God’s Science v. 4.1 The Science of Jesus

Vol. 4: 
The Science,
The Second Coming,
Of Jesus:

Over Faith;
Jesus Stresses Science;
The Second, “Full”er Appearance of Christ,
In the Science of God
The Bible’s Arguments for God’s Science # 137 to ?

Jesus Expressed “Mature” “Faith” … Faith in Science, Religious Studies;
Physical  – Not Spiritual – “Fruits,” “Works,” “Signs,” “Deeds”

[Science to p. 195?; with appendices, Apostles on Faith, p. 300-400
Last Edited by Author to p. 35, 11/12/2010; & to END of BOOK, main text, P.321, 8/23/09.  Revision of Appendix, from p. 521-335 pending]

By   “Dr. Goodman,” Ph. D.  (Copyright 2011, edited 10/16/2011)


The Second
– The Second Coming –
of Christ,
In the Science of God:
Jesus Stressing “Mature” “Faith”
In … Science, Religious Studies;
Material, Not Spiritual “Fruits,”
“Works” (& “Signs,” “Deeds”)

Chapter 1 Intro to p. 44

Chapter 2 [Section 1/Chapter 8 SCIENCE OF JESUS]:  1) new thing; 2) no faith, due to false prophets; 3) few references to faith (cf. “belief”); 4) “fruits”; 5) not spiritual; 6)  physical miracles by Jesus; 7) “signs”; 8) “deeds” 9) “proof”s; 10) seen by our literal “eyes”; 11) “works.”
14) mammon,  p. 129 END OF THIS FILE
Chapter 3 [Section 2/ Chapter 9 p.488]:  FAITH OF JESUS? P. 88   seldom mentions; 12) only after works; 13) as mustard seed; only after proofs; the same amount of faith needed to believe science; 14) Of Women, etc…. 00) Doubting Thomas ; 15) only “Gentiles” seek signs?; 16) Signs And still not believe? 17) faith from unreliable witnesses like women; 18) Hearts deceived; 19) Hypochondria 20)Roman centurion; 21) Men of Little Faith; 22) Which is easier; walk ; 24) “Don’t Believe”
p. 536? 

p. 180 END Section 3 or EPILOGUE 1 p. 136:  Are We to Have Faith in Jesus?   23) Which faith?  False idols (cf. False priests)  24) Don’t believe Jesus is God, but “works”;   25 “who do you say I am?”  All intermediaries, holy men who say so, are unreliable;) only demons, apostles, “cloud”s; “unclean” people, say that;  not Jesus 26) Could Jesus be a False Christ; 27) “Authority” proven only by works;  28)  In End deeds;
36) Roman Centurion p. 156

30) End Reverses; seeing the Second Coming.  31) Paul advocates “all” knowledge; 32) Heaven comes down to earth;  END 498.  Epilogue Jesus’ fruits finally; false priests OT]

The Destruction of Heaven, Vol. 3:
The Science, the Second Coming, of Jesus:
Chapter 1

Christ Mentioned Faith 21 Times –
And Then Moved on, to
The Science of God


[The following book is volume number 4, in a possible series of about 7 to 10 volumes.  Our first book, vol. 1?, will probably show how God himself orders us to follow Science, more than faith, throughout the Old Testament; God orders us to follow Science, because – as vol. 2 shows – there have always been many “false” and “deceitful” things, in our holiest men and angels; in our priests and prophets, and in their most “inspired” doctrines.  While now – vol. 3 – we see that not only the Old Testament God, but also Jesus of the New Testament, stressed “Science,” even over faith.  Indeed, there are many problems with “faith.”  And vol. 4 on Miracles, shows us one of them:  those who are trained to faithfully, blindly follow preachers, often end up following the wrong one; the one with the wrong interpretation of the Bible, making false promises. But – as we note in vol. 5, on Spirituality –  many preachers have asked this:  if there have been many sins and errors in holy men, if their promises of physical “miracles” are not reliable, then what therefore, should we believe? Many preachers have suggested that perhaps the Bible is not about physical material goods after all; instead, it is about … getting just mental or “spiritual” things; like “hope.”  Yet to be sure, we find – in vol. 6 – that life is not just about spiritual things; and a theology that does not tend also to the physical side of life, leaves us physically starving to death (as ascetics and James 2.14 began to see).  So that finally?  It seems best to – vol. 7 – simply face the fact that there have always been sins in essentially “all” our holiest men, and all their most “inspired” doctrines – like promises of miracles, and spirituality.  We should fact indeed, the destruction of our childhood “heaven” itself.  In order to see – vol. 8 – a “new” and better heaven; a science-based Christianity that comes down to earth, to get real, provable material results, a kingdom, here this material earth.  That can demonstrate scientifically, a real “resurrection,” a provable “immortality.”]


