THE PRIME DIRECTIVE

enin rebnun - enin rebnun - enin rebnun - enin rebnum - enin -rebnum

To Kick Things Off - Let's talk a little about the morality of The Prine Directive, as enunciated in so many Star Trek episodes. I think as a member of virtually any religion we can pretty much agree that the Prime Directive sucks. Out task here on earth is not just to "be happy" but to be a Light to the world, as Jesus commanded. We are supposed to let our Higher Principles radiate out to the rest of the world. Some people have said, "I hate a know-it-all". I don't hate know-it-alls. Not one who in truth really does "know it all" and brags about it. You should be glad that a "know-it-all" is there. You can learn from him even if you don't like him personally. What I really dislike is the so-called "know it all" who doesn't know anything but claims he does. Bob Dylan in one of his songs says, "Do you take me for such a fool to think that I'd make contact with one who tries to hide what he doesn't know to begin with". I also hate people who say "I could tell you what you need to know but you're not ready to hear it yet". What does that mean? It sounds like a person hiding behind smoke and mirrors. I don't like either Jesus or his impostor representative on the radio saying "I could tell you what heaven is like but you lack the capacity to understand it". That's an insult to our intelligence. Give it the old college try. Isn't that what your father tells you? "You'll never know untill you try".

I think an excellent example of where Captain Piccard disregarded the prime directive himself, or at least was caught in the middle of it was where he encountered a guy- a real jerk- who claimed to have come from the future to "observe" the past. Personally I don't like being "observed". I can't picture some artist just sitting there on a hill with a canvas as a bloody Civil War battle is raging and he's hired to paint it. Anyhow, Captain Piccard was faced with a moral delema when he had to decide whether to intervene to save a planet that was undergoing climactic changes where the atnosphere was blocking out the sun and soon millions would freeze to death due to a global ice age. Piccard wanted to try some expiriment where the atnosphere was burned off that would let the sun through, but if there was even a tiny percentage error the whole atnosphere would burn up and the planet would be in a vacuum. Piccard asked the traveler from the future what he should do and was taunted with the reply, "You know I can't intervene in the Past". Piccard finally developed the balls to say "I don't give a damn about your so-called future. To me it hasn't happened yet. I have to make a decision with what I know here today". That's what is known in the real world as courage. I sometimes wonder whether Christians have courage because they have their little insurance policy of eternal bliss in Heaven, so they think, and any lack of character down here will be lost in the sands of time when their expected future arrives. There's one thing about morality and that is that it is practiced when you don't think anyone is looking. (Selah)

Man has to fight off his lower animal urges. The human brain is a layered affair. There is the higher brain and then there are more primal, primitive parts of man's brain that he shares with the lower vertibrates. Some would say this points to evolution. The thing is virtually every other animal is living up to its full potential. A dog or a bird or a deer will act on instincts that are thousands, if not million years old in terms of caring for its young and such. Even reptiles that abandon their eggs after laying them in the sand- - seem to have God-given instincts. Once hatched a lizzard or a dinasaur of old will break out of the shell and make a mad dash to the water on sheer instinct, before some predator can catch and eat him. Man seems to be the only "animal" that does not live up to his potential. Some people may talk about "Animal rights". Well, the way we treat lower forms of life is a reflection on our values, not there. We may want to save some species of mountain lion that in itself has only beastly instincts and has no time for lofty thoughts like ecology or preservation of species. Of course animals have themselves benefitted from being around human beings. They live longer and are generally healthier, believe it or not. It's been a saying of mine in my writings that I would rather live with a dog that was raised around moral human beings- - than a human being, who wasn't. Dogs take on certain traits from learning to socialize with higher forms such as ourselves. And it's ludicris to suppose that we could not learn something from "God", were "God" the sort of being that wanted to tell us anything. If an animals personality can be improved from being around humans, then a human should be vastly improved from being around God. The fact that said "transformation" hasn't seemed to have happened is only a reflection on God, or rather, God's seeming reluctance to get involved in human history or dreams in any manner.

I would like to stress again this notion of Monday morning quarterbacking. As the beer commercial says, "You only go around once in life". If there's anything more, it's only speculation. You can't live your life on a speculation; you need to live your life on facts as you have known and lived them. There is another Next Generation Star Trek episode where Piccard was given the chance to avoid getting into a fight in his youth because said fight caused medical complications later on. That is, he regretted getting into the fight till he was shown by the being "Q" that he would have been much less a man and much more a mousey individual were to let this new spirit of "caution" get the better of him. In some ways young people are more in touch with life and reality than older people, because they're there, in the moment. They are not looking at an incident through twenty or thirty years of practiced guilt and naustalgia or otherwise distorted or rehearsed memory. Frank Sinatra sang, "Regrets- I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention". Pray we could all live our lives like this. I can't picture looking over my own life, "You know I really would have been happier as a teenager if I had had the mental logic and reasoning of a man of fifty". No, no!

It's been my thought for years now that the two biggest faults of Christians - - you know the ones - - is that they are hypocrites and cowards. It's wrong to say that the church contains hypocricy; the church is hypocricy. In the same way, so I'm told, that liver is one meat that can't be made kosher because it's virtually impossible to get the blood out of a liver. In terms of cowardess- - they will face a fierce enemy in Iraq, and this is to their credit. But they are scared spitless of that neighbor down the street because he's a practicing Athiest.

I would like you to briefly think of four animals that Christians resemble.
THE RAT: The first is the rat. A rat is an animal that races through a maze to get it's food. This is like an infant who cries to get food and knows he'll get it by crying. I wonder whether in time the rat comes to believe that it's his running through the maze and presses the bar that causes the food to appear. It would not be the first time people got cause and effect confused. Do you know that a hundred and fifty years ago that a hundred percent of the people who ate carrots eventually died? What a shocking fact. I think about that one every time I light up a cigarette. Christians think if they make a "decision" for Christ and subsequently get a lucky break in life that somehow one caused the other. This is delusiona thinking.

THE APE: Apes are a curious breed because ape development actually exceeds human beings' development. I am told that a two and a half year old ape could actually take care of a two and a half year old toddler. I have never liked Apes. I guess it's just too much raw "ape" emotion for me. They think they're something they're not and after the passage of enough time, the whole world knows they're not. So it is with many church men.

THE SABER TOOTHED TIGER Here we find savagry in action. Even the comon feline has this trait. A tom cat has sex with a female and she has kittens. The first thing that happens is the mother cat doesn't want to have sex any more. But another tom cat comes along and sees this and thinks, "I know what to do. I'll kill the kittens and then her hormones will chance and she'll want to have sex again to have more kittens to care for". And so it is. Church Pastors, when they first take over a church seek to get strong members out of the church. If possible they will evicerate a church of most of its members so they can "have members after their own heart". This isn't just hypothetical. I've seen three instances of it. There has been the case of Gene Scott on television, and I've seen two instances of it in real life.

THE HONEY BEE: First one of the Drones gets picked by the Queen bee to have sex with her and so becomes the King bee. Aparently they have sex in the "consort flight" and after the copulation the King Bee dies. Of course a "Queen" in either the ant or bee world has to be almost born that way. They are groomed from birth with special necters and pollins that produce certain Queen hormones. The Drones searve the Queen in her court. The worker bees exist outside the hive and do all the grunt work. The King Bee is Jesus Christ, the Queen bee is the local pastor, the Drones are the Church elders and the workers are the laity.

Greetings to those in cyber space. I’m glad you found my blog. The name of this blog is “Escape from Egypt” and that’s what I intend to get around to talking about eventually. First let me tell you a little about myself and this blog. This is the eighth posting on this blog, which makes it a little like a Black Sabbath album with eight songs. I intend to make this the most lengthly post of the eight, assuming I include all the little “bits” I was planning. Most of the material in these blog posts has in some way to do with either religious or spirituality or metaphysics. I hope you’re interested in those things. There’s a place for my photo on this blog but the thing is I don’t have a digital photo of myself ready at hand to use, but I don’t have anything to hide. If you’re curious about my age let me put it this way. I became interested in the teachings of the Bible after I graduated high school.. Among the things that got me interested in Christianity were Jehovah’s Witness literature and listening to Garner Ted Armstrong on the radio. At that time, around 1970, I was still too young to vote. If you “My Space” people are wondering what I am wearing today, I have on black leather shoes, dark gray socks, kaki dress slacks, and a red Florida State shirt. Randy Rhodes said on her radio program yesterday that back in Florida she and the girls could always tell which of the young men were down from Washington D C because they always wore kaki slacks.

MATH CORRECTION: On the posting after this one I saw that the angles at the edge of the Pyramid at Giza were 78 degrees. This was based on Gene Scott’s flawed reconing of the height angle at 51 deg. When the correct number is used the angles at the edge of the eight sided pyramid come to approximately 70.5 degrees.

