Have you ever wondered why you are your own singular person , or why another person can be so different from you? Undoubtedly, most people ask themselves and others that exact same question over and over again without even realizing it. How often we hear someone (anyone) say, ‘I just don’t understand why/how so and so thinks or does this or that’. I doubt any conversation could go on five minutes without similar statements being made. The answer to all those queries is a simple, personality development—and just what does that mean?
It would be nice if personality development could be explained in a few words—it can’t. It would take volumes and volumes to explore all the intricacies involved. However a brief intelligible overview is possible—hopefully that would help alleviate some of the misunderstanding, and bewilderment we experience on a minute to minute basis in our daily lives. Hopefully…
DISCREPNCY–a discrepancy marks the lack of compatibility or similarity between two purported facts. In everyday life, we encounter seeming discrepancies on a rather frequent basis. That is especially true in the turbulent times of presidential elections.
A candidate or supporter will make a statement of ‘proposed’ fact. A candidate or supporter of an opposing party will make a contrarian ‘factual’ statement about that identical subject. Of course, those statements are intended to ease and appease their ‘base’ supporters while, simultaneously, hopefully gaining new supporters.
Considering how national ‘news media’ (?) have aligned themselves with political ideologies, those who consistently watch particular TV channels are never exposed to the ‘opposite’ viewpoints—one might say, they are being brainwashed. Then the question arises—how do we know truth?
Enter the ‘fact checkers’—then what? Well, in my experience, discrepancies frequently exist among the ‘fact checkers’—it depends on who the fact checkers are. Where did their ‘facts’ come from? In the realm of ‘hard science and mathematics’, facts are difficult to disguise—it can sometimes be done by sly ‘slight of hand, but very difficult. However, in the field of ‘soft science’ (sometimes classed as pseudoscience), it may be rather easy.
Just consider for one moment ‘climate change’. That singular subject has become a completely, world-wide, ‘political football’. There seems to be little doubt or disagreement about the fact that climate change has existed for billions of years. Our earth has undergone many periods of climatic change. Archeologists and geologist have demonstrated rather conclusively that at least two major ‘Ice Ages” have occurred—the most recent began about 15,000 years ago and ended about 10,000 years ago. Since that time the earth has gradually warmed.
The big question, then, is why the earth’s atmosphere is warming. Many scientists claim it is a ‘natural’ occurrence happening in the normal ebb and tide of global temperature changes. On the other hand, the ‘Green Wave Liberals’ proclaim with ‘Biblical certainty’ that global warming is man made and must be stopped. They have disavowed the use of any and all carbon dioxide producing materials such as crude oil, natural gas and coal—I might add that many ‘extremists’ have suggested putting a ban on beef cattle in order to eliminate the ill effects of ‘bovine flatus’—pretty radical?
We, The People have to be the ‘Judge and Jury”. Our obvious problem is the ‘fact checkers, themselves’. As a scientist, myself, I am definitely inclined to go with the ‘natural history’ of things.
There is another source of discrepancy which affects peoples lives continuously—so-called Christianity and the Bible. I say so-called Christianity because there are at least 33,000 Christian religions—and I daresay, not one of them can concretely define the ‘essence of Christ’. The reason being, they cannot define the essence of God. However, they keep pouring their bias at you and you are ‘caught in the middle’ not knowing which way to turn—just likened to a wild animal caught in a cage.
The Bible is full of discrepancies but I will point out two of them:
The Bible frequently depicts Jesus warning people in one way or another about the ‘dangers of sin and its’ consequence of eternal damnation’. However in one specific place it paints an entirely different picture. In 1 John-3:2 we hear an entirely different assessment—“Dearly beloved, we are God’s children now; what we shall later be has not yet come to light. We know that when it comes to light, we shall be like him, for we shall see him as he is.” It goes without saying that no-one can see God as he is except God himself. Therefore, collectively we and all of God’s creation, including, Jesus are the 2nd person of the Trinity.
The second major discrepancy I will address in the Bible is the crucifixion story as told by Matthew and Luke. In Matthew’s ‘version’, both of the insurgents crucified beside Jesus berated and derided him continuously. However, Luke paints an entirely different picture. Luke’s ‘version’ claims that one insurgent scolds the other for his hostility toward Jesus and asks Jesus to ‘remember him when he comes into his kingdom’. Jesus replies, ‘this day thou shalt be with me in paradise’. That statement in itself is a major contradiction to the Apostles Creed which states that ‘Jesus descended into hell for three days’.
I point out the discrepancy between Matthew and Luke because, in the Catholic Liturgy, there is an entire section devoted to ‘the repentant insurgent’—what does that mean? To me it means that very likely, Luke was lying. I say that because Professor Garry Wills in his astute book, What Paul Meant, shows rather conclusively that Luke was a veritable liar. In comparing Paul’s writings with Luke’s descriptions of Paul’s activities, there is no similarity. It seems very likely that Luke was a ‘romanticist’. He painted a picture of a church the way he envisioned it—not the way it truly was. Parenthetically, I would strongly urge you to read Professor Wills’ book.
So what’s the point—the point is very simply this: we, ‘the herd’, for the most part, are at the whimsical ‘mercy’ of the scalawags who earnestly desire, and will stop at nothing, in order to control our minds and our pocketbooks. We have to always be ‘on our guard’ so as not to get caught in the whirlwind of their ‘self-serving untruth.
I have written two books which discredit them. I strongly urge you to read Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality.
SPIRIT-SPIRITUAL-SPIRITUALITY— a quite long title involving two nouns and an adjective concerning the same subject. So, just what is ‘spirit’ anyway? We hear that word used often with seemingly different connotations. Often, especially at Halloween time, the word is meant to be synonymous with ghost. In fact, the original versions of the Bible refer to the Holy Ghost. As I personally listen, I strongly suspect the user of that word doesn’t fully comprehend its meaning—I may be wrong.
We often hear expressions such as, ‘boy, she sure has spirit’, or ‘he is such a spiritual guy—likewise, ‘I wonder where that group gets all of its spirituality?’ What about the Holy Spirit—probably the most common usage. And, no doubt, each listener has a different interpretation and/or understanding of what was said. Why do you suppose that is?
If you look up the definition of ‘spirit’ in the dictionary, you will find a long, rambling, jargonistic definition with no explicit meaning. And that definition stems from the fact that no one before me has defined the ‘essence of God’—that definition demands the understanding of just who the Holy Spirit is. Likewise, it gives a concrete definition and understanding of the essential definition of ‘spirit’.
