WHAT IF—how many thousands, maybe millions, of times have we heard or uttered the expression ‘what if’. It is literally as ‘common as houseflies’. “What if she hadn’t said that”; “what if that storm had hit us directly”; “what if he hadn’t broken his ankle in the third quarter”—and on and on and on.

The implications of all those ‘what ifs’ are consequences. There is always a consequence for every action of any kind whether physical, or mental—change always occurs. And we are continually questioning ourselves and others about the potential consequence of a ‘what if’—a different course of action or reaction.

The ‘what if’ I want to address today is Jesus. When Jesus appeared on the public scene, the world was in the same state of corruption as we are witnessing today. The Roman empire had expanded extensively in all directions. The Jews also were under Roman rule and were basically enslaved by Rome. However, they were different—they believed in ‘a one true God’, while the rest of the world was pagan. The Jews had long since devised and orchestrated a form of government whereby the rich got richer and the poor got poorer. The rich included the King, the High Priest, and the Sanhedrin.

The ruling Roman governors had long since determined that it would be much less burdensome to allow the Jews to continue their form of government, provided they did so in a cooperative manner. It was a ‘convenience’ arrangement for both parties—the Romans had to expend less military manpower while the King and High Priest could legally continue to fleece their subjects.

As I mentioned in previous communication, Aslan, a masterful student of the history of Jesus’ day, noted that there were many insurgents desiring and campaigning to overthrow the Jewish government in an effort and fight for their freedom from Roman dominance. Each, in turn, received the same treatment—death by crucifixion. Those crucifixions all took place on the highest, most visible spot on the road to Jerusalem—it was called Golgotha. The purpose of that site was to be a ‘clear warning’ to would-be traitors.

Jesus knew that his teaching would be considered treason. The Jewish law prescribed retribution for most personal crimes as ‘tit for tat’—‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’. Jesus, however, recognized the untenableness of such a system. He could see clearly that the Jew ‘lick for lick’ legal system only fostered hostility among people. More importantly, he realized that love and acceptance were the only dictums by which people could live in harmony. So he preached extreme heresy—‘Love your God with your all and love your neighbor as yourself’ (paraphrased). Desperately, he tried to convince his disciples of that truth before his ultimate fate came to reality. We’ll never know for sure whether or not he was successful.

What we do know is that, just as all traitors, he was convicted of treason and crucified. After his death, all sorts of stories were written and rewritten with the ultimate fate of his teaching being basically discarded or ignored. By the year 325 AD, his so-called followers (Christians) were in total discord with one another—perpetual bickering, quarrelling, and even fighting among themselves. That atmosphere prompted the Emperor Constantine to commission them create a Christian Church of their liking—it would become the ‘official Religion of the Roman Empire’.

The Church they established was patterned exactly after Judaism—Jesus’ teaching of love were totally ignored. Instead of an all loving, all forgiving, all accepting God who permeated every tiny aspect of creation with his Spirit, they promulgated a God separate from his creation—a God who was ‘just and merciful’—seldom loving. Just like the Jews, Christians created a God who could be bargained with—he could ‘knock you on your butt or send you to hell one second’ or handle you like a little lamb’ the next—a truly schizoid God.

So, look around at what we have—an entire world at war or threating war perpetually. So, what about the ‘what ifs’?

What if the followers of Jesus had perpetuated his teaching of the universality of God—‘split a peace of wood and ill be there, lift a rock and find me there’? What if they had accepted Jesus’ teaching that everything they ate and drank was the substance of God, while being ever-mindful and thankful for their God’s loving sustenance—the word eucharist means ‘thanksgiving’. What if his followers had perpetuated his teaching that God is ‘all love’, and , therefore, our command is to love and accept our God as all loving, while, simultaneously, accepting our neighbor with that same love. What would be the ‘consequences’ of such what ifs?

I would freely suggest to you that the consequences of such ‘what ifs’ would be an entirely different world from ours. There would be no monstrous buildings erected under the guise of ‘pleasing God’—built on the backs of literal slave labor and costing billions of dollars to both build and maintain. There would be no hierarchy lording over their subjects, fleecing their money and distributing power among themselves—does any of that ring true with the Jewish religion of Jesus’ day? There wouldn’t be a preacher on every ‘street corner’, telling you that he’ll show you the way to heaven for a ‘pretty penny’—and each of them has a different way.

What if there were genuine ‘love’ of God and neighbor rather than the ‘greed’ exhibited in Jesus’ Judaism and perpetuated through religion today? Jesus despised religion and he flatly said so—he called them hypocrites. Paul, likewise, despised religion. You should read Professor Garry Wills’ book, What Paul Meant. If you haven’t already, you need to read my books Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality. You would get a real ‘what if’ perspective in their reading.

If Jesus’ followers had heeded his advice, there likely would be peace in the world. However , the lure of the ‘almighty dollar’ led them away from Jesus and us all, who are God—we are of God’s substance (spirit)—we are God’s children—Jesus is our brother.

