. The answer to this question was the same as the answer to the reason behind the things he had seen people make: It depended upon the effect it had upon him. For instance, why did a person make rain? If it rained a lot in his natural environment and caused dangerous flooding, Abraham thought a person made rain in order to hurt him. If it rained frequently in his natural environment and caused the plants to glow green and bear fruit, Abraham thought a person made rain in order to help him. If it rained intermittently in his natural environment, Abraham thought a person made rain in order to tease him. If it rarely rained in his natural environment, Abraham thought a person made rain and had accidently dropped it. Even more, determining the intentions behind the people who made everything else around him depended upon what effect each, individual thing had upon his ability to survive. Even as Abraham asked and answered the same, logical question in every human society, the effects of the various things which surrounded him were unique to each individual society, based upon its unique circumstances and natural environment. What helped one Abraham didnt necessarily help another, and visa-vera. Also, some of the things made, such as mountains, snow, types of plants and animals, bodies of water, and many other things, were also unique to some Abrahams. The things which surrounded each Abraham were unique. The effect each thing had upon each Abrahams ability to survive were unique. And each Abraham answered the question of intention based upon the unique things which surrounded him and their ability to help or hurt his prospects of survival in his unique situation. Abrahams perception of people he had not seen who made things such as grass, rain, trees, mountains, animals and plant is an example of local logic. Local logic is the process of taking observations from

ones visible and perceptible environment, or local scale, and projecting them on large or small phenomenon, or the telescopic or microscopic scales. For example, local logic says the earth is flat. Why? Because it looks flat from the local scale of human eye sight. It was logical for ancient man to think the earth was flat. It would have been illogical for ancient man to say the earth was anything but flat. Local logic also says the sun revolves around the earth. Why? Because it looks like the sun revolves around the earth from the local scale of human eye sight. But as mankind has progressed, he has learned that which is visible and perceptible on the local scale is rarely the correct description of large and small phenomenon. The idea that the sun revolved around a flat earth was indeed, supremely logical, but was also supremely incorrect. As result of local logic, Abraham treated the people who he had not seen in the same manner that he treated the people he had seen. He gave each of them names because every person on his local level had names. He ascribed personalities to them because every person on his local level had personalities. He did not have to meet the people he had not seen to know their personalities; just like the people on his local level whom he had not personally met, such as the chief of a rival tribe, he knew what these people were like based upon what they did and/or made. No one had ever seen these people, but what they did was all around him, and like the bracelet, arrow, and fire, he knew people could drop, send, or make things without being seen. They were people, just like him, but unseen, or invisible. Abraham called the unseen people who made things which helped his survival good and the unseen people who made things which hurt his survival evil. Now, Abraham could control the things he made. He made things which were essential to his survival, such as tents, spears, and food. But the other things which surrounded him also effected his survival because they were the raw materials from which he made things. So how could he ensure that he obtained the natural materials which were vital to his survival? In the same way that he obtained anything else he wanted but could not make: by bartering with the person who made it. Abraham bartered with the unseen people who made everything else around him which he needed to survive, such as rain, plants, and animals. He bartered with them in the exact manner in which he bartered with seen people who made what he needed: by giving them some of what he made or had in exchange for what they made. Abrahams part of the transaction was unique to each person and/or society but consisted of things such as food, animals, various plants, precious stones or metals, ornaments, or clothing, amongst many other things. But he couldnt give the unseen people the same sort of things he gave seen people because the unseen people provided the raw materials for the things he made to survive. Therefore, he had to give them the best he had, just as he would give a seen person the best he had if what they made was vital to his survival. How did Abraham give these gifts to people who he could not see nor had never met? He gave them in the same manner that he made other things unseen: by fire. And as the fire burned his part of the transaction, it turned into smoke and disappeared into the sky, and his seen gift turned unseen and was received by the unseen people. Abraham perceived that everything else around him, such as the grass, rain, trees, mountains, animals, and plants, were made by individual unseen people, just as everything he saw made on his local level was made by an individual seen person. In addition to the names and personalities of a myriad of unseen people, many other matters concerning the unseen people were considered, such as: Which payments were to be made to which unseen people? How often were payments to be made? Why did the good unseen people not always make things after a payment was made? How could the things made by evil unseen people be avoided? Could an extra payment be given to one, particular unseen person, but not to the others? Even though the people are unseen, where do they actually live? Had anyone ever seen an unseen person? How did the unseen people make things? Besides payments, what else did the unseen

people want us to do? What are the unseen people like? When will the unseen people become seen? These were just a few of many questions the people in Abrahams tribe asked. Abraham answered these questions in the same manner that he communicated everything else: by telling stories. In these stories, he told them the names of the unseen people, described their personalities, explained every aspect of the payment system, clarified the actions of both the good and evil unseen people, shed light on times the unseen person had been seen in the past and would be seen again in the future, and defined the actions that the good unseen people wanted them to do and not do. Abraham told these stories to his tribespeople and they were passed down from generation to generation by word-of-mouth, just like all of the other stories in that time. When tribes gradually joined to create societies, Abrahams concept of the unseen people reflected this transition, and the myriad of unseen people were gradually consolidated into one supreme good person, or God, in the exact manner that one king ruled over many people in his society. The actual Abraham of the Bible did this by selecting one of the many existing unseen people, or Yahweh, who was worshipped by many societies in his region, and consolidated all of the actions of the other good unseen people under his domain. He treated the supreme unseen person in the same manner that he treated the king of the society on his local level. Just as the king on his local level lived in a palace, Abraham built a palace for the supreme unseen person to live in. Just as the king on his local level had a special class of servants to wait up him, Abraham gave the supreme unseen person a special class of servants to wait up him. These stories were passed down, and like the telephone game, they were adjusted, expanded, and altered by each generation until they were finally written down, then were adjusted, expanded, and altered while being passed down in written form. Abrahams written stories are the sacred texts in each religion, and the written stories of the actual Abraham are the Old Testament. Should Abraham be faulted for the local logic which gave rise to a myriad of unseen people and was later consolidated into a centralized unseen person, or God? Absolutely not. It was only logical, locally speaking, to deduce that people had made the things which surrounded him. Why? Because he had never witnessed anything except a person make something and was completely unaware of anything but a person being capable of making something. The actual Abraham was not alone, as every ancient society went through the same, logical process, and reached the same, logical conclusion: unseen people made things, and to obtain these things, one had to barter with them in the form of gifts, offerings, sacrifices, and in the spiritual systems which eventually developed, in the form of prayers and rituals. Each society gave these unseen people different names and personalities, created differing payment requirements, and had unique stories about the actions and visible appearances of the unseen people. Why did Abraham think that everything around him was made by unseen people? Because logic is inextricably linked to personal experience and observation, and in Abrahams time, he was only able to interpret what he observed through the lens of his limited knowledge about his surroundings. Was Abraham wrong? Yes and no. He correctly perceived there was a cause behind everything that surrounded him but incorrectly attributed it to unseen people. Why? Because the unseen laws which caused the formation of everything around him were literally invisible to him.

B. Ancient Man & The Law Of Cause And Effect

Even more, Abraham used the unseen as a way of explaining the seen. Many animals acknowledge what they see, such as the death of a mate, and their reaction demonstrates they understand the question of What happened? But Abraham added a new element which changed the equation. Unlike other living

organisms, many of which acknowledge and react to the What? Abraham asks the question Why? as represented in the following equation: 9+_=14. Let 9 represent a person or thing and let 14 represent the result. When Abraham sees, for instance, a deer fall to the ground, he inspects the deer and sees a spear in its side. So deer+spear=dead deer, or 9+5=14. But what happens when Abraham sees or experiences something which does not have a visible cause, such as a spear, to fill in the equation? For instance, Abrahams preferred wife (9) dies (14). But what is the cause of her death, as there is no spear in her side, nor any other visible cause? Religious skeptics say, Abraham fills in the equation with any number because it is his nature to not allow a Why? to go unanswered. Perhaps, but why does he not allow a Why? to go unanswered? Why does Abraham, and everyone for that matter, always fill in the blank in an attempt to answer the question of Why? behind anything and everything? Some religious skeptics say, There is no Why? behind that which occurs, and they are correct, but for a different reason than they think. The question of Why? denotes intention; it is a question that you ask a person. For instance, upon inspecting the fallen deer, Abraham does not ask the spear, Why have you done this? Instead, he acknowledges the What? or the fallen deer, and upon inspecting it, inquires about the cause, or What killed the deer? The answer, of course, is the spear. He then may turn to ask the person who threw the spear, Why have you done this? as Why? is a question of intention, not causation, even if a person initiated the cause. Simply put, Abraham asks What? twice. The first represents What happened? and the second represents What caused what happened? When Abraham sees his preferred wife on the ground in the tent, he asks What happened? The answer: his wife is dead. Many animals respond to this sort of occurrence. But Abraham then asks, What caused my wife to die? So he searches for the cause but when he does not see a spear or any other visible object which caused her death, he still answers the question of causation. Why? Because he has internalized the law of cause and effect through observation and is aware there is a cause behind everything he sees and experiences. The only problem is the true cause of her death is unseen, at least to him, as he cant see the microscopic bacteria that caused her death. But he still answers the question, not with a number, but with the variable X which represents the unseen. He is correct, in that, the cause is unseen, but as he has never seen anything unseen, he projects an unseen person because he has never seen any cause except a person. His solution: 9+X=14. My wife + unseen person = dead wife. As the death of his wife is a negative thing because its harmful to his prospects of survival, he perceives the X to represent a bad unseen person. So he updates the solution: My wife + bad unseen person = dead wife. He then proceeds to the question of Why? which denotes intention. He asks, Why did a bad unseen person kill my wife? At this point, he answers the question of Why? in a variety of subjective manners. He may think the bad unseen person killed his wife because she did something wrong. He may think the bad unseen person killed her because she did something right. He may think the bad unseen person killed her for any number of reasons. Its not (just) that his subjective answers to this question are inaccurate; the question itself is inaccurate, as unseen laws, unlike (seen or supposedly unseen) people, do not have intentions and thus the question of Why? is not applicable.

C. Modern Man & Natural Laws

The subjectiveness of the Why? is one of the reasons many modern people still hold onto the idea of unseen people even when they are fully aware of the natural laws behind large and small phenomenon. First, they are more familiar with Abrahams unseen people than they are with the mechanisms of the natural world. In addition, they are more familiar with people, personalities, and intentions, in a general,

everyday sense, than they are with the constant, unchanging nature of laws. As a result, when posed with this same equation in regards to phenomenon such as an earthquake, they still defer to local logic. Consider the equation 9+_=14 once again. 9 represents the earth and 14 represents the sudden shaking of a certain portion of the earth, or an earthquake. Abraham inputs a variable, or X, which represents the unseen, but perceives the unseen cause of the earthquake being a person, not only because such laws are unseen to him, but also because he is entirely unaware of their existence. So 9+X=14, or Earth + Unseen Person = Earthquake. He then proceeds to ask the question of Why? which is a matter of intention and only asked to an unseen person, not an unseen law, inquiring Why did an unseen person make an earthquake? If an earthquake destroys his enemy, he will rejoice, saying The unseen person made the earthquake to harm my enemies. Then he will proceed to ask yet another What? such as What did my enemy do to anger the unseen person? If the earthquake harms him, he will mourn, saying The unseen person made the earthquake to harm me. He will also proceed to ask, What did I do to anger the unseen person? He will then ask another What? such as, What do I need to do or not do in the future to avoid angering the unseen person? But as the unseen person is not present to clarify his intentions, no one can regulate what is asked and answered. It then puts the individual person in complete charge of asking and answering the questions in a variety of subjective manners. This system of questioning is extremely appealing to modern man even if he aware of natural laws. Why? Because he is aware of natural laws but cant control many of them, and in the absence of actual control, he still seeks to influence them because they effect his survival and he defers to local logic as a means of doing so. Unlike Abraham, the modern man will answer the equation of 9+_=14 with the correct integer, or the number 5, as the natural laws of tectonic plates are now visible to him. But the laws of tectonic plates arent actually visible to him; he is aware they exist and may acknowledge their function, but he is more familiar with both Abrahams unseen people and people in general. He may input the correct number, or 5, but uses local logic to project intention. Like Abraham, who correctly attributes the death of a deer to the spear then turns to the hunter and asks Why have you done this? the modern man correctly attributes phenomenon such as an earthquake to the natural laws of tectonic plates but projects Abrahams question of intention to the unseen person he believes is behind the visible cause. This is a faulty symptom of local logic. Why? Because the idea of people initiating causes is a 100% local level phenomenon. Simply put, people only cause causes on the visible level on earth. Let us look at this again: Man throws spear at deer. Spear kills deer. A person has caused (thrown) the cause (spear) behind the occurrence (dead deer). But the notion that people cause causes only occurs on earth, and only on the visible level. On the very small, microscopic level, and the very large, telescopic level, laws cause laws. It is not a question of Why? but of What? indefinitely. You may think such an explanation is illogical. It is. Logic is tied to that which you observe on your local level. What do you observe on your local level? People causing causes. But your visible, local level is literally the only place where people initiate causes. When your visible horizons are made larger or smaller, things work entirely different, and in a sense, the rules change on the small and large scale, at least to local logic, which is familiar with how the rules appear on the visible level. Simply put, Abraham would fight to the death insisting the earth was flat...until you put him into a rocket and slowly ascended into space. He would then see things on a large level. He would see that the earth is a sphere, not flat. In this same way, the majority of moderns think people initiate causes. They do. On earth. Not anywhere else. And not on the small or large levels on earth either. In Abrahams time, ancient man perceived a universe upheld entirely by unseen people. Modern man is

now aware of natural laws but thinks, Some things are caused entirely by unseen people and some things are caused entirely by natural laws or Some causes are initiated by unseen people and some causes are initiated by natural laws. Why does modern man believe that unseen people, or God, either causes or initiates some natural phenomenon but not others? Religious thinkers are under the impression that claiming natural laws on their unseen persons behalf is a means to reconcile their codices with the undeniable discoveries of the modern age but the inevitable problem with this notion is that of control. Again, imagine Abraham. He cuts down a tree and uses the wood to form a spear. He holds up the spear and says, I made this. But he looks at the tree and says, How was the tree made? He does not see how the tree was made so he perceives the cause of the trees formation as an unseen entity. He then projects a person as being the unseen entity. Why? Because he has never seen anything but a person make something. People are all he knows; the unseen laws which caused the formation of the tree are invisible to him. But as such trees are vital to his survival, he needs to ensure they continue to form. So he bargains with the unseen entity, which he perceives as a person, to influence their growth, in the same way he bargains with a visible person. Ancient man bargained with every unseen person who he perceived as causing the natural phenomenon which effected his survival. The actual Abraham simply consolidated all of these unseen people into one supreme unseen person, or God, and placed all natural phenomenon under his domain. But upon harnessing the natural laws which cause trees to form, what does man do? He stops bargaining with God over the particular phenomenon. Why? Because its no longer necessary, as God doesnt control something that man clearly controls. The only natural laws which modern man says are caused or initiated by God are the ones which he himself cant control. And as natural laws which effect the survival of man are being unveiled and harnessed at exponential rates in modern times, they are being removed, one by one, from under the domain of God and being placed under the domain of man. Within the next two centuries, nearly every natural phenomenon, including death itself, will be harnessed by man, at which time bargaining with God, or religion, will go extinct by virtue of irrelevance, at least in modern societies. Already, man is transitioning from the era of religion, which attempts to influence unseen people, to the era of technology, which influences unseen laws. Why? Because attempting to influence unseen people is unreliable. Why? Because natural laws are the cause behind natural phenomenon and they only respond to application of other laws, not to bargaining. Technology consistently influences unseen laws by the application of other laws . Religion bargains with unseen laws which it perceives as unseen people and is largely ineffective. The only area which religion correctly perceives natural laws is in local level observations of man, his nature, and interactions between people, which, of course, can be ascertained without assistance from a higher power. Religious thinkers say, God created natural laws but it is more correct to say, Mans desire to control natural laws created God. Mankind has always attributed the natural laws which he cant control to unseen people precisely because he cant control them but thinks he can influence unseen person which then gives him control over natural laws. This list of unharnessed laws has been gradually dwindling, particularly in modern times and in modern societies, and in the not-to-distant future, the initial creation of natural laws will be all that religious thinkers will be able to attribute to God because nearly everything that effects the survival of man will be fully under his control. Mans increasing control over natural laws isnt proof that he is playing God but is a demonstration that God had nothing to do with them in the first place.

D. The Power Of Personal Experience

Regardless of whether one is religious or irreligious, everyone has a sacred document. The name of this codex is personal experience, or PE. It is this codex, not Abrahams, nor the facts and figures of religious skeptics, which is the filter through which all things are understood and processed. Why? Because it is the sacred codex of personal experience which is vitally important to survival on the local level in everyday life. Why? Because PE forms its own moral code, or a system of commands and prohibitions which informs the actions best suited for an individuals survival. Consider the ancient man. He comes across a certain tree which causes the skin on his face, arms, and chest to turn a bright, painful red. What does he do? He makes a mental note to avoid such trees in the future. It does not matter what anyone tells him; he knows that such trees cause him pain, regardless of what anyone or anything says. Take this same, ancient man. He goes to a certain section of the river one day and is able to spear more fish in an afternoon than he usually does in a week. What will he do? He makes a mental note to return to this certain section of the river in the future to catch more fish. It does not matter if someone tells him that its nearly impossible to catch fish in that certain section of the river; he knows that he can catch many fish there, regardless of what anyone or anything says. Why does this man avoid certain types of trees and go to a certain section of a river, in spite of the discouragement he may receive from others? Because he has personally experienced the pain and pleasure of the tree and river. Why is it important that this man continue to avoid such trees and continue to fish in a certain section of the river? Its important because survival, on its most basic level, is intrinsically individual. It does not matter if anyone else in his tribe is effected by this type of tree nor does it matter if anyone else cannot catch fish in this certain section of the river. As long as it effects him, positively, or negatively, that is all that matters. It is this innate, irreversible appeal to personal experience which is the reason humanity has survived all manner of difficulties. It is this ability to both remember and recall the experience of the tree and river which allows one to avoid danger and gain provision on the local level. It is adaption in real-time, where you have an experience and make note of the results, and from that point on, you know exactly what to do when you encounter the situation again. Personal experience, in its aggregate, is the basis of all human knowledge. For instance, if you are in the woods and spot a snake which makes a rattling noise with its tail, you already know what to do: Run! You do not need to draw close to the snake to assess its potential to harm you and have the experience of being bitten by it because you wont live long enough to learn from the mistake. Indeed, it is the misfortune of others to not have known the danger of such serpents, but their personal experience informs you about what to do in such situations. In fact, if you think about everything you know, very little is based upon what you have personally experienced. This means that you know, based upon the experience of others, to stop at the sidewalk and look both ways before crossing the street. You do not have to walk without looking, get hit by a car, spend time recovering in the hospital, then learn to look for oncoming traffic the next time you are on the streets again. In this same way, most of what you know is a result of the experience of others. Something worked for someone else or something didnt work for someone else, or someone felt or witnessed something, and one way or another, you found out about it, and now you know it. Nevertheless, this knowledge is a result of PE, but simply the PE of someone else and not your own. These personal experiences and the passing of them to others is vital to your survival because it allows you to avoid the mistakes which you wouldnt recover to learn from. The Personal Experience Tier System, or PETS, accounts for the whole of human knowledge, but is organized based upon the way

a particular person bestows legitimacy upon something of which he is made aware. The different types of personal experiences, in order from most to least likely to be believed, are as follows: Personal Experience Tier System (PETS): PE0: The personal experience that you as an individual feel. PE1: The personal experience that you as an individual witness. PE2: The personal experience of a person that you know and trust, such as a family member, friend, teacher, or coach. PE3: The personal experience of a person that you do not know but trust, such as an expert or a public figure, past or present. PE4: The personal experience of a person that you may or may not know but do not trust, which is everyone else, past or present. If you think about it, you know many things, but you dont actually believe everything you know. Believing simply means to have confidence in something and trust that it is true or legitimate. PETS is a general description of how you process incoming knowledge. Imagine all information of every kind as a piece of mail, and each day, your mailbox is full. PETS describes how much legitimacy or trust you give each piece of mail, in order from the most trusted sources to the least trusted sources. There are numerous nuances in each level and many different shades of trust and distrust, both of a person and of a piece of information, but in a very general way, this is how people process incoming data. First, there is the personal experience which an individual feels, or PE0. A PE0 can be defined broadly as any experience that causes a tangible, internal reaction; the stimuli may be internal or external in nature. The second type of personal experience is one that an individually personally witnesses, or PE1. A PE1 is normally connected to sight but is not exclusive to this particular sense. The first two categories of PETS are distinct, but frequently overlap, as one may witness something that causes a tangible, internal reaction, but one does not need to personally witness something to feel it. For instance, imagine that you are having some sort of pain in your elbow and you examine it but it doesnt appear swollen or out of place, nor do you recall having injured it. Nevertheless, you are still having pain, so you go to the doctor and after taking several tests, he says, You are all clear. There is nothing wrong. In such a circumstance, how would you respond? Would you be satisfied and go home? No. Youll continue to insist that there is something wrong. Why? Because though you may (or may not) trust that the doctor is an expert and that his machines are functioning correctly (P3), you are still feeling pain in your elbow (P0). It also does not matter that you did not witness injuring your elbow or that nothing appears to be wrong with it (PE1). You trust your eyes, but you trust what you feel even more, as you should. A feeling is often more important than what you witness because a benefit or danger is not always visible. Unlike sight and hearing, which only perceives things on the visible level, feeling, which is not synonymous with touch, but describes all tangible, internal reactions, can sense small level phenomenon which cannot be seen or heard. As a result, feeling is overwhelmingly vital to your survival, and thus, you trust it more than anything else. The last three PEs are somewhat self-explanatory. PE2 is someone that you personally know and trust. Even within PE2, there is an hierarchy, as trust is also based upon what you have witnessed the person do,

and thus, you trust some people more than others. People in the PE2 category can be anyone, such as parents, siblings, guardians, extended family members, friends, co-workers, coaches, teachers, neighbors, and anyone else that you know. Also, as in all of the tiers, you may trust or distrust someone in just one or many areas. For instance, you may trust a friend who is an expert in fixing cars to advise you about repairing your vehicle but not necessarily in relationship advice. PE3 consists of people that you trust but do not personally know. It includes experts in any field, such as a doctor or other medical professional, a trainer, real estate agent, technician, plumber, and any other person who is very smart or experienced in a particular area. This is why you can go to a doctors office and literally place your life into the hands of someone that you do not know. Why? Because they are experts. Youd prefer a doctor that is an expert and is someone that you come to know, which is why you return to the same doctor if his diagnosis is correct and his prescriptions works (PE0). If it doesnt work (PE0), it doesnt matter how many degrees he or she has on the wall; you wont go back to see them. End of story. PE3 also consists of public figures, many of whom are experts as well, whom you do not know but trust. Public figures can include any sort of people, such as authors, TV personalities, news reporters, actors, athletes, and the like. Many times, you may not know them personally but you do know more about them then you know about your neighbor. In a sense, you do know them, and their expertise in a particular field combined with their well-regarded lifestyle or decisions in other areas causes you to trust them. This is why companies hire public figures to promote their products. Often times, the product has nothing to do with their expertise and they arent hired just because they are famous; its because you kind of know them, and as a result, trust them. The best way to get a promotion gig these days seems to be a person who plays a trustworthy TV character, such as a lawyer who fights criminals, or by portraying a politician who has integrity and pose. Such people may be the devil in their personal lives and may have no expertise besides acting, but they portray people of integrity and character in their TV shows so when they pop up on a commercial, its almost impossible not to let the trust you place in them while watching their show bleed over to the product they are promoting, especially if they are dressed and speaking in the same manner as they do on their shows, which of course, they do. And whenever a bad deed done by such a public figure becomes fodder for the gossip hounds, what happens? They lose their endorsement deals. Why? Because you dont trust them anymore, and thus, they are ineffective spokespersons. PE3 also deals with people from the past, such as great writers, effective leaders, and other people who you, of course, do not know, but trust because of their expertise in an area or as a result of their reputation as proven entities. PE4 consists of people who you may or may not know but do not trust. There are, of course, different levels of distrust, based upon personal experience and the experience of others that you may or may not know, when it comes to assessing PE4 people. PE4s may be co-workers, neighbors, or even family members or friends, who have proven themselves untrustworthy. PE4 also includes complete strangers. In addition, a PE4 may be experts or public figures who have proven untrustworthy, at least, to you. If you are a person who stays abreast on the politics of your society, simply think of the feeling you get when you see a politician on TV or on the front of the newspaper who represents an ideology different than your own. It doesnt matter what he or she has to say; you do not trust the person, perhaps for a variety of reasons. They could come to your front door with a million dollar check with your name on it and you would slam the door shut on his or her face. Whether you know them or not, you do not trust them, and whenever they say something, youd have more confidence in the opposite being true. In some rare occasions, the person that you do not trust may be yourself. If you have made a series of decisions or actions that have proven to be negative, you may seek advice, counsel, or just some time off to reflect and ponder, as you, usually for only a brief period of time, do not trust your own ability to make certain decisions. PE4 also includes

people from the past that you never knew but do not trust, such as leaders or thinkers who you view in a negative light. Its important to note that PETS accounts for the totality of human knowledge and is organized in the order which you give information legitimacy. Whether you know them or not, whether past or present, everything you know has come from one of these levels of PE, including things you have personally experienced and have come to know on your own. This is the lens by which you assess everything and pass judgement on its credibility, which, of course, is separate and apart from it actually being true. As such, think of your belief system as a concert hall, and you have invited all of the PEs to a show. PEO gets a Backstage Pass; all it has to do is flash the pass and it can go anywhere, anytime, no questions asked. If you feel something, you believe it. Its really that simple. That is how your body is built. That is why you are alive today. Your body instructs you on what it needs and desires to survive via feelings (not synonymous with emotions) which your mind may or may not turn into conscious thoughts. PE1 gets a VIP pass. It can go anywhere except backstage. Its very important. If you witness something, youll believe it, as long as it doesnt contradict what you feel (PE0). For instance, you know that if you overeat, you will gain weight. You know this. You believe this. Youve witnessed this. Nevertheless, this instinctive urge to eat, which you feel (PE0), has priority over what you witness (PE1), which may be an expanding waistline. In this same scenario, PE2 gets a Front Row seat. They are close confidants and you trust what they say, as long as it doesnt conflict with PE0 or PE1. In areas where you dont have personal experience, youll go to a PE2 for advice. But if a PE2 tells you something that is adverse to something you feel or witness, then you wont do as they say, unless, of course, they enable you to feel or witness something that aligns with what they are advocating. PE3s get the expensive Box Seats on the sides of the theater which are above the regular seats. They are important and you trust them, but since you do not actually know them, they are not as close to the action as the others. If they say something, youll take it into consideration, particularly if the other PEs do not have experience in what they are advocating. For instance, if a public figure that you trust is promoting a cell phone service, you may try it out, unless a close friend (PE2) has already tried it and says that it sucks. The rest of the seats go to PE4s, who are actually the majority of people you see and interact with. They are still in the concert hall but they are behind and below everyone else. But they can be upgraded to Backstage, VIP, Front Row, or Box Seats, at any point in time, and those in special sections can get sent to the regular seats as well. The accidental genius of religion is that it captured the totality of mankinds (who this author will refer to as Adam) observations and experiences; religion has never had anything to do with an unseen person but rather everything to do with people and how they function. The power of PE0 is best illustrated in the new codex by the conversion of the leader of the new followers, or Paul, who was leading the campaign to persecute the followers of the carpenter in an attempt to protect the traditional understanding of the messiah portrayed in the old codex. As soon as he had a vision, or a PE0/PE1, which he both felt and witnessed, he disregarded his PE1/PE2, which was the correct understanding of the messiah as a military hero and natural king, which he had been instructed in by the religious authorities (PE2) and fully understood and acted upon (PE1). Why? Because people trust what they feel above any and all other considerations; this instinctive trust that you have in PE0 is vitally important to your survival. Simply put, if you can get someone to feel something (PE0), it will have priority over all other PEs. What you tell someone doesnt have to be true; if they feel it, their body, in a very literal, functional manner, tells them This is real! Obtain it or avoid it! In terms of survival, this function keeps you alive but religion

has harnessed this human instinct to support its claims. PE0 not only has a Backstage Pass but it also has the authority to reseat the other PEs. It can cast the PEs who are in the VIP, Front Row, and Box Seats into the regular section and fill the newly-emptied sections with whomever the PE0 desires. Religious thinkers try to uplift Pauls conversion as proof that the claims of their system are true but if changing ones mind is proof of veracity, then everything and nothing at all is true. But these thinkers are correct; the conversion of the leader of the new followers is proof, not of the veracity of their claims, but rather of the power of PE0. The power of personal experience. Personal experience is, in fact, more powerful than their unseen person, precisely because people need one in order to believe in him. And whenever someone has an alternative PE, such as the death of a loved one, the claims of their religious system are challenged by the newly authorized personal experience, but religion, having captured the totality of human experience, is adept at keeping people in their system by making account for every possible situation. This is why religious people always have an explanation for everything. If something good happens, God did it. If something bad happens, God allowed it. If what you planned works, God made it possible. If what you planned doesnt work, God guided you in a different direction. If you understand it, God revealed it to you. If you dont understand it, Gods ways are mysterious. Religion is a mindset for people who do not perceive the natural causes of the effects they are experiencing, so they personify natural causes into an invisible being who they attempt to influence, and thinking they have successfully harnessed the initiator of causes, attribute any and all effects to Gods control, whom they influence. Read that sentence again and youll understand why religious people always have an explanation for everything. In some ways, PE0 literally is the unseen person because people trust PE0 more than they trust anything or anyone else, including the unseen person, codices, religious ministers, and religious skeptics. The result of the PE0 is based upon where its directed, which is usually with the help of someone else in the PE system. The same thing which happened to the leader of the new followers also happens to every modern person who bows their knee. They know, based upon personal observation (PE1) and being taught about the natural world (PE2) that the claims of the codices are, quite simply, impossible. In this same way, the leader of the new followers also knew that the claims of the original followers could not be true; he was so convinced of this that he led the campaign to persecute them. What changed his mind? He had a personal experience. A vision, to be specific. Now, imagine this blinding light, as portrayed in the codices, struck him to the ground, but ended as quickly as it had started. What would have happened? Nothing. He would have attributed the occurrence to one thing or another and gone on to pursuing those who bowed their knee. But notice the codices portray their master appearing in the vision and speaking to this man. What is their master doing? He is doing the same thing which modern religious ministers are professionals at doing; their master is portrayed as directing the personal experience to his own claims. Simply put, he is telling this man, I am responsible for what you are feeling and witnessing. As a result, the leader of the new followers attributed a personal experience which he could not logically explain to the claims of the original followers, but only upon being directed to do so. If a different unseen person had appeared in this alleged vision, then this man would have become the leader of a different set of claims in the same manner that all religions have numerous people whove had dreams or visions about their traditions. Religious ministers do the same thing to modern people as their master is portrayed as doing to the leader of the new followers. They take very natural personal experiences, most of which happen in everyday life, albeit in a less effusive manner, and some of which rarely happen, and as a result, arent popularly understood, but most importantly, both of which occur outside of the context of religious

settings, and direct these experiences to the claims of their codices, saying The feeling or experience you are having is caused by our unseen person, and thus, portray the experience as spiritual. And just like the leader of new followers, the modern people attach a personal experience, as directed, to the claims of the codices, and a newly authorized PE0 is in place. This author shall deal with matters of spiritual phenomenon later on in this essay but he will provide a few examples at the present time in the discussion of PETS. The power of religion is two-fold. First, as most of their traditions are invisible (such as heaven, hell, and of course, the existence of an invisible God), they have much more freedom to be creative. The result is claims that encompass the totality of mans desires and fears, even those, and especially those, that cannot be realized and the prospects of obtaining the impossible results in a correspondingly powerful response. Even though this powerful response, usually emotional in nature, is very natural, its not recognized as natural, not only because its more effusive than reactions to regular, everyday situations, but also because its directed to spiritual claims, and done so by means of clean words, or lingo, which arent normally used to refer to natural experiences. For instance, as religious claims are permitted to be invisible, they say their master was resurrected from the dead and is alive today. This appeals to mans desire to survive indefinitely, thus creating a personal response that is on par with the desire. But notice the religious ministers never actually present a resurrected master as proof of the veracity of their claims. What do they present as evidence? A supposedly spiritual phenomenon. What is this spiritual phenomenon? A miracle that breaks the laws of nature? No, this is not what they present. Instead, the religious ministers make impossible claims that appeal to the desire for the impossible and literally present your reaction to that which they present as the proof of the veracity of their claims. They say, Its true because you feel its true. Its true because you have become emotional. But the craftiness of the religious ministers is they dont actually say Its true because you feel that its true. Its true because you have become emotional. Why? Because you would relate what you are feeling and the emotions you are having to other things you have felt and other times you have been emotional. What are those other things? Natural things. Instead, they ease their claims into your PE0 by using clean words, or lingo, (which this author notes is separate from the concept of translating Abrahams unseen people into their corresponding unseen laws). They dont say, Jesus flew vertically into the sky after awaking from the dead. Why? Because you know people dont fly into the sky. You know that from PE0 and you have the scar on your knee from when you tried to fly as a kid. You also know from PE1 that people awake from sleep, not from the dead, which is why you bought flowers, not an alarm clock, when you went to your deceased relatives funeral. Instead, they say something such as Jesus ascended into the heavens after being resurrected. Why? Because you tried to fly in the sky as a kid, not ascend into the heavens. And like ascend and heavens, youve probably only heard the word resurrected within the context of the claims of the codices. The religious ministers use clean words, or lingo, which havent been soiled by anyone, most importantly, yourself, on the PE Tier System. They would never in a million years say that their master flew vertically. Why? Because everybody knows that people dont fly, especially vertically. But they might ascend because no one on PETS has tried ascending. No one on PETS even uses that word regularly beside the religious ministers. And this might is all the religious ministers need. And you respond to this life-altering possibility the same way you respond to all lifealtering possibilities; effusively, and at times, with great emotion, just like you would if someone told you that you won the lotto. But they dont proceed to present a resurrected master to finish their sales pitch; instead, they present your reaction as their proof. But again, they dont say, Its true because you feel

that its true. Its true because you have become emotional. They say If you feel the conviction of God in your heart... or If God is touching and speaking to you... and other words, statements, and lingo which are entirely untainted by PETS, to attach what you are feeling in reaction to what they just said as the proof that its true, in the same manner as their master is portrayed as doing with the leader of the new followers. If you dont think words are important then you do not understand their actual operation. Think of a word being like a Turkish Shish Kabob, which are those sticks with little chunks of meat. The stick is the word and the chunks of meat are the personal experiences of PETS. The religious ministers avoid the usage of words tainted by PETS. For instance, despite her claims, you knew that girl at school was having sex with someone because she got pregnant. Why? Because every woman who has become pregnant has done so, one way or another, by means of a physical man. You know this. Not in a million years would you believe, under any circumstance, that a woman has become pregnant entirely by herself, which is why the mother of the master was overshadowed or conceived by the Holy Spirit, not got pregnant or was knocked up by a special ghost. The religious ministers will say something about this being the language of their codices but that is nonsense, best seen in the reaction that they have whenever a new translation comes out that doesnt use 100% clean words (such as The Message translation). Also, the codices werent even written in their native language so they have complete power over which English words they choose to use. In addition, the religious ministers have adapted everything, including the manner in which they dress, the days of the week they have services, and even the music they sing, not to mention the whole of their faith and practice, but their lingo hasnt changed one bit. They are professionals at making impossible claims, then unashamedly harnessing the natural reaction to the possibility of eternal vacation or being roasted by fire as proof of the legitimacy of their words, and with the assistance of lingo, and of course, the little piano boy they call up to play some sad song, create the aura they call spirituality. Simply put, the only proof the religious authorities have presented for 2,000 years is...you. Your reaction to their claims is their only proof. They know that if they can get you to have a PE0, you will believe whatever its directed to because that is literally how your body functions. This is the reason why smart, modern people believe impossible, ancient claims. Secondly, the idea of a system ran by unseen people appeals to local logic and preceded awareness of unseen laws. In fact, the system of unseen people is a byproduct of local logic. As a result, whenever someone has a personal experience that he cant attribute to a natural law that he is personally aware of, he reverts to the default explanation of local logic, perceiving an unseen person as the initiator or cause, or both, of what he feels but cant explain. This is true of all people, regardless of whether the person is religious or not. You simply call irreligious people who perceive unseen people superstitious. Religion simply puts a name to the unseen face and directs it to support its claims, even if the experience is harmful to you, as there are both good and bad unseen people in their system to account for the whole of human experience. In a way, this author does not necessarily blame people for perceiving unseen people behind extreme experiences that one cant personally attribute to a natural law, as many dont seem natural, at least not in comparison to what is normally considered natural, and a few arent understood by anyone, including scientists. Simply put, Abraham saw an unseen person as the cause of everything around him and everything that happened to him. Since that time, these occurrences and experiences have proven to be the domain of unseen laws, but these laws havent been presented by scientists as a complete system, but rather, one by one, as they have been discovered. But there are many natural laws that science hasnt investigated and/or have yet to fully comprehend, particularly in regards to the human mind and body that do not have immediate, medical application. In general, people are only nominally aware of a portion of

what scientists already know, and are,of course, ignorant of what scientists are presently investigating, as well as that which has yet to be investigated. There are some clearly natural experiences, such as dreams, which are simply directed to the claims of the codices. But there are also very unusual experiences, such as the emission of energy, which is perceived as the presence, power, or anointing of God, amongst other phenomenon, which fall far outside of the investigation of science and the experience of everyday life, and as a result, are labeled spiritual, both by default, and by being directed to the claims of the religious ministers. It is the concept of a system, either entirely natural or spiritual, which should motivate scientists to investigate the experiences of those who bow their knee. Why? Precisely because every unseen person that has been investigated thus far has proven to have been an unseen law, not something that is imperceptible. The religious ministers are describing natural laws which they dont understand and thus perceive as spiritual; as a result, religious skeptics should put more confidence in their testimony. Indeed, it is the discovering and harnessing of the natural laws behind the experiences of those who bow their knee, or translation of Abrahams unseen people into their corresponding unseen laws, which is the key to finally reconciling faith and reason.

E. The Genetic Soul & Survival

What is the purpose of life, religious thinkers ask, if there is no after-life. This author responds to such an inquiry with a similar question: What is the purpose of life if there is an after-life? As the only living organism that is aware that death is their ultimate fate, it is not surprising that humanity has developed a system that is portrayed as overcoming what cant, at present, be physically overcome, namely death. People speak of a strange concept called the soul, which is portrayed as an ethereal version of themselves located in or near the heart or belly. They think of themselves as invisible souls trapped within bodies which they then animate, similar to how an astronaut animates a space suit. They provide no proof for their claims besides the idea that something must be true because it is imagined to be true. Nevertheless, they did not exist before they were born so why do they fear returning to their original state? Fear of suffering at the end of ones life and the anguish of the loved ones left behind is understandable but these are just details in regards to mans primal fear of the end. Again, why is humanity terrified of death? To understand mans fear of death, a parallel can be drawn to the decision that many young adults must make, which this author calls, The Choice. After graduating from college, moving to the big city, and going for their dreams for a few years, the gap between dreaming and accomplishing has grown to such an extent that a large, seemingly physical gulf now separate the two. As a result, the consequence of making the risky jump once again towards The Dream is not falling flat on ones face but disappearing altogether into an abyss of utter nothingness. The failure of previous jumps are not for lack of effort; its just a competitive world, thats all. It happens at various times for different people but everyone with a dream has to make The Choice, and often times, more than once. To jump or not to jump? A difficult question, indeed. On one side of the gulf is mundanity, or the regular life. Regular job, regular house, regular spouse, and 2.4 kids and a mutt. On the other side of the gulf is...The Dream. Now, life in The Dream wont actually be that much different, but since youve never been on that side of the gulf, you wouldnt know that. Life in The Dream could be, in fact, worse than Mundanity. But what it is or isnt is secondary; having a dream and obtaining it, in some ways, brings meaning to life, even if she wakes up with bad breathe and crusty toes in the morning. But the obtaining part is very difficult, as The Dream is both a quick and agile prey. Mundanity is a much easier catch; its slow and clumsy, almost as if it desires to be caught. And this is the main consideration when deciding whether to

leap across the gulf. A dreamer does not fear hard work and sacrifice. A dreamer fears hard work, sacrifice...and failure. Buy why do people fear failure? a slacker may ask. Because working towards a dream actually reinforces your desire desire to obtain it. It is simply a desire when you begin the journey but becomes an addiction as you work towards it; even before you have The Dream in your hands, you have it in your heart. It lies in your inner most being, and as you continue to work for it, it becomes even more real to you, which causes you to work harder for it, and the back-and-forth process continues until your efforts succeed or fail. This is why failure is so difficult; its more than just losing and more than just a waste of time. When you are consumed by a dream, it becomes personified, and in some ways, becomes a part of you in a very real way. You are your dream and your dream is you. So when your dream falls apart, the difference between what your heart sees and the reality that your eyes see is so shocking that it is difficult to deal with. When a dream fails, it is a microcosm of death because as the dream dies, a part of you also dies in a very real, tangible sense. A person who dreams is like a woman who is pregnant. Her child is something she carries around with her because it is in her and is a part of her, even though the two also have separate, distinct existences. She is her child and her child is her for they share genetic information, nutrition, and oxygen. Literally everything she does and that which she doesnt do is for her child, and although the child cant be seen, the reality of the childs coming birth is so real that she prepares for it, even hosting a large party to collect gifts and rejoice with friends and family before its born. If for one reason or another the child is lost before it is born, she is bereft with sorrow, for a part of her, in a very literal sense, has died, and everything she invested in the unborn child is lost as well. Failure is a similar process, and this is why The Decision is difficult. Working towards something increases your desire for it and your hand not obtaining that which is fully formed in your heart is extremely difficult. For those who dare to dream, the prospect of this process, likely based on previous experience, often becomes too difficult to bear once again. As a result, many remain on the side of Mundanity, which is slow and clumsy and easily obtained. This author encourages you to always make that leap, for Mundanity is the only fate worse than death for a dreamer. Whether you are a dreamer, worker, or slacker, you have labored every moment of everyday, even while you sleep, towards a single dream: survival. Every cell, organ, and part of your body functions in unison to achieve this singular goal. And everything you do, and everything that you do not do, works together to support this mission. Regardless of your career, you are working every moment of every day to stay alive. Regardless of your level of education, you were born an expert and a professional at surviving. This genetic impulse reigns supreme and is reinforced by every breath of air you inhale. The investment you make in staying alive is unparalleled and it continually reinforces your desire to stay alive in the same way that working for a dream increases your desire to obtain it. It can be said that on a basic level, the purpose of life is staying alive, at least long enough to create more life through the birth of a child. Its what you were born to do and its what you are best at. This impulse to survive is so strong that it has the ability to override your own attempts to end it. For instance, imagine a poor, starving man is promised one million dollars in cash to hold his breathe for 5 minutes. He begins, desiring to obtain the prize, but his desire to complete the task is overridden by another force which literally opens his mouth and sucks in oxygen. Its lifes way of saying, Oh, no you dont! Try ending your life and you may find that life has a mind of its own, or more likely, it will simply use your mind to keep itself from harm. How? By changing your mind. Ending ones life is an unfortunate circumstance and very unnatural; in relation to

what was previously done to stay alive, its the equivalent of liquidating a billion dollar investment portfolio and then burning the money. Big deal. Now, life has a sophisticated warning system throughout your body which prompts you to do things, or to not do things, and communicates its wishes to you via feelings. It thinks quicker than you can, which is why you are often able to react to danger quicker than you can decide the best way to escape the danger. It has an internal medical kit that can patch you up better than any doctor and a defense system far more advanced than any military. It demands that you maintain it with oxygen, food, and water, and forces you to take out the trash, although its polite enough to keep it at the door so you can remove it when you are ready. This desire to survive, in some sense, is separate from you and is a more acceptable definition and understanding of the soul, for its development preceded you in both a macro, human genetic sense, as well as in a micro-sense, as your genetic makeup preceded (and caused) the unfolding of your personality and active, rational thought. It also continues to live if you pass it on through offspring. But the desire to survive is not a person or the real you, as some would suggest, for a person may have good or bad days, but the genetic soul operates according to laws and is supremely consistent. The process of development would never entrust something as important as survival to a person, as the bodys operations consists of millions of processes and is far more complicated than any computer. If it were ran by a person, a single mistake would result in your death, which is why you are still alive today in spite of yourself. The desire to survive, or the soul, has but one goal, which is to keep you alive, and by force if necessary. And the greatest force it can release to get you to do something, or to not do something, is fear. Fear is the souls whip and it uses it to keep you alive. But do not be afraid of this whip, for the soul is a responsible master and uses it in proportion to the threat it perceives. It means you no harm; quite the opposite, in fact. Your soul gives you many reasons to fear death because the individual soul knows no state except that of being alive. But the individual souls existence ceases upon your death, for is genetic, not eternal. Again, you may inquire, What is the purpose of life if it ends at death. This author is not quite sure how to respond because to such a question as it is packed with numerous false assumptions. First, one must define your use of purpose. By purpose, this author surmises that you are referring to the point of, reason, or meaning of life. But you fail to realize that death has nothing to do with purpose. If you die, it means you have already fulfilled your purpose. You lived. Death is like a diploma or trophy; it is an award, certifying that you fulfilled your purpose, not by dying, rather by living. And your reference to death also needs to be refined. Life doesnt end at death. Life continues, unabated. Again, life is like all of the beaches on the earth. A single individual is like 1/1,000,000 of a single grain of sand. Your end doesnt mean lifes end. You are alive but you arent life. Life is a force much bigger and greater than any individual. Instead, you are actually asking, What is the purpose of my life if it ends at my death. To this, this author would ask, What is the purpose of your life if it doesnt end at your death? You fail to see that death doesnt take purpose away. It is, in fact, the complete opposite. Death gives purpose to life. If there was no end, each day would be useless for it would be followed by another and another into all of eternity. Imagine a sporting even that had no end. Would you cheer as loudly, or even at all, if your preferred team scored? No, because there is no end, and as a result, there is no winner or loser. There is simply playing. A game with no winner or loser has no purpose for the purpose of sports is to compete. Your team could be up by 100 points but it would not be a reason to cheer, as the opponent would still have 500 years to catch up. A sporting event has purpose because an end gives it one, as the athletes turn mere playing into competing solely because the game will end. Some will continue to persist, saying But I feel deep down in my heart that there is life after death, even if I have no proof. Somehow, I just