We have irrefutably defined the essence of God thus: God is a Perfect Rational Being. That rationality translates into A Perfect Intellect which perceived all and a Perfect Will which achieved all. That Perfect Intellect represents God, the Father, that Perfect Intellect reflecting upon itself sees a ‘mirror image of itself’—being in the supernatural means that image is a living being, the second person of the Trinity, God the Son. Those two Perfect Intellects viewing each other have no choice except to accept (love, choose, will, spirit) each other. That ‘willing’, drive, choosing, loving each other carries the perpetual image of its generators, and, again, being in the supernatural, is a living being, identical to its generators—the third person of the Trinity—the Holy Ghost (Spirit).
With that perception in play, we may now define the essence of spirit in absolute terms: spirit is the ‘unseen driving force’ which causes an action—it may be described as drive, choice, love, acceptance, or will.
So then, how does ‘spiritual’ come into play? It most often is used in religious or contemplative way—usually describing an individual or group exhibiting a devotional attitude of one kind or another. However, it could just as well be used to describe the attitudinal dedication of a determined athlete or anyone dedicated to a cause of any kind. Its antonyms might be defined as lazy, indifferent, lackadaisical etc.
What about ‘spirituality’? Simply put, it is the state of being or the defining quality of being ‘spiritual’. How, then, does it apply? In the natural world, like everything else, it has limits, faults, inconsistencies, and finiteness. Nevertheless, it has many good qualities. For instance, investigative spirituality has been responsible for literally all of the scientific discoveries as well as the benefits derived from those discoveries and their ensuing developments and deployments.
From the beginning of recorded history, humanity was shackled by a spirituality of astrology, superstition, and mythology—the ‘driving force’ of all of their beliefs and activities. That force led them to understand and believe that there was a ‘higher power’ which exerted influences on their lives. They reasoned, in one way or another, and, in one place or another, world-wide, but, surprisingly, in similar fashion how that/those higher powers operated. Most groups reasoned that those powers were responsible for all the good and bad things that happened in their lives. In addition, many surmised that those powers (gods) needed to be appeased in order to bring more good from them. Accordingly, various forms of sacrificial rituals were developed. Some of those rituals actually included human sacrifice—usually a teen-aged girl. Be that as it may, each and every one of those sacrificial rituals became known as ‘religion’. Strangely, it seems that rituals of every form and description sprang up rather simultaneously on all inhabited continent’s.
In South America, the native Maya and Inca nations built many temples of worship for their God. The north American natives as well as the far East Asians were more contemplative—they seemed to sense the presence of god in everything. The Indians had specific names for each of the visible and palpable elements ( wind, moon, stars, rivers, etc.). The Far Easterners, Hindus, Buddhists and related kind recognized the ‘presence of god in everything’, but, simultaneously, were intent on understanding and defining the basic essence of that god—I believe they still are.
On the other hand, in the Middle East, Abraham, a Hebrew, recognized and accepted the concept of a singular God, He and his successors developed schemes of ‘bargaining’ with him. In the meantime, the Egyptians had developed their own scheme of things based mainly on the Zodiac from fourteen thousand year back. They had baptism, and their god was a ‘trinity’ god—father, son, and holy ghost. When one died, he had to cross the Nebel Bridge in order to get to heaven and a new life. However’ on that bridge he met with a judge (the holy ghost) who balanced his good and bad deeds—if the good outweighed the bad he got free passage—if the bad outweighed the good, he got pushed off the bridge into Sheol, the Netherworld below.
As time passed, famine hit the Hebrew tribe and they were obliged to purchase grain from the plentiful Egyptians. During the process, they became enslaved by the Egyptians—during that forty year entrapment, they adopted some of the Egyptian religious customs, particularly baptism. Upon their delivery from slavery and escape to the Promised Land, they also developed a religious scheme for appeasing their God. It started with the Ten Commandment and eventuated with 640-some rules and regulations controlling every aspect of Jewish life—sin was invented
Enter Jesus and Christianity was born. Through turmoil and strife it rather rapidly spread westward to Europe and southward to North Africa. Reportedly, all of Jesus’ apostles were killed except John who was banished to the Isle of Patmos—he supposedly lived one hundred years. During those sixty fife years or so, Peter, James and John developed a scheme of ‘power transfer’ from themselves to their underlings—and the first Catholic Church was born. Peter, ,of course, was the first pope. Five hundred ad seventy years or so after Jesus’ death, Mohammed established Islam—and the three Abrahamic religions were established.
Now, mind you, up to that point in time, there already were hundreds, maybe thousands, of different religions and religious sects in existence—and no two alike—many similar but no two identical. Since that time there have been thousands and thousands of Religions spring up ,world-wide—and why?
Plainly, each in turn had ‘spirit’ but not one knew the ‘source’ of that spirit. Therefore each, in turn was based on a mythical understanding of its spiritual generator—mainly the Zodiac. While, I have not seen it personally, it is my understanding that a giant Zodiac is embedded in the stone/brickwork of Saint Peter’s Square in Rome.
So, with that historical overview, we can logically and legitimately address ‘spirit’ and its derivatives. We already know and understand that human as well as all ‘natural spirit’ is temporary and subject to both change and even failure. But what about Eternal Spirit—the Holy Spirit—how does it apply in our lives?
Allow me to start this way. We’re going to assume that we have a pile of identical bricks one hundred feet high and covering an area one mile square. In addition, we have seven other identical sized piles but the bricks in each pile are a different size and color from the other seven piles. So each brick in each pile is identical and indistinguishable from its counterparts—each is perfect in size, shape and function. Now we are ‘ready to build’.
So we dutifully go out and build and build and build. We build schools, temples, stores, post offices, etc. By the time we have exhausted all of our brick supply, guess what?—the mortar holding the bricks together in our first buildings decays, liberating the bricks—and our supply is replenished.
Now with this simple little paradigm, I have described God, the Big Bang and his creation. It is God’s perfect intellect that envisioned each of those perfect, tinniest particles of energy of different varieties and functions (quanta). In aggregate, they represent a mirror reflection of That Perfect Intellect—they are God. He commissioned them with his Perfect Will (Holy Spirit) to be perfect and perform perfectly. Like their creator, each is prefect, unchanging, and unchangeable—Like God they exist in Eternity.
So what does all that means/ Very simply, everything we see and don’t see is made of those perfect little bricks which never change. You’re looking out your window—that big tree in on your landscape is beautiful—some day it will vanish—its bricks wont—they’ll show up in a blade of grass, a weed, a pile of mud, in water molecules. They may help constitute billions of physical objects before time ends and only Eternity is left, but guess what—they always have been eternal and perfect because the were imagined by God and are driven by the Spirit of God who is prefect.
