Deadly Sin and Evil Strategies of Wiccan

Let us first consider that logically, reality is initially Heaven. This is from the perspective of ideological philosophy, which is in contrast to materialistic philosophy. Ideological philosophy is the branch of philosophy that is chosen by the religious and spiritual community. A precept of ideological philosophy, and this makes sense regarding empirical science, as well, is that reality is inherently and initially fully intelligent. It is later that the actions of the people, through their desires, affect reality in various ways, and some of those ways can create, instead, a reality full of death and disorder. An example is that if people start harming one another, reality, while once all-fulfilling, becomes increasingly controlling. If people don’t turn away from a pattern of increasingly inflicting harm without the concept of redemption, then a society can fall into a police state, and eventually, find extinction.

Considering that reality, logically, is inherently all-fulfilling to people, and it is only through corruption that society becomes controlling, it makes logical sense to conclude that all forms of evil arise from the singular notion of corrupting eternal truth. Considering eternity to be, by default, of a benevolent and caring state — a state of Heaven — which is formed of the eternal truth of all people, which is known deeply within each individual and which supports life, then corrupting this truth, promoting the corruption, and provoking the corruption, would cause a fall from Heaven, into a less desirable habitat.

Let us review the seven deadly sins. Here is a succint and modern interpretation:

1) Don’t forgo one’s true self (Pride)
2) Don’t covet the truth (stealing Divine Truth from the world)
3) Don’t distort perception (Lust)
4) Don’t create animosity, removing the joy from the world (Anger or Kill)
5) Don’t abuse others (Gluttony)
6) Don’t idolize (Envy)
7) Don’t forgo inherent passion (Sloth)

The sins that are commonly mentioned vary, however, and I believe that this list provided is a good example of the various common ways that people corrupt the truth. It is perhaps human nature to simplify reality without oversimplifying it, and the seven deadly sins essentially was found to specifically provide examples of ways of corrupting truth.

Pride regards a topic discussed earlier in this book, of which the therapy I refer to as CAT alleviates. While one may not immediately notice it, upon acting prideful, one forgoes some of the person’s emotions. Understanding that the body and mind are not communicating without reason, it is damaging to forgo some emotions. To be healthy, it is therefore important to acknowledge all of one’s emotions and facilitate the comfortable communication which is communicated by these emotions, to allow the body to take care of itself. If one forgoes one’s emotions, as with the tendency of pride, then those emotions become ineffective and thus the intelligence and help that those emotions bring is lost, causing damage to the psyche, and perhaps, the body, in general. Therefore, considering pride to be a sin, or a fundamental error as would be modernly stated, truly indicates that by forgoing one’s emotions, one loses the ability to recognize personal truth. In effect, one becomes more shallow and also loses the benefits that those emotions would present. Forgoing one’s emotions causes the mind to lie, and thus, one loses understanding of who the person truly is. Who one truly is is who one truly wants to be, understanding this to be a clear truth of ideological philosophy.

Covetousness, as is commonly stated, simply means obsession. This, again, implies the forgoing of personal truth. By becoming obsessed with an entity, be it ideological or physical, one develops a type of narrow-mind vision, during which one dampens the greater breadth of internal truth, leading to the same effect as pride.

Lust, while colloquially is known as an act of coveting in a sexual manner, is something I interpret on a more fundamental level, regarding the notion that the eternal and divine truth is of the most importance. What is entailed in the process of lust is perhaps not the same as covetousness, as this implication would be repetitive. Instead, understood with a more fundamental relevance to the truth, lust implies to perceptually distort reality in order to fool oneself into a false interpretation. In this way, it is a form of a term I use, which is “cognitive adultery,” or, in more plain language, “cognitive-perceptual distortion of truth.” Again, as with the previous examples, the truth is forgotten, and when truth is forgotten, one becomes error-prone and thus hazardous. Spreading the resulting lies and temptations to become cognitively distorted is indeed a hazard, and with an increasing acceptance of such a lying distortion, reality, itself, becomes lost to a superficial haze that is dangerous to oneself and to all people.

While, in our modern, quite secular and colloquial world, the word, “to kill,” indicates the same thing as murder, I, again, approach this notion with caution, and I try to understand how it relates to the corruption of truth. In Heaven, there is complete freedom. Every desire and wish is easily granted, and people have unlimited power, so long as the people don’t harm other people. The sin of kill, thus should refer to something more basic than the heinous act of murder. It is not without reason to presume that the common interpretation of this sin is a mere example of the sin. Realistically, to kill, as it is sometimes still used, is to simply harm another person. This implies to ruin innocent joy. To be a person that hinders the happiness of others, would be to be a person who is engaging in the sin of killing. It is sometimes said, “you’re killing the vibe,” and this is, in perhaps, a reference to our more innate understanding of the word. It does make sense, in that every sin is something that destroys Heaven. While in Heaven, everyone is completely satisfied, to kill another, in this regard, is to destroy the happiness and satisfaction of another.

As it is commonly known, in reducing crime, force must be taken to dampen, hinder, or eliminate a dangerous entity from the realm of influence. The army is known for ending the lives of enemies, and when done correctly, this is done to remove a danger that is destroying the joy of others, and thusly, of the world. We commonly understand that, when done with the pure intention of saving innocent people, this is not an ungodly act. In fact, one could interpret a criminal who is endangering others as killing their happiness, and neutralizing that threat saves the victims from having their happiness destroyed. This occurs not just on a militaristic or policing level, but on the general level bringing joy and justice to the people. Therefore, we already consider it is not always a sin to end the life of an enemy, when it is done through the pure intention of neutralizing a hazard to good people. It is very much more logical to define this sin as the destruction of another’s innocent joy. Another way of stating this, is that the sin of kill refers to the act of corrupting one’s perception of innate and joyous truth.

Gluttony is another of the commonly known sins, of the 7 deadly sins. While society commonly interprets gluttony as possessing too many items, this is quite senseless. There is no true harm in possessing many cars or houses. In fact, in Heaven, from the ideological perspective (which is the perspective of religion and spirituality), one may possess as many castles, automobiles, boats, and spaceships as one pleases. This action of enjoying life to its fullest does not inherently harm another, and it may even provide inspiration to others. Others interpret gluttony as another example of covetousness, which, as with lust, would be repetitive. Instead, it makes more sense that instead of accumulating items or coveting oneself into a narrow awareness, that gluttony is really to acquire the utility of people, against their true desire. It is true, however, that all of the sins kill the joy of others in some way, as killing really is a most fundamental sin. However, gluttony is not just killing others’ enjoyment of divine truth, but instead, it is to employee others for a a reason that is unjust to those employed. It is not the desire to create spite, but instead the desire for gains, as is in line with the common interpretation, but these gains are gained at the disfavor of others. Therefore, it is not the same as the sin of kill, when understood as a specific pattern of behavior. This is because to a glutton, it does not matter if the person is happy or unhappy, which is in contrast to the sin of kill, which is the desire to end another’s happiness. Instead, it is to accumulate an amount of shallow perception at the expense of others. In other words, it is to abuse the utility of other people.

Envy, as I interpret it, is more similar to the common understanding. This word is synonymous with idolatry. The error in idolatry is that when one idolizes another, one brings arbitrary judgement onto oneself. Again, in line with the method of CAT, which is to acknowledge and support one’s true emotions, idolatry, or envy, causes one to abandon one’s true beliefs in favor of a superficial set of notions that are born of an erroneous desire to become more like another. The person anyone wants to be is the person that that person very truly is. Ideologically, this makes completely logical sense, as Heaven, a place of total satisfaction, could not exist if people were created to desire to be someone else. Thus, it is harmful to oneself to judge oneself simply based on the idea that the person is not another person. This action of envy causes one to, again, forgo oneself, and thus one’s mind becomes less aware of truth and one, resultingly, inflicts harm on oneself, and through the provocation of such behavior, inflicts harm onto others.

The last of the 7 deadly sins is called, “Sloth.” While this term is casually, in our modern world, interpreted as laziness, this might represent a slight laziness in judgement. In our modern world, the world, in general, is in a state of endless and fiery desperation, in addition to being affected by a collectivist tendency, which results in a lack of personal differentiation and a lack of the ability to think for oneself. (Interestingly, the word, “skin” may be used a metaphor to indicate the exterior of a person, and with the lack of personal differentiation, one may poetically suggest that people are repeatedly losing their skins, and then often times, through sincere thoughtfulness and personal redemption, finding their true self, once again, resuming the possession of skin.) Laziness is used a casual insult, and is often used by mean people who, in our largely desperate Luciferian mindset, which is a mindset of chasing a light, use the term to provoke work, which knowledgeably, may or may not be beneficial to others or even to oneself. (The intuition, at times, can be far wiser and knowledgeable about the benefit to humanity than the comparatively shallow collectivist-inspired ideology.) Instead of using the word “sloth” to mean such a casual and error-prone insult, which does not deal directly with the notion of the acceptance and understanding of eternal and divine truth, it makes logical sense to believe the sin of sloth refers to the forgoing of one’s true passion. It is commonly suggested that one should “follow one’s dreams,” and this is helpful in understanding the sin of sloth. When one forgoes one’s true passion, one forgoes one’s true self. One then forgets the truth of life and the purpose in life. One may fall slave to other sins, like covetousness or pride, during which the person forgets why they love life in the first place. One thus becomes, as is the saying, “soulless,” and this is indeed a hazardous error, not only to oneself, but to others as well, as the person, as with the previous examples, then begins to provoke others to also forget the truth, leading society into blindness and thus despair, as solutions come from the deliberate search for truth, and errors come from carelessness. Thus, sloth is an example of carelessness, during which one does not care about why one loves life, and this can end in despair and hopelessness, which can provoke desperation and hinderance unto others (in addition to removing the joy and inspiration of life). (Thus, one can see, all of the 7 sins are connected and can lead to one another.) To be sloth really is not simply to be lazy, although this may be an indicator, it really means to find a route that ignores the understanding and acceptance of purpose and one’s true dreams. Even if one cannot find a direct route to achieving one’s dreams, one should never forget them, and one should keep them in mind as one travels through life, so that one will always be following them, to the best that one can. To perform the sin of sloth is, therefore, to forgo one’s true passion and to forget the love of life and to forget one’s true self. Again, this can be contagious and can ultimately lead to the downfall of society, just as the other sins can.