What if we all had similar understanding? What if each of us adopted that theme as our living guide? —wouldn’t the world be a much more pleasant place to live in!!!

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

MIRACLES—Do you believe in them—if so, why—if not why? I suspect that most who do believe in miracles do so because they have been taught (led to believe) that by begging God to so something spectacular for them, sometimes it actually happens. Of course, there is usually an associated anticipation that it will happen—and the greater the anticipation over an entirely menial request, the greater the likelihood that the request will come to fruition.

Now let’s review miracles from an historical perspective. If you will recall, all pre-Christian religion was bases on mythology, astrology and superstition—there was very little science (known truths) about anything—the earth was flat, the earth was the center of the universe etc. Therefore, imaginations ran wildly rampant. The tricksters (Magi) rapidly caught on that they could readily impress people and control their imaginations by pretending to perform a miracle right before their eyes.

The Zodiac had long since been recognized as the controlling influence over literally everything. Therefore a Magus (magician), who was readily recognized as an expert in interpreting the constellations and their activities, had little trouble convincing his audience that he was performing a miracle right before their very eyes. The Bible, both Old and New Testaments, is filled with descriptions of miracles, one after the other.

Aslan, a super credentialed student of such matters, in his book ZEALOT, relates that by the time Jesus appeared on the scene, there were literally hundreds of ‘miracle workers’ roaming the Mid-east. Many of them were attempting to generate a rebellion against the Roman rule, and were using their magical show of power to garner followers in their coup attempts. The Jewish hierarchy were fearful of any such anarchy, and gave them all the same treatment for such treason— crucifixion.

Jesus, also was a ‘miracle worker’—at least that’s what the biblical writers say. But he wasn’t crucified for that—he was considered a treasonist because he preached a philosophy of love in contrast to the Jewish eye for an eye—. Jesus was a super genius. He readily understood human nature—he understood that we each are different people with different personalities and traits. He knew that nothing could be in existence without the presence of its creator (God) being in it, and that included himself, you and me—‘Split a piece of wood, and I am there. Lift a rock and you’ll find me there’.

I am as convinced as I’m sitting in my seat, that Jesus was not a ‘miracle worker’. Those who were with him and those who wrote about him had all been indoctrinated with the Magi understanding—undoubtedly, they figured their stories about Jesus would be more impressive if a few miracles were thrown in here and there. I suppose we’ll never know in this life what those who followed Jesus, as well as those who wrote about him, actually understood and wrote—so distorted is the re-written Word.

In any event, here’s my take—miracles involving physical change are an absolute impossibility—here’s why. I have defined the essence of God thus: God is a Perfect Rational Being. That perfection means he cannot possibly change anything—if he did, he would no longer be perfect. He would be reverting into the temporal world of change. Remember, time is a measure of change—God exists in a state of Eternity where no change is possible—there is no time in eternity.

What God did do with his Perfect Intellect, was to visualize each of the perfect particles of energy (quanta) which make up everything in existence. Upon ‘seeing them’ in his perfect intellect, he said ‘I love them, I choose them, I accept them, I Will them to be. That Will of God is the Holy Spirit—by necessity, it is branded onto each perfect particle so that they remain perfect. They have done so for 13.7 billion years and will continue so until God’s plan has been executed to completion.

Now, 13.7 billion years is the ‘time measure of change’ which we humans are able to observe. But, each of those particles is perfect in both form and function, meaning each is unchanging and unchangeable, so guess what—they, each, have always existed in eternity—they are God. So Jesus didn’t know Quantum Mechanics (particle physics) as we do, but he did know that his Father was present in everything or it couldn’t be—that is verified in the Coptic Gospel of Thomas by his response to his disciples when they asked him ‘when are you going to restore the kingdom’, he replied, ‘the kingdom of God is spread out all over the earth about you and you don’t see it. Remember, the Jews were expecting the Messiah to restore Paradise just for them—that’s what they had been told and believed for centuries.

So, from my philosophical perspective, no physical miracle is possible. Certainly, many instances of so-called miracles occur randomly. However, there is an exact scientific explanation for each—that explanation may not be readily obvious, but it’s there. Remember when it wasn’t obvious that the earth was round? Our knowledge base has expanded so dramatically since the days of mythology, astrology, superstition, witchcraft, and the likes—who would ever have imagined putting a human on the moon or on to Mars. Strange as it may seem, we’re just scratching the surface of understanding the truths of God’s Perfect Intellect—the scientific explanation of any and all ‘miracles’ will be apparent someday.