So then, what is Spirituality?—how does it apply to our recognizance?. It is, in fact, the most important understanding and acceptance we can possibly have. Look at the world this very minute—nothing but chaos universally—there is no ‘peace’—there is no ‘tranquility’—why? Because there is absolutely no ‘like-mindedness’. And why is there no like-mindedness? Because no one knows who God is. In order for us to have like-mindedness, we absolutely must understand and accept the fact that everything in this universe is made of the identical prefect God-generated and Holy Spirit (God) commissioned particles of energy. We and every star in the farthest galaxy are of identical material—we are brothers and sisters with evert blade of grass, every tree, every flower , every fish,every existence of every kind—we all are God.
Like-mindedness delivers that understanding and acceptance—that my friends is Spirituality. In my Book, Wilderness Cry, I define the essence of God and its ramifications. In my book Peace in Spirituality, I elaborated on just one of the billions of ramifications of that understanding—Spirituality—its meaning and implications. In calling for the World-wide Communion of Spirituality, I am reiterating my desperate call Peace through Spirituality—religion not only has failed the process—it is the problem. Religion is not the peace-maker—its the peace breaker.
The terrible shooting in Texas church and the “predictable” inability of our church leaders to explain it—why?— the reason is simple. Their basic premise about God is so grossly incorrect. We all have been brainwashed with the idea that God is a “human-like” King , sitting on a throne deck out in glorious robes and crown, and Jesus, His little boy sitting beside him. That God has chosen us as his only people to the abandonment of everyone else; he can be bargained with; his mind can be changed. Then something like this happens and there is extreme wonderment and questioning about how our God could allow these things to happen.
I listened to preachers (protestant and catholic alike) all night long wallow all over their tongues with no sensible answer forthcoming. The reason is clear—they have no earthly idea about God’s Will (the Holy Spirit). They think of God…
JUST AND MERCIFUL GOD—How many times have Christians of all denominations heard that statement. Both the Old and New Testaments are loaded with such exact or similar references. Christian hymns are framed around that term. Why do you suppose that is?
I have written extensively about the ‘false narrative’ regarding the nature of God and the ‘false implications’ emanating from that narrative. It all began with the imagination of the author of Genesis. That person(s) framed God as basically a mirror image of the writer(s), albeit much more powerful. God was pictured as having each and every inclination attributable to man—love/hate, generosity/greed, peaceful/bellicose, sharing/selfish etc., just to name a few.
It is entirely understandable why it would be that way. After all, early homo sapiens had very little knowledge. He had only the basic instincts of survival—scavenging for food and water, avoiding dangers, and breeding for propagation. He did , however, have the ability to learn and choose. We have labeled those abilities as ‘rationality’—an intellect with which to perceive, and a will with which to achieve (choose, accept, love, will).
Literally, billions of ‘mistakes’ in perception were necessary before the ‘lights came on’ and mankind became aware of the ‘the scientific process’. He finally discovered that perceptions could not necessarily be trusted—they had to be tested over and over to make sure they were correct. It was thirteen to fourteen thousand years before some of the most common misperceptions were exposed. The earth was not flat after all, and certainly not supported on five crooked, wobbly legs, in perpetual danger of falling into the netherworld below. Neither was the earth the center of the universe—to the hierarchy’s dismay, the sun was discovered to hold that honor. However, even that was proven to be incorrect—-our little solar system is only one of trillions and trillions of such similar systems in our universe. And I use the word ‘our’ universe because it has been postulated the the likelihood exists that there are ten to the exponential power of fifty universes in existence. Try to imagine such a number. I will write it out for you—1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. Now, try to imagine that number multiplied by X number of trillions of stars. No human mind can comprehend such immensity.
And there is a God who created and controls all of this!!!!!—and who knows what else?
So, with that knowledge and insight, we can plainly see that the writers of the Old Testament were guided by a ‘dreadfully lacking’ cache of knowledge in making their assumptions about literally everything pertaining to God and his universe. For centuries, philosophers, theologians and great thinkers galore have pondered the question of God and his essence. Each, in turn, readily recognized the miniscule description of God as painted in the Bible—each attempted to define once and for all the real God’s essence—each failed. The reason for their failure was their lack of scientific facts—they were attempting to philosophize through ignorance. Thomas Aquinas went to great extremes applying Aristotle’s philosophy to a God who resided ‘here’ and presided over his creation which was ‘over there’. He, like others failed to recognize the ‘presence of God’ in everything. He couldn’t possibly know for one simple reason—he didn’t know (ignorance) what ‘anything-everything’ was made of.
Through curiosity and pure ‘dumb luck’, I stumbled onto a course in Quantum Mechanics (particle physics). There I discovered that everything in existence is constructed from quanta—the tiniest particles of energy which cannot be further subdivided. Furthermore, I discovered that those particle are perfect in both form and function. In addition, each is indistinguishable from its counterparts and each is both unchanging and unchangeable. Bingo—we were/are describing eternity.
Time is a measure of change and is used to record the continual alterations in our finite (temporal) existence. Since no quantum can possibly change, it is both infinite and eternal—it exists in eternity. Are we not, then, describing God—perfect, unchanging, unchangeable, and eternal?
With that understanding and insight, I was not only allowed but rather mandated to define the essence of God—God is a Perfect Rational Being. That Perfect Intellect visualized each and every quantum of energy in existence and that Perfect Will chose (loved, accepted) each and every one. Therefore, the ‘building blocks’ of everything carry the brand of God and already exist in eternity.
So, what does all that have to do with ‘Just and Merciful God’?—everything. We all, and every finite thing in existence are dreadfull sinners in the sense that we are all universally selfish—God made it that way so the finite universe could function. Selfishness mandates change—we eat, drink, breath, breed and millions of other functions and activities directed at self , and all of which require change (time).
If there were a ‘hell’ which there isn’t, not a single person could escape it—God’s ‘Justice’ would send us all there.
No, God is Perfect and that perfection mandates Perfect Love. Prefect Love means ‘acceptance without conditions’. Remember, with his Perfect Intellect he visualized all of the quanta in existence and commissioned them with his Prefect Will to function perfectly. That they have done and in so doing, they have created the ever changing universe(s) and everything in it/them.
If God were ‘merciful’, it would mean that we were ‘guilty of some crime(s)’. Obviously, our total evil selfishness constitutes a perpetual state of criminality—but God made us that way. Why?
That ‘why’ could be pondered forever and I did. Finally, it struck me—God wanted/needed to exhibit his ‘Perfect Love—he did—enter Jesus.