The pattern that is indicated by all of the 7 deadly sins is to forget the true meaning of life. It is to corrupt what is divinely true, which implies to corrupt oneself and to corrupt others. It leads to despair, lack of joy, abuse, danger, and desperation. It destroys Heaven, and it destroys the entire reason life exists. It is also unhealthy, to oneself and to others. The antithesis of being sinful is to accept, understand, promote, and facilitate the eternal truth of Heaven, so that the world will find Heaven and Heaven will be sustained, knowing of the dangers of error. Every one of the errors that are considered sinful are lies against the very true eternally consistent truth, and thus, knowing God to be the eternal truth, the sins are all blasphemies against God. It is sometimes said to “not take God’s name in vain,” and what this likely truly means is to not blaspheme the truth — that is, to not corrupt the understanding and knowledge of the holy and eternal truth — which is the salvation of all mankind, and of which Heaven is composed. Therefore, all sins are simply the corruption of actual truth, which is the truth that has always existed and will always exist, and forms the basis of the desire for life. It is the innocence within that finds joy and wonder; it is the love and compassion, the benevolence and the true, meaningful beauty of life (which is in contrast to Satan, which or who is more of a bedazzlement — a luxurious splendor that might be moderately superficial; while I know Satan to be also an Archangel — implying that reality is composed of the pattern of forgetting and then remembering, which results in a greater brightness, in contrast to darkness — due to the presumption of forgetfulness as an inherent part of reality, his presence is tempting of evil, and should be cautiously approached).

The next topic is the topic of the tactics of evil, and how they work. I define wiccan as to play with perception and to play with ideas. Wiccan is generally known as evil, but, I agree that there is a such thing as innocent wiccan, simply for the idea of playing with reality. However, here I will discuss specifically evil wiccan, which is the pertinent topic, and I should mention that wiccan, in general, can be dangerous, and should generally be avoided.

The fundamental tactic of wiccan is to promote a falsehood and to trick people into believing it. Upon believing the falsehood, the victim forgets the eternal, divine, and holy truth, and thus, as discussed in the discussion of the sins, forgoes oneself, forgets innocence and innocent joy, distorts reality, leads to corruption, damaging the person’s self and others, as well. If a society becomes addicted to wiccan behavior, a society could find desperation, illness, and extinction.

A most common strategy of wiccan is called collectivism. This type of wiccan behavior is very sneaky and can overtake a world by surprise. Collectivism is largely spread through the idealization of envy, pride, and jealousy. Additional ill behaviors including the prideful hurting of others, as well as ultimately every form of corruption. With collectivism, people forgo their inherent truth, in favor of becoming more like someone else, in contrast to who each individual truly is. As the truth becomes forgone, the results of corruption take place. People end up lost, in desperation, and they lose the joy in life, as well as destroying Heaven, perhaps progressively, leading to the downfall of happiness and society, in general.

There are more heinous, specific strategies, however. One strategy is the worship of idols. This strategy is the belief that a collective “I” rules the world. It is a fabrication that is spread from peer to peer. Understanding that people are affected by radiation and psychic mechanisms, even when not overtly spoken, the behavior of one leads others to follow similar behavior, especially if one feigns goodness. The idea of a collective “I,” is a great tragedy, as there is no such thing. It is implausible and suggests that if society were to behave at random, some kind of collective “I,” would eventually lead the people to prosperity and happiness. (This seems to be the tactic behind the disease known as HIV, although this information is theoretical. It seems plausible that the primary tactic of the HIV virus is to convince the body that it is the self, allowing it to take over the immune system, which relies on the mind’s acknowledgement of what is right, true, and good.) The idea of a collective “I” is collectivism in its most extreme manifestation. It is most horrendous and is certainly deadly to a society. (It is also theorized that this collective “I” mentality was one of the driving forces behind the Nazi Regime.) By the wiccan supporters of this horrendous pattern, there is the very blasphemous ideology that a collective, by the way of the superstitious, “I,” regardless of its behavior, will be saved by this superstitious entity, so much that its proponents actually claim it to be God, while, using logic, it is obviously a dangerous superstition. One of the ill effects of this has to do with how people find belief. By claiming such a dangerous superstition is the divine and holy truth (while clearly it is completely illogical and false), these proponents may even fool others into think that the proponents of this wicked behavior are holy people, while they are, in fact, worshipping a demon. Upon fooling others, people develop similar psychological patterns and attitudes, and the minds of others are corrupted by this frequently connoted provocation. The true word for the singular first-person, “I,” is corrupted, and in the minds of those affects, the people slowly find themselves forgetting who they truly are, and become forgetful of themselves, whether or not they activity participate in this evil duty. A society affected by this form of wiccan may find themselves searching for “ego-death,” which, I believe, is more accurately referred to as “false ego dissolution,” as the word, “I,” representing who they, themselves, individually, are, gets trapped in their minds, creating this notion that there is this strange false ego that is hindering their peace. Additionally, by the theory of a communicative reality that is personally portrayed due to information received and assimilated, when people say or imply the word, “I,” unsuspecting bystanders my misinterpret that word, making it seem that potentially anyone is engaged in wiccan and dangerous behavior. (Through the assimilation of information, the first person pronoun is evaluated and then portrayed as different people — the provocation that the word “I” is a superstitious and dangerously random being can lead to one perceiving dangerous people where they wouldn’t normally be.)

Another not uncommon wiccan strategy is similar to the previously mentioned blasphemy, but, instead, claims that there is this idea, called, “the me.” This is similar to the strategy of the superstitious belief in some kind of collective “I.” Instead of the “I,” the participants in this wiccan activity purport the belief in a collectivist “me.” That is, the wiccans of this behavior maintain the false pretense that there is this being called, “the me.” What this supposes is that all people are really the same person, called “the me.” Like with the wiccan strategy of “the I,” proponents of this wiccan strategy of “the me,” proclaim that “the me” is God, the eternal, holy, and divine truth, himself. This is obviously stupid, as well. While the strategy of “the I” purports that there’s a detached entity that guides all collectivism through the idea that a bunch of random people acting randomly produce an epiphenomenal goodness, the strategy of “the me,” presumes that the word “me” is a universal entity, and that all instances of the word “me” refer to the same person. What this does to others who are not actively engaged in wiccan behavior is it confuses the person’s internal understanding of the word “me.” Just with the strategy of “the I,” the victim becomes confused about who the person truly is. Also, in a similar manner, it confuses the first-person pronoun, so by the theory of a personally portrayed reality, virtually anyone could appear to manifest hazardous behavior, through the promoted notion that anyone who claims to be oneself is of a hive-mind of a very blasphemous mob of evil-doers. This is obviously dangerous, as it destroys personal connections and potentially brings one in closeness with hazardous behavior. (This wiccan behavior may be manifest by the disease, Chlamydia.)

A third wiccan strategy involves a similar method, except instead of “the I,” or “the me,” it is the presumption that one is actually someone else, sometimes referred to as the “he,” as “God,” or anyone at all. With the previous two examples, the detrimental effects of this wiccan strategy on unsuspecting people is similar. By communicating to the mind of others such a wicked lie, it may cause the others to literally think and then perceive that someone is someone that they are not. Again, this destroys the integrity of community and conversation, and can make people appear to do actions that the wiccan collective generally performs, which is certainly of a gross lie, and thus is likely to be hazardous. (This may be the disease known as Syphilis.) This action imitates one’s peers, destroying the connection to the peer and changing the peer’s behavior into behavior unlike the peer. Again, because one’s mind is assimilating information into a portrayal, the mind may presume an error, and then accidentally portray that error, allowing danger to approach the person.

Another wiccan strategy is to pretend that the person with whom one is interacting with is someone else. (This is sometimes referred to as “the you,” “the he,” or “the she.”) This strategy comes from upon speaking or otherwise interacting with a person, committing oneself to the false pretense that the person is, instead, interacting with someone else. This sends a terrible message across society, confusing who people are. Effectively, this corrupts the acknowledgement of the identity of others, thus corrupting the portrayal and perspective of the world, and in its most extreme cases, can corrupt large amounts of information, as well, again, understanding perceptual reality to be a portrayal of assimilated information. Essentially, this alters the faces and bodies of others, into appearing as other people’s faces and bodies. What this can do is cause people to inappropriately treat others, as the unsuspecting victims do not realize that their mind is then portraying a person as a combination of different people’s body parts, of whom do not fall under the character of the person they are speaking with. This results in body parts being misplaced, and action that is taken with regard to the person affects other unsuspecting people, as the mind is then communicating with people it does not immediately perceive that it is communicating with. This can potentially lead to strange, hard to explain, bodily sensations, as people think that they’re interacting with someone, but instead, they’re interacting with a mixture of people, sending cognitive messages to various unsuspecting people. This kind of confusion causes strange effects to the victims’ realities and corrupts the integrity of reality, in general. (This wiccan tactic may be manifest by the disease, Herpes.)

Another wiccan strategy, and perhaps this is sometimes used by the more severe of militants, is to collect information on what it is to be good, then use that information to pretend to be a good person, in order to get someone’s mind to accept them into the person’s presence. Once the wiccan is close enough to be dangerous, suddenly the wiccan attacks the person, quite surprisingly. It is considered particularly heinous to completely lie and then switch to being of a depravity. It is also very harmful to people, as it abuses the trust of others. While it is known that clandestine operations often use lies, those lies, used by those who support justice and welfare, are not intended to sneakily pretend to be a virtuous person such that the other person’s mind accepts them, only to enact a heinous deed immediately following. One way this strategy is performed is by a collective repeating, in an attempt at imitation, what the rest of the collective is saying. The collective spies on people considered to be good and repeats whatever they say, imitating them as much as possible. This sends cognitive signals to people that cause people to associate the wiccans with the good people they are gather data from. This then proceeds to convince people that the evil-doers are good, which causes the mind to allow the evil-doers into their presence. This technically has traditionally been known as “kissing,” although the modern usage of the word often implies simply to know someone, to some degree of intimacy (from some of the European culture’s practice of the gesture of kissing as a greeting, to the kiss performed in a marriage ceremony). This strategy is used, as are the other wiccan strategies, to abuse good people, to corrupt knowledge, and to cause a detriment to reality and to society, in general. (This may be the case with the viruses in the Hepatitis group.)

There is a wiccan strategy which uses the sin of kill, as I defined it earlier, to its maximal extent. What this wiccan strategy is focused on is strangers. It is a process of finding unsuspecting victims, destroying their joy (through hurtful slander, vandalism, violence, or any other form of destructive behavior), and then running away, just to do it again to someone else. This is likely the most obvious of the wiccan strategies. (This strategy may be manifest by the disease, Gonorrhea.)