For a fuller understanding read Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality, and Provocative Catholic. All are available now at Amazon-Kindle or, autographed from me — handg@comcast .net

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

CRYING OVER SPILT MILK—How many times I’ve heard the expression, ‘Ain’t no need in crying over spilt milk’—I suspect many of you have heard the same or similar expressions. The meaning of that exhortation, of course, is that ‘what’s done is done and can’t be undone’. So rather than cry and moan about it, get on with meaningful acceptance or change if possible. If the undesired event was your fault, make whatever adjustment necessary to prevent its happening again. On the other hand, if you were the recipient of such untoward activity through no fault of your own, try as best you can to avoid the perpetrators—sometimes, it may seem unavoidable resulting in a self-felt justification for defending yourself.

Throughout history, people have felt ‘justified’ in bring grief upon others. In the Bible, it started in Genesis with Cain slaying his brother Able and continued with a procession of skirmishes and wars involving the Hebrews—at times, even God got into the fray. At one time the Jews were enslaved by the Egyptians for forty years, but they dutifully endured their hardship, and eventually escaped. However, their escape was no ‘picnic’—they wandered haplessly and seemingly helplessly in the desert in rout to the ‘Promised Land’. At times they lost faith in their God and began worshiping idols. That activity prompted their leader Moses to fabricate the Ten Commandments, the breech of which became known as sin with attached dire consequences. Somehow they persevered all of their hardships and eventually reached the ‘Promised land’. Life there, however, was no ‘bed of roses’—there seemed always to be some adversary desiring to conquer and enslave them—guess what—there still is.

The point I’m making is this; the Jews seemed never to ‘cry over spilt milk’—through ‘thick and thin’, they always seemed to ‘pick up the pieces’ and move on. They were, in fact, constantly crying out to their God for help. At one time, when they were being threatened with extinction by a Philistine giant, a lad named David took that giant down with a sling-shot—he eventually became king. I might note, parenthetically, that sling-shots are featured big-time in my book, Growing up in Fancy Farm, Kentucky.

Strange how things happen—four thousand and more years later, they finally are able to begin making peace with their neighbors.

Fast forward to Jesus. He saw the inequity in the Jewish society. Also he deplored their philosophy of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’. He spoke of love as the answer.—that got him killed. He knew it would but he didn’t ‘cry about it’. We don’t know for certain what his followers understood and actually wrote about Jesus’ teachings. What we do know is that , during the next three hundred years, there were literally hundreds of Christian factions which sprang up all over the Roman Empire—they bickered and fought among themselves so much that Emperor Constantine commissioned them to form a single Christian Church which he made the official religion of the Roman empire. Of course that church had a hierarchy which put itself in charge—the underlings had no choice. I suspect many of them did cry but to no avail.

During all that activity, one thing became clear—white Europeans came to consider themselves as superior to all other forms of humanity. They considered black Africans as little better than gorillas. They spoke of native Americans as ‘savages’. It may surprise you, as it did me, to learn that in the year 1452, Pope Nicholas V issues a Papal Bull, ‘Dum Diversas’, in which he authorized the European invasion of Asia, Africa, and the Americas with enslavement of their inhabitants—and basically they did in many areas.

From our perspective, the most affected seemed to be the Black Africans and the Native Americans. We all know the rest of the story—the Natives were relocated to reservations—the blacks were bartered like animals as slaves to white European Americans. The Black African Americans eventually won their freedom, but the scourge of ‘racism’ hung over their heads. Discrimination against blacks was generally universal—many blacks seem to think it still is, and they may be right.

My point is this—many, many black Americans have risen above that scourge—they realized that ‘crying over spilt milk’ would only keep them ‘beat down’. They ‘held their heads high, became educated, successful, and some or our country’s ‘best citizens’—they have, on fact, done it by the thousands. Yet we have this unfortunate group who are incited by a few to keep ‘crying’ because their great and great, great grandpa was a slave.

Our job, as I see it, is to encourage those of that ilk to ‘throw off the blanket of self-imposed oppression’, rise above the fray, and become productive, respected citizens in our society. Where are the churches in this conundrum? They have lost all respect. They, collectively, have been the main instigators and perpetrators of slavery from the beginning. They need desperately to make a public apology—then, and only then, can their ‘faint voice’ be heard. Until they apologize, anything they might say would be total hypocrisy—don’t hold your breath.

No, we as a society, must cease ‘crying over spilt milk’, ‘take the bull by the horns’, and offer all the encouragement, both verbal and financial necessary to help remediate this situation. There has to be a major psychological change in both the black and white communities before improvement can occur. We all must quit ‘crying over spilt milk’. History cannot be changed—its effects can and must be reversed. It takes all sides to make it happen—you can ‘lead a horse to water, but you can’t make him drink’.

I have outlined my supporting philosophy in two books, Wilderness Cry, nd Peace in Spirituality. They are available on-line both hard-copy and e-books.