In the past, for many centuries, the main idea of Jesus that we got in most churches, was a Jesus who promised us 1) huge, amazing, physical “miracles” the ability to walk on water, and to make bread appear out of thin air, and so forth.  For centuries, the main appeal of Christianity in fact was its promises of huge material rewards, miraculous powers, if we joined; “all” the “works” that Jesus did, and “greater things than these”; even “all” and “whatever” we “ask” (q.v. Bible).  Yet to be sure, often people find that in their own lives, nobody at all is really getting “all” the wonders that our preachers promised to us; today, most of us have never seen anyone at all, literally walking on water.  And so, even in ancient times, our 2) priests and ministers began modifying the old promises; suggesting that after all, mere physical things, material “possessions,” pleasures of “wealth,” were unimportant; since in the end we physically die, and lose all these things anyway.  So that many around the time of Philo and Jesus, began to suggest that developing our mind or “spirit,” is far more important than the old promises of physical miracles.  Indeed, elements of the Bible itself hint – but do not absolutely, finally, definitively say – that the old promises of physical, material rewards, miracles, are best seen a metaphors or “figures” of speech, “parables,” symbols for … mental or spiritual things.  So if the Old Testament and even much of the New, had promised real, actual, eatable “bread,” Jesus and others made statements that introduced the notion that such promises might just be merely metaphors for mental or “spiritual” things; as when Jesus himself suggested that himself, or this spirit, that he gives us, is “bread indeed” (q.v.).

For centuries, for thousands of years therefore, the traditional Christs that we were offered in churches, promised 1) gigantic, huge, amazing “miracles”; or, oddly failing that, 2) wonderful mental or “spiritual” elements.  Especially 3) the spiritual Christ, stressed the spiritual quality, “faith.”  So those are the two or three main elements of traditional sermons, of traditional Christianity:  “Miracles” and “Spirituality,” and “Faith.”  But here and now we are about to see … that none of these three elements are the true, most important side of Christ.  Amazingly, Christ’s main idea, the real basis upon which Christianity was really supposed to be based, was not miracles; nor spirituality; nor faith.  Instead, 4) the Christ of the Bible tells to base our lives, our religion, our Christianity, on … Science.  A Science of God.  Though this vision of Christ only begins to appear, later on in life; as a “second” “appearance,” to Christ.  A second “appearance” that some might say, is the real meaning of the foretold, “Second Coming.”  An appearance that we will begin in any case, to see in part, even here and now.  At last.



In our earlier volumes (our volume on say, God Returning to Earth, in the Science of God – as pictured especially in the Old Testament) we saw God himself, in the Old Testament.  Firmly supporting Science, even over Faith.  Here and now, though, it is time to move on to the New Testament, a look at Jesus, himself especially.

 Here and now, it is time to try to get a clearer idea, a more complete sight, of Christ himself.  But when we do, it is a startlingly unexpected sight:  we will see Jesus … stressing not “faith,” but science.  What we are about to see is a vision of Jesus which s very, very different from what we have been taught in Sunday School.  So, can it be right?  Suppose we take a short look at who Jesus is; and then return to show that Jesus did not back “faith”; as much as he finally, backed Science. 

Who has Jesus been thought to be, historically?  In many ways, believers often think of Jesus or Christ, as being entirely perfect and complete.  And even as having completely “fulfilled” all the old promises of the Bible, of an ideal “kingdom” here on this material earth.  At the same time however, though we often think of the first appearance of Christ, as Jesus, as being perfect and complete, at the same time, there are many scholars and others, who feel that many of the old promises of the Old Testament and even the New, were not yet entirely fulfilled or completed by Jesus; and that somehow, yet another, “appearance” of Christ – a Second Coming – will be necessary.  Before “all” the “full” promises of the Bible are fulfilled.  When God gives us a “new heaven and a new earth”; and an ideal “kingdom” here on earth at last (Rev. 21.1).

In particular, most Christians believe that Jesus in some ways, and the churches he left behind him, furnished many of the old promises from God, of an ideal “kingdom” here on this material earth.  A kingdom of peace or material prosperity, where there is no more pain, no more suffering.  Yet on the other hand, most Christians and scholars, instinctively feel that still somehow, Christianity has not quite delivered the “full” kingdom.  As it was described say, in Isaiah or Revelations.  As a very, very material, physical kingdom, here on this material earth.  In which there are huge amounts of prosperity – and were there is no pain or death at all, any more:
“Death and Hades gave up the dead in them, and all were judged by what they had done.  Then Death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire….  Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passed away….  And I saw the holy city, new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as bride adorned for her husband; and I heard a loud voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling of God is with men.  He will dwell with them … and God himself will be with them; he will wipe away every tear from their eyes, and death shall be no more, neither shall there be mourning nor crying nor pain any more, for the former things have passed away.’  And he who sat upon the throne said, ‘Behold, I make all things new’” (Rev. 20.13-21.5 RSV; from Isaiah).
Some churches have at times claimed proudly, that they themselves have already fully produced this promised “kingdom”; perhaps in this or that church.  But today many admit that still somehow, there is probably no place on earth quite fully as good as what was promised here; even a Roman Catholic pope can be shot, and experience some pain it seems.  While there are still pain and tears for many good members of the greatest churches.  Some say that the mental or “spiritual” life of “hope” and “faith,” in which believers live, just having a full spirit, is a complete fulfillment of that promised kingdom.  But on the other hand, even the Bible itself seemed to settle finally, in the Book of Revelations, on the feeling that the first coming of Christ, and the creation of Christian churches, was still not quite a complete fulfillment of every single prophesy of the Bible; of a God who at last fully punishes the wicked … and who rewards loyal followers with an ideal kingdom … her on earth.  So that finally, Revelations settles on the expectation that yet another, “second” coming or second “appearance” (/“Parousia”) of  Christ, will be necessary.  Before at last, all the huge promises of our holy men, our Bible, are completely, “full”y “fulfilled.”

And so for centuries, to this very day, billions of believers have been faithfully waiting; it is time for a second and better “appearance” of Christ or God, on this earth.  It is time for what is popularly called the Second Coming (intermixed with related events; like the “Day” of  “Judgement,” the “Apocalypse,” the “eschatological” or final “End,” and so forth).  But here we will find that exactly as foretold, in many ways the second coming reverses many of our popular and theological expectations. 