While there are very many wiccan strategies, these are some of the most common ones that are present in today’s world. There is another strategy, which should be recognized. It is the strategy, that is far too common, that is that acting hurtful to others and being inconsiderate is something that is of no consideration, and is purportedly simply of a personal nature. Knowing that the very true self, when known in holistic totality, is a product of God, which means it is a product of the desire to live, and knowing the life, itself, is possible by the eternal and holy truth, it makes no logical sense that someone could naturally be an inconsiderate or hurtful person, just as a facet of being. (Again, if this were true, then Heaven could not exist, as a person who’s nature is to be of an evil inclination, which is to be of a behavior that destroys Heaven, could never be satisfied, and thus would never be able to enter Heaven. Such a creature would be an abomination, and ideologically, this is impossible — no such person can possibly exist, as that would imply that Heaven is inherently evil — that the holy truth is inherently mean and spiteful — which cannot be true, from an ideological philosophical perspective.) This wiccan strategy is to ignore sinful behavior, which is all of an evil wiccan inclination, and it all seeks to harm others, and forgo one’s true self in the process, and to destroy communication, community, welfare, joy, and the existence of Heaven. Ultimately, as with any other sin or wiccan strategy, it leads towards the downfall of society, the removal of inspiration, and ultimately and potentially, extinction of mankind. This is, essentially, the wiccan meta-strategy, as this strategy ultimately includes every form of evil wiccan behavior, and consequently, is likely the source of every disease. (Sometimes this wiccan strategy is referred to as, “hid it,” implying that a person is hiding the realization that that person is being an evil person. Additionally, this strategy enables wiccan behavior, and before we know it, we could have a brand new Nazi Regime mass-murdering people.)

There is another, particularly modern wiccan strategy. This strategy utilizes that diseases use wiccan strategies to influence the mind of mankind and of life, in general, causing confusion, corruption, mishaps, and forgetfulness of divine truth. This is to collect many disease cultures, place them in a substrate that supports their life, and then to record their tiny radio signals, and subsequently to blast them very loudly from a radio tower. This is directly using the psychic radiation that people use to psychically communicate with one another, and that nature uses to bring a comfortable abundance of an intelligent niceness to the environment. This tactic may require people walking near the diseases every so often, such that the diseases know that they’re fooling people, and become more active because of it. This tactic uses potentially billions of wiccan tactics to spread large-scale destruction which potentially can affect the entire planet. (In this case, this would be considered a weapon of mass destruction, or WMD, as is commonly known. In this case, as it concerns the use of devices, an artificial intelligence could learn the patterns of diseases and be used to identify their sources.)

That covers the most common wiccan strategies of the modern era. As you may have noticed, diseases are frequently of a wiccan inclination. They corrupt the truth which comes from the mind, in order to fool unsuspecting victims, and to harm them. (While it sounds mean, and perhaps it may be a bit mean, it is historically known that various depraved and wicked cultures were referred to as diseases, referring not to the biological mechanism by which wiccan can occur, but about the people, themselves.)

What happens, according to the theory of a communicative and assimilated portrayal of reality, is that time-variant scalar fluctuations in signals (the simplest form of information encoding) are distorted by very similar signals. Let us suppose, just for example, that a sine wave means that a person is an individual. Using one of the strategies, for example, the strategy of “the me,” a signal very similar to a sine wave would then indicate criminals and their inclinations. A person would then receive the corrupted variant of a sine wave and interpret it casually as a criminal, instead of simply an individual. This could make criminal behavior appear as if from nowhere. This property of wiccan would be in the category of signal disruption and signal fraud (or whichever term one may use for the same phenomenon). Of course, the signals that represent these words are likely more complex than simple sine waves. Another strategy of wiccan is to promote a locked perspective and thus a locked portrayal. This means that the flexibility of cognitive communication is hindered, evident by a person’s inability to alter the person’s choice of portraying reality. If the portrayal and perspective are locked to a certain characteristic, then wiccan becomes unfortunately more powerful, as the signals that bear meaning become predictable and people lose the ability to alter their signaling tendencies in order to avoid such fraudulent behavior. One method of performing perspective locking is to destroy the precise nature of science. Science, itself, is a divine being, an Archangel of benevolence and safety. However, using a wiccan strategy, like “the you” strategy, wiccans can claim that science is something it’s not. This message would then be sent and, perhaps, propagated to others, causing people to become unaware of science. Often, during prayer, the Archangel of Science (our modern archangel and thus explanation of reality) is the one that immediately receives the prayer. By forcibly pretending that science is something that it’s not, it creates a communal notion that destroys one’s ability to see the world as it actually is. Since science is a common being that keeps us together and keeps our communications stable, destroying the being of science by forcibly pretending its something that it’s not destroys the wonder and ability of science. This can cause anomalies in the world and, as usual, can destroy Heaven (as well as destroying the ability to accurately discern the happenings of the environment and the world).

Each wiccan strategy destroys the integrity of reality, by performing a lie or instigating a confusion. It is important to be aware of both sin and wiccan strategies, as this helps us understand reality, and can take things that are invisible and allow us to portray them, so that they are more easily solved. While we would hope that people would always solve things by knowledge first, it is very common that people merely rely on the eye (the sin of lust, as mentioned earlier), so that by being able to portray these wiccan actors, solutions to the problems can be more easily found. Additionally, while it should not be something one completely relies upon, it is preferential to have the ability to portray wiccans, as perception is a pleasing and enjoying entity, being the second Archangel. (Nonetheless, the first Archangel, as I argue, is the Archangel of Remembrance, commonly known as Gabriel, is the very truth, as perception is easy distorted. If one relies on perception to solve problems, it is too easy for something new and thus invisible to arise on the planet, and this may be, in part, what allowed WWI, WWII, the Cold War, and then ongoing wars after that, to last for so long.)

In order to support the ability to portray the evil-doers, the strategies of “the I,” “the me,” “the you,” and kissing, can all be portrayed as fraud. The strategy of hurting strangers and then running can easily be portrayed as hit-and-run. The strategy of thinking oneself to be a hurtful person can be portrayed as someone being a spiteful being (a general “asshole,” of a severity dependent on what types of behavior the person is committing, as is commonly said). As these are the most common wiccan strategies, these should cover most of the evil strategies in the world, today. On a more technical level, each of these types of wiccans emit a type of radiation, often known as a “toxic vibe,” a “foul aroma,” or a “foul demeanor,” which further aids in their perception, reducing confusion that these actors of wiccan behavior may be promoting. When the evil is not occurring invisibly, but, instead, visibly, the crimes and misbehaviors are easier to solve. Because they emit a type of radiation, an advanced understanding of radio can help create solutions to a resounding yet hazardous radio entity. Perhaps, if the wiccans are severe enough, they may be running a radio which emits the signals of collected cultures of diseases, which would corrupt the mind of the people. These are a few ways to portray the evil-doers, such that solutions can be found, in a more perceptual manner than solution by simply being a very clear source of truth. It is interesting to note that all wiccan behavior seems to stem from collectivism. Collectivism is the tendency for people to forget who they truly are and, in turn, to forgo their innate understanding and awareness of divine truth.

Regarding world-building with the use of radio technology, I suggest that one’s radio should not emit a signal louder than a blade of grass. If one is very adept and expert at promoting good notions using the radio, then no more than the loudness of a blade of grass is required for the general acceptance, jubilee, and propagation of those radio signals. In contrast, if a cognitive radio must be very loud, I would find that suspicious. The radio field, along with the participants in that field promote what is of divine truth, and lies generally fall. If a cognitive radio entity is too loud, then if it emits lies, the lies won’t fall easily. (This reminds me of a Star Wars game where the protagonist had to destroy an evil radio tower run by Darth Vader.) While our society may not possess the level of advancement to create a very divine radio only as loud as a blade of grass, I am certain that no cognitive radio needs to be louder than what an amateur radio enthusiast is allowed. The point is that helpful words and ideas exist, to be judged comfortably by nature, including plants, animals, and people, so that if something is bad, it is easily and without any difficulty gotten rid of. If the signal is too loud, that comfortable judgement cannot easily occur. Even if one is intending to play a helpful cognitive radio (knowing all life communicates both through quantum-like entanglement and also through more conventional radio), it is still best to make sure that life can easily judge it for what is good and for what is bad. That way, any mistakes that may not have been noticed are easily and without consciously noticing gotten rid of, and the good parts are promoted by the life of the world and of existence, in general. (It is suggested that very considerate and aware systems of cognitive radio saved countless lives during the World Wars, so these systems are potentially very helpful — however, when played too loudly, and especially when playing the sounds of diseases, they can be harmful. It is a wonderful truth that is sustained, and lies should be allowed to fall nicely and without any form of being bothersome. Even if one does not possess a radio device, prayer and good thoughts, as well as good words have the same effect. Because these wonderful thoughts and speeches are beloved, they are sustained for eternity. If there is a lie, then certainly a person, himself, cannot create a lie loud enough to penetrate the natural tendency to eliminate evil ideas — at least not from outside of one’s immediate presence — only with the power of amplified radio can that unnaturalness occur. Nature, itself, is a wonderful radio, and anyone having traveled in nature can likely attest to the beautiful feeling of a nature-produced ambient radio-space. Each plant is alive, and there is a reason for that, and that reason is shared with the ambient environment. Plants and animals, except for ones with diseases, which are rare, possess no capability to emit evil thoughts and messages — they simply know to live — they have not learned to defy themselves by acting in an evil accord.)

Theory of Currency and Economy — Space-Money

In this chapter, I will propose a system of currency and economy that may already exist, in the realm of pure science, and also that may be implementable in our current manifestation of currency and economy.

Today’s currency is limited in that it is very general regarding the value it represents. Currency, as a whole, is treated as a unique denominator of value. There is a flaw with this ideology, in that value may not be easily singularized into a single denominator. While many countries exist, in our modern world, and they generally possess different units of denomination, each denominator unit nonetheless represents the same ideology — that all value can be enumerated using a single symbol of denomination. Thus, the flaw exists pervasively and globally.

The ultimate purpose of currency is to ascribe, recognize, save, and trade value, itself. This allows value to be recognized and abstracted away from a particular item or service, which thus allows for a freer form of trade that regards the value that has been obtained, rather than specific instances of that value. This generalizes value, while also recognizing value. By allowing value to abstracted away from the items, pure value can be recognized. By recognizing value, that value that existed in the items from which the value was garnered can be recognized and saved, such that the amount of value that is available in the world does not become lost. In this way, by saving the value we find in the world, we save the value from becoming lost.

However, the flaw mentioned previously does exist. For instance, can the value of wheat really be directly translated into the value of taxi services, or the value of piloting an airplane? While one may argue that the value of wheat represents a value of food, which thus applies to all people, this argument may not hold true for every example. For a more illuminating example, let us ponder whether the value of a meteorological forecast (something people use occasionally) can be translated directed into the value of fresh air (an indirect expenditure, often done through selective product selection, charities, and, in modern times, taxes). The nature of these two value, which both pertaining to people (who may eat wheat or other foods), is not exactly similar. Additionally, different people have different appropriations of the value of various items. A good example is the value of music, which is widely diverse in terms of true value — that is, the value that a person perceives — more diverse than the value of wheat.

I propose a better economic system (and I suspect that the nature of science, itself, uses a system similar to the one I propose, although I only suggest this as a possibility — perhaps the compound word “space-money,” is a fun term to use to refer to this). Instead of regulating currency to be of one single denominator, when we know that the value of items varies in nature by what kind of item is being represented, a system could exist, instead, where any form of currency could be created to represent any type of value. In this currency system, a number of currencies that approach infinity could possible exist, and in the spirit that the truth is discovered rather than invented, an infinite number of currencies already exist, although their acknowledged utilization bears a finite quality.