On a personal note, my upbringing was in some ways similar to many blacks—the main difference was we were not slaves. I was raised in a strictly pioneer situation—three room shack by the railroad track—five brothers, no electricity or convenience of any kind. The one thing we has was extremely hard-working, dedicated parents. We were pure paupers raised in the heart of the ‘Great Depression, but the one thing my parents refused to do was ‘cry over spilt milk’—much of the time we didn’t have any milk. As a result, each of us, in turn, became successful.

I have chronicled much of that life in my little book, Growing Up In Fancy Farm, Kentucky. Most of the hundreds who have read it have expressed awe and inspiration, as well as history and humor in its reading. It is available only from me (handg@comcast.net)—cost of book is $15 plus $5 for mailer and postage in US.

My advice to all is ‘hold your head high’ and never ‘cry over spilt milk’.

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

SLAVERY AND RACISM-Slavery is a binding legal ownership of one human being by another accompanied by an obligation of the owned to work for and obey the orders of the owner. Racism is the perception that people of a certain race are inferior, in one way or another, to people of their own race. These two subjects have been the objects of ‘social division’ seemingly forever.

Slavery has its most notable roots in the book of Genesis. There, Abraham’s wife, Sarah, because she was barren, directs him to mate with her ‘slave girl’ and bring forth a child. The slave girl whose name was Hagar was noted to be Egyptian. Abraham did as directed and mated with Hagar, the slave girl. She conceived and bore a son named Ishmael—presumably, he became the progenitor of essentially all of the Arabic peoples.

It is also noteworthy that the entire Hebrew tribe eventually became enslaved by the Egyptians. That came about, as you will recall, by virtue of a famine which struck the Hebrews necessitating the purchase of grain from the prosperous Egyptians. The Hebrew leader at the time was Abraham’s grandson, Jacob, the son of Isaac who was born to Sarah, Abraham’s barren wife, after the birth of Ishmael. That ‘miraculous’ transaction was ‘arranged by God’ so that Abraham’s heir would be from a Hebrew rather than from an Egyptian. Strange, isn’t it how ‘what goes around, comes around’?

In any event, after a forty year tenure of enslavement, the Hebrews escaped from Egyptian bondage. However, along their nomadic way they developed a legal system involving slavery. Their system involved enslaving ‘their own people’ for a specified period of time as restitution for indebtedness. They had rules for enslavement of men only, women only, and, at times, entire families. Quite obviously, those rules persisted in one form or another for thousands of years because, in at least two places, we hear Paul in his epistles exhort the the slaves to be ‘respectfully subservient to their masters in all things’ (paraphrased). Paul, of course was a Jew and knew the Jewish law quite well.

Strangely, I have been unable to find any teaching of Jesus on that subject. We know that Jesus was a zealous traitor—that in itself was sufficient to get himself crucified—he needed no additional fuel for the fire. Certainly, if he had condemned slavery, it would have been tantamount to throwing gasoline on an open fire. It is reasonable to suspect (possibly assume) the writers and re-re-re-writers of the New Testament avoided that subject—they had all of the support for slavery they needed directly from Hebrew Law—no interference from Jesus needed. Maybe they assumed that ‘if Jesus didn’t address slavery through their writings, no one would notice’.

Well, as a matter of basic historical fact, no one did notice until Abraham Lincoln came along. He freed the black African slaves, and in doing so, he caused and won a civil war— got himself assassinated as a result—sounds a little like the Jesus story, doesn’t it?

Now, I would like to look each and every one of you in the face directly and ask you, individually, ‘who was responsible for the enslavement of the African people?’ I can tell you in a heartbeat, it was the Roman Catholic and European Protestant (Christian?) Churches. If any one of them ever offered a ‘word of dissent’, it was with the ‘tiny whisper voice of a mute sparrow’. You will recall that once upon a time the Pope in Rome was the most powerful person on earth—he crowned the kings. When he fell into disfavor with Martin Luther et. al., it wasn’t over the concept of slavery—they all condoned it.

I might add, that in all of my eighty seven years of attending Catholic Church, I have never to my recollection heard one single murmur suggesting the immorality of slavery. In addition, during seventeen years of Catholic education, it was never suggested that slavery might be wrong. I often wondered why—I have, on fact, asked the question often—I never got an answer—I think I know the answer. The Church stood to lose way too much power, money and control by getting involved in that fray. So they didn’t—they still haven’t. They play their same old ‘sly game’—knowing full-well that very few care and that fewer yet will research the history, they wait it out—in a few short years, those old dudes of us who do care will be dead and gone—they conveniently ‘sweep it under the carpet’ and pretend it never happened. That same old dog has been hunting for hundreds of years, but I suspect he’s getting old and tired—likely wont hunt much longer.

In my humble opinion, that immoral stance by so-called Christianity is the foundation for the civil unrest in our society today. There are many great black citizens who have risen above the foam, and ‘command the respect of all’. However, there is a ‘seething volcanic seam’ being incessantly utilized for ‘destructive political purposes’—and the Christian leaders remain silent. The ‘agitators’ continually ‘demand respect’—no one gets respect by demanding it—yes, they might get ‘attention’—respect, no.

