2011 empire - religion - Deadly Love 

2011 - Exploring the Inevitable Truth

The New Testament

Deadly Love

The age of honor killing is far from over. Some say it claims the life of upwards to 30,000 people per year, with the victims being predominately women. While religion is in the vast majority of the cases the driving force behind the atrocities of often brutal barbarism, the range of religions involved is wide, covering almost the entire field. The God of religion demands murder in the name of love. And society, which is always the victim, finds itself stoned to death by a mob desperate people roused into a rage to cleanse themselves of the deemed 'affront' against God for their collective honor and to their religion. And so the killing goes on.

While the intensity of honor killing seems to be less now than in ancient times, the honor killing continues, even the stoning of people to death for adultery still continues - though in just a few rare cases now - the scourge honor killing (and also mutilation) may not end until the world is healed of the underlying cause, with a sense of universal love. 


preparation for stoning

While in the overall scheme the honor killings are minuscule, the murdering of people on the political altar has become the greatest holocaust of all times. In the world where over a billion people live in chronic starvation, the burning of food in cars, in the form of bio-fuels, is a crime against humanity of vast proportions. The worldwide bio-fuel hoax, that is not a net energy producer nor reduces carbon emissions, presently has farm resources devoted to it that would normally feed 100 million people. And we are all participating each time we pull up to the gasoline pump. We have become willing partners by default in a global holocaust that is probably killing 100 million people a year by starvation and starvation related causes of the 1.2 billion people locked into chronic starvation. This is the new face of honor killing, a holocaust that pales that of the Nazis. Oh yes, we are honorable in our mind, in doing this, but are we really? We kill in the name of the non-existing manmade global warming, a doctrine of the deadliest fiction ever concocted, based on lies for the evident purpose of inflicting genocide. For ranking the crime, it appears that death by starvation is just as brutal, painful, and agonizing than stoning a person to death. In recalling Jefferson's 'comments on slavery, "I tremble, when I remember that God is just," one may well tremble at the crimes of this age that pale the worst in history, and which once again have become considered civil..


The following is an exploration on the subject of adultery that historically required honor killing. It is explored in this case of the biblical Christian context, and the specific case in which Christ Jesus had successfully defended the victim and prevented the honor killing. The exploration is taken from my novel, Discovering Love, Chapter 17. While the novel is fiction the censorship is fact, of the missing eleven verses of the eighth chapter of the Gospel of John, that have been omitted from modern editions of the Bible in order to protect the mythology of institutional ownership-rights over human beings. The censorship is real, it does exist. It should be noted that the censorship did not remove the perverted version if the Decalogue in Leviticus vs, Exodus, but instead removed the account of Christ Jesus defending a victim against the perversion, that prevented the honor killing.

The very act of removing those verses from the Bible (see the 1976 Oxford Study Edition ISBN 0-19-529710-5) without an explanation given, seems to indicate that some deeply fundamental aspects are being touched on in these verses that have the potential to threaten the power structure of the oligarchic and imperial system. A similar reason appears to exist for the removal of the Susanna story from the Bible (formerly Daniel 13). If these 'adjustments' to history are so easily possible in modern times, how much more easily and extensively would they have been done in ancient times in the shadow of one of the most fascist empires on the planet and in the shadow of insane rulers, like Emperor Nero?


Healing society of the thought crime of unauthorized love (adultery)

Steve didn't answer me. He waved me off. "Hush," he said, "I want you to read another story." He went back to the bookshelf and brought another Bible to the table, a modern paperback version. He handed it to me. "Read from the Book of St. John, Chapter Eight, Verse One to Eleven."

I located the Book of John, the chapter, but I couldn't read the requested text. It wasn't there. The chapter in the book started with Verse Twelve. I told him so.

He nodded and then asked me to read the title page of the book that he had handed to me. The title page indicated that this was the Study Edition of the New English Bible published in 1976 by the Oxford University Press. I closed the book, and without a comment I gave it back to him.

He nodded approvingly, and without the lightest change in his expression he handed me the old leather bound volume once more. It contained the complete text of the chapter that I had been requested to read. I read the text. It tells the story of a woman who had committed adultery. She had been taken in the very act. The scribes and the Pharisees had brought her to Jesus for judgment in the hope that they might entrap him. The entrapment appeared to be a sure thing. The law of the land, according to Moses, required the death penalty by stoning a person to death, for the offense that she had committed by having had unauthorized sex. 'But what sayest thou?' the accusers demanded. They demanded that he judge the woman, knowing full well that he, the renowned healer of the people, would never agree to the death penalty. But if he didn't agree, he would speak against the law of the land, and that was treason. It was a perfectly contrived frame-up that they had developed, designed to destroy him one way or another.