Jesus was the only person to recognize that he and everything in existence mirrored their creator. He clearly saw the universal selfishness, but more importantly, he saw the universal beauty in God’s creation. Without question, Jesus had a keen awareness of the extremely selfish ineptitude of the Jewish Religion and the ‘self-serving’ mantra it sported. He knew, without doubt, that the Hebrew God was a hoax. He clearly understood that since he was the only one to have that underestanding, he had to be the ‘messiah’.
So with shrewdness and determination, he set about to educate twelve basic illiterates about the ‘real God’. He knew he was preaching heresy; that he would be considered a traitor and that crucifixion would be his fate. But, he was driven by the idea that he was the ‘Son of God’, and that he must die in atonement for all the evil in the universe which his Father had allowed to be created—The Father’s Perfect Love must be shown.
Consequently, he basically stayed in the shadows for three plus years desperately attempting to educate his disciples and straggling followers—we’ll never know whether or not he was successful, so distorted is the written word we have. When he determined the time was right, he made one final attempt to infuse the stubborn mentality of his apostles. He took bread and wine, the common meal constituents of the day, held them in his hands and told those present that those food elements were his body and blood. Jesus knew no particle physics, but he knew that he, they, that food, and everything in existence were all mirror images of their creator—he asked his apostles to ‘remember that fact’ each time they ate. He also commissioned them to go into the world and teach to others what they had learned from him, the Cristus—the light of the world. teach everyone about God’s Perfect Love. Teach everyone that God resides in everything—everything is God. The rest is history. In light of that, I would strongly urge everyone to read the Coptic ‘Gospel of Thomas’. It parallels the Canonical Gospels but was rejected by the Council of Nicaea because it espouses a God who is present in everything. They needed a God set-aside from his creation so as to justify their ‘power and control’
So, what does all that rambling mean. Clearly, plainly and simply it meams this—God is Perfect Love.
God’s Perfect Love precludes any possibility of holding anyone ‘accountable’ for anything. Therefore God cannot possibly be Just. God cannot possibly be Merciful. As a matter of fact, he held himself accountable in the form of Justice and Mercy through Jesus, his mirror image. There is a big, big distinction to be made between the Justice and Mercy of God shown through Jesus—Jesus’ body died—not his soul. Religions of most kinds teach you that your soul can and will die—not only die but die in perpetual torment. That teaching is aimed at power and control over you in order to abscond with your pocketbook. It has proven to be an extremely successful tool from centuries on to date.
I have repeated this ad nauseum, but if you want a complete, deep seated accounting of this philosophy, please read my two little books, Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality.
CONSCIENCE-Do you have a conscience? If so, why?—where did it come from? If you don’t have one, why not? Just what is a conscience anyway, and how do we go about getting one?
One might define ‘conscience’ as an intellectual inner voice which tells us right from wrong. Obviously, each person’s conscience differs from all others in some degree or another, because each person’s life experiences and inculcations are somewhat different. Strictly speaking, we are not born with a conscience—only the ability to develop one. So, how do we get a conscience?
There are many sources for conscience formation. The most basic is our parents and/or guardians. From day one, so to speak, we are counseled repeatedly about what to do and not do—later on about what to think and not to think. Then comes the big ‘conscience producer’—religion(s). Consider this; world-wide there are thousands of different religions and/or religious sects—over 33,000 so-called Christian religions alone. Each religion proclaims to be the best and, in some cases, the only way to heaven. Of course that ‘heaven’ is different also from one religion to the next.
It should be very clear that each person’s conscience must be somewhat different .As in literally all considerations, consciences vary from one extreme of no conscience at all to extreme scrupulousness, and fit very nicely on a ‘bell distribution curve’. How, then is it possible to have a limited conscience? I suspect that in most cases it involves little if any parenting—children in such circumstances are exposed to very little if any discipline. Therefore, they have little regard for other’s rights, and seemingly, no respect for law, either civil or religious—witness the blatant irrational civil unrest and rioting of today.
On the other hand, at the other end of the spectrum, we observe people who are extremely ‘reserved’ about everything—often to an very irrational degree. They are so ‘tied up in knots’ of scrupulosity that they have difficulty functioning in everyday society—some cannot and require institutionalization. Others are mandated to be under the influence of mood altering drugs including possible heavy alcohol intake in order to function. Legitimately, one might ask, ‘why is that?’
If we look back to Genesis, we see that Cain had no problem with slaying his brother Abel. Later on, the folks of Sodom and Gomorra had no problem with all sorts of sexual deviations. Fast forward to Moses—he had no problem killing someone, but he did know he’d better run for sake of his own life. Later on, in a desperate attempt to control his subjects, he gave humanity the concept of sin and the guilt associated with it—he gave us the Ten Commandments. They were, in fact, good ‘civil law’ but went unheeded until he put a price on their violation—God’s vengeance—‘vengeance is mine sayeth the Lord’. Instantly, sin, guilt, fear of punishment from God, and religion were invented—all for the sake of enforcing ‘civil law’.
Follow the history. Those ten laws eventuated into six hundred plus Jewish laws which addressed literally every aspect of Hebrew society. Then comes Jesus and Christianity—what an explosive development of God’s Laws. In the beginning, it was a conglomerate of squabbling between various settlements about what the conscience was to think. It became so bad that Emperor Constantine called the authorities(bishops)in those little settlements together and mandated that they establish once and for all a religion (conscience generator) of their liking—it would be the ‘law of the land’ enforced by the Roman army. Only a few came to the generation site (Nicaea), but those few succeeded in reaching a consensus—Catholicism was born. Three to four hundred years later, the Prophet Mohammed appeared with a new religion, Islam—the three Abrahamic religions were established and each with its own set if values.
In the meantime, in the Far East, Buddhism and Hinduism were flourishing—they were/are vastly different from the Abrahamic religions. Simultaneously, native cultures world-wide were establishing their own endemic religious understandings and practices.
Early on in Catholicism, the Ten Commandments, plus some Church laws were sufficient. However, as is usual, loopholes began to appear—peoples discovered ways that their consciences could avoid some of the dire consequences. No way was that to be allowed. So, gradually, as one loophole was closed with a new law, another loophole appeared. It reached a fever pitch during the Inquisitions but even then it had just begun to gain steam. Loopholes were appearing, seemingly from nowhere, and each mandated closure.