Better Free Your Mind First

John Lennon in the song “Revolution” said the words “Better free your mind instead”. Freeing your mind and spirit comes first before you try and strive for freedom in other ways. The Jews won freedom from slavery in Egypt, only to confront a God who demanded the sacrifice of your son, like Abraham did. King Saul thought he was king of the hill only to confront a God who demanded the complete genocide of the Amalikites. King Saul balked. But some of you may say, “But those Amalikites were bad people; they bullied the seven daughters of Jethro in The Ten Commandments and wouldn’t let them water their flocks!” If you make yourself a mental whore without a moral compass, what will you do next? Some may say that Christianity is about a vicarious sacrifice, or a sacrifice of one’s self covering the sins of another. Let me tell you a story. Once there was a couple named Bo and Hope. They were happily married and had a little four year old boy named Zach. But one night Zach was run down and killed by a hit and run driver. The driver was the husband’s daughter who he didn’t know existed till recently. The daughter had an enormous capacity to self pity because she was an orphan and people blaimed her self-obcessive center of the world mentality on the fact that she had a deprived upbringing. But hope, the step-mother already hated Chelsea because of her spoiled and “delinquent” ways. So it was decided that Chelsea’s mother would take the rap for running down Zack, because Hope hated Chelsea so much this would defuse her anger. Of course it didn’t work. The truth came out. The truth always comes out. What a person wants is not just “anybody” paying for the crime; they want the guilty party paying for the crime. And this is exactly what is wrong with vicarious atonement.

Last night I had a dream. I dreampt I was in a van with other people headed vaguely westward to some school where we were supposed to sign up to take courses. I remember at the time I lived with my parents at home. I couldn’t have been more than twenty. I had wanted to take a shower that morning but things kept happening to prevent me from doing that. Elvis was also in this van. I knew Elvis personally. I knew that Elvis was at the time in prison. He was married but not to Pricilla. He owned a house on the outside but said his goal was to buy a home in Santa Cruz but right now he didn’t have enough money. Elvis was perhaps in his early twenties in this dream. I was thinking “If you don’t have enough money, who does?” The “campus” was more like one of these “Industrial parks” you see around town. Elvis had classes to go to but I was supposed to sign up for something but had no idea what to take. I wandered the outside area. There were some picnic benches there and some woman was surprised to learn that I actually knew Elvis. I said “Sure I do. He appears in all my dreams”. (strange) Someone had brought me some stuff left in the van. It was a bunch of letters in long, business envelopes all addressed to various people. Only someone, and I had a definite suspect in mind, had scrawled all over the envelopes in red felt pen stupid remarks and circled items and such thus rendering them unmailable. Shortly after this I was given a box of long, and very sharp knives to carry somewhere. The box was coming open and the knives, held together with a piece of twine, were coming out and cutting my hands, which was painful but I kept going. Finally, I remember being in some hospital or something with bloody cuts all over my hands. I then remembered that the nurses here had drugged me in the past and now they wanted to inject me with a drug again. I shouted at them in protest calling them stupid and other things but to no avail. They only addressed their remarks to each other such as “Do you have the medication” or they would respond to some woman having difficulties in labor. They ignored everything I said to them and injected me. Finally I remember riding back in the van. I saw that Elvis was again in the van. It suddenly dawned on me that I had absolutely idea where I lived. We came up to the Prison and went through all the security gates and checks. They let us off in this big warehouse type area with bars everywhere. There was a courtyard to the north where the sun shone through and bars separating us from the court yard. I remember there was organ music like a baseball stadium playing in the background. “How curious” I thought.

Someone reading this dream would conclude that I’ve got unresolved psychological conflicts, and no doubt I have. Some times (we aren’t going to get to everything I was planning) there can be a law of unintended consequences. Liberals, like Christians have “good intensions” but things don’t work out like they planned, or we would have reached perfection by now. Christians make grandiose claims for themselves, too. Like the liberal they believe man is basically evil and only “they” know how to “rein him in” so to speak. You know (and I’m going to use a little cryptic code here just like that Supreme Court decision on the Di Vinci code)- - There is an event that occurred 29 years ago in my life to the day and date. We have provided a few clues to help you guess what that event is. I remember the day because it was a classmate’s birthday. Lennon must have thought Paul had sleepless nights. Some may argue that “The Apostle Paul” had a hard time sleeping at night. Some (after reading this blog) may say “The one mistake you made was in your head”. Well, roll these clues around in the stony recesses of your mind and maybe you’ll get a little satisfaction after a while.

But is it always “In your head?” Once there was a little girl in a startrek episode and she was lonely and developed an imaginary friend. But one day this “friend” became real because an alien being had assumer the identity of the little girlfriend. And she would tell the girl to do things she knew she shouldn’t do. Eventually the ship’s psychiatrist got involved. I guess I’m wondering which is worse. Would it be better if the Apostle Paul, who wrote between he and Luke 2/3 of the New Testament- - would it be better if he really “made the whole thing up?” Paul admits to going into “Arabia” in the desert for three years and “There I was taught by the Lord Himself personally”. How could this be? Some soap opera people “Have an encounter with God” and it turns out not to be God at all. Who’s to say the encounter in the desert Paul had was all in his head. Perhaps it was a real person but also, perhaps it was not “The Lord Jesus Christ”, at least as we have come to know him. There will be more “clues” later on in this blog and read posts seven and eight if you’re curious for an identified Name.

I was going to talk about four wonderous animals, the Rat, the Saber Toothed Tiger, the Ape, and the Honey Bee and how they relate to Church people. I think I’ll save that for another blog except for this one example. Do you remember a Startrek Next Generation episode called “The game” where one person brought back this headset game that kind of hooked into your brain and used your mind as the computer screen? The object of this game was to put some ball or other shape in this hole, and when you did you got an electric “buzz high”. That was your “reward”. Soon it seemed everybody aboard ship was playing this game. You would advance to “higher levels”. People would say “After a while the game practically plays itself”. You use your mind power to manipulate the ball to get the “reward” of a mental buzz. Soon this game became disruptive. I think you can see what we have here is nothing more than a conditioned rat. A rat will brave an electric shock grid more powerful than anything to get a brain electrode stimulation of its pleasure centers under circumstances where if it were only food that were being offered the rat would rather starve to death than face the electric shock grid.

John Lennon said on a Live at the BBC recording, “I’m John and I too play a guitar! Sometimes I play the fool”. Once there was a man from Antioch. He was a proud member of the Antioch Baptist Church and was on sabbatical in pursuit of Wisdom. He sailed and came to the port of Heipha. There he met a fish processor. They got to talking about fish and the Jewish man who was the fish processor said to him, “Above all what you need for wisdom is to eat the head of the sucker-fish”. “Are you sure you don’t mean a blow-fish” the man from Antioch said. “No, I mean a sucker fish”. So the fish processor sells the man a whole bag full of fish heads that he might get wisdom. He eagerly hurries home to try out the fish on his family. Everyone turns up their nose in disgust saying “This tastes terrible!”. The man from Antioch angrily goes back down to the fish processor and demands his money back saying indignately, “You cheated me! I took these fish heads home to my family and these things are positively uneatable’ The Jewish fish processor says, “Oy Vee - - - already it’s working!”

SECRETS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH

Greetings to all the blog-ees out there. I am the blog-er so you all must be the blog-ees. I hope you like our new color. I am still new at this this being only my second day of blogging. Today we are going to talk about the early Christian Church and speculate what got it going. In case you are wondering I did used to be a devout Christian and just earlier this evening I "played the part of the holy roller" to an individual with whom I didn't want to appear "back-slidden". You know if you've read my previous posts I really don't believe prayer in the form of petetion to an all powerful and all-caring Diety works. I believe at times people can have a "positive feeling" about something that can turn out to be accurate. Some speculate that somewhere in the cells or our brain we are plugged into the primal Universe since we are all products of the Big Bang and part of that primal explosion, which is Creation, is in all of us. One of these days I hope to talk about a rather fictional realm of mine called the Orion Federation, which borrows heavily from Star Trek, Star Wars, and "Dune". The constellation of Orion has two primary stars that people know and those are Betelguese and Reigel. (That's how I spell it) The Catholic Church once saw itself, and still may, see itself as the repository of all knowledge, both physical and spiritual. I think it's time we investigate the "Catholic" or Universal church. The tag of "Universal" was applied to the Bishop of Rome quite early, by the end of the first century. They claim to trace their Popes back to St. Peter but I'm not buying that. I don't believe St. Peter ever went to Rome. I don't believe he wrote either of the Epistles of Peter. In fact after not that long of a period I believe he died in obscurety, being no longer relivant to Christianity, that role being taken over by St. Paul and "John of Ephesus". The word "Catholic" or "Universal" dates so far back in history we can pretty much state that the origion of the Christian church and Christianity is the origion of the Catholic Church. Let's now take a look at some of the secrets of the church and who holds them and what their relivance is.
OPUS DEI: If you have internet or TV access you know by now that this is Latin for "work of God" and there are various layers to the organization. Many are bound to celebacy but some live normal lives, except that they need "permission" (from who?) to leave the house and that their mail is routinely monitered and one may presume, censored. The organization was founded by a Mexican priest in 1922 merely as a way of showing love and devotion to God. You also may know that the Jesuits are suspicious of Opus Dei. Basically I class Opus Dei kind of in the same catigory as the Skull and Bones fraternity. There "really isn't much to find out" about them aside from that which they want to tell us. If they are secretive, they are doing a good job of guarding their secrets. It is also known they wear a spike thing on their thy, and also that they routinely whip themselves in pennance. The Di Vinci code says they are involved in murder or something but I haven't read the book, and after all it is fiction.

