WRONG JESUS–HILARY L HUNT MD

WRONG JESUS–You may be wondering , already, ‘what on earth does he mean by ‘wrong Jesus?’. Well, I’ll tell you, but it won’t, necessarily, be a short answer.

To begin with, let’s take a look at the so-called Christian world—as of the year 2014, there were 33,000 listed, different Christian religions and/or sects on this planet. Any reasonable person would ask in wonderment, ‘how can that be?’ Again my explanation will not be a short ‘one-sentence-er’.

To begin with, we must look at the book of Genesis—therein lies the framework for all of our division and consternation. The scientific information we have today, in my opinion, proves the ‘Creation story’ to be pure mythology which was based on someone’s imaginary attempt at explaining the universes’ existence. That singular ‘false premise’ set the stage for everything following to be false—any conclusion which is based on false premises is, by its very logical nature, certain to be false.

So, given that original false narrative, the plot thickened and expanded from there—a continual and continuing ‘string of incorrect conclusions’ right up until the time of Jesus. The myth goes like this—

Mankind and, indeed, all animal life had been created into a state of ‘perfect harmony’—a paradise where all animals loved each other and snakes could talk. Genesis doesn’t tell us about any other animals talking—it makes sense that they all could and did—I would loved to have eavesdropped on their conversations.

Genesis does tell us that Eve and Adam disobeyed their Creator (God), and he, in turn, cast them, along with all the animals, out of Paradise and condemned then to a life of toil. No longer were the animals lovey-dovey with each other—can’t you just imagine how ‘all hell broke lose among them’? It’s a wonder that any of them survived—maybe the ‘sly weasel’. Ill bet that snake wished he’d kept his mouth shut.

By the way, how’s come Genesis doesn’t tell us how it came to be that all of a sudden the snake decided to ‘turn against God’ and tempt (lie) to Eve—maybe that was an ‘incidental triviality’ not worth mentioning. My take—I suspect that the mythology writer thought his story was convincing enough with no further explanations necessary—just let you ‘fill in the blanks’.

And, fill in the blanks, they did. They started with ‘frequent conversations’ with their God—their ‘bargaining sessions’ became often and sometimes lengthy.

Ultimately, their fantasy and ‘wishful thinking’ had to be satisfied. In one of their most famous bargaining sessions, they convinced God to send them a Messiah who would immediately ‘recreate paradise’ just for them—to hell with everyone else. So, they waited in ‘long suffering’ for that day. When it finally came, guess what?—they discovered that their period of waiting wasn’t over, after all. To their chagrin, Jesus told them that he first must die and then come back before their Kingdom of Paradise would be restored—what a disappointing ‘slap in the face’—2000 years now, and still waiting.

Well, we know the historical story—the Jews, themselves, killed Jesus because he was ‘teaching hearsay’ to their religion. Jesus followers, however, believed in his teaching—but what was his teaching? That’s the ‘sixty four thousand dollar question—that’s where the ‘rub’ comes in.

Remember, literally all of Jesus early followers were Jews—they were well aware of the Jewish religion. Consequently, from day one on, there was no consensus about what Jesus teaching really was. More importantly, there was no consensus about what his teaching meant. And there, my friends, is where all the trouble started.

Paul was the first known person to write a single word about Jesus some fifteen years after Jesus’ death. He freely admits that he has no idea of how he came by knowledge of Jesus’ teaching—in previous communication, I have opined that I am certain he got his information from those he was persecuting. When he suddenly realized that he may be/was persecuting God, himself, he had an overwhelming emotional (hysterical) reaction which prompted him to proclaim he did not know ‘whether he was in the body or out of the body (paraphrased)’. Be that as it may, Paul never agreed with Peter, James and John about the requirements of salvation. Paul preached a salvation by faith in Jesus whilst the others insisted on, not only faith but ‘works’ as requirement for salvation.

After three hundred years, the Christian community world wide was so divided as to prompt the Roman Emperor, Constantine, to call a general council of the worlds ‘bishops’ at Nicaea, and demanded that they formulate a singular religion of their liking—that, they did, and Roman Catholicism was born. That religion created a ‘high and mighty’ hierarchy, which eventually exhibited so much corruption as to prompt the ‘Protestant Reformation. That ‘break-up’ began a well-spring of Protestant religions. The Catholic Church, itself, had already split in to Roman and Eastern Churches by the mid-one-thousands.