What is the Second Coming of God to earth, to flesh, really like?  Today, many churchgoers and even some theologians, speak as if God comes visibly, materially to earth at last; to simply congratulate our churchgoers and priests, for a job well done.  Many sermons speak of the second coming, as a time when our preachers and regular church attendees, will at last be rewarded for being “good”; while everybody else, non-believers and secularists and liberals, are at last given the painful punishment, even the annihilation, they deserve. But as we re read our Bibles more carefully here, we will find that ultimately, the Bible offers a massively consistent level of text … that warns that actually, in the end, many popular and priestly expectations about God, are … strangely reversed.  In the end, many things thought “first” with God, are found “last”; many of those were thought were “noble” are found to be “fools” (Isa. 32.1-11); many we thought were holy prophets and good Christians, are found to have been “deceivers” and hypocrites.  And shocking, even the idea of “Christ” that the whole “world” “worships” (Rev. 13, etc.), is to be found to have been, shockingly, associated with a “False Christ.”  In the end, most of those who think they are following Jesus, are to be found to have been following a false Christ; a false idea of God.  In contrast to the God we are to see – and be judged by – in the End.

This of course is an awful state of affairs.  So how can we avoid it?  How can we here and now, get the right, accurate idea of Christ?  In order to be rewarded, not punished, in the end.  Specifically, what unexpected sides of Christ, will the second appearance of Christ be revealing?  Where have many perhaps made some serious mistakes, about their notion of Christ and God?  Amazingly, as it turns out, thanks to some rather new academic methodologies, a little Post-Poststructuralist “code” breaking, it is possible to come to “see” a surprisingly vivid preview – and even experience the substance? – of the Christ of the Second Coming.  And as foretold, the appearance of Christ we come to see here, in this book, is totally conforming to every word of The Holy Bible itself  (say, the Revised Standard Version); even as He indeed, just exactly as foretold, reverses many of our popular, standard, received notions, and too-simple theologies, of what God and Christ are really like.  Preachers for example, have presented Jesus to millions of people, as stressing “faith” in “miracles” or “spirituality.”  But here suddenly we find that those ministers and priests, were following and representing, as foretold, a False Christ.  The fact is that, as we see here and now, in his second appearance, you will see Christ as he really is:  stressing not faith, but science.

What are God and Christ, really like?  How do they appear in the Second Coming?  Until today, the Second Coming has been largely a mystery even to the most erudite theologians; the Bible seemed to offer nothing but a wild, confused, surrealistic, dreamlike mixture of incompatible elements.  And so most of us first learn to envision a simplified vision of Christ, from church; seeing Christ as a special man, as we have constantly been told, of especially, great “faith.”  Jesus, our preachers have constantly told us over and over again, stresses “faith” above all other things; and Jesus wants us to have total faith in him, and in God.  Indeed, the very core essence of being a good Christian therefore, as most of us were constantly told in countless sermons, is having complete confidence – or total faith – in Jesus Christ, and God.  Or more specifically, total at faith in the vision of Christ presented to us in our church, by our priests and ministers:  a suffering, patient, loving Christ.  Who seemingly stressed total faith in religious authority, in preachers, and/or their ideas about, their verbal picture of, God.  A Christ who promised us seemingly, over and over, that if we just believe and have faith, that would give us mental or “spiritual” strength; through the “hope” and so forth that “faith” in the future gives.  While indeed, in addition to “spiritual” goods, the Christ we are introduced to in countless churches around the world … also even promises us huge, amazing, physical “miracles.”  If we just follow our preachers and their vision of Christ, we are sometimes even told, the Bible guarantees that we will get huge, amazing, miraculous powers: the power to walk on water, and to make “mountains” move through the air.  The power to heal the sick – but even also raise the long-dead.  The power to get “all” the “wonders” and “works” achieved by Jesus … and “greater things than these”; even “whatever you ask” (q.v., Bible).  

And if no one on earth could get those huge miracles?  Then the picture we were finally offered, was of Jesus telling just we should just have “faith.”  We should just continue loyally believing in him and Christianity, even if they did not furnish all the physical wonders they promised.

That is the “image” of Jesus, that has dominated the West for millennia:  Jesus promising miracles … or commanding us to have “faith,” if those miracles did not show up.  This was the essence of the Christianity that dominated the West for one or two thousand years.  While the West, in turn, dominated the whole world (in say the British Empire, c. 1700-1947). 

Ultimately therefore, this Christ, promising “miracles” or commanding “faith,” is the Christ that effectively dominated the whole world.  But finally, here and now, it is time to ask this critical question:  is that massively popular image of Christ, really true and correct?  Is it really the final one?  Is the popular image of Christ, the one that we got from thousands of churches worldwide, really the accurate, true idea of Christ?  Is He the true Christ?  Is the massively popular Jesus, promising miracles and commanding faith,  really what the Bible describes?  Particularly, is that the Christ or God that we see in the Bible, appearing in the End?  In the Second Coming?  Surprisingly, as we re-read our Bibles here, the picture we get of Christ the Bible itself – especially from the parts of the Bible regarding the End – is very significantly different, from the Jesus that dominated the whole world for two millennia.  Ultimately, we will find here that Jesus did not stress “faith” all that strongly at all; not even faith in Jesus himself.  Instead, Jesus stressed … an unblinkingly critical, scientific method, in Christianity.  Far from telling us that our religion was supposed to be based on faith, instead, just as in the Old Testament, Jesus himself told us to base our thinking, even our religion, more on science. 