THE NIGHTS TEMPLAR: This is a group that knows where all the bodies are burried. They were formed in the middle ages in order to fight the crusades. After the war they brought home the spoils and became very rich, such that the Catholic Church became afraid of them. This organization is known to guard the secrets of the Holy Grail. As you may know from the Di Vinci codes, there is no challice or cup in Leonardo's painting of "The Last Supper". This is said to send a message that the "secret of the grail" lay elsewhere, other than an object. People look at things like the effimate face of John and conclude it's a woman and see other things like an "M" for married in the painting. Of course Leonardo may have been suspected of dabbling in the black arts because it's said he used a magnifying glass to focus an image on the canvas. I was quite disappointed with the presention of the Knights Templar Good Morning American did last week. It seemed to me they were going out of their way not to tell us anything.

THE MASONS: It is said this group appeared originally in the middle ages and that it is stone masons and not brick masons as I might have presumed. Many of their secrets are Methematical. There are many "things" a construction worker or stone cutter should know involving math. I am fascenated with math. There is the 3 x 4 x 5 Pythagerean triangle, where all the sides are whole intigers. There is also a 12 x 13 x 5 triangle, and an even more stretched out narrow one with dimensions in the low twenties. They say the ancient Egyptians knew about the pythagerean therum. This involves adding up the two short sides to get the long side. This is useful in construction to confirm that an object is at true right angles. Another mystory number is the golden mean, which is 1.618034. There is a way of figuring this number in the BASIC or other programming language where this number gets repeated about ten times being "refined" in a number formula involving adding the last two numbers in a progressive searies together such as 2 ,3 ,5 ,8 ,13, ect. and then you divide to get a ratio. The Golden Mean was used in a dimension in Greek Temples and has interesting properties in other ways being a number that increases by exactly "one" when squared. There are other numbers. The number for dividing a rectangular block of wood exactly in half so that each piece has the exact same perportions, ie. shape as the old one is the ratio 1 to the square root of 2. If you want to divide the rectangle in thirds it ia 1 to the square root of 3, ect. No doubt shapes are important. There is such a thing as a tetraheden in chemistry involving the carbon atom that is a perfectly cubic four sided triangle. The pyramid is another shape, which has eight sides, if you count the part under the ground. The angle from all sides of a "perfect pyramid" is roughly 78 degrees. The proper angle for the height of a pyramid is 54.735 degrees. A pyramid of this exact shape is believed to have mystic properties. There is a duo-decahedren, which has twelve sides and is a perfect "cubic pentagon", with angles of 72 degrees. The highest perfectly symetrical figure is a six sided figure. My guess it would have 24 sides. Six is the highest number where you can have a perfectly symetrical figure thus making six some sort of mystic number. 33 is a numerological six and Masons seem attracted to it. The masons have no bizzare beliefs. On the other hand many of our nations founders were Masons.

JUSTIN MARTYR: This is a martyr who lived around AD 140. Before him, all Christian history is like some giant black hole. It's burried so deep that information cant overcome the "escape volosity" of the Black Hole or get past the "event horrison" as astronomers call it. Since Justin lived in AD 140 he was much closser to the Event Horison and thus would be able to see farther into the dark and murky church past. If we could uncover more of his works than we have, particularly his treaties on Marcion, a heritick, we might learn a lot. What Marcion did was resurrect the minestry of St. Paul via his letters to the early church. In Paul's letters we get insight to the early church we'd never have before. In them St. Paul said his goal is not to "Know Jesus Christ after the flesh". In other words St. Paul had no use for "the historical Jesus" but rather some other "Jesus" we'll come to later. I also believe Marcion knew "where a lot of the bodies were burried". Marcion preached that the OT God was not the Christian god of love in peace but rather is the one who created this evil Universe. This in Gnostic thought is called the "demi-urge" if I'm not mistaken, the urge to create material matter. This is a doctrine a lot of the Gnostics have. They are very dualistic believing in a complete separation of flesh and spirit. Hence they didn't regard carnal sin as a real problem because it was only a sin of the flesh, and not the spirit. It's a shame Justin's treaties on Marcion is lost today. As to the Catholic church they hated gnostics because they and they alone posess the "Knowledge" of truth. Any other "Knowledge" is heretical and dangerous. It's plain to me that Gnosticisum is not an evil since the Greek word only means "knowledge" and not "esoteric- - knowledge, as Gnosticisum's detractors claim. Gnosticisum has nothing to do with a drug induced trance.

LUIGE CASCIOLI:

I hope I spelled his name right. This Italian who says Jesus never existed has his own web site. I would like to conclude this post talking about Luige, because this post is running rather long. Among the things he states is that Judas of Galilee had a son named John. Judas of Galilee was a famous rebel who fought in the "Cencus Wars" of AD 6. At this time Jesus was either Just being born or about age eleven, if you believe Biblical sources. Judas had a son named John and John had four brothers named Simon, James, Joseph, and Thaddeus. These just also happen to be the brothers of Jesus listed in the Bible. Like Jesus John lived by the lake of Galilee. In fact he lived in a town by a cliff on the lake. This same "cliff" is described in Luke as being the city of Nazareth, even though Nazareth lies in a valley and nowhere near a cliff. There are many other events described in the Gospell historians don't seem to remember. There was no total ecclipse causing three hours of darkness at the crusifiction anybody can remember. There was no massive earthquake Easter morning. Jesus was not seen rising to heaven standing on the Mount of Olives for the whole town of Jesusalem to see. If Jesus died in 30 AD he could not have known about the "blood of Galileans that were mixed with the sacrifices". Pilate slaughtered Galileans in 35 AD or five years after Jesus was supposidly alive to talk about it in the gospells. The author of Acts does not know that Thaddeus (or however it's spelled) lived in 44 AD and spawned a rebellion and this was after and not before Judas of Galilee, as Luke falsely states in the book of Acts. Also there was a priest named Zachariah who was murdered in the tample while making a Sacrifice in AD 62 that Jesus talks about on the Mount of Olives in 30 AD to his desciples. Jesus predicted that the Abomination of Desolation, or Antichrist would come into the tample and the Jews would see it. This never happened and the temple was destroyed. Luige Cascioli raises many mystories we've gone into in other blogs.

THE SIX DIMENSIONAL UNIVERSE

Welcome to my blog. We are here to discuss the six dimensional Universe and how was it created and what are its properties. First of all I’d like to thank all the people who have dialed into this blog. I realize we’re probably hard to find. We’re like a new pop song that is no. 98 on the Billboard 100 and is looking to get a little air play. I realize at the time of the writing of this blog it will be the first one you see on the roster, but that fact will be short lived. I hope to make these blog posts intelligent and enlightened. Right now I’m in word because I had problems with the computer last night and I need to do multiple saves in order that I not lose material.

First of all people’s conception of Creation is wrong. I know mine was. They think of a time when there was no Matter in the Universe and envision only vast quantities of time and space in blackness. Neither was the case. For some of you who’ve read science books this may be old hat but bear with me. Space itself was created by God. This, of course, is what is known as The Big Bang. This occurred in our perspective about twelve Billion years ago in the past. But this is not so from God’s perspective. It would be just as accurate to say God created the universe yesterday, or today or even at some moment in the future, because time doesn’t exist with God. It didn’t exist until he created it. In a philosophical sense you could say that Time has an “accidental being”, meaning it wasn’t always here and is not a necessary part of “What is”, for lack of a better term. Time is the fourth dimension besides the three space dimensions we all perceive. Scientists tell us that events in the future are just as real as events in the past. After all they were only “created” to occur at a time not yet.