know it. Perhaps, but first consider this. Imagine a basketball coach is involved in a game in which his team is trading leads with their opponents. In this scenario, how do you think such a coach would address his team? Does he say, Hey, listen guys. We might lose. Look at the scoreboard. All tied up. Im not sure if we even have a 50/50 chance because that #14 is a really good shooter. Well, just do your best. If we lose, it doesnt really matter because we have another game in a week. Maybe well have better luck next time. Is that what he says? Absolutely not. Why? Because even though he realizes his team may lose, hes is also aware that his game plan and encouragement has the ability to effect the outcome. This is what an ordinary coach does. Now imagine a coach that has never lost, or even more, is literally unaware that losing is a possibility. Who is this coach? Your soul. Your soul is not a person but a bundle of laws which exists, in a sense, separate from you, if we understand you to be your personality and active thoughts, although it must be noted that such a division between you and your soul is a false dichotomy which this author utilizes only to examine its function. Its easier to understand the genetic soul as being a luxury car with all of the latest gadgets which you drive, and not the inverse. This car, or your soul, has no keys or ignition, because it was turned on when it was made and does not have an off button, even when you, the driver, are asleep. Also, this car has no gas pedal or brakes; instead, it moves continuously at 100 mph. It has a steering wheel which you control and a special seat with sensors that can send various signals from the cars detection system to you, the driver. Deep within this cars engine is a kill switch, which is powered by the pulse of your heartbeat. When your heartbeat stops, the kill switch is activated and the car itself explodes. The purpose of the car is simple: keep the drivers heart beat going by all means necessary in order to keep the kill switch from being activated. The car has no destination in particular, even when the driver does. The car requires oil and gasoline to function and the quality of both affects the cars performance; in addition, it sends waste out the exhaust pipe. The driver has control over the car via the steering wheel, but this control is, in fact, more limited than the driver may realize. For instance, when the car detects impending danger from another vehicle, it sends a signal through the specialized seat, which directs the drivers attention to the oncoming danger. Most of the time, the cars advance warning system enables the driver to avoid a collision. If a collision does occur, the car is built to absorb the brunt of most accidents and can repair itself. Whenever a collision occurs, the car sends a signal to the driver called pain, which indicates that the car is damaged and is undergoing repair. If a major accident occurs, the driver is forced to get the car manually repaired. The driver is not, in fact, forced to obey the advanced warning system; he can choose to ignore the signals sent through the specialized seat. But he cant turn the signals off, which normally provides the driver sufficient motivation to obey the cars warnings. The car goes wherever the driver directs it but it is not concerned with the destination; it is only concerned with continued driving. If the driver chooses a route that is dangerous, the car sends a signal called fear, which can be ignored, but is often so overwhelming that it motivates the driver to select a different route. In some cases, the drivers objective may differ from the cars objective, the latter of which is always to keep driving. But the driver, though influenced greatly by the signals, still retains the ability to ignore the cars signals if he is set upon arriving at a particular destination. Religious skeptics will protest, saying You are simply describing the normal functions of the body! Yes, this author concurs with such an assessment. Ancient man perceived a separate, unseen entity within himself and projected a person which he termed the soul; but the separate, unseen entity is a law. Indeed, man does have a soul. But such a soul is not ethereal, but genetic, and not endowed, but conceived, and not eternal, but reproduced. And the key word in religious skeptics analysis is functions. A corpse in the morgue is a body but does not have these characteristics. In some sense,

there is a spark that animates the body upon conception and guides a person in the pursuit of survival until death. Is a person synonymous with this spark? Does he or she control it? No, because this life force, in some sense, exists separate from the individuals consciousness. The genetic soul, which guides a person in the pursuit of survival, is an acceptable understanding of its supposedly ethereal, invisible counterpart, even if it is simply the normal functioning of the body on a technical level. But I still feel there is something out there. I cant explain it but I feel like something or someone is guiding me throughout life. I may have no evidence to support it but I know that Im not alone you may say. Precisely. That which you feel is correct. Again, this sense of guidance is undeniable, but the source of what you feel is not out there but rather in there, namely the genetic soul. Why do you feel you are being guided through life? Why do you feel there is something more going on than meets the eye? You feel these things because the soul existed before the mind. False! the religious thinkers will exclaim. No, this is a true statement. The soul existed before the mind did, not in a philosophical sense, but in an actual one. To clarity, the genetic soul is simply a reference to the genetic code, or DNA, which makes humans distinct from other forms of life. The mind does not mean the physical brain, as many living organisms have a physical brain, but is a reference to active, rational thought. Simply put, the human genetic code came before active, rational thinking. Even more, the human genetic code gave rise to the ability to think in an active, rational manner. How do you know this? Were you present at the rise of humanity? the religious thinkers will question. No, this author was not present. He does not need to have been present to know this. He only needs to observe the birth of a human infant to understand that the soul preexisted the mind. Simply put, an infant is human, genetically speaking, but it is not able to think in an active, rational manner. Instead, it is the infants human genetics which will later give him the ability to think in an active, rational manner. Genes first. Thinking later. Even more, the genes cause the thinking. Can this be denied? It is for this very reason that those who bow their knee desire to protect the unborn. They are against abortion because they view a single cell which has formed as the result of the union of a sperm and egg as 100% human, even though a cell, embryo, newborn, or infant is unable to think in an active, rational manner. In fact, it is not until the mid-teenage years that a human has fully developed the abilities to think in a fully rational manner, as their parents can attest. This relationship between the soul and mind is vital to understanding how you function as a person. Even though humanity possesses the ability to think rationally, it is the soul, not active thought, which is responsible for your survival. Again, you survive in spite of being able to think, not as a result of it, and the very capability to form rational thoughts is a result of the human genetic code. The preeminence of the soul, or genetic code, over the mind, or active, rational thought, is illustrated in every other living things ability to survive without active, rational thought. The soul helps you and other types of organisms survive. But what does the mind do? you may inquire? The mind helps you dominate. On an individual basis, the reason your mind perceives guidance is because the soul is an expert at identifying natural laws. In fact, that is all it does, as adherence to these laws is how it ensures that you survive. Even as the soul adheres to the vast majority of natural laws on its own via involuntary functions of the body, it also requires that you actively cooperate in some matters in order to fulfill its purpose. The soul commands the body to adhere to laws which it has perceived but this command must go through the mind, or active, rational thought, before it reaches the body. Now, there are some basic commands the soul sends to the body which is relayed through the mind, such as when to eat, drink, remove waste, and the like. How do you know when the soul is commanding the body to eat? You feel hungry, then you

think, Im hungry. The mind, perceiving the command of the soul, then commands the body to eat. Simple, right? But the confusion comes into play due to the fact that the soul doesnt operate on the local level like the mind and body; instead, it operates on the small level. And when the soul perceives something on the small level which isnt perceptible on the local level, it still commands the body to adhere. But this command must go through the active mind to reach the body, and as that which the soul perceived isnt perceptible on the local level, the mind may confuse the command as coming from a separate entity. In addition, that which is perceived on the small level and relayed through the mind is often felt or sensed, though actual words may or may not be used to describe the feeling. For instance, a guy meets a girl. He has met hundreds of girls in his lifetime but there is just something about this girl. She is pretty, but hes met hundreds of pretty girls in his lifetime. She is smart, but hes met hundreds of smart girls in his life. She is nice, but hes met hundreds of nice girls in his lifetime. Nevertheless, there is something about this girl and there is not something about the other, hundreds of girls he has met before in his lifetime. He cant explain it, although he may refer to her smartness, prettiness, and niceness in an attempt to explain it. But he knows that this girl is the one and it goes beyond the smartness, prettiness, and niceness. As a result, he pursues this girl, and with luck and persistence, he may obtain her. Now, in such a scenario, why does such a guy denote specialness to such a girl? He may explain it via his local level, referring to her traits, personality, or background. He may explain it via the invisible, attributing it to Gods plan, destiny, or even fate. But he is unaware that his soul is perceiving things about this girl on the small level that his active mind isnt perceiving. For example, his nose intakes a scent of this girl on the small level, which is different than her local level smell, which may be enhanced by perfume and such. This scent is relayed to the soul but this relay isnt picked up by the active brain because it cant understand small level phenomenon. The soul analyzes the scent and identifies it as an indicator that this girls immune system is a highly preferred match for mating. It then sends this information to the active mind, as the active mind must command the body to pursue her. The guys feels attraction, or a connection, professing that fate or the gods have brought this girl into his life and that she is the one, and the soul smiles, because it doesnt care what you call it, as long as you obey its commands. This is an example of just one of many aspects of attraction, many of which happen on the small level, is perceived by the soul, and is translated into whatever you want to call it on the local level by the active mind. And attraction is just one of many examples of this soulmind-body interaction. In fact, every interaction, experience, and observation is a result of this soulmind-body interaction. The soul is perceiving things on the small level that dont register with the mind because the mind cant understand incoming data from the small level. Then the soul commands the body to obey that which it has perceived on the small level by sending the command to the mind. And the active mind, which relays this action to the body, interprets this guidance as coming from an external entity because it is unaware of the small level perception of the soul. It is separate from you but its very internal. Its your soul. And the soul does this 24/7, not just on the day you meet your future spouse. The small level interactions of the soul, which causes you to know (or think you know) some things that you werent aware of on the local level is vital to your survival. You are being led and guided by an unseen law within you, or the genetic soul, not an unseen person beyond you, or God. The soul is like a freight train and you are like a passenger. Just as a passenger feels the sensation of being tugged along while on a train, you feel the sensation of being guided by your soul. The problem is that just as the passenger feels the sensation of being tugged but cannot see the tracks which the train is riding upon, you feel the sensation of being guided but cannot see the small level data that the soul is

perceiving. And just as the passenger on a train feels the sensation of being tugged but looks out the window and sees people, buildings, and other things, you feel the sensation of being guided but see things on your local, visible level, then connect the sensation of being guided to what you see. You attach the people, opportunities, and experiences that you see to the sensation of being guided because you cant see the small level data the soul is perceiving, which is the true source of the sensation of being guided. This is why the vast majority of the specific people, opportunities, and experiences that you see and have dont actually work out, even if you felt they were part of your destiny or Gods plan. You were being guided by your souls perception of small level data, but your mind, trying to make sense of this feeling of guidance, connected it to the things on the local, visible level, thinking the two were related. Yes, that which the soul perceives on the small level can align with what your mind sees on the local level, but that is the exception, not the norm, and what you see on the local level also has a mind of its own and isnt required to adhere to what you perceive, such as the girl in the previous example. Now, in spite of the guidance you felt, what you often feel is destiny or Gods plan usually doesnt work out. Nevertheless, both religious and irreligious people nearly always say, It didnt work out because it wasnt meant to be or Everything happens for a reason. Why? Because even though the specific person, opportunity, or experience to which you attached your feeling of guidance didnt work out, you continue to sense the feeling of guidance in the alternative route, causing you to think that you are still being guided. Why do you still feel guidance in the alternative route? Because the feeling of guidance doesnt have anything to do with what you attached it to in the first place; your soul is perceiving small level data 24/7, which is why you are alive, even though you continually attach the feeling of guidance to people, opportunities, and experiences that you see and have on the local, visible level. The feeling of guidance and what you see on the visible, local level, is usually unrelated. Now, religion harnesses this natural law and directs it towards its claims, saying the undeniable feeling of the genetic souls guidance is that of their unseen person. But notice how many accidents those who bow their knee encounter, even though they portray themselves as being guided by an all-knowing being. But as is almost always the case, not just with religious people, but with everyone, that whenever the unreliable connection between the feeling of guidance and visible things prove unreliable, those who bow their knee continue to feel the guidance of their genetic soul and conclude that their unseen person is guiding them down an alternative path. This is precisely why religious people can be supremely stubborn, or alternatively, vexingly inconsistent. Sometimes, they incorrectly attach the souls guidance to a visible person, opportunity, or experience, but as the connection has been deputized by their claims of Gods guidance, they are simply unable to catch a clue and drop the matter. But at other times, as soon as they attach their feeling of guidance to a visible entity, another person, opportunity, or experience comes along to which they also attach their feeling of guidance, giving them the authorization to immediately abandon the prior commitment, though in reality, what they felt in both cases usually has nothing to do with the visible level. Their system actually praises both tendencies as virtues, calling such behavior faithfulness and obedience, respectively. Nevertheless, even irreligious people believe they are being guided by someone or something; religion simply supplies a precise explanation for the guidance that is felt. And as the guidance is portrayed as being inspired by an all-knowing being, it causes the attachments or rejections that everyone makes to be exaggerated by those who bow their knee. Now, imagine four friends go on a road trip. One friend is the driver and represents the soul. The three friends are passengers and represent the mind. As the driver, the soul must focus unwaveringly on the road and must follow the correct route to guide the car to safely reach its destination. That is his only

concern. But the passengers do not have this responsibility and are free to focus on other matters. At times, the driver may ask the passengers to assist him in some tasks, such as looking up a route on the map, requesting food or drink, or to keep the noise level at a minimum so that he may focus on the road. As the driver focuses on the road, the passengers may sleep, listen to music, talk amongst themselves, and do a variety of different activities, but the driver is always focused on the road. And at the end of the trip, if you were to ask the driver and the passengers, What did you see during the trip? the driver would respond by saying that he only saw what was on the road. But the passengers saw many things, such as people, buildings, signs, as well as some things which were on the road. In this same way, your souls only purpose is to keep you alive and does this by focusing entirely on doing exactly what is needed to ensure your survival. Your mind is a passenger and is free to do other things as long as it doesnt interfere with the souls objective. At times, the soul may request that you do things to assist it in ensuring your survival, such as eating, drinking, and relieving waste. And just as the passengers may also see some things which are on the road, the mind can focus on small level data which assists in survival by doing the corresponding, local level actions, such as eating healthy, exercising, and the like.

F. The Creation Of The Unseen Person

But the question regarding the purpose of life reveals a matter much more complex than simple considerations of the end. This author will give you an analogy to explain the true issue at hand. This author knows identical twins. Both are attractive ladies but if you saw them, you would not immediately ascertain that they are twins as one of them is approximately 30-40 pounds heavier than her identical sister. This author shall not reveal their true names; instead, he shall call the heavier sister, Rachel, and the slimmer sister, Sarah. Now, this author would like to emphasize the fact that Rachel, though heavier, is still attractive. But as a result of the extra pounds she carries, the shape of her face and the form of her body is entirely different than that of Rachel. Although everyone knows they are sisters, as they closely resemble each other, few know that they are twins, and even fewer know they are identical. In fact, Rachel looks approximately 5 years older than her sister. Even as Rachel is attractive, Sarah is very attractive, possessing a nearly perfectly proportioned face and almost a flawless physique; she is the type of woman who causes a commotion by simply walking into the room. In spite of their difference in appearance, their personalities are nearly identical. Their pattern of speech, unique way of laughing, bubbly sense of humor, and general aloofness are exactly the same. It is as if they are the same person, but one is just a little less attractive. As a result of this difference, people treat the two women completely different. Sarah is afforded the deference normally given to beautiful women; people are either intimidated by or in awe of her, and as a result, she pretty much keeps to herself and is generally left alone. But Rachel is perceived as much more approachable and people are more apt to include her in conversations and activities. Less guys may be attracted to Rachel but it actually seems that more guys ask her out because they discern they have a better chance at success with her. But this author finds his own interaction with them to be the most interesting factor to ponder; he rarely sees them together and he knows them more as two unrelated individuals than as identical twins. And though they are similar in every way besides appearance, this author admits, somewhat sheepishly, that he enjoys Sarahs company and presence much more than that of Rachels. Whenever this author sees Sarah, he has found himself mesmerized by her laughter, mannerisms, and her general demeanor and even though Rachel possesses the same laughter, mannerisms, and demeanor, he does not find interaction with her to be nearly as interesting. In fact, this author confesses that when Rachel is before him, he thinks not of Rachel, but of

Sarah. Why? Because Rachel is literally a less attractive copy of Sarah. She is a flawed, imperfect version of her sister. Sarah is as Rachel should be. You may think that such a description of a flawed and imperfect twin is extreme but this way of thinking is shared by all people who bow their knee. When such a person looks into a mirror, they do not see a reflection of themselves. Instead, they see a reflection of a reflection, as they do not believe their bodies are their real selves. They view themselves as an ethereal soul (or spirit) which is temporarily in a body. The body, to such individuals, is the equivalent of an earth suit (read: space suit) or an avatar. They believe that their soul is their real selves and it simply controls the body, which it will discard when they die, and as their body rots, their soul will live on in some alternative place or state, which varies from codex to codex. In the mind of those who bow their knee, this dual reality, or dichotomy, between the natural and spiritual, where the seen thing, like Rachel, is lesser, and the unseen thing, like Sarah, is greater, is not limited to just the body. Everyone and everything on the earth, including the earth itself, is part of this system, where that which is seen, natural, or physical is the lower, lesser, and paler form of that which is unseen, spiritual, or ethereal. Imagine taking the Mona Lisa to Kinkos and making a black and white copy of the painting; to those who bow their knee, their bodies, the earth, and everything on it and in it is the black and white copy and their souls and everyone and everything in the unseen realm is the Mona Lisa. And as a copy, the sole purpose of all natural things is to garner information about, and eventually go/return to the original, ethereal state. They do not care for natural things (in theory) because they view them as cheap imitations of the real spiritual things which they represent. Even more than simply being a representation, they view all natural things as reflecting their spiritual counterparts, like an echo. In religious systems, there is the original, spiritual shout from the unseen realm and the natural is simply the echo. And since all natural things are mere copies or imitations, they have no intrinsic value besides that which they can inform one about the original, spiritual world. Within this mindset, the question, What is the purpose of my life if it ends at my death makes perfect sense, because life isnt real to such people. They view themselves as souls trapped in earth suits who maneuver through life, which is filled with imitations and copies of the superior spiritual realm. To them, the purpose of life is to discern the natural as clues so they may successfully go to or return to the superior spiritual place. This is why the idea of the finality of death is an outrage to such people. To them, life isnt the real thing. Its more like practice, a dress rehearsal, or a fire drill. They view death, not birth, as the launching pad into reality. This way of thinking is well known; therefore, the question is not What do such people think? but Why do such people think in such a manner? Let us return to the example of the twins. Why is this author discontent with Rachels company? Why does this author think of Sarah when he is with Rachel? Its not because Rachel is ugly; in fact, she is an attractive woman. She is more attractive than the majority of women this author knows. When he is around other, less attractive women, he is not discontent with them nor does he think of another woman. The only reason this author is discontent with Rachel is because he knows that she literally has a copy of herself which is more attractive. This copy, or Sarah, casts a shadow upon Rachel. It does not matter what Rachel says or does; this author knows there is a prettier version of her. This author, like most men, does not want the attractive one when he knows there is a very attractive one. Whenever this author sees Rachel walk, talk, or laugh, he compares her actions to the image of Sarah doing the same. And Rachel simply cant compete with Sarah. Even if Sarah died and if this author were to marry Rachel, she would always be the less attractive version, not because she is unattractive, rather because this author knows a better version exists.

In this same way, religion has created an invisible copy of everything that can be seen and has presented this supposedly superior, invisible copy to the world. Just as Rachel is a less attractive version of Sarah and is therefore perceived as less valuable, those who bow their knee compare these invisible copies to their visible counterparts and have become (in theory) completely and entirely discontent with the natural realm. Now, religious skeptics state these invisible copies are inventions made by the founders of the various religious systems. The thinkers counter by saying the fact that people long for these invisible ideals is proof that they exist. Both are slightly mistaken, as this author shall demonstrate. The invisible copies were indeed, invented, but not in the manner religious skeptics use the word. By using the word invention, they essentially refer to the process of making something out of nothing. They portray Abraham as simply making things up, such as an invisible God, the commands in the codices, and a place of pleasure and torment. But this concept of invention is inaccurate and is not a logical or thoughtful explanation. This author shall deal with the creation of the commands in the codices as well as the places of pleasure and torment later on in this essay, but shall now explain the process by which the personality of God was created. First, the idea of unseen people, as has already been discussed, was a result of ancient mans perception that an unseen entity controlled natural phenomenon. He projected people into the unseen world because of his familiarity with people in the seen world, as he was wholly unaware of the concept of natural laws. But how did Abraham conceive of the personality of this individual, supreme unseen person of the Old Testament and other sacred documents from a similar time period in antiquity? Indeed, Abraham did invent an invisible God, but not from scratch, rather by collecting the seen things and characteristics he perceived as virtuous in his society and unique circumstances and infusing them into the single, invisible person who controlled natural phenomenon. It is better to refer to this process as a collage rather than an invention because he simply assembled all of the things he perceived as good and used them as materials in the formation of the unseen person. This author shall now return to Abraham directly after his conception of the supreme unseen person, which was a reflection of the consolidation of ancient tribes into established societies ruled by a supreme natural ruler. After consolidating all of the good unseen people into one, unified supreme person, Abraham is tasked with attributing personal characteristics to the unseen person, just as every person on his local level had personal characteristics. He cant see the unseen person nor have they met, so at first glance, deciphering Gods personality may seem a difficult task. But for Abraham, perceiving the characteristics of the supreme unseen person isnt problematic. Abraham did not discern the difference between good and evil based upon a moral code because he existed before the code was given. Instead, to Abraham, good meant good for/to me and and/or my tribe/society, or positive, and evil meant, bad for/to me and and/or my tribe/society, or negative. To determine the personal traits of the supreme good person, he accumulated all of the good characteristics (to/for me and/or my tribe/society) that he witnessed in people that he observed on his local level; these were the materials that Abraham used to form the collage of the supreme good person. The supreme good person was a personification of all of the characteristics Abraham perceived as good in himself and those around him, or better said, the traits which assisted his prospects of survival . Simply put, he created a super person who just happened to be invisible who embodied the ideals of his society. The good/bad for/to me and/or my tribe/society formula is vitally important in this equation, as it explains the unique collages of supreme good people we see each Abraham forming in different ancient societies. Each societys supreme good person was a personification of the characteristics that the individual Abrahams observed and esteemed in their unique circumstances, as the characteristics that they forged into the supreme good people were vital to each of their distinct societies survival. Even more, it explains the inconsistent micro-collages that are present

within single codices, especially the unique portrayals of the unseen person by different authors in the same codex. Each author uses the characteristics that he values, or even more, the characteristics that needed to be assumed by the society and/or generation to whom he writes, as the traits he uses to forge the personality of the unseen person. The collage that Abraham creates is always perfectly formed to fulfill the needs, desires, and expectations of the unique society and historical situation that was being faced. Another way of saying the needs, desires, and expectations of a society is culture. The collages that Abraham created were always perfectly formed to its culture, and when it found itself in a society foreign to its origin or in the same society but in a different time than which it was written, the collage of the supreme person and his commands, not the people or their culture, was/is adapted to fit the needs, desires, and expectations of the society. This accounts for the variety of practices in different cultures since the codices were authorized. In a very natural way, the supreme unseen person is the highest expression of what a society perceives as good/for/to me and/or my tribe/society. Another way of saying the highest expression of what a society perceives as good is patriotic. This is why the religious thinkers are slightly correct in asserting that one cant long for something that doesnt exist. This particular assertion, along with other attempts to successfully reconcile faith and reason, is more of a symptom of intelligent people whove had PE0s directed to impossible claims, then use such arguments to convince themselves what they know is impossible is somehow, someway, possible. Nevertheless, it is this authors assumption that his dear adversary was not referring to specific things but rather to categories or concepts. For instance, the specific existence of little green people on Mars may not be true but the larger category of this specific is the concept of life somewhere beyond the earth. It would seem to this author that such arguments would make religious thinkers less confident in the specifics of their systems tenets, especially in light of the multitude of similar claims, but the thinkers are, as usual, slightly correct. Here is the fully correct idea: Everything you long for does exist. But these things exist right here on earth, in bits and pieces in everyone and everything around you. Abraham simply collected them, combined them, and projected them into the sky. The supreme good person was a collection of all of the good characteristics Abraham observed on his local level combined into one, invisible person. This is done quite often, albeit in other contexts. For instance, imagine you were tasked with creating the perfect basketball player. Where would you begin? You would begin with the best known basketball players, perhaps from the NBA. You would take a certain players height, combine it with another players jump shot, yet another players dribbling ability, and so on and so forth. You would combine the best of all of their individual abilities into one, solitary person, then would scrub away any deficiencies that remained. Not 7 feet tall, but 10 feet tall. Not a 40% three point shot percentage but this player never misses. Kids do this often in video games and this is exactly how Abraham ascribed qualities to the unseen person in each society. Again, Abraham always uses what is familiar to him; he projects people into the unseen because he is familiar with people and uses the good characteristics from his local level to form the personality supreme unseen person. This is why the supreme unseen person of the Old Testament does not seem like a deity to moderns who value different characteristics. Instead, he comes off as a complete dude of the ancient variety. Killing everybody. Multiple wives. Vast riches. This guy came straight from Abrahams Ancient Deity Fantasy League. And this is why modern religious ministers who (incorrectly) use the old codex just as much as the new codex do not bring up his ancient tendencies that do not correlate with modern values; they are absolutely clueless as to why a deity would command half the things he did. As a result, they treat him like that rich but crazed uncle that you must deal with at family reunions so hell keep you in the will, but on any other occasions, you keep his

backwards, racist, sexist, classist, ethnic cleansing, absolutist nonsense in the closet. Yes, the religious ministers are aware that all of those -ists were cool back then. It was moral back then. It was normal back then. Thats why they made it into Abrahams fantasy collection. Thats not really even the problem. The problem is that the religious authorities froze it. No, not a deity. A culture. Now, many ages later, they are trying to pass it off as the commands of an awesome, other-worldly being, not realizing the entire portrait of God in the Old Testament, not just a few -ists, was cultural. The creation of God was a means to control natural phenomenon; the personality of God was infused with the characteristics best suited for survival in a particular place and time. In the Old Testament, the unseen person, in a functional sense, was more like a national mascot and a rallying cry for a society in a specific circumstance facing a specific threat. Patriotic, not religious. Religious is simply what people have come to call it when they encounter this collage in entirely different circumstances. An analogy will assist your understanding of Abrahams development of distinct supreme people in different societies and/or cultures. Suppose you have two people who drive vehicles for a living and you ask them to design the perfect car. Do you think their designs will be exactly the same? Perhaps, but their design will be primarily based upon how they intend to use it, not upon a prototype vehicle that exists in some unseen place. Now, imagine one of the individuals is a truck driver and the other is a NASCAR driver. In this scenario, their designs would be entirely different because their needs are different. The truck driver would design a large vehicle because he needs strength to haul things. The NASCAR driver would design a smaller vehicle because he needs top speed and control to beat his competition. Although the two vehicles would be very different, so different, in fact, that they would not even be put in the same classification of vehicles, to each driver, their individual design would be perfect. Too often, moderns think of concepts such as perfection as being a matter of personal satisfaction, and they are not incorrect for thinking so. But the majority of people who lived in the past, and many who live today, label things according to their usefulness, as they did not and do not have the luxury of wealth and options that you do. Perfect to the ancient man was that which got the job done best, or a measure of usefulness. In spite of the differences between these two perfect vehicles, they would still share many similarities, such as tires, steering wheels, and axels, as there are vehicle components which are necessary to all, or universal, and a contraption without these components would not be considered a vehicle. The collage of each supreme person in each society was developed in the same, natural fashion: a collection and projection of the characteristics that a distinct society deemed most vital to its survival at a specific point in real time and history. As a result of the different circumstances facing each society, each collected the unique traits best suited to address their circumstance and fit their distinct culture. These are the differences that humanity has waged war over for many ages, although these were not religious wars, but ones of culture, as the supreme person was simply a personification of cultural norms. But as some religious authorities are now pointing out, there are shared similarities across traditions and within each collage of supreme people. This is partially because many religious systems are sequels of each other and share a common history, partially because most were frozen in antiquity where some cultural characteristics were universal to survival, and primarily because all were composed by the same species which values certain traits at all times, everywhere. What does this mean? Same natural process, you foolish children, not the same God. It was the same natural process that created your unseen people in the same way that the same natural processes are responsible for the whole of human similarities. Why? Because you all are relatives! You all came from the same tribe and were only in small number not that long ago, relatively speaking. Its like going to a family reunion and concluding

the gods are responsible for the similarities that you all share. No, not the gods. The genes!

G. Morality Is Synonymous With Survival

The problem, once again, is that of terms. As religion claims that humanity is unique from other forms of life, it use entirely different words to describe the actions of human beings. Consider the following example. A man sees another mans wife and is attracted to her. As a result, he inquires about her character and is told that she is a responsible woman, faithful wife, and efficient housekeeper. So he goes home, loads his gun, stops by her house and kills her husband. He then takes the woman and marries her. Is this a good man? No, of course not. He is guilty of breaking both the law and the moral code. He is not just a criminal but also a monster. But let us alter this scenario. Let us switch people in this example to lions. So a lion sees an attractive lioness, attacks and kills her mate, and makes the lioness his own mate. Is this lion good? This question is difficult because you do not use terms as good, bad, right, wrong, moral, or immoral when it comes to animals. The only exception is when you speak of pets, primarily because a pet is like a person to its owner, or when you refer to an animal that represents a virtue or vice, but even then, you realize that you are speaking of the symbol and not the innate nature of the animal. Why do you not use these terms when you refer to animals? Because you universally recognize the behavior of animals has nothing to do with morality; instead, it has everything to do with survival. This author submits that humanity, in this respect, is precisely the same as other living organisms. Call it whatever you want but morality functions solely to keep a society alive and growing, similar to the souls function in the body. It is a living organism that adapts to its environment but its purpose remains the same: the survival of the society in which it is present. Now, the old codex (Old Testament) was not written for the sake of writing, nor was it written as a general history for keepsake. Every story, passage, and command was written to address a very specific emergency which threatened the natural survival of the tribe to which it was written. It was addressed to a very specific audience as a means to inspire them to do, or not do, actions which would improve their prospects of natural survival. And each book in the old codex was written to meet the specific need of the specific audience in a very specific place in real time and history, which varied from book to book. This author like specifics. Whenever this author wants to dismantle an argument made by an opponent, he says, Give me a specific example. Even in spite of his request, they often continue to use general rhetoric about this thing or that thing and are usually unable to give him a specific example to support their argument. Why? Because words such as morality, righteousness, truth and similar mumbo-jumbo are all good and dandy until you have to apply them in a specific time and place. Notice how the politicians of all stripes almost always reply to their opponents specific proposal or legislation, even when pressed for details, with generalities. They know this principal well; avoid specifics because generalities can always be interpreted by those predisposed to like you in whatever manner they choose. But once morality, righteousness, and truth touch down on the runway of a specific time and place, it reveals itself for what it truly is. Not necessarily bad, but clear, and it gives people a chance to gaze upon it, untouched by the clouds that blanketed it while it was soaring in the skies of generalities. Fortunately, the old codex provides innumerable examples of such landings, or application of lofty concepts such as morality, righteousness, and truth, and in every single case, we do not observe an unchangeable moral code. Instead, the commands given in each circumstance and to every generation are modified to ensure the natural survival of the society. It is the surviving, not the code, which is unchanging. Now, everyone agrees that one should be a good person. But morality isnt being a good person and it isnt generalities. Morality is

discerning the difference between right and wrong in real space and time. Its the specifics. Its when good comes down from the sky and lands in a war-zone and has to decide between two sides. In the numerous cases provided in the old codex, morality, illustrated by the specific commands of the unseen person, always sides with natural survival, not with the concept of an unchanging moral code. Why not unchanging? Because each situation was different and it required different actions to be taken. The situation determined the command, not visa-versa, because true morality, like the genetic soul, commands the society to do, and not do, that which is needed to survive. The religious ministers will protest, saying But natural survival was the agreement Abraham had with the unseen person! Of course the unseen person commanded him in such a manner. Yes, this was the agreement Abraham had. But altering ones behavior based upon the circumstance in order to ensure survival isnt an unchanging moral code as those who bow their knee would have us to believe. You can call it whatever spiritualized term youd like, but scientists also have a term for such fluid behavior in response to ones environment: adaptation. And your codices reek of it. Those who bow their knee are constantly demanding the entire world be subject to their moral code but the very thickness of that which they wave is the very thing that demonstrates their concept of an unchanging moral code which was established in ancient times and must continue to be adhered to is simply false. One does not even need to read the actual codex but simply look at its table of contents, which provides the names of the numerous titles which comprise the Old Testament. The codex is thick and the titles are numerous because in every generation, the unseen person is portrayed as sending a messenger to speak to the people on his behalf. The message of the unseen person always contained a very specific action plan, consisting of commands and prohibitions that would lead to the survival of the society in light of the very specific circumstances that each generation faced. These commands and prohibitions were not unchanging nor were they the same in each situation. Why? Because each generation was facing a different set of problems. As a result, the necessary actions that were needed to be taken were not an unchanging moral code but rather responsive to the specific circumstances. It was the circumstances that determined the course of action, not an unchanging, immutable code. This, of course, is why the unseen person is portrayed as sending a messenger to each generation to instruct them on what to do and not do. But they were always called to obey and worship the unseen person the religious ministers will counter. Yes, of course they were. But morality is not obeying and worshipping the unseen person. Morality is differentiating between right and wrong in very specific, everyday situations. Its not generalities such as be a good person. Its the do this and dont do that. Again, the specifics. And in the old codex, every command and prohibition rendered was for one and only one reason: natural survival. And in each generation, these specific commands and prohibitions were updated by a messenger in order to ensure survival in the new circumstances which the latest generation was facing. No, not unchanging. Adapting. This is why this author, unlike the religious thinkers, does not need to provide numerous citations from the old codex to prove his thesis. They must provide references to support their ideas because other parts of the same codex rebuke their stance. It is almost as if they hope you will only read that which they have provided in support of their nonsensical rationalizations and ignore the other parts of the same codex that repudiates their explanations. They constantly search for the principle that animates their codices and upon their continuous failure to create a system of thought to fully account for what they believe about the unseen and what they cant deny about the seen, their explanations are rightly mocked as contradictory, irrational, and downright juvenile by religious skeptics. They are then forced to base their explanations upon matters which cant be proved or disproved and tests the very limits of human imagination, saying

It is the very ridiculousness of our explanation which is evidence of its veracity, for who could think of something so ridiculous unless it were true. Its only ridiculous because you have attempted to make a very natural document into something that its not. Faith and reason never has been nor will it ever be reconciled, as the relationship between the two is not one of conciliation but translation. This author will not play the thinkers childish game of racking up references, as if truth was a game to see who can score the most points. Instead, this author will provide one, and only one reference, to demonstrate the adaptability of commands and prohibitions, or morality, to meet changing circumstances: The entire Old Testament. Every book. Every chapter. Every verse. At every turn, the unseen person is portrayed as commanding them to do that which was necessary to survive and the commands were not unchanging but rather very unique to the specific situation. When they obeyed, they survived, and when they disobeyed, they were slaughtered. If the morality of the old codex was unchanging, then there would only be one book with commands and the others would simply state the following: Refer to original commands given in the first book. But doing the same thing during each circumstance is tantamount to calling the same play on every down in a football game; you might do well at first but as the defense adjusts, you must make adjustments as well in order to win. In this way, the commands and prohibitions were being continually adjusted to survive in the unique circumstances being confronted. The only reason the commands and prohibitions in the old codex are somewhat similar to each other is because they were all written in the same general time period and each generation was facing similar problems, namely attacks or oppression by a local or regional powers. Yet, those who bow their knee say We must abide by ancient morality even though the circumstances facing modern societies are very different. Even more, they dont even follow the actual morality they espouse but react in modern ways to modern situations and reinterpret their codices in order to portray themselves as pious. The best example of morality adapting to respond to new circumstances is contained, to our good fortune, in the codices themselves. This author will deal with this topic in greater depth later on in this essay but it deserves a mention at this present time. What happens when your new circumstances literally make the possibility of natural survival completely and utterly impossible? You react by portraying survival as beginning at death, not birth. The new circumstance? The legions of the Roman Empire. The portrait of survival beginning at death? The New Testament. The new codex (New Testament) also adapts to its circumstances just as each messenger sent to the generations in the old codex also updated the commands and prohibitions to further the natural survival of its society. But as a result of the overpowering strength of the Roman Empire, the restoration of the tribes natural society was literally not an option. Simply watch the first scene in the movie Gladiator and you will see exactly what this author is talking about. The Romans were actually quite civilized as long as you paid your taxes and kept the peace. But if you didnt do these things, they personified the brutality of the ancient world. And they werent just sending an army; they were sending Maximus, the hero in the movie Gladiator (played by Russell Crowe) plus a legion of warriors, not to negotiate, but to make an example out of you. No, not a war. A massacre. To be clear, the tribe to whom the old codex was written had absolutely, positively, no chance at overthrowing Rome and reasserting its sovereignty. This, of course, is why the entire tribe eagerly awaited the promised messiah, who would be a military hero and natural king; they knew they needed a super hero type to beat Maximus. Its similar to being a colonist awaiting a military leader whose coming had been predicted for hundreds of years to lead the efforts in overthrowing the vaunted British military, then Gandhi shows up, robes and all, saying Im here folks. Peace be to you all. Its not that their master was a bad guy; just the wrong sort of guy. This, of course,

is why nearly the entire tribe rejected their master. Why? Precisely because Abraham had an agreement with the unseen person which guaranteed natural survival if they obeyed his specific commands in each generation. The masters message, of course, was the exact opposite of natural survival. This is why his teachings became a new religion, yet still derives its authority from a codex and tribe that rejected him. There is one and only one word that can describe such an absurd development: genius. Truly, the power of PE0 cannot be denied. Yet, those who bow their knee, after having a PE0, believe the master was the messiah of a tribe that rejected him and uplift the morality of the new codex as the fulfillment of that of the old codex. Even more, they portray him as being the unseen person of the Old Testament inextricably fused into flesh. So how did the unseen person of the old codex update morality when he personally came face to face with the new circumstance of the vast Roman Empire and its legendary legions? Did the master challenge Maximus to a knife fight? No. Why? Because the master would have lost. He knew that. So what did he command? Eternal survival. Why? Because natural survival was literally not an option. Why? Because of this: Maximus! Maximus! Maximus! And in perfect reflection of its circumstances, the master, whose every command and action as the unseen person in the old codex was to further natural survival, updates the unchanging moral code by promoting the complete opposite, or eternal survival. Why? For one and only one reason: it was his only option. The circumstances determined the commands. The circumstances determined the morality. The master promulgated eternal survival, which was accomplished by sacrificing natural survival, or the desires of ones body and society, with exception to the bare necessities. Again, this author does not need to give you any references besides the following: The entire New Testament. Every book, every chapter, and every verse. Every command and prohibition given in the new codex was to ensure eternal survival by sacrificing natural survival, or the desires of the body and society, with exception to the bare necessities. I dare the religious authorities to disagree with this statement. Even more, this author dares those who bow their knee to read the new codex with this statement written on a notecard next to that which they are reading. Why? Because every verse, including the nonsensical ones, will finally make sense.

H. The Old Codex & Literalism

The problem is that many of those who bow their knee do not understand the circumstances under which the old codex was written. They look upon the codices as a journal or diary, as if something incredible happened and the author rushed back to his tent to write about it. But even the religious thinkers will tell you that this is not true. The books of the codices were written many years, sometimes hundreds of years after that which is written about allegedly occurred. Yet, the books of the old codex were not written for keepsake. They were written because the societys natural survival was endangered by one thing or another and the authors of the codices wrote to encourage the people to do or not do things that furthered or hindered their society. In some ways, the books of the old codex were pep talks to a specific audience facing a specific emergency. What is the best way to inspire people facing mortal danger? Tell them a story about how someone faced a similar challenge and overcame it. It does not matter, in fact, whether someone actually faced a similar challenge and overcame it. All that matters is that those facing danger are inspired, one way or another, to do or not do the necessary things to survive. Imagine you are a military captain and are in the trenches with your soldiers. Bullets are whizzing overhead and you see your enemy preparing their bayonets and readying for the final charge. You look at the soldiers under

your command, all of whom are in their late teens or early twenties, and they are understandably frightened. What are you going to tell them to help them summon the courage to fight, especially if they are vastly outnumbered? Whatever it takes! Lets take this a bit further. Imagine you and your soldiers are in a trench that extends a half mile in both directions and the roar of engines, the whiz of bullets, and the cries of the wounded make it too loud for everyone to hear this very important thing you are about to say. So you need to tell them something inspirational but also something they can remember so they can pass it down to the soldiers further down the trenches. In such a scenario, what would you tell them? A story, as people can forget names and places but its hard to forget a narrative. These are the conditions under which the books of the old codex were written: an emergency which threatened the survival of the society. And they told stories, not because of the noise, but because their audience couldnt read, so their message needed to be in a form that could be heard, remembered, and passed on, primarily to their children. And just like if you were in the trenches, you wouldnt be concerned about historical accuracy or if the story actually happened. In fact, fictional stories work better than real ones because they are unhinged by the poison of familiarity and the author is free to synthesize any necessary elements to make it specific to the circumstances faced by the audience. At the same time, stories involving real, historic characters are effective because it reminds people of their identity, which has a good, patriotic effect. Its also important to point out these stories were initially told and passed down orally from generation to generation before they were written down and formed the old codex, as the physicality of parchment, or paper, often gives something an authority which was never intended and isnt deserved. Now, imagine that you are the team captain of a professional basketball team which has won many championships in its history but has not been successful over the course of your career but this year is different because you have a new coach, and after many seasons which ended in a losing record, you finally make the playoffs, but barely. In the first round, you face off against the top team in the league which has numerous, perennial All-Stars, and though your team beat them in the regular season, you are big underdogs in the eyes of the fans and analysts. Before the team runs out onto the court, what do you think the captain says to his fellow players? Does he give them a scientific explanation on the statistical possibility of his teams chances of victory, complete with a powerpoint presentation, pie chart, and journal citations? Absolutely not. Why? Because such a presentation is informational, not inspirational. What he probably tells them is something like this: 1. No one believes in us and the odds are against us. But we beat this team before so we can do it again! 2. We have the best coach in the league. If we stick to the game plan and if everyone does their part and plays as a team, we can win. 3. Scottie, you are the key to this game. You have to shut down their power forward. Be a beast! Take it to him. Knock his ass into the rafters if he tries to drive the ball into the lane. Regardless of the activity, this is generally how you inspire people. Remind them of a previous, applicable victory, remind them that a very smart person has a plan, and use colorful, exaggerated language. In such a scenario, do you think that Scottie would respond by saying, Um...excuse me captain, but Im a human, not a beast, or would point out that tossing a large man far into the sky is physically impossible? No, of course not, because Scottie knows the captain is not being literal. Instead, he is simply saying, play hard and be tough. And this is exactly what the authors of the old codex did in response to specific threats that were facing their society. Even more, its important that you understand this: the codices were not written to you; instead, they were written to a specific audience in real time and

space. Generally speaking, the authors of the codices reminds their audiences of a past victory of their ancestors which was similar in nature to the specific emergency the present audience was facing. Consider this example. What were George Washingtons noble actions during the Revolutionary War that led to him becoming the first President of your society? This is not a rhetorical question. Grab a pen and write his specific actions below. Feel free to include any details about his presidency as well:

Cant think of many specifics, huh? Although you know few, if any specifics about this man, every single person knows that he was a great leader. So imagine an author taking his name, the positive impression you have about him, and a few of the well known details about his life, then creating an entirely fictional tale of courage and bravery. This is sort of writing is actually a literary genre in modern times and its similar to what the authors of the codices did. But not with George Washington, rather with other names that you know: Abraham, Moses, David, Solomon, and Elijah, amongst others. Real people. Fictional stories. The authors of the old codex took known, historic entities and embellished in order to create a story to inspire their specific audience which was facing a specific emergency. But the problem is not only have these fictional stories been taken literally, but the specific commands given to survive a specific emergency was frozen and promulgated as a rigid moral code for situations that are very different than the ones for which it was written. No one is upset with the author of the codices, as they were simply like the captain in the trenches, trying to encourage their soldiers to survive. If anything, one should celebrate the authors. Why? Because it worked! They survived, thanks largely to such creativity of mind and heart, and in the same spirit as the great speeches of your time which have changed and bettered society, the codices did the same in theirs. Now imagine that you awake and find the following note on your refrigerator. You look at the note and it states the following: Daily To Do List: 1. Do 750 pushups 2. Run 5 miles 3. Jump rope for 1 hour 4. Eat 4,500 calories 5. Get muscle therapy massage