All of the Two Dozen or So Statements by Jesus
Mentioning “Faith” –
But Then Statements of Problems With Faith Too
To be sure, conventional preachers have always been able to find dozens, even hundreds of quotes by Jesus himself that seem at first seem to firmly reveal Jesus as the firm advocate of very strong, all but “blind” faith.  But suppose we take a quick look at what Jesus said about faith; and then move on to his Science.  As it turns out here and now, Jesus himself in person, mentioned the word “faith” less than two dozen times, in the entire New Testament. 

In fact, we can quickly reproduce here and now, for the record, every single one of the statements that Jesus himself made, that mentioned “faith” by name; (about two dozen times in the RSV; excluding times that the text refers to “faith,” but Jesus himself did not mention the word):
“Not even in Israel have I found such faith” (Mat. 8.10).

“And when Jesus saw their faith he said to the paralytic, ‘Take heart …; your sins are forgiven” (Mat. 9.2 NIV).

“Daughter, your faith has made you well” (Mat. 9.22).

“According to your faith let it be done to you” (Mat. 9.29).

“O woman, great is your faith!” (Mat. 15.28).

“ Jesus rebuked the demon, and it came out of the boy.… ‘Why couldn’t we drive it out?’  Because you have so little faith….  If you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, ‘Move from here to there’ and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you’” (Mat. 17.19, 20 NIV; prior evidence 17.16-19).

(“O faithless and perverse generation”; Mat. 17.17).

“If you have faith and never doubt … you will receive” (Mat. 21.21-23 RSV; see prior evidence, 21.19-20).

“You will receive, if you have faith” (Mat. 21.22)

 “Justice and mercy and faith” (Mat. 23.23).

(“When Jesus saw their faith” Mat. 2.5)

 “Why are you afraid?  Have you no faith?” (Mark 4.40).

“Daughter, your faith has made you well” (Mark 5.34).

“Your faith has made you well” (Mark 10.52).

“Have faith in God” (Mark 11.22).

(“When he saw their faith he said” Luke 5.20).

“Not even in Israel have I found such faith” (Luke 7.9).

“Your faith has saved you” (Luke 7.50).

“Where is your faith” (Luke 8.25).

“Daughter, our faith has made you well” (Luke 8.48).

(“The apostles said to the Lord, ‘Increase our faith!’” Luke 17.5).

“Will he find faith on earth?” (Luke 18.8).

“Receive your sight; your faith has made you well” (Luke 18.42).

“I have prayed for you that your faith may not fail” (Luke 22.32).

“Faith in me” (Acts 26.18 NIV; cf. “faithful,” “faithless,” etc..?).
The word “faith” we have earlier found, had previously been mentioned in the Old Testament, only about six or seven times.  And – as we noted earlier in our book on faith vs. science in the old testament – of those times, it sometimes does not refer to our faith in God, but God’s faithfulness to us; while once it is used to refer to the faithfulness of an untrained versus a trained ox.  While here we find that in the New Testament, Jesus himself, in person, mentions “faith” by name, only about 21 times..  So where and how did we get the idea, that God and Jesus, are all about … Faith?  In fact, as it turns out, the whole emphasis on faith, is not really from Jesus himself at all:  it all came mostly from especially and particularly, the Apostle St. Paul..  So the massive emphasis on a Jesus of “faith,” that has been dominating churches for centuries, as it turns out, is not really from Jesus himself.  The fact is, Jesus himself mentioned “faith” by name, about 21 times or so; while is only the apostle and saint Paul.


Paul, Not Jesus, Stressed Faith
There are some scholars who have suggested that it was not just Jesus, but also Paul, who created what we today call Christianity.  And indeed, we verify that it is not Jesus, but Paul, who mentions “faith” for example, over and over.  It was not Jesus, but Paul who stressed this concept hundreds of times.  It was not Jesus, but Paul, who discussed “faith” for pages and pages.  It was Paul as much as anyone, who came especially to refer to religion, Christianity, as “the” Faith.  And who made the very word “faith,” into a synonym for all religion, for all Christianity.

Paul hammered the concept over and over.  Here are a few samples of the hundreds of times that Paul stressed faith:
“Take heart men, for I have faith in God that it will be exactly as I have been told” (Acts 27.25).
“The righteousness of God is revealed through faith for faith” (Rom. 1.17).

“Man is justified by faith apart from works of law” (Rom. 3.28; Ga. 3.8).

“He grew strong in his faith as he gave glory” (Rom. 4.22).

“His faith was reckoned to him as righteousness” (4.22).

“You are all sons of God, through faith”  (Gal. 3.26).

“Let us do good to all men, and especially to those who are of the household of faith” (Gal. 6.10; but cf. “household” in Peter).

“In later times some will depart from the faith by giving heed to deceitful spirits and doctrines of demons, through the pretensions of liars whose consciences are seared, who forbid marriage and enjoin abstinence from foods which God created” (1 Tim. 4.1; reference to priests, who don’t marry and order fasting, etc.?)
Where did the stress on “faith” really come from?  It came from parts of the Bible; especially parts written by Paul.  In churches all over the world, we all constantly heard parts of the New Testament like the above, read to us in countless sermons.  Sermons intended assure the whole earth, that the primary, core message of God and Jesus, was to stress faith. While indeed, the whole world has believed and followed this advice; so that today, the word “faith” is today considered a synonym for “religion”; most people think of the word “faith” and “religion,” as meaning exactly the same thing.  And unreflective persons like George Bush, often used them interchangeably (as in “faith-based initiatives”; though to be sure Bush had trouble pronouncing these phrases). 