Scientists believe time and space were both “predestined” and are part of a whole that exists in God’s perspective all at once. There is no real “creation” or “destruction” because these facts are fate accomple already. Scientists are people you have to have faith in if you value people more intelligent than ourselves. Albert Einstein was trying to reduce the whole universe to one mathmetical formula when he died, which would encompass the past, the future, and the whole thing. The reality of predestination has shall we way certain theological implications. What it means is that God is incapable of change because everything was predestined from the Big Bang onward, and that includes God. It follows that one cannot, as they say, petition the Lord with prayer. Prayer is a little pointless if you expect it to change “what is”. God cannot “intervene in human affairs in order to change things because the way things will be is the way things already are. It follows that God cannot do miracles in the sense of “altering the rules” that have been set into motion since the dawn of time. There are a few Bible stories we’ll have to throw out. Mostly these are stories in Genesis where God appeared to “change his mind” or “regret” something or hadn’t decided what he was going to do. These stories include the sacrifice of Abraham’s son, Isaac, the destruction of Sodom & Gomorrah, and the story of Noah and the Ark. Also in 2^nd. Peter where it says that “God has delayed the second coming in order that more people be saved, God not wanting any to perish”, also has to be laid aside. That said – predestination “works” for the rest of the Bible.

I said the universe had six dimensions but first let’s talk about the life and death cycle of the Universe. The three dimensional universe can be likened to the surface of a soap bubble. As you blow it it gets bigger and bigger, and it eventually bursts. This is how it is with the universe. In three dimensional perception the universe is the surface of the soap bubble, not the whole sphere. The universe grew very quickly in the first few seconds. After a time the universe, as it expands will lose its molecular integrity and it will finally just burst! In Peter this is described as “the heavenly bodies melting and passing away with a shrill noise”, perhaps like the air being let out of a balloon. It so happens that the Universe is expanding at a rate faster than scientists were expecting and many are troubled by the ever accelerating rate. This just drives home the point that as there was a beginning to the Universe, so shall there be a final end. Some may ask what happens after this. The answer is there is no “after this”. You have to get it through your head there is literally absolutely nothing. There is no time; there is no space. (Selah)

Some may wonder about dimensions five and six. The “fifth dimension” as I call it is the dimension of “non reality”. You may ask “how can something be created and not real? Mathemeticians say that it can. Supposidly there even “imaginary numbers” that are routinely used in math, though I can’t imagine how. So the un real dimensions were just as “created by God” as the real dimensions were. So the question exists, “Just what is the fifth dimension?” The TV show “Sliders” has talked about it. This is the dimension that “might have been” were things different. Rather than a parallel universe, try and think in terms of an oblique universe. (Selah) To put it in simpler terms, it is a Universe that intersects at one point in time, but both the past and the future are different from ours but there are also a lot of similarities, particularly around the point in time of the intersection. It can be speculated whether people can “slide” from one Universe to the other, or rather “slide on a fifth dimensional plane”. It is further an obscure possibility that when people talk of many futures at a point of decision- - all the futures actually exist, but they exist in alternate fifth dimensional realities. I’m not sure how you would ever prove the existence of the fifth dimension because in order to prove something it first has to be real- - and the fifth dimension exists in “unreality” On a Star Trek episode officer Warf had lived in “alternate fifth dimensional realities” so there were multiple Piccards as well as multiple star ships with alternate versions of “what the reality was”. The show “Sliders” also explores this phenomenon.

The sixth dimension is the psychic dimension. Perhaps you have heard of quirks. Quirks are sub atomic particles that don’t behave according to the laws of normal physics. Hence they behave in a “quirky” manner. But they also move in symmetrical patterns to some other quirk off in the distance but you as it were have to be looking at the molecule from the distance, as if observing a half time show, to see what quirks do.

Perhaps you have heard of the term synchronicity. This is seemingly unrelated items being intimately related but they are at a distance. It may be possible that “thoughts” themselves have their own reality as the Greeks suppose. If so these thoughts may have relations to other thoughts in other people’s minds. Perhaps the thoughts and ideas of dead people have some “reality” out there in the ether somewhere. I use the term “ether” to describe a seemingly non existent medium for psychic “waves” to travel in. But you shouldn’t think in terms of waves but rather of- - events mysteriously interacting with other events. Perhaps two people will have the same thought separated by distance and in some way it is the same thought that both people had at once. Some of this can be called coincidence, but not all of it. Some game shows on TV can be called quirky because they don’t appear to obey mathematical odds. Mr. Spock would consider the actions of people on “Deal or No Deal” highly illogical because in reality the price of the suitcase should go down just as often as it goes up. But it never does. Somehow the contestants are psychically or by some other means able to eliminate all the cheap amounts on the left side of the board and avoid the high amounts on the right side of the board, thus raising the bid price of the suitcase with the unknown amount in it. It is said that the sinking of the Titanic was predicted in advance by an author of a novel who wrote about a ship called “The Titan” that sank with many of the same attributes of the real Titanic which sank. People who’ve investigated say it’s beyond guess work.

There may even be a real of consciousness where people or at least ideas “exist” and perceive this sixth dimension more plainly. Some may call it heaven or the after-life, though there is no indication of such a real in the Bible that is “out of time”. In this theorized psychic realm- - time and space would have no reality. The only things of any important would be various ideas and the “patterns’ they form in the fabric of the Universe. Right now we have pushed the Frontiers about as far as we can push them.

A POTPUREE OF BIBLICAL EXOGESIS ON DEATH AND OTHER MATTERS
I feel led to talk a little about God, mortality, Life and Death. If there was one book in the Bible I'd say Don't read it would be Hebrews. It wasn't even cited as a book untill AD 180 and wasn't cannonized till almost the year AD 200. There are ideas expressed on Death that are at variance with the entire rest of the Bible. Hebrews after talking about the Martyrs, speaks of "a cloud of witnesses we are surrounded by", looking down on us, kind of what the Catholics believe. It also says "It is appointed once to die and then the judgement". Not exactly. Everyone who has ever lived and died on Planet Earth is still dead and awaiting the Judgement Seat of Christ. As of now they are unconscious and un-judged. Hebrews seems to imply that "Jesus will appear" after we die, and once we die we are "with Jesus". If you think Hebrews is right and I'm wrong read ANY OTHER BOOK of the Bible. Some say the verse about dying "once" means there is no reincarnation. Here is my position on reincarnation. In Eccliastes it says "after you die, the spirit of a man goes back to God, who gave it". It also says "As a dog dies, so dies a man". It also says "- - - but the dead know nothing" and "The memory of them is forgotten" (meaning their OWN memory of themselves) Let's look a little further. In Genisis 2 in the "second" creation story it speaks of a time when there was NO LIFE on the Earth. Then it says that God formed man from clay and breathed into his nostrels the breath of life and he became a living soul. Two things. More properly this story should be called "The first protoplasum" rather than The First Man. Because the earth was lifeless at the time. This "breath" or "energy" or "life force" mixes with the "dust" out of which man and all life comes. I've heard that the same seventeen elements that are in the soil are also in the human body. Organically, that's logical. The next thing is that the SOUL IS MORTAL. Once the "vessle" of the flash passes and returns to the dust, the soul ceases to exist. Now all that "life force" goes back to God and I suppose if God wants to "give it again" in a future life form after we die, that's his perogitive. It's a fact difficult to overemphasize that the Soul is mortal and doesn't go on forever. Indeed Jehovah says not to attempt to contact the dead, because the realm of the dead is the realm of Angels and Demons. If you doubt me on this just think a minute what the somon societal perception of Witches and the Occultic community refers to human beings as. They refer to us by the supposidly desparaging term of "Mortals". Even THEY know we are not immortal like themselves. I guess we won't talk about Alice Cooper.