P.S. If you do these things everyday, you will be rich. If you dont do these things, youll end up in the hospital. Even more, you dont want to disappoint the big guy. Perhaps looking around and seeing no one else, you decide that the note must be for you. Most of the tasks seem extremely difficult but the reward sounds great. Also, the result of not doing them sounds scary, so you pick up the note, head to the gym, and do your best to fulfill the tasks. But what you arent aware of is this: that note wasnt intended for you. Instead, it was intended for a professional boxer and every item on the list is specifically intended for the specific opponent he will be facing in two months time. Before his last fight, his training was altered to include more pushups to build body strength to face a stronger opponent and before the next fight, hell do more long distance running to prepare for an opponent who is known for endurance. This list, in fact, is not that difficult for a professional boxer. Its not a list of things he must obey. Why? Because he is a boxer and has been doing similar training activities since he was a teenager. This is what boxers do. If he continues to do them, hell become wealthy as a result of his victories and if he does not do these things, his opponent will beat him to a pulp. But more than both of those things, he doesnt want to disappoint the big guy, who is not only his trainer, but also his father who has sacrificed in order to see him succeed. In this same manner, neither of the codices were written to you, just as the note on the refrigerator was not written to you. They were written to specific groups of people. The authors of the codices were literally not aware that you would read what they were writing. In both codices, each command was specific to the circumstances, and when the circumstances changed, the commands changed accordingly, just as a boxer trains in a manner to counter his upcoming opponent but changes his training regiment when he faces a different opponent. The commands in codices were not a moral code to the specific audiences to whom they were written. Why? Because the entire old codex was tantamount to telling someone, When someone breaks into your house, defend yourself. The books of the old codex were written when the tribe was either being attacked or in captivity in a foreign country. It had nothing to do with morality but everything to do with survival. As for the new codex, the words of the master were literally a depiction of what each authors unique audience was going through at the time the author was writing. This is why many of the masters quotes dont match each other amongst the first four books, even when the same situation is being portrayed. Every word coming out of the masters mouth was tailor-made for the situation being faced by those receiving the books. These werent commands, at least, not in the sense in which the word is commonly used. These were literal descriptions of the difficulties being faced by the intended audience attached to spiritual promises, which is illustrated in the following equation: Description of Circumstance + Spiritual Promise = Command The words of the master served as an encouragement. The command, if one would call it that, was to endure the circumstance because they would receive everything they had lost in life upon entering paradise. Even more, the specific quotes of the master describing their unique circumstances served as a huge motivation to endure. The only reason modern religious authorities promote the codices as a moral code is because it wasnt written to them. Its only a code for people who are in different circumstances than the author intended. These things were not difficult to the people who received them. In the old codex, defending yourself was and always will be a natural reaction to a threat. It only served as inspiration, like a pep talk before a game. It also served as proof that they could actually win, as they were instructed on how their ancestors, facing similar situations and overwhelming odds, won

unlikely victories. In the new codex, it was the circumstances, not the commands, which were hard. That, of course, is why the books were written! If someone is facing grave persecution, you dont send them a list of rules and regulations; you send them encouragement. What was the encouragement? You write to them saying, The master thought of you when he was on earth. He mentioned exactly what you were going through so dont give up! But like thieves rustling through someone elses mail, the religious authorities have interjected themselves, declaring We must submit ourselves to this unchanging code when the code wasnt unchanging. It only seems unchanging because you froze it. The only thing that doesnt change is the index but everything in those books adapts continuously. Thats why there are so many books! And that is also why the tribe and church survived. Its literally the complete opposite of that which the religious authorities claim. But thats not even the significant part. They say, We must obey the moral code when it wasnt a code to those to whom it was written nor was it obeyed. It was a description of their situation and an encouragement, in the old, to do what was natural, namely fight, because they could win, and in the new, to suppress what was natural, namely fight, because they couldnt win. This author will paint a picture so you can understand this clearly. Again, put yourself in the shoes of someone who bowed his knee immediately after the death of the master. You emerge from the upper room with the other followers and you have a message. What is the message? That a person who everyone saw get crucified, was, in fact, alive. So they ask you, If the master is alive...then where is he? Your response? He already flew vertically into the sky but hell be back. It was in response to the proclamation that a man that everyone saw die not only being resurrected, but also flying away before any non-supporters could see him, that the original followers were persecuted. The result? They had their possessions taken away and became poor. They had their careers taken away and became last. They were scorned by their family and were rejected. All of this happened before the new codex was written. Way before. As in, tens of years before. So the authors of the codices wrote to encourage believers to persevere. Why? Because a lot of people were giving up as a result of persecution. So each author assembled a collection of narratives, selecting the stories and modifying the quotations to fit exactly what each of their audiences were going through. When the people were read one of the first four books, they didnt say, We must obey. Why? Because the commands were a description of what they were already doing. Instead, they said, We must endure. It wasnt a code. It was a pep talk. An encouragement. It basically said, Dont give up! It didnt require them to do anything other than what they were already doing: persevere in the face of persecution because they were saying that a man everyone saw die had risen from the dead and flown vertically into the sky before the public could see him. And it worked, which resulted in a change of circumstances, which of course, is the worst thing which can happen to a revelation written to address a specific circumstance, as this author will explain throughout this essay. The circumstances of the modern people who bow their knee are very different than the ones which faced the audiences to whom the codices were written. But the primary difference is not one of socioeconomic factors or religious liberties; instead, the primary difference is that of worldview. Can you comprehend the ancient mindset? When considering the ancient mindset, its very important to remember their expectations were very different than yours, as people today are very, very different than the people of antiquity. This author could describe many differences, but the main one is that you live in a Objective Constant age and they lived in a Ancient Subjective age. Your modern society is very literal and your mindset is accustomed to communicating in exacts, whether it be in pounds, ounces, miles, dollars, time, and the like. You rely on numbers or exact descriptions to make objective decisions because you are aware of the consistency of natural laws. Instead of entrusting your fate to unseen people, youve learned

that to drive X number of miles, you need X gallons of gasoline, and if you eat X number of calories, you will lose or gain X number of pounds. It does not matter how often you pray, give alms, or chant; if you have $10 in your bank account and try to make a $20 purchase, that debit card is going to get denied. In nearly every area of your life, you base your existence upon the consistency of natural laws, measured in gallons of gas, calories, and account balances because it gives you more control over your environment and everyday life. Yes, surprises can and often do happen, but if you think about it, there are few majorr surprises in your everyday life. You set your alarm clock for a certain time and it goes off at the same time that you set it for in the morning. You turn on your MP3 player and select a particular song which plays in the same manner everyday. You buy a cup of coffee and pay the advertised price. You go to work and are paid an exact amount. You set the exact temperature of your air conditioning or heat as you drive home from work. You turn on the TV and see the program that is listed in the prescheduled TV guide. You cook or microwave your food at an exact temperature for a set amount of time. You dial a specific number and a particular phone rings. You visit a website by typing a specific web address and a particular site comes up. The vast majority of your everyday experiences is consistent as a result of exact measurements. Thats not just your technology. Thats your mindset. Technology is just a reflection or child of this mindset. You may not realize how much this mindset influences your lifestyle; its not just a way of thinking but literally a way of perceiving reality. This simply means you think in exacts and you organize incoming data into exacts. You think in literal exactness because everything you do and touch throughout the day requires literal exactness. Try living in a third world country and you will see the truth of this. Such an experience can prove to be exhausting because you are used to precision but the nontourist parts of such countries are anything but literal or exact. Why? Its not just because they are poor. It actually has more to do with education and a lack of familiarity with constances, which, of course, one cant disconnect from poverty. If a countrys general population is not familiar with constances, then it will not be as central to their way of thinking, and therefore, they are less reliant upon constances. And what is the result? Mayhem! At least from your perspective. Nothing is labeled. Nothing is priced. No maps. No direction signs. Nothing is categorized or grouped. The neighborhoods and streets are not organized in any particular manner. Its a free-for-all! For a modern, this can be a very frustrating experience. You may even wonder how they can stand to live in such a manner but if you are in such a country and look around you, you will notice that everyone else is going about things and conducting their affairs just fine. Its not just because they live there, as you can take another person from a similarly disorganized society and place them in such country and they will get along and around just fine. The difference is that you are literally processing reality in a different way than they are. You are processing reality through Objective Constances while they are processing reality through a SemiObjective, Semi-Constant lense. They dont need price tags on the food because the price is based on weight which they can estimate by picking the item up or just by glancing at it. Can you say the same? They dont need tags on clothes and the like because haggling with the merchant is part and parcel of the purchasing process. Can you say the same? They actually have more street signs than your society; they just call these street signs pedestrians. Just ask one and they will become a living, breathing street sign, and will direct you in the way you need to go. Can you say the same? Its perfectly organized but just in a slightly less constant manner. When you buy something, you pay a little more or a little less each time but it all evens out at the end. For a modern, being in a slightly less constant society can be like being on the moon. It may be interesting at first but you may soon find yourself saying, Okay, all this bouncing

around is getting annoying. Wheres gravity when you need it? And the tags and signs are only a small portion of the difference between your society and a poor one; just wait until you have to deal with the people who are not accustomed to constances! The result? More mayhem. At least to you. No one is on time. They will show up two hours late and apologize for arriving early. If something happens, youll get 10 different explanations...from the same person. And if you need to get something done, do it yourself, as less constant people treat specific instructions more like optional suggestions. All in all, its literally a different world, even if its in the same continent, country, city, or even home. It is often called cultural differences and it is. But the actual cultural difference is the level of familiarity with constances, which is primarily tied to education levels. Go to a country with a more educated population than your own and you may be impressed by how organized and efficient everything is. And take someone from a third world country and put him or her in a major metropolis of an Objectively Constant society and they will likely be completely lost for a while, not because they are stupid, rather because he or she is not accustomed to things being organized in an objective, constant manner. Theyll initially be much more comfortable with finding their way around by means of living, breathing street signs before they become accustomed to using a map. Now go back in time. The ancient man awakes and is relived, as he believes his soul leaves his body, which causes him to sleep, and he fears the day when his soul does not return. He turns to his right to check on his livestock which are sleeping beside him in his tent. He turns to his left and sees his four wives and their 11 children sleeping peacefully. He awakens one of his wives who he bought for the price of an ox and she crawls under his blanket. After 6 months of marriage, she has still not conceived: Clearly, she has sinned and has been cursed by the unseen person who causes conception, he thinks, but I will give her one more month before I stone her to death. After he is finished with her, he scrambles out of his tent just in time to put his daily gift upon the community altar, and as the priest burns the offerings, the sun slowly rises in response. He bows solemnly at the sight then affixes his bow and arrow to his chest. Hunting time! he shouts, as he and the other men run into the forest. They are gone the entire afternoon but are unable to kill anything besides a few small birds. Someone has offended the unseen person who provides us game, the chief declares upon their return. Let he who sees all be the judge! he declares. So they draw lots and the man who draws the shortest stick is stabbed to death and they proceed to take his blood and wipe it on the front of every tent in the village. Tomorrow will be better, the ancient man concludes. It then starts to rain and everyone returns to their tents to tell their families sad stories because they must cry when the unseen person who causes rain is crying. The ancient man tells many stories until the rain stops and a rainbow appears, and as the unseen person who causes rain has indicated that all is now well, they have a large feast with food, music, and celebration. They offer another sacrifice, and in response, the sun begins to set and the moon appears in the night sky. The men sit around the campfire, counting the corresponding campfires of the gods which they can see sparkling in the sky. A fellow tribesman then draws close to him, saying I will give you a calf for your daughter. He ponders the offer then replies, Deal! Now, how long do you think you would last in such a society? Not long, as even the most fervent person who bows their knee and lives in a modern society, would be unable to make sense of such practices, beliefs, and customs. Why? Because you know the objective reality of constances. And the same constant that allows you to sleep in on Saturday mornings without worrying the sun wont rise is the same constant that governs the entire universe, even if you often call some constances spiritual. The main thing in considering Objective Constant, SemiObjective Constant, and Ancient Subjective cultural mindsets is that it pervades the entire way that you

perceive reality. Just as important to note, this worldview is molded, formed, and ready to go long before you even touch a codex; its like a secondary language. The codices were originally written in a different written language but also a different cultural one as well; the problem is that you have translated the codices linguistically but not culturally. And there are many aspects, such as background, setting, and audience, amongst other factors, which are vital to understanding the cultures (plural intended) of the codices. But the most important aspect is the cultural mindset, or worldview. Religious skeptics say, Aha, the stories are mere inventions that were not meant to be taken literally. And the religious ministers say, Indeed, these are accurate depictions of events that were meant to be taken literally. Both are right and wrong. Yes, the authors meant for the codices to be taken literally. But the literalness was to answer the question of Who? not the question of What? The authors of the old codex were not depicting actual events. They knew that. You ask, Did their audiences know that? My response? The audience did not know they were supposed to ask if the stories of the old codex were actual events, for matters of literalness is a modern question in Objective Constant societies, not one of Ancient Subjective cultures. Simply put, Abraham perceived an unseen person and told fake stories to explain what he perceived as the unseen persons real personality. In a modern sense, the stories were fictional but the personal characteristics these stories revealed were literal. But even real and fake are modern labels, for in Abrahams time, to imagine something or someone made it real. Again, the mindsets of a modern person and an ancient person are entirely different. For instance, if you were to tell a modern person to arrive at 2:00pm, they would arrive at 2:00pm unless you specifically communicated that they should arrive around 2:00pm or after 2:00pm, such as in the case of a social gathering. But if you were to tell a semi-modern person to arrive at 2:00, they may arrive at 1:00pm, 2:00pm, 3:00pm, or 4:00pm. Why? Because they look at time more in regards to time of day instead of the specific numbers that modern people uses to describe the specific time. You say 2:00pm and they hear afternoon, which means anytime after the morning and before the evening. Its a completely different way of conceiving time. And this gap between moderns and semi-moderns exists in every aspect of perception, not just in regards to time. This gap becomes an oceans length apart when it comes to the different mindsets of a modern person and an ancient one. Yes, it is this serious. The religious ministers think they can understand the codices without taking such matters into consideration, and as a result, they ravage the codices with their Objective Constant minds, which is like trying to interpret the Rosetta Stone by means of a graphic calculator. The result? One book. One unseen person. One spirit. But an ever-expanding number of denominations, traditions, and interpretations. Nevertheless, it was the personal traits of the unseen person, or the Who? in the story, which were intended to be understood literally, but religious skeptics are correct in that the actual stories are massively exaggerated, and at other times, downright falsehoods, as the archeologists who are physical descendants of this tribe have now proven. For instance, the Israelites did not defeat the Canaanites, as portrayed in the conquest stories of the old codex. They were Canaanites. Thats common knowledge amongst Jewish archeologists who have more of a vested interest in this not being the case than others, not to mention an actual expertise in such matters. So why does the old codex portray the Israelites as outsiders even though they were one of many societies which originated in Canaan? For the same reason politicians always portray themselves as outsiders. The best way to inspire people to work on your behalf is by portraying yourself as unlike the object of your desire. Thats why all of these politicians run around with accents, cowboy boots, and sports caps featuring teams as far away away from Washington D.C. as reasonably possible. What are they really saying? They are saying,

I am not like the typical politician in Washington D.C. which qualifies me to run Washington D.C.. In this same way, the authors of the new codex told their audience, You are not like the typical society in Canaan. In fact, you all arent even from here originally. This qualifies you to take over Canaan. This author doesnt give a damn about modern squabbles over territory, but in regards to the manner in which the old codex was written, and in light of modern archeology, this cannot be denied, although it will be denied. Why? Because if the stories portrayed in the first five books of the old codex are not literal representations of the origins and travails of this society, then it represents a massive problem, as it is the foundation upon which the new codex rests. But like the 2:00pm and afternoon example, the literalness of a story wasnt a question the original audience would have thought to ask, as they were listening to understand the personal traits of the unseen person, because, of course, he was unseen and not visibly perceptible. The story was merely a tool to accomplish this. Its like when you listen to the news to get a weather update. In such moments, you do not care about the stories of the day such as recent events, sports, movies, and certainly not commercials, but the people who make the news know this so they make you wait a bit so they can earn some money. Abraham did this same thing. He knew the people wanted to know the personal traits of the unseen person; that was the sole reason they were listening. For the Who? But he forced a story upon them, not to make money, but because he knew the illiterate, ancient masses may forget a list of descriptive adjectives which would be subjective and somewhat personally interpreted, but they would never forget a story, nor would their children or their grandchildren and so on and so forth throughout the ages. Now imagine this author is picking you up at the airport. As you walk into the terminal, he greets you and grabs your carry-on bags as you walk with him to the Baggage Claim area. As you walk with him, what are three questions he may ask you (not rhetorical): 1. Question #1: 2. Question #2: 3. Question #3: There are any number of questions that this author may ask you, such as How was the flight? Did they serve any food on the flight? Did you sleep during the flight? He may even ask Did you sit next to a sexy and mysterious woman whom you instantly connected with and made plans to meet later for a night of wine, cheese, and passion like in the movies because that never happens to this author he always gets scrunched between the nun and the balding, fat guy, but lucky you if it happened? But one question that this author would never ask, even if you all did this routine for 1,000 consecutive days is, How fast did the plane go? Why not? Because this author doesnt care how fast it went, and even though they often provide these details once the plane reaches peak altitude, regardless of how many times you have flown, not once have you ever remembered or cared about the speed at which the plane was flying. This is not just because you were just beginning to chat it up with the sexy and mysterious, wine, cheese, and passion lady, but because you were listening for a detail which was more pertinent to you, namely time, or How long until we get there? And even more important, you were listening to make sure the plane was headed to the correct destination. In this same way, the audiences to whom the old codex was written were listening for the Who? which was illustrated by fictional stories, not for the literalness of the

actual story. In addition, planes dont fly at the same speed for the entire flight. At times, particularly at the beginning and end, they must change their speed to successfully take off and land. And even though modern commercial flight technology renders the pilots basically unnecessary once the plane reaches its peak altitude, in the older days, the pilot had to use his controls to manually navigate the planes speed and direction, all for one purpose: to get you to the correct destination. This is what the authors of the codices did. Just as the plane changes speed and the pilot navigates the aircraft to get it to the right destination, the authors of the codices alternated between real, historical characters and fictional narratives with the sole purpose of inspiring their societies to do or not do the things necessary for survival.

I. The Formation Of Societies

Religious thinkers claim their unseen person exists and point to the same, basic moral code which has existed in all known societies as their proof. First, this author would point out that each of these societies also had their own unseen person and codices so why do such thinkers attribute the work of another to their unseen person? Nevertheless, this author will summarize this basic moral code which exists in every society: do not harm your neighbor, with harm being defined as killing, stealing, lying, and the like. So why have all societies prohibited its members from harming each other? Because this is the very definition of a society! We call groups of people who do not harm each other societies. And we call groups of people who do harm each other enemies, adversaries, or foes. There are different types of societies. The smallest societal unit is the family. The largest societal unit is humanity. In between these two we also have clans, tribes, nations, and unions. The religious thinkers say socieities formed and then their unseen person revealed the do no harm ethic as the moral code, as clearly portrayed in the old codex. According to this logic, people were regularly stabbing their neighbors, stealing from their family members, and butchering anyone else in sight. Then, their unseen person revealed The Code and the people looked at their blood-covered hands, said a collective, Damn, my fault. Didnt know that. Then they all hugged, shook hands, and went to the river to wash the blood off. No, this is not how it happened. The do no harm code wasnt revealed in every society. In fact, the do no harm code wasnt revealed in any society. Not one. Instead, the do no harm code caused societies to form. It preceded the formation of societies. Perhaps the religious thinkers will counter by saying, Our unseen person may not have revealed the do no harm code within each society but he placed it in each persons heart. This is why societies formed. First, this is not what is stated in the old codex, which portrays the unseen person revealing The Code after the society had gathered. In addition, the old codex certainly doesnt take credit for the ethics of other societies or groups; only modern religious thinkers do that. Even more, its clear the do no harm code wasnt placed in mans heart before societies were formed because harm was the very reason he agreed with others to do no harm. Societies formed to protect themselves from harm at the hand of others and to increase their tribes prospects of survival. To illustrate the formation of societies, imagine a game very similar to basketball with a court, 10 players, a ball, but only one hoop but there are no teams and every man plays for himself. The objective of the game is to put the ball in the hoop, and each time a player scores, he receives one pound of flour and the player with the most pounds of flour at the end of the game wins. If two or more players have the same amount of flour, both players win and the winners get to leave the court in peace. The remaining players that lose get to leave the court, but only after a portion of their privates are cut with a sharp blade, and without anesthesia. Do not be offended by the punishment received by the losers as this is the command given by

the unseen person in the old codex, except to infants as a consequence for being born. So when this game begins, one can imagine the competition is fierce because the stakes are high, or low, depending on how you look at it. In such a competition, perhaps a few players would have an advantage because of various factors such as height, speed, skill, strength, or toughness. But as they continued to compete, it would occur to one of the players, based upon the rules explained before the game began, that it would be more advantageous to ally himself with another player. Perhaps he would say to one of his competitors, Listen, if we keep playing in this manner, we are both going to lose. Lets work together to increase our chances of winning. We can split the pound of flour in half for each basket either one of us makes. Although well get less flour per basket, well get more pounds of flour in total working as a team. So who does this player choose as an ally? It all depends on the flow of the game but he probably does it in the same manner that a political candidate chooses a running mate: the ally should reinforce a strength or shore up a weakness. For instance, a short player may choose a tall player to shore up his height disadvantage or may choose another short player to reinforce his own abilities and beat height with speed. Or he may choose a medium-sized player who has a measure of both speed and height. The most important factor in selecting an ally is need. Players ally themselves with others who they were previously trying to beat and agree to no longer try to beat each other so their skills can be combined to give them the best chance to win. In this same way, ancient clans and tribes allied themselves with each other to improve their prospects of survival precisely because the do no harm code was not placed in mans heart. They had to agree to do no harm to escape being harmed by others and pool their resources and abilities together to improve their prospects of survival. There are those that say that morality is the key to a successful and prosperous society. This author wholeheartedly agrees, though not because morality is a singular, unchanging code handed down to us from antiquity, as the religious authorities would have us think, rather because morality adapts to each society to ensure its survival. Those who bow their knee simply do not understand the following: morality changes to meet the specific situation a society is facing. You do things that help you survive and dont do things that hurt your chances at surviving, based upon the circumstances you are facing. But the ancient religious authorities made a foolish mistake: they froze a specific set of ethics that were given for a specific set of emergencies. Why? Because the person to whom they bowed their knee was invisible, and as he was invisible, Abraham wasnt the only person who could legitimately create a collage to describe the unseen ones personality. Anyone could. Everyone could. This is the problem with invisible things: there are no rules. Anyone and everyone can collect the virtues they esteem and attribute them to an unseen person. Why? Because that is exactly what Abraham did! The religious authorities froze the specific ethics given for specific emergencies because in them, the personality of their unseen person was revealed through fictional stories largely involving real, historic characters. Those who had similar but somewhat different collages were labeled heretics and those with entirely different collages were labeled different gods. Nevertheless, every societys collage of an unseen person was a reflection of the values that each society esteemed, which was a reflection of what the society needed to survive in a specific circumstance. This author is not sure what they are called, but surely you know those huge, white lights they use at movie premieres in Hollywood. This author is referring to the ones that are so strong that they shoot into the sky and seem to hit the very stratosphere. There are usually two of them and they go back and forth, crisscrossing in the skies. They are an analogy of what Abraham did. Abraham valued the characteristics that gave him the best chance to survive. The characteristics that each society needed to survive in their natural and human environment were unique, even as each society shared the do no

harm ethic which gave rise to their society. Abraham, observing the unique traits that his society valued, combined these characteristics with the societal do no harm ethic and projected them as the personality of the unseen person, placing the commands and prohibitions the society needed to ensure its survival in his mouth and using largely fictional tales of historic people as the light which allowed people to perceive the unseen. Although this portrait originated from below and was projected into the unseen, like the Hollywood lights, when seen from afar, it may appear that the collage of the unseen person originates from the sky and illuminates that which is below. Each society has this light which illuminates the sky but the religious authorities have thrown dirt upon the source so it appears to originate from the sky. Like the Hollywood lights, which move this way and that, man has battled each other, saying the distinct movement of their light, or collage, is true and the others are false, largely because the cultural boundaries that guarded these lights were too thick to pear through. But as these barriers have slowly began to crumble and the similarities of each societies light becomes undeniable, what do some religious ministers conclude? They believe there is one, unique light, or unseen person, which is the source of each individual light in each society. Why? Because even when they come face to face with a natural law, they still see a person, even if this singular unseen person who they join together to bow down to completely contradicts the whole of the claims of their codices, which they unabashedly continue to use. The natural process, not the unseen person, is the same. The do no harm principal which led to the formation of societies, is the same. But the unique circumstances that revealed the distinct personalities of the unseen persons in each society resulted in the differences, although every command in every codex can be summarized by one word: survive! Now the religious ministers, both those who cling to their individual collages, and those that embrace a newly developing universal collage, may take offense to the explanation of the natural process which gave rise to their gods. But to do so would miss the entire point. This author understands the natural process that led to the development of their systems and appreciates them as Adams first attempt to control the natural phenomenon around and in him. As a result, this author exalts in Adams deft observations of his own nature and his ability to perceive an unseen cause behind all phenomenon, even if he projected people instead of the laws which were literally invisible to him at the time. The codices are mankinds first complete system of thought and were his initial attempt to bring order to that which delighted and vexed him. But the greatest legacy of the codices can be summarized as follows: We can be better. We can be better, both as individuals, and as a society. We can correctly and rationally identify the traits that best suit our survival and codify the commands and prohibitions which will ensure our thrival (read: new word). As an individual, the codices teach me that I can become a carrier of all the traits that Abraham projected upwards; I do not have to succumb to the lowest common denominator and dwell in the cellar like a beast. Instead, I can absorb the good that Abraham values in my unique society and be a walking, living, breathing, moral being, an example to others, and a code unto myself. The codices teach us that we need not walk on all fours but can stride erect, heads held high, for we are the kings of the jungle. We are men and women, developed from below but always reaching higher. We dont give up and we dont take no for an answer. Let no man attempt to shame our origins or hide our identity. Disease bows its knee to Adam; the outer boundaries of space submits itself to his inquiry. Hidden things reveal themselves upon his command and large things must move when he speaks. Achievement through hard work, not endowment, is the definition of accomplishment. It is because we are beasts that our domination and expansion is impressive. Within two centuries years, Adam will be able to do nearly everything which has been attributed to God by manipulating small level phenomenon through advances

in nanotechnology and bioengineering, to name a few. At such time, man will not enter paradise, but will dwell in an entirely new natural environment fashioned by Adams discoveries. This new environment will not include hunting, gathering, digging or farming but will consist of making and modifying things from what seems like nothing on the visible level. The future isnt in the codices; its on perceiving and refashioning that which can only be seen on the small level. And in the future, even this sphere will not be enough to satisfy the human sense of inquiry and adventure, and when the riddles of our present time have been vanquished, we will realize that the unseen person is no longer invisible, for he and us are one and the same. The morality of the old codex was not a code given by an unseen person but a survival guide for unique circumstances facing a particular society. These codes not only described the accurate actions and prohibitions best suited for survival but also the dietary, marriage and family customs, and penal code, amongst other cultural factors, best suited for the societys survival, all commanded and authorized by the gods. So when people from different societies began to interact, they perceived the differences in others as inferiorities. And in a sense, they were right, in that, people with different physical traits and cultural traditions would have a less likely chance of surviving in differing environment and societal circumstances. These unique survival guides were frozen by formation of codices and promulgated as the commands of an unseen person, and when different societies encountered each other, the result was most often butchering each other in the form of wars, genocides, enslavement, and various forms of discrimination. This human tendency was not solely a result of the cultural differences between societies, but also because subjugation of another societys resources, including human capital, ensured both survival and thrival. Even in spite of humanitys claims of modernity, very little, in fact, has changed. Fairly recent times have been the bloodiest in Adams history, though perhaps more due to enlarged populations to be sent to fight or become collateral damage than an actual increase in violence. This is Adams left hand and it will continue to wreck havoc indefinitely. But his right hand has also grown stronger since the dawn of the modern age. Why? As a result of technological advances, most notably the engine and easy access to cheap oil, he has slowly gained more control of his natural environment, rendering many of the needed differences amongst societies and its peoples increasingly obsolete. The differences, particularly in regards to physical traits, are no longer needed to survive, as the advent of technology has gradually created a new natural environment with its own characteristics best suited for survival and unique traits needed to ensure thrival. Technology has also allowed for increased interaction amongst different peoples, which has allowed them to see that the differences, whether rendered obsolete as a result of technology, or still held to as a result of continued necessity or cherished tradition, are minor compared to the commonality of their shared human experience. And just as important, if not more so, the prospects of cooperation have proven to be just as profitable, if not more, than oppression, which is very profitable but also very messy, particularly as oppressed people have a tendency to eventually fight back. This slow and steady emergence of various groups whose differences are understood, not as interior or evil, but rather, quite simply, human, is a broad description of the various causes which form the modern human rights movement. Human rights may seem like a secular term to those who bow their knee but the morality of its past victories are universally supported by all modern people, including those who bow their knee, so much so that the religious ministers have reinterpreted the codices, primarily by ignoring the sections which clearly speak against these rights, to accomodate what is literally a new, universal moral code. You may disagree with the term but you agree with its various elements. Here are just a few:

1. Womens rights, including the right to vote and equal pay in the workplace 2. The right of workers to organize and negotiate with their employers 3. Civil rights, including the right of minorities to vote and be treated with equality in all aspects of society 4. Treaties to ensure restraint during warfare, including avoidance of civilian casualties and humane treatment of prisoners of war These are just a few of the parts of the modern human rights movement. These are universally known and supported by all modern people, regardless of their religious views, yet none of these rights, though unarguably moral, are supported by the codices. These are a result of a growing sense of shared human experience, where differences of gender, race, class, sexual orientation, national identification, and other personal, societal, and cultural norms are being accepted as different, not evil. The clock on ancient morality is ticking and will soon be entirely overthrown by all modern, rational individuals.

Solving The New Testament & Spiritual Phenomenon

A. Aspects of Spiritual Phenomenon
First, this author will point out that spiritual phenomenon is a very large category but simply refers to something that is inspired by the spirit of God. Its somewhat amusing that most religious ministers will not feel comfortable with discussing spiritual phenomenon as they perceive it as a wind that comes and goes according to the varying desires of their unseen person. They are not predisposed to perceiving natural laws, but even if they were, they have not experienced spiritual phenomenon with the frequency or tangibleness to know that it does not function with the occasionalness of an (unseen) persons whim but rather with the consistency of a pen dropping to the floor from the same height ten consecutive times. Absolute consistency is not a characteristic of a person; its a characteristic of a law. The entirety of spiritual phenomenon can be categorized in five distinct, yet overlapping and fluid categories, which this author has defined and extrapolated later on in this essay. The variety of experience is a result, not of an unseen persons whim, but a change in the natural variables, such as the activities of the body, or singing, clapping, dancing, lying, and kneeling, amongst others, and the condition of the body, such as the ingestion of food, water, especially medication, and anything else that effects the natural processes within the body. Whatever effects your body will also effect your interaction with spiritual phenomenon because its a wholly natural phenomenon coming from, not passing through, your natural body. This is the quirky thing about natural laws; you dont have to understand them to feel or use them. A huge variable involved in spiritual phenomenon is the number of people involved in the spiritual exercise, as all people give off as well as receive energy, with some giving off much more than others, and as a result, are normally the ones on stage. As energy can be felt, but not seen by the naked eye, its perceived as spiritual and its operation is not understood. Spiritual phenomenon as a whole resides in the shadows of humanitys ignorance. Why? Primarily because of an incorrect self-perception. If you were a computer, you would consider yourself a perfectly functioning model designed by a large, well-known technology company. But this is not how you should view yourself. Instead, view yourself as the prototype of a computer being designed in the basement of a genius Ivy League dropout who uses spare parts to assemble the device and designs an original operating system, software, and processors. Upon completing his project, imagine that he takes the weekend off before he returns to do a full test of the system to work out any kinks that may exist, but before he leaves, he attaches a sticky tab with the phrase Finally Finished! before he grabs his bags and heads out the door. But while he is gone, his roommate sees the sticky tab, and knowing his buddy has spent every waking hour over the past year working on the computer, is curious about how well the device runs, so he turns on the computer and tries it out. Perhaps he clicks on a folder on the Desktop and all of the folders open up. He may think, Neat design. I can save time this way, or the File tab at the top is much larger than the other tabs and he thinks, Thats good because I use that tab more than others, or the music application begins to play whenever he clicks on an image file and he thinks A soundtrack for pictures? Cool dude! So when his roommate returns, he may congratulate the novel features, but the computer designer will explain that these, in fact, were not intentional modifications but kinks in the system, and upon running a test, may even point out the error in the software code and correct it to show him how the design is supposed to be. Now imagine Abraham is walking in the woods and comes across a type of plant he has never seen. But

as he draws close to examine it, he begins to sneeze and his nose begins to run. He knows that every effect has a cause but he does not see the person causing him to sneeze. But he does perceive that this reaction has only occurred in the presence of this particular plant, and since it makes him feel bad, he perceives it as an evil plant. Or perhaps its not a tree but a type of animal, food, or anything else. But Abraham, like the roommate, is unaware that he is experiencing a kink in his body. He calls it an evil plant but you call it allergies because you know that when some people encounter certain substances, it causes their body to overreact and release chemicals to fight a danger that is not actually present. Some of the kinks in the physical body, like the desktop folders opening simultaneously, are negative. Some of the kinks in the physical body, like the enlarged File tab, are neutral and do no harm nor do they help. And some of the kinks in the physical body, like the picture soundtrack, are positive. The reason you have kinks is because you are not, in fact, copies of a perfectly functioning prototype, but rather organisms that have adapted in an unique environment over a long period of time. And many of these kinks were positive factors at some point in time but your environmental surroundings have changed faster than your body is able to adapt. Thats why even the religious authorities must get their wisdom teeth pulled, for they no longer gnaw on ancient foods that shaped the jaw in a fashion to make them useful, rendering a formerly positive trait a painful kink. They are only kinks in the sense that you are still adapting and your present environment is likely not the same as the one in which your body was adapted to live in. But we are aware of all of this! the religious authorities will exclaim. This author knows that you are aware of this and provided these examples as a frame of reference. Why? they will ask. Because you call many of the kinks that you are unaware of spiritual phenomenon. Why? Because people assume, and even more, fervently believe, that all of their personal experiences are a result of intent, meaning that an unseen person intentionally caused the experience. Within the context of religious settings, when things happen that you cant explain, you perceive it as being intentionally caused by an unseen person, or spiritual phenomenon, instead of the functioning of kinks in your physical body, perhaps because it happens so rarely that when it does occur, you are too preoccupied with it that you do not think to inquire of its actual cause. Spirituality has always been an entirely natural phenomenon which is why every society has discovered its operation. The original followers harnessed it to serve as proof that their master was resurrected just as their master used it in an attempt to prove his connection to the supreme unseen person. Nevertheless, they had to contend with the fact that even though they used it as a battering ram to further their own aims, their rivals also did the same. So in the midst of competing religious authorities, many of whom used spiritual phenomenon as evidence of their claims, how could one determine which authority was the representative of truth? And in the midst of spiritual phenomenon, how could one determine which manifestation was from a good unseen person or a bad unseen person? The answer to the first question is the person who worked the greatest miracles and acts of spiritual phenomenon was perceived as the true prophet of the supreme good person because it was logical to believe the supreme unseen person was more powerful than other unseen entities. The entire old codex is an illustration of this mindset. Time after time, the religious authority who worked the greatest miracle was considered the representative of the true God and the other religious authorities who worked inferior miracles, and at times, no miracles at all, were considered representatives of false gods. There are countless examples throughout the old codex but the two best are Moses confrontation with Pharaohs magicians and Elijahs battle with the prophets of Baal. In the old codex, miracles and demonstrations of spiritual phenomenon were common amongst all religious ministers but it was the religious authority with the greatest manifestations of spiritual power

who was considered legitimate and their words were accepted as a message from the supreme unseen person. Both the original and new followers in the new codex also abided by this same mindset: spiritual phenomenon was proof of legitimacy. It was the reason, as the new codex states, the original followers believed the master was the messiah, and spiritual phenomenon gave them the authority to reinterpret the old codexs expectation in regards to the messiah, who was supposed to be a military hero and king. But by the end of the new codex era, and especially in the generations that came after the early followers, matters of spiritual phenomenon were addressed, but solved it in a manner different than portrayed in the old codex and new codexs record of the ministry of the master and launch of the early church. The biggest question facing the the generations of religious authorities who followed the apostles was Who exactly was the master? This question arose because the writings of the original followers contained in the new codex wasnt clear on this matter. Sometimes, he seemed very human, being portrayed as eating, drinking, laughing, crying, and sleeping. At other times, he seemed like deity, being portrayed as born of a virgin, working many miracles and healings, and being raised from the dead. In other portrayals, he seemed like an angelic being, such as during the transfiguration, but like a prophet when he raged against the religious authorities of his day, and like an enlightened teacher during the sermon on the mount. At times, he clearly stated that the supreme unseen person was greater than him and at other times, that he and the supreme unseen person were the same and/or equal. So the masters precise identity, and eventually, the relationship between him, the father, and the spirit, became a major issue of contention amongst the generations of adherents who came after the original followers. Matters concerning the nature of the master and his relationship to the father and spirit may seem like nobrainers to modern adherents but they stand upon a foundation that was given to them by the early church, not upon formulations contained in the new codex. If you were to take 10 people who had never read the new codex and put them in separate rooms, they would come to 10 different conclusions about the masters identity and relationship with the father and spirit, all based upon the same Bible. This author desires to tread carefully in this matter, not for fear of modern religious authorities, but out of respect for a historic and very delicate process in dealing with such matters. The religious thinkers will say that the 100% God and 100% man formula is a reflection of the apostles teachings, and this author doesnt necessarily disagree, although its doubtful the original followers were overly concerned about the precise nature of the masters identity (beyond his messiahship) or his exact relationship with the father and the spirit. Also, this author finds such a formulation quite convenient; there were massive problems with him being either just God or just man which the church leaders at the time were very aware of and they consciously and intentionally solved these problems by proclaiming him both. But this author will not quibble over this theological development at the present time as it is not the matter at hand. If one says, This is what the apostles meant even if they never said it then this author will accept it as a convenient reflection of the apostles teachings but certainly not as a quotation of what they said and certainly not of what they wrote. But the issue at hand isnt the eventual formula but rather the actual need for one. Why did the very precise, very technical definition of the masters identity even matter? Why couldnt they just say, He is the savior of the world and leave it at that. Later on, why couldnt sayingThe father, son, and spirit are all good unseen entities suffice? Why were matters as small as a one word disagreement between the church leaders of the time become the difference between orthodoxy and heresy? The reason they had to clarify, and even more, interpret the teaching of the apostles, was because the church had expanded rapidly across the Roman empire and uniformity in faith and teaching became a necessity. They could no longer rely on spiritual phenomenon but needed something more reliable to rule

their burgeoning religious kingdom. For instance, imagine you are one of five sons who run five housing supply stores started by your father, all of which are in the same state. Now, you may have some written, centralized business regulations, but you have never needed to even look at them because you and your siblings grew up running the family store and already know from personal experience (PE1) how things should operate. Each sibling may do things a bit different but its all within the general guidelines that you grew up doing. Now, imagine the business later expands to 500 stores scattered across 50 different states and each store is ran by a manager who has never personally met your father. No good businessman would allow such a diverse group of people to just do their own thing because they would not stay within the boundaries of how things should be done. One would train each manager extensively so each would abide by protocol and the centralized business guidelines would be present and followed to the letter at each branch. In this same way, as the church expanded, the need for uniformity in faith and practice slowly took precedent over the need for spiritual phenomenon. The problem with spiritual phenomenon is that it is unreliable, in that, it is perceived like the wind that comes and goes at the whim of the unseen person and there were more pulpits than there were spiritually-gifted religious ministers to fill them. Spiritual phenomenon is good to launch a revolution, and the master and the original followers used it quite effectively to not only get their foot in the door, but to knock the door off the hinges. But once you own the house, you need something more objective than the wind to maintain control. You need a code. And the authorized codex was used to distinguish their unseen person from the unseen people of other collages. Why? Because there were other people who were saying the master was 100% God and others saying the master was 100% man. These individuals werent heathens but respected bishops who were invited to discuss matters concerning the masters identity with their peers from across the empire. And what did they use to support their positions? The new codex. But the God-man description won, in a literal sense, as they held a vote, and those who dissented and decided to stay faithful to their interpretation were thrown out of the church, and in some cases, their supporters were even killed. Its interesting how quickly the tables turned and its a great illustration of the consequences of attaching a spiritual kingdom to a natural emperor who was probably sincere in his faith but certainly more sincere in his ambitions. The church went from being the martyred to the slayer literally overnight. Now some say this is when the church went bad, but as this author will demonstrate, the whole franchise began bad. This was just another adaptation, not for survival, but the first step towards domination. And when the new codex and various creeds professing the authorized interpretation of the masters identity and relationship with the father and spirit were ratified, the code, not spiritual phenomenon, became ones proof of legitimacy. Why? Because those who said the master was only either 100% man or 100% God, as well as those who bowed their knee to other deities, had miracles too. As a result, the objective code, which was clear and unambiguous to the very letter, replaced spiritual phenomenons role as the proof of legitimacy. Even more, the correct code became the proof that any spiritual experience was legitimate. And this code was enforced, not with a curse, but with a sword. What type of sword? Roman. Of the same variety that killed the master, the original followers, and countless many in the generations of followers before that time. And not just in the Roman empire, but in literally every society upon the earth since that time, as not a single people group and hardly any individual society has gone unmolested by an army bearing the masters cross. This isnt religious history; this is the history of the entire world for the past 1,650 years. Your own society became a place of refuge for individuals fleeing from the dangers of not conforming to a similar code. This cannot be denied. Many people may label the exaltation of the

code over spirituality as many things, such as apostasy, sinful, or immoral. But here is a better word to describe this process: genius, at least, if domination of this world is your objective. Imagine you are playing a basketball game and are losing badly but as soon as your team catches up and leads by one point, you change the rules to state that a basket only counts if its shot by someone wearing your teams jersey. This ensures that you can never lose and this is exactly what the religious authorities did. They conquered the world saying Our spiritual phenomenon is proof of the legitimacy of our code but they have maintained their dominance by saying Our code is proof of the legitimacy of our spiritual phenomenon. Brilliant. And they killed those who dissented. In modern times, they still use swords but in the form of words. Why? Adaptation, of course. You cant kill people, at least not for religious differences. Why? Because Adam doesnt like that, at least not in modern societies. He likes tolerance, globalism, diversity, acceptance, hugs and kisses, that type of stuff. So the religious ministers make the necessary adjustments but their aim is still the same: destroy the dissenters. This is why many of the religious ministers will say, Why such talk about spiritual phenomenon? Our faith is based upon a moral code, not an experience. And they are correct. Its not that they dont believe in miracles; its that they dont need them. They have something more reliable. A code. And if you work any spiritual phenomenon but refuse to submit to their code, then it is labeled lying signs and wonders, false miracles, voodoo, witchcraft, or any number of names in hopes of discrediting it, even though spiritual phenomenon separate from the old codexs expectation of the tribes messiah is how they got their start, not to mention the fact that its an entirely natural phenomenon unrelated to the ridiculous notion of good and bad ghosts. Why are the religious authorities so fearful of what they perceive as spiritual phenomenon? Because it puts too much power in the hands of one person. Even more, it put too much power in the hands of someone who is too often the wrong person. And not that long ago, in the minds of the established religious authorities of his day, it was the master who was that one person. Not that long ago, it was the master who was the wrong person. The religious authorities of his day are portrayed in a negative light due to the new codex being written by the original followers, but they were simply upholding the correct interpretation of the old codex. Seeing what he was able to accomplish, and how even the old codex was twisted in any matter to accommodate an overwhelmingly gifted individual, the religious authorities who came after the original followers took note of this lesson: Use spiritual phenomenon as an offensive tool in battle, but once ones enemies have been overwhelmed and the world is yours, revert to the law and order of a code to maintain control. Another way of saying that is Miracles happened then but they do not happen now. What happens now? The code is enforced. All it takes is a superficial read of both the entire old codex and most of the new codex and its clear: spiritual phenomenon is the singular proof given over and over again throughout the Bible to support the legitimacy of ones message. The message was given after, not before, the mighty miracles wrought by the ancient heroes of the faith. It was the man who worked the greatest miracles who was granted permission to speak. Another question that those who claim that spiritual phenomenon is caused by the spirit of God is Why are such spiritual experiences always preceded by so much natural effort? Yes, this author is referring to the singing, clapping, praying, chanting, murmuring, music, choirs, orchestra, reading of codices, often- times lengthy sermons, reciting of creeds, kneeling, dancing, praying in incoherent languages, and the whole of natural activities which always precedes such spiritual encounters. Has it ever occurred to those who bow their knee that these natural activities, in and of themselves, and not an unseen

person, are responsible for that which they feel? If they are really interacting with a spirit, why does it require so much natural effort? Why are they not able to enter into a place where knees are bowed and meet with their unseen person just as they are able to meet with others who also gather to bow their knees? If you have ever been completely alone in a place where knees are bowed, then you probably found it eerily empty. This may partially be the result of it being a place which is customarily active, at least when you are there, but you will also come to the realization that it isnt a special place, but rather a big, empty room, as many who bow their knee will readily concur. Yet, the religious ministers make the claim that the spirit of God is also present in the room when people gather to bow their knees. They say they can feel him, as if he were a roaming being, whispering into peoples ears, causing them to become emotional, listening to and answering their prayers, speaking to them via the codex and the words of the pastor, and becoming, at times, physically tangible and able to be felt. The religious ministers claim their unseen person is in their midst, but this author wonders, What would happen if they were to gather in the same way but simply sit in their seats and await their unseen person to present himself? The answer? Absolutely nothing. This is not even a debatable point; the religious ministers and those who bow their knees know this to be true, although they may not have thought of it in this manner. Every time they gather, they often greet each other and make small talk, but in the moments before a service starts, nothing spiritual ever happens, even though they are all gathered. It is not until the music is cued and their minds are focused and sharpened upon considerations of their unseen person and their bodies begin to move in various ways that their unseen person decides to invisibly present himself. This is tantamount to claiming that the gods have miraculously drenched you with dew from the heavens but you fail to mention that this only occurs during the course of an intense workout at the gym. Yes, it very well might be holy water but normal people call that sweat. This is exactly what the religious ministers have done: they take people through an intense soulish workout, which isnt too dissimilar to that which is done in other areas of regular life, but as that which they describe is invisible, they are free to be much more creative, and unlike authorities in other fields, they dont promise jobs or health tips, but eternal life. The religious ministers will say their unseen person is responding to their worship and this author readily agrees: this is literally their way of describing the natural law of cause and effect. They initiate and then feel a response. When they dont initiate, they do not feel a response. They admit they make the initiation but claim that the response is from God. But what is the response? Do they fly into the air? Can they lift large vehicles? Can they run a mile in two minutes? Does the contents of the entire dictionary suddenly appear in their minds? No. What is the response? They cry. They get happy. They get sad. They feel a warm sensation on their bodies and a thickness in the air. They feel comforted. They feel inspired. What do all of these responses have in common? They are all very, very natural. Now, in some instances, the response may seem unnatural. For instance, crying, happiness, sadness, comfort, and inspiration are all clearly natural responses, even if they are experienced in a more effusive manner inn religious settings than in most other contexts. But there are some responses that do not seem natural, such as the physical warmth or sensation that can be felt on the body and what can only be described as a thickness in the air during singing time. Those who bow their knee exclaim, This is the presence of our unseen person! Hahahahaha. No, actually, its not. Thats the emission and reception of natural energy, part of the human exchange that occurs amongst people, especially in a crowd. Simply put, thats a natural law of which you are clearly not aware and do not understand. The natural law of emission and reception of energy, which is perceived as the presence of God by those who bow their knee, is a great example of how religious skeptics should interact with religious

authorities. They are continuously debating religious thinkers and ministers about the nature of the visible world and grow visibly frustrated with rationalizations that are the modern equivalent of saying the earth is flat. Yes, some religious thinkers and ministers may use local logic and faulty science to support their traditions, but the vast majority of those who bow their knee do not actually believe these false assertions about the visible world. They may debate, argue, claw, and fight on behalf of them in public, but that is simply to save face in light of attacks. In private, amongst themselves, and in the safety of places where knees are bowed, they readily admit there is no visible evidence to support their claims. Nevertheless, they still believe. Why? Because their faith isnt a result of observations of the natural world. Their faith is a result of PE0, or personal experience. This is how it works. Imagine a guy named Joe goes with a friend to a place where knees are bowed. He hears a story about how the master died so that he could live forever. Although the story seems impossible, the prospects of living forever causes his soul to respond to this possibility, just as he would respond to the prospects of winning the lottery, and the religious ministers say, in their own way, Your response is proof that it is true. Upon his PE0, normally emotional in nature, being directed to the claims of the codices, Joe bows his knee. That is the foundation of this entire franchise, not observations of the natural world. Joe may be very aware the visible world does not align with the claims of the codices but he continues to believe. Why? Because he trusts what he feels more than he trusts what he can observe or what he is told about the visible world. PE0 trumps PE1 and PE2, nearly every time. But this is only the beginning. He continues to have PE0s that reinforce the claims of the codices on a weekly, and for some, daily basis, by regularly going to a place where knees are bowed and also doing spiritual exercises on his own, where he interacts with what he perceives as the unseen person. It does not matter what you tell such a person. Its not that Joe is faithful, as the religious ministers would say, or stupid, as religious skeptics would say. What is Joe? Joe is human! Thats what humans do. They instinctively trust what they have felt more than what they can see or what they are told. That is a good thing. This is how the human body functions. This keeps you alive in the same way you would continue to insist that something was wrong with your elbow even if the doctor could not find anything wrong with it. So how should religious skeptics counter the religious ministers use of human instinct to support their claims? No, not just by debating matters of the natural world, but by explaining the natural laws behind the spiritual phenomenon that those who bow their knee are experiencing. The problem is that religious skeptics think so lowly of those who bow their knee that they completely disregard their testimony but they must investigate the experiences of those who bow their knee. Why? Because religious people are describing natural laws which they do not understand and thus, perceive as spiritual. Yes, haggling over the nature of the visible world can be effective, as some of those who bow their knee come to the realization that the claims of the codices, are, indeed, impossible, and they do something very, very unnatural: they come to trust PE1 and PE2 more than they trust PE0 as a result of the overwhelming evidence that contradicts the claims of the codices. They, in a sense, repudiate their own personal experience. But most people simply cant do that, nor should they necessarily be expected to do so. The efforts of religious skeptics would be one hundred fold more effective if they uncovered the natural laws behind spiritual phenomenon, as they are the heart of this franchise. Do not present those who bow their knee with charts, graphs, and presentations of the natural world; instead, present those who bow their knee with charts, graphs, and presentations of the natural laws behind, for instance, the natural energy which they perceive as the presence of God, so they may see they have been describing a natural law of which they were unaware, or were aware of but didnt apply to their religious activities. Dont argue with those who bow their knee; instead, listen to them, then translate the unseen people that they perceive as the cause behind their spiritual experiences experiences into the

corresponding unseen law. This author will also add the following. It is, in fact, those who bow their knee who will be most interested in the natural mechanisms behind their spiritual phenomenon. Why? Because they will immediately recognize them in a manner which will surprise even religious skeptics. Just as those who bow their knee would immediately recognize a portrait drawn of a spouse or sibling, they will also recognize the natural laws which underly that which they perceive as spiritual because it will explain the experiences they previously had but did not understand. It is precisely the whimful nature of spiritual phenomenon which causes those who bow their knee to pursue it, thinking the inconsistency is a result of the varying desires of their unseen person. It is like the wind, which blows at times, and at other times, does not, and those who bow their knee have no clue why. It is precisely the mysterious nature of spiritual phenomenon which makes its pursuit very appealing and simultaneously very frustrating. The natural laws which animate spiritual phenomenon will be investigated, classified, and unveiled, and when they are, they will illuminate the weekly and even daily experience of those who bow their knee. Imagine doing something everyday and considering it the most important part of each day but not actually understanding what you are experiencing. This is what those who bow their knee do. They will immediately recognize the natural laws that cause what they perceive as spiritual phenomenon in the same manner that they recognize their own reflection in the mirror, even if they do not accept what they recognize, as it will explain the variables which determine when the wind comes and when it does not come. Upon hearing that spirituality is 100% natural, perhaps out of honest curiosity, a man may ask his pastor, Let us prove this young fool wrong and show that our unseen person is responsible for what we feel. Let us cease using all of these things with which we surround ourselves with. We should have a service with no exercising and simply allow our unseen person to present himself. Then he shall notice the disturbed look on his pastors face; even though he (hopefully) views these things as a tool of his unseen person, he knows very well that if they were to simply gather with those who bow their knee and sit quietly in their seats, absolutely nothing would happen. Such a pastor will then protest against such a suggestion, saying But our codices command us to do these things. And indeed, they do, for Abraham took every element that moved man and attributed them to God. But such a man will continue to insist, saying, Lets just try it once. But his pastor will resist such overtures and will condemn him until enough people in his church agree with the man and his position is threatened, then he will submit to their request for the sake of his own survival. And when they gather together, forsaking song, dance, chant, codices that appeal to the souls primary desire, prayers that warm the heart, and the like, and upon entering the place where knees are bowed and being seated, simply say to the unseen person, Come and join us. We invite you to present yourself, then remain silent. What will happen? Absolutely nothing. The silence will be deafening. But the pastor will not be deterred, saying We have not obeyed the codices! We must do these things. I told you all this from the beginning. And likely the majority of people in his church will agree with him. But a few of the adults wont, and they will see religion for what it is, and even more, there will be a row of young people who will be told to agree with them, but upon growing older and recalling the experience, they will understand the implications of the silence. And that row of young people isnt your youth group; that row of young people is a generation. Now what will happen? This author will tell you what will happen. Nothing. The adults will refuse to partake in this challenge simply because they know exactly what will happen if they do. But surely a group of young people will be inspired to try it on their own, and initially, they will fail. And after each

failed attempt, they will take note of their failure, and perhaps they will stumble upon an agreement to concentrate upon an image of their unseen person, which will not cause them to fly in the sky, part an ocean, or do anything that defies the laws of nature, but simply to cry or weep or groan. Then they will post such a video online, saying We have done it! And those who bow their knee will rejoice, saying Our unseen person has answered our prayer. Not quite. Why? Because they may not have sung, chanted, prayed, or read the codices, but indeed, they did do something: they concentrated on the image of their unseen person. What is this author getting at? He is referring to the very law the religious thinkers laud as proof of Gods existence, saying Every effect requires a cause, which they use as evidence that their unseen person is the creator of all. This author concurs with this law but the nature of how things came to be isnt the only area where it can be applied. It also has implications in so-called spiritual phenomenon. Those who bow their knee make the argument that what they feel in times of worship, prayer, and invitation for salvation, which are the effects, are caused by their unseen person. They will say, Our unseen person uses the singing, preaching, and the like, as a tool to touch us. Perhaps. But what happens when you remove these tools? Your unseen person is nowhere to be found. And when these same tools are utilized individually in other areas, such as concerts, movies, theatrical performances, political speeches, and the like, they cause the same effect, albeit less effusive because they are individual, not combined, and do not promise that which the soul is most moved by, namely eternal life. So the tools that the unseen person uses works without him and he doesnt appear when these arent used? Thats not evidence of an unseen person; thats evidence of an unseen law. Even more, in the example given of the concentrating youth who bow their knee, their effect still had a cause, namely concentration. But they have done nothing but think! You are never satisfied! the religious ministers will say. This author concurs. They have done nothing but think, but think, they have. Thinking is an active action, even if one does not physically move, at least not in a visual way. But when does one not do anything? the religious ministers will demand. That is precisely this authors point. You are always doing something, even when you are sleeping, for even as you slumber, your soul is active in its purpose of keeping you alive, which is why you do not die at night for lack of oxygen. And your codices claim that every single action that Adams takes, including the ones that his soul takes as well, are inspired by your unseen person. Adam awakes, and your codices say that it was the unseen person who allowed him to wake. Adam opens the window and sees the sunlight, and your codices say that the sun rose at the unseen persons command. Adam eats breakfast and your codices say it was the unseen person who provided the nourishment. Adam goes to work and your codices say that it was the unseen person who created him for the purpose of work. Adam returns from work to spend time with his family and your codices commands him in the manner in which he is to have a family. Adam goes to sleep and has a dream and the codices say that it is the unseen person who has given him this dream. Do you not see a pattern? Before Paul and Peter. Before Elijah and Moses. And before even the actual Abraham, ancient man perceived an entirely spiritual system and attributed every single action that Adam did, and every single thing which surrounded Adam, to the gods, plural. This was before organized religion. All the actual Abraham did was consolidate all of the myriad of unseen people which animated everything in and around Adam into one, supreme unseen person. He did not even give this unseen person a name, for he was already named (Yahweh), and was one of the gods who was also worshipped by other people at the time. And everything that was attributed to the plural was now the domain of the singular. Why? Because ancient man could not explain how his body, surroundings, or world operated. Everything was credited or blamed upon unseen people. But Abraham didnt stop with the question