According to the story, Jesus acted at first as though he hadn't heard them. Still, since they pressed the issue, he had to react. He looked up at them and suggested to those assembled that whoever of them was without sin should cast the first stone. At this point the story revealed that they were all convicted by their own conscience and left the scene, one by one. Neither did Jesus condemn the woman.

I put the book down.

"Why did they impose the death penalty for such a human act?" Steve asked. "Who or what did they protect with this cruel law?"

"Certainly, they didn't aim to protect the woman," I replied. "They wanted to kill her. Nor would her husband and family have benefited by her death, as they would have suffered a great loss. Nor would society have benefited from it," I said to Steve. "Society doesn't benefit from murdering one-another. I suppose, only the scribes and the Pharisees stood to benefit by it."

"Why?" Steve asked.

"Because this cruelty increased their power."

"How so?" Steve demanded to know.

I felt like being interrogated to the deepest level of my being.

"Take your time," Steve counseled, "this is important. This goes very deep."

"I suppose they had to protect the grassroots platform of their own power," I said to Steve.

Steve reached across the table and congratulated me with a great big smile. "You are almost correct," he said. "The death penalty wasn't imposed to protect anything. It was imposed, and if need be enforced, to block the development of the Principle of the General Welfare in society. That's the same effect the Pharaohs had as their goal by mutilating the slaves. Except the Pharaohs did it more gently. Under the cruel Hebrew law applicable to adultery, fear and the death penalty imposed the blocking effect. Here the entire community was demanded to do the execution, lifting up stones and causing injuries to the victim till the victim would be dead. I can't think of a more effective method for preventing the natural intimacy in society. Every empire aims to prevent the unfolding of the Principle of the General Welfare in society. It is the same here. Towards this end, their interpretation of the marriage bond was largely centered on property rights."

Steve explained that under this law a husband owned his wife as property. "She was deemed to be his property in as much as the rulers of that society owned the people who were deemed the property of the church, so to speak. The rulers realized that the idea of people being hierarchically owned had to be established at the very grassroots level of society, for the notion to be effective as an instrument for maintaining power over society on a feudal basis. It had to be rooted in the ground, so to speak. This was required in order that it could serve as a foundation for the entire hierarchical power structure that the priesthood was a part of, or the ruler. How else could an oligarchy create and maintain its private zoo? This structure of the ownership of people as property supported the status of all feudal rulers. Everything rested on this foundation. It legitimized the power that the church had assumed over the people, which literally owned the life of its subjects as the cruel law amply illustrates. It also legitimized the self-assumed rights of kings and emperors, who claimed to own the whole society, to do with as they pleased. And this worked. The people complied willingly under the rule of this terror."

Steve said, "The rulers of the empires couldn't possibly allow the foundation of their power to become eroded, certainly not at the grassroots level. The slightest challenging of the notion of people being owned as property, especially at the grassroots level, had to be regarded by the rulers as an act of the highest form of treason that they were obliged to meet with the death penalty. This harsh penalty reflected the severity of the danger that an expanding sense of unity represents to the feudal system. They imposed the death sentence to protect their own illegitimate status, even while they were spouting out Moses' law, 'thou shalt not kill.' That duplicity is still going on as you may have realized. They even found it necessary to put the blame on Moses, for dishing out this cruelty. Evidently, their blaming Moses for it served to obscure the real issue, as nobody would question Moses. This gave their political cruelty the desired legitimacy."

"The story of the adulterous woman follows the imperial vertical model, the black-cross model of fantasies of insanity," I said to Steve. "All the elements are there. The story defines a process that is clearly imperial and fascist in nature, as one would expect it to be. Still, the Decalogue forbids adultery, doesn't it?" I replied to Steve.

Steve shook his head. "Axioms, axioms, axioms!" said Steve. "People blabber out slogans without being aware of what they mean. Adultery, democracy, these words are used so loosely. They have become twisted into stereotyped images. In the West, democracy has become the rule of the rich who are able to finance their own servants into positions of power in order to protect their looting enterprises. The concept of democracy has been adulterated. It has become corrupted. It no longer signifies the rule of the people by the people for the people, that the original idea stands for."