MORE DISCUSSION ON THE SUBJECT OF DEATH

There are a few things I'd like to express now in terms of TRUTH IN SCRIPTURE. A lot of popular ideas people have are "extra Biblical". A comon theme is that we are carried by angels to heave, or that we become angels ourselves and sprout wings and will be able to fly. Chuck Smith teaches that we will be able to fly in outer space and visit other planets after we did. In popular song lyrics there's "And if my wings should fail me won't you (Jesus) meet me with another pair". That's from "In My Time of Dying". There's another lyric "Just before the angels come to carry me, I want it down in writing how to bury me", and also another line "She grew so lonely in the end; the angels picked her for a friend." You have talked about Christianity being "stories". This bit about being "carried by angels to heaven" comes from a Parable Jesus tought about the rich man and Lazzarus. It can't be literal truth because there are Other theological problems with it. Also in Revelation there IS a relating of how we're given White Robes after we die. The trouble is if you analize this it looks like another "story" because it also says we are to Wait- - for God to take out his vengence on all those who martyred us". That's two thousand years of just "waiting around" with the same prayer on our lips. I don't think that makes sense. God tells these people to "rest a little" and I think that's just just what they do. They "rest"; they're not conscious. Paul and Judy in their letters to me talked about the Glories of the Next Life- - so it doesn't matter whether I'm happily married in this one. The only time Jesus ever talked to people in Hell- - it was "departed spirits" who sinned at the time of Noah and the flood. There is no specific reference to their being human. Gene Scott teaches that God did a "castration job" on the angels because in the Days of the Flood they came down and had sex with women and spawned mutants. They are held in a place called "tarterus", which is sort of like Hell. But it also says in scripture that DEATH (as when you and I die) will be the Last Enemy to be Defeated. Read and learn. We are promised "Dinner and a tournament" when the rapture comes lasting up to seven years but perhaps much shorter. After this there is a reference to Jesus Christ coming back to earth, "with ten thousand times ten thousands of his saints". We spend a thousand years on Earth- with no promise of "flying" anywhere. The last time I checked that's a hundred million. It sounds like a lot. I was just thinking that Bush's popularity rating is at 36%. That would just about accound for the hundred million, given America's poor popularity rating in the rest of the world. We will be like the angels in one sense. NO SEX. About the best we can brag about is we can point the finger of shame at all the mortals STILL ON THE EARTH at that time, and accuse them of sin. That's not much to look forward to in my oppinion.

BEHOLD THEY HAVE A FORM OF RELIGION BUT DENY THE POWER OF GOD
The following is a letter to a Sunday "religion" radio show that was never sent:

I'm the same person that sent that E mail six or so hours ago under the heading of "The Malcolm X of Christianity". When one looks at the beliefs or rather lack of beliefs of the Jesus Christ Show it's amazing. If something in the Bible doesn't fit in with your science of "Hermanutics" you throw out the verse or verses. You don't believe in a God who answers prayer. "God is not your own private bell-hop" is the stock line of you and others. You don't believe in the Spiritual gifts in general including, tongues, prophecy, and healing. I remember one caller who says they were healed for the moment of an illness and Jesus' only response was, "I hope you have your affairs in order. It's a horrible thing for a person to die and leave others to wonder what his wishes were". You don't seem to believe in the very coming of the Kingdom of Heaven. As you put it, "The study of Last Things is best done last- - - or not at all".

One time you said there were Three Heavens. You left out what St. Paul refers to as "The heavenlies" where there is an ongoing battle between angels and demons, presumably for our souls. You don't seem to believe in Satan at all. You seem to feel sorry for practicing Witches and you refer to them as being persecuted. You feel empathy for gays to the extent that one time when one gay left a regular church for a gay church- - - you condemned not the gay man but the Church that made him feel "unconfortable". It's a generality worth making that you seem to major on the minors and minor on the majors. Put another way in the Gospell's words you "Strain at a gnat and swallow a cammel". St. Paul once said "I count all my rightious acts as loss". Ironically, I find myself in the same boat when I look on my Christian life and my own "good works". I know that were I to try and justify myself by my works you would say that I was in a vain persuit. So I won't. I'll just leave the Church and everybody will be happy. And I already have.

Ther is indeed "gifts" in the modern church but not the "gifts of the spirit". Indeed the lack of regard for the Spiritual gifts Paul talked about in scripture has always baffled me in the church. No. People have the "gift" of "being lucky". I suppose a Black man would say they have the "gift of being born White" - - not that I'm Black or anything. You yourself have stated that there is no moral wiggle room with God. If someone owes you a few dollars down here you as a human can choose to let it slide and that's OK. But you say God works on moral perfection. If You really died for our sins how come Paul in Ephisians is still talking about Spiritual warfare against legons of demons and principalities and all that? My response to your supposed "perfection doctrine" is merely to say "Be it done unto you have said". That goes for you and your show. "What you mete out will be dealt back to you".

I want to mention one more thing. Both St. John and St. Paul taught that the Kingdom of Heaven was coming in their life times. Both spoke of being Born Again as living in a somehow higher dimension. You yourself seem to teach that this life is just a waiting period for the euphoria of heaven. You describe this as being in some other time realm where they don't seem to remember or at least care about the past or their loved ones still on earth. I don't think you will find one verse of scripture saying that people "go to such a place- - after they die". I happen to think of that Homer Simpson episode where Homer was in heaven but it wouldn't really be heaven without his loved ones there. I'd have to think Homer Simpson is more spiritual than Jesus but that's what it looks like.

LETTERS TO RUSH LIMBAUGH

First of all I would like to express my thanks to all the people who have been reading this blog. I have done three postings so far and this is number four. Last night I was working on a rather lengthly posting called "Four Animals that Christians Resemble" but that was interrupted due to sudden computer failure. In addition to that one I have planned "The Six Dimensional Universe" and also "Secrets of the Catholic Church" and possibly another called "Irrational Man". Right now I am going to post the three letters to Rush Limbaugh I have written this year:

THE FIRST LETTER Written February 1st. 2006

Dear Rush,

I have been listening to your show since March of 1989 and this is the first time I have written you. First of all I don't listen as much as I used to by any means because frankly I thought you lost your sense of humor after about 1996. I used to enjoy the parody songs. For a long time after 1996 it seems as if all the enenergy just went out of your programs, like you "gave up". Under this current President you have slid so far to the right, or perhaps I have gone the opposit way, I don't know, that I find myself disagreeing with you so much of the time now. Lately I've been listening to a new talk station that features mostly liberals. I'm really mad at the two stations in our area, KFI and KABC for sliding so far to the right that listening to them is like playing a broken record. Between your show on KFI and Sean Hannity and Larry Elder, who come on after you on another station, I have about "had enough" of the right wing.

I guess you could call me a different kind of conservative. One who actually wants to "conserve" our Nation's values. I'm a supporter of the right to life of the unborn and think Roe vs Wade was one of the worst court decisions from a legal basis. I am against gay marriage, I am against doctor assisted suicide laws like they have in Oregon, and I'm in favor of the ten commandments and morality in general.

Having said this I have a lot of problems with the rest of what you stand for. Your economic statictics are bogus. You and others keep saying the recession we had for most of Bush's first four years began in the Clinton adminestration. The economic statistics just don't bare this belief out. The recession began somewhere in the second quarter of the Bush adminestration. In fact, if you'll remember, people blamed 9 - 11 for the economic slow-down we were having. This slow-down was in effect till I believe about July of 2004 when the economy took off. You people say the deficet now isn't as bad as un named "other adminestrations". I'd be careful what you wish for because the only other two adminestrations with as bad a deficet are Ronald Reagan and George Bush 41, who first pioneered the 400 Billion mark. The solution to this problem is obvious- - raise taxes. Since taxes on the rich were primarily the things that were cut- - - it's logical that these same taxes will be what should be raised. President Clinton- - and I'm not his biggest fan- - you can say one thing for Clinton in that he was the "Eisenhaur of the ninties". We've been forever trying to get back to the "good old days" of his adminestration..

I think that President Bush's speech was flat last night. It was probably the poorest of any State of the Union speech he has given. I wasn't impressed by all the "rah -rah" securety stuff at the beginning. As for Justice Allito I'll say this. I want him to rule against Roe vs Wade but I'd have to ask myself in voting for him how many bad decisions I'd have to put up of his to get to One decision I like. I'm glad President Bush talked about energy. More importantly I'm glad he didn't talk about this gigantic Strip Mining project they have in Alberta, Canada, which is supposed to "solve our oil crisis for centuries". That area up in Alberta is becomming an ecological disaster in many respects including Global Warming. Yes, I believe in Global Warming. I think the warm winter most of the country has had is evidence of that. I think a Gulf of Mexico temperature of ninty last September is evidence of it. And we've seen things like frogs dying in Central America, and massive losses in the polar ice caps. You know, I saw a nutty article yesterday you might like. It said that oil in the earth spontaniously regenerates itrself and hasn't been there from millions of years and didn't come from dinasaurs. I know you believe massive deaths of species all over the earth is no problem because nature is "Evolving". As a Born Again Christian I don't believe in "Evolution" as you state it. Once a species is gone, it's gone.