Why? but proceeded to the question How? And upon investigation, particularly in the modern era, every single time the question How? has been asked, an unseen law, not an unseen person, has been found. Yet, those who bow their knee insist that it is their unseen person, and not their own actions, which are the cause behind the effects which they experience even though they acknowledge the existence of natural laws. In modern times, the unseen person behind every occurrence which has been investigated has bowed their knee to a natural law. But instead of extrapolating the first submission of a person to a law and applying this lesson to each aspect of Adams existence, religious authorities have fought tooth and nail at every turn, rebuking the uncovering of natural laws until the evidence becomes overwhelming, then shifting to claim that which they previously rebuked as now being under the domain of their unseen person. Why do the religious authorities fight the uncovering and harnessing of natural laws? Because they know that sooner or later, man will realize that this entire system would still work even if their God did not exist. The religious ministers will insist, The response may be natural but its more powerful than the response in any other area because we are interacting with our unseen person And this author agrees. Again, let us revisit the law of cause and effect. You say the response, or the natural effect, is more powerful than in any other context. Why is this? Perhaps one should examine the natural cause. Voila! The natural cause is also more powerful than in any other area! The claims of the religion are many but it all boils down to one thing: the promise of eternal life in paradise. If they removed eternal life from their traditions, very few people would be motivated to bow their knee, in spite of what they may say otherwise. In fact, the promise of paradise is really the only thing that makes religion, a religion, instead of some sort of social or community group. Simply put, you call organizations that portray participation as extending beyond death as religious. The codices, the unseen person, and all of their activities, are means to one, and only one end: eternal life in paradise. How can one understand the effect that the promise of eternal life has upon the soul? Quite easily. Have you ever seen a girl, whether in real life or perhaps in a TV show or movie, who is finally asked out on a date by that guy who she has had a crush on for a long time? This author doesnt even need to explain her reaction because you already know it. Now imagine that same girl, or a different one, being asked by her boyfriend, who is also her dream guy, if she will marry him. Again, no need for explanation. You already know how she reacts. Both events are important and moving on an emotional level. So moving, in fact, that at times, a woman can be physically overwhelmed by emotion. But the marriage proposal, for many reasons, including its foreverness, is many times more moving, best illustrated by how each and every woman who has genuinely been in love reacts when she is the recipient of a marriage proposal from the guy who is the object of her affection. You know these things. All this author needs to do is point them out. You can go to a rock concert and become filled with joy at the sight and sound of your favorite artist, causing you to become so excited that you dance and sing with wild abandon. You can go to a dramatic movie and be moved emotionally, so much so that tears will pour down your face, only to watch the same movie over and over again to relive the experience (read: Titanic). You can also see a movie about a patriotic or courageous person and be filled with inspiration to such an extent that the most dangerous place on earth for a criminal when the movie is over would be the space between the theaters exit door and your car that sits in the parking lot. You can listen to a politician speak about your society and be literally moved into action to support that which he or she is advocating. All of these are real experiences that move the human soul. All of these experiences are natural, both in origin and manifestation. But clearly, as the religious ministers love to point out, their traditions have always moved mans soul more than their secular counterparts, although this isnt as true

as it used to be, particularly in regards to the present, younger generation. Nevertheless, this author concurs with the religious ministers. Its not a question of If? but rather, Why? The religious ministers will say, Man is moved to a greater extent by our traditions because they are authorized and inspired by our unseen person. No, not quite. Man is moved more by your nonsense because the benefits are better. Remember, the sole purpose of everything that your soul does, most of which you are unaware of, is meant to keep you alive. The soul is moved, as the religious ministers will admit, and often times compete with, by individual elements which are important to your survival, even if the form in which they are presented do not appear to have anything to do with survival. The form itself may be a sports competition, social website, movie, TV show, song, clothing line, hair care product, or any other sort of thing in your society. Regardless of the form itself and how it is presented, there is a trait which pertains to survival lying underneath literally every single thing which exists in your society , even if you do not think of it that way. The reason you like or admire or are interested in anything or anyone, regardless of what or who it is, is because you perceive its importance to your survival or that of your society, even if you do not think of it in this manner. The form, whether it is a thing, or a person, represents a trait, such as love, courage, bravery, social interaction, athletic ability, beauty, intelligence, justice, integrity, peace and so on and so forth, all of which are necessary for individuals to survive and for a society to function. The reason why people like different things is because they value the traits they perceive are best suited for their individual survival, which varies from person to person. Why? Because everyones situation, or circumstance, is different. But there are enough people in similar circumstances that they collectively admire a particular thing or person, thus making it popular. Everything in your society revolves around survival, even if you dont realize it. Even things such as the manner in which you dress and your dialect of speech may seem superficial but they are only so in the sense that they are outer traits, instead of inner, invisible ones, so they get a bad reputation because visible things are perceived as fake and therefore inferior and that which cant be seen is real and therefore superior. They are not superficial because these things, and many more like them, effect your ability to gain employment and advance in your career, as well determine your ability to find a mate. Man is moved by religious traditions because their codices are not a single, individual element, such as love or courage, but rather a pot into which every single element which moves man is placed. Imagine going to a cooking competition where each chef prepares a single, solitary food to serve to the guests. You go from table to table, eating delights such as love, courage, passion, strength, beauty, wealth, and other similarly named foods, all of which you enjoy. As you arrive at the last table, you notice that unlike the others, the last chefs selection isnt laid out as individual samples but is a stew that simmers in a large pot, which he serves to you in a bowl and you consume with a spoon. Upon tasting it, you are in rapture over its unique taste and its proclaimed the best selection at the convention. And when you inquire about its recipe, the last chef says, The recipe is from heaven. And even though you enjoyed each chefs individual offering, the last chefs stew was so good that you accepted his explanation about the origins of his recipe. But what he failed to tell you is this. His soup is actually actually a combination of all the other foods which the previous chefs were serving. In fact, when the competition started, he was the first guest in line and went from table to table, collecting samples from each. Instead of consuming them, he combined them by putting them in a large pot and proceeded to do something that none of the other chefs had done: he added water and placed the pot on a fire, and thus, created a stew out of all of the elements which he had taken from the other chefs. As the various elements melted from the heat of the fire and melded into

a liquid mixture, they no longer became recognizable as individual elements taken from the other chefs but combined to create a new food altogether, so much so that even the other chefs lauded the last one for his creation. This is exactly what the authors of the codices did. They took every individual element that Adam admired and combined them with the waters of spiritual phenomenon and the fires of paradise, creating a combination that nothing except a similar stew could compete with, as such a stew had absolutely nothing to do with unseen people but everything to do with what appealed to man, namely, survival, even creating an unseen person who was the personification of the traits he needed to survive and placing the actions and prohibitions best suited for survival in this unseen persons mouth. The religious ministers know the reaction that a woman has to the prospect of a first date, though moving in its own right, much like a concert or movie is also moving, can never compete with her reaction to the prospect of marriage, as a first date comes and goes, but she imagines her present bliss will last forever within the state of marriage. The writers of the codices took every individual trait that Adam admired and combined them, which is overwhelmingly powerful in its own right, and said to him, Taste this stew. And upon tasting, Adam loved the stew, as it was a mixture of everything he valued. But the authors of the codices did not stop there, drawing Adam close, and whispered these words into his ear, You can have this forever. And Adam fell down upon his knees, saying, Whatever I must do to have this stew forever, I will do. And thus this recipe which initially enthralled Adam became the sacred documents. Even as Adam has matured and his sense of taste has changed, the religious authorities have continued to offer their stew to Adam. He frowns whenever the stews ingredients do not align with his developing sense of taste, but whenever he rises to taste another selection, the religious ministers change the elements which they mix into their stew ever so slightly, ever so gradually, so that he does not notice the flavor of the new elements, nor does he care, for he enjoys what he is consuming and is convinced that he will have it forever. But whenever Eve points out that the chef is no longer visiting a particular table to collect elements, such as obeying the actual commands of Jesus by rejecting bodily and societal desires, or is combining elements that he previously refused to collect, such as building a visible kingdom and attempting to dominate a society, the chef pulls out the codices and say, Look, Adam. Its the same recipe. Same recipe, my man. Nothing has changed. Just keep eating. Yeah. Same recipe. Different ingredients. Same book. Different interpretation. And this Same book. Different interpretation has succeeded, even when the written recipe and the pot are the only things the modern adherents have in common with the original followers. Religion is a show, just like every other show which you enjoy, but it combines every hope, every fear, and every possibility and mixes it with so-called spiritual phenomenon and the hope of eternal life. This is why nothing thus far has been able to move man to the same, soulish extent. Its not in competition with other genres as it is a combination of all genres, thus creating an original concoction called religion. And they have live performances of this genre on a regular basis, normally on some supposedly special day of the week, where they take peoples soul through an intense workout, where every cord of his heart is played, and in the midst of this workout, they tell him, Look, you are sweating! This is proof of the legitimacy of our code. And the people consume their words, not realizing that this stew is actually a combination of every individual thing he knows, desires, fears, and most important, is very familiar with as natural is other contexts, but the usage of clean words and the promise of paradise makes the elements nearly unrecognizable. And even when someone says, But others are serving what appears to be a very similar concoction, the religious ministers say, No, our recipe is the only true one, and people consent because the religious ministers are very local and combine

the unique elements which appeal to each persons highly unique taste buds. And even when the common man points out that he sweats when he is in other contexts, the religious ministers say, But you sweat more with us! Those things are simply false, inferior imitations of our true, superior recipe. Yes, they are inferior, but only because other contexts only present individual ideals; religion combines all of these ideals, thus creating a new genre altogether, and projects it into the sky so that from afar, a light from the sky appears to be illuminating that which is below. Religious ministers have transformed natural human emotion into a weekly modern miracle to support the exaggerations in their new codex. Most of those who bow their knee dont even believe in actual miracles because they know they dont happen now, and this author is not even sure whether those who bow their knee still believe in demons, except to explain how other people can do things which they wish they could do. Nevertheless, they rationalize that these incredible miracles happened then. Why? Because when they hear about what happened then, they get emotional, and since no one is visibly making them emotional, they were told that this emotion was the touch of their unseen person. So they reason, If the unseen person can touch me now, then certainly he healed the blind then. But these emotions are not the touch of anything but natural, human emotions which occur in other areas of life but are simply portrayed as spiritual by the religious authorities. For instance, have you ever seen a game show where some contestant wins, perhaps, a free vacation to some distant island. How do they respond. With emotion! Often times, they jump, scream, and cry. Why? Because they wanted and probably needed a vacation. When they were informed they would receive a vacation, they reacted emotionally. Now, the religious ministers will say, That, of course, is the point. Their response is evidence that the vacation exists. People respond to paradise because it exists. No, not quite. Have you ever seen a show or an instance in real life where someone was promised something they wouldnt actually receive? How did they respond? The same way. They jumped, screamed, and cried. And when they found out it was a joke or a scam, they also responded emotionally, sometimes even running when it is one of those cop shows where they trick criminals. But that which they were promised still existed the religious thinkers will insist. Yes, it did. This author is not saying paradise doesnt exist. This author is saying its an accumulation of everything people want but cant have in this life, which is compressed and projected in the sky. The religious ministers have simply captured the reaction to natural human desires and used it for their purposes. Now, imagine if the contestant who wins a free vacation to a distant island is told this vacation will last forever? How do you think they would respond? Emotionally. With great joy, tears, and hugs. All religious ministers does is make the eternal vacation which it offers redeemable upon death so you cant come back for a refund. Imagine if on the way to this distant island, this lucky individual spent a few days in a foreign country, and during this short stopover, they were arrested by the police and charged with numerous crimes, many of which they were unaware were actually crimes. Then they were sent before the judge, who sentences them to life in prison, but as the person is being carried away to jail, he says, But if you sign this document acknowledging what you did and promise not to break an abridged version of our laws, then you can go on your eternal vacation. How do you think such a person would respond? Not yes. More like, Hell yes! This is exactly what the religious ministers have offered to the masses, telling them the emotion they feel at the prospects of an eternal vacation is proof that its true. Such emotions have nothing to do with unseen people; thats how humans react to promises and punishments. It happens everyday. They have simply told a more significant story by removing physical life as a barrier to that which they promise. In fact, the reactions on the game shows and before the judges are often times more effusive than what is experienced by those who bow their knee because

the effects are more immediate than awaiting death as a launching pad. Again, they are always forced to tell the story, play the music, and even interpret the emotions people are feeling on their behalf. Natural cause. Natural effect. Nothing happens without a cause. This is the natural law the religious thinkers love to promote but fail to mention that their spiritual phenomenon is simply the sweat from their soulish exercise, as they can only present natural effects, not ones that break the laws of nature, except the unverified claims from antiquity in their codices. This is a crude example but its crudeness is effective. Imagine that someone you know was releasing the lust (read: jerking off) and they were discovered, not because someone opened the door, but because someone was in the corner, videotaping them. How would they feel? How would they react? Now imagine this videographer tells them, I have always been in this corner videotaping your releases. You simply didnt see me. I have recorded every episode and have an archive which I will present to a judge on your wedding day. He will decide, based upon your actions, if you are worthy of being married or not. How would such a person feel if their most private moments were not only witnessed, but recorded, archived, and eventually presented before another party. Horrified! They would beg and plead for this archive to be erased and promise to never do it again. This is a natural reaction. And this natural reaction has been harnessed by the religious ministers who claim there is an invisible videographer who follows you around 24/7 from the day of your conception to the day of your death. This videographer is, of course, invisible, but he records and archives your actions and will present them to the unseen person, whom you must stand before as a defendant stands before a judge, to account for the records of this archive. This videographer records is portrayed as not just record your intimate moments but also records everything you do, holding you accountable for things you werent even aware were bad, and the punishment for your wrongdoing is to spend the next trillion plus years being roasted by fire. This is what the new codex teaches and this is what is proclaimed by the religious ministers. Its not that its actually true; its just scarier. And just like the person arrested in a foreign country or the person who is recorded releasing, you feel bad, perhaps whimpering in sadness because of your badness and becoming emotional over the prospect of your eternal punishment. But the religious ministers seize upon this natural reaction, saying, Aha, you feel bad. This is the unseen person communicating to you. But dont worry. Simply repeat this prayer and your eternal punishment will be exchanged for paradise. And just like the person being carried off to prison, you are relieved to be offered a plea deal and rejoice, for not only have you been set free from punishment, you have also inherited paradise. All you have to do is follow a few rules, most of which you normally wouldnt do, and most importantly...die.

B. Revelation & Adaptation

The modern religious authorities have survived by entirely symbolizing the commands of the master, as this author will explain later on in this essay, but these commands werent symbolic to the people to whom it was written. Why? As already explained earlier in this essay, the original audiences to whom the books of the new codex were written were already poor, last, and rejected before the new codex was written. Why? Because they were proclaiming the resurrection of someone who everyone saw die and were claiming he had already flown vertically in the sky before any non-supporters could verify it. The result? It pissed people off. The original followers were to abandon mother, father, sister, and brother because they had already been abandoned by their families. They were to give all because everything had been already taken from them. The last would be first because they were already last. The new codex

was written to a specific group at a specific time going through a specific set of circumstances, namely being systematically hunted down by the authorities.. These commands were a description of what these people were going through in a very literal sense. Whenever you see the master giving a command, simply disassemble it from the promise that follows. Upon investigating the highly unique situation to which each gospel was written, you will see that these werent commands; these were depictions of what each specific audience was going through. Again, the formula of the masters commands is as follows: Description Of Current Circumstance + Spiritual Promise = Command It didnt require obedience from the original audience to adhere to the moral code. It required perseverance! These writings were an encouragement, not a rule book of commands and prohibitions. Even more, the new codex served as a natural survival guide for them as well. Let this situation assist you in understanding the new codex. Imagine you are quietly asleep in a small, one room house with your family resting peacefully by your side. But this isnt your house. As a result of your faith, you were stripped of all of your possessions, lost your career, and were rejected by both your extended family and all of your friends. You were then forced to move in with other believers, several of whom are also sleeping in this small, one room house with their families as well. You also call this house a church, as 20-30 others who bow their knee come daily, in secret, to meet, partake of the body and blood of the master, and to be read the old codex in light of its recent fulfillment. You are suddenly awakened by a heavy knock on the door and the sounds of men shouting, demanding that you open the door. The other families are also awakened and fear grips you all. In the past month alone, almost 1/3 of the other churches in your city, which also doubled as sleeping quarters, were discovered by the authorities. Upon discovery, the women and children were sold as slaves and the men were all executed, not quickly, but slowly, in various, indescribably horrific ways. The banging on the door continues, and as the leader of the families assembled, you slowly walk to the door, breathing the name of the master under your breathe, and when you open the door, 50 Roman soldiers, swords drawn and torches alit, stand before you. In this moment, what do you do? Now...read the first four books of the new codex, not as symbols, as the ridiculous religious ministers will have you, but placing yourself in the shoes of the original audience. Why? Because every word of it will make sense. The new codex was an encouragement, as it promised spiritual rewards for the natural sacrifices that the believers had already made. It contained pointed examples of other people, such as the rich young ruler and Ananias and Sapphira, who had done or given much, but had not given all like its audience had given all, and encouraged them by demonstrating that the people who gave much would not inherit paradise like they would. It was also a natural survival guide for dealing with the persecution that they were already facing. Turning your cheek and blessing your enemy isnt a moral code; its a lifesaver when the hand that is striking you is a Roman officer; you had better submit and hold your tongue or you were a dead man. And since the Romans were clearly not going to show them mercy, their actual survival would begin when they physically died. Every single line in the gospels, including both the quotations and the selection of the narratives, was specifically tailored to suit the circumstances of the differing audiences to whom each gospel was written, even to the point that parts of the new codex blatantly contradict themselves in order to satisfy the taste buds of those consuming their stew. And you may say, But its symbolic for me because I am not about to be fed to the lions. All this author can say to that is...exactly. Thats why it was not written to you. It has nothing to do with you. The state of the early followers who lived in the immediate aftermath of the masters death is clear from

the descriptions within the codices as well as other writings and records from that time. But a legitimate question arose amongst those who followed in later generations, namely, What happens when followers are no longer poor, last, or rejected? What do we do when our circumstances change? Why was this a necessary question? Because no one knew! The master didnt say! He only gave commands in regards to the original circumstance of being poor, last, and rejected; the only time he spoke to the rich, first, or accepted was to command them to give all and become poor, last, and rejected. My beloved adversaries throughout the ages have attempted to reconcile the commands of the new codex with the ever-changing situations which those who bow their knees have found themselves in. An entire city could be filled with their many writings and words, but this author shall not bore you with them, so his analysis shall be brief. Herein lies the irreconcilable demands of invisibility and survival. This problem extends beyond its present application to this particular tradition and becomes present, eventually, in every religion. The claim that every religion makes is quite simple. It says there is a person whose commands must be obeyed; the only complication is this person is also invisible. There is nothing wrong with saying that a person must be obeyed. There is nothing wrong with believing in the invisible. But when you combine these two elements and claim that an invisible person must be obeyed, then you will eventually run into an unavoidable problem. As the person who is to be obeyed is not visibly objective like a tree or a house, or even more, like a visible person, it creates two very important questions: What is the invisible person like? as well as What does the invisible person want us to do? Let us say, for sake of argument, that God actually exists. As an invisible being, he must make what he is like, or his personality, and what he wants, or his commands, visibly objective. This simply means that he must relate his characteristics and wishes to humans in a way they can perceive them. Now, every religion states that at some point in time, their God did just this; the invisible person makes his personality and wishes visible. The time and manner in which this was done varies from religion to religion, but in general, it is always by means of the only way something can become perceptible to visible people: via another visible person. Now, history is littered with individuals who claimed to have spoken on behalf of God, but for sake of argument, again, let us say that one particular person, out of the multitudes of others, was legitimately speaking on behalf of God. So we have two variables in this equation: an invisible person who reveals his personality and commands to a visible person. Now here is where it gets tricky. A visible person, unlike the invisible person, exists in two important elements: time and space. Even more, visible people do not just exist in time and space in general, but exist in a particular time and in a particular space. So this visible person goes forward to inform other visible people about the personality of the invisible person in a particular time and in a particular space. So the people ask the visible person, What is the invisible person like? And the visible person says to the people, The invisible person is XYZ. Okay, cool. Next, the people ask, What does the invisible person want us to do? So the visible person says, The invisible person commands you to do A and B and prohibits you from doing C. Okay, cool. So at this moment in time, the invisible person has made his personality and commands visibly perceptible through a visible person. Hurray! The good news? You have found the yellow brick road to paradise. Congratulations. The bad news? Your invisible person used a visible person to reveal his personality and commands. Damn! Why is that bad news? Because visible people exist in time and space. Why is time and space bad news? Because time and space, unlike invisible things and invisible people, are specific. And if you say, This visible person revealed the personality and commands of the invisible person then that specific personality and those specific commands are the personality and the commands of God. What is the problem with the specific personality and specific commands of God? They cant be changed by another visible person. Why is that a problem? Because the specific personality and specific

commands that assist its adherents survival in the original circumstance in which they are revealed will eventually be the same specific personality and specific commands that will endanger future adherents prospects of survival in a different circumstance. The inherit problem with the concept of Gods revealed personality and commands in space and time is that they must become specific to be perceived by visible people. They must come down from the skies of generalities and take sides. Better said, God must cast votes by saying, I am X but I am not Z and Do A but do not do B. Even when being X but not Z and doing A but not B assists its adherents survive its original circumstance, being X but not Z and doing A but not B will run counter to its adherents survival in different circumstances, and as a result, adherence to the original revelation slowly dies off and those who adapt to new circumstances by being Z and not X and doing B but not A are the only ones who survive. Listen, this author will help you understand this in a manner so simple that you will proclaim, Eureka! The invisible God must become visibly perceptible in order to be perceived by visible people. Since people exist in time and space, the personality and commands of the invisible God, which this author will now refer to as traits, must also enter into time and space. Time and space are specific so the revealed traits also become specific. If the traits survive the original circumstance in which they are revealed, a new system, or religion, is born, immediately changing the original circumstance. In the new, or second circumstance, the original, revealed traits are common amongst its adherents, so a new trait emerges which is best suited to win the competition for limited resources amongst those who share the same original traits. In the second circumstance, those who adhere to the common traits but also absorb the new trait win the competition for resources over those who continue to adhere to only the original traits, causing adherence to the original traits to die off and directly creating another new circumstance, where the original traits plus the new one are common in the system. This process goes on and on, with new traits continually emerging which are best suited to beating common traits in the competition for limited resources, until the accumulated traits are so different than the original ones that by definition, they must be reclassified as an entirely new system, whereupon the last set of accumulated traits become the original ones in the new religion. Consider this principle from an angle with which you are more familiar. Imagine there is a lion which is born with a random, genetic kink, which causes his normally functioning eyes to turn red whenever he exerts himself in any fashion. This kink doesnt effect his actual vision but it does give his appearance a measure of fierceness that causes the other lions in his pride to avoid confrontational encounters with him. What will be the result of this new trait which has been introduced into this pride of lions? It will improve this particular lions ability to compete for limited resources, such as provision and opportunities to reproduce. As he passes this trait on via reproduction, the prospects of his offspring will also improve, and over time, the lions with normal eyes will slowly die off and the lions with red-eyes will be the only ones remaining. But it is the survival of the red-eyed lions which causes a new circumstance. Why? Because this trait survived and is now common; every lion in this pride now has red-eyes so it no longer assists any particular lion in the competition for limited resources. At this time, a new, unique characteristic held by one lion will become the new trait that assists him in the competition amongst a pride of red-eyed lions. Perhaps this new trait will be a quicker acceleration that assists him in the hunt for provision. This quicker acceleration will then become the trait that is needed to win the competition for limited resources, and the red-eyed lions without this trait will slowly die and the red-eyed lions with the quicker acceleration will be the only ones remaining. This process will continue, with a new trait being introduced every couple of generations, and lions without the latest trait dying off every couple of generations, until the aggregate of the new traits, in comparison to the original, regular-

eyed lions, causes the lions in the pride to be classified as a new species. Religion functions in this exact manner. As usual, this author has no need to give you numerous examples to prove his case. He will simply give you one, and only example to prove his thesis: Every religion which has ever existed, with religion being defined as the claim that an invisible God has revealed both his personality and commands via a visible person or persons, regardless of the differing connections such visible people have claimed to have had with an invisible God. Simply start with the original revelation being proclaimed by the visible person and watch it adapt immediately upon its own survival as new traits, or beliefs and practices, are introduced to survive common traits in the competition for limited resources, or power, money, and people, each of which are synonymous with the others, as obtaining one attracts the other two, over those who continue to adhere to only the common traits, which slowly fade into extinction. The newly introduced traits are always perfectly suited for the unique resources in the specific culture in which it resides, and as cultures differ, so do the gradually accumulated beliefs and practices. After time, the accumulation of differing beliefs and practices causes ruptures in the religious system, and even though they share origins, eventually, multiple subdivisions appear within the same system, grouped by similar cultures, and thus, similar beliefs and practices. This continuous process of new traits being added to common traits and beating only common traits in the competition for limited resources is a very slow and very gradual process. Over time, the adapted system will have very little in common with the original, revealed traits, and the subdivisions will have little in common with each other, but neither are termed a new religion until something which isnt slow or gradual occurs, such as the introduction of a new name for God or the authorization of a new codex. Nevertheless, once the aggregate of collected traits is not only dissimilar to the original ones, but are in direct contradiction to the revealed traits, by definition, a new system has been born, even if it is not acknowledged. It is the very survival of the original revelation that directly causes its own erosion via the introduction of new traits to win the competition amongst shared traits in unabated, continuous fashion, until the system eventually becomes something different altogether. It is the revelation itself, where the invisible person is portrayed as giving specific personality traits and specific commands which causes the system to take on a life of its own immediately upon survival. Why does every religion ascribe specific personality traits and commands to their invisible person? Because people, not gods, render personal characteristics and commands uniquely suited for the only thing which they are humanly able to perceive: a particular time and a particular space. And just as ancient man projected his flat, local level view upon the shape of the entire earth, religion projects the specific characteristics and specific commands that it needed to survive its original circumstances as the only characteristics and commands of God. It is the shallowness and childlike vanity of this projection that reeks of humanity, not God, because the claims of religion are universal but the revelation of each invisible person is very, very local, and reveal specific personality traits and commands suited to promote survival in the specific circumstances of its origin, not survival at all times, everywhere. These revelations only see survival from the perspective of its immediate circumstances, not from the perspective of the totality of circumstances that can and will be encountered by all people, everywhere. It is the very specificity of specific personal characteristics and specific commands in such revelations that demonstrate that they are from men, not God. Why? Because the revelations in each religion contain specific characteristics and specific commands to ensure survival of its own unique, original circumstances, not demonstrating an awareness that these same specifics traits will endanger its survival in other circumstances. Each religion approves certain characteristics and actions and disapproves other characteristics and actions, not demonstrating an awareness that every

human characteristic and every category of action will be called upon, at some point in time, to ensure survival. These revelations do not even demonstrate the ability to forecast the trait which will immediately become necessary upon its own survival, not to mention the traits which will become necessary in an innumerable sort of different circumstances over the course of decades, centuries and millennia. The original traits only work in the unique circumstance in which they are revealed and in other circumstances which are similar to the original. The system only survives apart from the original and/or similar circumstances by absorbing new traits previously unmentioned, and in many cases, repudiated by their own invisible person. This is precisely why all religious systems are innately false, at least, in relation to their claims. Their own survival causes their eventual death in the same manner as any living organism begins to die as soon as it is born. The only system that could maintain its integrity in full measure yet survive indefinitely is one that is constant enough to be reliably perceived in time and space but flexible enough to adapt to every new circumstances without need of revision. What system is both immutably constant yet infinitely flexible? That not a description of a religion; thats a description of the system of natural laws. These revelations are obviously false due to the fact that unlike visible people, the personality and commands of invisible people are dead. How so? What is the single trait that defines whether an organism is alive or dead? The ability to respond. All living organisms respond, even if you cant visibly see such responses. You walk into the room and your dog is lying on the ground. You say his name and he doesnt respond. You shake him a bit and he doesnt respond. Why do you then become overwhelmed with concern? Because your dog isnt responding. What are things that dont respond? Dead. In this same way, the visible people who claim to speak on behalf of God rightly perceive the personal characteristics and commands their audience need to survive in a particular situation, yet make the fatal mistake of projecting the specifics they needed in a unique circumstance as the only personal characteristics and commands of God. As soon as their collage survives, it begins to mutate precisely because the original traits were only a subsection of human characteristics needed to survive in a particular situation. Its somewhat comical because humans are much more complex than the invisible person who is portrayed as being and commanding only one subsection of traits. If one were to actually adhere to the traits portrayed in the codices, you wouldnt survive past the original situation. Why? Because they are uniquely suited for one situation and only one situation. Those who say, Morality is not subjective are 100% right. Morality is, in fact, responsive. Its the opposite of subjective. Its very objective, not as unchanging, but in direct proportion to the circumstance. Morality serves in the exact way that the soul functions in the body. It is a living, breathing organism that responds in proportion and scope to the threat it perceives. Moralitys function in a society is the exact same as the souls function in the body: survival. But religion freezes one response to one circumstance, then holds up this massive piece of frozen water, saying Obey that which we have frozen in every circumstance. Yes, the traits of the new codex were perfectly suited for its circumstance. Perhaps it can be called, Morality In Situations When You Have No Chance To Survive. But what does one do when you do have a chance to survive? For instance, introducers break into your home. What do you do? Depends on the intruders. If its two punks with baseball bats and you have a shotgun in your closet, then eliminate them. Thats moral. That will keep you, your family, and your property intact. If you have a shotgun in the closet but you intentionally allow the two punks with bats to overrun you, then you are an immoral person. Why? Because you had a chance at survival. But what if the intruders are ten heavily armed men and you only have a baseball bat. Do you charge at them, swinging like Sammy Sosa? Perhaps, but your best shot at

survival is to do exactly what they say and hope they will take everything but leave you and your family alive. Thats moral. Why? Because you dont have a chance to withstand ten men with guns if you only have a baseball bat so allowing them to abuse you may be hard to swallow but it might also save your life. This is why the young warriors in the movies always want to charge, swords drawn, even when they are greatly outnumbered. And what do the older, seasoned men say to them? Depends on the situation. If charging at the enemy, though greatly outnumbered, helps to slow down their foes and allows their families to flee, then they advocate confronting the enemy. But in other cases, the older warriors instruct the younger ones to stand down and live to fight another day. Why? Because young people are taught that traits such as courage and strength are valuable characteristics but have not lived long enough to learn that such characteristics are key to survival in certain situations but are not the ones needed to survive in every situation. Sometimes true courage is having the strength to thrown down your sword and live to fight another day. In other instances, true courage is running directly at the enemy, knowing full well that you will die, but also knowing your death will allow others to survive. It all depends upon the circumstances. The ability to perceive which set of traits is needed for a given situation is the very definition of wisdom. The portrait of the new codex is precisely the same as the ten men with guns and you with a baseball bat example due to the power of Rome. But the new codex and the religious authorities do not portray the revealed traits of God as morality in specific circumstances, but project the personality and commandments for a unique circumstance as the only and always traits of God. Now, here is where it gets interesting. They say, The personality and commands of the new codex are the traits of God but those who bow their knee in modern times do not adhere to these commands when they are in circumstances different than the original. And their disregard of the commands of the master arent limited to just matters of war and peace; they do not do anything the master commanded, as this author shall explain later on this essay. Why? Because the traits revealed in the new codex are dead; they dont respond to new circumstances. They still work like a charm in circumstances similar to the original, such as adherents in modern times who are being persecuted for their faith in third world countries, but are unable to respond to new circumstances precisely because they arent a matrix describing a higher being but rather very natural documents describing a subsection of human characteristics which they project as being the only traits of God. Its like taking a map of the world, cutting out the national boundaries of your society, then stretching it so that it covers the entire globe, then saying My society is the only one on earth. No, actually, its not. You have simply covered the entire map with the projection of your society. In this same way, religion projects one set of traits, saying This is the personality and commands of God. No, actually, thats only one of several subsections of characteristics, and human ones at that. The very fact that these traits are modified immediately and continuously so that the system may survive, not to mention entirely disregarded in circumstances which vastly differ from the original, demonstrates that either God is really shallow or those traits are very natural. The master himself was very much a product of his physical tribes religious system. He simply differed in one trait, which was singular in nature but possessed innumerable implications, thus creating a new religion altogether. The promised messiah of the old codex was supposed to restore natural survival to his people because that was portrayed as the legal agreement that Abraham made with the supreme unseen person, but the master introduced a new trait: eternal survival. This new trait, which was attacked mercilessly by the system in which it was introduced, survived precisely because it was a perfect reflection of the times. It was best adapted to its circumstance as it recognized that overthrowing Rome was simply not going to happen, and

thus, the invisible was the only place where establishing a kingdom was going to occur. It succeeded precisely because it promised nothing. And as nothing is exactly what his adherents received, it survived as other revolutionaries before and after the master rallied their supporters around promises of restoration which were not fulfilled because they could not be fulfilled, at least at the time. Eternal survival was simply a new trait in an established system and the original followers of the master were initially another sect of their tribes religious tradition that proclaimed the fulfillment of the old codex in the person of the master. But this new trait also became the original trait of a new system and this somewhat unorganized theological system is best illustrated in the words and teachings of the master in the gospels, but is systemized and further defined in brilliant fashion by the leader of the new followers. As soon as the eternal survival trait survived and a new system, or religion, was born, it immediately began to adapt. Now, many people point to the benevolence of Constantine, the young Roman emperor who embraced Christianity, as the time the church went bad, but such people are unfamiliar with the nature of adaptation. First, adaption occurs in a system as soon as the original trait becomes common amongst its adherents. Second, adaption occurs within the system itself as a result of internal competition amongst adherents. Yes, it occurs within a system as its adherents compete for the external resources of money, power, or people, but in an on-going, continuous, and fluid manner, not just in reaction to such an obviously visible resource such as Constantine, who was the most powerful man on the earth at the time. The first introduction and absorption of a new trait into this fledgling system, to our great fortune, is in the new codex. So lets go through this. The master is portrayed as being resurrected then flying vertically into the sky. So what do the original followers do? They proclaim his resurrection. Where? In Jerusalem? To who? Members of the masters tribe. But an interesting thing occurs. The leader of the original followers, or Peter, introduces a new trait to the fledgling system. What is the new trait? The new trait is the belief that Gentiles were to be included in the plan for salvation, illustrated in the conversion of the Roman centurion in the book of Acts. And how do the other followers react? With great anger and indignation. Why? Because they had been proclaiming the master as the messiah of their physical tribe. This may be just the next chapter in the new codex but they had done so for a significant period of time before this new belief was introduced and had suffered immensely in doing so. The actual time frame can only be approximated, but the new codex portrays this as occurring after the conversion of Paul. So for at least one year, and perhaps as many as three years, the original followers, as a sect of Judaism, were promulgating the death and resurrection of Jesus as the spiritual savior of the Jewish people. This can in no way, shape, or form, be denied. Even when the leader of the original followers met with the group of people the Roman centurion had brought together, the first thing out of his mouth was an explanation that it was against the religious law for him to associate with Gentiles. Nevertheless, he agreed to go and meet with them because the unseen person had given him permission. How had the unseen person given him permission? Via spiritual phenomenon, of course. Actually, several of them. First, the leader of the original followers is portrayed as having a vision which occurred three times, then he is told by the spirit to accept the invitation from the centurion, who himself also had a vision. Then the same spiritual activity that occurred on the Day of Pentecost, or being filled with the spirit and speaking in incoherent languages (or jabbering), also occurred amongst the group of Gentiles the centurion had assembled. As the new codex states, the leader of the original followers concluded this was the unseen persons way of communicating that Gentiles were meant to be saved by their master as well. Now the modern religious ministers will attempt to say that incorporating Gentiles into the plan for salvation was the original plan. No, thats not true, as anyone who are aware of Jewish-Gentile relations in that time,

will attest. The whole concept of the Jewish messiah was extremely tribe-centric, as many of the religious thinkers who are experts on the subject will testify. The new trait the master introduced was the concept of a spiritual savior, which replaced the notion of a military hero and king, which is why the original followers were initially considered a sect of Judaism and adhered to Jewish religious law, but the new trait was singular in nature. The belief in a spiritual messiah was the only thing which initially separated the early church from the religious authorities of their day. Even more, Peters own initial reaction to this new trait, along with the initial reaction of the other apostles and early followers, clearly shows that those who personally knew the master were unaware that this was the original plan, and yes, they knew more about this matter than you do. Nevertheless, the point is not about the original plan. The point is the competing demands of revelation and invisibility. How does one know the plan of the unseen person? He reveals them to visible people. And what did the visible people do? The original followers only preached to members of one, physical tribe. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex plainly states. Then, after the early followers had been preaching exclusively to the physical tribe for a significant period of time, the leader of the original followers comes to the belief, as a result of several spiritual phenomenon, that Gentiles were to be included in the plan for salvation. As a result, the church had to call together a council and question their own leader about the matter. Why? Because it was a new belief. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex plainly states. And after recounting the story, Peter says, quite sheepishly, It just happened to them like it did to us. Who was I to stand in the way of God? Why did this just happen to the Gentiles as it did to the original followers on the Day of Pentecost? Because the presence of the spirit and speaking incoherently are entirely natural phenomenon which the original followers did not understand as natural, and thus, perceived as an intentional action of their unseen person, thus giving them authorization to incorporate Gentiles into the plan for salvation. And this new trait appeared so quickly that it got included in the new codex, thus giving it the appearance of an original trait, even though the new codex itself plainly says that it wasnt. What would have happened if the other early followers continued to adhere to the common trait of the master being the messiah of only his physical tribe? Their access to people would have been limited to their tribe while the leader of the original followers traveled around the world, converting believers into a subdivision of their system which included Gentiles. The immediate result would have been a small subdivision of early believers in one territory who adhered to the original traits and an expanding subdivision of new believers across the known world who adhered to the original traits plus one new one. Those who adhered would have slowly become less and less relevant until adherence to the tribe only ethic went extinct. This new trait directly threatened the survival of the other apostles and early believers; so what does one do when a new belief threatens your survival? You adapt or become irrelevant. What does the new codex tell us the other apostles and early believers did? They did away with the tribe only belief and adapted. And where does historical accounts tell us the leader of the original followers went after spiritual phenomenon gave him authorization to convert Gentiles? Does he stay in the country outpost of Jerusalem? No. He went to Rome. Whats in Rome? People. Lots of people. This cannot be denied. The religious system revolving around the master, as well as all religious systems that have survived, clearly demonstrate immediate and continuous adaptation. Each system begins as a new trait amongst common traits within a prior system and these common traits plus the new one then becomes the original traits of a new system. Upon its survival, new traits are absorbed to survive common traits in the

competition for resources until the new traits outweigh the original ones, and by definition, though rarely by acknowledgement, a new system, or religion, is born. After the death of the master, Christianity was just another sect of Judaism which possessed a single, distinct trait that differed from the traditional, mainstream Judaism of its time: eternal survival, illustrated by the portrayal of Jesus, the spiritual savior of his physical tribe. This, of course, is why Peter told the group of Gentiles that it was against the law for him to meet with them; he was still a Jew adhering to Judaic religious law. This, of course, is why the notion that Gentiles could be saved was so offensive to Peter and the other apostles; at the time, Jews hated Gentiles and visa-versa. The Jewish messiah was supposed to conquer the Gentiles, not save them. But as soon as the eternal survival trait became common amongst the original followers, the system began to gradually absorb new traits. First, the tribe only belief was exchanged for the belief that the Gentiles were to be included in the plan for salvation. Why? Because of spiritual phenomenon: the Gentiles were having the same experiences as the original followers. Second, the belief that Jewish religious law was to be upheld was exchanged for the belief that the Jewish religious law was no longer necessary. Why? Because of spiritual phenomenon: the true law was portrayed as a life lived according to the spirit, not a written law. Third, the belief that Jesus would return in the lifetime of the original followers was exchanged for the belief that Jesus may tarry (meaning, return later than was promised). Why? Because of spiritual phenomenon: Jesus had clearly not returned but spiritual phenomenon was still occurring, which was perceived as proof that he was still alive and set to return one day. These are just a few of the new traits that were absorbed by this fledgling system after the death of the master; each of these, as clearly stated in the new codex itself, were not original beliefs, but new ones. On the Day of Pentecost, the original followers believed the master was the messiah of his physical tribe, that it was necessary to adhere to Jewish ceremonial law, and that the master was returning in their lifetime. By the end of the new codex, the original followers, along with the new ones they added along the way, believed the master was the messiah of the entire world, that adherence to Jewish ceremonial law was not necessary, and that the master may not return in their lifetimes. Now, the religious thinkers will gasp, saying But these are just developments of a new theological system. And these religious thinkers are absolutely correct. The theological developments contained in the new codex, in and of themselves, are not necessarily problematic. This is the problem: the theological developments of this religious system didnt end with the new codex; they continued in a fluid, continuous, on-going manner, from the day the master was taken down from the cross to this very day. The ancient religious authorities simply authorized some early documents which illustrated the first few absorptions of new traits, quite comically, around the same period of time in which they forever abandoned the original trait of eternal survival by marrying their system to a natural emperor. The new codex itself portrays events over the the time span of nearly seven decades (perhaps even longer, depending on where one dates the authorship of some of the books of the new codex), beginning with the events surrounding the birth of Jesus and ending towards the end of Pauls life. In approximately 70 years, the initial trait of eternal survival, along with the additional traits of incorporating Gentiles, non-adherence to Jewish law, and a delay in the return of the master, all emerged and were absorbed. These things are clearly portrayed as new traits, or beliefs, in the new codex. The whole purpose of the new codex was to explain the events which caused these new beliefs to emerge and be absorbed. But this process of new traits emerging and being absorbed didnt end when Paul died; it continued, unabated, to this present day. Despite the claims to spiritual guidance, the new traits that emerge and survive are always perfectly suited to attract the visible resources of money, people, or power in whichever culture it is being promulgated. Simply look at the new traits the new codex itself portrays as emerging and being absorbed. What would have happened if early followers

would have maintained the beliefs that Gentiles were not to be incorporated in the plan for salvation, that the strict Jewish ceremonial laws were to be observed, and that the master would return in the lifetime of the original followers? They would have remained a small sect of Judaism that would have gone extinct upon the death of the last apostle. By eliminating the tribe only ethic, doing away with the Jewish ceremonial law, and resetting the expectation of the masters return, they created a unique system that could incorporate the entire world, had few actual rules, and could continue indefinitely. That, of course, is exactly what happened! This system is truly unique because its founding trait, namely eternal survival by rejecting bodily and societal desires, causes anyone who actually adheres to it to become irrelevant, and the only ones who thrive are the ones who adapt by absorbing additional traits, and thus, pass on these traits to a new generation of adherents. After two thousand years of continually absorbing new traits, the only churches that are experiencing active growth in modern societies are the ones which promulgate a message which emphasizes the exact opposite of eternal survival. This system isnt the most true; this system is the most adaptable because it eliminates anyone who actually obeys the tenet of eternal survival and those who are willing to adapt are the only ones who remain. Now, this author is not the only one aware of this process of continual adaptation. In fact, most subdivisions within this system are very aware of it, though they used clean words to describe it, such as Gods continuing/on-going revelation to man and make provisions for it within the context of revealed truth. Now, let us return to revelation of the invisible person who makes himself visibly perceptible in time and space via specific characteristics and commands, which is communicated via a visible person. The revelation of specific traits is a potentially immense problem because once they are expressed by an invisible person via a visible person, they cant be changed or added to by another visible person because those specifics are the traits of God, unless, of course, another visible person is also the legitimate representative of the invisible person. Lets examine the nexus between an invisible person and visible people in particular traditions. In ancient times, the invisible person is portrayed as choosing a man named Abraham and revealing his personality and giving him specific commands. But Abraham was not the only representative of the invisible person; in fact, every generation had a legitimate representative of the invisible person through which the personality and commands of the unseen person were revealed. The stories which portray these representatives, usually termed prophets, is the Old Testament. Then the master came as the visible spokesperson of the invisible person of the old codex, even being portrayed as the invisible person of the old codex inextricably fused with flesh. Now, the people who did not believe Jesus was the visible representative of the invisible person of the old codex rejected him and remained faithful to the prophets of the old codex. You call those people Jews. The people who believed the master was the visible representative of the invisible person of the old codex accepted his words and those of his early followers as the visibly perceptive personality and commands of the invisible person. You call those people Christians. Now, this author will fast forward to the present. Who is the visible representative of the invisible person in modern times? The Catholic and Orthodox subdivisions say, more or less, that The church itself is the visible representative of the invisible person, of which the new codex is only a part, albeit a vitally important one, as it was written by the church. As the (literal) body of the master, of which he is the head, it is the visible spokesperson of the invisible person on earth, beginning with the original followers and continuing to this very day. What does this mean? This means, within the context of truth, these churches have the authority to speak on behalf of the invisible person. So does the Anglican subdivision, but as a result of a failed marriage and a failed request for a divorce, it defines the church as its own, national church. The thing all three of these subdivisions have in common is this:

Since the day the master flew vertically into the sky until this very day, theyve always had a living, visible spokesperson to speak on the invisible persons behalf, beginning with the original leaders of the church, or the apostles, and continuing with the present leaders of the church, or whomever is in charge of those churches now. As a result, whenever any of these churches find themselves in a circumstance which differs from the original, as the visible representatives of the invisible person, they have the authority, within the context of revealed truth, to adapt their faith and practice accordingly. Simply put, they are allowed to absorb new traits in the same fashion as the apostles did as long as it does not contradict the new codex or a belief which has already been revealed through a previous visible spokesman. In reality, this claim means nothing due to the naturalness of spirituality, but at least they admit to making it up as they go, albeit in their own way, and with great pomp as well, hence the robes, smoke, and whatnot. All it takes is a superficial read of church history to see that these subdivisions have always adhered to the opposite of eternal survival; they have always grabbed as much temporal power that each circumstance has allowed. The only reason they arent doing it now is because they cant. Why? Because modern people arent so convinced of their claims, even if they retain the respect and adoration of many. But respect and adoration is basically the extent of their influence in modern times, hence the term nominal. They say the spirit of God has guided their faith and practice but their actual actions have always abided by natural survival. So no, Jesus spirit doesnt guide you in disobeying Jesus commandsk. But a continuous, visible spokesman, illustrated by the prophets sent to every generation in the old codex, and the church leaders, beginning with the apostles and continuing to modern times, isnt the only way to solve the matter of new circumstances. Other traditions have simply added an additional codex in order to make account for their new circumstances. They accept both the old and new codices as legitimate representatives of the invisible person but include another codex as his final revelation. You call such people, for example, Muslims and Mormons, amongst many others. Interestingly, the Muslims are far enough removed from their original circumstances that the demands of survival and invisibility have already split them into two major factions, directly grouped by culture, and thus, belief and practice. The Mormons are close enough to the original circumstances of their founding to not have major fissures, but as their system is expanding and intentionally being spread by their members in every corner of the globe, it will be interesting to witness the rise of major centers based in other cultures whose survival will demand differing traits, and thus, differing beliefs and practices, which will eventually challenge their current, centralized operation. But the cross section of their present unity and globalism, where diverse cultures are actually becoming more similar, may cause Mormonism to remain centralized, and thus stronger, for a longer period of time than past religions. As a result, this system is perfectly suited, at least structurally speaking, to become a dominant religion in the coming global age. But there is one tradition which rejects both a continuing visible representative and an additional codex. You call these people Protestants. Now, the Protestor, perceiving the corruption (read: adaptation) which had overwhelmed his religious system, sought a return to the common traits of the early church, which was, within the context of revealed truth, a noble endeavor. But the primary means by which to effect this return, or the principal of only scripture, sounded pious, but was ahistorical and certainly didnt exist in the early church, and was a principle that he himself didnt take to its logical end, to his credit. The result wasnt a return to the early faith but the introduction of a new trait which became the original trait of a new subdivision. Protestants say the codices, and only the codices, are the visible spokesperson of the invisible person. They only accept the Bible as the sole representative of the invisible person, not a visible person. But the problem in such a formula is the codices were written to a specific audience facing

specific circumstances; so what happens when the specific circumstances change? Why is this an important question? Because the master doesnt talk about what to do in other circumstances; he only talks about what to do when one is poor, last, and rejected. Why? Because all of his followers were poor, last, and rejected and the new codex was written to them in very painstakingly specific fashion. Just as the old codex illustrated, you need a visible person to tell you the invisible persons personality and commands in regards to your new circumstances in each generation because he is not visibly objective, which is the whole reason, within the context of revealed truth, that Jesus had to come to the original circumstances in the first place. So the Catholics, Orthodox, and Anglicans, within in the context of revealed truth, dont have this problem because theyve always had a living, visible representative who reveals the invisible persons wishes in diverse circumstances and situations and authoritatively absorb new traits on an on-going basis. But how have the Protestants accounted for their new circumstances? They have no visible representative to speak on behalf of the invisible person nor have they added a new codex to account for their new circumstances. They have remained with the book and only the book. How pious, right? Wrong! They have kept the same book but have accounted for their new circumstances by entirely changing its meaning. Same book. Different interpretation. The innate problem with the proclamation of an invisible person is that he has to become visible in a particular time and a particular place for you to perceive his personality and commands. He has to get specific. He has to cast a vote. And these votes, to our good fortune, were frozen by the ancient religious authorities and is the one artifact that those who bow their knee cant deny. More so than any other tradition, the Protestants cant run away from the votes contained in the codices because those are the only time their unseen person, according to the tenets of their own subdivision, made himself visibly perceptive. They cant change the revealed personality traits and commands nor can they add to them. Why? Because they arent authorized to do so, as they proudly proclaim. If the Bible is the only visible revelation of the invisible person to visible people, then it must be accepted, in whole, from start to finish, in every aspect, as there is no other way to decipher his opinion otherwise. This simply means, Thats it, folks. If its in the book, you arent authorized to change it because by your own admission, you arent the visible spokesperson of the invisible person. Those were his votes then, now, and forever until he becomes visibly present again to tell the world otherwise. Regardless of their professions, in practice, the religious ministers within the Protestant tradition do believe in a visible representative of the invisible person who is authorized to continuously adapt faith and practice by absorbing new traits which differ than the original. But unlike the other subdivisions, which have centralized operations with established entities which speak on behalf of the invisible person, there is one, and only one qualification needed to be a visible representative of the invisible person in their subdivision: literacy. Literally. They have traded one tyrant many miles away for many tyrants one mile away. They say, Our cousins bow their knee to a man not realizing that they bow their knee to the reflection they see in the mirror. What does this mean? Same book. Different interpretation. What is the interpretation? Whatever I think it means. Not pious. Humanistic. Again, the problem with the new codex, at least in modern times is that it doesnt address the various circumstances that its adherents have found themselves in. It only dealt with the problems which were at hand in the midst of the original circumstance, which were severe persecution and suffering, the formulation of eternal survival theology, as well as specific matters present within the early churches. Simply put, the master gave no instructions about what to do when you are rich, first, or accepted, besides, of course, his commands to such people to give up all and become poor, last, and rejected.