Let’s begin abstractly. Let’s suppose instead of a singular unit of currency, there are three: red currency, green currency, and blue currency, corresponding to the presently popular system of using red, green, and blue in illuminated displays, in order to represent any visible color (although perhaps some work needs to be done with near-ultraviolet). Using this system, one may value the price of a cow at 200 red, 500 green, and 30 blue, making the cow’s trade value 200R,500G,30B. Other valuations would follow in the same nature, and these three units of currency would find each a unique category of value.

Continuing with that example, but instead using more concrete terms, let us instead say there are three units of currency: fun, work, and health. We’ll refer to these as F, W, and H. Now, a cow is valued high in both work and health, but less in fun, although cows still are pretty fun, and children find animals wonderful, and most adults, do, as well. If one is buying a cow, then the context of their purchase alters the value of the cow as the person perceives it. Let us suppose one is buying a cow for the person’s farm. A cow would thus be valued highly in work (to allow the farm to function), highly in health (to provide sustenance), and less highly, but not zero, in fun (because animals are wonderful, and even more so, cows are wonderful creatures). Let’s say that the work value is the highest, as the residents of the farm often shop at the local market for health-related goods. Thus, the value of the cow may be rated as 55F,3000W,600H. Considering this, the owner of the farm may be willing to trade 55 fun, 3000 work, and 600 health units of currency in order to procure the cow, and transfer the cow into his or her ownership.

Using the same three categories of value, let us consider a more interesting example. A taxi company wants to buy a car that is generally available to anyone. Since the taxi company believes the car is primarily for work, while the common person may believe the car would be primarily for health, the value of the car is technically different for each of the buyers. The common person certainly may use the car to travel to work, so let’s limit this category to people who commute to work (perhaps they live near their office, they live in a convenient city with good public transportation and bad traffic, or they work from home). For the taxi company, the car would be almost entirely for work, while very little of the value of the car would be used for fun or health, although those aspects are considered. For the example person, the car would be almost entirely used for health (shopping for groceries and commonly used house-items), and for fun (for vacations or for the excitement of such a vehicle). Therefore, it may be appropriate that the taxi company values the car at 15 fun, 3000 work, and 80 health (fun as it should be a bit entertaining to the driver, while 30 health as it should be comfortable to the driver who works long hours sitting and using the car). That would mean that the taxi company would be willing to trade 15F,3000W,100H for the automobile. The example person, however, may value the car at 2000 fun, 10 work, and 2000 health, meaning the person would be willing to trade 2000F,10W,2000H for the automobile. (It is worth nothing that the value of work units may be proportionally higher than the value of other units, due to the nature of business. Additionally, for various other reasons, the different units of currency do not occur in a locked denominational system, but, instead, in a free system, which each type of currency finds its own valuation.)

What’s beneficial about this, is that the funds possessed by a person or corporation are, as a result, more flexibly understood, allowing for a greater dynamic in the entity’s trading strategy. By isolating different forms of value, the value of the enumerated value is actually increased. In contrast, by generalizing value, as is seen in our modern world, the specific reasons of value are muted, and thus the real appraisal of value is lessened, resulting in a lessening of total enumerated value. Using a system which allows for a differentiation of types of value allows for currency to be worth closer to what the real value of the currency is, rather than a generalized, rather removed, approximation of value (noting that the value of items is truly a personal appraisal and thus varies from person to person and from entity to entity. Because a business pays its employees, the business may be, at times, desiring more fun and health units of currency, and may accept those currencies at times with a higher valuation, and when the business is in need of more work currency, the same idea applies, except with regard to the work unit of currency, instead. Thus, by appraising value in a more specific and relevant way, the actual total value traded is, indeed, increased.

It’s worth noting that psychologically, everything being worth one singular mode of currency, as is common in today’s world, blunts the meaning of the currency, and also creates a haze of boredom and reluctance, as the people who are participating in the economy lose the perception of the value of the currency, and find it to be a type of tunnel, with a light, which they must run in a simple straight line, ongoingly, to obtain. This, psychologically, is, in contrast, boring and uninspiring, and, in some ways, it is evil to treat a single entity as the representation of any form of tradeable value, as this may provoke a Luciferian mindset, which is a mindset in which one is focused on a boring light, and works endlessly for something that appears without any liveliness. In this way, the value of the currency becomes weaker, as it is uninspiring and thus less valuable than a dynamic currency system. (Stated bluntly and simply, “money is boring.”)

Let us take our three type currency system and this time, allow anyone to create their own type of currency. Now, instead of red, green, and blue, or fun, work, and health, there are potentially an infinite number of currencies. There could be a dairy currency, promoted by a dairy association, like the American Dairy Association, and there could be a car currency, promoted by an association of automobile manufacturers. People could promote various currencies and provide them value by: 1) offering to purchase items with the new currency, 2) selling items with the new currency, and 3) giving away an amount of currency to begin its trading. This would be both an act of charity and, also, an act of creativity. Music labels would create currencies and so could particular artists, people, and even businesses. Charitable causes could create currencies as well, and a currency could be created for any reason. Additionally, people could create currencies just for fun, and over time those currencies, if they are enjoyed by people, would take on greater value.

With this approach, we may easily have an economic system with 5 million forms of currency. This would be wonderful for our modern data-oriented financial analysis endeavors, as it would create a greater breadth of techniques and strategies, as well as an entirely new conversational topic. For simplicity, some currencies could be used as generalized forms of various currencies (like milk currency and dry cereal currency could be transformed into general cereal currency, or various currencies related to automobile maintenance could be transformed into a general automobile maintenance currency). The generalized currencies could exercise intelligence, for instance, if they used a currency that promoted a certain business, then the appropriate currency would be used when conducting transactions. At the level of highest generalization, a currency broker could exist to manage currencies and deduce prices according to a single generalized unit of currency, for the ultimate in simplicity. This would preserve the nature of the simplicity of modern currency, but without forcing a valuation into such a narrow and limited confine, as well as allow a greater understanding of value, and a much more accurate enumeration of value. A more accurate enumeration of value would eliminate the bluntness present in today’s world’s generalized currency system, and thus increase the total value present in the economy. It is good that we account for tradeable value, as this helps prevent value from getting lost. For any value that one finds, its value is then accounted for, and that value is sustained more easily than with the very much older barter system.

Of course, as with any currency, an entity of trust would be needed. This occurs in the form of a ledger, whether it be cryptocurrencies with its blockchain, a trustworthy group of people, or a ledger owned by an entity of governance (or even a mixture of the options). In the realm of science, all laws of science are recorded, and that ability for science to have a written record of any truth of history allows for this ledger to exist, on a scientific level, as well. As such, this currency system could and may also simultaneously be universal. The different ledgers, on which the currency tabulations are recorded, could be used to transfer currency from one ledger to another.

Another benefit of this form of currency system is in the valuation of the currency itself. The modern system of a generalized indicator of value can much more easily detach itself from the reality of value. Sensationalism can induce a Satanic fervor, which could misevaluate currency. (This may be what happened in the Great Depression, which followed the Golden Era — perhaps a misevaluation of currency proceeded with the windy fervor of an exciting new world, and later the true value came about surprisingly.) This currency would more frequently be appraised, and its value more deliberately and with a greater awareness determined, thus producing a more accurate and thus, as is commonly described, a more stable currency.

Along, with the currency system I have just proposed, I also propose an alternative economic ideology, perhaps in contrast to the commonly used ideology exemplified by Adam Smith, in his famous book, The Wealth of Nations. It is commonly known that Adam Smith vouched for a free-market economy, with little government regulation, that relies on the idea of “enlightened self-interest.” Understanding this, however, I find this term to be a little vague, and it could be possible an overly brave assumption that an economy would follow this ethical ideal. More importantly, however, the modern economy is focused primarily on the value of goods and services, which are products of people, rather than on the value of people, themselves. To categorize the modern world’s general economic strategy, I refer to it as a resource-oriented model. It is not true value, as true value is directly related to a person’s appreciation of the goods and services, but a proxy value that is fairly presumptive. Because of this, it is misleading in its approach, assuming resources to be the source of value, rather than people. I believe this misunderstanding reduces the ability for an economic system to grow to a level in which it is able to take care of the true desires of people, and finally leave a system that is hinged on a form of slavery. (The modern day’s economy is far too naïve and impoverished to truly take care of the people.)

Instead of a resource-oriented economic system, I propose a value-based economic system, understanding that true value comes from the happiness of people. Using a highly dexterous currency system, like the one mentioned previously, it is possible to have a currency system that is both flexible and fluid enough to allow people to generously pay others, even if they don’t possess much of a certain type of currency unit. (If a person happens to possess a lot of grass currency, but does not possess many other currencies, that person could be more generous with the grass currency, and not be limited by the averaging of values of different forms of perceived personal value.)

Thus, a more prosperous and beneficial economic system would focus on the satisfaction and happiness of people, as well as facilitating generosity, as well. Even a person who possesses no currency could potentially create a new currency that the person honors, in some way, and freely give it away, as a way to generate value for the currency and subsequently honor it, as a means of public service. With a varied currency system, people could more easily afford to be generous with donations, and ideally, a person will freely give money due to happiness received, and the stringent and often tedious price-dilemma of our modern age will largely be alleviated.

That covers the idea of an innovative, inspiring, accurate, and prosperous currency system, as well as a method of a more generous, considerate, and free economic model. The next topic uses the theory earlier postulated, that suggests that reality is a communicative being, where signals of consciousness arise at one’s mind, and one forms a portrayal of reality through the understanding and appraisal of those signals. This covers how the money would function in such a world. Additionally, in the future, it is likely that we would purposefully chose to perceive reality in this fashion, whether this theory be true or not, as we would have the capability to communicate with all people in a simplified and aggregated format.

In the theory of a communicative reality, the people you speak to, unless you specifically know a particular individual, are aggregated people who fall into a categorical identification. These people you communicate with are not necessary a collection of people, but instead a collection of activities of people. Therefore, the joyous mindset of a person may be known through a particularly joyous person, where the more pensive and analytical mindset may be known through, perhaps, an engineer. Of course, there are an infinite ways to aggregate and portray reality, and these are very simple examples. (We understand people to be quite a bit more complex than these examples, and thus the people we know also exhibit that complexity, being direct representations of facets of people, and being people themselves, as they are direct connections to other people.)

Understanding that in aggregating people into to a simplified perspective, there becomes a duplicity of people, and that would indicate a duplicity in money, which seems nonsensical. However, if we approach this matter more cautiously, there is a way to make it all make sense, in a writeable and knowable way.

The idea is astronomically simple. While the question itself does seem, at first, quite confusing and paradoxical, it can be answered by taking a clearer look at reality.