So today and for some time, everyone has thought that our religion should be, as they came to say lately, “faith-based.”  Yet this we will now find, is largely thanks to the Apostle Paul specifically; more than Jesus himself.  While for this and other reasons, we find that it is now time for us all, to perhaps, look beyond mankind’s long fixation on faith. While to be sure, we here will have begun already, to look beyond the parts of Paul and others, that backed faith.  We have begun here in fact to look at many other parts of the Bible; the parts that our preachers did pay adequate attention to.  Here for example, a) we have already spent whole volumes, looking at the times God himself stressed Science, not faith; where God constantly warned that there have always been too many bad and “false” priests and prophets and angels, to put too much stress on simple faith in holy men and their vision of God.  While next, here and now, we begin looking too, at b) the many parts of the holy books … that even say or hint, that there is something wrong, or “lacking” in Faith itself.


Problems With Faith;
Being Gullible, and Having Faith
In the Wrong Thing
Amazingly, aside from the fact that the Old Testament almost never mentioned faith; in aside from the fact that in the New Testament it was Paul, not Jesus, who stressed this subject, we now find that there were also problems, something lacking and even wrong, even within faith itself.  And c) when we say something is lacking or wrong in our faith, that does not mean what our preachers have constantly assumed; that the only thing that can be wrong with faith, is just that we do not have enough of it.  Rather we will find that the Bible itself often warned that … d) faith will often fail us, in part because it is not the “whole” or “full” measure, of all that we need to be whole; because aside from faith, we need other virtues, like “love,” and “science.”  But in addition to this, e) faith often fails us, because … there are bad things with faith, just in itself; in that those who believe too much in it, tend to be gullible; to all-too-faithfully follow … bad, false religious leaders.  For these and a dozen other reasons, ultimately Jesus  – and even Paul the most vociferous spokesman of faith – began to … call our attention to problems with faith.  Especially they began to note many other, more important virtues that we must also have, to be whole, holy persons.

So there is something wrong, with so much emphasis on “faith”?  At first, this seems impossible:  it is exactly the opposite to what they always told you in church; what could be wrong with faith?  In the past, whenever a preacher talks about any possible problems with this subject, generally a preacher assumes that the only possible problem with faith, is that you just don’t have enough of it.  So that whenever something seems to go wrong in our life, or with our religion, e) the most common answer to that from priests, is to simply recommend that we adopt even still more … faith.  But amazingly, we will show here, that is not what the Bible itself – and Jesus himself – always said on this subject. As we will show here especially, Jesus and even Paul sometimes began to indicate that it is possible after all, to have too much of a good thing; it is possible to experience severe problems, even death.  From an excessive or very strong faith.  Especially faith experienced without other complementary virtues in hand; like knowledge and so forth.  Indeed, having faith without “knowledge” for example, means that … we become gullible.  And will often ignorantly follow false preachers, false prophets.  Not knowing better; having no critical, prudential capacity. 

So to begin to outline the first truly great and nasty flaw in Faith, we might here just use common sense, to say that a) faith, as many have said, is all too “blind;” it tells us to simply follow people and things, without asking or looking hard, for evidence, that they are really good people to follow.  Being told we must have faith, in effect tells people to stop using their critical intelligence.  And while that might be useful in some situations, more often, it means that our preachers are turning off people’s brains, their God-given intelligence and knowledge; encouraging the people to be blindly obedient, gullible automatons, simply and blindly following whatever someone tells us to believe.  While of course, the problem here is that so much faith in effect, makes us gullible suckers.  Those who lose their critical side, often follow the wrong leaders or the wrong ideas, all too faithfully, all too gullibly. 

An example?  Suppose for example, you duly believe and have faith … when a bad preacher tells you that you are Napoleon.  Should you really have total faith … in that?  If you do, ironically, the more faith you have, the worse your life will be.  So that we can begin to see that amazingly, it is possible to have too much of a good thing; too much faith.  Indeed, too much faith makes a person easily influenced, and gullible; and can easily ruin your life.  As the faithful will often all-too-faithfully, all too religiously, will often follow … false prophets, false holy men, false leaders.