Throughout history, the religious thinkers have been forced to extrapolate principles from the old codex and unrelated commands from the new codex, which is religious for We have to make it up ourselves, in order to create an ethical foundation that simply did not exist for a variety of new circumstances the church has found itself in. In spite of their efforts, this author submits the very presence of new circumstances is a direct result of disobedience to the masters commands. Perhaps the names of the tormentors, persecutors, and devouring animals would change, but anyone, at any time, in any place, who lived in the manner as the master did would always have been poor, last, and rejected. Why? Because the new codex took the principal of survival to unprecedented heights. It labeled that which could survive into eternity as moral and that which could not survive into eternity as immoral, even if it was good in a natural sense. This is why the teachings of the master were so radical; the litmus test of morality was eternity. If something, or someone, could not be taken with you into eternity, it was not to be valued and wholly rejected. This didnt include just sinful things; this included things which were good in a natural sense, such as mother and father, brother and sister, wealth and status, military strength and political power, and even your own life. The master commanded his followers to give all of these things up, not because they were bad but because they werent eternal. In complete opposite manner, the old codex commanded the actions which assisted natural survival and prohibited the things which damaged natural survival. Two wholly distinct principals animate the two codices and its ultimately the difference between two systems, namely Judaism and Christianity, or natural survival and eternal survival, at least theologically, though certainly not (anymore) in practice. To truly reject all temporary things in favor of eternity is a direct repudiation of human nature and society, as eternal survival always commands one to do the direct opposite of what the body and society desires. Simply put, its impossible to ever be rich, ever be first, or ever be accepted if one were to truly take up ones cross and follow the master. Perhaps he, being acquainted with the ways of man, knew this when he said that many would do all types of wonderful things in his name but he would not recognize them and that many would walk down the road but few would actually be on the path. These were not references to sinners but to those who confessed him. Why? Because even in spite of his attempts to inspire people to get their eyes off the visible and focus on things above, even those closest to him simply could not take their eyes off of the seen world. Perhaps he saw that once he was gone and not there to regulate things the leader of the original followers would learn that a sword was more useful than a miracle. This author submits that the change in circumstance the historic and modern church have experienced and have attempted to reconcile with their codices is a result of not having taken up their cross and following the master. They have disregarded eternal survival entirely in pursuit of natural survival and have ravaged the codices to justify it. If you were to investigate the desperate situation the original followers were in, you would understand the symbolic interpretation the modern religious ministers spout is nonsense because that which you consider extreme was the early followers daily reality. But its vital to note the suffering they were experiencing was a direct result of them imitating Jesus rejection of their bodily and societal desires; such obedience always causes intense persecution. This is precisely what the new codex teaches. This is precisely what the master says repeatedly. Why? Because the obedience comes first and would then be followed by persecution, not visa-versa. Its not that the master calls his followers to be poor, rejected, and last; instead, obedience causes you to be poor, rejected, and last. You cant disconnect the two, at least, according to the codices and according to the master, as suffering is the natural result of rejecting the desires of your body and and your society. Those who bow their knee, both historic and modern, have not obeyed. Instead, they have proceeded,

largely in an honest attempt to do as they think the master would have them do in their new circumstances, and in the process, have broken nearly every command that the master actually did give in regards to the original circumstances. Simply put, there has never been a need to account for new circumstances because obeying Jesus commands would ensure the original circumstances continued indefinitely. The original believers were doing the obedient actions portrayed by the masters commands before the gospels were written and the commands were a description of their actions plus spiritual promises, which served as an encouragement for them to persevere. These same commands also serve as a roadmap for any believers who come to the faith in different circumstances. They are to obey the commands and accept the persecution and torment which will inevitably follow a person who rejects the desires of the body and society. As a result of obedience, the original circumstances would then be recreated, thus rendering any need for accounting for different circumstances obsolete. It is disobedience to the masters commands, or acceptance of the desires of the body and society in pursuit of visible resources which placed the church in new circumstances. Even if an individual were to come to the faith while in a different circumstance, simple obedience would restore the original circumstances and he would have a code, plus promises, to assist him or her in persevering. And the masters own life, that of a fascinating but fanatical, roaming preacher and enlightened teacher, who was scorned by every authority and power of his day, who worked miracles but had nothing and wanted nothing but a robe to show for it, and was brutally tortured and put to death as a common criminal, is a perfect template for the lives of Christians and the results that they should expect if they took up their cross and followed in his footsteps. The religious ministers will protest, saying But being a follower does not mean you have to suffer. No, you are mistaken. This is the whole point of his message. You temporarily suffer now by rejecting everything your body and society desires in order to attain eternal pleasure. This message of temporary suffering in life to attain eternal pleasure in paradise was a perfect reflection of the times in light of the power of Rome. In addition to addressing the specific circumstances facing the original audience, the new codex was also forever linked to something which the religious authorities have continuously attempted to extract it from: a culture. Removing the culture from a religion is like trying to remove a mans heart from his body but commanding him to live. Why? Because everything in the new codex was cultural. No, not just being content with slavery or telling women to shut up and sit down, but things much closer to the heart of the tradition, including virgin births and resurrections, amongst many other elements. Every element, in fact. Everything was very cultural. In those days, virgin births were as common to gods as sex tapes are to celebrities now. Not a virtue. A necessity. The writers of the codex were not attempting to fulfill the old codexs expectation of a virgin birth because no expectation previously existed; they were using (read: abusing) the old codex to fulfill the cultural expectation of the time. Why? Because all of the gods of the time were born of a virgin. But none of the other gods had their mother and older, blood-related siblings tailing them, saying What are you doing? Come home! Thats why Joseph dominates the narratives in the early part of the first four books but conveniently disappears after the masters virgin birth. They needed the lineage of David (read: Joseph) to make him the messiah but needed a virgin birth to make him acceptable to an era full of gods born to virgins (read: Joseph...go away). In those days, a virgin birth wasnt a miracle for a god. It was a requirement. Being resurrected from the dead was also not a big deal. It was quite common in those times, at least according to the new codex, which documents other resurrections besides that of the master. In one instance, the new codex portrays numerous resurrections occurring simultaneously, as a graveyard of dead people woke up and starting walking around the city. It was normal in those days. Neither of these cultural aspects can be denied. A charismatic leader with specifically twelve close followers. Normal in those days.

Crucifixions. Normal in those days. Incredible miracles. Normal in those days. Demons galore. Normal in those days. Very little about the master was original. This is precisely why it worked! It was perfectly molded to fit the expectations of the time from start to finish with one exception: eternal survival. But even that new trait was temporary, as he was supposed to return in their lifetime and setup a visible kingdom. It worked in their time because it fit every cultural expectation but had a new trait, or eternal survival by rejecting natural survival, which was perfectly suited for a circumstance in which they had no chance at winning in the natural. Now many years later, a modern person has a PE0 which is directed to the claims of the new codex. The life of the master is perfectly portrayed to meet every cultural expectation of an ancient society and the revealed personality and commands abide by a new trait to survive a very specific situation, and upon its survival, is projected as the only personality traits and commands of God. What do you do when the whole of your system is irrevocably cultural and tied to a specific circumstance, both of which are completely opposite of yours? You do exactly what the modern religious authorities have done: you cut and paste. First, you keep the specific personal characteristics of the unseen person intact because you need his love, forgiveness, mercy, patience, and the rest to get into paradise. This simply means that they need God to be the same now as he was before to survive eternally. But you change Jesus commands, which are, in fact, an expression of Gods personality in real situations, into symbols or principals which represent something other than what he actually said because they are untenable to modern people in circumstances which differ from the original. This simply means they need to do things different now than the followers did before to survive naturally. Then you build a fence around the cultural things that you perceive one needs to believe in order to please God enough to get into heaven: The master was a God-man. He was born of a virgin. He lived a sinless life. He died for sins. He rose again. He will return. The religious ministers regularly proclaim that all you need to do is say these things and believe them in your heart to enter heaven. As for the other parts? Well, those were just cultural or symbolic. The problem is the whole damn thing is cultural and the commands were not symbol but a description of what the original audience was already doing before the new codex was written. The religious authorities have symbolized nearly every command, tossed out most of the cultural parts, but kept the personality of God and a fraction of the core cultural parts, thinking this will convince their unseen person to let them live eternally. Maybe. But its clear by their actions that they havent even convinced themselves! They are like the boy in the story who cried wolf. They read through their codex and interpret verses in the following manner: Verse #1: symbolic, Verse #2: symbolic, Verse #3: allegory, Verse #4: analogy, Verse #5: cultural, Verse #6: really weird, Verse #7: cant do that, Verse #8: symbolic, Verse #9: cultural, and then arriving at scriptures that they eagerly hope are not symbolic, allegoric, analogies, cultural, weird, or things they simply cant do, they try to convince themselves that things such as paradise are real. Thats not how it works. No, not just your unseen person. Thats not how you work. If you proclaim 90% of the things in your codex as symbolic or cultural, then you cant expect to convince yourself the 10% is real. Perhaps you will think that its real. But you wont actually believe it. You cant believe it. Why? Because they have rejected every verse and command surrounding what they call the core beliefs. They have cried symbolism so many times that when they come along a verse they desire to believe and act upon, their bodies ignores them, just like the shepherds ignored the boy who cried wolf. This is why they do not obey the commands of Jesus. But the problem of attempting to remove a religious system from its culture while simultaneously promoting very cultural things as the core goes far beyond attempts to trick a modern mind into acting upon part of that which has been wholly rejected.

The problem isnt the attempt to deceive yourself into believing the core when everything that surrounds it is untenable. The problem is what is perceived as the core. Its not actually the core. Its simply the core in modern times precisely because all of the commands and cultural stuff are untenable. It has become the core because those who bow their knee are trying to protect their turf from other subdivisions and systems. Even more, its become the core because the only thing religious ministers can get modern people to do is say it, not actually do it. Even more, the problem with their symbolism is that principals unattached to a culture and a circumstance in real time and real space isnt called a religion; its called a philosphy. And that is exactly what the Christian church in America has promoted in lieu of the gospel of Jesus Christ.

C. Understanding Covenant & Kingdom

Christianity is extinct, and has been extinct for a long time, at least in modern societies. Although the system continues to call itself by its original name, has kept the authorized codices, attributes the same name to the supreme unseen person and portrays very natural phenomenon as spiritual, these four things are the only remnants of its origin. The law of adaption, which began the moment the original disciples stumbled out of the upper room, illustrated in the new codex by the acceptance of Gentiles into the plan for salvation, rejection of Jewish ceremonial law, and the resetting of expectations in regards to the return of the master, continued, unabated, to this very day, absorbing new traits best suited for natural survival in every circumstance, and as a result of the numerous hands, cultures, and eras it has passed through, morphing in each to ensure its survival, cannot be defined as anything except an entirely new religion, which this author has termed Modern Christianity, or MC. Each of the major subdivisions of Modern Christianity has adapted to their differing circumstances and absorbed the beliefs and practices best suited to winning the competition for money, power, and people in the cultures in which they reside, thus creating four distinct species, or Catholicism, Orthodox, Anglicanism, and Protestantism, which share the genus of Judaism plus eternal survival, or Original Christianity. The effects of adaptation are most evident in the Protestant subdivision, whose adherents, like all religious people in every system, breathe their own life experiences into the codices, but having no centralized authority to provide accountability or balance out their interpretations, absorb new traits on an usually rapid and micro-scale, many times as the result of the teachings of a single individual, thus giving birth to countless offspring, or denominations, some of which will prove durable, and in time, will become new, distinct species, or subdivisions, in and of themselves. It is so very strange that the pluralism within this system doesnt bother those who bow their knee in the slightest, in that, it affects their perception of the legitimacy, or normally illegitimacy, of other subdivisions and denominations and/or churches, but they do not apply this lens to inform themselves of the legitimacy of their own faith and practice. In somewhat fascinating manner, most adherents conclude that their church and/or denomination is most correct, that other churches and/or denominations in their own subdivision are less correct but acceptable, and that the other subdivisions, or species, in their own system are not correct at all. Why is their church and/or denomination correct? Because it has absorbed the traits best suited for survival in the subculture in which it resides, and thus, attracts adherents from the same subculture, who then breathe their life experience into their interpretation of the codices, then, quite logically, perceive their own breathe as the most correct one. This is precisely what is most the most puzzling thing about those who bow their knee; they perceive their own faith and practice as correct but perceive the faith and practice of the vast majority of adherents in their own system as being somewhere on a descending scale of flawed, not realizing the

reason that, according to their own estimation, the vast majority of subdivisions, denominations and churches are flawed is because the system itself is flawed. Read that sentence again. Whats wrong with the system? The whole of its contents are natural but are being portrayed as something entirely different. Its not that some are most correct, less correct but acceptable, and not correct at all; its simply the way those who bow their knee express a natural law which they clearly see but do not understand as natural, and thus, portray as spiritual, as if out of all the gods mankind has imagined throughout the ages, not only is their god, but their system, their subdivision, and their denomination and/or church are most correct, and all others are less correct, and their most correctness comes two thousands years after the events of the new codex, to boot. No, actually, none of its correct; the entire system began flawed, is flawed, and will always be flawed, not because its evil, but because its natural and its claiming to be something other than what it is. As this author shall explain later on in this essay, religion is a language which describes and simplifies natural laws; as a result, such illogical statements become very logical upon translation. They may say most correct, less correct but acceptable, and not correct at all, but they mean most like me/us, less like me/us but close enough, and not like me/us at all. Thats why their church and/or denomination is correct and others are either somewhat, mostly, or entirely flawed; it has nothing to do with codices or gods but everything to do with similarities and differences amongst people, which, of course, is why the vast majority of churches are so monolithic; Sunday morning is still the most segregated place and time of the week in every society, not just in terms of race and ethnicity, but also in terms of specific elements of class, such as education and socioeconomic status, amongst others. In light of an authorized new codex which forever freezes eternal survival as the trait which is supposed to define the system and its adherents, the religious authorities infuse the traits necessary to survive their modern circumstances on an on-going basis by keeping the new codex but changing its meaning. This is, by no means, something new; this is how all religions survive their original circumstances. This is how the military hero and king messiah suddenly became a spiritual savior messiah in Peters time. Same Old Testament. Different Interpretation. This is how a spiritual kingdom being persecuted by Rome was married to a natural kingdom being sponsored by Rome in Constantines time. Same New Testament. Different Interpretation. Let not the pious amongst those who bow their knee look down upon their systems intermingling with national powers throughout its history; the only reason their claims survived, then came to thrive and dominate, is because they entirely rejected eternal survival in pursuit of natural survival, or money, power, and people. If the religious authorities of the past had not done this, the system would have gone extinct like most others; it is the extreme demands of eternal survival, or at least perceived as extreme in circumstances where natural survival is an option, which makes this system most adaptable, because its commands are perceived as impossible, and therefore, are interpreted as symbols. This author has listed and extrapolated the manner in which modern religious ministers reinterpret the new codex later on in this essay, but the problem is bigger than their dealings with individual verses; indeed, their reinterpretation of the Bible is simply a symptom of a problem on a much larger scale. Simply put, the modern religious ministers are wholly ignorant of the original trait, or eternal survival, which launched their system in the first place. Why? Because they are in circumstances which differ from the original. As a result, the commands of Jesus, each of which orders actions that seek eternal survival by means of rejecting natural survival, makes positively no sense when one is in circumstances where natural survival is available. Why? Because its unnatural! You literally have to do the opposite of everything you want to do, are taught to do, and, in many ways, should do. Why? Because everything you want to do, are taught to do, and should do, at every moment of everyday, seeks

natural survival; that is how your body functions. That is why you are alive today. So why did the master command that one reject natural survival? Because it wasnt an option in the original circumstance. This is precisely why, even in the context of revealed truth, he had to be sent to the original circumstance in the first place! The revelation in the old codex commanded the actions which sought natural survival; but what do you do when your opposition can in no way, shape, or form, be overthrown? Do you grab a sling shot and five stones and charge at a Roman legion? No. Why? Because that will get you killed, which is the opposite of survival. You only do that when you have a chance, even if its only a small, unlikely chance. You do that against the families, clans, tribes, nations, and regional powers which came and went in the era of the old codex. But what do you do when you encounter the worlds first superpower? You either wait until you do have a chance or you drop your sling shot and use the stones to build your own empire in the only area of the known world which wasnt controlled by Rome: the unseen. Thats not moral. Thats natural. At the time, the people who waited until they had a chance were called Jews; the people who built an invisible empire were called Christians. But Christianity takes this very natural response to encountering the worlds first superpower, or eternal survival, and by means of declaring the Bible as Gods infallible and unchanging revelation to man, they freeze Gods personality and commands in time and space. Thats not a problem, in and of itself. The problem is this: Time changes. Space changes. Situations change. People change. Cultures change. Everything changes. So what do you do when everything changes except that which you froze? You cant throw it out because youve already declared it Gods revelation to man. This is what you do: you keep the text, meaning, the actual letters remain the same, but you change what the text means and how its understood. Why? Because being oppressed by Rome and being persecuted by the religious authorities was just the first circumstance. Not everyone is oppressed by Rome. What is Rome? A city. Whats in a city. People. And what if those people are interested in what you are promising? Do you tell them, Well, first, you have to turn your cheek when you are struck.... No. Why? Because they wont be interested anymore. Why? Because they are the ones doing the striking. They like striking; it ensures their survival. So they wont join. And what happens if they dont join? Your system wont survive. So what do you do? You do what the modern religious ministers are professionals at doing; you say, Well, first, you have to turn your cheek when you are struck, which means... Stop! Stop! Stop! Which means? Jesus just told you what he means: When you are struck, you turn your cheek. Period. This was an encouragement to the original audience because they were being struck by Romans; they were commanded to turn their cheek because it could keep them from being killed. But what happens if you portray a man as being God and everything he says is in reference to a specific circumstance which is opposite your own? You keep his words because you have already portrayed him as God but you change the meaning of his words by saying, for instance, Which means... amongst many other Tools of Reinterpretation, all of which this author explains later on in the essay. The new codex certainly doesnt say the master meant something other than what he plainly said; only the modern religious authorities say that. So what does it mean besides what it says? To those who bow their knee, it means whatever you think it means. It means whatever you hope it means. It means whatever you want it to mean. Where do your thoughts, hopes, and wants come from? Personal experience. Thats why those who bow their knee in the different subdivisions in Modern Christianity are all reading the same book but cant agree on anything besides the name of their master. The religious authorities will gasp something about this being the manner in which the codices have always been used...but thats kind of the point. So lets start from the beginning. The word Testament, as in the Old and New Testaments, doesnt

mean part or section. Its not the Old Group of scriptures or the New Division of passages. The word Testament, which is often translated in the codices as the word covenant, means, quite simply, a legal agreement. This author loves this term because it perfectly encapsulates the theology of both codices. Okay, so this is how it works. Man sinned. So he was sent from the perfect garden into a natural world tainted by sin. Adam and Eve had kids, which led to more kids, until a man named Abraham arrived on the scene. The supreme unseen person is portrayed as revealing himself to Abraham as the one true God, telling him, If you will obey me, I will give you these things: 1. He will me made into a great nation. 2. He will bless those who bless him and curse those who curse him. 3. All humanity will be blessed through him. 4. He will be given a portion of land in an area now called the Middle East. The reason that testament, covenant, and legal agreement are important, synonymous terms, is the unseen person didnt make an offer to Abraham as a modern friend makes to a buddy. No, in fact, the dialogue between the unseen person and Abraham is intentionally reflective of the king-vassal contract that was popular at the time of its writing. Simply put, it was a contract. A legal contract. And it was ratified by blood, as was custom at the time, seen in the sacrifice Abraham made of a ram. You have to imagine not just the seriousness of a king offering a lord or some other lower royalty a parcel of land to tend in exchange for taxes, but also the legality of it. And the expectations of both parties were clear, just as they are in a contract to rent an apartment or lease a car. And in a very literal sense, the entire old codex is the story of this contract being played out, with the children of Israel obeying and enjoying prosperity and disobeying and being conquered. Then the master comes along. And what does he offer? Salvation? Paradise? Healing? No. A contract. Salvation, paradise, healing and the rest were simply parts of the contract. This is why he didnt come saying, Confess and believe. What did he, his cousin, and others come saying? They came saying, The Kingdom of God is at hand! He came as a king and he offered you, the vassal, or servant, a legal contract. How did he ratify this new contract? With his blood. He took the place of the animals which were sacrificed to ratify the old contract. And you sign this contract by confessing and believing. But like any contract, the day you sign something is just the beginning. You have to do something. Actually, just one thing: obey. Obey what? Jesus commands. No, not his literal commands. His only commands. As a result of their understanding of this legal contract the authors of the new codex use the old codex in one and only one way: To demonstrate how the physical promises of the old were fulfilled in the spiritual promises of the new. Why? Because the two codices are animated by two opposing principals, namely natural and eternal survival, and as a result, the actions one takes when adhering to one of these codices is almost always the opposite than if you were adhering to the other. This, of course, is why they represent two separate religions, or Judaism and Christianity. And this, of course, is why modern religious ministers constantly refer to the old codex, as it can justify nearly anything because it is animated by natural survival, not the eternal survival of the master. Within the context of revealed truth, the old codex is literally an expired agreement. You couldnt say to your landlord, Hey, I want to pay $1,000/month. It says so right here on last years lease agreement. Yet, the religious ministers continually point to last years lease agreement, saying, Aha! Here it is. Its there but it doesnt apply to you unless you are demonstrating, like the authors of the new codex, how the physical promises of the old codex are being spiritually fulfilled in the present or in paradise. This is the inspired usage of the old codex, illustrated both by the person of Jesus and the entire new codex. What

is the usage of the old codex separate from its spiritual fulfillment in the new? A reinterpretation. And one that has been used ad nauseam long before the modern religious ministers arrived on the scene. Even in a theological sense, this doesnt make the old agreement irrelevant. It is a vivid demonstration that the unseen person is faithful to the agreements he makes. This is supposed to give you strength to persevere the persecution you receive as a result of obeying the masters commands, and though you may struggle in the flesh, the illustration of his faithfulness throughout the course of the old codex is supposed to inspire you to continue to obey, trusting that you will be rewarded in paradise. Also, its supposed to show you the process and history of the new agreement; basically, its the background to the legal agreement you are about to sign. Jesus is portrayed as fulfilling the old codex. How? By replacing physical wealth, power, and status on earth with eternal wealth, power, and status in heaven. Even more, the physical wealth, power, and status were to be wholly rejected because denying oneself the desires of the body and society was the only way to attain eternal wealth, power, and status in heaven. The old codex, which promised natural survival, was fulfilled by being replaced by something better, namely eternal survival, which could only be received by rejecting wealth, power, and status on earth. But this, of course, is not what the church, both historic and modern, have done. Why? Because its unnatural; you only reject physical wealth, power, and status when it is unavailable to you, which is why it was commanded to the original audience in the first place. But those who bow their knee froze these commands so they must keep them, as it has been exalted as Gods word. And what have they done with Gods word in circumstances which are opposite than the original? First, they have made confess and believe the cornerstone of their system and the rest, the details. And instead of obeying their masters commands, they have said, This is what he said but not what he meant and interpret his commands as symbols because their goal is natural survival while his goal was eternal survival. Its not that people dont believe what they confess; they dont understand what they are confessing! And this author holds the modern religious ministers responsible for this, as they have completely and utterly misrepresented what one must do to become a follower of the master. Why? Because they themselves dont understand what one must do to become a follower of the master. They are completely ignorant of what is supposed to be their own expertise. Forget translations, interpretations, and codices. The religious ministers dont even know how one becomes and remains a Christian! The basic message of the Protestant subdivision (particularly their most active subgroup, the Evangelicals) is that one has to confess and believe in order to go to heaven. Yes, its a bit more complex than this, but only a bit. They make it quite simple and then pat themselves on the back for their simplicity, which is like being a math teacher and being proud that you have made calculus simple. What is simple calculus? Math, perhaps, but no longer calculus. This is exactly what they have done. They have looted the gospel in an attempt to adapt the demands of modernity and have created an entirely new religion in the process. In this new system, Confess + Believe = Heaven. But why are they so focused on confession? And why are they so focused on heaven? It is because they do not understand their own codices. Yes, they know scriptures but they dont understand the Bible, and they sure as hell dont understanding being a Christian, and having repudiated every authority besides themselves, they have successfully created a new religion. Its actually quite an achievement. Congratulations! Now, this author will instruct you, within the context of truth, on how to become a Christian and just as important, remain a follower of the master. The religious ministers roam the globe saying things such as Repeat this prayer and you can go to heaven, but one does not see the original followers saying these things in the new codex. Why? Because their concept of salvation was completely different than the modern ministers. Why? Because their goal wasnt going to heaven.

Why? Because they believed the master was returning to earth in their lifetime. They were not preparing a group of people to go to heaven; instead, they were preparing a group of people on earth to serve as a welcoming committee for the return of the master. The name of this welcoming committee? The church. This is precisely why they rejoiced when they encountered persecution; they believed everything physical was about to be replaced upon the return of the master, which would happen at any moment during their lives. Their obedience, and the resulting persecution, was an investment in the new society that was coming down from heaven with the master. The name of the new society? The kingdom of God. And everything they sacrificed would be replaced and multiplied in this kingdom, in direct proportion to the desires of the body and society which they denied, and they would go from being poor, last, and rejected, to first, rich, and accepted. This is why they embraced suffering and pain; persecution was only temporary and it was the currency of the new society that was to come at any moment. The early followers were convinced the master would return to usher the kingdom of God in their lifetimes, and in the time between his resurrection and return, they became members of this coming society before it was fully setup by confessing and believing and stayed members of this new society by following its rules. What were the rules of the new society? The commands of the master. Why didnt the master and the original followers say, Repeat this prayer and you can go to heaven? Because heaven was coming to earth, and soon! So what have the modern religious ministers done? They have adapted. How so? They have completely modified their faith and practice to account for the same thing which they have simultaneously attempted to convince the world of: that the master is still alive and returning. In Original Christianity, the early followers rejected natural survival. Why? Because natural survival was the currency of the temporary body and temporary society, which was about to be replaced with the eternal body and eternal society. Think about it. If you knew the dollar was going to collapse in your lifetime, what would you do? Youd trade it for a more durable currency, even if it meant you suffered temporarily, because youd be better off long-term. In this same way, the early believers rejected the desires of their body and society because it was about to get replaced with an eternal body and eternal society. They prepared themselves for entering into the new society by obeying the commands of the master because their obedience and perseverance in the resulting persecution directly determined their eternal status in this new society. But this is not the message the modern religious ministers are proclaiming; they are like army recruitment officers who get people to enlist by only referring to the benefits of being in the military, such as the pay scale, college benefits, and housing stipends, but fail to mention that one actually has to go to boot camp and proceed directly to the front lines of a war. In this same way, the religious ministers make their sell by proclaiming the goodness of their unseen person and persuade the masses to confess and believe but fail to mention that immediately upon confessing and believing, you also have to reject all of the desires of the body and society in pursuit of eternal riches in paradise and that the hatred and rejection the master endured will be the same hatred and rejection they must also endure upon imitating him. Its not a difference in semantics or ways of explaining the gospel; its altogether a different message. In Modern Christianity, you do exactly what the master said cant be done: you seek natural survival in your life then receive eternal survival in a heaven in the skies when you die. Its the exact opposite than the original. Literally the exact opposite. This is a new religion. Why does the new codex teach that obedience to the masters commands is the proof of true confession and belief? Because upon coming to faith, the believer receives a down payment of the new society which is to come in the form of the masters spirit. And from that moment, the process of being prepared to enter this new society begins. How does one prepare? By

singing songs? No. That is not what the new codex teaches. You do not see the master singing a damn thing. You only hear a few references to singing in the new codex, not to mention such singing is mostly done by angelic beings, not humans. Instead, the new codex teaches that you prepare to enter the kingdom of God by rejecting the desires of the physical body and the physical society and embracing the desires of the eternal body and eternal society. How does one do that? By obeying the commands of Jesus. What does the master say are the results of adhering to the norms of the eternal body and society while being in a physical body and society? Suffering and rejection. Suffering in the body because you are ignoring its desires and rejection by society because you are ignoring its desires. Even within the context of revealed truth, the modern religious authorities have created a revolving door, where people enter the kingdom of God by confessing and believing and within the same week, walk right out of the kingdom of God by failing to reject the desires of their body and society. Why do they not reject the desires of their body and society? Because they werent aware that it was a requirement; if they had known it was a requirement, the vast majority would not have signed up. That is why the churches who teach rejection of the body and society have the following sign placed upon their facility: Foreclosed. Imagine if the modern religious minsters said, Do you see how the master suffered, being persecuted, rejected, and tormented by all. He says this is what will happen to you if you confess and believe. But persevere because this persecution is an investment in the new kingdom which is to come. Whatever you sacrifice in your body and reject in your society is an investment in your new body and the new society. Just as he was faithful in the physical promises of the old codex, he will be faithful to reward you with eternal riches in paradise. Now, how many would come forward to embrace persecution, rejection, and torment in this life for reward in the next one? Only the same sort of people who embraced the master during his actual life: the poor and destitute. So what happens when you try to get people who arent poor and destitute into your system? Do you demand that they sacrifice all like the master did with the rich young ruler? No, you adapt. How? By portraying natural survival, not rejection of the natural, as the down payment of the new society. Why? Because the down payment of the masters spirit which causes rejection of the desires of the body and the society isnt just difficult; its also invisible. But natural survival is both very visible and very pleasing, which is why those who bow their knee have convinced themselves the very things which the master repudiated are actually evidence that he is in their midst. They celebrate, saying, He got a promotion, or She won an election or He was honored with this award, not realizing that according to the master, if you find yourself rich, first, or accepted after having confessed and believed then it is evidence that you are doing something wrong, not something right. Literally the exact opposite of what is being pushed by the modern religious ministers. True Christianity is a non-starter in modern societies because you can hardly convince people to reject what they entirely own and only partially exists in poor societies where the circumstances of its adherents are similar to those of the original followers. This is how you know that a church in your modern society has entirely adapted: Its still open. The religious ministers have reduced the immutable commands of this kingdom of God into optional street signs. Even if the masters claims were true and even if they somehow squeaked into paradise, they would be beggars and paupers, pleading with those whom they scorned in life for assistance. Why? Because in this new kingdom, it is lows which you reach in this life as a result of obedience which determines how high you are in the kingdom of God. This is what the new codex teaches. This is what the master says repeatedly. This author does not hold those who bow their knee at fault; it is the religious ministers who have been irresponsible shepherds. Why have they been irresponsible? Because the

survival of their invisible message depends on visible resources. And as most do not come from wealthy backgrounds which would enable them to simply self-fund their ministries and as modern folk dont normally respond to decrees, it is the ability to attract people, not money or power, which is the resource needed to survive in modern times. As a result, these people do not come to places where knees are bowed as worshippers; they come as customers, which all religious ministers readily admit, albeit behind the scenes. If the customers arent given what they want, they simply leave and go somewhere which provides what they want, just like any other marketplace. It is this internal competition for resources, not obvious external forces, especially in societies which practice freedom of religion, which forces the majority of new traits to emerge in the process of religious adaptation in modern times. And it is the origination of religious ministers from this internal pool of customers who function as carriers of these new traits. To put it simply, the religious ministers are a product of their distinct subculture and adapt their faith and practice to their personal experiences; this adaption then attracts adherents who have had (or want) similar personal experiences. This is why churches are so so monolithic; its not just because half of the people there are related to the sweaty guy who is huffing and puffing on stage; its because the guy who is ranting in the mic, along with everything and everyone else from the moment you walk in to the moment you exit reinforces your life story. Most of the people in individual churches even look the same, talk the same, have a similar level of education and make a similar amount of money. Church is the place where people go each week to get their personal experiences explained, supported, and reinforced, which is why those who bow their knee are nearly uniformly convinced that the vast majority of other Christians arent true believers. Same Bible. Same master. Same spirit. But what isnt the same? Personal experiences, which then results in differing practices and beliefs, and as they align with ones personal experiences, they are perceived as the correct ones. But such huffing and puffing is a dying art amongst religious ministers. Why? Because survival in modern society doesnt require being inspired to have the courage to face an opposing army or the strength to trek into the unknown. What does it require? Information. So the proclaimers of a king and his kingdom are now the teachers of various life tips that use the Bible as a starting point. Just read a couple of unrelated verses, close the codex, and you are off to the races. Why is this done? Because this is what the people want; this is what they need to survive, and even more, thrive in modern times. But as they feel some strange need to have their thoughts and decisions deputized by ghosts, they go to church instead of staying home and watching Dr. Phil. But a faithful minister doesnt give his members what they want; instead, he gives his members what they need, even if it damages the survival of his ministry, as he knows the rejection that he receives in life will be rewarded in paradise. And when his members switch to a church which provides the type of things they like, the pastor that receives these transfers is honored as a greater leader. Why? Because he has resources. What resources? A large number of angels? Riches in paradise? Crowns awaiting him in heaven? No. Why not? Because these type of resources are not visibly objective. You cant measure them. But what is objective and measurable? Visible resources, namely people, which then brings money and power. Then such leaders expand their ministries, setting up training institutes, schools, parachurches, and the like, and the new trait which attracted the transfers is carried on by the next generation of adherents. This is how adaptation works. The traits that win the competition for people, which then provides money and power, are the ones which survive precisely because they win the competition for people. But the traits that attract modern people are not the same as the traits that attracted ancient people. Why? Because people have changed! A lot. Same DNA but completely different mentality, as

has been discussed. In light of the supposedly unchanging nature of Gods personality and commands which were revealed in a specific time and space in antiquity, modern popularity is evidence of a religious minister being the worst leader, not the best, because one has to appeal to modern sensibilities, not the ancient ones to which their revelation was infused, in order to attract modern people. The religious ministers have translated an ancient religion so that moderns can relate to it not realizing that a translation without the ancient parts is actually a different religion. They are very aware that they have to make their message compatible to modern audiences, so they have said, We will preserve the ancient core but make everything else modern, not realizing that what they perceive as the core is not the core precisely because the true core of Christianity, namely, the rejection of the desires of the body and society in pursuit of eternal riches, is wholly incompatible and nonsensical to people in modern times. True Christianity is about being a member of an invisible kingdom where eternal riches are earned by rejecting physical riches and eagerly awaiting its full establishment on earth, where you will be compensated based upon how low you were in your actual lifetime as a result of obedience. Why? Because if you imitate Jesus, you get fired, not a promotion. You get your citizenship revoked, not an electoral office. You get mocked, not honored. Simply put, the commands of the master are not logical to moderns in different circumstances, which is why they say, He said this and what he means is... then proceed to make it logical for people in modern circumstances. They claim the spirit of God guides them in such endeavors but this is pure nonsense; Jesus spirit guides them to disobey Jesus commands? No comment. The religious ministers interpretations are being led by their personal PEs but perceive their thoughts as being inspired by God. Nevertheless, if they are in constant communication with an otherworldly being, then why is everything they say and do so goddamn local? These men are such a product of their time that its like they eat Zeitgeist bars for breakfast, lunch, and dinner, then vomit it out before they go to bed at night, only to pop it in the microwave and consume it again as soon as they wake. But being a product of their time is a necessary trait for the religious ministers because the people they must attract are in their time, not in the past or the future. This is precisely why many religious thinkers are unable to bring themselves to preach the gospel. They are acquainted with the past and know that making an ancient system relatable to moderns would require them to adapt it in such a massive manner that they wouldnt be able to sleep at night, not to mention proclaim it with much gusto. So what do these men do? They teach it, either in a ministerial or education setting, keeping their concerns about their system amongst their own kind, and sneer at the flashy religious ministers who have figured out how to pass off life tips from daytime talk shows as the gospel. These men know their system is flawed but cant bring themselves to solve the equation that vexes their soul because they had a PE0 which was directed to their system. They assume the claims of the codices are right, not because it looks right (PE1), but because it feels right (PE0), and give whatever explanations and rationalizations needed to provide cover for their system and themselves. But what they do not realize is the flaws they clearly see are only symptoms of a greater infliction embedded within religion. Simply put, the claim that God exists is false and religion is an entirely human system which harnesses unseen natural laws which are perceived as unseen people. Why have these men been unable to solve this equation? Because the thinkers are a product of ancient times but know little about the future or the discovery and harnessing of natural laws, as it is the expertise of religious skeptics. This author thinks these intelligent men should face down their PE0 by acknowledging what they are very aware of but are very afraid to contemplate: the only way to fully reconcile their system and codices is by acknowledging them as the work of man, not God. What will be the result? Every book, every chapter, and every verse will make perfect sense. But the religious

ministers know nothing of the past or future but simply the here and now and are proud of it. They are guided by their PEs, which they perceive as the guidance of their unseen person, and twist the codices to align with their own personal experiences. Even within the context of revealed truth, this isnt a problem. Understanding things through ones personal experiences is the only way to perceive anything. The church accounted for this since the beginning by always gathering all of the leaders from across their system into joint meetings to discuss a new doctrine or creed (read: new trait). Its quite beautiful to see how the various PEs of religious authorities throughout this systems history offset and complimented each other, helping the church arrive somewhere in the middle of an issue instead of the extremes that any particular leader(s) needed to survive in his unique culture. But what happens if this practice of balancing out PEs is not done? This is not a theoretical question. This has already happened. Its called Protestantism, where thousands upon thousands of denominations read the same book but expound different interpretations. A variety of interpretations is not new; the early fathers who came after the apostles didnt always agree with each other, especially if they were from different cultures. The difference is that submission to authority is an ancient trait, not a modern one, and the variety of interpretations, which has always existed due to varying PEs, are now unhinged due to the influence of humanism and the value it places on the individual. We are not influenced by humanism! the modern religious ministers will protest, not realizing that being able to read and being able to own a Bible, in and of itself, is very, very humanistic. Its not a bad thing; its just a modern thing which wasnt present in the past. As a result, they have said, We do not need anyone to tell us what this means and their refusal to submit to any authority except their own modern mindset has resulted, logically, in a modern system, which is okay, unless, of course, you are claiming that the specific personality and commands tied to an ancient system are Gods. This system has adapted so much that its adherents are literally incapable of recognizing the original traits of their system; the idea of rejecting the desires of the body and the society are so foreign to them that they will fight and rage against it. Even those who talk about such rejection only portray it as temporary, saying Sacrifice now and God will reward you. When? Later on in the week. Later on in the year. Later on in life. How? With something visible and physical, of course. But whether sooner or later, its always about visible things in this life to those who bow their knee. Always. The modern religious ministers arent the first adaptors; they are just one of the most obvious ones because the tenets of modern culture, especially the elements which have come to the fore in the past 50-60 years or so, are so vastly different than the original culture in which the master attached his personality and commands. It may not seem like it, but religion is about to be overwhelmed like a massive tidal wave by the exponential harnessing of natural laws which pushes their unseen person further and further away until he only exists as some wandering mist somewhere outside of the known universe. Why? Because they can only claim that their unseen person controls the natural laws which Adam cant control himself. This will change, and very, very soon. And when it does, the currency of the emerging global society will not be the characteristics of unseen people one reveals but the characteristics of unseen laws that one unveils. Why? Because people value what contributes to their survival, and when survival requires things being made by harnessing unseen laws, not controlled by attempting to bargain with unseen people, then the entire value system of humanity will flip. There are vast acres of available real-estate in this burgeoning system of natural laws, and behind the scenes, large corporations are already making huge investments and gobbling up as much property as possible. They are analyzing and mapping out the human genome, genetically reengineering everything (such as plants, animals, and human organs), are rapidly harnessing the ability to manipulate matter on the nano-scale

(resulting in previously unimaginable medical and technological advances), are developing new ways to make resources in renewable ways (such as food, energy and the like), and so much more. The value system of mankind is about to flip, and when it does, those who bow their knee will be on the outside, looking in. The villians of today, such as religious skeptics, will be the heroes of tomorrow, and the heroes of today, such as religious ministers, will be the villians of tomorrow. The only religious figures whose reputations will be spared are those who also fought for human rights; as a result of their adherence to human morality, the fact that they were religious will be conveniently scrubbed from the pages of history and not held against them. Indeed, this change has already begun to take place in modern societies due to the natural laws which have already been unveiled and harnessed at the click of a button. The statistical gap between people who claim to believe in the master in this particular society and those who actually practice it by regularly attending church is as wide as an ocean. And the number of young people who admit to being convinced that either God doesnt exist or cant be known in this lifetime is a full quarter of their demographic, probably meaning that at least another quarter isnt so convinced either but havent the gall to admit it to some stranger on the phone. The religious ministers may have their claws sunk deep in this present generation but this author thinks the younger generation is not so convinced; they know the claims of religion are impossible. Their parents may claim to believe in the tenets of their system but their actions demonstrate they only think these things, albeit quite loudly. But their children dont even think these things, even if they bow their knee; the younger generation wonders these things. But jumping from one system to another is nearly an impossible task, especially as religious skeptics are quite good with laws but not very good with people. These kids need a bridge between their PE0 and PE1/2, or a pathway to connect their personal religious experience with what they know about the natural world. The religious ministers are panicked about the statistics regarding young people but think a new generation of leaders will arise to bring their peers back to their system. Maybe. But this is the problem. The present version Christianity which their parents adhere to is only religious in a verbal sense; it has little bearing or influence on what they actually do. They simply change the meaning of the Bible to fit what they want to do. If a new generation of leaders adapts this system once again to incorporate the things young people know about the natural world (in much greater detail than their parents) and their mostly postmodern views about other people, then the result wont be a religion, and certainly not anything which can be reasonably related to Christianity. This, of course, is the problem many Christian youth groups are having; they cant attract young people with invisible claims about heaven and hell because the coming generation knows too much about the natural world to be swayed by baseless claims about the invisible. So they are forced to make church cool and modern but the problem with this strategy is it places them in direct competition with things that are actually cool and modern, such as Lady Gaga, Diddy, and the like. It may not seem like it, but Modern Christianity is in between a rock and a hard place. In this society, they have already hit the ceiling in terms of adherents. Yes, some churches may be full but thats only because many more have closed; the people in the pews of the churches that thrive are transfers, not converts. And in the coming generation, the young people know too much about the world to be truly motivated by invisible claims and there simply arent any religious ministers who are going to out-cool Lady Gaga and Diddy. The key to winning the coming generation is to connect the knowledge that young people have about the natural world to their religious experience by uncovering the natural laws which animate so-called spiritual phenomenon, thus creating a bridge between the systems, where extended life is sought by influencing unseen laws, not unseen people. Yes, a new generation of leaders will arise to incorporate the knowledge young people have about the natural world along with the new cultural trait of postmodernism, but religious authorities shouldnt be so

presumptive as to think these new leaders will point young people their way. Why? Because the new generation of leaders will arise from this same pool of postmodern young people who are knowledgeable about the natural world. Ultimately, the difference between two systems is only a single trait, which is why the challenge to a system always comes from within. As such, the next adaption, in whatever form it takes, will be the same as the current system in every way, except the introduction of a new trait: natural laws. The new trait will be the latest adaption of the existing system but will also be the first trait of a new system, which may seem religious, but will lack the fundamental thing which makes a system religious, namely, God. Simply because of the amount of time which has passed and the 180 degree turn in terms of the culture of the new codex and modern society, anything remotely resembling true Christianity would be extremely weird if not considered downright evil. In adapting their faith and practice to their modern cultural circumstances, the religious ministers of the Protestant subdivision have literally reduced it to the following: 1. First, confess and believe. Congratulations! You just won a one-way ticket to paradise, redeemable the moment you die. By the way, no refunds. 2. If you get around to it, get baptized, but its not really required. Its a symbol more than anything else (read: Thats the sound of the early church gnashing their teeth in outrage at such a statement). 3. Get a Bible and read it at least once a year and come to church (women) twice a week and (men) on the days which your favorite NFL team isnt playing. When you come, make sure to sing (emotional displays, such as tears and various hand motions preferred or we wont think youre sincere), listen (notes are cool but not required. You can also listen to it again by buying the audio tape after the service or watching it on our TV show), and come forward if you feel any sort of emotion, which is how our unseen person communicates that you fucked up. 4. Do not have sex outside of marriage, though your children, statistically-speaking, are more likely to do every other sort of sexual practice besides the (ahem) variety than their heathen counterparts. And no, according to studies, the purity ring thing doesnt work, but dont take the ring back because you dont know (or rather do know) where its been. Also, conventions for the religious ministers have the highest rate of hotel pornographic movie orders and the divorce rate amongst those who bow their knee is just as high as their heathen counterparts. But if you had sex outside of marriage before, in the present, or in the future, its okay because you can get forgiveness. 5. Do not be gay. Touching yourself to release the lust is not good, but is not gay (because your hand doesnt have a gender), but preferred to breaking either #4 or #5. Also, if you think you are gay, its actually the devil playing tricks on you. Simply ignore it because you care more about survival than sex and well be forced to destroy your gay ass. But if you used to be gay, you can still get forgiveness and well have events to get your formerly gay-self a spouse (read: wife). Just dont let that gay shit flair up once you get married, or if it does, simply release the lust. If you are a woman, insert lesbian for gay and husband for wife. If you are neither, then...well, too bad. Just choose one.