So, why all the break-ups? They had to do with many factors, but two were outstanding—power struggles on the one hand, and theological on the other. The Roman Church was so bestraught with corrupt leaders and tainted practices—selling indulgences for profit, the ‘Inquisitions”, etc., as to prompt the Reformation. Once the Reformation began, the ‘cat was out of the bag’. Different “versions’ of the Bible were appearing often, and each version represented the theological whims of each writer.

Consequently, the mythology story of Genesis began, in earnest, to ‘play out on the giant, world stage’—Star Wars isn’t even ‘in the running’. Splinter sects of Christian religions sprang up like weeds, everywhere—they seem still to be. Why? None of them, of which I am aware, ‘knows Jesus‘. They each, in turn ‘paint him with a little different brush’—that brush gives them an ‘identity’—it destroys Jesus’ identity. Not a single, solitary one of them is willing or seemingly able to accept Jesus as he was /is. Not a single one is able or willing to accept the Jesus I know—Pure Love and nothing more. He gave his life that we may have life—can there be greater love? He commanded us, explicitly, to love—‘love our God and love our neighbor’. That’s the only, real Jesus I know.

Every preacher I have ever seen or heard has to ‘flavor’ Jesus’ teaching—they are compelled to ‘put words in his mouth’, and why?—I think I know—power, money, control.

So. I ask you, truthfully, ‘Which Jesus do you know?’ I know the Jesus who recognized and understood that the Spirit (Will) of God was in everything in existence. He knew that God was not separated from his creation—God was/is in all of his creation simultaneously. He knew that God was ‘Perfect Love’—therefore he could reject nothing—God is ‘all loving, all accepting.

In light of that understanding, two years ago I called for the recognition and acceptance of The World-wide Communion of Spirituality. That insight recognizes the presence (Spirit [Will]) of God in each and every particle of energy of which everything in physical existence is composed.

Please consult my two book’s, Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality, for full understanding.

HYPOCRICY–HILARY L HUNT MD

HYPOCRICY–Do you know what a hypocrite is? In short, it’s a person who says one thing, or pretends to be doing one thing, while doing the exact opposite. I have known many hypocrites in my eighty seven years—likely, you have also. Most of them have been in the field of politics, but not all. Political hypocrisy is so commonplace as to, almost, be expected. We see it play out on the national scene daily—-people in power making rules ‘for everyone’ except themselves.

The most recent case came to light just today—the governor of California attended a lavish birthday dinner party involving many people, in spite of his order for his constituents to avoid such events. I must refer again to George Orwell’s famous book about communism, ‘Animal Farm’ in which, in describing the status of equality in communism, he notes that ‘all animals (people) are equal; it’s just that some are more equal than others’ (paraphrased).

For me, the most disturbing place of all for hypocrisy is in the realm of so-called Christian (?) religion. I say ‘so-called’ because in my lifetime, I have not seen a single cleric of any religion do as Jesus commanded—‘go into the world and preach the good news that I have come to die for you, and that God loves you; take no provisions, not even a second cloak; live off what you are offered; if you are not accepted, shake the dust off your sandals and move on (paraphrased)’. What I have observed is a hypocritical, self-serving hierarchy, and televangelists who have made a ‘mockery’ of Jesus’ commands.

Do you remember James and Tammy Faye Baker?—I do. Do you remember Jimmy Swaggart—I do. Do you remember Oral Roberts?—I do. In fact, I not only remember him, Mary Lou and I attended his TV production at the ‘City Of Faith’ in Tulsa, Oklahoma. Not only that, I played Golf with him at the Sothern Hills Country Club after the US Open was over in 1977—I was an invited guest of his ‘right hand man’. Oral was a good golfer—5 handicap. Both of them were members of Southern Hill Golf Club which, at the time, was rated the 12th. best course in the United States.

Each of those three televangelists fell like ‘shooting stars’ because of their ‘infidelity’ to Jesus teaching—they all proved to be hypocrites of the highest degree—they preached one thing and did another—their words were for everyone except themselves. There’s an old, oh so true, saying—‘pride comes before the fall’.