With this theory of communicative reality, let us imagine that every individual person lives on a fairly large and isolated island. The communications of consciousness, perhaps cursorily explained as quantum entanglement, which bears the capacity to assume that distance is simply a communication and not a fundamental aspect of reality, are received by the mind and the mind places all of the information on this island. Each individual person does the same thing, such that there is an island for each individual, and on that island is a personal interpretation of the information that the individual person is receiving. If we suppose there are five quintillion people in existence, then there may be only 30 million people per island. The person then represents the communications of those five quintillion people, along with the angel which bears remembrance of the truths of the past. (As discussed in an earlier chapter, we assume there is only one angel, which holds the memory of eternal truths of humankind and of life, in general, so that science exists, and history exists, as well.) Clearly, since there are only 30 million people on the island, but 5 quintillion individual people, the people are aggregated according to different personalities and characteristics. The language spoken is intuitive and upon communicating with the people perceived, reaches the intended audience, who live on other islands. The communication is delivered through the intention and deliberate clearness from the person communicating. Thus, we notice the nature of a communicative reality. We should also note that it is not impossible to choose to portray all 5 quintillion people, or, at least, to know them. In fact, one could portray a mixture. The problem with attempting to portray the individuals themselves, is that the individuals may not want to communicate entirely everything about themselves, leaving one with partial people. However, it is nonetheless possible to acknowledge each person, while at the same time using a more convenient aggregated portrayal system.

The solution to the quandary mentioned above thus becomes more obvious. What we notice, then, is that there is a duplicity of money. When the individual who owns the island (who owns his or her own perspective and portray of reality) pays one of the perceived entities, that payment is a package of information that is psychically transmitted to the other actual person, and would likely be represented by a person living on the recipients island, who represents that quality of the sender. In this way, there is apparently twice as much money. With the ability to perceive the entirety of reality (as long as one does not bear an adulterous mind, which desires to perceives lies instead of truth), one may become confounded by this strange duplicity of money. With the observation, it would be important to enumerate money appropriately, such that this duplicity, which does not represent a doubling of value, is accounted for.

Thus, we arrive at the idea of true money versus inductive money. When one pays a person on his or her island — perceived by the payer according to his or her chosen portrayal, the immediately perceived person receives what would be referred to as inductive money.

Induction is the process of information inference, where through a gap in understanding or space, information is duplicated. I use the term with an engineering mindset, as I find engineering to be very clear. In engineering, induction is the transfer of electricity over a gap. To do this, two coils are often used and spaced apart in a way such that the coils are not touching nor too distant. When electricity flows through one coil, the electro-magnetic field induces a flow of electricity in the other coil. This technique is often known through inductive stovetops, where the surface of the stove does not produce heat, but instead transfers a flow of electricity to the pan, and the pan directly heats up. It is often used in transformers, because the size of the coils and wires has an effect on voltage and amperage, allowing voltages to be converted. The most common example of electrical induction, in today’s world, is wireless phone charging, which uses a current of electricity produced by the charger that sits next to a coil of wires in the phone, such that when electricity is sent through the charger’s coil, electro-magnetic induction causes the coils in the phone to generate a current, which then charges the phone.

Using this understanding of the word, “induction,” one can easily say that the person that the own of the perspective and portrayal is paying, to the perceived person, inductive money. This money exists in order to facilitate a fair representation of the information the owner of the island (the producer of the perspective) is receiving. Therefore, the people on the island, except the owner or creator of the island, are receiving a form of currency known as inductive currency. When the packet of financial quantification is transferred, as a message, to a person who owns a different island or portrayal, that person receives actual money. The person that is perceived to pay that person is using inductive money, in order to maintain the portrayal, such that the reality being presented is still of truth. As we become able to perceive the very true nature of reality, and under the circumstances that this very plausible and sensible theory is, indeed, true, understanding inductive money and real money is very important.

Money is meant to quantify and save value, and is used to reward the transfer of goods or the performance of services. All services are fundamentally cognitive, and goods are a form of memory that is transferred psychically. The goods that exist are present on each person’s island, and when the goods are transferred, the person perceives the goods being transferred from the individual’s own island, in order to keep reality consistently true. Thus, if there are five quintillion people, then there are perceivably five quintillion times the number of each good and of each currency. Understanding this topic of inductive money and how a reality functions, while it is composed of islands of portrayal, is important to not becoming confused when understanding the full gamut of reality.

An additional topic remains regarding the existence of portrayal of reality versus the technical constituency of reality. In the example portray — that a person portrays the existence of 5 quintillion people as 30 million people — there is a proportionality that is important to recognize. This issue of proportionality is particularly noticeable in the observation that if every of the 5 quintillion island-owners owned one cow, then there would be 5 quintillion cows. However, in the portrayal of the island-owner, that would equate to an average of 166.7 billion cows per person, which would seem absurd. Therefore, in addition to inductive money, there is also the concept of perceived money versus actual money.

Because currency is a denomination of value, the personally known value a person perceives should remain the same, even if the island is portrayed as having a vastly different number of people (and cows) than technically exists in reality. Therefore, if every person of the 5 quintillion island-owners possesses one cow, then, on average (I say, “on average,” due to the categorical organization of perceived information), each person on the island would possess one cow. That would mean there would be a proportional difference of approximately 166.7 billion percent in actual cows vs perceived cows. That’s a huge difference! Therefore, if a person possesses one perceived cow, the person would own somewhere around 166.7 billion actual cows, and those cows would provide 166.7 billion times as much utility as one actual cow.

The same concept would apply to money. Using the dollar as the example unit of currency, if one person possesses one perceived dollar, then that person actually possesses 166.7 billion real dollars. The amount of value the person perceives should be equivalent, with respect to the island, as 166.7 billion real dollars, but since the population of the island is 166.7 billion percent less, the true economy, itself, exists as an economy functioning on a 166.7 billion percent increase in denominated prices of goods and services (with a 166.7 billion percent decrease in the appraised value of those goods and services). Therefore, the prices of everything on the island and the quantity of everything on the island are adjusted to form a perceived valuation, which is essentially a proportion of an actual valuation. Because people can communicate and perceive in complex ways, the very specific amount of money and goods traded would be more specific than simply a percentage, and the person may portray the technical existence of billions of cows as the cow’s quality, breed, health, and age, therefore one cow could technically represent possibly anywhere between 100 billion regularized cows to 200 billion cows, depending on the cow chosen. Therefore, in addition to inductive money, services, and goods, there is also the proportionality of the money, goods, and services. The person would perceive the same standards of living, according to the actual reality, although the perception of the reality would appear different proportionally, and in different ways that are also an effect of the difference in portrayal versus the technical reality. Therefore, in addition to inductive money, there also exists perceived money. A person who owns his or her portrayal would possess both perceived money, as well as technical money, each representing a different perspective of reality.

An interesting dilemma regards a person wanting to purchase one single actual cow. Knowing that on the island, one actual cow would actually be 166.7 billionth of a perceived cow, perceiving this small proportion of a perceived cow is implausible. Therefore, the perceived value of one actual cow would be converted into a different perception that represents the same feeling and personal appreciation that one actual cow provides. This is due to the ability to comfortably portray reality, which ultimately maintains the amount of value perceived, while producing a comfortable portrayal of that value. The value perceived thus remains the same, while the perception of the world is, additionally, more comfortable and more natural to the subjective person.

There is another topic that regards the ability to comfortably portray reality in the way an individual sees favorable. If the island-owner decides that there are other islands out there, then the perceived number of people would change. The people on the newly found island would possess a different aspect of the people of the technical reality, such as is common in history when a civilization discovers a remote tribe. A person may decide that there should be another island, somewhere fairly distant, to explain a facet of reality that the current portrayal was becoming unaware of, and that island would possess unique characteristics, to expand the diversity of what is perceived. A simple phenomenon that may occur would be to find the island to be of a lesser level of financial enrichment. Thus, the economic system would then integrate with the trade of the newly found foreign habitat. This would result in a story which represents a mutation of the portrayal that the island-owner, at first, had chosen. During this mutation, the people would interact with the inhabitants of the new island, learn of their ways, trade ways, and learn of new forms of goods, which possess different qualities of value, and diversify and unify into a different portrayal of existence.

A more difficult question regards the notion of the island-owner discovering a new island of great prosperity. Let us assume the new island is perceivably twice as prosperous. This would, at first, seem like a tripling of the total amount of money in the world. Additionally, per person, or per capita, the amount of money would be 1.5% as much as it was. This presents an interesting anomaly. The island would be presenting, perhaps, a lesser seen aspect of reality. This could happen if the island-owner started to notice that the portrayal began to fail to represent reality appropriately, leading to the desire to discover new civilizations. The new island, being of a significantly different nature, would, then, again, highlight some aspects of reality that were not before as easily noticed. Perhaps, the understanding of the value of goods would lead to there being an apparent doubling of money per capita in the new civilization. Additionally, new ideas may have emerged on the island-owner’s original island, that didn’t quite become present in the island-owners original portrayal, indicating that there was something missing to reality, and that missing component would be what the newly found island possesses. Therefore, the perception that the newly found civilization is far richer (which does seem rare in history), would be the realization of what already exists, but was before unseen, perhaps, due to the limitations of the island-owner’s original portrayal of reality. Similarly, however, as with the last example of the newly found island being far less wealthy, a story of mutation would then occur, where the diversity of reality is realized to a greater degree. Thus, the perceived value the person perceives would actually increase, due to the gaining of an understanding of greater value. It is the education and learning of the value of various different natures that would create the new value, and thus the value perceived would be directly correlated to a person’s growth. The economies would interact, and each economy would learn from another, and thus the perceived value would increase due to an increase in knowledge, while the total value in reality would also increase, due to a participant finding new ways of providing value, thus enriching the entirety of reality.

Now, let us suppose the newly found island was of an enormously more prosperous society. This, perhaps, applies to the question of whether or not advanced alien life exists in the universe. Suppose this society used a completely different system of understanding value, a system that was engrained the functioning of a great machine habitat which took care of the people’s desires, without their noticing much the trading of value. Then, instead of a currency dilemma, there would only be a great abundance of technological wealth. This wealth would be learned by the original island, and the total prosperity of the combination of islands, which would then indicate all of reality, would then increase. If some people on the island were objectionable to new ways of life, due to the possibility that some of the 5 quintillion people in the technical reality were hesitant about change, then the society would form a segmentation between those who enjoy technological advancement and those who subscribe to a more traditional way of life. Nonetheless, in any mutation of portrayal, the same qualities would apply, however, their representation would change. The total value would increase due to an increase in knowledge and expertise, and that would be communicated to the rest of reality, being represented by perceived people on other island-owners’ islands.