When I was a child studying Catholic Catechism daily, the ‘Baltimore Catechism” was relatively small—likely a 70-80 page 4″x5″ pamphlet. Guess what, the collective conscience of Catholics became so cunning and created so many loopholes that the current Catechism of the Catholic Church consists of 904, 6″x9″ fine print pages. The question is ‘who knows exactly what’s in those pages, and better still, how are they regarded’ (who really cares). As Catholics and Protestants alike have come to realize the irrationality of many church teachings, two things have happened—many have quit churching—most seem to ignore the rules. Both of those attitudes are conscience reliving ‘tools’. Observing the lack of Church attendance with the attendant loss of income prompted Pope Francis to proclaim; ‘No rules have changed. We just got to stop talking about them’.
It would seem rather obvious that of the five billion or so non Catholic people in the world, not many of them would know or care about what’s in that Catechism. So what about their consciences—very obviously, they would be vastly different. That’s not to say that we all couldn’t agree on some items. Let’s try ‘murder’ for instance—no way—there are people who consider everyone else in existence to be an ‘infidel’ and must be murdered according to Allah’s dictates. What about sex—try getting a consensus there. I could go on and on and point out countless instances of major societal attitudinal differences regarding what we may consider right or wrong. It would be impossible to get a significant consensus about literally anything.
The point I’m trying to make is that there is no such thing as a ‘universal collective conscience’. Neither is there the possibility of any two people having identical consciences—similar, yes—identical, no. The reason is very clear—religion and ideology.
If everyone in the world could be like-minded, then every conscience would be identical, and guess what—peace would break out.
I have written extensively about these subjects in my two books, Wilderness Cry, and Peace in Spirituality. More importantly, my frequent blog posts, such as this one, elaborate on some aspect of my philosophy. It all begins with an irrefutable definition of the essence of God. God is a Perfect Rational Being. That awareness dictates that the “Spirit of God’ (Holy Spirit) is imprinted on each and every particle of God’s energy which makes up everything in existence. In that real sense, we and everything in existence are ‘one’.
That knowledge prompted me about two years ago to call for the understanding and acceptance of The World-Wide Communion of Spirituality—the absolute only way peace can prevail.
OPPORTUNIST- May be described as an unscrupulous person who exploits circumstances to gain immediate advantage. Throughout the ages we have seen this form of activity played out in many different forums and on many different stages.
Lets consider the plight of Black Americans for a moment. If I understand history correctly, they were brought to America in the belly of ships equipped for no better than livestock. They were sold into slavery to the southern plantation owners. They lived in shacks on the meagerest food supply, and toiled daily in the fields. They had no rights of any kind since they were not considered to be truly human. Neither could they own land nor could they vote. Frequently their women were raped by white owners—just to enumerate some or their horrible existences.
In the early 1860s’, president Lincoln declared them to be freed—the Civil War began. Eventually, the North prevailed and the slaves were freed—what then? What were they going to do? Having no wherewithal and prompted by their natural instincts to get away from the their ‘slave masters’, they gradually migrated north to the cities. Here again, they were clustered together in meager housing with more meager sustenance—the slums were enhanced and enlarged.
With that brief history, fast-forward to my personal memory—post WW2. Every Democrat politician I have known or heard of has made wild, opportunistic promises to ‘help’ Black people in exchange for their vote. In spite of the fact that it was Abraham Lincoln, a Republican who freed them, like dutiful little sheep, they have obliged the Democrats by an estimated %90 or better margin.
To my understanding, and without much support from the Black voter, Donald Trump has done more for Black society than any other president in history. Yet look at the national scene. We have seen perpetual protesting from both Black and White against ‘Police brutality’ fostered by social media videos. Peaceful protests a la Dr. Martin Luther King are impossible—the paid anarchists, in opportunistic fashion, seize upon the moment for rioting, burning and looting. Not only that but it has gone on in some quarters for months with no Democrat ‘voice of dissent’. Donald Trump has been perpetually demeaned by liberal media and Democrats attempting to shift the blame onto him—another example of opportunism.
Now lets address other very visible cases of historical opportunism. The bible tells us that Moses commit murder as a young man. He was forced to escape and live in exile for roughly twenty years. Upon his return, sensing a void of leadership in the Israelite community, he and Aaron opportunistically seized power control over them and became their leader. Moses, of course, was responsible for the 10 Commandments and the creation of the concept of sin, another case of opportunism—Moses could maintain control of the Israelites by convincing them that God could either like and help them or he could hate and hurt them if they disobeyed him.
Now let’s fast-forward a few thousand years to the year 325 AD. Constantine was Emperor of the Roman Empire and the Jewish community as well as the new Christian communities were still under Roman control. By that time Jesus had been dead almost three hundred years. The ‘Christian’ Church was flourishing in a way. Due to the ‘power’ transfer in the hierarchy of the Church, the most prominent male in each little settlement had been consecrated a Bishop—there were 1800 such Bishops at the time. That may seem very well and good but there was one big problem. Few, if any of those Bishops and their followers agreed with the others about matters concerning Jesus, what he did, what he said, and what he meant. They were constantly bickering among themselves—at times actually fighting. They were supposed to be working and producing for the Empire, but their productivity was severely hampered by the distraction of religious differences.
Prior to that time, the official religion of the Empire was a pagan religion called Mithraism, and the Romans generally loved it. Opportunistically, Constantine, realized it would be easier to change the State Religion than try to settle disputes between Christian sects. Consequently, he called a general council at Nicaea. He invited all 1800 Bishops and offered to pay all of their expenses—only 180 or so showed up. Realizing how opportunistic they would be, he commissioned them to form a new unified religion of their own liking—it would become the new official Religion of the Roman Empire—Mithraism would be abolished. Anyone who refused to accept the new religion had two choices, beheading or abolishment to the wilds—what an opportunity for the Bishops. Of course, there were dissenters—some were beheaded. Eventually a consensus was reached and the Catholic (universal) church was born. Guess what, opportunistically, those Bishops put themselves in ‘total control’, and that control was guaranteed by the Roman Army.
So, has anything changed seventeen hundred years later? If so, I have been unable to detect it in my eighty seven years. We persist in having unscrupulous people in all walks of life preying on their fellow man—some say it’s worse now than ever—I doubt that.
There’s a reason for everything, and there’s a solution to every problem. I have systematically and painstakingly addressed the nature of those problems and their cure in my two books Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality. You may wish to take this opportunity to avail yourself of those solutions in their reading.
Sex–volumes and volumes have been written about this subject, and, undoubtedly, many, many more will be written. Some of those writings have included scientific considerations and understandings—many have been written as a propaganda tool by and for various individuals or groups.