The Bible itself in effect, often noted this very problem.  More specifically, amazingly, even Paul warned that we should be particularly careful about just “faith”fully following whatever  preachers or “gospels” that present themselves. For this reason:  there are many false preachers, and false gospels out there.  And if we have been primed to simply follow whatever presents itself, faithfully?  Then we will often end up following for example, a false gospel.  In the below example, Paul asserted that his own gospel was authoritative, and it would be good to faithfully “hold” onto it; but Paul also warned that that there were other, unreliable gospels – with indeed another and unreliable vision of Christ – in them.  So that if we are simply primed for “faith,” simply primed to blindly follow whatever is placed in front of us, then after all, we will end up often, following false things.   Significantly, following even “another Jesus” than the right one:
“I betrothed you to Christ to present you as a pure bride to her one husband.  But I am afraid that as the serpent deceived Eve by his cunning, your thoughts will be lead astray from a sincere and pure devotion to Christ.  For if some one comes and preachers another Jesus than the one we preached, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you submit to it readily enough.  I think that I am not in the least inferior to these superlative apostles.  Even if I am unskilled in speaking, I am not in knowledge….  And what I do I will continue to do, in order to undermine the claim of those who would like to claim that in their boasted mission they work on the same terms as we do.  For such men are false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ.  And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light.  So it is not strange if his servants also disguise themselves as servants [/”ministers”] of righteousness.  Their end will correspond to their deeds” (2 Corin. 11.2-6, 12-15; not that there is another gospel” but Gal. 1.7).
Paul clearly thought that many Christians would often develop or be exposed to – and all too faithfully, credulously follow – the wrong idea of Christ.  So that therefore, their “belief,” their faith, would be in vain.  As Paul confirms here as well:
“Now, brothers, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand.  By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you.  Otherwise, you have believed in vain” (1 Corin. 15.1-8 NIV).
So our faith” can often mislead us, and our “belief” can be “in vain.”  In particular – as  Paul himself notes – the main problem with “faith,” is that it makes us foolish, credulous, gullible, suckers; it leads us to follow false, even Satanic apostles and gospels; and to follow ultimately even, “another Jesus” than the right one. The great problem with faith, the great caveat that nearly all our preachers have missed, is that faith is great … but only if have faith in the right thing.  Otherwise, you can end up – Paul himself warns – following a false religious leader.  Or a false Christ.

Many preachers today, have half-understood the above passages; but they mistakenly take them to somehow only mean to warn us, not to all-too-religiously follow … the gods of other religions, other gods.  Most preachers today, read the above or similar passages, as merely warning about … other religions entirely, other than what passes as Christianity.  But that wasn’t what Paul was warning about.  Here Paul was clearly warning that there would be false, even Satanically false religious leaders, who would present themselves as Christians, within Christianity itself; who would present false writings, false sayings … and deceive many.  Especially those who were trained to have great “faith”; and who would therefore follow these evil, “deceit”ful religious leaders – “ministers” in fact, in some translations – all too well; “readily enough.”

The millions of preachers who stress “faith,” have clearly ignored this side, this part of Paul.  They have ignored this dangerous side to “faith.”  And furthermore, in consequence of such huge errors as this one, we will soon show (in our writings on Miracles especially), that – just as Paul warned – many millions of credulous believers, have historically followed “another Jesus” than the right one.  Specifically, they have mistakenly followed the vision of Jesus that has him over-stressing “faith”; while ignoring the many times that Christ and even Paul warned against having too much faith, after all.

Preachers have over-stressed “faith”; to the point that they have often said, over and over, that as long as you have faith, then you will be saved. But here Paul and others will have begun to, amazingly, issue remarks that are quite inconsistent with the prevailing vision of Christ that we get in nearly every single church, worldwide.  No doubt to be sure, if you happen to be exposed to the right idea of Christ, then the more faithfully you follow it, the better is will be for you.  But the problem that Paul is beginning to hint at here, is this: f) how do you know that you, or even your preachers, read the Bible correctly?  And have the right idea of Christ?  How do you know that the view of “Christ” that your preacher taught you, and/or that you follow, that you believe  – or have faith in – is the right one?  To be sure, many priests and Churches attempt to “answer” this; by attempting to prove that they themselves are the one reliable, infallible church.  So that all we need to do, is follow … them.  But remember this:  Paul was here warning that even those who present themselves as the highest holy leaders – in this case, even as “apostles” or followers of apostles – will often have been wrong. Finally, noting this – and a dozen other fatal sins – in “faith,” finally even Paul began to back off his at-first apparently firm, inflexible, dogmatic, lengthy advocacy of faith.

Ultimately in fact, we find on “second” glance at the Bible that, b) though at first sight, the Bible definitely seems to stress faith, eventually the Bible itself, even Paul himself, began to perceive some bad things, -even some literally physically fatal sins in – faith itself. At the very least, Paul began to warn that often this limited virtue, would mislead people, into all too faithfully believing … wrong things.  So that in such cases, faith has failed us.  Indeed therefore …
“Your faith is futile” (1 Corin. 15.1 RSV).
How apocalyptic and unsettling is Paul’s attack on not only faith or “belief,” but also  “apostles”?  It is heaven-shattering; it demolishes conventional Christianity.  Especially when you realize who those “apostles” might be:  Peter and James for example.  Two of the “pillars” of  Christianity.  So that we are paying Paul to rob James and Peter.

Could Paul be attacking other core authorities, even other apostles who are in our New Testament?  Paul apparently went to Jerusalem, to make his peace with the Jewish Christians there, and was “given the right hand of fellowship.”  But there were conflicts.  Paul was a rather Romanized Jew, who lived outside of Jerusalem.  He was a Roman citizen he himself said, who spoke and wrote Greek, and whose view of God sometimes quotes Plato’s Theory of Forms (life on earth being a mere inferior “copy” or “shadow,” of the ideal forms or “models,” paradigms, in “heaven”).  Paul often advocated Greeks in fact, and was often in their company (like Stephen?).  While Paul’s attacks on the “law” or “Moses,” especially food prohibitions, actually dropped various laws of God.  So that more traditional Hebrews in Jerusalem – including other early Christian apostles – found him a little heretical; to be in danger of simply abandoning the Hebrew god; abandoning God in other words.  Thus Paul and his Christianity were no doubt often accused of being simply, heretical; of abandoning God himself.