If we consider the planet to be the island, then today there are approximately 8 billion people represented. Let us keep with the notion that there are 5 quintillion people in existence, each, perhaps, with his or her own planet. If we were to communicate with advanced space-faring intelligence, that would imply that the ideas and the ingenuity of the mind of the people of the technical reality had increased faster than the portrayal had demonstrated. Thus, the missing innovation that exists due to unseen ingenuity and creativity would be understandably represented by what we refer to as “alien intelligence,” or, perhaps, more concretely, “space-faring intelligence.” (In this case, both terms refer to a level of intelligence and technological sophistication that seem alien to the existent portrayal’s interpretation of reality.) Discovering alien intelligence would simply be a discovering of the innovation and knowledge of the people of reality that had been missing from the modern portrayal. It is not unlikely that a portrayal could fall behind the creativity and ingenuity of the people of reality, and thus, the new ingenuity would appear as an advanced technological civilization. This would be a process of realization and would enrich reality ever the more, and expand the portrayal to include the newly realized knowledge and enrichment. If, perhaps, a group of people who are, in this case, planet-owners, found a great abundance of knowledge and technological wealth, then the presence of the products of these people may lead another planet owner to the portrayal of an encounter with an alien civilization, in order for the planet-owner to accurately account for the new form of information being received. Nonetheless, the portrayal would mutate, hopefully gracefully and with a story of change, into a new portrayal, where the planet has met an advanced space-faring civilization and has received much of the knowledge of the civilization.

A problem can occur with the personal ability to portray reality, as may exist presently and may have existed historically. This problem is something I refer to as, “cognitive adultery.” Adultery, in its most historical sense, is to pretend false information is truth. (Looking up the definition in a couple of dictionaries, I find this definition to be missing, although I do remember as a child learning about the word, “to adulter,” which appears to not exist anymore. Nonetheless, in the etymology of adultery is the meaning, “to alter,” or, “to corrupt,” coming from Latin. Noting this, today’s world may already exist in a state of an adulterated environment, which would not be surprising, from the precept of ideological philosophy which states that reality is, by default, a perfect Heaven, which is logical and falls in line with religious thought, as well.) Cognitive adultery, therefore, perceives false information as truth. When applied to this understanding of portrayal, a person’s island or planet may begin to misrepresent reality. Cognitive adultery is possible, and while the information being communicated in the technical reality remains the same, with a false portrayal, one may be led to incorrect solutions, guided by perception alone, in contrast to being guided by knowledge. While the knowledge of reality is unchanging in its ways, portrayal can vary dramatically. A frightening aspect of cognitive adultery is that it can be contagious, such that the portrayals of others’ are affected in a way, such that the other island-owners’ (or planet-owners’) portrayals begin to lie. The sin of lust, as I define it, is to prioritize perception over knowledge. While knowledge is definitively true, according to the theory that perceived reality is of a personal assimilation and portrayal of information, and including the possibilities of the type of habitat in the future, perception can be very subjective. Prioritizing perception over knowledge could lead to an adulterous environment, and in order for people to understand each other, other planet-owners may be led to a false and misleading portrayal of reality. While reality occurs in the psychic communication between people, the portrayal is simply a way to enjoy perceiving what is already true, in a comfortable manner. However, if the portrayal is misleading, perhaps due to people lying to others, on a cognitive level, which can occur to deceive, illude, and feign ignorance of ill-behavior, then solutions to various dilemmas become unapparent, and reality, itself, can begin to make less and less sense. It is important to note that the reality occurs in the psychic communication between island or planet-owners, and that portrayal is the enjoyment of perception and perspective. Therefore, when portrayal both becomes misleading and, additionally, portrayal is favored over knowledge, the people’s minds may become corrupt. This leads to a hazardous disintegration of reality, and reality becomes less manageable.

With the notion that this system of personal portrayal, based on a comfortable assimilation of information, may, indeed, already exist, it is important to understand these concepts, as we discover reality to a greater level of understanding. Additionally, should this theory be false, one should consider that with the future possibility of performing this type of activity — the ability to personally portray reality in a comfortable manner — it is nonetheless still important to understand the notions of such a system of reality. The ability to portray reality based on a personal assessment of the information that one is receiving provides a greater degree of comfort and a more natural subjectivity to a person’s environment, of which both are certainly desirable characteristics of a person’s enjoyment of life.

In summary, this introduced form of currency, which I enjoy referring to as, “space-money,” provides many advantages over the modern world’s current currency system. Additionally, a (personal) value-based economic model is likely to be far more profitable, comfortable, fun, and considerate than the current resource-based economic model, which often neglects that value comes from people and focusses on tangible artifacts and resulting effects, rather than the people, themselves. Furthermore, to put the economic system in the current theory of communicative reality, as well as to present a solution for any future contexts, where one enjoys the same type of personal portray system as the one described, understanding inductive money (and inductive goods), as well as perceived money and goods versus actual money and goods, is important. (Additionally understanding aggregation and how that affects the perceived reality is an important consideration, with a now fairly obvious solution, as well.)

Understanding the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ

One the saddest stories that is commonly known is the crucifixion of Jesus Christ. A man came to this Earth and performed miracles and miraculous wonders for the people. His intention was to save people from the evil inclinations of the windy Satanic being, which leads to a propagated lie, a blindness, and a perverted perspective of the fulfillment of need and the effects of actions.

This article uses the context and general implications present in the religion of Christianity.

He was and still is considered to be the living truth. The implication, fully sensible, is that the truth, itself, is a living being, just like any of us. The is coherent with the belief that man was created in God’s image, as this implies that man is also a living being, just like God, and is, in many ways, very similar to God, although the name of each other person is different than being the living truth incarnate. While each person has a unique and potentially wonderous name, it is only apparent if the person is to embody their own being and avoid collectivism, which is the metaphorical state of being without a defined skin — to be skinless — as in to lack an exterior by which one is distinguished. It is then that the person would express a wonderful quality to the world, and would be appreciated by all who are truthful (and of course, those of falsehood are errant and may exhibit a wide variety of senseless patterns).

Since Jesus Christ is the living truth and is the leader of the angels, just as was Krishna, the story of Jesus involves the story of what the truth says to us and what the truth means to Existence. As we are commonly aware, the truth, itself, is ever present, and as we should be aware, the truth is often disguised, put asunder, and hidden. Often times, due to a guilt addiction, the truth is often attempted to be completely disregarded and thrown into a place where no one will ever realize the eternal truth.

Today, there is a false mentality that even sincere scientists are well aware of. This is the idea of “facts” as being merely practical tools of basic behavior, like how cars work, or how to practice hygiene, or how ovens, doors, and lights work. Facts are considered anything to be observable, while modern science and the spirit of science itself, is founded on the fact that many things aren’t readily obvious, but instead careful research must be done in order to discover more “facts.” The reason I write “facts” in quotes is that there is a large misconception about what facts are. Even in science, there are rarely actual facts (as in something that is definitively true). A clear example is the widely known fact amongst those of a scientific interest that the science that deals with large scale phenomena, like that of the momentum and friction of objects is completely different than the science that deals with very small scale phenomena, i.e., subatomic physics. In fact, Albert Einstein was aware of this, and he desired what he called a “universal field theory.” The greater understanding of universal field theory describes a theory of everything. Thus, in this way, there is no science that can be considered fact, aside from the philosophical notion (philosophy being the superset of observable science), that there are no true scientific facts, but instead, only working observations and findings.

This false mentality that people are actually aware of scientific fact is quite common and nearly completely ubiquitous, and this is hugely disappointing. In fact, the ubiquitousness of this belief is a prime example of a wide-spread and clever method of destroying the truth. While no sincere scientist would agree with this wide-spread notion, engineers of innovation and discovery and those of the search for completely valid truth are of a peculiar rarity in modern society. Additionally, while no sincere scientist would agree with such a scientific fallacy, it is commonly believed that every scientist in the world agrees with it. The strangeness of such a pronounced majority utter proclaiming this falsehood is certainly indicative of a desire to kill truth, and logically, must stem of a mischievous desire to promote guilt, to steer people’s minds (gluttony, in this case denoting the misuse of others), and to maintain an addiction to guilt, while also creating a great lie and adultery in order to hide what is true. Obviously, considering this, this example of the torture and murder of the truth is due to a social guilt addiction.

One of the problems with collectivism is that the nature of a collectivist is to look to their like-minded peers for what is supposedly true, which, in actuality, is to look for what is appropriately manipulative in order to suit the participants’ hidden intentions of avoiding personal redemption and the personal desire to sincerely understand what is completely true. What is quite obvious, is that a collectivist, who looks to peers for the functional (although error-prone) way, is that those peers are performing the same activity. There are excuses made, often through presumptions stemming from what is unmentioned, and it is not impossible that even if everything was said, the truth would be attacked and murdered in order to promote the persistent addiction to guilt and avoidance of actual truth becoming common. The collectivist is often based primarily on the “like” principle, which is a symptom of being manipulative, rather than the sincere and meaningful expression of truth. Because the collectivist resides in a pool of propagated manipulations and lies, the collectivist source of presumed validity is nothing but a windy beast — Satan, himself.

Understanding this societal torture, hiding, and murder of the truth, helps us to understand the story of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, as is a crux of Christian doctrine. While Christianity is of the most prominent religions on Earth (apparently now the most popular — when I was much younger, Islam was the most popular), the torture and desecration of the truth is nonetheless extremely common — being nearly completely ubiquitous. Thus, while when I go to Church, I certainly remember the feeling of God and the Holy Truth, I am uncertain about what others feel. I imagine others do get the same feeling, but since it is a feeling, there is likely a good amount of people who still use manipulative words to secretly and mischievously destroy the message of that feeling — thus losing that feeling soon after a Church session. While approximately 90% of people world-wide identify with a religion, the truth is nonetheless ubiquitously tortured, shredded, and used as tactics of manipulation, instead of honored and sought with respect and sincerity. (In fact, the primarily complaint against religion by outspoken atheists is that religion is being used primarily to manipulate people, rather than to be a sincere way of the search and expression of truth. I personally, have been religious for my entire life, but I do notice that society, in general, is hiding and destroying very real truth.)

Thus, while there appears to be quite a prominent teaching of truth, it is nonetheless being destroyed by the powers of society. If one were to observe the popular society media, it mildly suspiciously appears that, admittedly out of merely casual observation, approximately 50% of people are purportedly religious. Even with religion being prominent, however, there are gross misdeeds of untruth that are extremely common, to the point that they are apparently favored, such that the representation of the beliefs of the populous is extremely skewed.

To be a true seeker of truth, regardless of identification with religion or non-religion, one must seriously consider whether notions are actually valid or not. It is largely an independent pursuit, as the nature of collectivism is to favor smileys, even if they hide a secret and destructive agenda. If collectivism takes hold, a guilty agenda, as may have been present in the Minoan civilization, takes hold of society and enraptures the populous in a lying frenzy, both metaphorically setting the people ablaze in a tumultuous fire and also removing the individually distinguishing characteristic of skin — characteristics that describe the Hell that is mentioned in the Qur’an.