Since this is the first time I have written you my thoughts aren't really organized and I apologise for that. In terms of the President's energy policy- - one might think this is a bright spot, getting gasoline from wood chips and switch grass. Unfornately I've learned that this "ethanol" boondoggle is bogus because it takes MORE energy to produce the ethenol or methenol than the use of it SAVES in oil. Personally I think we should give nuclear another shot. I actuall.y agree with you that the hazzards of nuclear energy have been overstated. And they can be overcome. As to Bush's talk about getting more qualified math and science teachers- I am in whole hearded Agreement. I am an "America First" kind of guy. I guess you might tag me as one of these "conspiricy nuts" who is against free trade because it stacks the deck against American products and that is unfair to the American worker. Ironically my "protectionisum" stance is the classic Republican party position. I think the American worker needs to build up pride in his own product and not let foreigners call the tune. We used to hear a lot of talk about the "New World Order". As a Christian perhaps you can understand my paranoia at the use of this phraise.

Respectfully Yours

THE SECOND LETTER Written March 13th. 2006

Dear Rush, I wrote you before once about a month or go. I don't have any real problem with Bush's foreign policy in Iraq. Personally I would have pulled out troops in 2004 after Saddam was caught and his sons were killed. If you have a cancer you cut out the cancer and let the body heal itself from there. Whether a Civil War takes place or not should be immaterial to us. I'm not one of these Negative liberals you're always talking about. I have no real problem with the way Bush has handled things in Iraq. I hope and pray for his success. He's aiming for a lofty goal.

Domestically it's another story. I don't need to remind you of all the scandles and problems Bush is facing. People say "If we have a big deficet we can grow our way out of it with economic expansion". People say we can cut taxes and "grow our way out of the deficet". The fact that the economy is in good shape now should be a source of concern rather than optimisum. You can only "cut taxzes so many times". The economy is at a peak and we STILL have a whopping deficet. What will happen when the economy even gives a hint of a recession, which it inevitably will one day and perhaps soon? Already if you compare stock market indexes with Clinton, Clinton comes of looking MUCH better. Capital growth in the Clinton years about trippled. Bush hasn't come close to equaling that. The market has "narrow leadership" and the advance-decline line is already topping out. Interest rates have been raised thirteen times, and they may go higher. Foreign nations like China, who buy our bonds, may balk at a certain point seeing our bonds are harder to sell. People for the first time since the recession have a negitive savings rate. This isn't good. The disparity between the rich and the poor is growing. You've got to be a fool to ignore all these signs. But there is still another problem- - - .

Even at full employment our nation is vastly under-employed. People retire at age fifty-five and then retire and live the next thirty years of their lives on pensions or Social Security, and get "senior discounts". This new, whopping class of "Seniors" is a growing non-productive class in America we never used to have. Of course issues like "Fair trade" and border security are issues Bush almost completely ignores. People are diagonsed as "Disabled" by doctors these days who are anything but. But despite all these people being "off the market" the unemployment still exceeds what it was in the late sixties when Nixon in 1968 said, "What we need is more people OFF welfare rolls and ON pay rolls".

Bush will lose about forty-five seats in the House and six or seven seats in the Senate come election day 2006. In 1993 you were WRONG about what the ecconomy would be like in 1996 for Clinton, COMPLETELY WRONG. I expect my prediction to be fact soon.

THE THIRD LETTER Written April 24th. 2006

Dear Rush, This is the third letter I have written your show. Today is the first day I've listened to your show in a while but that's only because Al Frankin was talking about a murdered abortion doctor. Abortion is not my thing. Last night on Sixty Minutes they clearly spelled out how George Bush routinely disregards intelligence he gets from the CIA. We know that Bush was hell bent for war from the book "Plan of Attack", which is so laboriously documented I don't even think you could dispute it. Everyone but you says that Joe Wilson looked into the yellow cake uranium thing and found the case unfounded. Sixty Minutes documented that days after Bush heard a thumbs down on evidence of mass destruction, he went ahead and put it in his Strate of the Union Speech anyhow. As to your statement about how leaking information on "rendering" of abducting a person and taking him off to some foreign country to be tortured, I think this falls less under the umbrella of "national securety" and more along the lines of ethical policies of the United States. I presume from your remarks today that it's OK with you if even grosser. more offencive things are done by our government as long as they keep it secret and the American People have no right to know what moral principles our government works under. I have to strongly disagree.

Your show has become increasingly hard right wing political. It's no longer the "entertainment" show it used to be with all those cute musical parodies you used to do. You've lost all your sense of humor. The thing is Bush is bad enough but his supporters on the right that bother me more. George Bush is trying to be moderate on the immigration issue and "you people" on the right want more. You want blood. But 95% of the time you and the other Bush groupies are just his "Kool-Aid" drinkers. Any objective person who voted for Bush like I did would ask himself questions like: - - has Social Security been rescued from bankruptsy? No. Have we made new strides in alternative energy production? No. Have we done any new space exploration? No. Is Roe vs Wade overturned yet? No. Is there an anti gay marriage amendment? No. How is the trade deficet with China? Has the US successfully been able to put pressure on China not to oppress their own people? No. Then what HAS Bush done as President? He has pursued an endless war in Iraq diverting resources that are badly needed elsewhere in the world, like Sudan, for instance, to stop the genocide there. Bush is the most sheer stubborn President since Lyndon Johnson. Bush spoke today of "Losing our nearve in Iraq". That sounds just like something Johnson would have said. Bush is "mentally frozen" seemingly unable to save either his own legasy or the Republican Party election hopes in November.

I'm getting a little fed up with Mc Cain's kiss-ass behavior, too. I was going to vote for him in 2008 but now I'm not so sure. By the way Rush you are all wrong about what liberals want. Then DO NOT want this country to fail. This is a figment of your imagination. The thing is that you are worse then Senator Joseph McCarthy of old. You're like McCarthy on steroids! According to you the following can't be trusted. The media, congress, the State Department, the CIA, and the military. Everyone is conspiring against George Bush according to you. If things get any worse I'm going to have to switch parties and become a democrat. By the way Chris Matthews was hard on democrats last Saturday. He says the reason why democrats lose is because they are too "wooden" and have too long of an explanation for everything. They need short two or three or four word expressions like the Republicans use.

Respectfully, [Marcus Arelius]

SIXTEEN PROBLEMS I HAVE WITH THE BIBLE'S ACCOUNT OF THE RESURRECTION

There used to be a song "Sixteen Reasons Why I Love You". Sixteen is a good number to get into a song lyric. As you know from the other two blog posts if you have read them, I think Jesus Christ was able to beat death on the cross. Just because something is rare is not to say that it doesn't happen. One wise man said (I forget who) that when the impossible has been scientifically ruled out, whatever remains, however improbable, is the truth. I believe Jesus did survive death and that his desciples probably saw him. I do not use the word "Apostles" because scripture in the old testament in Zechariah plainly states "Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered". I don't believe the desciples were in any frame of mind Easter morning or any other time to start a new religion. They were too disheartened, not to mention scared. What people don't say is that they probably all felt like Judas is said to have felt. They were disappointed because Jesus didn't summon down twelve legions of angels to smite their enemies. They were afraid because they thought (perhaps rightly) that the Romans were looking for them to extermanate them too. When they saw Jesus they were probably horrified at the pain he endured and also saw I imagine human weakness at that moment they had never seen in him before. There is no indication that ten of them went on to do anything else in the Bible. Acts says James was killed later but we don't know why. John may or may not be the same man as "John of Ephuses" heard from at the turn of the century in AD 100. How come we only hear from John in history as an old man? It seems about the only role Peter plays in the book of Acts, despite making a good Pentacost speech, is to be a foil for Paul. Paul would preach liberty apart from the law and Peter along with "James" would protest. About all we know about Peter and James comes from the book of Acts. There is a history of a James who was high priest in the temple in AD62 when he was either stoned or else fell to his death. There are indications in the Josephus text itself that he was not the brother of Jesus of Nazareth but another Jesus, who was also a priest. Since I am rather new at this there are several things I'm not doing right, like keeping track of the color Right now here are the sixteen reasons:

0. It says in scripture, “They gambled for my vesture” and we know the Roman guards cast lots for his seamless white robe. They mentioned it being a nice garment saying “Let’s not tear it”. Only thing is it was stained with blood from Jesus being scourged. Scripture says, “They took off the purple robe and put his own clothes back on him” and movies depict Jesus in a robe before Pilate. Who would cast lots for a robe they couldn’t wear?

1. When the three women were on the way to the tomb at sunrise they said to one another, “Who will roll the stone away?” Naturally it’s odd to wonder why they didn’t resolve this point before they set out. But more curiously, Mary Magdalene was with them and she had already been to the tomb “While it was still dark” and seen Jesus, or “The gardener”. Why didn’t she tell the other women? Good question.