Now let’s look at the scandal that’s rocking and wrecking the Catholic Church even as I write. I’m speaking of the ‘cover-up’ of the Cardinal McCarrick homosexual sex scandal. It seems clear that high ranking prelates, from Pope John Paul 2 on, ignored his escapades. In fact, it seems so bad that there have been a calls for John Paul to be de-sainted—that in itself may be a cover-up—who knows?—somebody (s) does/do. The pressure on Pope Francis got so bad that he, finally, had to address the scandal. He did so in a weakly-worded four hundred page report in which he failed miserably on two fronts—seemingly, he did not ‘finger’ other living prelates, although he did accept the resignation of one other—more importantly, he did not address the rampant degree of homosexuality and homosexual practices among the clergy.

All of those activities are hypocritical attempts at holding together a Church torn from corner to corner by one scandal after another. Neither has it ever been different in the history of the Church. There have been many ‘bad popes’ in the Church’s history. Benedict 1X was pope three times—some historians say he was first made pope at age eleven. Others dispute that, and say he became pope first at age nineteen. There is, however, no dispute that he sold the papacy. There were many ‘bad popes’ because the papacy seldom seemed be about spirituality—it always was about ‘power, money, control’. If you care, just go on-line and read the history of the ‘bad popes’.

Could we have expected anything different?— unless we are dunces, I think not. Was not the Church which Constantine commissioned patterned exactly after Judaism, where those in control ‘had it all’ and the peasants had nothing but guilt and shame—they were obliged (forced) to make expensive ‘perfect offerings’ to God for their sins. Of course that perfect offering could only be provided by and offered by the High Priest at an extortionate expense to the penitent.

The hypocrites who led Christianity have always been about power, control and money. They have built monstrous edifices as their ‘home churches’ (cathedrals; basilicas—status symbols), and hob-knobbed with the ‘rich and famous’ while, hypocritically, preaching humility and charity to their subjects. Their sexual escapades, literally from day one, are well documented—yet, hypocritically, they have universally given their subjects the ‘piss ant’ treatment over their sexuality—they certainly knew how to control people—just tell them, authoritatively, they are going straight to hell for being normal human beings.

As the result of such attituded toward sex, Gordon Rattray Taylor, in his astute book, ‘Sex in History’, described Medieval Europe as ‘A cesspool of psychosis’. Of course, the Inquisitions were going on at the time—who wouldn’t ‘go crazy’ worrying about being burned to death for bring normal.

In my opinion, one of the biggest hypocrisies involves the Church’s refusal, to-date, to address the issue of homosexuality, in general, and among the clergy, specifically. Pope Francis recently suggested that civil unions between homosexual partners should be established so as to protect their civil rights—personally, I have no problem with that. However, I suspect that opinion of Francis’ is intended to offer ‘cover’ for the homosexual clergy—in that sense, again, pure hypocrisy.

People are becoming more and more disenchanted with both religion and politics, not so much because of what is said, but more importantly, because of the observed hypocritical actions of the ‘sayers’. I am fully aware that this may seem partisan, but Donald Trump is the only president I have ever known who has done exactly what he promised—guess what, he’s not a politician—just a simple, straightforward business-man—he’s a deal-maker—a bargainer. Oh, would that we had more like him. You may not like what he did, and that’s your prerogative. However, no one can truthfully deny that he kept his campaign promises—he proved he’s no hypocrite—I’m just observing.

Wouldn’t it be nice if both politicians and preachers alike could and would ‘speak truth—‘do as I do’, just as Jesus said—“come, follow me”.

There exists an absolute, non-hypocritical, truth, which is explicitly outlined it in my two books Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality. You might want to investigate farther.

MYTHS AND MYTHOLOGY–HILARY L HUNT MD

MYTHS AND MYTHOLOGY—A ‘myth’ may be defined as ‘a widely held but false belief or idea’. ‘Mythology’ may be defined as ‘the adaptation of myths into a philosophy of cultural beliefs and practices, especially religion’.

When we take a look at the derivation of religions in ancient times, we discover that each religious belief and practice was based on a false narrative. Fourteen thousand years ago, the obviously brilliant Egyptians connected the dots of adjacent stars to form various animal entities. They accurately calculated the time required for each character to rotate off the horizon and called it an ‘age’. Because each character was of different dimension, the ages ranged in time from about 1800 years to 2200 years. The word Zodiac means ‘circle of animals’, and the Zodiac as designed by them contained twelve characters—the time required for the complete rotation of the Zodiac characters was calculated to be about 25,960 years. They were, in fact, ‘pretty smart dudes’.