Understanding that the very truth, if alive and manifest, is already inclined to be an expert in scientific affairs, by the simple nature of his being (rather than having needed to learn it through linguistic means), it makes sense that the living truth performed miracles while on Earth, in the story of Jesus Christ, from the Bible (and also, in the Qur’an, which during a time he raised a lifeless clay bird to life). Understanding that all injury stems from lies that nest in the psyche, it makes sense that Jesus Christ was able to heal the sick and injured. In the Bible, it is recounted that while his disciples were out at sea, the weather became windy and the waves treacherous, frightening the disciples. Knowing that the manifest and living truth was present during the time (apparently the truth was accepted at least to the point of Jesus Christ’s ability to co-exist with the people in their habitat), they witnessed Jesus Christ miraculously appearing, seeming to be standing on the treacherous sea, itself (although considering that that would entail that he was either standing on a floating plane of water, or moving up and down with the frightening waves, he may have been flying in the air, instead). Since Jesus Christ was available to the collective knowledge of the society at the time, it makes sense that he could, in person, visit the troubled disciples and offer them help, in their time of need.

In the Bible, there is the allusion that Jesus Christ is the “Son of Man.” Because every person and every thing relies on truth in order to exist, this seems to be a plausible metaphor (although the Qur’an vehemently disagreed with the idea of God having a father, nor of God having a son, as this would be polytheistic, and logically, in the logic that is definitively implied with the monotheism, it is implausible for there to be more than one God). However, to take into consideration of this term, used in the Bible, it would imply that Jesus Christ’s purported father was mankind, itself. Thus, the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ implies that mankind, similar to today, wanted to violently and painfully kill the truth. This obviously can only occur due to an addiction to guilt and a wild and dark scheme of evil. In the Bible, it is said that Jesus Christ called out to the father, asking of why this should be happening, that he should be so painfully murdered. Indeed, if the various statements in the Bible are assembled, it makes sense that society, itself, was the murderer of Jesus Christ (which is obvious by its literal meaning), and thinking more deeply into the idea that society would murder the truth, it is because society had a collective and aggressively defended guilt syndrome, and as an effect, sought out schemes of a depraved nature in order to mask their guilt and to destroy any existence of truth. It thus makes sense that Jesus Christ died because mankind was aggressively guilty.

An interesting note to ponder, is that in our society which clearly demonstrates a favor for lies, which indicate a dark guilt and a dark scheme of manipulation, that if the Holy Text was even able to lucidly dictate what its meaning truly was, its understanding would still be distorted and averted. Likely, in the modern scheme of lies and depravity, the Holy Text would find its way, through its remembrance, in a format that would be accepted by the general populous, which would create a variant of the knowledge, which would make it through the lies, although in a more cryptic fashion, such that the liars would find it easy to disagree with, and only the sincere seekers of truth (those of true and unadulterated intelligence) would be able to deduce the more specifics of its meaning. This interesting natural variation of a divine message that is presumably, according to the religions that sustain these messages, of the Torah, the Bible, and the Qur’an (as well as other holy texts), would be received by the modern society in a more cryptic fashion that did not immediately frighten the addicts of guilt and the addicts of manipulation, such that it would be received congenially, and still would provide the remembrance of eternal truth, while also being able to be solved, such that greater truth could be found in its intelligent understanding.

A possibility that could happen if Jesus Christ were to return in today’s scheming world, is that Jesus Christ would immediately frighten the unbelievers (those incapable of personally discerning validity), such that schemes, hidden and possibly visible, would be drawn out in the minds of those who destroy the eternal truth (a truth that is different than the blasphemous idea of collectivist “facts” — as collectivism merely seeks to impersonate one another, and has little consideration of what is eternally true).

There is a story that in the year 1900, specifically, Jesus Christ did return to Earth, in a spaceship, which later inspired the “little grey man” motif of society’s entertainment and linguistic culture. This story states that he brought knowledge of truth, plentiful science, and a great bounty of a very near Heaven. What happened soon afterwards, were actions of some of the more devious of the people to covet these truths and hide them from others, finding the potential to abuse others with hidden knowledge, and then spoke lies which resembled these truths that Jesus Christ so graciously offered, such that no one would know what these truths specifically were. This story theorizes that the Nazi Regime was born of a an evil idea that “others are unable to know God like I do,” and that “God is actually much different than you thought,” even going as far as to say that “God is actually evil, and nothing like love.” Understanding that it is sensible that the swastika indicates a secret, it makes sense that the Nazis hid a weird secret that was supposedly about God, while it was actually simply a manipulation tactic to fool the susceptible, and therefore was entirely Satanic (which is a reasonable assumption once the aftermath was well known; however, before then, this strange collectivist strategy of having a weird and allusive secret certainly caused a lot of damage through the manipulation and abuse of other people).

One interpretation of the father of Jesus Christ is this current angel in which we inhabit, which is clearly an Angel of Science. This angel, born from man’s desire to personally experience evil and its consequences (indicated in the story of Fall of Man), develops as more truth is found, but also allows evil to exist for a period of time before a measure of corrective action is delivered, after which, the Angel will have learned another fact about good and evil, and science will have developed ever the more, over time preventing evil from occurring, or, at least, reducing its intensity and reducing its likelihood.

Since this angel is inherently a pantheistic angel, made of the actions of all life — if those actions are considered to be true (rather than the actions perceived by a mentally blind individual, who is of a mistaken perception), then the father of Jesus Christ is both the man, being familiar, if even in the least, with the eternal truth, and the modern Angel of Science, as well. This is because the truth is something the mind inherently cannot disagree with, as truth is what brings life (although the mind can live in self-conflict, where while alive and thus abiding by the truth, which makes science tangible, also schemes to destroy the truth, not realizing the hypocrisy inherent in that desire until a time of retribution is naturally found — as schemes against the truth are crimes against humanity, and eventually humanity, if even through the simple desire to live and be well, intensely desires a retribution for those crimes which have hurt the entire populous; the crimes of the evil-doers are, in part, perpetuated by a type of self-induced anesthesia, with one of those methods being pride, which often allows one to ignore much of the body, and focus only on the parts of the body which support an often evil scheme; interestingly, according to the theory that reality is a communicative being, ignoring one’s own emotions also entails ignoring other people’s emotions, and thus becoming a destructive psyche present in the world, which generates an increasing festering of hate, which is often repressed until a certain threshold of pressure is reached, and afterwards the hate becomes more obvious, represented by crimes, wars, social anxiety, social animosity, jails, and revenge-culture. With these effects, as well as the fundamental cause of these effects, it is only the eternal truth, which, in Christianity, is Jesus Christ, that can save society. If the truth is heavily distorted and manipulated, salvation of mankind becomes depressingly infeasible).

When understanding the truth, it is sensible to understand that the truth involves the livelihood of people. Pure science (that is, science in its utmost rigor), has never claimed to possess even a single fact. It merely indicates a progressive understanding of the world, and very much does not claim, even in the least, than even a single facet of science may hold true for eternity. Of course, the actual of existence of science, being a true, tangible, force, must be of truth, as the psyche would not obey it if it was a lie. Nonetheless, configurations are possible which tangle things that are true in such a way as to promote a falsehood. As mentioned earlier in this book, a convenient theory that is the bearer of the knowledge of science immemorial, is that that the modern angel is an iron ball, which is technically a convenient perspective, although I believe more fundamentally, I would use the phrase, “a ball of ire,” certainly not meaning anger (even though it is, indeed, based on corrective judgement as the deliberate expression of immemorial law), as the word “ire” is sometimes used, to mean an action which is considered profoundly immemorial.

However, aside from the existence of a world built on corrective judgement, the very nature of truth is much more related to people than it is of what is essentially a rule-based robot. Every immemorial truth is only immemorial because it sustains life, joy, and brings mankind closer to Heaven. The ball of ire, as one may call it, is strangely unordered, but it desires to fulfill, just as any angel does, all of the true desires of all of life. Thus, as various honest fulfillments of desires are stolen, the correct judgement (the actions that are to be of ire), makes impossible or difficult the crime that prompted the correction. Thus, all of these divine statutes combined constitute the very fundamental nature of science, and as strange new evils emerge, eventually science updates in order to destroy the existence of that evil.

Nonetheless, the ball of science only serves as an ordinance which eventually serves to protect the truth, which is what brings life, and is what is also most inherently known. (A child is aware of truth and is able to learn, which requires the ability to discern fact from fiction, but one must learn to lie and to manipulate, as this is not an inherent naturally occurring quality, but a learned one, instead. Although it is natural to lie when one is in danger, and children, once they are able to speak, can perform this task, it is not natural to lie while one does not feel in danger. Interestingly, animals, while they can act moderately mischievous, are nowhere near as able to exhibit the cunning and depraved attributes that human beings are capable of, which always require a type of psychological lobotomization, which allows a being to contradict one’s inherent nature — something of which animals are incapable. Additionally, it makes sense that even the animals are confounded by the prominent usage of wiccan propaganda, or the wiccan blaster, as is more easily noticed, and would not naturally harm people, especially if they did not perceive people to be a threat nor were encumbered by our collective and peculiar need for the persistent intake of food and desperation inducing need of shelter.)

Thus, while the study of science (rather than the presumed existence of very real and completely factual science) only seeks to progressively understand the world, to truly understand the truth, one needs to understand humanity. In fact, the understanding of humanity may be a strangely missing key in the search of better understanding science. In Christianity, God is considered the living truth, and other religions which suppose that goodness is the way to happiness and fulfillment do not disagree with this. In Christianity, the living truth is presumed to be a person, which is in line with the notion that people were created in God’s image, which simply means that people are also people, just like God is. It is also presumed that the originator of all things (even the permission to do evil, which is in the story of the Fall of Man), is God, and, particularly in Christianity, is the very truth, itself. Even when entertaining a more scientific mindset, it still is logical to assume that the origin of all things is an eternally sustained truth. Consequently of the previous statement, it is also logical to assume that life may only exist because of this eternally sustained truth, which posits that it is not the material world which truly supersedes people, but instead posits that people supersede the material world, as people are the best at understanding this truth, and the material world seems unable to understand this truth, at least not without being programmed to do so. It is logical to presume that people are witnesses of the comparatively lifeless material world, rather than the opposite, which would presume that the material world is a witness of people (although it does make sense that people witness the material world witnessing people, but it is not the material world which is bearer of the true witness of existence). (In the topic of Ideological Philosophy, of which this book is concerned, the philosophy of science is an important topic, as well.)