2. When Jesus appeared to all the disciples they were gathered together in the upper room. Question: Why were they all gathered together like that? Scripture says, “Strike the shepherd and the sheep will be scattered, and I will turn my hand upon the little ones”. Last time I checked “scattering” refers to movement- - dispersing. Perhaps fleeing to another town. Yet here they all were. Peter and John had seen an empty tomb. Were they gathered to discuss this? Next: When Jesus appeared to them was it to eleven or ten of them? Or perhaps it was twelve, as it says “Then he appeared to the twelve”. Was Paul unaware that Judas was no longer with them? And Luke seems to be unaware that Thomas was not with them. I don’t see that as something you could forget but it clearly states that eleven were there. We have a credibility problem.

3. Jesus told his disciples to stay in Jerusalem and wait for the falling of the Holy Spirit. An angel also told his disciples to go to a certain mountain in Galilee where Jesus gave “The great commission”. You can’t have both, because if they had obeyed the second they’d have never returned to Jerusalem. Complicating this issue is John 21 where seven of the disciples go fishing in Galilee and were not expecting to see Jesus when they did. John 21 is truly an “independent source”.

4. We return to those women going to the tomb Easter morning. It says in John that Nicodemus and Joseph of Arithmea wrapped the body of Jesus in spices and buried him the same say as he was crucified, which is the Jewish custom. The women knew that that was Jewish custom and one wonders why they would violate it, especially since it was a holy week and they would be ceremonially unclean touching a dead person.

5. Why is there three examples of the disciples not even knowing it was Jesus after they saw him. Mary Magdalene, the two on the road to Emmaus, and the disciples on the lake. This suggest to me a suggestive state of mind, or that they were not sure what they were seeing. That’s my opinion.

6. The two disciples on the road to Emmaus were talking about women who could not find a tomb. They were not talking about how Pilate just released a Zealot who was a patriot. This is a very unusual act historically speaking. They weren’t talking about the earthquakes, or graves opening and dead people coming to life. If they thought they had seen Jesus did they ever ask themselves, “Have others seen dead people today?”

7. Why didn’t Jesus just show himself to the Pharisees and put all doubt to rest. Or did Jesus enjoy a good mystery. Certainly anyone else would have sought to shut the mouths of lying accusers. If the Roman Guards saw certain events are we to presume they were so godless that a little money could shut them up?

8. In Luke it says Jesus led the disciples out of town where Jesus ascended into Heaven. This had to attract notice. Unidentified flying objects were far less common in those days than they are today. Certainly many city people must have seen it.

9. Why didn’t Jesus describe the afterlife to his disciples. In Revelation many argue we only have allegory and imigry. Isn’t it funny that the only person to die and come back isn’t talking about it. It would clear up a lot of mysteries.

10. Why did Jesus tell his disciples at the Last Supper, “and now I am no more in the world”. Doesn’t this imply that if you aren’t a “believer” you wont see him even if he is, for instance, right in the room? Doesn’t this allude to a “spiritual” resurrection like the Jehovah’s Witnesses believe? Doesn’t it imply Jesus disbelieved he would rise physically?

11. What did Jesus mean when he said “This is what I said while I was still with you”. Is this to imply his current state is somehow “less real”?

12. Why did Jesus say at the Mount of Olives “If someone says, ’behold he is in the desert’ or ‘behold he is in the secret changer’ don’t go looking for it. The son of man will come as the lightning flashes from east to west”. Isn’t this to imply that if you see an “appearance” of Jesus after he’s crucified to ignore it? Did Jesus not expect to rise again when he gave his Olivet prophecy? Is there a “time limit” on appearances? What about Methaius. He wasn’t appointed until after Jesus’ ascent into Heaven. Did he re-ceive an appearance? What about the apostle Paul? How seriously did Jesus mean this “no secret appearances” ban. Ah, that is the question.

13. When Jesus was on the cross he promised the repentant thief, “Today you will be with me in Paradise”. This implies to me that Jesus expected to go to that other dim-ension we call eternity that Dad talks about where time is different. The only thing is scripture is quoted which says, “I will not abandon thy soul to sheol or allow the Holy One to see corruption. Sheol means “The grave”. If this is so what did Jesus mean when he talked about the son of man being “In the heart of the earth?” Doesn’t the OT scripture imply at best soul sleep? If Jesus was really with the thief in Paradise why didn’t he bring back the thief with him when he rose? (perhaps we could get the needed answers from him) 1^st. Peter gives us yet another view. In Thessalonians it says “the dead in Christ will rise first; then we who are alive will be caught up and we will ever be with the Lord”. This implies soul sleep, and it implies the event has not yet taken place.

14. Jesus said on the cross, “My God, my God why hast thou forsaken me?” and then he said “I am thirsty” and one person ran up with the hyssop soaked with sour wine and perhaps some drug. And another said, “Wait, let us see whether Elijah will rescue him from the cross”. This implies for one thing that Jesus was worried about what was happening to him and perhaps things weren’t going as planned. There is the obvious inference that whatever he drank contained some drug which caused him to go into a swoon, after which he was taken down off the cross. The evidence of the Shroud points to it being a living person who occupied it. The inference of all of this would suggest that perhaps Jesus didn’t really die on the cross, but later.

15. When Mary Magdolane saw Jesus in the garden Jesus said, "Touch me not, for I have not ascended to my father in heaven". According to the teachings of some when Jesus went to "Hell" he liberated all the dead souls and they at that time made a procession to heaven. If this is so how is it Jesus is making an apparent "pit stop" on planet earth now?

THE EGYPTIAN CONNECTION

First of all I would like to think all the readers who have found this site. No doubt you were intellectually curious. You no doubt are curious why I have chosen to call this site "Escape from Egypt". Well, when the Jews departed from Egypt in the Exicus, they carried over certain traits from Egypt that they perhaps shouldn't have. The Egyptians did things like marrying their sister and the early Israelites precticed more endogamy than is genetically advisable. The Hebrews were slaves before they left Egypt and as the reacent movie special of The Ten Commandments indicates, the Jews needed to be conditioned not to think like slaves. When struck by a superior the Israelites were accustomed to cowering in silence. Also there are provisions in the Mosiac law for slavery. This should not be in an ideal society. But the Christians, too, carried over certain "Egyptian" ideas into their religion. Theirs was a slavery of the spirit to whoever would make himself a religious leader over them and burden them with rules. The Egyptians thought they knew everything there was conceivably to know about the universe. In like manner the Catholic Church has in the past claimed to be the repository of all knowledge both physical and spiritual.

To me, the Church and perhaps the Israelites themselves made an error in thinking when the Roman general Titus, who later became emperor, marched into Jerusalem in 70 AD that somehow "God" had forsaken the Israelites once and for all. Once again Christianity was thinking in the old Egyption "master - slave" mentality. One thing people need to learn is just because something happens it doesn't mean God morally approves of it. This would seem obvious to any right thinker but to some deluded ones for good to be "predestined" to happen to one and bad to be "predestined" to happen to the second means the first person must be more Holy or Rightious or Godly than the second. I spoke on my last posting that the Universe has at least four dimensions. The best scientists today state that everything that ever happened or will happen was all predestined in The Big Bang that created this Universe. Albert Einstein was attempting to prove the Universe was predestined when he died. But just because the Universe is predestined the best thing you can say if you live your life by whether you are "lucky" or not is not to worship God but rather the Universe. God is greater than the Universe because he created it. When something either extrordenarily good or bad happens to you or another what you must think of is that this action is the Universe but not necessarily the heart of God. (Selah) This expression means either "pause" or "meditate on this truth" or "musical interlude in a psalm". It's an expression I often use in my writing to denote a moment of thoughtful pause.

We come again to the birth of Christianity. Scripture says "I called my son out of Egypt". The Bible quotes this to refer to Jesus. They say Jesus visited Egypt but I maintain that he already lived there before he even became Jesus. Some would say that my premise is shakey at best that Jesus was actually Philo of Alexandria before and after his life as Jesus. If Jesus was physically born in Egypt in 20 AD (approximately) that would make Jesus a much older man during his minestry. Yet it would. He would be about fifty. It's interesting that in John 5 or somewhere the Pharicees say to Jesus "You are not yet fifty years of age". If Jesus were thirty it might be premature to say he was "not yet fifty". There are numerous clues in the Bible that Jesus did not intend the "Kingdom of Heaven" to actually be in heaven but on earth. Didn't Jesus say, "the miek shall inheret the earth"? Not heaven but earth. Some may say John 14 talks about death and going to heaven but neither the words "death" or "die" appear in this chapter. All that Jesus said was that he was "going away". Jesus also told the priests in John 5 or 7 (I forget which) the following, 'I am going away. You will look for me but you will not find me". Jesus later said "I am no longer in the world" when he was about to die. Obviously if you believe in the resurrection this statement was not true. What he meant was this "world" of Palestine. Jesus in the nineth or tenth chapter of John said, "I have other sheep, which are not of this fold". The question arises, "What is a fold"? the fold in this case was the nation of Isrial. Even the people in Judea who Jesus preached to knew he was originally from Galilee. When Jesus saw Mary Magdolane after his resurrection he said "touch me not, for I have not yet ascended to the Father". Many have rightly said this was not an admonition against "touching". The desciples, according to scripture, did that. What he meant with Mary was "don't cling to me emotionally". Indeed the song "Don't Think Twice It's Allright" by Bob Dylan seems almost prophetic. In the song you think he must be saying the words he's saying while dead or something. He speaks of being "on this road". May I suggest it is the road back to Egypt.