6. Do not have abortions because we value life. In addition, life and death are in Gods hands, but if you had an abortion in the past, or if you have one in the present or in the future, you can always get forgiveness. But the value of life ends once the child is born. Kill anyone who has done something really bad to you, might do something really bad to you, or happens to be in the same house, street, or country as someone who has/might do something really bad to you. Just dont kill people before they are born but after they exit the womb...all bets are off. 7. Give money to us. Wed like 10%, but if we insist on 10%, you might go somewhere that doesnt insist on 10%, so well just hint at it, read (Old Testament) scriptures about it (because the New Testament commands that one give all, not 10%), and play happy songs during pay the bills time. Well make up for whatever we need by selling tapes and books at the end. Dont worry....10% of your 10% goes to the needy, meaning you give a grand total of 1% to the poor, which is good enough, especially since everyone knows 90% of your taxes goes to recipients of welfare. 8. As for others, basically, be nice to people. Lets not make things too complicated. Just be nice even if you dont feel like it. Smile. Wave. You know the routine. 9. Dont break the law, especially the border-hopping one. If you are already here, go back to Mexico, regardless of which country the other 40% of illegal immigrants have come from. Just go back to Mexico then get a flight to wherever you are from. Adios! (P.S. But if you insist on staying, let us know because we could use a little help around the house...) 10. There are only six approved numbers, which are as follows: 1,3,7,12, 2,000 and 6,000. Every other number is the devil. Evolution is the devil. Global warming is the devil. Dinosaurs bones are the devil. Monkeys are the devil. Cloning is the devil. Stem cells are the devil. Al Gore is the devil. The only thing scientific that isnt the devil is medication and oil, both of which we need each day to survive. The unseen person put oil under the ground because he knew wed have cars. He also gave us guns because he knew we would have to take the oil from people in the Middle East. Thats about it. Just do #1-#10 and youll go to heaven! Now, this author may have had a little fun with the descriptions but this is literally the tenets of Modern Christianity in America. But this is not what we teach! the religious ministers will cry. No...this is what you do! Yes, you use different words and each minister may specialize in a particular aspect of ghost worship, but this list is the core of it. This is what the church in America does. And this author has absolutely no clue why those who bow their knee are under the impression that singing amounts to worship. These people are constantly singing. Singing, singing, singing. They ignore everything the master commands but think they are believers because they get emotional when they sing and spend half their time in the places where knees are bowed doing something that is only nominally mentioned in the new codex. And this is why they are always raving about abortion and gay marriage. Its not because they care about these issues; its because these are the only two issues they have left! These are the two last flood barriers that protect them from the waves of secularism that will soon overtake them (and the churchs stance on homosexuality is slowly adapting as we speak). They are clutching them like a smoker clutches his last cigarette and match on a windy day. No, not with faith. With desperation. The

rest that they espouse is selected from the other types of morality. Abortion, which isnt mentioned in their codices because it was unthinkable, has more to do with societal morality because birthrate largely determined its survival, but this author will allow them to have it. This author wont let them have the whole sex outside of marriage ethic because thats not the teachings of the new codex; its lust outside of marriage, and statistically, they are equal, if not worse, than their irreligious counterparts. Like drug dealers, the religious ministers have reduced their product, in a very literal sense, to simply saying they believe and adhering to a few social issues. And they have mistaken the whole point of their codices. The old and new codices consist of stories about the unseen person and the master; the purpose of these stories is to inform those who bow their knee about the personality of God, causing them to bow their knee in awe and worship him through obedience. But this is not the lesson they have learned. Instead, they read their codices and do not see the wonders of God, instead noting the things he did at various times for other people, and pointing at such instances, they are like children who point at toys in a stores window, saying, I want that. The codices arent supposed to cause you to ask; they are supposed to cause you to obey. Why? Because the unseen person was faithful to the promises in the old agreement; the key word is faithful, not promises, for that which was promised to the physical Abraham was not promised to you. Yes, they are! the religious ministers will rage. No, you get something better than the promises of Abraham; all he received were physical things, but in the new agreement, you get spiritual things, which your own codex teaches are superior because they are eternal, and therefore, are the fulfillment of the old agreement. Thats why the master raged against things such as wealth, status, and power which would have been considered the fulfillment of Abrahams covenant. Why? Because the master did away with the old promises, not by destroying them, but by taking those things and covering them in his blood, thus making them eternal, and therefore fulfilling them. He then extends his blood covered wealth, status, and power, and the world extends their natural wealth, status, and power, and you must choose between the two. This is the meaning of the phrase, No man can have two masters. And at every turn, those who bow their knee grab for the worlds wealth, status, and power, forsaking both the blood and promises of the new covenant, and use the old agreement, which is void (unless you are Jewish) to justify their natural desires, saying I appeal to Abraham even though their own codices says that their master did away with this agreement on the cross and replaced it with a superior agreement. This is what the new codex teaches. You must choose between Jesus and Adam. Eternal and temporary. Your blood being spilt or spilling the blood of others. If the modern religious authorities were faithful servants, they would acquaint themselves with their faith and be sure that before anyone confessed and believed, that the individual knew exactly what would be expected of them. But if they were to do that, they would be left with the same sort of followers that their master had: poor people. So what do they do? They cut their product, add symbolism, package it, and push it to the masses. They have offered an abbreviated, revised, and shortened version of the new contract to the world, saying, Just sign on the dotted line and all will be yours. Their promise of paradise is as empty and superficial as their society; its drive-bye salvation where you pick it up and continue on your merry way, assured of heaven as long as you dont go over the speed limit or run any red lights. Within the context of truth, the contract the king of heaven offers to man has not changed; what has changed are the circumstances. They can obey the commands and thus, recreate the original circumstances, and be considered weird, evil, and extreme, or they can adapt. And those who bow their knee should not say the scornful words of religious skeptics are persecution; those who bow their knee are mocked because they do not obey, because if they rejected the world as they should, no one would see them, except, perhaps, on the side of the road, wailing about the master and rebuking the world for its sins. Nevertheless, they continue to adapt in their pursuit of natural survival

because those who bow their knee cant forsake a world they are trying to dominate.

D. Religion Is A Language
As has been discussed, the formation of the soul, or the human genetic code, precedes that of the mind, or active rational thought, both in a macro-sense of human development and the micro-sense of the development of each human. Even more, it is the makeup of the genetic code which gives rise to the ability to think actively and rationally, and as a result, the soul functions as a babysitter of sorts for the mind. Like all babysitters, the soul protects the mind and its sole responsibility is to ensure its survival; as such, it uses candy and pinches, or pain and pleasure, to get the mind to obey its commands. But in matters that do not directly pertain to survival, the soul allows the mind to do as it pleases, similar to how most babysitters will allow a child to choose its preferred toys, snacks, or TV programs. All the soul cares about is survival and its vital to note that it only cares about what the mind does, not what the mind calls what it does. So imagine the soul, or the Gardener, and the mind, or Adam as a child, are on their daily walk in The Garden. As they walk along, little Adam sees a river and says, Look, evil ghost tears and runs to clutch the Gardeners hand that is on the opposite side of the river. The Gardener nods, saying Yes, evil ghost tears because he doesnt care what little Adam calls it as long as he doesnt go near the river, lest he be swept away. They continue walking and little Adam sees a cliff and says, Look, an evil ghost house. If I go over there, it will eat me. The Gardener nods and smiles, because even though little Adam isnt correctly describing the danger of a cliff, it doesnt matter, as long as he doesnt go near it. They keep walking and come across a beautiful bed of flowers with weeds growing alongside the roses. Little Adam stoops over and says, Look, the evil ghosts are attacking the good ghosts and yanks the weeds out of the flower bed. The Gardener chuckles and gives little Adam a piece of candy; even though he didnt accurately describe the danger weeds pose to flowers, it does not matter as long as he knows to pull them out of flower beds. They keep walking and come across a small animal who is lying on the ground, panting heavily. Adam runs to its side, saying I will give it some good ghost tears, and pours out some water from a bottle in his satchel for the animal to drink. Upon drinking, the animal is revived, and The Gardener is pleased, because he may not have described water in the correct way, he is happy that Adam has learned that animals also need it to live. In this example, and in every case for that matter, why do babysitters not care what small children call things? Because it doesnt matter what a child calls something; it only matters what a child does. Now, the religious ministers have all sorts of claims about codices, spirits, dreams, and miracles. But notice that they still breathe. They still eat. They still have sex to reproduce. They still grow old and die. And in a very literal sense, everything they have presented as being made or controlled by the power of their unseen person has, upon examination, proven to be a natural law which ancient man didnt understand. Religion isnt a relationship between man and God; religion is a language. Its Adams first language and is called the name of every small childs first utterings: Gibberish. Gibberish is the utterances that a small child uses to call the things and people that surround him. The child isnt wrong when he calls a dog a dauh. In fact, he is right, as dog is a dauh to him and if babies ruled the world, calling such an animal a dog would be considered wrong. Why do babies speak Gibberish? Because their ability to hear and speak are a development and they slowly but surely increase their ability to hear a word and correctly repeat it. Nevertheless, until this process is complete, when a child says, dauh, everyone knows that it is referring to a dog and no parent chastises its child for such an utterance, for its

very ability to speak, albeit Gibberish, marks an all important development in its life. In this same way, religion was mans first systematic attempt to control the natural phenomenon which determined his survival. Unlike other living things which interact with and respond to their surroundings, ancient man perceived there was an invisible cause behind natural phenomenon and sought to control it. Yes, he incorrectly projected a person but his ability to perceive a cause, then attempt to influence it, were both quantum leaps of epic proportion which should never be looked down upon. It should be noted the faulty projection of a person always represented a corresponding law, not something which didnt exist, which is why religion must be seen as a forerunner to modern science, if not a rudimentary science itself, as there are hardly any natural laws which havent been somehow accounted for in Abrahams unseen people. Religion is a system of unseen people which correspond, without fault, to actual natural laws. It should also be noted that ancient mans faulty projection was only temporary; ever since his initial conception of invisible people, he has slowly but surely replaced unseen people for their corresponding unseen laws, as harnessing laws has always proven to be more consistent than bargaining with invisible people. But this translation of people into laws has occurred, in a very literal sense, on an individual basis, as projecting a system of invisible laws, unlike perceiving a system of invisible people, is illogical, at least to people. Nevertheless, it would seem the continuous submission of invisible people to invisible laws would serve as a torpedo to the hull of religion, but this has not proven to be the case. Why? For many reasons, perhaps, but certainly the compression of the myriad of unseen people into one unseen person is responsible, as such a centralization superficially, though not functionally, disconnected the clear link between the conceptualization of unseen people and the control of natural phenomenon. This disconnect caused the unseen person to take on a life of its own, partially unconnected to its original purpose of controlling natural phenomenon and adaptable to any situation. The compression of many unseen people into one, larger-than-life supreme unseen person has proven to be able to withstand the steady erosion of its individual parts precisely because it is larger-than-life. Its like trying to destroy a tank with a rock, which is very possible if you were to accumulate many rocks and compress them into a boulder comparative to the size of the tank, but on an individual basis, a rock can do little but dent a tank. In this same way, the gradual unveiling and harnessing of natural laws, unlike the immediate projection of people, is slowly absorbed into mankinds consciousness, as personal control counters the notion of Gods control, but only in regards to one, particular phenomenon at a time. Indeed, the individual rocks of such harnessing has resulted in numerous dents, which is illustrated by the fact that modern societies have largely become irreligious, and even the religion of those who continue to bow their knee is vastly less spiritual than the religion of the ancients, not to mention the religion of those who live in developing and third-world societies. But it will prove to be the case that religion will continue to be an active force until the individual rocks of controlling natural phenomenon is compressed into an actual boulder, which simply means religion will exist until technology is capable of doing every single thing which was previously attributed to God, as man will forever desire to control his fate, and in the absence of actual control of a particular unseen law, will revert to unseen people as a means of exerting control. In addition, the harnessing of natural laws means little to those who do not have access to such technology, which is why religion will prove to be durable in poor societies whose population cannot afford to harness unseen laws and will continue to bargain with unseen people by default. Indeed, it is this logical projection of people into the invisible which continuously breathes life into religion because laws do often seem whimful because their expressions are seemingly inconsistent. For instance, the sun rises and sets in such a consistent manner that one can set time according to its movements but other

phenomenon, such as rainfall or catching a cold, is not nearly as consistent. The former operates according to cycles on the big scale and the latter as a result of organisms on the small scale, neither of which, even in modern times, can be controlled, and both of which occur irregularly. As a result, the cause of such phenomenon can easily be perceived as a whim of a person, because sometimes it rains and sometimes it doesnt, and sometimes you catch a cold and sometimes you dont, even though laws animate both. Its so very interesting to observe that it is the very inconsistent, whimful nature of that which surrounds man which causes him to bargain with an invisible person in hopes of exerting control over natural phenomenon so that it will function with the consistency of a law, not at the whim of a person. Read that sentence again. In other words, those who bow their knee want God to function like a law, not a person. In its totality, the claims of religion are not evil but are simply an immature symptom of an developing organism. But religion is evil, religious skeptics will rage, saying, Think of all of the wars and torments it has caused! Hahahahaha. Not quite. Again, religion is a language which reduces very complex natural laws into easily understood commands. This author will provide you with the key to decoding the rantings of those who bow their knee in modern times: God = I/we. Yes. Literally. In this linguistic system of religion, the word God means either I or we (and at times, my, mine, us, and ours). Now think about everything that religious people have ever told you and translate it by replacing the Gibberish word God with the words I and/or we. Every word they said now makes sense, huh? So what religious wars are religious skeptics referring to? The ones in which they say, Our unseen person is better! Translate this Gibberish: Our society is better! Or when they say, Our unseen person wants us to have this land? Translate it: We want this land. Or perhaps when they claim Our unseen person is better because he commands us to do this and not to do that? Translate it: Our society is better because we do this and we do not do that. Religious skeptics seem to have forgotten this fact: God does not exist! And if God does not exist, then what is the nature of religion? Natural. And if natural, then what must it abide by to survive? Natural laws, such as adaptation, amongst others. The religious ministers can wave their codices in the air but religion has always been a dynamic, real-time expression of whichever culture it finds itself. It has simply personified their values, which is the expression of the unique traits needed to survive, into an invisible being, and even when they freeze such a portrait by authorizing a codex, their actual actions always align with the traits needed to survive their contemporary circumstances. There has never been a religious war. Not a single one. These are culture wars. These are human wars. Again, laws are smarter than people, even if they take on the form of an invisible being, commanding you to do the things necessary for you to survive your unique circumstances. The naturalness of religion is apparent in the identical divisions it shares with other human systems, such as linguistic, political, social and economic, amongst others. Religion is indeed a language which Abraham taught Adam. The purpose of this language was to express not only the causes which were too small or large for him to see, but like all languages, to describe the entirety of his existence. Gibberish is Adams native language and the only one he has known for the majority of his existence. As he matures, he does not trade Gibberish for a new language, but upon further development of his ability to perceive his surroundings and harness the ability to mimic what he hears, he slowly replaces each individual utterance for its proper intonation, beginning with the words he is most familiar with and uses the most. This process of intonation, or proper reflection of a proper perception, is gradual and does not occur over a childhood, but rather over a lifetime, as even adults will not properly intonate an impressive number of words if given a selection from a dictionary. Why? Because the correct pronunciation of words which are

infrequently used is unfamiliar to most people, but given enough repetitions, even the most difficult words can be properly reflected. In this same way, in the absence of familiarity with a particular natural law, people speak Gibberish. Modern societies have slowly but surely gone through the process of replacing Gibberish with proper intonation, but similar to the speaking abilities of small children, there are still some words which are regularly spoken in Gibberish, such as describing spiritual phenomenon and the spark of the universe. Why? Because people are so unfamiliar with their operations that they attribute them to unseen people. There are other words which people speak with entirely proper intonation, such as describing the growth of plants and successfully dealing with common ailments like bacterial infections. Why? Because people are so familiar with their operations that they can control them, thus rendering things which were just recently attributed to unseen people into the 100% natural category. But many other words fall within the hybrid category, such as earthquakes and uncured diseases, where the modern man acknowledges that unseen laws are the cause but think that unseen people initiate them, or cause the cause, similar to how a child may successfully intonate dog but completes the utterance by unsuccessfully pronouncing went home. Why? Because people are only nominally aware of the workings of such natural processes, and thus, acknowledge their presence, but are not sufficiently familiar with them nor can they control them, and thus, use unseen people as a default explanation to both comprehend and attempt to influence the phenomenon. In regards to spiritual phenomenon, it is the rigid connotation of natural which may force many to select unseen people as the only logical cause of such experiences. Why? Because in spite of religious skeptics insistence otherwise, those who bow their knee arent crazy. Even if one were to burn the codices, fire the religious ministers, destroy every place of worship, and do away with all of the traditions, many of those who bow their knee would still not be convinced of the naturalness of spirituality. Why? Because in spite of religions illogic, there is something which this author cannot deny: Theres something going on. Allow him to explain. The new codex is similar to the old codex, in that, it was not a historical account of the life of the master, at least not in the modern sense. Instead, each book was written to convince a particular audience of the claim that their master was the messiah, and this desire to persuade, along with the fact that the books were written not so long after his death (tens of years later, unlike the old codex, which was primarily written hundreds of years after the person written about was alive), gives them the authenticity of a direct mail piece from a politician running for office. Both pieces of literature arent completely untrue, as they are held to a certain level of accountability by the proximity of the events described, but both are written, not to inform, but to persuade. And whenever persuasion, not information, is the purpose, then one must proceed with caution, ensuring not to either disregard it entirely nor take it for complete truth as well. This attempt to persuade differing audiences is the reason the first four books of the new codex cant be reconciled on what must be considered vital details about the life of the master. The authors of the new codex took a recently historic person and developed individual collages of his personality and actions, using both similar and differing quotations and carefully selected narratives to illustrate each collage. The authors did whatever was necessary to convince their audience that the master was indeed the savior, but their portraits were somewhat bound by general knowledge of his life, as he had only recently died and his life and actions were well-known before they set forth to write their accounts. But what actually happened in the life of the master? The religious ministers often say Such and such is true because its in the new codex, but the correct understanding of the new codexs purpose actually makes the opposite more true. Why? Because people already knew the general life story of the master, and as one reads the new codex, this general knowledge

is constantly present in the background, as the very purpose of the new codex was to argue against what everyone already knew. The authors are constantly forced to counter the prevailing knowledge of the masters life and you consistently hear the details of this prevailing knowledge within the gospel accounts. Basically, the gospel message is: I know what you have heard about the master but I am writing to tell you what really happened. And what had the audience to whom they were writing already heard? What was common knowledge about the master in the era following his death? One simply has to survey that which the gospels argue against, and at times, clearly states as being common knowledge at the time: The master was Joseph and Marys naturally conceived son who was born in Nazareth. He had begun a ministry with some sort of radical message and was repudiated by the religious authorities, who adhered to the historic understanding of the messiah, as well as by the vast majority of his own tribe. As a result, he was killed as a criminal and remained dead. His followers stole his body from the tomb and claimed he was resurrected and were fiercely persecuted, rejected by their families, poverty stricken, and hunted in systematic fashion. During the time following the death of the master, everyone knew these things. How does this author know? The same way the religious ministers know what they claim to know: Its in the Bible. The gospels were written to argue against what actually happened. For instance, if the stories surrounding the masters birth were true (not just the virgin birth, but the ministry of his cousin, the wise-men, the angels instruction to Joseph, and the list goes on), then why would his mother basically attempt to grab him by the ear and drag him home (to Nazareth), as clearly portrayed in the new codex? Because the events surrounding his birth didnt actually happen but they were a necessary construct to set the stage for his eventual ministry. But why does the author contradict himself by including his mothers initial reaction to his ministry? Because everyone knew that even his own mother thought he was crazy! That was common knowledge at the time. Everyone knew that. And because that was generally known about his life, the authors had to mention it, then spin it to their advantage, even if the acknowledgement contradicted what was stated at the outset of the narrative. This, of course, is the reason why the facts about the masters actual life were included in the Bible; at every turn, the authors acknowledge what actually happened because what actually happened was commonly known at the time. The authors were forced to point out what its audience had already heard because the whole point of the gospels was to argue against what everyone already knew. If you want to know what actually happened in the life of the master, it can be easily ascertained. How? Simply read what the gospels argue against. Thats what happened. And the details of what they argue against are contained throughout the gospel accounts as the authors attempt to put their own spin on it, not too dissimilar to a politician who says, You may have heard my opponent say such and such about me but the truth is.... What is the truth? The truth is whatever he needs to say to get your vote, or in this case, your faith. Thats why vital parts of the gospels do not agree with each other; just like a masterful political strategist who surveys each locality and modifies his candidates message and record to fit the varying needs and wants of different constituent groups, the gospels took their unseen master and made him whatever he needed to be to meet its specific audiences expectations. For instance, which aspect of the differing portraits is one to believe about the masters dealings with Gentiles? Was he the Jewish messiah who, like all people in his tribe, looked down upon Gentiles (read: Dont be offended. Racism was cool back then). Depends upon who you are trying to convince; if you are writing to members of his tribe, then yes, he looked down upon Gentiles and dealt harshly with them. This disdain for Gentiles was an absolute requirement to prospective followers who were part of his tribe; they didnt mind casting away the historic understanding of the messiah as

long as the dirty Gentiles were still portrayed as inferior. This is why the the early followers were so offended by Peters meeting with the Roman centurion; the tribe had always expected the messiah to come as a military hero and reestablish the independence and glory of their society by killing Romans, not saving them. (And lest the religious authorities attempt to say, But saving the Romans demonstrates the love of God, this author will point out this same new codex states their loving master would return in the lifetime of the original followers to literally massacre their oppressors in bloody fashion.) This, of course, is why a different biblical author portrays a Roman military officer, of all people, as the first outsider who is welcomed into the plan for salvation. Why? Because if a Roman military officer could be saved, then anyone could. But notice this Roman wasnt your typical officer; he was pious and Godfearing. As usual, the author of the codex pleases everyone eating his stew by satisfying both the belief that Gentiles were to be included in the plan for salvation but also ensuring that members of the masters physical tribe werent too offended. This, of course, is why the person who converts the first Gentile is the leader of the original followers, of all people. Why? Because they may have claimed that spiritual phenomenon gave them authority, but people are rarely convinced solely by invisible things so the author also needed a visible thing. And as their master wasnt visibly there anymore, portraying Captain Peter as the one advocating such a momentous and controversial belief was the next best thing. But if you are writing an account of the masters life to Gentiles, then feel free to disregard the masters disdain for Gentiles because the very fact that you are writing shows you have already trashed it. This is, of course, is why the dispute between Peter and the other followers over the status of other peoples was included in the new codex. This dispute was common knowledge. Everyone knew about it. Imagine the Gentile recipient of this account asking, Hey, I thought you all hated us but now you are saying the master is our savior as well? What changed? So the author of this particular book is forced to explain the dispute, but resolves it by saying, Dont worry; the change was authorized by our unseen person. Our #1 leader, who was best buddies with the master, had three visions and received instructions to go meet with a Gentile who was very Roman, but also very pious, who also had a vision, and when they met, the same spiritual phenomenon which occurred amongst members of the masters tribe also occurred amongst them. Even more, in a similar way as the authors of the old codex, the authors of the new codex were more concerned with persuasion and survival than historical accuracy. The only difference between the two is the authors of the new codex had a little more accountability in terms of the portrait because their master had only recently died and many people who witnessed his ministry were still alive. Even more, there was this minor but undeniably influential factor of the efficient Roman administration, which recorded everything significant, so the authors of the new codex couldnt wildly exaggerate about entire seas parting but could only mildly exaggerate about walking upon seas, one of many phenomena which were incredible enough to serve as proof but small enough to go unnoticed, and therefore, unrecorded, by the Romans. The Romans provided accountability, albeit ever so slight, over the portrait of the master contained in the new codex, with the notable exceptions of certain things which had to be included in the portrait for it to survive, such as the conveniently unrecorded, empire-wide census that gets the master born in the right city. One can explain away mixing up who was governing where when this supposed census took place but if he isnt transplanted in order to be born in the right city, well, pack up your bags because the gig is up. This accountability is why the new codex itself portrays all of the miracles which break the laws of nature as being witnessed exclusively by the masters own followers, and it is because the exaggerations in the new codex are mild, unlike the wild exaggerations of the old codex, that modern religious ministers have

expended so much energy trying to be like their master and his original followers. Its like hearing, perhaps 500 years from now, about A famous basketball player who could fly in the sky. He could fly so high that the velocity removed the hairs from his head. He wore the number #23 to demonstrate to his opponents that 2nd and 3rd place were the only options when competing with him and he intimidated his foes by sprinkling his own blood upon his jersey, thus turning it red. And in such a future, perhaps people, taking such descriptions as a literal depiction of actual events, would try to jump so high that it would remove their hair and would cut their wrists to provide blood for their jerseys, not even being aware that this isnt what actually happened. And upon asking why they still had hair, they would say, These things happened then but they dont happen now. No, actually, they dont happen now because they didnt happen then either. In this same way, the religious ministers in modern times continually try to do the things their master and his original followers did because their codices state that they are able to do so, not realizing that he and his followers didnt actually do that which they were said to have done, yet they grow frustrated when they are unable to do the same, then rationalize it by saying, These things only happened in those times even though their codices state You can do the same things, and more. No, actually, the reason the things the master and his followers were portrayed as doing dont happen now is because they didnt happen then either. Its not that complicated: the authors of the New Testament were exaggerating! Read that sentence again, and again a second time, if necessary. But just as important as it is to point out the exaggerations in the new codex, it is equally vital to note this: the modern religious ministers may not be able to do the same things which are portrayed in the new codex, but they are able to do, in fact, some things. And these some things are exactly what their master did as well; his some things were simply exaggerated in order to create a collage fit for deity. Even in spite of the revisions, reinterpretations, and downright lies, one can sense when reading the new codex that something was going on. Perhaps the words of the master were revised to fit the situation that the church, tens of years later, were confronting, and maybe he didnt heal every person who had a physical or mental problem. Nevertheless, its clear that something was going on. The master was a relatively young man when he began his ministry and was, perhaps, a physically imposing person due to his work as a carpenter. He was clearly a person of a high level of personal charisma and power and was teaching some sort of radical message which drew crowds, some of whom came to listen, others who came out of curiosity, and many perhaps to mock. He likely spoke with authority, both teaching and preaching with the conviction and passion that had not been seen in a long time. And as he spoke, the crowds pressed to listen to this unusual man and when the sick and mentally challenged were brought to him, its clear that something happened, even if the literal depictions of the codices are not to be believed. Allow this author to explain. Its similar to when the police arrive on the scene to break up a fight between two rival gangs. Upon ending the conflict and beginning the investigation, they may get two very different stories about how the fight began, with both sides pressing their case. They may never get to the bottom of how things actually started, but clearly, as the fight was still in progress when they arrived, something happened, and the key to getting to the bottom of the story, or as close as possible, is by focusing on the common themes that both sides include in their very different explanations. They may disagree on the details, but if both sides mention, for instance, the girl in the red jacket or a bat, then the detectives know that even if neither side is to be entirely believed, the common themes are a legitimate starting point, even if how they are used in each sides narrative arent completely true. In this same way, the similarity of claims across religions, codices, and traditions cannot be denied. As such, it is important to note that Abraham wasnt actually wrong in seeing an unseen entity behind visible

phenomenon; he simply perceived people instead of laws. So when Abraham speaks, especially in unison across religions, codices, and traditions, religious skeptics must listen, not for the words of the gods, but because Abraham is telling you, in Gibberish, about natural laws. This author must chide the religious ministers, for whenever scientists translate an unseen person into its corresponding unseen law, they protest until it becomes so clear that it cannot be denied by the general public, and when continued denial threatens their survival, they acknowledge the workings of the law, but attribute it to their invisible person by continuing to call it by its Gibberish name, saying that their unseen person is the initiator of that which they previously, and vehemently, denied. But this author must also chide religious skeptics, for they are so cynical about the claims of the codices that whenever they hear a Gibberish word that may, as they incorrectly assume, lend any sort of credibility to those who bow their knee, they use one and only one word for translation: mental. In a way, they are correct, for if something is perceived in any way, shape, or form, then its mental because your brain must inform you what it is sensing. But thats not the manner in which religious skeptics are using the word; instead, they say the brain both creates and senses that which it has created, as if the mind itself is the place of origin of all spiritual phenomenon and experience. In this respect, this author disagrees with them, but only to a certain extent, which is why he has broken up the naturalness of spiritual phenomenon into five divisions, not a single mental category, because even as the mind is responsible for reporting that which ones sense, it is too simplistic to label all spiritual phenomenon and experience as mental. Why have religious skeptics oversimplified spirituality? Simple. Its because they do not have personal experience in the subject, and thus, incorrectly perceive its true nature. This is why this author says that those who bow their knee arent crazy; they arent just imagining the things which they describe. Instead, they are using Gibberish to describe laws which they do not understand as entirely natural. Why? For the same reason that anything is attributed to unseen people; no one, including the scientific community, understands the natural laws behind many spiritual experiences, and the laws that are known in other contexts arent applied to religious experience. As such, religious skeptics must listen to the descriptions of those who bow their knee, scientifically measure their experiences, and translate their unseen people into their corresponding natural laws. Why? Because something is going on, and it is this something, which is present in all codices and religious traditions, past and still practiced in the present, which is the true foundation of religion. This something isnt just the music, chants, and codices; this something came before all of the nonsense that the religious authorities dressed it up with. This something occurs in every religion and tradition, past and present, and occurs to a less effusive manner in secular activities as well. To be clear, this author is not referring to any sort of unseen person but rather to something very natural which should be translated, not wholly discarded into the mental waste bin by religious skeptics, even if most of it eventually belongs there. There is what this author can only call a human exchange that occurs amongst people which isnt caused by an unseen person but is attributed to God because it is not understood as natural, particularly within the context of religious experience. In relation to the everyday connotation of the word which refers to the five senses and visible causes, this human exchange can hardly be termed natural, but this doesnt mean one need to call it something else, but preferably, expand the common use of the word in order to avoid confusion or misuse of another term. Natural simply means anything which abides by natural laws, even if an effect or experience doesnt seem natural to local logic or the vantage point of that which is visible. Indeed, this human exchange occurs, as energy is emitted from one person to many, and amongst and in the midst of many, and from the many back to the one person. Athletes feel it as they enter into the

stadium and rock stars sense it on stage and it goes beyond the roar of the crowd, as it can be felt even when the crowds are silent. Something is going on, as there is a fluidity amongst and between people on the small level which can be felt and sensed but not seen on the local level. People can send and receive energy on the small level without physically or visibly touching or being touched. But is this the extent of this human exchange? What else occurs on the small level? Can one hear and be heard? Can one see and be seen? The problem, once again, is local logic. You ask each other, Can you swim? in referring to the ability to navigate in water, not realizing the totality of your existence is within a literal pool of mostly unseen matter. There are interactions within this interconnected pool of matter, which encompasses the entirety of all things on earth, which cannot be seen on the visible level. There are exchanges taking place amongst people that defy the visible, local logic, and is thus rendered as spiritual within the context of religion. So who will guide religious skeptics in the pursuit of translating spiritual phenomenon into natural laws? Abraham, of course. There are common themes and claims across traditions, codices, and systems which must be investigated. Their commonality in different places and times is a demonstration that Abraham is experiencing natural laws which he cant see, and thus, perceives as the workings of unseen people. For instance, what would happen if someone with a physical or mental ailment was hooked up to a medical advice which sent a concentrated source of energy into his or her body? Indeed, this is a routine medical practice for certain ailments and disorders. But what if it wasnt a machine sending the energy? What if it was a person sending the energy? In some instances, they would feel a relief of their ailments, and if they had such an experience in a religious context, they would raise their hands in the sky, saying God has healed me and would rejoice. But as is almost always the case, in a short period of time, the symptoms would return, but unlike the medical practitioner, who says Be sure to return regularly so that we may continue your treatment the religious ministers say, Go, for you have been healed by God! This emission of energy is what captivated the crowds in the masters time, as it is rare indeed, and the new codex even mentions it, almost as a side note, saying that the people crowded around him because power was coming out of him (Gibberish for emission of energy). As a result of his emission of energy, many people were temporarily relieved of symptoms and perhaps the occasional person was fully made whole, just as if the same amount of energy was applied using a modern machine, though it is portrayed as every and all because if he had failed to heal just one person, then it would cast a shadow upon his collage, for how could God fail to conquer a disease? Sadly, not knowing that even the master did not heal all but simply emitted energy, those who bow their knee run to and fro, seeking the miraculous, and upon feeling this real energy, they suppose it is the power of their unseen person, as it is in the religious context, and are saddened or disillusioned when it dissipates, as is true of most energy treatments. In fact, those who bow their knee consider individuals who can emit this energy at a high level as being most special (Gibberish for anointed) amongst religious ministers, although the ability is perhaps a genetic kink which has nothing to do with religion nor God. This is precisely why the new codex says the abilities to work the variety of spiritual phenomenon (which are described in 1 Corinthians) is a gift from their unseen person which cant be taken away from an individual. Why is a gift from their unseen person? Because religion takes credit for everything, especially that which isnt fully understood. Why cant these gifts be taken away? Because they arent given by the unseen person to begin with; people are born with them. These are natural gifts. Religion is simply the only genre that systematically harnesses these natural abilities to further their claims. This is why the religious ministers who have fallen(read: been disgraced as a result of a personal or moral failing) may lose everything but they still retain their spiritual capabilities. This is why those who bow their knee who cant work spiritual phenomenon can beg and plead with their unseen

person for the ability to do so, but according to the new codex and in practice, such prayers are 100% futile. You can either work spiritual phenomenon or you cannot. Its that simple. Why do those who bow their knee continue to beg and plead for that which even their codex says cannot be granted? Because those who are born with these kinks do not realize it until their abilities are harnessed and put to use to further religious aims, and thus, it appears that such gifts have been activated in a normal person as a result of similar begging and pleading with the unseen person. Then, like the master told his followers, these individuals tell other people, You can do this too! Many religious ministers will deny the operation of spiritual phenomenon in modern times. First, its interesting how they have deputized themselves to decide which commands and promises in the new codex have a time limit and which do not. The master says, Do these things until I come back but they say, These things no longer happen but still insist that the master is coming back. Why? Because their survival isnt dependent upon unreliable genetic kinks which cause spiritual phenomenon; they have upgraded to something more dependable: an unchanging moral code. But these mostly mainline religious ministers are correct, in a way, as always. They look upon their, well, typically less civilized brethren who claim to work spiritual phenomenon and point out that what happens now doesnt approximate the descriptions of the miracles worked by the master and his original followers. As a result, they say, Miracles have ceased. What they dont realize is the things which happen now are the same things which happened then; the only difference is what happened then was exaggerated so that dummies like them would keep the franchise going until now. Also, the theology of many who work spiritual phenomenon is typically suspect (at best) because if you have the genetic kink, you dont need organizational support or formal education like other religious ministers, and thus, there is no accountability system to keep your PEs from ravaging the codices and claiming anything short of personally being deity. In addition, many who cant work spiritual phenomenon still proceed in their attempts to do so for a variety of honest and dishonest reasons so it muddies up the waters for the few who actually can. In total, its perceived shortcomings, unhinged theological claims, and just as important, a cultural distaste for running around like (ahem) people in places where knees are bowed, makes many mainline religious ministers repudiate the exact shortcomings, unhinged theological claims, and wild experiences that got their system started in the first place. Simply read the new codex. A great example of all of the above is the occurrences surrounding the initial proclamation of the masters resurrection. The codices portray the original followers as regrouping after the death of the master out of fear for their own lives. The resurrected master then portrayed as appearing in their midst, spending some time with them, then ordering them to wait in Jerusalem until the arrival of his spirit. So they regroup again and the spirit becomes present in their midst. Now notice what is portrayed as happening: a wind blows through the room, fire appears upon their head, and they begin to talk incoherently. Then they emerge from the room to proclaim the master is resurrected. Now, what is the reaction of the people who witness this spectacle? The people that see them think they are drunk. Why? Because they are stumbling around, talking incoherently. Now, the recipient of this particular account portrayed in the fifth book of the Bible had heard about what happened that day. It was common knowledge at the time that the original followers regrouped, then spilled out onto the street, stumbling around and speaking incoherently, as if drunk, and proclaimed the master had been resurrected. When the people asked them, Okay, we saw the master get crucified. Now you are saying he is alive. So where is he? their response was He only appeared to us before he flew vertically into the sky. But hell be back soon. Youll see! This is why they were persecuted. But the author of this book wants to persuade his audience that the event was proof

that the master was arisen. So what does he do? First, he claims that a wind and fire appeared in the room, which, of course, conveniently disappears as soon as they hit the streets. Next, the author has to do something which may appear to be very difficult; he has to acknowledge what his audience already heard from other sources but put a spin on it so that it serves as proof that the master is arisen. So how does he do it? He acknowledges that people thought they were drunk, but as soon as he cites what was common knowledge at the time, he argues against it by saying, They were filled with the spirit who the master sent after he was resurrected. The proof that the master is alive is that their incoherent words were actually real foreign languages which were understood by numerous bystanders who joined the church in great number as a result of the miracle. Nicely done, Luke. Nicely done. Now, lets fast forward to the present. In some traditions within the masters religious system, people go to places where knees are bowed and have spiritual experiences which cause them to speak incoherently. Now, religious skeptics say, These are crazy people who are having hallucinations. Perhaps. Mostly mainline religious ministers say, These sort of thing ceased during the times of the apostles. Perhaps. And those having the experiences say, Our incoherent speech is caused by the spirit of God. Perhaps. All of these groups are slightly correct and slightly incorrect. This author will explain shortly but as a side note, the truth of any matter is usually found somewhere in the middle, not on the extremities. Why? Because people arent actually ideological, even if they appear to be so. Instead, they are Incuriously Experiential. What does this mean? This means that they adhere to their personal experiences and are totally and completely uninterested in the personal experiences of others. As a result, they have little ability to perceive the true nature of a thing, part of which they experience but project as the whole, even though its simply a part, as the other parts of a thing are experienced by other people who also project their parts as the whole. People are rarely completely wrong. Why? Because their beliefs are based upon personal experience which they feel and witness; the mistake they make is thinking their personal experience is the whole nature of a thing instead of just a part. But its not really a mistake because survival is intrinsically individually; its only a mistake when you are attempting to describe something larger than your personal existence and survival. It is at this point in time that you must recuse your part and plead with your enemies to share their personal experiences with you so that you may add your part with theirs and correctly perceive the whole. So yes, those who bow their knee in modern times who have these experiences are correct in that they are real experiences and not hallucinations, as religious skeptics would say. But notice these people simply talk incoherently but claim that it is proof of the existence of their unseen person; this causes mostly mainline traditions to repudiate such spiritual phenomenon in modern times because their brethrens incoherent speech is clearly not the same as portrayed in Lukes account. But what these mainline traditions do not realize is the incoherent speech which happens today is the same incoherent speech which occurred on the Day of Pentecost; this is why, as Luke points out, people thought they were drunk. It was common knowledge at the time. But the authors goal was not a historical account; his objective was persuasion. So as soon as he acknowledges what everyone at the time knew, like a masterful political strategist, he spins it ever so slightly to his advantage by claiming the followers were speaking real languages. But they werent real languages. He was exaggerating! Thats why in a few traditions, modern believers talk incoherently on a regular basis but arent speaking real languages; the vast majority of these people acknowledge this. So how do they adapt to this reality? They claim they are speaking heavenly languages. Even more, the other authors of the new codex were either unaware of the claim or already adapted to the reality that such incoherent speech wasnt real languages. What is more likely, based upon the dates in which the various parts of the

new codex were written, is the author made this claim in his own written account after most of the new codex had already been written. And those who practice this incoherent speech in modern times are content, thinking that invisible things cant be disproved, so they go about, jabbering in a manner very different than what is portrayed in their codex, thinking themselves pious, while their cousins say Miracles ceased and religious skeptics say, These people are crazy. They arent crazy. They are Incurious Experiential. They are right, in that, the experience is real, not imagined, but are wrong in believing it is caused by their unseen person. Their cousins are right, in that, its not the same as what is portrayed in the new codex, but are wrong in not realizing what was portrayed in the new codex was a persuasive exaggeration. Religious skeptics are right, in that, it is abnormal behavior that has nothing to do with unseen people but are wrong to say the practice is simply a figment of their imagination. What is the new codex, those who talk incoherently, their cousins, and religious skeptics all (inaccurately) describing, each contributing a part? A natural law. An entirely natural law which has nothing to do with unseen people but everything to do with unseen laws and how the human body functions. This is why the dirty Gentiles could jabber, to the apostles great surprise, in Lukes account. Those who speak incoherently in modern times portray their ability to jabber (in referring to the personal, devotional practice of praying in tongues, not the spiritual gift described in 1 Corinthians) as evidence of being filled with the spirit of God, but notice those who turn their back on the master...can still jabber. Again, this is not even a debatable point; the religious ministers and those who bow their knees know this to be true, although they may not have thought of it in this manner. So what does this non-disputable fact mean? It means either non-adherents continue to be filled with the spirit after they have left the faith or such jabber isnt, in fact, evidence of being filled with the spirit. Clearly, the personal, devotional practice of speaking incoherently, like the spiritual gifts, functions separate and apart from their unseen person, but both are still used as evidence of the legitimacy of their systems claims. Those who bow their knee are professionals at rationalizing things away and will probably attribute it to an evil unseen person. So how does one counter such nonsense? In the same manner that unseen people are always shown the door: control. Simply uncover the natural laws which animate such experiences and duplicate it separate and apart from religious settings. Such incoherent speech has nothing to do with God and everything to do with the functioning of the human body; Christianity simply harnessed it as proof of their claims because it wasnt understood as natural. And each groups surrounding this controversial practice grabs the ignorance which hovers over this unveiled law and uses it for their own purposes. Those who speak incoherently use it as proof of the most correctness of their subdivision. Their cousins use it to make themselves feel more civilized than those who jabber. Religious skeptics portray it as an extreme practice and use it to attack the entire system and religion as a whole. Fortunately, natural laws are unseen, not invisible, and this particular natural law plays a supremely important role in the new codex. This incoherent speech is both the evidence the original followers presented to the public as proof of the resurrection of the master and is also the evidence the leader of the original followers presented as proof that Gentiles were to be included in the plan for salvation. It plays an undeniably primary role in the faith and practice of the early church, as clearly indicated in the new codex, even if many of those who bow their knee in modern times do not practice it themselves. The discovery, and equally important, harnessing of the natural law which underlies this spiritual phenomenon will prove that the claims of the new codex are, quite simply, false.