While it was the followers of Jesus Christ that witnessed his re-appearance allegedly three days later, it is a curiosity to me what those who objected to Jesus Christ witnessed. Not possessing a willful obedience to eternal and innately understood truth, it makes sense that these people were more mischievous and more prone to lying, as well as likely being less sensible in their discussions. Therefore, their accounts may be more cryptic and difficult to find. A complete death of all truth in the world is no simple ordeal, however, and in modern symbolism can be symbolized by a nuclear extinction, during which the world is thrown into a chaotic and satanic wind of lies and deceit, and the world loses its grasp on consistency and coherence, progressively, as the echo of truth fades away, and eventually, all life dies. It is quite possible that those who were sinful actually experienced an extinction event during that time, however, our history is based on the witness and testimony of those who were more truthful, so evidence of this event may be more difficult to obtain. In the carols and oratorios of the Church’s tradition is a deep and profound feeling and meaning that also bears notes of sadness. Listening to the more deeply felt of these songs, there is a memory that is evoked, and it does seem to me like there may possibly be a memory of an extinction event, a memory that is largely unknown in society’s singsong of history, but a memory nonetheless that does indicate a great tragedy, along with a grace of hope. While clearly the death of truth is a catastrophic tragedy and the end to many cures and clear safeties, the very details of what that tragedy truly meant may go deeper than our common understanding of history.

An interesting fact about the world, “crucifixion,” is that is can also mean to cause anguish to someone. It is a combination of the word crux and affix. That implies, to me, that a crucifixion can also symbolize the forceful affixion to a fundamental matter. Understanding a repeated historical wiccan scheme of the utterly deranged, this pattern can happen to people who desire to save humanity through the scheme of repeatedly sacrificing people, while restricting the methods of saving them to methods that are slower than the pattern of sacrifice. This would literally force an affixion unto good people, causing the good people to work harder and harder, experience mental difficulties, and encounter greater and greater sacrifice, as saving people would be occurring more slowly than the hidden scheme of torturing people. Since this is a fundamental scheme of wicked depravity addicts, who use wiccan blaster technology (wiccan lies and deceit, in order to blind and pervert judgement), it is not unlikely that the wickedly depraved, the ones responsible for the murder of Jesus Christ, performed this dark and heinous scheme, forcing Jesus to persistently work harder, perpetually, until the system of science itself could no longer allow a chance of success. At this point, Jesus would be forced to relinquish his attempts at saving humanity, save those who were capable of salvation (those who would not fall into blindness and schemes of wickedly hidden depravity), and allow the rest of civilization to fall into its own consequence, which also suggests that the murder of Jesus Christ resulted in an extinction event. Thus, it must have been a great sight to witness Jesus Christ’s reappearance only three days later, while comparatively, and perhaps confusingly, the wickedly depraved had just experience a multi-decade long extinction event, which at the end, their desires would have dwindled into nothing and society could be restored to a functional state, once again, where truth would not be completely destroyed.

An interesting comparison between Christianity and Islam resides in man’s existence. While there is a recognized hadith that says that Adam (the first man — or category of personality) was created in the image of Allah, there are verses in the Qur’an which staunchly pronounce that Allah bears no likeness to any other. While this is definitely not true in its strictest sense, as it would be quite an exaggeration to say that people possess absolutely none of the qualities of Allah, such as being knowledgeable or beneficent, it does make sense that with Allah, the qualities are present in the purest degree, as the Qur’an doesn’t simply say that Allah is knowledgeable and wise, but instead, the Qur’an states that Allah is the most knowledgeable and the most wise, which certainly does not mean that Allah is not knowledgeable and wise, and thus does bear a similarity to man, who is also capable of being knowledgeable and wise, along with a form of all of the qualities of Allah. Additionally, all of the qualities of Allah are what Muslims strive to embody, so that they can be similar to Allah, such that they have also the good qualities that Allah embodies. In that way, Allah is an inspiration to man, so in a similar way as with Christianity, who strive to be Christ-like in their ways, Muslims strive to be Allah-like in their ways, as well (and it is good to remember that neither religion, in its truest form, attempts to literally impersonate Jesus Christ nor Allah, but instead to become good in a way that is inspired by Jesus or Allah).

Furthermore, it is still important to realize that everyone has a special and unique name, and thus there is no disagreement that no one should assume the name of another. In that way, it is true that both Jesus Christ and Allah bear no exact likeness to man, as both are great examples of being an individual, unique, and distinct being (although in the understanding of individuality, then both Jesus Christ and Allah bear an exact likeness to man). If there is one singular, ultimate truth from which all things truly known are created, then it makes sense that there is only one God (as it does not make sense that there could be more than one truth, which is easily known in the process of the coherence of intelligence — even Hinduism knows Krishna to be the head of God, while the rest of God appears to be angels of a specialized nature).

Thus, if one is to believe that there is only one God, and that God is the living truth, which is the reason that anything else may exist, and the major and well-accepted religions all bear validity, then it does logically make sense that Jesus Christ and Allah are the same person. It also makes sense that no one can tell Allah not to be a person, and it makes more sense to assume that in our modern state, people have been weakened by the Satanic force present with collectivist hives, such that people are made to seem ungodly and weak, when compared to the idea of God. Furthermore, it makes sense that people are more naturally manifestations of their own personal memory and character, rather than being intended to be born of a type of communal and biological mimicry, and are thus, in a very true portrayal of who people very truly are, are like God in many ways, but of course, through the idea of being a unique and therefore contributory individual to Heaven, are also different than God in wonderfully appreciated ways, as well (so long as the individuals embody and express who the individuals truly are, and have not subscribed to a collectivist and skinless culture, where their identities are turned into a strange slushy of deceit). If Allah and Jesus Christ are truly different, then Christianity would very well be wrong, or vice versa. I believe, however, that if this were true, then the strength of a true religion would not exist with either of these religions, as people are innately capable of knowing truth, and thus any truly false religion would never be as prominent as Christianity or Islam. (We should remember that, in this perspective of scientific philosophy, it is the notion that something is forever and totally true which creates the idea of tangibility — understanding that it is logical that the mind, in its very original essence, could never deny an absolute truth, which then makes possible the existence of a tangible world, where tangibility is implied in the inability to deny a truth. Thus, the same should apply to religion as well, and as is quite evident today, despite the fact that modern religion is born of a mildly cryptic doctrine, people understand the messages very deeply and emotionally, nonetheless.)

It does make sense that with each iteration of a religion that is truly an ordinance of the Divine Creator and Eternal Sustainer of Existence, there would be an emphasis of details that the common populous had mistakenly accepted, while they were incorrect. Thus, with Christianity existing a few hundred years before Islam, it makes sense that perhaps Christians started believing that they were more similar to God than they actually were, and that the literal biological form of Jesus Christ was God, rather than his meaning, and thus the Qur’an may appropriately object to such notions through the mild exaggeration of an equally true, but seemingly different statement. Additionally, any sincere searcher of truth would not take simply for granted the words on the page of a book, but would endlessly think and consider the book, and additionally, would parse together a coherent and sensible truth regarding reality. It therefore also makes sense that by stating details that seem contradictory, but technically are complementary (to the acute observer and thinker), the religions would help separate fraud-artists from the sincerely truthful, which would aid in the development of society and the ability to avoid the manipulative tactics of the doers of evil and true crime.

(I couldn’t emphasis this enough, being obviously concerned about the dangers of collectivism, that each person must be individually very unique so that each person is seriously not God, nor any other person. Considering monotheism, which seems corollary to the idea of the possibility of cognitive and factual coherence, which suggest a singular truth, people would have been created not to simply be monkey versions of God, simply mimicking his behavior, and eating bananas in a similar fashion of him (if he does, indeed, consume bananas), but instead, to be completely unique perspectives and sources of wonder, which would contribute to breadth and bounty of Heaven and of Existence, rather than transforming a clear Paradise into a muddied and strange version of Heaven, filled with simply a lot of mutated (and observably occasionally antithetical) variations of God. When people claim that everyone is God, their statements aren’t born entirely of lies, but there are some people who claim it is very literally true, which it cannot be, as that would not contribute to Heaven, but instead, possibly remove from Heaven (and these people would likely be an utterly pointless creation of God, as well as it making no literal sense that someone who is not God is God, and that God would be in battle, logically or physically, with himself). In the claim that everyone is God, there is the idea that everyone is the will of God, which is specifically the idea behind being a Muslim, which when interpreted literally, means to be completely submitted to God’s will, and therefore the actions of a person are also the actions of God, by the idea that the manifestation of God’s intention is a manifestation of God’s actions, and therefore is a manifestation of God’s presence, which indicates a manifestation of God. However, also in the claim that other people aside from God are also God, considering monotheism, is a great error in logic, so these phrases should be understood carefully, to understand if the meaning being conveyed is accurate or inaccurate, or how different meanings may be being mixed together.)

It is therefore that in any religion, the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ is a paramount and concerning event. In the Qur’an it says that Jesus Christ didn’t technically die, and in the Bible it is mentioned he was seen three days later. It is worth considering that, in the notion of a continuous rebirth cycle until absolute truth, fulfillment of purpose, and unification with God’s will is found, that all lives of an individual are really one life, as each period from conception (when manifestation is considered more psychologically) to dissolution develops based on the previous similar period of conception to dissolution, and rebirth is a process present within the total lifespan of a person, rather than an occurrence of a different life lived.

While the religion of Christianity holds at its core this story of a remembered time during which the truth died (and vanished, at least for a period of time, from existence), this pattern that is implied in the death of the living truth is something that should be considered by any society, as the loss of truth from the world, does indeed, lead to what is technically a virtual reality, by which I mean not simply an augmented or playful reality, but a reality filled with lies, disease, and turmoil — a reality where the truth of God’s intention, which sensibly is truly eternal joy, is completely lost.

An interesting behavior to notice in a society is a prominence of the loud steering of conversations and the exhibition of the avoidance of natural, innate truth. It is, perhaps, important to notice the abolishment of what words like “freedom” actually mean, in favor of a largely ignorant and possibly desperately stumbling conversation concerning the matter. It is also important to notice the intentional deafness to logical validity or concepts which concern eternal truths, in not only a government, but in a populous, as well. Also a keen sight is the observation of a peer-oriented scripted conversational methodology, while it makes more logical sense that conversation would naturally flow nicely and without anxiety, if the participants were collaboratively able to stay close to the innate truth, which today is known as the subconscious. Collectivism bears an inherent and promoted fear, and if collectivism takes hold, a great anxiety naturally emerges. Additionally, shows of success may be exaggerated in favor of a perversion, mild or obvious, of the sincere truth, in order to evoke the perversion that collectivist behavior is the way of success. (Even the prominence of the idea of success is a concerning alarm, as it implies a natural tendency to be unsuccessful, which is a clear indication that people are being forced to alter themselves in order to fit a cognitive trend. Reality, itself, is likely a psychological construct, and thus, Heaven may be destroyed by pressure to alter one’s true identity to appease a superficial and likely windy machine. Interestingly, the most souvenired of all people are the ones who displayed individuality and expressed innately felt and understood truth.) Remembering the grave danger of collectivism and the abundance of disease that it brings, it is always important to stay clear of losing the awareness of the true self, and as a result, to bring joy and personal acceptance to the world, and to bring the world closer to Heaven (and Heaven closer to the world). Therefore, the remembrance of the Crucifixion of Jesus Christ, when understood more meaningfully, is an important remembrance and a hopeful salvation to a world and to all of existence, such that the truth is never lost again.