Throughout recorded history, sex has been portrayed as either ‘good’ or ‘bad’. There was a goddess of love and a goddess of fertility—sex was considered to be very good and desirable. The Kama Sutra is an ancient Indian (Asian) text on sexuality, eroticism, and the fulfillment of good emotional life, all of which are derived from sex. It was the Hindu recognition of the beauty in sexual pleasure as integrated into their everyday lives.
On the other hand, the Israelites put ‘chains of bondage’ on sex—a woman became a man’s property, and if she had sex with another man, she would be stoned to death. Parenthetically, Jesus attempted to change that attitude—he got killed for that.
Thereafter, those who developed philosophy and religion in the name of Jesus ignored his attitude toward sex. Initially, they were seemingly tolerant of ‘free sex’. Marriage was not yet considered a ‘sacrament’ and most so-called marriages were not expected to last more than a few years. That attitude seemed to persist until the fall of the Holy Roman Empire. Prior to the fall, the the hierarchy had the absolute ‘backing’ of the Empire—their sole concern seemed to be keeping the flock together by stamping out any heresy which popped up.
With the fall of the Empire, the church had no ‘weapon of control’—guess what—they pulled one ‘right out of the hat’ just like the ‘rabbit trick’. It took a few hundred years, but eventually ‘the lights came on’—sex would be their weapon. Immediately sex became almost ‘criminal’. Furthermore, women became synonymous with evil—after all, if there were no women, men wouldn’t be tempted to sin. Weddings were grudgingly allowed but not inside church buildings—the sex smells associated with women would attract too many ‘demons’ and, consequently, the church would become irretrievably ‘contaminated’.
Ascetics were rapidly gaining control of the church—one such ‘theological expert’ proclaimed that ‘it would be better for the human race to go extinct rather than be propagated by sexual union’. Irrationality regarding sex had reached its peak. Jerome was one such ascetic. According to professor Bart Ehrman, in translating the bible from Geek to Latin, Jerome removed or altered almost every reference to ‘anything good’ about women—such was his warped disdain of sex. Wouldn’t a psychoanalysis of Jerome’s personality be interesting to review—it would be to me.
From the beginning the Church was immersed in the mythology of astrology and Genesis,and it had to have a weapon to eradicate the ‘wayward’ sheep. What better weapon could be had than the second strongest natural urge in nature, sex—and the Inquisition was born. Witches were burned at the stake routinely, as was anyone accused of displaying any pleasure during sex. In addition, sex anywhere except on the ground was cause for execution by fire—the vibrations caused by sexual activity in an elevated structure would cause the earth to fall off its five crocked legs into the ‘netherworld’ below.
The psychological consequences of such irrational restrictions on a perfectly normal drive were devastating, and still are. Taylor in his astute book, Sex In History, describes Medieval Europe as “one giant cesspool of psychosis”—such was the dramatic effect of those restrictions. The Protestants in this country’s early history got into the act with the famous ‘Salem Witch Trials’—I believe nineteen people were convicted and hanged as witches before the government intervened and stopped the practice.
I used the term ‘and still are’ above referring to the Church’s austerity concerning anything to do with sex. For the first fifty years of my life, the Church’s attitude was extremely demeaning and controlling of sex. Their mandates created extreme psychological havoc in Catholics. Gradually, as people dropped away from the Church, the pulpits became mostly silent about sexual matters—haven’t heard a sermon demeaning ‘birth control’ in at least thirty five to forty years. Also, it is quite obvious, that few, if any, Catholics pay any attention at all to the Church laws regarding sexual matters—their ‘common sense’ dictates their behavior.
Pope Francis said it pretty succinctly when he announced, ‘No rules have changed. We just got to stop talking about them’ (paraphrased). Also, totally contrary to Church law, he said that couples should live together for two to three years before getting married in order to check their compatibility and, thereby, reduce the divorce rate. I’m convinced that he is correct in that assessment.
Furthermore, and more importantly, children should be instructed in both the science and psychology of sex. They need guidance in a proper and acceptable method of dealing with the insatiable drive of sex. The Church (sin police) are still attempting to control sexuality, but I can assure you that from my observation point, they are failing and failing miserably. Furthermore, their feeble but persistent attempts are alienating more and more—the pews are getting emptier by the day.
My contention is simply this; instead of attempting to control people with ancient mythology, the Church would be much better off and have much more meaning if it got on the science railroad. Science gives specific and explicit meaning to concepts of God and our universe. It beautifies and glorifies God’ beautiful creation. It shows that God’s presence is in everything in existence—otherwise it couldn’t be. More importantly, it helps to ‘mystify’ the beauty of sexual union—what a wonderful method of insuring species survival—instill in every individual, whether mouse or man, an irresistible urge to mate.
Several months ago, in recognition of God’s presence in everything, which brings everything into ‘communion’ with God, I called for the recognition and acceptance of The World-wide Communion of Spirituality as the only means to perpetual and universal peace. I have routinely reiterated that call. That concept involves an understanding that the Spirit (will) of God is imprinted onto every tiny particle of energy (quantum), of which everything in existence is made. Therefore the same Spirit pervades everything thereby imparting a ‘commonality’ to all in God.
My two little books, Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality say it all.
PHILOSOPHY- just what exactly is ‘philosophy’? Well, philosophy has been defined several different ways, and I will offer you my definition. Simply stated, philosophy is a set of understandings about any given subject based on known or presumed facts. Please note that word ‘presumed’. Throughout recorded history, presumptions have created constant turmoil in our world society(ies).
For instance, literally all of our philosophy has been based on premises which later were proven to be incorrect—the earth was flat and supported on five wobbly legs continuously in danger of toppling into the netherworld below; the earth was the center of the universe; the sun, moon and stars held the keys to our health, wealth and wisdom; there was a god for literally every aspect of our existence; the one and only ‘true God’ was a grizzled old man sitting in the clouds ever ready to shower you with glorious gifts of good fortune (if you were good) and equally ready to bring torments of all sorts upon you (if you were bad)—just to name a few.
Now, lets examine the consequences of such fallacious premises and their resultant philosophies. Flat earth–people, for fifteen thousand or so years, were fearful of sailing out to sea too far because they would fall right off the edge of the earth into the netherworld. Earth supported on five crocked, wobbly legs–during the ‘Inquisition’, sex on any elevated structure was strictly prohibited and punishable by burning at the stake ,because the vibrations from such activity might cause the earth to topple into the netherworld. Earth as center of the universe–again, when Galileo published his scientific discovery that the sun was the center of our universe (solar system) and that the earth and other planets rotated around the sun, he was brought before the inquisition, and he barely escaped burning at the stake by virtue of a ‘forced recantation’ of his discovery—in spite of that, he was held under house arrest for the last nine years of his life. The sun, moon and stars (astrology) held the keys–astrologers proved to be nothing better than skalawag magicians who tricked people into believing all sorts of untruths. Parenthetically, those structures do, in fact, exert extreme influences on our earth but not in the way astrologers portrayed. Gods (gods)–in the early cultures worldwide, there was a recognized entity (god) in charge of literally every aspect of life (god of love, fertility etc.). Eventually, the Israelites came to recognize ‘one true God’. However, as I will show post haste, their ‘one true god’ is a myth also just as all the other ‘pagan gods’.