Steve laughed. "Just try to stand for election for President in our home country on a platform that is not approved by the establishment. Just try it, and you'll get shot down. You will most likely be killed before your name even gets onto the ballot. That's what it means to adulterate the idea of democracy. You introduce elements that have nothing to do with the original idea. It's like a gas station that mixes diesel oil with gasoline and sells that adulterated stuff as high grate fuel. It means that you take an idea and twist it and distort it, to make it suitable for your agenda. Often the outcome is such a gross perversion of the original concept that its underlying idea becomes totally lost. That's what it means to adulterate. The very concept of marriage has become adulterated, Peter. It has been grossly adulterated by the priests, and not by the people. The concept has been turned upside down."

Steve paused and sighed. "I wish you could read German," he said and brought another Bible from the bookshelf, an old German version.

"My specialty is Russian," I replied. "I know some German, some Spanish that I learned recently. I must admit, my German isn't great. It's adequate for most occasions, but not for interpreting ancient Biblical texts."

"These are very old texts," Steve said as he found the Decalogue. He said that the Decalogue is first introduced in the Second Book of Moses. It's called Exodus in the English Bible. "Here it is, Chapter Twenty." He said that there are four fundamental principles presented among the Ten Commandments of the Decalogue. These are in essence simple statements of the principles without which the human society cannot function. He said he would like to read them to me, translated from the German, with a slight change in the sequencing to illustrate the nature of the commandments. He read the last four commands: "Thou shalt not kill; thou shalt not steal; thou shalt not lye against thy neighbor; and thou shalt not 'ehebrechen.'" He explained that the term "ehebrechen" literally means that one mustn't break what is honorable. It means that one mustn't negate and interfere with the bond that Love has forged, or is forging. One mustn't adulterate that bond. "And that is all that the Decalogue says," said Steve.

"It then doesn't say a word about married loving, or unmarried loving, or homosexual loving, or lesbian loving," I said.

"It merely says that one must never break the bonds that Love has forged, or dishonor those bonds," said Steve. "This includes all possible bonds that we find reflected in the wide model for Universal bonds that the Intelligence of the Universe has established, such as the molecular bonds that are as numerous in their diversity than the grains of sand on the seashores of the world. Every type of bond that we can imagine exists fully established in the Universal model, as manifest in the molecular bonds. Even the homosexual bond that society cries about with indignation, is a natural bond under the molecular model. Most gaseous hydrogen, for example, exists in molecular form as H2, rather than in pure atomic form. As I said earlier, the hydrogen atom has one electron and room for two. This means that two hydrogen atoms tend to join naturally and share each other's electrons in order to fill the empty room that each one has, whereby each one has its electron shell completed. This 'homo'-molecular union is not uncommon. In a similar manner two oxygen atoms join in a, O2 molecular bond, by sharing the four electrons each one has in order to fill each other's four empty rooms. The oxygen's 'homo' union is also quite natural in the triple-bond form as O3, the famous ozone molecule, in which each of the oxygen atoms shares two electrons with two different atoms, filling all the empty rooms by which each one's outer shall is filled. The various forms, of course, have a purpose. The O3 molecule, for example, is needed to protect life on earth against the intense ultraviolet radiation coming from the sun."

Steve paused. "The 'mixed' bonds of course are far more common than the 'homo' bonds," he said moments later. "Also the mixed bonds come in a vastly wider array of different shapes and sizes, from triple bonds to bonds that unite hundreds of atoms, as in the long carbon-polymer chains."

"Are you saying that all bonds are of equal value?" I interjected.

"Value isn't the right term to use here," said Steve. "Value isn't an absolute concept, but validity is. I would say that all molecular bonds are equally valid, even while they fulfill different needs and different purposes, as the harmonizing Intention of the Universe requires. And this applies also to our human bonds. I would say that we have a wide range of bonds before us to choose from, according to our specific needs for creating an efficient civilization. We might choose several types in sequence or in parallel, in order to create the most efficient platform for our individual involvement in enriching civilization. For example, we now have a bond of three established between us here in this house. That's a valid bond. We also have individually several bonds of two established. These are also valid. Some day in the future you may establish a bond of seven, and another if five and another of four, and so on. And they will all be valid, Peter. Whatever Love draws together into a more efficient union for its intention, is valid and needs to be honored, or else we would dishonor the Universe that has created the model for it all. In honoring these bonds we fulfill the Decalogue."