So, given that scientific (mathematical) observation to be true, what happened next? In their earnest desire to explain the events in their lives, and, indeed, explain the meaning of their existence, they began using that ‘known fact’ in a mythological way—they began rationalizing. They perceived deities who had specific duties and/or attributes, and they gave them names. Those deities were usually representative of some celestial body. Later on, the Greeks did likewise. The great Greek philosopher Socrates was sentenced to death because of his insistence on ‘essential’ explanations of everything, including gods. His acolytes Plato and later on Aristotle attempting to define the essence of matter devised the term ‘atom’ which means the smallest indivisible particle of matter. They had no tools at the time to explain their hypothesis, so, in reality, they had no realistic idea about an atom. Of course, they were proven wrong my modern scientists—a quantum is the smallest indivisible particle of energy (matter)—not only that but each quantum is perfect in both form and function.

It is noteworthy that the writer(s) of Genesis recognized ‘one true God’ two hundred years or so before Socrates time. While the ‘one true God’ is likely to be factual (that can’t be proven), the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses was/is also a myth—and now I can hear you screaming, stomping and pulling your hair out—you are calling me every despicable name known—how dare I say that? And I say, ‘its mandatory’—if you cannot ‘define the essence of your god, your god is a myth’. The Athenians killed Socrates for demanding essential definitions. Socrates knew that nothing has meaning without an essential definition. In other words, using plain simple language, if you say it and can’t define it, ‘you don’t know what you’re talking about, and neither does anyone else’.

At an early age, I recognized the ‘deficient image’ of the God as presented to me. Instinctively, I knew something was wrong but I had not the tools with which to correct it. My studies and quandary led me through many cracks, crevices, twists and turns before , by sheer good fortune, I was able to ‘honor Socrates demand’—I was able to do something never before done—I was able to ‘define the essence of my God, and to do so in ‘irrefutable terms’—My God is a Perfect Rational Being—and so is yours—if you only knew it. However, truth is always truth whether or not we have discovered it—the gold in the hills of California was always there before 1849—it just hadn’t been discovered yet.

My definition of God’s essence says it all—it explains all in clear, concise, unquestionable terms. It graphically explains the Trinity, Soul, Eternity, Heaven—it precisely dispels the ‘myths’ of Hell, Purgatory, Limbo, Physical Miracles, and much more. It dispels the myths surrounding Jesus—his birth, life, death, and beyond. It does, however, lend credence to who the real Jesus was/is—he and we and everything in existence are of that same essence. That same Spirit of God permeates everything in existence—otherwise, it could not be. Jesus was the messenger, the one and only messenger to understand that—he was the cristus, the light (enlightenment) of the world. He told us who God is—God is all love. God created every tiny perfect particle of energy of which everything is made—he commissioned them to perform perfectly. That, they have done, and because they are perfect and unchanging, they exist in eternity—they are God. God could not possibly reject himself.

No one can prove the existence of God—neither can anyone disprove God’s existence. However, knowing, scientifically, that everything in existence is perfect in both form and function makes it philosophically sound to accept a concept of God, and that God is a Prefect Rational being. It is not some grizzled old man sitting on some mythical cloud in some mythical place—it is, however, a Perfect Being who exists in a state of unchanging and unchangeable eternity—a state of being where time, which is a measure of change, is impossible.

Therefore, all of the myths promulgated in the Bible and perpetuated by organized religion are just that—pure, unadulterated mythology, straight out of the astrological, zodialogical playbook of Egyptian and Greek mythology. The pity is this—here we are, scientifically, and psychologically educated, rational human beings, patterned after the rationality of their creator, and we are still mired in the swamp of mythology from 14,000 years ago. Will we ever shed that ‘dead snake skin’ and turn to the teaching of the ‘real Jesus’. ‘Moses gave you ten commandments, but I give you two—hear ye, oh Israel, thou shalt love your God with your whole self, and you shall love your neighbor as yourself (paraphrased)’. It is then and only then that peace can prevail.