Many Jews, and early more traditionally Jewish Christians, were particularly scandalized when Paul was accused of actualy allowing Greeks into the Hebrew temple; and when Paul ate meals with pagan Greeks; which was not done by good Jews, because this inevitably meant violating Jewish – and Old Testament – food prohibitions, against eating pork and so forth.  To be sure, when Paul went to Jerusalem, the others he said “extended the right hand of fellowship” to him; but finally they authorized Paul only to preach outside Jerusalem, and almost only to non-Jews; as the “apostle to the gentiles” only.  While Paul indeed had severe conflicts with James and Peter it seems; Paul criticized Peter or Cephas as a hypocrite, as “insincere,” for occasionally eating meals with Greeks and non-Jews, but other times not. 

So that therefore, Paul’s attack on other, “superlative apostles,” even his attack on “Satan”ic false apostles, may well have been attacks on not just some false apostles who never found their way into the Bible, but may be an attack at times on …some of the other canonical figures in the New Testament; including probably James, and Peter.  (And possibly Matthew, Mark, Luke?).

If Paul is attacking James and Peter, and is advocating supporting Greek ideas of gods, and breaking the food “laws” and other laws of God, then after all, Paul is then of course, likely a heretic himself.  Or indeed, the Christianity he founded made significant changes in Judaism, that put him at odds with other apostles in the New Testament itself; so that Paul’s attacks may have been even in the “superlative apostles” James and Peter; whom he calls only alleged “pillars” of the church in Jerusalem, before launching the most virulent attack on unnamed Satanic apostles; and attacking Peter rather directly.  In the end, the apostles of the Bible in fact rather seemed to agree to disagree; Paul was allowed to continue, marginally; but only so long as he stayed out of Jerusalem, and spoke mainly not to good Jewish followers of the Old Testament Gut was instead merely the apostle to the Gentiles.  While meanwhile, all this surfaces again in Paul’s noting of problems with “faith” itself; the problem being that all too many people with faith, will become too gullible.  And will end following false apostles.  While, since some of those apostles (James, Peter) became the pillars of what is today called Christianity?  Therefore one might conclude that Paul believed that some of the early foundations of what was to become mainstream Christianity, Christianity itself, was simply … heresy.  That the other apostles like Peter himself, were simply presenting “another Jesus” than the right one.  That what we now think of as Christ, in other words, was a False Christ.  Or on the Anti-Christ. 

So Paul can be read as conflicting with other apostles like Peter and James; and as hinting that other “superlative” “pillars,” apostles like Peter were simply “hypocrites.”  And that their “faith,” or faith in them, was leading people into heresy.  Indeed, Paul even ultimately hints in the above, that especially Peter’s presentation of Christ was in fact simply, “another Jesus” than the right one; or as other for him, that the Christ of Peter’s part of the Bible, was actually, the Anti-Christ.  (While of course, no doubt, James felt the same way about Paul and his picture of rather Hellenized, Greco-Romanized/Platonistic Jesus, in turn.  Perhaps this is why the Roman Catholic Church sometimes calls itself the “church of St. Peter.”  Though to be sure, Matthew’s Jesus often conflicted with Peter – and finally calls Peter himself in turn, “Satan.”  In Mat. 16.23)

So Paul’s attack on “Satan”ic, false “apostles,” and problems with “faith” in them, is no small thing, many scholars suggest; it is a major rift in the heart of Christianity, between two significantly different views of God; offering two rather different Jesuses, in fact; two partially different Christs.

To be sure, this potentially severe, even fatal conflict between canonical apostles, Paul vs. Peter, and between two different Christs in effect, was finally muted, veiled, in the version of the New Testament that was passed on to us today by the scribes.  When Paul conflicted with Peter, for example, Peter’s name was represented not as “Peter,” but as “Cephas,” so that most readers do not even know who Paul was criticizing as a “hypocrite.”  Then too, Paul himself in the New Testament was at some pains, to try to modify the “laws” set by God, about food and circumcision and so forth, without appearing to simply go against the laws of the Old Testament, and therefore being seen as going simply against God.  But there are still enough signs in the text, of a severe conflict between early, more loyally Jewish, Old Testament type Christianity, and its rather Jewish Jesus, versus Paul’s more Hellenistic, “another Jesus.”  There are enough elements of this conflict still in the text, that scholars have been able to reconstruct this conflict between Paul, and Peter and James.  While of course, external historical knowledge helped finally to firm this picture up; by confirming that what “came to pass” out of this eventually, was that after all, what many today call “Christ” and “Christianity,” the rather Pauline spiritual “faith,” was eventually to split rather perceptively from its Jewish, Old Testament roots; to the point that “Christianity” came to be regarded as a different religion, than Judaism.  Even though it constantly claimed to be absolutely consistent with the Jewish Old Testament, this Pauline “Christ,” Paul’s other “Jesus” of “faith,” was counterpoised as another Jesus than what was offered by James, or Peter.  So that today we have an uneasy compromised between at least two different Christs (and more, elsewhere).  Though, since we now find that Paul himself came to note problems finally, even in his own “faith,” then finally it seems that in effect Paul and the “faith”ful side of Christianity should largely abdicate.  Though abdicate not so much specifically to Peter; but more to James.  And/or, more exactly, all of Christianity today, should begin to lean far, far more to the side of the Bible, the Christ that indeed, noted problems with “faith”; and that told us to therefore trust more, as the Old Testament god suggested, to material, visible, physical evidence:  “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” and “proofs.”  “Faith” being so unreliable.  As even the voluminous advocate of faith, St. Paul himself, finally began to notice.
Unfortunately though, historically, the wrong Jesus has won.  Paul himself was rather conflicted, on which Jesus or Christ was the right one, it seems; or in any case, Paul himself above discussed good and bad things, about faith and belief.  But today we can clearly see which view, which Christ won out historically:  today Christianity is known as a “faith.”  So that indeed, exactly as prophesied, a false Christ … defined Christianity, and thru it, has ruled the whole world. 