So how does ‘racism’ play in this game. I’ll tell you how—it is perpetuated by those ill-intentioned, power-seeking individuals who have long recognized it as a ‘political weapon’. I’ll ask one more simple question; ‘do you think white, black, brown, red children are born with a racial bias?’—not the chance of a snowball in hell. Left to their own devices, their skin color would never be an issue—likely, it would never even be noticed, or if so, only as a lament—‘I wish my skin were as beautiful as yours’. No, someone has to tell them how bad that color is and how, as a consequence, the person in that color is undesirable. Our children would never in a billion years be ‘racist’—it has to be inculcated—and it continues to be on all sides. Shame on everyone.

If you would only read my two little philosophy books, Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality, you would recognize the foundational basis for my understanding.

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

POSSIBLE-Now here’s a word that is used frequently, and with many different implications. For instance we often hear someone say, ‘that’s not possible’. Or, ‘I can’t possibly believe she said that’—‘maybe, but do you believe that’s possible, do you?’ How about, ‘I know that’s impossible’—just a few examples. So what does the word ‘possible ‘ mean? Simply stated, it means able to, be done or accomplished.

Throughout recorded history, the realm of ‘possibility’ has been expanded beyond human imagination millions of times. In the beginning, the pace was extremely slow. However, during the last century or so it has quickened at an ever-accelerating speed. Why do you suppose that is? That answer can be summed up in one word, science. And what is science?—simply stated, it’s the discovery of a truth—it is not the creation of a truth—the truth has always been there—we just had to discover it.

And how does that discovery come about?—through the ‘scientific process’ of imagination (speculation-postulation), experimentation, and observation. When we do the same thing over and over with identical results, we have discovered a truth. Mind you, we did not ‘make or manufacture’ that truth—it has always there—we just didn’t know about it or recognize it yet.

As we have discovered more and more unknown truths, we have unearthed the possibilities of even more astonishing truths at an ever-accelerating pace. You likely have heard the expression, ‘necessity is the mother of invention’, and that is so true. Global disasters, major wars, pandemics and the like have stimulated the human mind to imagine all sorts of here-to-fore unknown scientific facts (truths). Some of those include Galileo’s discovering the sun to be the center of our solar system rather than the earth which the bible taught, Vasco da Gama’s sailing to the Far East and back proving the earth was round and not flat as proclaimed by the Church, Einstein’s development of the theory of relativity leading to the rapid development of the cosmological sciences and Quantum Mechanics, the Wright brothers proving that human flight was possible, Henry Ford’s development of the ‘assembly line’ form of manufacturing making it possible for mass production at a quicker pace, development (discovery) of penicillin and other anti microbials and vaccines of all sorts to fight infections, just to name a few. And then, we fast forward until today when it appears that the unthinkable is taking place—the development and mass production of a Covid-19 vaccine in a year or less—that would have been thought totally impossible one year ago.

Now lets get to the nitty-gritty. Very likely, any church-going Christian has heard this expression many times; ‘With God, all things are possible’. And I would say, that is absolutely true, but not in the sense and connotation which we have been led to believe.

We, in general, have been taught that God is the overseer of his creation. He is sitting somewhere outside his creation observing everything that’s going on. His people are doing all sorts of things which ‘displease’ him, and for that, they will be punished in hell forever or, at the very minimum, serve a stay of severe torment in ‘purgatory’ in order to teach them a lesson and get them all cleaned up for heaven.

On the other hand, we have been taught to beg God for forgiveness so we might escape those torments. We have been repeatedly exposed to the concept that God’s Will can be changed and that we can entice him to perform a miracle just for us—I often wonder how many millions and millions of people have been disappointed or even despaired to find out that they had no ‘favor with God’—their loved one died with cancer or what-ever disease in-spite-of their begging and pleading for a miracle —their wayward son continued on his path of dereliction and wound up in prison—or their wayward daughter eventuated as the ‘harlot of the neighborhood’.

There is an explanation for all of that foolishness and it stems from one, and only one, possibility—the folly of religion and the defining essence of God; God is a Prefect Rational being—God is not a ‘puppeteer’. In a nutshell, that means that everything possible in this existence has already been determined—it is up to us to make the discovery of each of those possibilities (truths). To be frank, as much as we seemingly have discovered, we haven’t even ‘scratched the surface’.

Lets look at some examples: if it’s possible for someone to develop a personality that allows for murder, larceny, rape, etc., it will happen—if it is possible to knock a baseball over the wall for a home run, it will happen—if it is possible to send a manned rocket to the moon, it will happen—if it is possible to have computers, iPhones etc., it will happen—if it is possible to perform major surgery on infants in-utero, it will happen—of it is possible for an 87 year old man to make a hole-in-one playing golf, it will happen—if it is possible to send a manned spacecraft to Mars and/or beyond, it will happen—and, sadly, if it is possible for mankind to destroy himself and everything else living on this earth, guess what; it will happen.