Some of you may protest, "But you still haven't connected him to Philo of Alexandria". Well, in the book "The Jesus Papers" the author speaks of various documents saying that Pilate was compilcit in riggingJesus crusifiction so that he could survive it. We need look no further than scripture itself for support. It's a historic fact that in no other instance was Pilate swayed by a mob. Yet the Bible clearly states the Judean mob turned against him. But Jesus expected them to. It was part of his plan all along. Indeed Jesus said, "No man takes my life, I volentarily give my life, and if I lay down my life I can take it up again". This is not the way most people die. Most people don't plan out their death literally an eternity in advance of the event, and then stick to the plan. Pilate personally liked and respected Jesus for various reasons, one of them being that Jesus Christ never said one thing against the Romans. Any time there was any dispute between the Jews and the Romans Jesus always came down on the side of the Romans. "Should we fight in self defence"? Jesus said "No, lay down your life". "Should we pay taxes to Caesar?" Jesus said yes to pay the tax. The "bad" people in the Gospell are always Jews and the "good" ones are always Romans. I'm not here going to make a moral judgement on this now; my point is that the Judeans in Jerusalem had plenty of reasons to turn against Jesus. Do I believe Judas and Jesus got together to plan the betrayal? I don't know. It's a possability. We know Jesus wanted to be "betrayed" at a certain moment in time, right after the last supper, and if this betrayal were left to an outsider it "might not go as planned". Pilate didn't want Jesus dead, but he wanted Jesus "gone", kind of like the old Westerns, "get out of town before sundown" kind of thing. Scripture tells us the following "They gave me gall for my wounds". I didn't make that up; it's in the Bible. It also quotes God the father as saying "I will allot him (Jesus) a portion with the great". For those who think Jesus was absolute God what is he doing being rewarded. As scripture itself says "The one who blesses is greater than the one who is blessed" (Selah) We are told Jesus said, "I am thirsty" and someone came running up with a spongs with sour wine. Jesus took the sop and then lapsed into a swoon, some might say. Right away Pilate was told he was dead. In the Greek those who petitioned Pilate for the body asked for a "living body", not a corpse. Pilate agreed. He was taken down off the cross and then subsequently "treated" with herbs and spices.

What is the Coptic Church?
The word "Coptic" means Egyptian in their own tongue. We use the Greek word in our language. As you may know the first Gospell was written by Mark. According to my source Mark was a man of "African" descent who appeared around 50 AD in Egypt. It is said that Jesus life came to an end on earth about ten years before Mark died. This was around 65 AD. Ten years earlier would make 55 AD and those in the know say Philo of Alexandria died 50 AD. That's close enough in my estamation. Mark did not write the first gospell in Rome but in Egypt. Matthew, the second gospell is also Egyptian. So two of the first four Gospells are Egyptian. This is interesting. We don't need to rely on one author to say Jesus was alive in 50 AD because I found another source right here on the internet. Interestingly the "gospell" spread "like wild fire" in Egypt. Faster than it spread anywhere else. One might wonder why. I can guess.

There are many secrets we will never know. The Church has had two thousand years to destroy any documents they didn't like. If anyone is now in posession of any document that supports these two blog postings, I imagine they might want to keep that document well protected. I think a lot of facts will be coming out in the future due to "increased knowledge" (another prediction of Scripture) and the fact that we're all much more inter-connected than we used to be.

Note: The spell-checker doesn't seem to be working. Otherwise I'd use it now.

I have more to say on the subject of Christianity but I'll leave these two postings to be read for now. But there is a lot more that can and should be said.

Respectfully, Marcus Arelius

Many have wondered over the years whether Jesus of Nazareth, whom many of us call Christ, had some secret identity or had some previous educational of philosophical background that the comon reader of the Bible knows nothing about. Some have suggested that Jesus visited India and became familiar with the Buddah because of his talk of some other world Kingdom of idealized atate of being and his teaching of denial of the Ego. Other Anglo Israelites have suggested that Jesus went to Glastonburry, England and that his father, Joseph, worked in the highly legondary "Tin mines of Solomon". Of course there are some who maintain that Jesus Christ never existed as a historical figure. For such people who are curious I suggest they read "The Jesus Mith" in the Wikkipedia on their computer. It is a fact that no historian in the first century after Jesus's death even mentions the existance of Jesus of Nazareth in a document that is historically credible. Both the works of Josephus, who was a Jewish historian in Rome around the end of the first century, or Tassitus, who was a Roman writing about the same time have brief snipets of information about Jesus which upon analisis are shown to be later additions. In the case of Josephus, you can actually trace the addition of his text to the start of the fourth century because an third century, Oregion, states that "Josephus made no statement about the works of Jesus Christ". You have to go to Eusebius to encounter the first occurance of this Christian entry to the text of Josephus's history of Jewish Palestine.
I reject the view that Jesus never existed since the strength of Jesus's teachings has come through so loud and clear over the centuries. There is one book called "The Five Gospels", which "evaluates" the words of Jesus in the light of "higher criticism" and some conference of pastors this book sponsored. In the book they color-code the words of Jesus varying from red, to pink, to terquoise, to black, depending on the certainty of whether Jesus said these particular words according to a "vote" of the pastors at the conferance. Anyone reading this book will quickly conclude that the words in black sound just as much like Jesus as the words in red do. It would seem that this book has no credibility or authority to cherry-pick the recorded words of Jesus in the manner that it has. This book includes the Goepel of Thomas, which may be that legondary "Q" document that Christian historians have been looking for and have theorized must exist. The Gospel of Thomas, as recorded in this book consists of "sayings" of Jesus, just as the "Q" document is theorized to be. What seems obvious to me is that no matter what Gospel you read, Jesus appears to be teaching the same thing. Those truths are bringing about some eutopian "Kingdom of Heaven" into being and peace among men. Miekness and lack of hypocricy and above all, Love for your fellow man is taught. Jesus, like Martin Luther King, taught that we are all brothers and all neighbors, because we are children of God.
My basis for doubting the historicity of everything in the Gospells stems from other things besides Jesus' words. There is a matter of consistency in other areas such as parentage of Jesus and his geniology. Also some have questioned the geographical knowledge of the land of Palestine, in which Jesus walked. There is a substantial disagreement in fact for both the Birth Narritive, aka. the Christmas Story, and also in the accounts of Jesus' resurrection. I hope to cover these in a later blog. There emerges a picture of Jesus as a man who appeared out of nowhere and lived and preached and healed throughout the last of Palestine for three years, and then was presumably cruxified. I plan in later blogs to examing whether Jesus really died in that crusifiction. The author of a new book, "The Jesus Papers" has a plausable explanation that Pilate wanted to preserve the life of Jesus and at the same time publicly showed that he had eliminated a political and religious threat because the people in Judas as a whole did not in the majority accept Jesus for what he claimed to be, the Messiah, even though they may have admired him for other reasons.
The only question, then, is just who "Jesus really was". I have what I think is a good answer and that is Philo of Alexandria, who was a Jewish teacher and philosopher and writer, who lived from some time "B C" untill 50 AD and died some twenty years after we suppose that Jesus did. This is the writer who first came up with the concept of the "Logos", which he referrs to as the "Word of God". Normally the word "Logos" in Greek means "logic" or "the study of- " a subject. To Philo the Word was the creative agent of God which enables man to interract with God and the force that created the Universe- - all four dimensions of it- as we know it. Not only this but Philo referred to the Logos as "The first born son of God". You have to wonder what was in his mind when he wrote this if he wasn't really Jesus. In Philippians there is a scripture that says that "Jesus was rich, but he became poor for our sake". Some may ask whether going off to another country from 27 to 30 AD or there abouts might cause a problem. Certainly events are covered in his life by biographies of his life. The thing is, there isn't. Very little is known of a "biographical nature" of the chronological events in the life of Philo. We know something about his family and where and when he was born but as to the specific events of his life, nobody seems certain, only that he wrote an impressive body of work.
I've given you enough to think about for today assuming this posts. Thank you for listening and I hope this blog has been a source of enlightenment for any who read it.
Respectfully -Marcus Arelius