The Israelite God was patterned exactly after them. Even though he was all powerful and created the universe, basically all of his other traits were strictly human-like. He could love you or hate you; he could coddle you or kill you; he seemed to always be vengeful. He demanded strict adherence to his ‘laws’ (mind you, those laws were fabricated by Moses)—religion (Abrahamic religion) was created. That (those–Judaism, Christianity, Islam) religion reasoned that such a vengeful god would demand sacrifice–and sacrifice he got.
Now, lets address the fallacy of all that ‘philosophy’. Obviously, people were thinking. They could see plainly that both bad and good things happened in their lives. So, they were trying to understand why everything wasn’t ‘good’. Obviously, they concluded that there was an over-lord who didn’t appreciate some of their activities. That (those) overlord(s) was/were given the general name god. In the pagan world, each god had a specific domain. In the Israelite world, their ‘one’ God was in charge of all. More importantly he had to be appeased—a formal religion of attempted appeasement was born.
Fast-forward a few thousand years and Jesus appears—another sacrificial religion was born (Christianity). Six to seven hundred years later Mohammed appears—another Abrahamic religion appears (Islam). While not strictly ‘sacrificial’, Islam seems to derive it ‘appeasement’ from a strict prayer routine and strict adherence to Islamic Law. In any event each such religion is based on ‘false premises’ and therefore is doomed to be false in nature. While the Abrahamic religions busy themselves with appeasement, the other two great religions, Hinduism and Buddhism seem more contemplative—they have always attempted to understand the ‘nature’ of their god. In so doing, they each have established general rules of good living—those rules (guidelines) are their understanding of what their god might expect of them.
So, what is the truth? Simply stated, all religion(s) of which I am aware are based on ‘false premises’. The reason being that not a single person in the history of mankind has ever defined the Essence of God. Absent an essential definition, nothing has meaning. So all of the gods and the religions derived therefrom are pure myths. At this very moment you likely are astonished, and possibly dismayed, that I would/could make such a statement. I am allowed such privilege because of one deliberate consideration—I, Hilary Leo Hunt, have defined, in irrefutable terms, the ESSENCE OF GOD.
GOD IS A PERFECT RATIONAL BEING.
Let’s examine that definition:
When we say ‘God’, we mean Supreme—there is no other.
When we say ‘Is’, we mean always in the ever-present—not yesterday, nor tomorrow.
When we say ‘A’, we mean singular (triune in nature but singular in Godhead).
When we say ‘Perfect’, we mean complete—cannot possibly be added to nor deleted from—cannot possibly be pleased nor displeased.
When we say Rational, we mean an intellect which perceives and a will which achieves.
When we say Being, we mean it is a living entity.
The implications of this ‘perfect’ definition of God’s essence are unbelievably astonishing. In the first place, it shows that all religion is mythical and fallacious. All prayer is nonsensical. God is perfect, and his will cannot possibly be changed (it truly is blasphemous for us to ‘beg’ God to change his will). Our only ‘justifiable’ prayer is a hearty Thank you Lord for my existence, my sustenance and my salvation.
So, back to philosophy—now that we have a concrete definition of God’s essence, we can develop a meaningful philosophe of our existence based on ‘truth’. That philosophy has ramifications unheard of. However, I have begun its development in my two books, Wilderness Cry, and Peace in Spirituality. I strongly urge you to read them both.
As a matter of information, Wilderness Cry has received a 4 of 4 review rating. Furthermore, it will be featured as On-line Book Club’s ‘Book Of The Month’ this coming December. Peace in Spirituality will be featured by On-Line Book Club’s ‘Book of the Day” on my birthday, Oct. 23, 2021.
Consequences– seems like a strange title for a blog post, or does it? Please allow me to explain. Knowing the ultimate implications of consequences is undoubtedly the ‘most important understanding’ we can possibly have. I can hear you now saying to yourself, ‘what is that simpleton talking about?’. And I answer by saying, ‘listen-up and I will explain post-haste’.
The word consequence means ‘the effect or result of an action or condition’. So, you may say, ‘what’s that got to do with anything?’—I would say, ‘everything’. The primary question, then, is ‘when did consequences begin?’. The obvious answer is, ‘with the beginning of time’—time, of course, is a measure of ‘change’. So how and when did ‘time begin?’.
Once upon a time, there was no time; only eternity. However there is that Perfect Rational Being who exists in eternity. With its ‘Perfect Intellect’ it perceived of converting (demonstrating) its perfect energy by the creation of Perfect Little Particles of itself, known as quanta (pleural for quantum). A quantum is the smallest particle of energy (matter) which can not be subdivided. That Perfect Intellect perceived of several varieties of those quanta to which we humans have given names such as leptons, bosons, quarks, etc. Each of those particles is identical and indistinguishable from its counterparts. Collectively, they represent all of the ‘bricks’ from/of which every material thing in this universe is made.
We human have dubbed that Perfect Rational Being (Prime Mover) by hundreds of different names—the most familiar in modern times likely are God, Allah, Yahweh, Buddha and Brahma. I know of no human dead or alive who recognized that Prime Mover as ‘A Perfect Rational Being’ except me and Jesus. And I can hear you again screaming, yelling, tearing your hair our at my extreme brashness. All I calmly ask is, ‘show me another’—you can’t. Now back to the subject at hand.
Having visualized those perfect quanta along with a ‘performance task’ for each class, that Perfect Intellect said ‘hmm, I love that’. So with its Perfect Will (the Will of God, The Holy Spirit), it said, ‘I will those quanta to be Perfect and stay Perfect—I “love them; I choose them; I put my ‘brand of Perfection’ on each. Instantly, they came into being and simultaneously ‘time began’. Immediately, those quanta ‘went to work’ doing perfectly what they were created and commissioned to do, and guess what, they’re still doing it.