So, you see, God is not directing the show on a moment to moment basis. His ‘show’ started roughly 13.7 billion years ago—it continues uninterrupted with no intermissions—the ‘cast of characters’ changes continually with all ‘possible’ contingencies being addressed on a continuing basis. We happen to be in that cast right now—who knows what tomorrow brings—likely things we never thought of or dreamed possible.

On a personal note, I became aware or those facts years and years ago but it took me forever to explain them to myself satisfactorily. My mind and personality had been so distorted by irrational religion that ‘perfect rationality’ had a very hard time working its way into my system of possibilities. When it finally did, bingo—I saw the ‘Perfect Rationality of God’. I saw that you and I are ‘mirror images’ of God’s Spirit. I saw that every one of God’s ‘natural’ possibilities (natural laws [truths] ) are possible for us—we just need to gradually discover them. It is doubtful if we ever will but who knows?—God does.

I have outlined and developed that philosophy quite clearly in my two philosophy books, Wilderness Cry, and Peace in Spirituality. For your peace of mind and clarity of understanding, I strongly urge you to read them. They are readily available on line.

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

COMING OF CHRIST-Christmas is Rapidly approaching. Of course, it represents Christianity’s selected date for celebrating the birth of Jesus. It is not his actual birthday—rather a day chosen in opposition to a pagan celebration. Jesus real birthday has been suggested by historical ‘experts’ to likely be in April or September. Be that as it may, we know the eventuating story of his birth, childhood, public ministry, crucifixion and ascension, and the prediction of his ‘second coming. However, before we can address the ‘second coming of Christ’ we must understand the ‘first coming’. I can see the quizzical expressions on your faces right now—what on earth does he mean?—we know all about the ‘first coming’—we have the Bible. And I would say to you, “not so fast. Maybe a quick historical brush-up would help”.

As you will recall, somewhere along the line, the Hebrews discovered the ‘one true God’. That God was theirs and theirs alone. Because of the disobedience of the first man, Adam, God had banished Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden (Paradise) and committed them to a life of toil by the ‘sweat of their brow’. Later on, the Hebrews entered into pacts with God—they actually had conversations with him. In the last pact, (covenant), God swore that never again would he abandon them. Furthermore he would send them the Messiah who would ‘restore the kingdom’ just for them alone—such was their collective imagination.

By the time Jesus appeared, the Jews had already developed a very corrupt, and self serving scheme of, government which rewarded those in power, and kept the rest at bay, poor and basically enslaved. Consequently, the masses longed for the Messiah whom they had been promised.

Jesus possessed a genius mind, dramatically superior to all others. He recognized the universal evil of selfishness, but, more importantly, he saw how the dualistic idea of God being ‘over here’, and his creation being ‘over there‘ was being used to control the peasant masses— all for power and money. He knew instinctively that nothing in existence could be unless the Spirit of God was present within it. Therefore, the concept of a dualistic God, as envisioned by the Israelites was dramatically incorrect.

Now, lets address the issue of Jesus’ name. His name is Jesus—not Jesus Christ. The word Christ is derived from Latin and Greek, and is interpreted as King. Remember, in the Old Testament, the Hebrews ‘were promised’ a Messiah (King) who would rule over their entire world in a ‘new paradise’.

When Jesus began his public ministry by proclaiming himself to be ‘the Messiah’, and preaching an heretical gospel (good news) of love, it was a ‘tough gristle’ for many to chew and swallow —they were so imbued with the philosophy of ‘an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth’, both in their society, and in their understandings about God. In fact, the King and High Priest couldn’t, and wouldn’t even try to chew it—it would have poisoned them and destroyed their ‘power base’ over society. So, they killed him.

After Jesus’ death, his bewildered followers seemed not to know what to think. There seems to be nothing recorded for fifteen after Jesus’ death until Paul began writing letters to his followers. As I have expressed in previous writings, I believe Paul got his understanding about Jesus from the very people he was persecuting. By his own admission, he had some sort of emotional reaction while he was riding to persecute them. Once upon a time, such a reaction might/would have been labeled hysteria , but today it is known as somatic symptom disorder. In some of his writings he referred to Jesus as Christ Jesus, which means that he recognized Jesus as a Spiritual King. Therefore, the word Christ is a titular reference, just as King David, or as M.D. following my name. I can find no writing as to when he was first referenced as Jesus Christ, rather than Christ Jesus, as Paul did.

If you have not read the Coptic Gospel of Thomas, I highly recommend it. In that gospel, Jesus keeps saying, over and over and over, the exact same thing while using using different words— it was his desperate attempt to get his apostles to understand his teaching. In the clearest statement of all, when his disciples asked him, ‘when will the Kingdom come’, he said to them; “It will not come by waiting for it. It will not be a matter of saying ‘Here it is’, or ‘There it is.’ Rather, the Kingdom of the Father is spread out upon the earth, and men do not see it.” That statement indicates clearly that Jesus recognized the presence of God’s spirit in everything, including him.