E. Paradise & The State of Non-Suffering

Ancient mans collage of the unseen person was not his only work of art. In the same way that he collected all of the good traits he observed and combined them into a single, invisible being, he created a bad unseen person, a place of paradise, and a place of torment. Abrahams description of paradise is somewhat comical because one would be hard pressed to answer why such an awesome invisible person would want the same things a typical ancient dude would choose for his dream house. In its defense, one would likely have to use known entities of value such as gold and precious stones to relate its value, even if only as a symbol. The religious ministers explanation of heaven, at least in practice, is much more influenced by philosphy than the new codex. Philosphy teaches the innate evil of the natural world which must be escaped so that one can dwell in the spiritual world but the new codex teaches the seen world was made good, became evil, but will be remade in its original, good state at the end of the age. According to the new codex, existence separate from the body is only temporary for those who die before the return of the master and when the end of the age comes, they will receive new and/or restored bodies, most likely ones that are very similar in appearance to the ones they already have, as parallels are drawn to the restored body the master is portrayed as receiving. So first, the new codex teaches that believers would have a physical body, albeit of the immortal, indestructible variety, not be floating around like Casper. Second, the new codex indicates that believers would look more or less the same. They would possess a real, actual body, which can be touched, like the master was portrayed as being touched, and would be able to eat, like the master was portrayed as eating, although its not clear whether the eating would be out of necessity or simply retaining the ability. Third, heaven is not in the sky but rather comes down from the sky and resides for eternity on a restored earth. The new codex isnt heavy on the specifics on what believers would be doing, but as a whole, the basic point is to restore man to what he was supposedly doing at the beginning: tending the earth. Now, this author has already discussed Abrahams development of the unseen person of the Old Testament and this same natural process was responsible for the unseen people in every society known to man. But not all of these people based their understanding of the world upon the worship of an unseen person, although unseen people, in one way or another, were a vital aspect of all systems of thought in antiquity. During the time span between the two codices, an sophisticated formulation of man and the seen and unseen worlds was developed by thinkers in Greece, which was a major power at the time. Even though their national prominence waned as a result of the rise of other countries, their ideas about man and the world, as well as their language, actually increased in popularity, and the same, efficient system of roadways that carried Roman legions throughout their expanding empire also carried Greek ideas throughout the world as well, serving as something of a subsidy for the efficient, but somewhat culturally disinterested Romans. Many people know the ideas of these Greek thinkers perhaps better than they know the concepts in the codices. Many people have married, or are waiting for their soul mate, or the person who is their other half. Greek. A person is really a soul which is temporarily in a body. Greek. The spiritual realm is the real world and the natural world is simply its reflection. Greek. When a person dies, his or her soul continues to live on the spirit world. Greek. The spiritual realm is pure and superior to the lower, inferior natural realm. Greek. The problem, or beauty, or both, in regards to the codices is that they are very much a product of the zeitgeist of the times in which they were written. And both codices draw upon the general mood and popular themes of their era and made it part of their understanding of the unseen person. For instance, the old codex made a massive contribution to the world

by consolidating all of the numerous unseen people behind each individual natural phenomenon into one, centralized unseen person, and portrayed him as not just the deity of their own society, but as the supreme god who reigned over all nations, peoples, and other unseen people. But the only problem with this consolidation is this supreme unseen person was previously just one of many unseen people worshipped by many societies in the region before being singularly exalted by the old codex. In fact, before this consolidation, the unseen person of the old codex, or Yahweh, had a wife, and her name is actually mentioned a few times in the actual Old Testament (Asherah). He, along with his wife, were one of many gods worshipped by many local societies before becoming the supreme unseen person of the nation of Israel. This alone doesnt necessarily make the old codex false, but it does make it suspect. Even more, its a reflection of how Abrahams understanding of the unseen person was a very natural development as he clearly incorporated the norms and traditions of the time in which it was written. It is then taken up by modern religious ministers who try to pass off a very, very local and a very, very culturally reflective document as a spiritual revelation. The old codex simply spiritualizes these cultural norms by portraying them as commands, or better said, a moral code, but these cultural norms were a reflection of the actions the society needed to take to survive. In the time between the Testaments, the Greeks popularized the concept of the eternal soul and the Romans carried this Greek philosophy throughout their massive empire. Simply put, the old codex doesnt speak of eternal paradise or punishment because the concept of man having and/or being an eternal soul was not developed until after the old codex was written, which is why most modern Jewish traditions still do not have a definitive explanation for what happens to people after they die. The idea of a spiritual savior was foreign to the old codex because they didnt know they had eternal souls which needed saving! This is why the Pharisees in particular get a bad rap in the new codex; unlike the Sadducees, who were more liberal in incorporating the philosphy of the day, the Pharisees were much more conservative and largely rejected infusing secular philosophy into their understanding of the old codex. Yes, the word soul is in the old codex, but the purpose of a word is to carry a meaning, and the references to the soul in the old codex, which is often interchangeable with the word heart, amongst others, is not the same concept as the eternal soul and/or spirit referred to in the new codex. Even more, the soul and/or spirit referred to by the religious ministers is not the same concept as the one in the new codex. And its interesting to note the authors of the new codex, as well as the master himself, were likely unaware they were speaking of a secular salvation of the eternal soul. Why? Because they were a product of their time, which was infused with this relatively new understanding of man. The religious ministers speak of a soul which is eternal in heaven but the new codex teaches the soul only temporarily exists separate from the body and is rejoined to a redeemed body and dwells for eternity on a redeemed earth. The idea of eternal paradise became a necessary construct for the original followers because the expectation of power, status, and riches had been ingrained in the society as a result of Abrahams agreement with the unseen person. But the original followers did not experience these things while serving the master; quite the opposite, in fact. Each apostle was killed for their faith and many more followers were persecuted, tortured, and executed in the most horrendous, inhumane ways. So how do you reward people who expect physical prosperity? By giving them something better: eternal prosperity. Thats why the teachings of the new codex were not moral in the sense of forsaking the world for the sake of forsaking the world; they were to forsake the power, status, and riches of this world in order to inherit eternal power, status, and riches. In a very real way, the master didnt condemn greediness; he simply rejected temporary greediness in lieu of eternal greediness. And this promise of paradise served as

both a motivation and a means to cancel out the suffering the followers experienced in their lives. It is, of course, life after death, not death itself, which voids the purpose of life itself. Paradise turns life into a dress rehearsal and an experience that is not real nor valuable. It takes real love, passion, sacrifice, and suffering and makes it a fraud, a poor mans version of reality, and a cellar where only shadows can be seen. If there is enternal life, then it does not come after life, as ones present existence cant be considered anything but a pre-life or a mere conception. Simply put, life has no purpose if eternal life awaits man on the other side of death. Take, for instance, an NFL season. Does a preseason game have purpose? Yes, but only in relation to the real season for which it is used to prepare. In and of itself, it has no innate purpose because it isnt real; its only a shadow of that which is to come. Does the Super Bowl have purpose? Yes. Why? Because it is the last game of the season where one team is declared a champion. Does the fact that the season ends after the Super Bowl remove its purpose? No, quite the opposite. The end gives the Super Bowl purpose, which is why its the biggest TV draw every year. In contrast, the preseason games, whose purpose only lies in the regular games which will come after, is hardly watched because everyone knows the games have little significance. It is the same with life. Death gives life purpose; it brings significance to every moment and every breathe because it could be your last. The love you experience with that special person in your life isnt a reflection of a higher, superior essence but is literally the fullness of the actual virtue. Embrace that person. Be passionate. Put his or her needs before your own. And in spite of all of the troubles that you may encounter, never let go of that person. If you mess up, apologize and do whatever it takes to make things right. Why? Because life isnt a fire drill or dress rehearsal; its the real thing. Cherish it, because youll never have that moment, experience, opportunity, person, or chance again. Those who place their hope on paradise are simply unable to make the most of their lives because life isnt actually real to them, and conversely, those who do not make the most of their lives place their hope on paradise. Why? Because paradise, in a literal, theological sense, served as the Life Canceler. The new codex wasnt written to a society, but to churches which consisted of small group of followers who met in houses. They were facing immense persecution and the message of paradise was, Dont worry. This life isnt real. The suffering you are acing is only temporary. If you are faithful, you will receive real life when you die. This promise, in the context in which it was written, was intended to void their lives because of the torments they were facing. This is why those who bow their knee have it completley twisted when they say, What is the purpose of my life if there is no after-life? According to the new codex, it is the complete opposite. It is paradise, not death, which voids the meaning of this life. That is the whole message of the new codex! Paradise turns life into a dress rehearsal for eternity as everything unrelated to eternity is to be wholly rejected. This message was only radical to those who heard the message but were in different circumstances than the intended audience, such as the religious or political leaders of those day. How so? To the tormented followers, the idea of a paradise full of gold was literally more realistic than the idea of overthrowing their Roman and religious oppressors. To this persecuted group, giving all to the poor was not extreme because their all were the clothes they had on their back. To this hunted few, turning the other cheek when struck by a legionnaire was synonymous to raising your hands when the police have their guns aimed at you. To this fleeing group, denying oneself of worldly power wasnt denial; their powerlessness was already a reality. This is why such teachings appealed to the poor and destitute as they were not so much commands as they were an accurate portrayal of life in poverty; it gave them hope when there was no visible reason to have hope. And what else could be expected in such a situation? This author admits there is a part of him that considers such ideas that brings hope to the hopeless as moral; if the idea of

paradise comforts the dying man who has suffered his entire life, then how could it be considered a disservice? This author does not entirely concur with religious skeptics notion of the evils of religion nor does he agree with the religious ministers claims of its goodness. This author thinks people are both good and evil and their creations share their innate qualities. Even more, religion is a tool which individuals wield to the heights of goodness and the depths of depravity. If religion was not a tool to be weld, it certainly would be something else. No, religion is not to be credited or blamed. You are. We are. I am. And even though the breeze of paradise has cooled the brow of countless multitudes, this author thinks it is primarily a disservice to infuse the masses with such fantasies. Why? Because the hope of paradise was specifically given to a group of people who had absolutely no chance of anything resembling a normal, decent life. But times have changed. We do have the opportunity to live a decent life, not just as an individual nation, but as a human society. Let not the poor man shake his fist at the gods because his family is starving; the unseen is not to blame. You are. We are. I am. Why? Because Adam has finally reached a point in his development where he can literally produce enough food to provide every mouth with three square meals a day. He has the technology to give every dry tongue sufficient water. Hes done enough research to cure the vast majority of life-threatening diseases. And he has enough bombs to ward off men of evil with a click of a button. A normal, decent life isnt riches or fame. Its not even a college education or a large house. A normal, decent life is the state of non-suffering. Thats it. Fuck utopia. Food, water, medication, and some sort of roof over ones head. The new codexs original audience needed paradise to void the suffering of those who had no option besides suffering but we have a choice and the means to extend this state of non-suffering to those who cannot obtain it on their own. But you have defined morality as that which is done or not done to ensure the survival of ones society. What responsibility do we have to others outside our borders? some may ask. Clearly, you have not been listening. There is but one society: Adam. And as one society, and even more, one living organism, the suffering of one member affects the functioning of the whole. Each part is dependent upon the other; if one part suffers, this pain will be felt by the whole. You have a responsibility to others, because when you touch them, you are, in a literal sense, touching yourself. Before this universal state of non-suffering can be realized, the entity which lends authority to our differences must be slain. This organism has been under siege for some time but has one, seemingly impenetrable fortress to which it has retreated. Spiritual phenomenon is the weapon religious ministers of all stripes have used as a massive club to dominate the entire globe. They use it as their proof of authority; it is their trump card during every card match even when they have no cards and no chips left. It is their access card into every society, enslaving the most powerful of kings to the lowest of peasants. It is the enforcer which makes even modern people believe things that they know cant be possible. Why? Because if you can get a man to think a thing, he may believe it. But if you can get a man to feel it, he will serve you all of the days of his life, for he felt a tingle, or a warmth, or comfort, or inspiration, or had a dream or vision, or any of the myriad experiences one can classify under spiritual, but saw no person causing it, he looks to the sky and says to himself, The unseen person has touched me, as I cannot explain what I felt. And if he perceives that the unseen person can touch him in the here and now, then the stories of old and the promises of tomorrow, though impossible, become possible, and nothing, even Jesus own commands, can dissuade a man from such an experience, because more than morals and codices, and higher than God himself, a man trusts his personal experience. And like Abraham, when a man cant attribute an occurrence to a natural process which he is personally aware of, he attributes it to the unseen, then proceeds to project that which he is most familiar into the invisible, namely people, even

if the occurrence is eerily similar to the experiences, albeit less effusive, that he has in other settings which he acknowledges as 100% natural. Why is it less effusive? Because other contexts deal with issues that are important or entertaining or educative but religion is the sole provider of the one thing that is his greatest concern: death. And like a master accordion, religion plays the strings of his soul, whose sole function is to keep him alive, to a pitch which other contexts simply cant compare with, causing the very, very natural occurrences which he would normally attribute to any number of natural causes, many understood and classified but some not yet investigated, to become the souls proof that its found the route to fulfillment of its function: everlasting life. And upon finding its proof of continued existence, for the religious ministers are the only entities in any society that can promise this without being charged with a felony, the soul clings to it like a drowning sailor clings to a life preserver, as it should, because keeping you alive is its sole purpose. These so-called spiritual experiences, which are now the only proof the religious authorities dare submit for fear of inquiry, are very real, but also very natural, both in origin and manifestation. The religious authorities have slumbered in the shadows, content with mans inexplicable inability to connect the dots, and few have attempted to waken them, for they are many and roar mightily when disturbed. Even as I approach, their watchmen do not sound the alert, for they say, He is but a silly little boy and fears the shadows, for he carries light assistance upon his head and by his waist. But I will awaken the religious authorities, for I am not afraid, because I, too, can see in the dark. And the flames upon my head are not torches, but my eyes. And the light by my waist is not a flashlight, but the glint of my sword.

F. Five Categories of Spiritual Phenomenon

It is in these five distinct, but overlapping and interacting categories, that spiritual phenomenon may be classified. The full spectrum of spiritual phenomenon will be scientifically examined, measured, and classified, which will likely require the following categories and its contents to be updated and/or revised. The religious ministers portray their practices as an interaction with God whose spirit enters into time and space. They are wrong. It is simple as that. Spiritual phenomenon is entirely natural; it is only portrayed as spiritual because the natural causes are unseen but tangible. But the causes are not invisible, and upon investigation, not only will they prove to be entirely natural, but also replicable. 1. The Souls Attachment To Eternal Life and the Ideals Assembled in the Collage of the Unseen Person The religious ministers portray very natural reactions to the prospects of eternal life or punishment as some sort of spiritual phenomenon which is caused by their unseen person. This is pure nonsense, as these are clearly natural reactions, evidenced by similar responses to the prospects of reward or punishment in other contexts. The four main reactions portrayed as spiritual by the religious ministers, including the clean words they use, are as follows: -The feeling of joy (feeling happy) -The feeling of peace (feeling calm) -The feeling of guilt or conviction (feeling bad) -The emotional reaction during worship (getting emotional during singing time)

The souls attachment to eternal life and the characteristics of the unseen person is also portrayed as a spiritual phenomenon in times of worship (singing time) as adherents interact with what they perceive as the presence of God. This so-called spiritual phenomenon is very natural, but has two aspects to it, the second of which will be covered in another section. The first aspect is the emotional reaction to the concept and characteristics of God during singing time. In theory, their unseen person is supposed to be amongst them whenever two or more believers gather together, but in practice, those who bow their knee only consider themselves as actively engaging their unseen person when they feel something in response to their singing. When they feel something, they perceive that they are encountering the presence of God. But notice what they feel is very, very natural. Perhaps they begin to cry, feel good, or feel bad, but it never breaks any natural laws. You see this natural law at work when teenage girls cry profusely, feel good, and grow wildly excited at a pop stars concert; the only difference is the religious ministers use clean words such as praise, worship, glory, presence and the like to portray it as interaction with a perfect, invisible being. Interestingly, many churches have adapted their singing times into miniature rock and/or R&B concerts, where the song selection, style of music, wardrobe and mannerisms of those on stage are literally synonymous with its secular counterpart, besides, of course, a few mentions of the master. Its also interesting to note that if you were to count all of the personal pronouns in the songs that are sung such as I, we, us, and our, that you would find they far outweigh the references to deity. Those who bow their knee want the world to think that they are encountering an otherworldly being because they grow emotional when they sing, but the only difference between teenage girls reaction to whatever piece of meat has been packaged and put on stage is that the piece of meat the religious ministers have packaged and put on stage is invisible. And what are invisible things? Perfect. Why? Because they arent visibly objective, and as such, become whatever each person imagines them to be, and upon the unseen person becoming whatever one wants, needs, desires, hopes, and dreams, people naturally get emotional. 2. Spiritualized Functions of the Natural Body -Dreams from God -Voice of God (separate from various spiritual gifts of communication) -Feeling of Guidance by God -Spiritual Inspiration of Codices There are some very normal and very natural functions of the body which are commonly known and experienced by all. Religion harnesses these normal functions and directs them to their claims by portraying them as being caused by their unseen person. Part of this perception is a result of the perception of a universe ran by unseen people, but even more, it is caused by the lack of familiarity with the mechanisms behind these frequently experienced occurrences. For instance, if you asked just about anyone, Why do people have dreams? they probably wouldnt be able to explain the phenomenon, even though theyve had many dreams and know that everyone has dreams. Perhaps theyd (jokingly) mention pepperoni pizza or something about the mind analyzing thoughts, but thats all that most people know about dreams. The problem is that in the times when the codices were written, the authors perceived an entirely spiritual system, so everything was thought to have been caused by unseen people. Modern people read these descriptions and knowing that everyone has natural dreams unrelated to God, they pick and choose which are from God and which are just natural. For instance, they have a dream about their

favorite football team or some TV show and they perceive it as entirely natural; but the next night, they have a dream about something which could be perceived as significant and perceive it as communication from their unseen person. But this is not how the universe works. Its an entirely natural system, not a hybrid, where some things are caused by God and some things are caused by the laws of nature. Now, the religious thinkers try to harness natural laws to their advantage by saying, But our unseen person uses the natural laws he created. If so, then let them answer the question, Which natural laws does the unseen person use? The common denominator in all of the natural laws that their unseen person uses is that they are laws that Adam cant control...yet. But whenever he harnesses a new one for himself, the religious thinkers are forced to cross that law off of their list, and in the near future, the only laws not controlled by man will be those above and beyond the earth itself. As already described, modern people know that dreams are natural but believe that their unseen person slips in a spiritual dream every once in a while. In addition, the notion that God communicates on an on-going, dialogue format with those who bow their knee, which this author notes is separate from the spiritual gifts that involve communication, is a very common trait in Modern Christianity, and comically, especially amongst the rank-and-file commoners who bow their knee. Nevertheless, the dialogue that goes on in your head is you, not some conversation between you and an otherwordly being. This author shall deal with this belief in more detail later on in this same section, but it should be noted that one of the problems is that people are not honest with each other about what is going on in each others minds. Everyones thoughts are so private and personal that no one, in any context, admits to the on-going thoughts, fantasies, ideas, imaginations and constant back and forth dialogue and haggling that everyone has with themselves (read: although such dialogue has been wittily portrayed in some movies). The taboo of this topic has created a general ignorance which religion has harnessed for its own use. Another problem is that people read the codices and observe the unseen person communicating with the heroes of the faith, not realizing that such heroes only came along once every generation. So even within the context of revealed truth, the spirit guides adherents, but this whole, God told me... thing, where some truck driver gives a quote from deity is nothing but complete and utter stupidity. This author has already discussed the feeling of guidance, as the genetic soul guides a person by adhering to unseen laws 24/7, but the mind, picking up on this feeling, attaches it to things it can see on the local level. Religion harnesses this feeling, saying that its from God...but its not. This is precisely why religious people (as an aggregate) claim they are guided by God but do not have many results to show for it; in reality, they are wandering around just like everybody else. The difficult thing in this section of spiritual phenomenon is that they have harnessed human desires, needs, and fears, so one has to use a scalpel to remove their claims but also acknowledge the natural laws onto which they have latched. For instance, the idea of being completely alone in the world can be somewhat scary; its a lot more comforting to hold onto the notion of someone or something, somewhere or somehow, guiding you along, even if its not God. This is a human desire. So religion harnesses it, saying that God will guide you. But what are the results of those who are guided by God? Entirely natural, and in terms of visible resources, (which those who bow their knee shouldnt seek but seek just as hard as anyone else), they are, in a statistical, provable manner, less intelligent, poorer, less educated, more violent, and equally as unsuccessful in marriage than those who do not bow their knee in this society. (This does not take into account the global comparison of religious and irreligious peoples and societies. Those who bow their knee have somehow convinced everyone that a society will collapse into

moral decay without their unseen person, but as usual, the very opposite is true. Simply put, in a statistical, provable way, the less religious a society, the safer and more prosperous it is.) But even the idea that everything will work out is a human idea, unrelated to God but harnessed by religion. Why? Because even when things dont work out as planned, you eventually feel they worked out as they should have. Why? Because God re-routed you? No. Because you adapt to your circumstances! You say, I want to go to this college but get denied and are forced to go to your second choice but have a great experience and learn a lot. All people, not just religious ones, say in such situations, I was not meant to go to the first college. Clearly, I was meant to go to the second college. Um, no. You werent meant to go anywhere. There is no big plan in the sky for you. The only plan that exists is the one that you make, which then interacts with the plans that other people make, forcing you to adjust your plans accordingly. And when you are forced to make adjustments, you adapt to your new circumstances and keep it going. Your adaptation provides a level of comfort in your new circumstance which, coupled with the genetic souls 24/7 guidance, may give you the impression that you were always destined to be there in the first place. Nevertheless, thats not how the world works, even if you think it does. And that is why the people who run big things in your society arent normally religious and the people who run big, big things are almost never religious. This has always been true in every society. Why? Because they have the power to make their plans reality. They control their circumstances. They think it, write it down, hand it off, and in the same manner as God is portrayed as doing in the first book of the Bible, it is. Its very hard to convince someone that God is in control when you are the one in control. That is why religion has always been for people who do not have control over their circumstances. And what does it take to control your circumstances? Resources: money, power, or people. A regular person makes a plan and it gets kicked around like a soccer ball until it ends up in a trash can eight blocks away from where he intended, then he concludes, I was destined to be in this trash can. No, you werent destined to be anywhere. You are simply powerless over your circumstances and adapt to wherever you get dumped. Thats not guidance. Thats life. You adapt. You survive. Call it whatever you want; just do whats necessary. But this is precisely the shameful nature of religion. Religious people do two things that will forever keep them from realizing their full potential. First, they make a plan but perceive the kicking around it receives by other plans as being caused by God. This simply means, they want to be or do something, but when life files their plan in an alternative location, they accept it, perceiving it as being caused by God. There are many inventions, ideas, books, medical cures, new technologies, and an innumerable other things stored in the hearts and minds of those who bow their knee but when they venture out to accomplish these things, life tells them Shut up and sit down. And they sit down, perceiving the resistance to their plans as being caused by God, and upon adapting to wherever life files them, they say, This is where I was destined to be. Um, no. You werent destined to be anywhere. You wanted to do something special but when life told you, as it tells everyone, Shut up and sit down, you perceived the difficulties you encountered as being caused by God and sat down. And at other times, religious people do the exact opposite. They get an idea in their head and perceive it as being inspired by God, and when life says, Shut up and sit down, they refuse to make adjustments and spend their entire lives trying to do something they do not have the natural ability to do, thinking that God will compensate for what they lack. Simply put, religious people do not comprehend natural cause and effect. They experience effects but think the cause is related to unseen people, not seen or unseen laws. So instead of modifying the natural cause, which is normally their own actions, they invest their time and money trying to curry favor with God or fight off the devil, both of whom do not exist, which means the sum total of their efforts is nada. Some try to do both by modifying the natural cause and attempting to influence the

unseen people, thinking they will have an advantage by being both a modern and a caveman. But the reason why religious people are generally less successful than their irreligious counterparts is because they dont realize that there is competition for limited resources and their rivals arent investing a minute or a penny into the invisible. Instead, they are investing everything in modifying the natural causes and it is that 10% which is the difference between serving coffee at Starbucks and serving smiles on the red carpet. This is why Christians who make something of themselves almost always stop going to church. Almost always. Its not because they are celebrities and will get mobbed during singing time; its because this whole manipulate the natural via the spiritual by prayer and the rest is no longer necessary. Why? Because manipulating the natural via the natural is much more effective. The very fact that they did something special is probably the result of dumping such a mindset and focusing entirely on the natural, or at least being managed by someone who did, and thus unleashed from the chains of superstition, they focus on the natural but often continue to use gibberish (read: I give all glory to God) for the visible resources which the master commanded his followers to reject, which means, of course, that they arent actually Christians anymore, despite giving shout-outs to God while on stage. Last of all is the perception that the codices are inspired by God. Now, this author has already discussed this but its quite simple. The religious thinkers are constantly haggling over this or that interpretation, but this author can make it easy for them by removing a single trait: God. Remove God and every verse in the Bible makes perfect sense. The codices are only troublesome when you try to take a very, very natural document and make it something that its not. From the perspective of the authors of the codices, feeling the normal inspiration that every writers feels could easily be interpreted as being from God if you believe in an universe entirely upheld by unseen people. But this author should also point out that the inspiration of the codices was a means to make them authoritative; it has much more to do with defending a systems territorial turf from other collages than it does with God. In the case of Christianity, it had much more to do with regulating a visible kingdom than building an invisible one. Its only considered revelation because the things it does reveal are invisible and not disprovable (or provable). Religions have never adhered to their codices but have projected a new, culturally adapted deity into the sky in every generation; all the codices do is provide the name and direction signs for this ever-adapting, invisible being. 3. Release and Reception of Energy The codices themselves, along with the only subdivision in this system which is experiencing active growth, albeit via transfers from other subdivisions in modern societies along with new converts in poor societies, portray the masters spirit as the active force behind their traditions. Both the master and the early followers also relied upon what they perceived as the spirit of God, and this invisible wind was the foundation of the entire Christian system, even if it is not part of the faith and practice of many of its modern adherents. All you have to do is read the new codex; ever since the day the master supposedly flew vertically into the sky, it has been his spirit which has been the glue that has kept this system together. But what natural law does this special ghost represent? What are they referring to? Both the new codex and its fastest growing subdivision portray these things as entirely spiritual. Both are wrong. Very wrong. This spirit they refer to, in fact, isnt spiritual; its very natural, and fortunately, it is unseen, not invisible. Simply put, they are referring to energy. Natural energy. Unseen natural energy. It is this energy, and the human exchange of this energy, which is the foundation of Christianity. As it is

unseen, it was perceived as a spirit by those who were unaware of the workings of natural energy, and the entire system was built upon the this spirit in the wake of the masters absence. It was the masters emission of this unseen energy, and the spiritual phenomenon which ensued, which caused the original followers to believe he was the messiah even though he wasnt the expected military hero and king. It was this unseen energy which caused the early followers to believe that the master was alive as a spirit following his crucifixion, even though his body was lifeless. Modern believers feel this unseen energy and it causes them to await the return of a man who has been dead for 2,000 years. This energy cannot be seen with the naked eye but it can easily be seen and measured with the right devices, and can be categorized, as follows: -Physical/Tangible Sensation Experienced In Places Where Knees Are Bowed (Presence of God) -Anointing (Power to Preach) -Anointing (Release/Reception of Energy) -Physical Healing Okay, so this is how it works. This is actually how it worked in the time of the master and this is how it works in this systems subdivision which is experiencing growth. There is a human exchange of natural energy. We see this exchange occurring throughout the new codex. This exchange is connected to eye sight, or at least, someone focusing their attention upon another person, which would always include their eyes as well (read: I know...I know. Just stay with me). The new codex says this very thing as a side detail alongside many of the miracles which were worked by the master and the original followers, as those who are healed are continually portrayed as focusing their attention and/or eyes upon the master and/or original followers. In addition, any person who can emit energy is very, very aware of this connection between energy and eye sight, even if they call it the power/presence of God and the eyes of faith/expectation or something like that. This is how these people describe natural laws which they do not understand and perceive as the spirit of God and faith. This is how the new codex described natural laws which Jesus and the apostles didnt understand and perceived as the spirit of God and faith. This is also the natural law this author is struggling to explain without being carted off to the looney bin. When a person, or a group of people, focus their attention upon someone, not in a unusual manner, but when you look at someone expecting to be told something important, such as during a speech or presentation, it causes a release of energy within the body of the person who can emit energy. Now, the level of this release depends upon the person. It is likely a genetic kink, as most religious ministers cannot emit even though they beg and plead with their unseen person, which is why they use Powerpoint projections, humor, a variety of stories, and whatever else, to make up for their genetic shortcomings. Simply put, you either got it or you dont. This is one of the reasons the code, not spiritual phenomenon, became the churchs litmus test of viability, as there were far more open pulpits than religious ministers with these abilities. But some modern religious ministers can emit, and the master himself could emit, and probably at a level far surpassing anyone of his time, which caused some people to become absolutely convinced that he was the messiah even if he didnt fit the old codexs expectation. Simply put, this dude was the best they had ever seen and probably had ever heard of, especially as many years had passed since the last recorded prophet was on the scene. As said before, the level of this emission is specific to the person, but there are three general levels:

a. Level 1: Energy to Preach This is the basic level where energy is released in a person and energizes him to preach with great gusto. Its beyond mere excitement; there is real energy involved. Many religious ministers have this ability, which, of course, is why they became religious ministers in the first place, as religion is the only genre that systematically harnesses this ability to support its claims. But many people who give public presentations, such as politicians, music artists, and the like, also have and use this ability as well. b. Level 2: Energy to Transfer This is the intermediary level, where this energy is released beyond the individual person and can be tangibly felt and/or transferred by/to other people who are in the persons immediate proximity. You usually see this occurring when religious ministers lay their hands upon those who bow their knee. Very few religious ministers have this ability but those who do not have it still do the whole laying on of hands routine. But even if a religious minister has the intermediary level, you still have to be in their immediate proximity, perhaps within a few feet, but they dont have to touch you for you to feel this energy because it emanates from their entire body, not just their hands. When this author says transfer, he simply means it can be tangibly felt, and at times, it can cause physical changes within the body, though usually temporary, like all energy treatments. c. Level 3: Energy to Disburse This is the highest level of energy emission. In this level, the energy released within a person flows beyond themselves and their immediate proximity and can fill an entire room, church, or even a stadium. You can be several hundred yards away and still feel the release of energy from such a person. Now, from time to time, a person causes a commotion with such abilities, but there is only one person, at least within the Christian religious system at the present time, who has done this consistently for a significant amount of time. Now, those who bow their knee will gasp, This young fool is describing the power of God, the anointing of God, the spirit of God, the presence of God and the list goes on. Yes, he is. Why? Because all of that is Gibberish for the emission and reception of natural energy, which is a natural law those who bow their knee dont understand, and the ignorance of this law has been personified in the spirit of both codices. Now, natural energy causes all sorts of things, depending upon the level of its release. Everyone emits a low-level of energy 24/7 in the form of natural heat; this is how the body functions. Touch your cheek; what is it? Its warm. Thats natural energy. During singing time, those who have gathered emit this continuous, low-level of natural energy in the form of heat, which causes the place where knees are bowed to have a heightened level of energy, which, depending upon many factors (primarily the number of people involved in the spiritual exercise plus a ratio of the crowd size versus the size of the facility), may either go unnoticed, or may be very noticeable and feel like a warm, tangible glow upon the body and a thickness in the air, and everything in between those two bookends. Combined with the souls desire for eternal life and the concept of a perfect, invisible being, this natural energy creates an electrified pool of matter in which those who bow their knee swim. And since they cant see this energy but feel it as they sing, what do they proclaim? Tis the presence of God! Not quite. Its the presence of you and all of the people around you, which is why God always seems to show up in a grander way when the church is packed. You already know this law, except in other contexts. When its cold, you sleep under a cover. How does a cover keep you warm? Do you press a button and it heats up? No. It keeps the

energy (or heat) which you emit close to your body; you keep yourself warm, and a cover simply helps to keep your energy near you. How do you know someone has recently sat in the seat that you are in? Its warm. What warmed it? Their iPod? No. Their body. You sometimes feel someone elses energy when you are sitting near them, which is really icky if you dont know them. And what happens when you overheat? You start sweating. What does sweat do? It cools you down. Now, those who bow their knee enter their facility and start greeting each other. What happens? Nothing. Nothing ever happens before the service starts even though they are all gathered, and in theory, God is in their midst. Then someone calls them to attention and the music starts to play. They start singing, clapping, and moving, which, like all physical movements, causes the body to heat up, and their bodies begin to emit this extra heat through their skins pores. Now, when those who bow their knee sing and clap, their bodies heat up, but usually not enough that they begin to sweat, but this release of energy, especially when a lot of people have assembled and/or the actual facility (regardless of its size) is at capacity, the heat literally microwaves the air, and this energy becomes physically tangible and feels as if you can cut it with a knife. This is not something these people are imagining or hallucinating, as religious skeptics suggest; its tangible and can be felt in the same way that humidity or wind can be felt. And because its tangible, unseen, and in the context of religion, those who bow their knee say, This is the presence of God. Again, not quite. This unseen energy can be both seen and measured with prosumer grade products that one can purchase at Best Buy. This is why these people can get emotional when they worship (sing) on their own at home as they imagine the idea of a perfect, invisible being, but they only feel this tangible presence while singing amongst other believers. And once the singing is over, this presence (energy) slowly dissipates. Why? Is it because the presence of God doesnt want to stick around for the announcements? No, its because they arent exercising anymore but are seated, thus cooling down the bodies which have gathered and decreasing the amount of energy which is being emitted into the air. This corporate release of energy occurs whenever those who have gathered do physical activities such as singing, praying, and the like, and grows stronger as the intensity of the physical activity grows stronger. Now, everyone emits energy 24/7 in the form of heat. Its a basic function of the body. But some people have the ability to emit what is likely a different form of natural energy (different than heat) from their bodies at a much high level than most other people, as explained in the L1-L3 description. In fact, the ability of some individuals to emit unusually high levels of energy is already a natural phenomenon which has been investigated and measured in some systems in Asian societies. But in the West, Christianity takes the natural ability and harnesses it as proof of its own claims. Many religious ministers in each Christian subdivision are able to emit Level 1 but its not as popular as in the old days because modern people want information (teachers), not inspiration (preachers). But Level 2 emission is only routinely practiced in the subdivision which is experiencing growth and Level 3 is so rare that only, perhaps, 5-10 established ministers in the entire system can do it, in varying degrees. Now, Level 2 emission is controversial and Level 3 is highly controversial in the eyes of the religious authorities of other subdivisions and traditions within the Christian system. Why? For many reasons. For one, the ability to emit is seen as the power of God and this instantly attracts immense resources. As a result, the religious ministers who can emit L2 and L3 do not need a formal education or a governing structure to assist them in building their ministries. As a result, they arent exposed to other streams of Christian thought (education) nor do they have anyone to hold them accountable (governing structure), causing their PEs, which includes authoritative spiritual experiences, to run roughshod over the codices. These men are regularly ignorant of anything besides scriptures and their personal experiences, which cause many

bizarre beliefs to be promulgated, and as they didnt need assistance in building their ministries, neither do they have anyone to keep their beliefs in check. And as they regularly win the competition for people due to their spiritual abilities, their bizarre beliefs are the ones which are carried on to the next generation. In addition, religious ministers who can emit L2 and L3, perhaps legitimately trying to imitate the master, tend to overreach in regards to their spiritual abilities in a variety of ways. For instance, they claim healings which often legitimately result in a temporary remission of symptoms, but almost always results in the person returning to their original, sickly state, which, of course, goes unmentioned. Also, such men claim to be in constant communication with God, resulting in various prophecies and the like, very few which ever come true. In addition, it seems such men are always selling something or asking for money and they also tend to be more lavish than conservative, lifestyle-wise, both of which makes everyone a bit queasy. Plus, a lot of people who cant emit or work other spiritual phenomenon pretend that they can, which muddies up the waters for those who actually can, not to mention the instances when notable leaders with such abilities have been exposed, which happens from time to time. Lastly, those who emit energy and work spiritual phenomenon claim their actions align with the miracles portrayed in the new codex, but its clear as day that they are not, though they refuse to acknowledge that its not the same. So for all of these reasons, the religious authorities in other subdivisions more or less repudiate spiritual phenomenon as a whole and simply stick to the code. But these religious authorities also reject spiritual phenomenon for a variety of mistaken reasons as well. Why? Because they cant emit energy! And though they supposedly have the same spirit, are reading the same Bible, and follow the same master, these men cant rationally explain why they are as dry as dung while other men can walk into a room and literally make it explode. The real reason is because its a genetic kink which the new codex says the unseen person gives according to his own whim, but moderns, who are infused with notions of equality, find it difficult to accept that other people can do things they cannot do. So these religious authorities rationalize their own genetic shortcomings by castigating the working of spiritual phenomenon, partially because of legitimate reasons, as listed above, but primarily because they wish they could do it as well, but since they cannot, they assume anyone who can do it must be cheating somehow, attributing it to anything from mere excitement to the devil himself. Again, this is their attempt to comprehend a natural law which they havent personally experienced (PE0), and thus, distrust, but have heard about (PE2), or have witnessed from afar (PE1), which is usually attached to people and claims that they do not trust (PE4), and thus, label in whatever subjective manner which suits their level of distrust. Both those who can emit, claiming that it is the power of God, and those who cannot, and claim that the practice is on some descending scale of false, are both describing a natural law which they dont understand, and which has nothing to do with unseen people whatsoever: the emission of natural energy. This, of course, is why those who can emit are so terribly exhausted after ministering; the energy is coming from them, not passing through them. So no, one cannot travel beyond the known universe is search of unseen people, but this author can prove, with the right equipment, that everything that occurs on earth is 100% natural. Now, how will the religious ministers respond? For the past 2,000 years, they have claimed that this wind which sweeps through the places where knees are bowed and empowers religious ministers is the spirit of God, not natural energy. How will they adapt? They will say that God uses natural energy, of course! But there are two problems with this. For one, this release of energy is a natural law, so it exists in other contexts. The religious ministers will claim that their God uses natural energy, but the release of natural energy at, say, a rock concert which has nothing to do with God, will prove to be much more effusive than the vast

majority of places where knees are bowed. So what will they say then? How will they adapt? Adapt, they must, to survive. They arent just going to close down shop and go home. Their survival depends on adapting like a chameleon. And as usual, they will say something to the effect that their unseen person is responsible for all energy emissions, even when it happens at rock concerts where some heathen is screaming, Fuck God! from the microphone. Why will they be able to claim this? Because this energy is unharnessed and not controlled. So how does one counter this universal claim of control by their unseen person? Easy. Build a machine which emits energy, or simply retrofit one that already exists. Measure the average level of emission in places where knees are bowed, then double the level in the machine. Then put the machine on a truck and drive it through the entire country and let people feel the presence/power/anointing of God coming from something that looks like a washer machine. Yes, many will continue to profess whatever they want, but many will also see the claims of religion for what they are. No, not evil. Natural. Even more, a symptom of a maturing organism. This natural energy is the substance of religion; everything else is just ingredients that are tossed in. This emission of this energy is felt by the those who bow their knee during singing time, as those who participate in this soulish exercise give off energy in the form of heat and tangibly feel the energized air, perceiving it as the spirit of God. A different form of natural energy is the power which the religious minister feels when those who bow their knee affix their eyes upon him as he ascends to the pulpit, resulting in a inner release of energy which causes him to proclaim the gospel with great gusto, and for some, enable them to transfer and even disburse this energy to those whom have gathered. This transfer of energy, in the same manner as a medical device, may cause a person who has some sort of physical ailment to temporarily feel the remission of symptoms, but in the same manner as medical treatments which provide energy treatments, those symptoms return without repeated exposure to the source of energy. This natural energy is the highway upon which all spiritual phenomenon rides, although many of them can occur even when this energy is not tangibly felt. Now, many religious ministers will say, Not only do we not practice these things but we repudiate the occurrence of these things in modern times. Herein lies the problem. This system has adapted so much that many of the religious ministers do not even recognize the original traits of their own system and rebuke the practices of their own origins. You know the wild people running around, jabbering like crazy madmen, praying for the sick, and making a theological mess of things? Thats not a modern denomination; that was Jesus and his fishermen. All you have to do is read the Bible; spiritual phenomenon plus eternal survival is the foundation of Christianity, even if neither is adhered to in modern times. And what happens to a building if the foundation is destroyed? The whole thing collapses. If spiritual phenomenon is entirely natural, what will the minsters who repudiate miracles in modern times be left with? A codex written by natural inspiration, a system which incorporates non-Jews because of a natural phenomenon, and a moral code in both codices which adapts like a chameleon. 4. Physical Kinks in the Natural Body This author has already spoken about the kinks in the body and mind which are responsible for the following phenomenon: -Visions -Ability to Emit Energy -Heavenly/Foreign Languages (Speaking Incoherently/Jabber)

The problem with genetic kinks is that those who bow their knee perceive every effect they experience as being intentionally caused by their unseen person so they exalt things which are the equivalent of a hiccup as spiritual phenomenon. Nevertheless, there are many spiritual experiences which are just kinks in the on-going process of human development, not the intentional actions of unseen people. Visions are kinks in the mind which cause vivid dreams. They occur, on occasion, to a small number of people and should be disregarded, even if the experience is intense; but those who bow their knee do not disregard visions, as religion harnesses them for its own purpose. The natural laws which cause visions may already be fully known but are not popularly understood by the general public. Even more, the religious skeptics appear to have some intense desire to specifically disprove the spiritual origins of visions, not realizing that the vast majority of those who bow their knee have never had a vision. In regards to the day-to-day practice of Modern Christianity, visions arent that frequent, and as such, religious skeptics should invest their resources uncovering the natural laws which animate more common phenomenon. Why are religious skeptics obsessed with disproving visions? Simple. Again, it is because they do not have personal experience in spirituality, and thus, do not have the ability to discern which aspects of spiritual phenomenon are significant, and which are not. It is, perhaps, because these intelligent men are intellectuals that they have exalted the brain as the centerpiece of spiritual manifestation, entirely disregarding the part of the body which Abraham clearly states is the true source of most spiritual encounters: the stomach. Simply put, religious skeptics, due to their lack of familiarity with spirituality, have been studying the wrong part of the human body in their pursuit of unraveling the claims of religion. Even more, visions are somewhat hard to prove or disprove for both religious adherents and skeptics, as they just happen, and as such, are unlikely to happen to an individual while he or she is under observation. But the other aspects of spiritual phenomenon are practiced weekly, and at times, daily, and can provide the necessary real-time data to disprove the claims of the religious authorities. Now, the ability to emit energy is a genetic kink which people are born with, or most of the time, born without. It, along with all of the spiritual gifts, are genetically conceived, not endowed by an unseen person, which is why even the new codex admits that God is powerless to take them away from people. The ability to speak incoherently (jabber) is also a genetic kink which all people possess; nevertheless, this natural law isnt understood but will be investigated and classified. This particular practice will serve as a smoking gun, as it is the evidence given for the resurrection of the master as well as the inclusion of Gentiles into the plan for salvation. It does not matter that most people who bow their knee in modern times do not practice speaking incoherently; the apostles did, and this particular phenomenon was the reason they believed the master was alive as a spirit, even if his body was lifeless. 5. Pool of Matter Okay, so this is the tricky one and it involves matters of prophecy, which includes, for sake of simplicity, the other spiritual gifts of communication and special insight as well. This author is convinced, due to this themes consistent presence in all religions, codices, and traditions, that a man in one particular space and particular time may have some notion of a future occurrence in a different space and different time. But how? Well, I dont know. But this author does know that on the small level, people are connected to everything and literally swim in a pool of matter. If this author were to venture a guess, he would point out the following. For one, the rules change drastically once you delve into the very small and very large levels. So how does time function on the small level? Does it progress in the same, linear fashion as on the local level? This author will jump off the beaten path of established scientific knowledge to point out

something which is being investigated at present and only recently (theoretically) conceived. Again, the problem is your visible view from the local level; you only see the things which your eyes can perceive. But there are things all around you which you cant perceive. Imagine smashing two eggs together. What happens? The eggs shells are crushed, the yolk spills out, but all of the original materials are still present. This is what happens on the visible level. But on the small level, if you cause two atoms to collide at a very high speed, some particles from the atom disappear. They literally go somewhere else. Thats solid science right there, at least mathematically speaking, and is undergoing actual testing as this author writes. So where do such particles go? This part is theoretical. Its been conceived that such particles pass out of your dimension and enter another one. Where is this dimension? Possibly right next to you; you just cant see it. And these particles originate from another dimension and pass through yours and continue on to another one. Thats why the forces in your dimension are either stronger or weaker than each other; some are just passing through on their way to another. A small child can pick up a basketball. Why? Because gravity is weak compared to the other forces as it may only be a visitor in your dimension. What is in these alternative dimensions? No one knows. But you might know because you might be in these alternative dimensions, along with everyone and everything else that is in this one. Thats where the theory ends. Now, this author wants to use the above-stated theory and connect it with another. Perhaps your concept of time is entirely wrong. You think of days, weeks, months, years, and whatnot, because of the rising and setting of the sun, which can be perceived with the visible eye. But for a moment, do not think of time in linear fashion, or like one minute after another, from start to finish, until you reach an hour. Instead, think of every moment (which this author will define as a second, though in theory, every moment would be much, much shorter than a second), as a picture, kind of how one second of video actually consists of 29 pictures called frames which are sequenced rapidly to form a second of video. And just like a frame is a fully formed image which is simply combined with other frames to form video footage, every second is its own, fully-formed, aspect of reality, or dimension. And particles from last second pass into this second and into next second, but not in linear fashion, but in a fluid, simultaneous fashion. Why? Because in this theory, everything in the universe which has ever happened, is happening, and will happen, happen at the same time. When is that time? Right now, indefinitely. You are just unaware of it precisely because it happens simultaneously. But perhaps some very unique and very rare people can sense other dimensions, somehow, someway, on the small level, precisely because its the present, not the future, and there is a fluidity between these moments, or dimensions, that is not yet understood. Such gifted individuals dont see into the future; they see across time but perceive it as the future because thats how the local level mind understands it. In this line of thought, the universe isnt a big deal; its just a moment, or a grain of sand on the ocean of many other universal moments. If this theory is combined with another theory which has been recently conceived, then the universe is only a moment old when it collides with another universe, which causes another moment, or universe, and the process continues, indefinitely and nearly simultaneously. The universe only seems to be some billions of years old within the linear framework but it may only be one simultaneous moment old. Is this possible? Who knows? This isnt the right answer but this is the right direction. Think small. Thing big. Thats where the answers reside. But stop this running around like cavemen, thinking that anything without a visible cause is animated by a ghost. Plus, the small and big levels are way more interesting than anything youll find in the codices, and pretty soon, the things on these levels will be vital to your descendants survival. Its time to start focusing upon them. When? At the only time that actually exists: Now!