For those of you who have not read my two books, Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality, I strongly urge you to do so, that you may obtain a clear understand of what you just read.

WHAT IF–HILARY L HUNT MD

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?

MIRACLES–HILARY L HUNT MD

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 sun was the center of the universe etc. Therefore, imaginations ran wildly rampant. The tricksters (Magi) soon caught on that they could impress people and control their imaginations very readily.

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 intellectual mind, 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 our all over the earth 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 its 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 some day.

For a fuller understanding read Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality.

PRAYER AND PRAYING–HILARY L HUNT MD

PRAYER AND PRAYING—Do you pray? If so, to whom do you pray, and for what purpose—what expectations do you have from your prayer? Have you ever been disappointed or felt rejected because your prayers ‘weren’t answered?—I have many, many times.

As a small child, through adolescence, and teen-age to adulthood, I was taught to pray incessantly. I was taught that there were basically four types of prayer—contrition, whereby we acknowledge our sins, beg forgiveness, and vow to never sin again—petition whereby we beg God for favors—thanksgiving whereby we thank God for the favors we have received and, more importantly—intercession, whereby we beg the Virgin Mary and other Saints in heaven to implore God to hear and honor our prayer requests.

Early on in my life, all of that seemed logical basically because I was taught that way. I spent thousands of hours on my knees begging God and the saints for everything imaginable. I can vividly remember dozens of times kneeling on the hard wood floor of our little tin-roofed, three room shack saying the rosary begging Mary too intercede with God to protect us from terrible lightening, wind and hail storms. Parenthetically, I might add, if you have never been in such a building during a heavy hail storm, you have no idea what a terrible sound that is—it would frighten the wits out of the devil, so to speak. By the way, our little house never got blown away nor struck by lightening—so, the assumption was that God was answering our prayers.

As I grew and became educated in basic physics, I came to realize that it would have been literally impossible for lightening to strike our house—there were trees ninety to one hundred feet tall standing near-by—they certainly would have sent up a charged plume directing the bolt to them. On the other hand, I can still hear the twang of lightening bolts hitting the railroad rails that ran only a few yards in front of our house—that twang could be heard running along those rails for miles. In light of all the ‘science’ which we didn’t know at the time, prayers got the credit for our house being protected—note how assumptions can be so erroneous at times—very often may get us in trouble.

About the time I became nine to ten years old, I became an altar boy in the Catholic church—that meant a whole lot more kneeling on hard-wood altar steps. But I was dedicated and just knew that the more I hurt, the more God loved me. After two or three years of that intense praying, and observing that the overt things we prayed for, even as an entire congregation, never even once came to fruition, I began questioning why God was not answering our prayers—after all, we were the ‘one true church’ founded by Jesus and perpetuated by the apostles—why would God not respond to us? I hadn’t even heard of Islam yet. I did, however, know that the Jews were unbelievably wicked people because they killed Jesus. So, I asked my priest for whom I had great respect. He told me, ‘it was God’s will’.

I was thirteen at the time and had already begun to think clearly and independently. It occurred to me that, if God’s will couldn’t be changed by all that praying, we were not only wasting our time and effort, but maybe we were actually offending God by begging him for something he didn’t want to do—I was analyzing.

At that very moment, I began questioning the nature of my God—who exactly was this God I had been taught about so rigorously and vigorously? I was well aware of the open animosity exhibited by many local Protestant preachers against Catholicism—the local radio stations carried their messages daily. They preached about the biblical God incessantly, and were always railing against Catholics—how come? We had the Bible also—what was different between ours and theirs—was their God different from ours? Because I didn’t know the answers to any of them, each of those observations and questions lingered with me and pestered me continually. The only thing I did believe (know) was that God’s will (whoever he was) could not be changed.

I was like ‘lost in a fog’—I couldn’t make heads nor tails out of the ‘God situation’. Oh I had been well indoctrinated in all of the Church rituals surrounding Christmas, Wise men (astrologers), Holy Week, Jesus’ Crucifixion, Resurrection, and Ascension, the Immaculate Conception of Mary’s mother, Mary’s Assumption into heaven, plus all of the Holy Days which mandated attendance at Mass—they all mandated prayers of extreme contrition, petition, and vigorous intercession—not a whole lot of thanksgiving except on Thanksgiving Day. Of course, the Catholic Mass is a ‘sacrificial offering’ as appeasement to an ‘angry God’. I was confused by all the mystery and ‘magic’ surrounding the God issue and religion.