In that same context Jesus told them, “It is I who am the light which is above them all. From me did the All come forth, and unto me did the All extend. Split a piece of wood and I am there. Lift up the stone and you will find me there.”

In proclaiming that he was ‘the light of the world’, Jesus was attempting to dissuade them from their understanding that God was sitting in some palatial heaven in some mysterious whereabouts, while overseeing and over-lording his creation—rather, God is in all creation. That creation, of course, included Jesus, as well as everyone and everything else.

Jesus spoke the only ‘truth’— love is all that matters. Jesus certainly had not the foggiest idea of/about Quantum Mechanics (particle physics), which, in my opinion, defines the essence of God, but his genius told him that the Holy Spirit (Will of God, Love of God, Acceptance of God) had to be present in everything or it could not exist.

Jesus readily understood the malicious and cultist nature of religion. He observed how religion was being used by High Priests to bilk the poor peasants of their hard-earned meager existences under the pretense of ‘appeasing’ an angry God—they were, in fact, appeasing their greed.

Jesus readily recognized that the light of that knowledge must be spread out over the entire world through his apostles. He knew he would be killed for his philosophy, and was hopeful of having them be the ‘spreaders’ of his message. Were they?—not yet, that I can determine. Those who wrote, and re-wrote, and re-wrote, and re-wrote, ad nauseum, the so-called canonical literature we have, the Bible, were not to be dissuaded one bit by Jesus’ heretical teachings, but they were, in fact, shocked to learn that Jesus was going to ‘die for them’.

Of, course, as matter of historical fact, the Jews did kill him. The narrative should have ended there, but it didn’t. Those writers were so determined to ‘have it their way’ that they created another narrative—a resurrection, ascension and, above all, a second coming. That wish became so strong that many taught and believed Jesus’s return to be imminent—such was their wishful thinking. It has been only two thousand years or so, and still no coming—so, what’s a few billion years to an eternal God?

Do you think Paul would be surprised to know that?—I suspect he would be flabbergasted. Also, I suspect John Mark, Paul’s side-kick, who wrote the first Gospel would be dismayed also—remember, he quoted Jesus as saying that the end of the world would happen before the current generation (40 years) passed. We will never know what their ‘real’ ideas and understandings were, nor where they came from. Quite obviously, if they came from Jesus’ mouth, he would have to be considered an imposter—I don’t believe that for one second.

If we accept Jesus as real, and I certainly do, then we are forced to accept that his post crucifixion narratives were fabricated by writers biased in their predetermined belief—they simply had to make their longsuffering come to an end. I don’t have the foggiest idea about who the culprits were, and I sincerely doubt that anyone does. It is possible that the answer lies buried in Vatican archives—I have no expectation of us ever being privy to that information.

Seemingly, no one (maybe John, a little) understood and accepted what Jesus told them. It would, in fact, be The Greatest Story Ever Told if we could only hear it straight from Jesus’ mouth.

Based on my definition of the essence of God as a Perfect Rational Being, coupled with my basic understanding of Particle Physics, the Jesus story as told in the Gospel of Thomas makes perfect sense—it adds absolute clarity to the subject. It also prompted me to write my basic philosophy Book, Wilderness Cry-A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe. Another book Peace in Spirituality has been published. It represents only one of a myriad of possible extrapolations of that definition. More importantly, it presents the absolute, indisputable meaning of The Second Coming.

The Second Coming will occur only through the universal awakening of the human consciousness to the presence of the Will Of God, the Holy Spirit, in everything in existence. Then, and only then, will Jesus’ truth, light of the world, shine over all creation—please don’t hold your breath—religion has the human consciousness pinned to the ground.

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

UNIVERSAL GOVERNMENT (Globalism)—That exact idea has been implied, suggested, and even attempted many times throughout the course of human history—always with total failure. Yet, in this country, the socialists Democrats are ‘hell bent’ to, turn our country over to some benevolent dictator who would rule with perfect compassion and equity for all. Everyone would share equally in everything. The strange thing missing in all of those proposals is ‘equal productivity’ by each and every individual.

I remember reading a book, some sixty years ago about Communism—how it was proposed to work and, more importantly, how it actually did work. The book, titled Animal Farm, was written by George Orwell and was a satire about the Russian Revolution. As is always the case with human (pig) nature, some become more important and therefore more ‘entitled’ than others. That prompted the famous statement that ‘all animals are created equal’ “But Some Animals Are More Equal than Others”.