"Still, the Decalogue, concerning marriage, implies a single bond of only two people, exclusively," I interjected.

"I think that whoever wrote the Decalogue had a much wider sense than that," said Steve. "Historians suggest that the Decalogue came from Egypt, probably from the Hermetic background, where it was deemed that God can have no name, or else all names must apply. I can't see how the small and exclusive marriage model came from this background. It was likely added later by interpretation to serve some rulers' objectives. However, this results into a poverty dominated world. Can you imagine the poverty that would rule if the artists of the world were restricted by law to 'paint' only with a single shade of a single color, with a single geometric form of expression?"

I nodded slightly. "An artist can't produce anything useful with that," I said. "Even the black and white world of early photography was more expressive than that as it used an infinite range of shades. Most artists would likely get by with six or seven different colors creating other colors and shades of colors applying a large range of combinations that bring a boundless pallet to their expression of ideas."

"Six you say?" said Steve. "Some do wonders with less. Now compare this with the Universe. The Universe paints with 120 different types of atoms in combinations of usefulness that are so rich in expression that it makes 'infinity' appear small. And every one of these combinations appears to be valid by its usefulness, if not vital, or even essential. It is hard to image how much of the universe would disappear if some of those vital 'bonds' would suddenly be blocked. All life might vanish."

"Isn't that what you said earlier, is being done with the circumcision," I interjected. "Didn't you say that some people who had the circumcision done to them in later years, described the change as suddenly having to live in a world without color? Wouldn't that change a person's outlook on life, his aspirations, his reactions, his relationship with other people, even his functioning in society, and all that even without the psychological stress disorders added?"

"That's the trap that over three-quarters of a billion people are living in," said Steve. "That's an invalid way of living. No model for it exists in the Universe."

"It is hard to imagine how frustrated the artists of the world would become if they lost all sense of color," I interjected.

"Unfortunately most people were circumcised at birth, so that they will never know what they lost, or what human living is really like," said Steve. "However, as tragic as the result may be, mankind has subjected itself to another type of 'circumcision' that is more universally practiced, and is more deep-reaching, and more limiting. Our social platform of the small and tightly confined marriage bond has created a similarly 'circumcised' society. Do we have any appreciation of the wide world of potential 'color' in human living that ancient doctrines still deprive us of? We simply don't know, do we? Mankind has never given itself the chance to know the difference between the color that it has the potential to experience, and what it allows itself to experience of it. Nor do we have a yardstick available to us to measure the cultural and economic losses that we thereby suffer and accept. We only know that the world is a mess, laced with wars, divisions, isolation, domination, starvation, ruled by forces of empire, filled to the brim with nuclear bombs, and its empty forests echoing with the 'song' of crows that demand depopulation. We simply haven't got a clue what the dimension of Universal Love really is, and what its color is in human terms, and what its freedom can accomplish. We live contend in our circumcised landscape, as if this all their is, and complain about the darkness that is covering the land. The sexual circumcision isn't nearly as tight as this accepted landscape has become. A few people have experienced the difference, and with a few of them now speaking out, the dreadful artificial landscape of the sexual circumcision is changing. It is getting lighter. But socially, society remains committed to its 'circumcision' that blocks the brighter, Universal colors of Love, and woe be to whoever challenges the legitimacy of the 'circumcision' even if there exists no model for it in the natural world."

"Are you saying that the small marriage bond of two mixed 'colors' is invalid?" I interjected.

Steve shook his head vigorously. "I am not saying this at all, Peter. In the Universal sense the small mixed bond is totally valid too, but not exclusively. It's not all there is. There exists a wide world of possible bonds that are all valid. Every bond of Love that we can imagine already exists and is totally valid within the model of the bonds that the Universe has established, by which it exists with near boundless dimensions. Everything is valid there, from the smallest bond to the largest imaginable. Except in the molecular world, the linking of only two atoms, like in the case of a single man and single women, is actually rather rare in the vast sea of possible bonds. Also, the resulting bond that we see happening in this particular case isn't as deep-reaching as many others. As I mentioned earlier, the bond that forms common table salt in the form of a molecule of sodium and chlorine is not as tightly locked. Sodium has 1 atom and chlorine 7. As the two join, the sodium gives up its atom to the chlorine, that thereby gets a full house of 8 in its other shell, which is called its valence, while the sodium thereby has its next inner shell exposed that thereby becomes its valence, which of course contains a full house. Thus, both are happy. However, the transfer of the one electron in the process of forming the bond creates an electric imbalance. In this case, the electric imbalance becomes the attracting force. The result is called an ionic bond. This bond isn't as deeply linked as the covalent bonds are that are most common in the universe, but it is just as valid. Everyone of the countless types of bonds that exist is valid and enables the fulfillment of certain types of purposes. The Universe becomes exceedingly rich thereby. Shouldn't this vast range of rich 'colors' be reflected in our human bonds of love and in our social structures built on these bonds? The ionic bond appears to represent the bond of attracting passion that draws the Principle of the General Welfare to the foreground, on which civilization depends. I would say that it has a vital role to play, even though it is one of the smallest forms of the possible bonds."