Of course, as each performed its task, something happened—there was a consequence. They rapidly formed Hydrogen and Helium atoms. As those massive gas clouds gathered, their density increased and a ‘star was born’—-there was light—another consequence. Eventually, the universe was filled with celestial bodies of all sizes, shapes and descriptions as we know them today—each a direct consequence of what went (happened) before—always in prefect fashion—a perfect consequence.
Now, fast-forward a few billion years. The sequences and consequences had resulted in the generation of ‘living’ things—that is, things that could reproduce themselves, and that they did. Initially, those living organisms seemingly had no intelligence of their own—they could, and did, react to stimuli—always in ‘perfect fashion’—a perfect consequence.
Now, fast-forward again—intelligent beings were consequentially generated and in perfect fashion. Cumulatively, and individually, each and every one of those distinct rational beings progressed on its own path of ‘perfect consequential development’ to being the ultimate individual it became at its death. No two could possibly be the same because no two could possibly have experienced each and every identical stimulus.
Somewhere, sometime, along the way, those intelligent beings noticed considerable differences in each other. They didn’t/couldn’t agree on a ‘code of civil conduct’—the reason for that, of course was each had different ideas about what was proper—each was a different ‘consequence’. Eventually, as their numbers and differences increased, they split into diverse tribes/nations and did develop rules of conduct—a direct consequence of intelligent ‘common sense’. They established ‘leaders’ with names such as Pharos and Kings.
One such tribe was the Israelites who the Bible tells us were enslaved by the Egyptians. The Israelites were stricken with a famine, and consequently, were forced to purchase grain from the Egyptians. During their forty year enslavement, a new leader named Moses was born. Mind you, the Israelites has already ‘recognized’ a singular God. They knew that when bad things happened, it was the consequence of their misdeeds. Likewise, when things were going well, they had God’s favor—consequently, they best behave.
As luck would have it, Moses grew to manhood, murdered someone, and was forced to live in exile for many years. However, upon his return, somehow (the Bible never made that clear to me), he and his brother Aaron assumed control of the Israelite tribe. They petitioned the Pharos to release them from slavery so they could go to the ‘promised land’. Of course, the Pharos refused, so Moses petitioned his God to send plagues on the Egyptians. After the tenth plague, the Pharos relented and allowed the Israelites to depart—a direct consequence of torment from God and fear of more of the same.
The Israelites escaped with many sequential and consequential events occurring on their journey, Eventually, as they wandered aimlessly and helpless in the desert, many of the tribesmen lost faith in Moses leadership and even his God. As a consequence, they began worshiping idols, and doing all sorts of illicit things. Moses and Aaron scolded them to no avail. Moses was no dumb-bell (after all he has weaseled his way into being leader, so he sat down and wrote out what he considered to be good ‘rules of governance—the 10 Commandments. when Moses presented the commandments to them, the Israelites just laughed at him and went right on their merry way—Moses was not happy at all with that consequence. So, in disgust, he threw the tablets upon which the rules were written to the ground, breaking them—a physical consequence.
Up to the mountain he goes again. He re-writes them on new stone tablets. This time he presents them as ‘Gods Commandments’ with warnings of any breeches having ‘dire’ consequences. Officially, ‘sin’ was born.
So we fast-forward several thousand years to Jesus. By the time he came along, the Jews had utilized that ‘sin’ complex to make a triple fortune for the King, High Priest and Sanhedrin—the poor peasants were just ‘out of luck’. Jesus recognized the ‘hoax’ being perpetrated on his people as a consequence of that ‘sin complex’ abuse. Not only that, but for the first time in history, Jesus openly de-vowed the nature of the Jewish God and offered an entirely different understanding of God to his followers. Of, course he was convicted as a traitor and, as a consequence, he was killed.
Now, fast-forward again 300 years. During that hiatus, as a consequence of total lack of unanimity of understanding of who Jesus really was, what he really said, and, more importantly, what he ‘meant, literally every village had its own ‘bishop’. Not only that but, literally, each of them had different ideas about the ‘Jesus thing’. Consequently, instead of working and producing for the ruling Romans, they were bickering and fighting among themselves. As a consequence, the official Church which Constantine commissioned them to form, put themselves in total hierarchal control—the ‘Sin Police’ were recommissioned. We know the rest of the story, so lets get to the punch-line.
Sin is a manufactured process aimed at controlling the masses—since Moses’ time, it has been that way. What no one, seemingly, has understood is one, plain, simple fact—everything in this universe is perfect. Every murderer, rapist, thief, or social ‘undesirable’ of any kind is a ‘perfect consequence’ of all the consequences that went before in his/her life. God knows no ‘sin’. Everything (quanta) God created is perfect—everything in existence is the ‘perfect consequence’ of each and every stimulus applied to it from its inception. Therefore, we as rationale, civilized beings must re-orient our understanding of our Perfect Supreme Being. We must know that God, with his ‘Perfect Intelligence’ knew in advance exactly how each of us would eventuate—and through ‘no fault of our own’.
Yes, when we are hurt by someone, we consequently feel anger—a ‘normal’ human reaction. A more rational reaction would be a feeling of ‘sorrow ‘ for the offender. As a consequence of that ‘understanding’, we, as a rational society must come to grips with this reality—we, each are the direct consequence of every stimulus applied to us. Having said that, we as a society must have order and civility. Accordingly, people who breech our major societal rules ‘must be taken out of society’ until, and if, they can be ‘reprogrammed’, and made fit again. We have been, and still are, exerting our efforts in the wrong way—consequently, things are getting worse by the day.
The proper course of action stems as a consequence of proper understandings. 1-a proper understanding of the essence of our creator, and 2-a proper understanding of how our psyches are developed. The immediate consequence of lack of understanding of God’s essence is cultist religion which feigns appeasement of that God, but which, instead, creates feelings of guilt and hostility in people. All religions seem to be based on the ‘false narrative’ of that ‘humanistic God’. The direct consequence of religion is guilt and rebellion, both of which create havoc in society.
We must expend our resources in the training thousands of clinical psychologists specifically trained in Psychoanalytic Psychotherapy. Most importantly, we must quit sending everyone on a ‘guilt-trip’ through ‘cultist religion’. We need ‘Spirituality’ which is the understanding that the ‘Spirit of God’ Is imprinted on everything and everyone. God is Perfect—God cannot possibly be hurt or pleased. God is Perfect Love (perfect acceptance). God loves everyone, criminals and all—he cannot possibly love one more than another. The consequences of that would be an ‘Imperfect God’—not possible.
I have elaborated those concepts endlessly in my two books, Wilderness Cry, and Peace in Spirituality. I implore you to read and study each for the consequences of ‘peace of mind’ and ‘peace in society’.