So it is with Communism, Socialism, Fascism, and literally every ‘ism’ you have ever heard of except Capitalisms grounded in republic democracy. The founders of our nation and the writers of our constitution were well aware of the ‘follies’ of other ‘isms’. They were well aware of the dangers of insidious power grabbing by a few ‘more equal than others’ pigs. They recognized that when everything is ‘free’, most quit producing with the net result that there is nothing left to ‘be free with’. Guess what happens then—total collapse of the system.

That exact scenario has played out many times—look at communist USSR. They were so hell-bent on conquering the USA and ultimately, the world with their ideology, that they exhausted their resources on military, while simultaneously, a great portion of their work force became rebellious non-producers—the inevitable happened—the roof caved in—‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down that wall’.(Ronald Reagan)—and he did.

To my knowledge, no socialist, communist government has existed one hundred years without eventual collapse—but they keep trying, pushing, suggesting, demanding—will they never learn?

Just today in our local newspaper, Pope Francis seems to be making a plea for ‘Globalism”—everyone must be reduced to the poverty state—then and only then the lazy, non-productives will be able to gloat in their envy—perfect happiness will prevail while everyone starves.

It is sheer folly to assume that the world can be fed by by ‘mule-driven’ agriculture. Likewise it is sheer idiocy to assume that the relentless uncontrolled breeding by the ‘unwed’ which, either puts countless millions on the streets, or fills the garbage cans with aborted fetuses, is a sustainable methodology of social existence.

Yes, each of us are gifted with different talents, and we are duty-bound to help our neighbor in need if possible. The best way of helping is through a ‘family structure’ with both a mother and a father guiding and instructing their children in a meaningful way—teaching them to be, not only responsible, but also productive and self-sufficient. There will always be those who, for one reason or another, ‘fall through the cracks’. Jesus said, ‘The poor you will always have with you’.

We must never foster poverty—however, we must always be responsive to the truly needy. There’s an old saying that is probably more true today than ever—‘Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day. Teach him to fish and he will eat for a lifetime.

In defining the essence of God as A Perfect Rational Being, and observing that Rationality play out on a ‘universal stage of selfishness’, it is obvious to me that God had an eternal plan. That plan has the rationality that every gross entity in existence operates in a time zone of selfishness. Expressed otherwise, it means that every existence, even inanimate ones, have needs directed at self. Those needs, of course, dictate ‘change’ and change is measured in units of time—so all gross entities exist and operate in an ever-changing selfish timeframe.

In order to be productive, we must be willing and eager to change. Also, we are called and given an opportunity, to share as needed. It is a figment of any mythological imagination to think that ‘all pigs can or will be equal’.

Pope Francis assumed his papal name after Francis of Assisi who lived on the edge of Catholicism, but nevertheless was canonized a Saint. Like so many before and after him, Francis was able to ‘see God’ in everything. But, because he didn’t have any fundamental knowledge of existence, he really didn’t ‘know who or what God was’. He did, however, sense the presence of a God in everything, and for that he is to be lauded. He reportedly lived a very simple, pauper’s life. Supposedly, he rejected the idea of using ‘too much’ of the earth’s treasure.

Francis and his companion were praised , and I suppose, rightly so. The hermits and ascetics, also, were lauded and admired— many were Sainted. But consider this, If everyone lived a ascetic’s life in the desert, or wandered around the world barefoot ‘smelling the roses’, it wouldn’t be very long until they were eating the roses—then what?—total starvation and an extinct human race.

In my book, Wilderness Cry, I lay the groundwork for defining the essence of God, and do, in fact, define that essence as A Perfect Rational Being. While extrapolating many of that definition’s ramifications, I demonstrate, conclusively, that religion is the basic cause of most, if not all, of the worlds problems. All three of the Abrahamic religions are based on mythology and astrology—not one of them have ever defined the essence of their God.

In my book, Peace in Spirituality, I show conclusively how and why religion creates both hostility and emotional derangement among people. At the same time, by defining the essence of spirituality, I show the absolute only way peace can be achieved. Philosophically, it can happen—practically speaking, total lasting peace cannot be achieved in the selfish time capsule within which we exist.

Therefore, it behooves us to honor our time-tested system of government and reject globalism at all cost—the globalistic, ‘more equal’, pigs will certainly become ‘hogs’ and devour our world.

I continue my call for the World-wide Communion of Spirituality as the absolute only possible pathway to peace.

baptism Bible Buddhaism catholic catholic-church catholicism Christianity church Eternity exodus Faith Future of Christianity God God's Will gods Hilary L Hunt MD Hinduism HolyGhost Holy Spirit homily Islam Islam Christianity Jesus Judaism Judaism Buddhism Money moses Philosophy pope-francis Power Religion religions saints salvation Science sin theology The Trinity

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.

• Bible
• calling
• death
• Eternity
• exil-selfishness
• God
• Jesus
• legal system
• love
• Philosophy
• poverty
• psychology
• Religion
• sin
• slavery
• spirituality
• survival
• Uncategorized