"And what about the national bond?" I interjected. "Isn't the cultural bond that binds a group of people into a nation, just as valid and vital as the smallest bond? This means that we are not as completely 'circumcised' as it appears we are."

"The national bond reflects the nature of the 'metallic' bond," said Steve. "Metals form infinitely extended 'homo'-type bonds. Metals form endless networks of covalent bonds between identical atoms. The entire network shares each ones valence electrons, right across the entire lump of metal. Take the case of sodium, which is a metal by nature. It has a single valence electron. When brought together with another sodium atom, the two atoms share their valence electrons, but they are too 'small' to complete each other's valence. The shared electrons thus move around across the entire resulting molecule. They become delocalized in the process. With their electrons delocalized, the atoms become electrically charged. In other words they now become held together by the electric nuclear force, one of the strong forces of the Universe. In the case of metals, the atoms become tightly packed by this force. This means that in their tight configuration each sodium atom is touched by eight other sodium atoms, whose electrons become likewise delocalized. There exist many types of metals. Some of the metal atoms have more than one electron in their valence to contribute to the common 'sea' of electrons that envelops them all. Magnesium, for example, contributes two electrons, which results in greater strength of the metal. Also magnesium becomes more tightly packed thereby, so that each atom stands in direct contact with twelve others, increasing the strength of the resulting bonds still further. There exists no inherent limit as to how far these networks of covalent bonds can be extended. The inner core of the earth, for example, is a single cohesive 'molecule,' so to speak, that is 1200-km in diameter."

"Are you suggesting that this aspect of the Universal model corresponds to the larger bond of a nation?" I interjected.

"Eighty of the hundred-plus elements that exist, are metals," said Steve. "Each metal is special. Each has special qualities and characteristics. Of course you have to respect and honor these special bonds that create the special qualities. You likewise have to honor the unique national bonds. If you scrap the national bonds on the road to establish a world-empire, you violate the model the Universe is built on, and the result becomes a mess. So you see, Peter, each bond that Love has forged is valid, and those are as many as the sea is wide. Unfortunately society, in its small-minded ways, scraps almost all aspects of the Universal model. It says that only a single bond between a single man and a single woman is valid. Even the national bonds are now being deemed invalid, and are now on the road to being scrapped altogether, by the masters of empire."

"Then, I would say, in doing so, society commits adultery on a vast scale," I interjected. "It then mutilates its perception of the natural model and applies the screwed-up version to itself. Why are we surprised that this creates a mess everywhere it is done, so much so that nothing much works anymore? In this sense the terms 'adultery' applies to the physical mutilation of people as well, such as by the sexual circumcision. The sexual circumcision then is a form of 'adultery' just the same. It mutilates the divine design; it adulterates it; and the result is in this case too, that nothing much works anymore in society."

 

 

Index: Empire - Religion

Religion: Creation Myths

Religion: Abraham Legends

Religion: Moses Legend

Empire Religion - New Testament

Religion: Christ Jesus Truth

Religion: Gospel of St. Thomas

Religion: The Decalogue

Empire Religion - Adultery

Empire Religion - Biofuels Depopulation Genocide

Empire Religion - Food Genocide

 


 

Also see: 

 


 

 Rolf Witzsche, author of books and novels on Christian Science, politics, science, and, love, and economics

Rolf Witzsche

My published books, research, novels, science,

spirituality, civilization, poetry, photography, peace and humanity

Home Index

Please consider a donation - Thank You

Published by Cygni Communications Ltd. North Vancouver, BC, Canada - (C) - public domain - Rolf A. F. Witzsche

Agape Research

About Cygni

Webmaster Resources