G. The Reinterpretation Toolbox

Religions with authorized codices have survived in circumstances which differ from the original by changing the meaning of the text to accommodate the visible resources in whichever unique culture it resides. Christianity has done this more than any other religion because of the extreme circumstances in which the new codex was written, namely under the authority of Rome and facing intense persecution, which produced the eternal survival trait. Certain subdivisions in this system, such as the Catholics, Orthodox, and Anglicans, have accounted for adaptation by making on-going revelation a tenet of their traditions via the same source which wrote the new codex: the ever-present church. Such claims are quite comical, as the actions of the church throughout history have consistently flaunted the commands of the master, but at least they admit to adapting, albeit in their own, spiritualized way. The Protestant subdivision claims that the book, and only the book, is the authority on matters of faith and practice, and have been forced to reinterpret the meaning of the Bible in continuous manner to survive in circumstances very different than the original. How do the religious ministers in this tradition accomplish this feat? By using The Reinterpretation Toolbox, which this author has delineated and explained below. One problem with modern religious ministers is they are accustomed to the importance of exactness. For instance, the difference between the placement of a single decimal point entirely changes a figure, such as the difference between .09 and .9, for instance. If you are talking about the percentage of a substance in, say, medication, then the incorrect placement of a single decimal point could kill you. The importance of and familiarity with exactness is a tenet of modern cultures and the religious ministers carry this mentality into consideration of the codices. Even within the context of revealed truth, the importance of any passage in the codices is found on the paragraph level, not the sentence level, and certainly not the word level. This simply means the author isnt communicating words. He is using words to communicate an idea. And that idea is grasped paragraph by paragraph, and really, chapter by chapter and book by book, not sentence by sentence, and certainly not word by word. This is true of all literature, not just codices. But having repudiated every authority besides themselves, the religious ministers have used their modern minds to interpret the codices and treated words, which, like atoms, are the miniscule building blocks of a larger idea found on the paragraph level, like decimal points, where single words and sentences are given a much greater significance than they ought to be. The result? A reinterpretation. The beauty of the new codex is that the authors are all writing sermons themselves, even when they are telling stories, such as in the gospels. The Bible preaches by itself! All you have to do is read the damn thing and it works by itself. Why? Because that is exactly what the original audience did! The Bible is a collection of letters from various apostles to churches. Upon receiving the letters, the local pastor would open up the letter and read it to the congregation. But the religious ministers have cut up the various sermons in the Bible, using sentences and words to create entirely foreign meanings than was intended by the author. Why do they use words and sentences? Because if they read the whole passage, or even more, the whole chapter, the author tells you himself what he means This is precisely why you rarely hear full passages being read by the religious ministers. Instead, they treat the codices like a game of hop-scotch, saying, Jump to this verse, then Jump to that verse, then Go over to that verse. What are they doing in these moments? They are reinterpreting the Bible. You would never open a book and read it by jumping around to various pages. Never. Even if you were not going to sit down and read the whole book, you would at least start at the beginning of the chapter so you could understand what the author is saying at a particular page. But this jumping around is what the religious ministers do regularly. Why? Because if they read the full

chapter, what the author says is either too difficult to do or too boring to get excited about. So the religious ministers water things down and liven things up by connecting the dots for modern believers. The result? A new religion. Modern Christianity. Congratulations! 1. Tool #1: Symbolism Symbolism is the primary tool the religious ministers use to reinterpret the new codex. Basically, they portray the commands of the new codex as representing something other than what is clearly stated. They treat the codices like direction signs, where a verse points them to a different meaning which lies somewhere else. When the religious ministers use Tool #1, they usually dont use the word symbolism, but often say things such as: a. What this verse means is... b. The principal is... c. What (the author) is saying is that... d. This represents... e. This symbolizes... Now, listen to what this author is saying and what he is not saying. There is a place, within the context of revealed truth, for expounding upon the teachings in the new codex. For instance, some of the theological matters discussed by the leader of the new followers can be quite complex for even the most learned of men. But the problem is the vast majority of the new codex isnt complex, especially the gospels. Its quite simple. The master says, in plain speech, Do this or Dont do that and also tells you what you will get in paradise for obeying. The authors even tell you themselves when he is talking symbolically, calling such things parables, amongst other figurative cues. So why dont the religious ministers simply read a full passage of a gospel, reread the verses which talk about what they must do, reread the verses which talk about what they get if they do it, then simply declare to their congregations, Now go do it! You will be rewarded in paradise! For many reasons. But the main reason is that if they simply read what the master taught, they would see they cant obey. Why? Because its too difficult. Why? Because their circumstances are different. So the religious ministers take the commands of the master and use them as road signs. Do you stop at a road sign? No, a road sign points you in the direction of wherever your destination is. In this same way, the religious ministers dont say, This is what the master said. Now do it. They say, This is what the master said then What he means is... or The principal is... or any number of things besides, Obey. Why? Because the actual commands of the master are untenable to people in different circumstances and make absolutely no sense to moderns. So the religious ministers attempt, mostly in very honest and sincere fashion, to use the actual commands as road signs for modern believers, basically trying to divine what the master would do if he were in their circumstances. Now, if you were to take that last sentence out of this essay and give it to a religious minister, they would agree that this is what they do. This is what they are trained to do. This is what the religious ministers have done in every generation since this system began. But what is the problem with this practice? This is the problem, and in fact, the most importance sentence in this entire essay: The present circumstances are so different than the original one that doing the logical, rational and normal thing in nearly any situation causes you to disobey the plainly stated commands of the master. Its really that simple. Most of the religious ministers are honest people and their congregants are sincere, hard-working folk. The problem is they are under the impression that the logical, rational, and normal thing is synonymous with the tenets

of their system, and when they read the commands of the master, they think to themselves, What the master said cant be what he really meant. Why? Because the commands of the master dont make sense. Why? Because the commands of the master are damaging to natural survival. If you obey them, you will lose your job, house, family, friends, and everything else. Why? Because natural survival was not an option to the people to whom it was originally written, causing eternal survival to become the personality and commands of God. Now, that is not a problem. In fact, it worked. They survived. But what is the problem? Because it worked, the ancient religious authorities projected what was needed in one circumstance as the eternal personality and commands of God. Now that they find themselves in different circumstances, they cant go back and melt what their forefathers froze because something so sudden would constitute a new religion. So they gradually change the meaning in every generation and in every circumstance, even though the master makes what he wishes as clear as day. The very notion of obeying Jesus actual commands would be supremely controversial in modern times; those who bow their knee would fight tooth and nail against the idea of doing what Jesus actually said. Thats how ridiculous these people are. Even more, they are trying to reconcile two things: being normal and being obedient. But what they fail to realize is that the master and his followers werent normal nor were they everyday members of their society. They started and furthered what was a very radical movement with a radical ideology, which, of course, is why they all got killed! This zealous message was quite simple: Whatever your body and society wants, do the opposite. This was not church. This was an allconsuming, everyday, every moment thing, where your entire life, defined as all of your free time and every free dollar beyond the basic necessities, was committed to furthering this message. Its not really hard to comprehend. Simply write out, or cut and paste, every quotation of the master from the new codex. Place the quotes on the left-hand side of a paper or document. Then put a Yes/No column on the right-hand side of the same paper or document. Then go through each quotation and put a yes or no if those who bow their knee in this society have fulfilled the individual commands of the master. The religious ministers will try to say they have fulfilled the adjective commandments, such as love, kindness, and meekness, amongst others, which, of course, cant be objectively measured. But morality isnt generalities. Its the specifics, or the do this or dont do that. The master himself teaches that fulfilling the specific commands proves that you have fulfilled the adjective commandments, namely to love the unseen person and your neighbor. They will then say, But these commands were given to specific people, not us. Hahahaha. True. But the entire new codex was written to different people, not you. They have hacked into someone elses email account but whenever they see a command they dont like, they say, Well, this isnt my email account so it doesnt apply to me. Ill just forward paradise to my own account and leave sacrifice where I found it. They will then say, But these commands are symbolic. As discussed, these commands were not symbolic to the original audience. These commands were descriptions of what the original audience was already doing and experiencing. Thats why the masters words are similar in each gospel account but do not exactly agree. The first three authors were using quotations from a shared primary source but modified them to make the quotes very specific to the circumstances being faced by their different audiences. Even more, the desire to satisfy distinct audiences resulted not just in modified quotations amongst the first four books, but the addition or subtraction of parts of the narrative, all designed for its specific audience, as the religious thinkers will readily concur. Second, does the new codex say these commands are symbolic? No, it does not; only the modern religious ministers say that. But for the sake of argument, what are these commands symbolic of? Does the new codex say what these commands are symbolic of? No, the new codex doesnt say they are

symbolic at all. It just gives the command. And who is in charge of saying which are symbolic and which are not? And who is in charge of what the symbolic ones are symbolic of? The answer: you are. Symbolism is just the religious ministers way of saying, These things are too difficult to do. The master must have meant something else. Yes, they are too difficult if you are rich, first and accepted but they read like an autobiography if you are last, poor, and rejected. Its clear that those who bow their knee do not obey the commands of the master. Again, they fight like hell against the idea of doing what Jesus actually said. So why do they still pretend to bow their knee to a man who demanded that his followers reject the desires of the body and society? Because religious systems have never been about God; theyve always been about people. Religion simply gives their PEs authority. Their personal experiences, which form their beliefs, are transformed from human experiences to ones caused by unseen people, becoming the only correct ones. This is why each church and/or denomination think that they are the most correct and their brothers in other churches and/or denominations and cousins in other subdivisions are somewhere between flawed and downright pagans. This is why they have made visible resources, not the rejection of natural power, wealth, and status, as the centerpiece of their modern system and the proof that God is in their midst. They have made the same local logic mistake that Abraham made. Abraham saw unseen people instead of unseen laws because he was familiar with people, not laws. Modern believers have built a seen kingdom instead of an invisible kingdom because they are familiar with the seen, not the unseen. The new codex repudiates every aspect of the natural body and society, but not because every aspect is innately evil. Instead, the new codex draws the line between good and evil based upon durability. Simply put, all eternal things are to be clung to and all temporary things are to be wholly rejected. What was temporary? The physical body and society. Both were to be replaced by the redeemed body and the Kingdom of God upon the return of the master. This is why all of the desires of the physical body and society were to be rejected. But those who bow their knee have done nearly the opposite and they devote nearly every moment of every day and nearly every penny of every dollar in building a visible kingdom on both personal and societal levels. Why do they do the opposite of what the new codex teaches? Is it because they are evil? Not any more than average. Is it because they are immoral? Not any more than average. Its because they are human! Humans do what is familiar to them and those who bow their knee are familiar with the visible. They rationalize that building a visible society that bows its knee to their unseen person is a good thing, not realizing that this is precisely what the master warned against because the actions that ensure natural survival are almost always the opposite of the actions which ensure eternal survival. The whole message of the new codex is that you cant have both the visible and invisible. You have to choose one or the other. Building a visible society that bows its knee is very logical. It makes sense. Its just not Biblical. Even more, what do modern religious authorities call small groups of people who find themselves in the circumstance of being rich, first, and accepted but obey the actual commands of the master and purposely make themselves poor, last, and rejected? The same thing the ancient religious authorities of Judaism called the small group of original followers: a cult. In the same way as it began, Christianity now derives its authority from a book which repudiates it. Thats the the bad part about adapting; you survive, but after time, you become something entirely new and unrecognizable, even if you go by the same name. 2. Tool #2: Suit-casing Whenever a religious minister starts talking about one word in particular, you know he is reinterpreting the Bible. Its really that simple. Its fine to believe that every word in the Bible is not just inspired, but

even more, directly dictated by God, which, of course, isnt inspiration, but even if God selected every single word, as discussed, the codices, like every other book in the whole world, communicates on the paragraph level. Even if you think the Bible is different than any other book, notice how the authors of the new codex use the old codex; do they single out a particular word, saying Wow, look at this word. I will spend the next 10 minutes talking about it? No, they do not. They use sentences and passages from the old codex, not individual words, so its clear that within the context of revealed truth, God doesnt expound upon individual words from the Bible. This author has already explained why the religious ministers are convinced that one word in particular is important and say things such as: a. In the original language, this word means... b. Look at this word. Now flip over to (another verse, usually in a different book of the Bible) because this word is used again... c. This word has various meanings, such as... d. Many times, the religious ministers just take a word in the Bible, such as soul, then infuse it with a (usually modern) meaning that is entirely foreign to the Bible. For one, if you hear a seen authority talking about the original languages, or Greek or Hebrew, that is nearly an absolute (95% of the time) way to know that he is reinterpreting the Bible, and probably on accident! Why? This author will explain. Just because someone communicates well in their own language doesnt mean they understand linguistic rules. Why? Because its his or her own language! You learn your own language, especially orally, before you understand the rules. So if a religious minister actually knew the original languages of the Bible, he would also know that individual words are not significant in and of themselves and wouldnt talk about them from the pulpit. Simply referring to the original languages of the Bible is (nearly) an automatic way to know that a reinterpretation is forthcoming. This author says nearly because some religious thinkers are also religious ministers and they may refer to the languages and use them correctly. Thats the 5%. It would be easier to castigate the practice entirely but this author is too honest to do so. Now, how do the religious ministers misuse the original languages. By saying thing such as Now, this word means... and then listing more than one meaning, or by saying, This word also means, and rendering another meaning. In fact, there is actually a full Bible translation which lists the various meanings in the margins of important words in the text. Why is this misuse? Think back to 5th grade. How many meanings does a word have? Many, perhaps, all of which can be found in the dictionary. But how many meanings does a word have in a particular sentence? Only one. What do we call a sentence which contains a word that carries two meanings that both work in the same sentence. A pun. How many puns are in the Bible. Zero! And the religious ministers reinterpret the Bible by replacing the singular meaning of a word with a different meaning, and at times, many meanings, then take that foreign definition and, well, are off to the Reinterpretation Races. Its not just misusing the original languages; its thinking that individual words, and not the full passage, are significant. Even saying, This word means... then giving the correct, singular definition may not be a reinterpretation, but its misuse because the full passage, not individual words, carries the authors intent. But they cant read the full passage because it rebukes what they are about to say! So they focus on words and individual sentences and use them as building blocks for reinterpretation. And no, the spirit doesnt assist you in using Greek or Hebrew any more than he assists you in speaking Italian or French, so drop that nonsense. Pointing out the usage of the same word (such as grace) in two separate verses, especially when the word is being used by two different authors, and absolutely when the

references are in separate codices, is misuse, because even within the context of inspiration, the authors use common words differently, which is only a problem if you are a modern thinking that a decimal is a decimal. Interestingly, even some of the thinkers get tripped over this as well. One of the primary ways religious ministers reinterpret the Bible is by breathing secular meanings which are foreign to the new codex into individual words. For instance, Modern Christians constantly refer to God as their friend. Okay, so lets break this down. For one, you are unaware that you are Suitcasing your modern idea of friendship with the masters idea of friendship. To you, your friends are your buddies. You know, the people who you hang out with when you eat, drink, and make merry. But this isnt the masters idea of a friend. How does this author know this? Its in the Bible. John 15, to be precise. The master talks about friendship, and to summarize, he explains his concept of friendship. A friend, to the master, is someone to whom he has explained what he received from the father, who then proceeds to obey it by imitating Jesus example. This author would like to point out that this particular passage is immediately followed by a teaching about persecution, where the master explains that if his followers obeyed him, they would receive the same hatred from the world that he received. According to this passage, the only difference between a friend and a servant is that he first explains why something must be done to a friend then commands him to do it, instead of just giving the command, as he would to a servant. Those who bow their knee are supposed to be his servants, but as he explains why he has given them such commands, he calls this type of servant, a friend. The leader of the new followers agrees with this author, mind you. This is why he continually calls himself the servant and/or slave of the master, not a friend, and certainly not a buddy, which is what those who bow their knee mean, for they say, I walk and talk with Jesus on their way to disobey him. This author wont give the leader of the new followers numerous references to being a servant/slave of God but have given you the reference to being a friend. Why? Because there is only one reference to such friendship in the new codex but too many to bother counting which refer to being a servant/slave. Does this matter? the religious ministers will inquire? Yes, it does. Everything matters, or havent you been paying attention? Suppose a man and his wife go to dinner on a Friday night, and during the course of the meal, he mentions a new secretary who just started working at his companys office. In such a scenario, how would his wife respond? By simple acknowledgment, such as a Oh, thats nice. But what if during the course of the dinner, he continually mentions this new employee? How would his wife respond? She may or may not respond verbally, but she would take a mental note of this new secretary, because she knows that this woman is important to her husband. How does she know? Because he mentioned her several times, either on purpose to agitate her, or unconsciously because he is thinking of her often. Frequency matters. The new codex continually refers to servanthood, but it refers, once, to friendship. And even though the masters idea of a friendship is a servant to whom he explains his purpose, they ignore the servanthood and the implied obedience but continually speak of being a friend, Suitcasing the term with their own cultures idea of friendship, which is similar to being a buddy. And wouldnt such a friend or buddy want you to have the visible resources which you desire? Certainly. Its only logical, right? And the philosophy of Jesus Christ lives on. 3. Tool #3: Temporarily Convert To Judaism This author has already discussed the religious ministers usage of the old codex. Its interesting to note that after the death of the master, his followers were considered just another sect of Judaism, and of course, the master himself and all of his original followers were Jews. Nevertheless, they adhered to

using the old codex to show how its physical promises were fulfilled in the eternal promises of the new codex. But the religious ministers refuse to adhere to this inspired usage of the old codex. In a very literal sense, they transform their churches into synagogues because Judaism, not Christianity, is being practiced in such moments, which is the religion this author thinks these people actually aspire to be. 4. Tool #4: Simply Ignore Parts This tool is kind of self-explanatory. If the average religious minister cut out each verse he taught upon in a given year, he would still have about 90% of the verses in his new codex still remaining. Its not just because he only uses individual verses and words to create his reinterpretation, and not just because 60% of his teachings come from the old codex. Its because many parts of the new codex are simply untenable. So they just ignore it. Problem solved. 5. Tool #5: Its Cultural Many of the religious ministers try to pass of the untenable parts of the new codex by saying, Its cultural or That was how things were back in those days, not realizing that every verse in the new codex is cultural. Does the new codex say, This part is cultural so feel free to ignore it. No, it does not. So how does one determine which parts are Cultural, feel free to ignore, and Cultural, but if you do not believe it, you will roast in fire for eternity. The next time the religious ministers say, Its cultural or Back in those days... please remind them that virgin births and resurrections, amongst many other elements, were also very cultural, so whatever they plan on doing to the cultural verses, please do to the latter as well. 6. Tool #6: It works! Some religious ministers try to pass off their reinterpretations by saying that the viability of their words are supported by their efficacy. But how can you tell if something works? By having a vision and seeing the number of crowns or mansions being added to your pile in paradise? No. Then how? By something visible. Like what? Like resources, or people, money, or power. If a message assists you in becoming first, rich, or accepted, then it might work but its not Christian because Jesus commands that his followers reject visible resources on earth in lieu of eternal ones in heaven. But if it works in the sense that it helps you obey the commands of the master or assists you in evangelism or discipleship, then within the context of revealed truth, thats fine. 7. Tool #7: God told me... Some religious ministers use spiritual phenomenon to support their reinterpretations, normally saying things such as God told me... or something of that nature. First, this constant reference to the utterance of deity, even within the context of revealed truth, is probably one of the most irresponsible and downright vile aspects of Modern Christianity. Whenever you see God speaking directly to a person in the codices, it is an event of epic proportions. The codices themselves are portrayed as a record of the rare, precious words of God in time and space, but even the rank-and-file amongst those who bow their knee in modern times regularly claims to receive direct, quotable communication from God. Within the context of revealed truth, this is nothing short of blasphemy! Do these people realize what they are saying? Have they no honor? Do they not understand the weight of their words? Must they rape and defile everything? Within the context of revealed truth, whenever God speaks directly to a person in space and time, it always changes history. For instance, God is portrayed as speaking to Peter about the

status of Gentiles and to Paul about his own conversion. What is the result? The world is changed because the codices teach that Gods words carry a weight and authority of which these people have no concept. Why? Because God is a king! What is the words of a king called? A decree! But when God speaks to these Modern Christians, what is the result? Absolutely nothing. If these people are actually in constant contact with a higher power, then the only logical thing would be for them to prove it. Simply ask God something that you couldnt know apart from him. Something. Anything. But all of the transmissions they receive are very, very local and very, very personal of the sort that they can easily deduced on their own. And most of the transmissions they receive from God are not supported by the new codex or is in direct contradiction of the words of the master, which is why they refer to an alternative authority which they conveniently control. But their claims should be translated, not debated. Using the Gibberish key, simply remove God and replace it with I and/or we and every word they utter will make perfect sense. They view the universe as being a system ran by unseen people and thus perceive the dialogue which takes place in their natural minds as being a conversation between them and God. But does it never occur to such people that even a 30 second conversation with God would literally shake the earth (not to mention their minds)? This is how those who bow their knee can know, within the context of revealed truth and supported by both codices, that God is speaking to them: If you have been knocked off your feet and terror has gripped your heart, then its possible, though unlikely, that you are interacting with a higher being. If not...then its you, silly. 8. Tool #8: Other Types Of Morality The religious ministers and those who bow their knee frequently refer to other moral codes to justify their natural desires. This is very effective because it largely goes unnoticed, as what they are saying is, indeed, moral, but is simply a tenet of another moral code and not of the new codex, while they simultaneously claim to only adhere to the morality of the new codex. Yes, there is more than one type of morality. In fact, there are five types of morality: personal, societal, human, old codex, and new codex. All of the five types of morality have one goal: survival and progression to thrival and domination of its system, whether that be personal survival (which will also include, for sake of simplicity, familial survival), the survival of ones particular society, the survival of humanity as a whole, natural survival of the old codex, or eternal survival of the new codex. The problem in this society is that everyone constantly haggles over what is moral and immoral but have not taken the time to define the moral code to which one refers. For instance, those who bow their knee love their society because it ensures their personal survival and thrival The actions which promote a strong and prosperous society is almost always the opposite of the actions which promote eternal survival. If the king or leader of any society obeyed the words of the master, such a society would be quickly eliminated. This is not because the actions that promote the survival of a society are immoral; it is simply because the objectives of natural and eternal survival are different. But when forced to choose between eternal survival and natural survival (either personal or societal), those who bow their knee always choose natural survival over that of the new codex. And there is absolutely nothing wrong with that! Yet, as they are part of a philosphy loosely associated with some carpenter, they feel the need to justify their moral selection with the codices and accomplish this by keeping the book but changing the meaning.
9. Tool #9: Cut & Paste

This has already been discussed, but whenever religious ministers jump around the codices, saying Go to this verse then Read this one then Go over to that verse, then this is a surefire sign that a

reinterpretation is forthcoming. Why? Because the authors of the new codex always tell you the meaning of a particular passage in the verses that come before and after. The only reason the religious ministers have to jump around, especially when only one or two verses are read from each passage at a time, is because they are creating a meaning that isnt in the Bible. For instance, the master says, Seek my kingdom first and all these things will be given to you. But what does all mean? All you have to do is walk back two scriptures and all is defined: all is food, water, and clothes. The next verse says Dont worry about these things because thats what the sinners do. Yet, those who bow their knee take this scripture and do the exact opposite, considering it in isolation and packing the word all like a Suitcase with whatever natural desires which fill their hearts, and instead of ignoring these things like the verse before commands, all they do is worry about it, begging and pleading with their unseen person for all, even though its not the all he was referring to, and even the all he referred to he also said to ignore, for he would provide it. 10. Tool #10: The Early Church This author will end this section by providing the one tool which is most important to Biblical interpretation, which, of course, is the one tool that is never used by the religious ministers in the Protestant subdivision: The writings of the early church. Now, imagine you are tasked with writing a historic account about Pearl Harbor. Who or what would you use as your primary source? The people who witnessed the attack, of course. Although there may be other legitimate sources of information, the people closest to any event are always the most important. So who were the people closest to the life and ministry of Jesus? His disciples, of course. Thats why their writings are considered scripture. But who were the people closest to the lives and writings of the apostles? Their disciples, of course, who were the leaders of the churches which scripture portrays the apostles starting across the Roman empire. The name of the leaders of the churches started by the apostles? The Church Fathers. And if you want to know what the writings of the apostles mean, its best to start with the people who knew the apostles, just as the apostles are the best source for Jesus life and ministry. The writings of the Church Fathers are the best way to ascertain the way in which the original audience understood their own mail. Why? Because they were the original audience! These writings must be examined by those who bow their knee, not by reviewing a few quotes selected by those trying to prove a point but by reading the full text of all of the writings of the Fathers of the Early Church, not as inspired scripture but as a far more qualified commentator than any of the present religious authorities. This author dares those who bow their knee to let those closest to the events of the new codex tell you how they understood their own mail. Even if you adhere to the ridiculous notion that the church went bad in Emperor Constantines time, then simply read the testimony of the Apostolic Fathers, whose ministries came before this era. Why? Because each of these men knew the apostles: take Clement of Rome, who was ordained by Peter, or Polycarp of Smyrna, who was a disciple of John, or Ignatius of Antioch, who was a disciple of John, ordained by Peter, and may have even met Jesus as a child. And upon reading the testimony of the pastors who walked and talked with the apostles, you will see, as clear as day, that those who bow their knee in modern times are certainly religious, but they certainly are not Christians. Tools of Interpretation: Conclusion This author has absolutely no desire to haggle over any matters of Biblical interpretation with those who bow their knee. Why? Because interpretation is not visibly objective and cannot be fully proved right or wrong. But what is visibly objective? The natural laws which animate so-called spiritual phenomenon,

which, with the correct equipment, can be seen, measured, and proven to be entirely natural. Let the religious authorities haggle over the past; this author has written this document to explain the natural processes behind religion but will not dwell on the claims of cavemen, but will instead endeavor to demonstrate that everything in the present is 100% natural.

H. Jesus: So What Really Happened?

Statistics show the vast majority of people in this present society, as well as many others across the world, believe the master is the savior and the son of God. If one were to ask such an individual, Why do you believe the master is the savior (or messiah) and the son of God? they would respond with statements such as He died for our sins, He rose again from the dead, and The new codex says he is. But the explanation people give today is very different than the explanation people gave during the time the master was alive. Why? Because some people came to believe that he was the savior and the son of God before He died for sins, Rose again from the dead, and before The new codex was even written. Let us examine the reasons why people who were alive during the time of the master believed he was the savior and the son of God. This author shall proceed by making reference to the codices, and only to the codices, as those who bow there knee insist. During the time the master was live, there was a plethora of religious groups, sects, and traditions operating in and around his physical tribe of Israel. Similar to modern times, where there are churches on every street corner in some areas, in his day, religious teachers and preachers advocated a variety of causes, from secular interpretation of the old codex to military extremism, and everything in between. As a result, when the master arrived on the scene and began his ministry, he was just one of many people advocating one of many different religious causes. The majority of these teachers and preachers did not minister in the places where knees were bowed, but like the master, expounded their beliefs in the public domain, whether near the markets, along the sea, near the the towns well, or any other place where a crowd of people could be found, as they, like the master, traveled from city to city and town to town throughout their tribes geographical territory. Seeing a traveling teacher or preacher in a public area would have been a common site to everyone, similar to the sight of a guitar player or some sort of performer is a staple of daily life for those who live in large, metropolitan areas. The normal reaction to such a traveling teacher, similar to the reaction to a guitar player, would instinctively have been to ignore the person, as one was likely in a public place for a purpose, and though each teacher advocated one of an array of causes within the context of the old codex, the typical person would have heard enough of them throughout his or her lifetime to know that one teacher was probably no different than the other. Perhaps on occasion, in the same manner as with a guitar player, one would hear a teacher saying something interesting, funny, or inspiring, and would pause to listen for a moment, perhaps even giving a donation to assist him in his travels. On other occasions, one would stop and listen to the entire sermon, perhaps even asking questions after the teacher had finished. This was a daily occurrence for the people who lived during the time of the master; seeing traveling teachers was very common and a sight every person in his tribe had witnessed since childhood. After seeing an untold number of traveling teachers advocating all sorts of causes, the typical man is in a public area on a particular day and sees the master. Perhaps he sees a growing crowd around this teacher

and draws close to hear what is drawing the interest of the crowd. Now this is important. After listening to the master, why does he walk away believing that the master is the savior and the son of God? Its not because the master died for his sins. Why? Because the master is still alive. Its not because the master rose again from the dead? Why? Because the master hasnt died yet. Its not because the new codex teaches that he is the savior and the son of God. Why? Because the new codex had not yet been written. This cannot be denied. So what is it about the master that causes such a person to stop what he is doing to listen to yet another traveling teacher? What is it about this man that inspires a person to not proclaim the master an enlightened teacher or a great prophet but to believe that the master has a historically unique relationship with the supreme unseen person? The new codex repeatedly tells us the reason why some people who encountered the master came to believe that he was the savior and the son of God. The new codex states that the master was preaching and teaching, not as the established religious figures of his day, but as one with authority, and he was healing all of those who were sick and demon possessed. Again and again, the new codex tell us he did these things in such a manner that the crowds exclaimed, This must be the messiah. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex states. But the old codex clearly stated what to expect in the coming savior: he was to be a military hero and a great king who would reestablish the tribes national independence and prominence. This expectation had been passed down from generation to generation throughout the ages and even poor and uneducated people had a general understanding of the type of man to expect. As a result of his powerful ministry, a group of men who believed the master was the savior and the son of God became his original followers, or disciples. This original group of followers believed that the masters ministry was a precursor to his ascent to the throne, as the new codex states they repeatedly asked him when he would restore their tribes kingdom and sovereignty, as they were under the rule of the Roman empire. They asked him about this national restoration at the beginning, middle, and end of his ministry. This cannot be denied. As the new codex states, shortly before the masters death, the leader of this group of original followers rebuked Jesus, saying that he would not be killed. In addition, the leader of this group of original followers attempted to protect the master when the Roman military sought to arrest him. Why? Because the original followers still held to the old codexs expectation of the messiah: military hero and a great king, not dying. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex states. After the master was put to death, the new codex says this group of original followers regrouped, as they feared for their own lives. So what happened at this meeting? First, the original followers believed the master was the savior and the son of God because of his authoritative teachings and incredible miracles. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex states. Second, they knew the old codex taught the messiah would be a military hero and great king. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex states. In this moment, the group of original followers had to make a decision. They could side with their personal experience, which told them that the master was the savior and the son of God, or they could side with the old codex, which told them that the real savior was a military hero and a king. They absolutely believed that he was the savior, which is why they followed him. But they also absolutely knew the old codex predicted a military hero and king, which is why they continually asked him about restoring their tribes kingdom as they followed him. Two absolutes. Two things which cannot be denied. The experience or the code. We all know what these original followers decided to do, and not long after this initial meeting, they emerged, proclaiming that the master was now alive and risen from the dead. But the proclamation of the masters resurrection isnt even the matter at hand. Its not necessarily about the miracle of resurrection because the new codex portrays it as being a somewhat common phenomenon in those days. Instead, to be the savior and

the son of God, you have to be alive. And if you are dead, the only way to be alive again is to resurrect. And the larger point is not about matters of death and resurrection because becoming alive again is just the starting point, at least according to the new codex. To be the savior and the son of God, the master had to meet the criteria of the old codex. What do you do if you absolutely believe the master is the savior but he absolutely does not fit the criteria of the old codex? What is to be done if your personal experience doesnt fit the code? Do you submit to the code and disband? No. You do what the original believers readily admit to doing: change the code, not in letter, but in meaning. Simply put, keep the old codex but change its interpretation, which is why in the new codex, they constantly say, This is what you thought the old codex meant; I am writing or preaching to tell you the real meaning. This cannot be denied, nor should it be denied by those who bow their knee. It wasnt denied by the original followers. Why? Because they had authorization which gave them the right to change the meaning of the old codex. They were given a key by which they opened the lockbox of the old codex, removed the military hero and natural king understanding which had been passed down from generation to generation based upon Abrahams agreement with the unseen person, and inserted the understanding of a spiritual savior in its place. When the original followers emerged from their last meeting to proclaim the master had been resurrected, what did they submit to the public? A resurrected master? No. He was not present when they emerged. The new codex portrays him as appearing only to the original followers then literally flying vertically into the sky. So what did they present in lieu of the resurrected master? A miracle. More specifically, a spiritual phenomenon. From the moment they emerged from their last meeting to this very day, two thousand years have passed and the master has not presented himself as resurrected. Yet, the majority of people in this society and many others across the world continue to believe he is the savior and the son of God. Why do they believe this even though he has not been seen for two millennium? What do they present as their proof that he is not, in fact, dead and gone, but rather, alive and returning? The same thing the original followers presented on the day they emerged from their last meeting: spiritual phenomenon. Spiritual phenomenon is a very large category but simply refers to something that is inspired by the spirit of God. As the master, who had already flown vertically into the sky, was not present to make account for his own resurrection, it was spiritual phenomenon which provided the evidence that the original followers were still connected to him. This cannot be denied. A basic reading of the new codex will show that words such as miracles, signs, wonders, authority, spirit, dreams, visions, and power are the proof that is given, over and over again by the master to prove his connection to the supreme unseen person and by the original followers to prove their connection to the resurrected master. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex states. Spiritual phenomenon gave them the authorization to change the meaning of the old codexs expectations of the messiah from a military hero and king to a spiritual savior. This cannot be denied nor should it be denied. The original followers didnt deny it. Why? Because spiritual phenomenon gave them authorization. It was the unseen persons way of okaying what they were saying and writing. And the rest, as they say, is history. Do you notice a trend here? The new codex says the people who personally witnessed the ministry of the master believed he was the savior, not because he was the expected military hero or king, but because of his works of spiritual phenomenon. The new codex says the original believers offered spiritual phenomenon as proof the master was resurrected. The new codex says the original followers were authorized by spiritual phenomenon to reinterpret the old codex and replace the understanding of messiah

as a military hero and king with a spiritual savior. The new codex says the original followers proclaimed their message to members of their tribe until spiritual phenomenon caused them to proclaim the master as the savior of the entire world. The new codex says the leader of the new followers lead the campaign to persecute the original followers until a spiritual phenomenon changed his mind. The new codex says the followers wrote inspired letters by means of spiritual phenomenon. In present times, spiritual phenomenon continues to be the foundation of this system, even amongst the traditions which reject the notion that miracles still happen in modern times, as all traditions rely upon the spiritual phenomenon which they believe led to the writing of the new codex. Spiritual phenomenon. Spiritual phenomenon. Spiritual phenomenon. This begs a very important question: Where is Jesus? No, not the words he is portrayed as inspiring in the new codex. No, not his spirit which is portrayed as filling the places where knees are bowed. No, not even his body of which he is portrayed as the head and those who bow their knee are members. Where is his physical body which was said to have been resurrected? He has yet to be seen publicly since he took his last breathe on the cross yet two thousand years later, the world is full of adherents who believe he is still alive and well. This begs another important question: If the master was truly resurrected from the dead, why didnt the original followers present him to their detractors? Why didnt they emerge from the room and say to the world, Here he is! Let us look at the story in the new codex once again. So the master is dead and the original followers regroup in fear for their own lives. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex says. When they regroup, what happens? (read: bodily resurrection claim deleted) They experience spiritual phenomenon in overwhelming fashion. This cannot be denied. This is what the new codex says. But they know the master is dead. Nevertheless, they cannot deny what they are experiencing. And what is the common denominator in every spiritual experience they have had thus far? The common denominator is these spiritual experiences happened while the master was alive. And they were very aware that despite the fact the masters body was still in the tomb, there was a way for him to be alive separate from his body. And thus, they emerged from the upper room and presented Jesus in the only form in which he still existed: as a spirit. And from that day until this one, the physical body of Jesus has not been seen or heard from. This is exactly why these same original followers were convinced, as clearly stated in the new codex, that the master would return in their lifetimes. Its not just about the timing of his return; the larger question is, Why did Jesus need to return in the first place? Why didnt he just stay on earth after being resurrected? Why? Because he wasnt bodily resurrected from the dead but they believed he was still alive as a spirit. And just as a resurrection was the only way to make a dead person alive again, a return was the only way to get a person who they believed was alive as a spirit back into a body. The belief in a return is the Bibles way of admitting that Jesus wasnt bodily resurrected to begin with. Thats why he had to return! Again, the authors of the new codice werent lying; they were exaggerating in an attempt to persuade. They believed he was alive as a spirit, but even in the midst of the overwhelming spiritual phenomenon (PE0), they knew they also needed something visible. Why couldnt they just be content with his spirit? For the same reason that modern believers have forsaken eternal survival entirely: both parties are more familiar with the visible than the invisible. His spirit was invisible. They wanted something they could see. They wanted something all of their critics, enemies, and detractors could see. Even more, they wanted something as visible as his public torture and crucifixion. Put yourself in their shoes. As the new codex states, they are having overwhelmingly powerful spiritual experiences so they were convinced he was still alive as a spirit. So what do you do if you know someone is alive as a spirit but his body is lying dead in a tomb? You do exactly what the new codex argues against

them doing. You do exactly what the new codex says was common knowledge at the time. You steal the body from the tomb. Why? Because a body is visible, and as all people are more familiar with the visible than the invisible, they knew no one would believe them if they said he was alive as a spirit yet his physical body was still in the tomb. This is exactly why they presented a spirit instead of a body when they emerged from their meeting. It was all they had to present. Can anyone reasonably say that these people would have chosen to forgo presenting a bodily resurrected master if it actually happened? Absolutely not. They were very anxious to present his spirit. Why not his physical body? They didnt present his because it was dead and discarded. But the spiritual phenomenon proved he was still alive, somewhere, somehow. You see this spiritual phenomenon decision making mentality best in the early followers 180 degree reversal on the notion of accepting Gentiles into the plan for salvation. They spent a significant amount of time following the death of the master proclaiming him as the savior of their physical tribe and they were persecuted horribly by the established religious authorities for doing so. But as soon as the first Gentile experienced this same phenomenon, they instantly threw the belief they had fought and died for out the window, concluding, This must mean God wants us to evangelize the Gentiles as well, and just like that, they reversed course and evangelized the Gentiles. This is exactly what these same people did when the master died. They regrouped out of fear and sadness over the death of their master, and when they met, they had powerful spiritual experiences and said, This must mean the master is alive as a spirit, and just like that, they reversed course and proclaimed he was resurrected. And when their enemies mocked, beat, and tormented them, asking If the master is really alive, then where is he? how did they reply? By saying, Hell be back in our lifetimes. Youll see! Youll see! He will punish you and reward us. They believed his victorious return in a new physical body would prove that he was still alive. The small matter of saying he was bodily resurrected and conveniently appearing only to those who were amongst his core group of followers wasnt a big deal. Why? Because they thought he was coming back in their lifetimes! They thought it was all going to be over very soon, as clearly stated in the new codex. And what would he do upon returning? Precisely what they absolutely wanted him to do, but he absolutely refused to do from the beginning: establish a visible kingdom. Simply put, this is false. Clearly, the master didnt return in their lifetimes, even though the new codex said he would, and he still has not been seen for 2,000 years. So what have the religious authorities done with the verses which clearly state the master would return in the lifetime of the original followers? Theyve kept the verses but changed the meaning. Why? Because the promise of an imminent return was extremely vital to their survival in the original circumstances because it was the primary reason for adherents to continue in the faith in the face of horrendous persecution but its damaging to their survival now because he actually has to physically return one day. Even more, just as the original followers genuinely believed he was still alive even though his body was dead, the modern religious ministers genuinely believe the master is still alive, even though he hasnt returned as promised. Why did both parties believe the master was and is still alive? Spiritual phenomenon. The original followers didnt ultimately need to present a bodily resurrected master in order to expand their system. Why? Because they still had his spirit which caused spiritual phenomenon. The modern religious ministers dont need to present a bodily resurrected master to continue to expand their system. Why? Because they still have his spirit which causes spiritual phenomenon. This will go on in some way, shape, or form for another 2,000 years unless the true foundation of this franchise, or spiritual phenomenon, is confronted. Why? Because an invisible wind cant be disproved but like the revelation of the unseen person, which must enter into time and space to be

visibly perceptible to visible people, this alleged wind must also enter into time and space to be tangible to physical people. Just as the personality and commands of every unseen person, upon examination, will prove to be survival traits for a specific circumstance falsely projected as the characteristics and desires of an invisible being, the spiritual experiences of physical people, upon examination, will prove to be entirely natural, not just in manifestation, but also in origin.

Appendix
Appendix: Part 1: More Information Part 2: Analogies of Reinterpretation Part 3: Religious Clean Words/Lingo Part 4: Gibberish: Religious Translation Appendix Part 1: More Information I SOLVED RELIGION was written by Gregory Pontha Stancil and reviewed by James Knowles. Copyright 2011. All Rights Reserved. For Permissions, please email isolvedreligion@gmail.com. As no works were used in the writing of I Solved Religion, no works are cited. Please visit Facebook.com/ isolvedreligion for more information. Appendix Part 2: Analogies of Religion/Reinterpretation

Analogy #1 Imagine you have been locked in a basement cellar which has a pantry in one corner and a door in another. On some days, the pantry contains food and water but on other days, the pantry is empty. You have never seen how the supplies are placed but without the food and water, you would die of hunger and thirst. As a result, you shout thank you when the pantry is full, slide notes under the door asking for supplies when its empty, and often attempt to stay awake all night so you can convey your request and gratitude in person. Your efforts are rewarded on the days the pantry is full which renews your motivation to show gratitude, but on the days the pantry is empty, you modify the manner in which you make requests in hopes of obtaining supplies. But what you dont know is this: the food and water is placed in the pantry by a machine, not a person, and it isnt influenced by acts of gratitude or requests, even if the placement of supplies occasionally corresponds with your actions and convinces you otherwise. This isnt a description of a hypothetical situation; this is a description of religion. Analogy #2 This ability to adapt is the singular reason why the religious ministers have survived, and even more, have thrived Their greedy desire to swallow up the entire world and everything and everyone in it far outweighs a commitment to a singular, unchanging moral code. Whenever their so-called morality nds itself in a new circumstance than the original, they toss it under the bus and devour the new opportunity. And after they have satised their appetites and their bellies are full, they patch up morality (because people are rushing over to see what happened), saying Oh, morality is okay. Hell be ne. Look, its the same ol morality. Dont worry people...go back to what you are doing. Nothing to see here. Then they rush the battered morality to the hospital and revive him with a blood transfusion along with all new organs and a new brain to boot. Upon recovery, they trumpet morality, parading him around the streets, saying Look, its the same! The same I tell you! Hes the same morality. Same code. Look at him. Same smile. Same crooked tooth. We are heirs of ancient promises! We are the chosen people! Bow down to our dear friend morality. Submit yourself to him as we have. Yes, it might be the same

body but you have gutted it and replaced it with whatever suits your fancy. Same book. Different Interpretation. Analogy #3 They married their codices but they have a mistress called Reinterpretation who they visit whenever they have a conict with their bride. Shes a wench and will do whatever they wish, and when she gives birth to their bastard child, they rush the baby over to take pictures with their wife in an attempt to give it legitimacy. But their bride cant protest because shes in a coma, and like most books, cant speak up to defend herself. So they take this beautiful picture of a sleeping wife and her slumbering child; a perfect portrait to send out for the holidays. The religious ministers also have a pet chameleon named after their wench called lil Reinterpretation. Regardless of where you put lil Reinterpretation, he always adapts to match his surroundings because if he stayed the same, predators would recognize him for what he is and he would be devoured. In this same way, the religious ministers change the interpretation of the codices to t the culture in which they reside so they may survive. Analogy #4 The Bible is not just one book, but rather a bookstore with many books inside of it, and the religious ministers are the clerks. They need you, the customer, to buy books in order to stay in business. And regardless of what you are looking for, they will nd you a book within the Bible, granted, of course, that enough people also want the same thing, or else you will be labeled as immoral, which is Gibberish for Not yet in high enough demand to justify ordering copies. Come back in 200-300 years and well likely have it in stock. So what do you want? To have slaves? This section of this book will justify it. Want to free slaves? No problem! Look at this part of another book. Sell your daughter as property? Got it! Here you go. Treat your daughter in the same manner as your son? Take this please. Save the unborn? Check this out. Kill anyone who might pose a threat to you? Hoped you would ask. Give everything to the poor? This book ought to do. Get rich or die trying? Man, this is a best seller. Save your marriage? Here you go! Divorce your spouse? Take a look at this one. Invade another country? 50% off! Work for peace? Plenty of copies left. Torture? Wipe the blood off rst. Treat people humanely? We only have the abridged version but its good. This bookstores slogan is As long as demand is high enough, we have a book for it. Thats why religious folk can never agree on anything. The codex is the same but their needs and desires are different. And which of these two do you think has to submit? So pick a book. Any book. We dont care as long as you pay us, vote for us, and recruit for us. Cash is preferred but checks and/or credit works too. Based upon the actions of the religious ministers, morality is what you need it to be. Then simply take the codices, old or new, doesnt matter because both are in the Bible, and then you select the part that agrees with what you need. If there are other parts that disagree with what you need, simply treat them like you treat the poor: Ignore them. Or better yet, hide it by calling it symbolic, which is religious for These cavemen were crazy. I cant do that. They must have been joking. If you cant nd a part that agrees with what you need, then at least nd a word in the codex which is also in the statement that you are trying to justify; then simply interject the word with your own meaning. Or simply string as many words or phrases together from as many books of the Bible as needed, sort of like the game Scrabble, in order to cook up the Biblical justication that you need. But most important, regardless of what you need to justify, be sure to get a majority of the people in your society to agree with your work of art, or else it will be called immoral. This is how the religious ministers have always done whatever they wanted throughout history and have adapted to whatever situation they found themselves. This author has to admit, at least in regards to survival, it can only be called one thing: genius. Pure and unadulterated genius. Fools they are; dummies, they are not.

Analogy #5 Its the greatest magic trick of all time and each generation has fallen for it hook, line, and sinker. Imagine the codices are like a kitchen cabinet with a trap door in the back. And whenever you need something, the religious ministers open up the trap door from the back and insert the item. You open up the front and say, Aha...here it is. And since its the same cabinent that youve seen your entire life, you do not grow suspicious when it always has what you need, even when what it previously provided you now consider evil and weird and what it will provide you now consider immoral. Same Book. Different Interpretation. Analogy #6 The religious ministers claim their morality is inspired by their unseen person but the interpretation is clearly inspired by the breath of Adam. They are like the cans that rattle behind the car which carries a married couple from their wedding. They are 25 years behind Adam and Eves wedding coach, making all sorts of noise, as they hate being dragged along, but the only alternative is to be cut loose and be fodder for the oncoming traffic. Adam, not their unseen person, determines their morality, and whenever Eve presents him a new ethic or newly discovered natural law, the religious ministers of that generation rage against it. But that generation passes, and a new one takes its place. This generation is then split between two camps: those who adapt and those who do not adapt. Those who adapt usually win out in legislative terms but those who do not adapt usually win in populous terms. But the third generation comes along and that which was immoral but legal becomes universally accepted, not because the third generation of religious ministers adapted, rather because they never disagreed. Why? Because they are more familiar with the ways of Adam than Abraham: they go to school, soccer practice, the shopping mall, and do all number of activities unrelated to Abraham, where they learn, for instance, that women are just as able as men and Blacks are just as equal as other races and the like. So when they look at their codices, which they consider moral, they are not trying to deceive you when they say, It says this but means something else, but are reconciling what they know to be moral with what the codices state, which they also believe are moral. Yet when faced with different ethical issues of their own times such as, they do not think of how their grandparents in a very literal, provable way, rejected what they now embrace but rather use their codices as swords in the same manner as their grandparents, even though most of the other ethics they espouse is not supported by their codices. Appendix Part 3: Religious Clean Words/Lingo One of the unrecognized practices of this system is the usage of clean words, or lingo, which is unique to places where knees are bowed, as has been discussed. The religious ministers avoid using words which have been soiled on the Personal Experience Tier System (PETS) so they can be harnessed to make very natural and very impossible things seem both spiritual and possible. They will continue to use clean words. Their survival depends upon it, as usage of commonly used words and phrases would cast an immediate shadow upon their claims and expose their beliefs as what they really are: impossible. There are many such words but here are just a few: 1. Overshadowed/Conceived = Impregnated/Knocked Up 2. Messiah/Savior = Rescuer 3. Repent = Say You Did Bad and Stop Doing Bad 4. Resurrection from the dead = Awake from the dead

5. Grace = Free Rescuing 6. Touching = Making Emotional 7. Guilt/Conviction = Bad 8. Joy = Happy 9. Peace = Calm 10. Works = Stuff You Have To Do 11. Presence of God = God Is Here 12. Holy spirit = Special Ghost 13. Tithe = Give Us 10% of Your Pretax Income 14. Soul/Spirit = The Real, Inner You 15. Worship = Singing Time 16. N/A in Modern Christianity = Obedience 17. Evangelism = Recruit Other People Into Our System 18. Discipleship = Teach Others To Act/Think Like Us 19. Faith = Believe Without Evidence/Believe By Ignoring Evidence 20. Sin = Bad Actions 21. Blessing = Good Things 22. Curse = Perpetually Bad Things 23. Demon = Bad Ghost 24. Angel = Good Ghost 25. Ascended = Flew Vertically

Appendix Part 4: Gibberish: Religious Translation Once inspiration is removed from the equation of the codices, Gibberish is the process of examining the commands of both codices to uncover the natural laws which were simplified, described, and attempted to be harnessed by influencing perceived unseen people. This may also be an effective tool for understanding other codices written in this time period as well. Gibberish: Old Testament For instance, in the times in which the old codex was written, the only concern was the survival of ones society and the only way to guarantee this, when confronted, was by killing all of your enemies. Not just the men who you would fight on the battlefield, but also the women so they couldnt bear more children (read: warriors), as well as the children so they wouldnt grow up and confront your children, remembering what you did to their parents. This notion was spiritualized as a command and cost the first king of Israel his day job, but was a reflection of what was needed to survive in that day and age. But why kill the animals as well? the religious ministers will ask, because we never understood those commands in the old codex. This author will respond to their question with a question: What wiped out the majority of the natives when the European explorers came to the Americas? The thing which wiped out entire native populations was disease. So you must kill all of the potential carriers of disease, particularly animals, because even a disease which is common in one tribe can be deadly when exposed to another, as they have not built up the immune defenses to counter it, or in most cases, have not had the

opportunity to be wiped out by the disease and repopulated by the minority who are immune to or able to overcome the disease. In fact, many of the major diseases which effect humanity originally came from animals. So the command to kill every man, woman, and child is Gibberish for kill every potential adversary and the command to kill every living thing is Gibberish for kill all potential carriers of disease. This is why one instructs a little child, not by explaining the full, scientific rational behind each action, but rather by saying, good or bad or yes or no. These basic instructions are vital to a childs survival; the child doesnt have to understand but simply obey. In this same way, the Gibberish in the old codex instructed its audience in the actions vital to survival, unconsciously cloaking natural laws in the commands of the unseen person. Gibberish: New Testament The New Testament also cloaks numerous natural laws such as the spirit of God (personification of natural energy) and its various manifestations. But the most notable idea promulgated by the New Testament is the concept of eternal life via influencing unseen people. The desire for extended life is, indeed, a natural desire, and since the masters time, the average life span has nearly tripled. The hope of longer life has been achieved, not through bargaining with unseen people, but through influencing unseen laws, and its very likely that something approximating eternal life (on earth) will be achieved through technological and medical advances over the next two centuries. Gibberish: Modern Times In a dynamic sense, the words of those who bow their knee in modern times can be easily ascertained by removing the word God and replacing it with either I and/or we. They do not worship the invisible, ancient God of the codices; they worship the invisible, culturally adapted God that each generation projects into the sky. This is why their God always agrees with them, as he is actively molded by every culture, subculture, and individual to fit their own needs, desires, and expectations. They are, in a sense, worshipping an invisible personification of their cultural and personal ideals, kind of like a glorified mascot.

The end.