Even though I wasn’t aware of Islam per se, I was well aware of the Mohammedans (Moors) who had conquered the Holy Land and even invaded Europe all the way to Portugal. I was taught extensively in Catholic religion class about the Crusades and their ‘justification’. In addition, I had already learned about the existence of Hindus and Buddhists but didn’t know much about their religion—it didn’t matter much because they all were wrong—at least that’s what I was told.

As I entered college and studied philosophy including Logic, I came to understand clearly that nothing has ‘meaning’ without a clear ‘essential definition’. I immediately went looking for an essential definition of God—I couldn’t find one—there wasn’t one. I didn’t know it at the time, but no one had ever been able to define God’s essence—many had tried; all failed. I vowed that I would—it took sixty years and a whole lot of luck but I did.

Driven by a continual curiosity ‘frame of mind’ of, I stumbled upon a video course in Quantum Mechanics (particle physics). Oh, I had been well educated in Chemistry, Classical Physics, Biology, etc.—I knew that atoms were composed of protons, neutron, and electrons, but I didn’t know what the protons and neutrons were composed of. I knew that light was composed of photons which traveled in wave form, but I didn’t know that a photon could and does exist in a particle (quantum) state. It was a very long course—24 forty five minute video lectures.

What I discovered in that course was startling—suddenly I knew who God is—God is a Perfect Rational being. That Perfection is exhibited in everything in existence. There is absolutely nothing in existence that is not a perfect example of what it was intended to be. Likewise everything in existence is prefect in function—everything functions exactly as it was designed for its state of existence. More importantly, each quantum of energy is identical to its counterparts—they, being perfect, unchanging and unchangeable already and always have existed in eternity—they are God.

So, with that knowledge and understanding, what legitimate prayers do we have—lets examine:

Contrition—What is its value? Only when we confess to ourselves—when we admit to ourselves our extreme greed (selfishness) in whatever way it has manifested itself in us, and we vow to ourselves to change our ‘wicked ways’, does it have value. Putting the burden of our sin on God by blasphemously asking him to ‘change us’ is ‘putting the cart before the horse’. God is perfect—he cannot possibly change or be changed. God has already accepted (forgiven) our sin through Jesus.

Petition—another misdirected form of nonsense. You’re only setting yourself up for either disappointment or disillusionment. Either way, if you pray and it doesn’t happen, you may think God doesn’t love you or that you didn’t pray hard enough or that you weren’t worthy—both d– and d–. If you pray and it does happen, you may think you’re ‘special’ in God’s eyes. Its like praying that your child’s appendectomy will be successful and it is; did your prayer cause that? What if you hadn’t prayed and it was successful, what is that? What if you prayed and it wasn’t successful—your child died, or if you didn’t pray and your child died and you feel guilty? Again both d– and d–.

Intercession—Now here’s a really good one; begging someone else who may have more influence to intercede for you. The same principle applies as petition—the only difference is the middle-man/woman.

Thanksgiving—now here’s a really interesting one. We know that God, being perfect, is perfect love. That means that he loves (accepts) us the way we are without any ‘strings attached’—he proved that through Jesus. Human nature, being as it is, would demand that grateful people express an attitude of appreciation. While God has absolutely no expectation of returned thanks, I believe it would do us good and maybe make us a little more loving (accepting) of our neighbor if we at least occasionally contemplated God’s perfect love and expressed our gratitude to him. In light of that I believe our only truly justifiable prayer is ‘Thank you Lord God, Jesus, and Holy Spirit (will of God) for my life, for my sustenance, and for my eternal salvation. Amen, Amen, Amen’.

I am aware that many of you have read my two books, Wilderness Cry and Peace in Spirituality and are tired of hearing about them, but for the few who haven’t, my philosophy is laid out clearly in them. You may want to investigate.

CRYING OVER SPILT MILK-HILARY L HUNT MD

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’.

SLAVERY AND RACISM-HILARY L HUNT MD

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.

POSSIBLE-HILARY L HUNT MD

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 truthit 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.

COMING OF CHRIST-HILARY L HUNT MD

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.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xeiuktXDhrw&feature=youtu.be%60