But while this is so, we have come here today, to repair that problem.  And to do it in a rather mild way, that allows many to pass through this impossible trauma … without so much pain after all.  By way of simple, quiet, academic discussion.  Rather than pouring fire from the Heavens in a dramatic and destructive way, we do it here and now in a subtle way:  putting the gold or silver of theological ideas, into a melting pot fire, to “refine” them.  To pass through even the Second Coming, the Apocalypse, without getting burned;  by simply, merely, in a quiet academic discussion with priests and others, in a “still small voice, changing the stress in our theology; from a “faith”-based Jesus, to a science-based one.


More Problems With Faith;
“Faith vs. Works,”
Protestantism v. Catholicism
More dramatically?  There are in fact some shocking, divisive, even famous, problems with faith.  For example, g) there was the extremely famous controversy, that split all of Christianity in half (once again, after 1052), after c. 1516 AD; it was precisely a “rift” regarding “faith,” that separated Protestants from the Catholic Church.  That fatal rift centered precisely around Paul’s apparent assertion, that we are saved not by physical “works” or acts like literal circumcision, but by “faith alone” as Paul was (mis?) characterized as saying.  And yet here we will not step into this infinitely divisive controversy.  Here we will simply suggest that it may or may not be that we might be saved just by “faith” alone; by converting to God in our “heart.”  But in any case, even it we can be, still, our position is that …you can never really know that you are really converting to the right idea of Jesus, Christ, or God … unless or until, you see some visible material evidence – “fruits,” “works,” “signs” – that prove that the Christ you are following is the right one.

So finally, we here do not take sides in the infinitely divisive “Faith vs. Works” controversy, that has separated Christianity in half; into Protestants vs. Catholics. (And that partially reflects and confirms, the conflict between Paul, and Peter and James).   It may be that we are saved in fact, just by faith in God.  Indeed, it is not so much our own works that are important here.

To be sure though, Catholics note properly, that the Bible itself never used the phrase “faith alone” at all – except when St. James condemned it.  James telling us firmly that we are saved only by faith – and works:
“What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds?  Can such a faith save him?  Suppose a brother or sister is without clothes and daily food.  If one of you says to him, ‘Go, I wish you well; keep warm and well fed,’ but does nothing abut his physical needs, what good is it?  In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead” (James 2.14-17 NIV).
Here we begin to see perhaps, another part of the conflict between Paul and James.  But to be sure, we explicitly, adamantly, do not get into, or depend on, one side or another of the endlessly devisive “faith vs. works” controversy.  Rather in any case, we use terms in different ways here.  We side-step this tar pit, by simply saying up front that having “faith” in Christ or God  might or might not. save you.  But in any case however, as Paul began to suggest above, faith will only save you, if you have faith in … the right idea of God or Christ.  As even Paul, the great occasional advocate of faith began to notice above, you can have all the faith in the world, in the false Christ … and it will not do you any good at all.

Paul therefore correctly began to note that we must somehow determine whether our Christ is the right one, or is a false Christ.  But how do you know?  How do you find out whether you have the right idea of God?  Unless you verify it somehow, by some other standard than just internal conviction.  Unless you… use science to see if following this one or that one, brings real material fruits.  (Contemporary Protestant preachers suggest something slightly different, but related:  they suggest that faith alone can save us; but of course, if a person really has faith in Jesus, then he will want to do the good deeds, works, that Jesus commanded us to perform.  And so – as our Science notes in fact – we will know that a given person’s faith is right, by his good works). 

The old, classic “Faith vs. Works” debate, is a very complicated matter; and worse, as a practical matter, it divided Christianity in half. Rather than get involved in that interminable and infinitely destructive debate?  We will simply step around it.  And say that it may or may not be true that we can be saved by faith in God alone; but in any case still, to have faith in God, or Christ, we need to know which idea of him, is the right one.  And?  The Bible itself told us that we can only know which Christ is the right one, by looking to see his material evidence.  As we will see here, that stress on material evidence, is actually the main theme in the Bible.
More Problems with Faith:
You Also Need “Love”
Even St. Paul often noted, surprisingly, problems with faith, in this sense.  In fact, though Paul at times seems to suggest that faith by itself is all we need to be saved, many Protestant theologians note that to be sure, if we have faith in God .. then we will be lead to obey his commands to do good works of charity and so forth, for instance.  So that faith in God, leads us quickly to … many other commands. 

If you have faith in God, they say, then surely you will want to follow all his commands; and among them, as James noted above, are commands to do good works; helping poor people with physical food for instance.  And faith in God leads to or involves, many other things as well.  For example, Paul himself even explicitly told us that once we have faith in God, we be lead to see that there are other important things God wants for us; particularly, “love.” 

Paul appears even to imply that even if we did not need “works” to save us, we might still need, “love” in addition to faith.  To be considered good:
“So faith, hope, love abide, these three….  But the greatest of these is love” (1 Corin. 13.13 RSV).

“If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal” (or “nothing,” RSV; 1 Corin. 13.1-2 NIV)

“God is love” (1 John 4.8 RSV).

“Supply what is lacking in your faith” (1 Thess. 3.10).

“So supplement your faith with virtue” (2 Peter 1.5 RSV).
Amazingly, Paul  seemed to tell us earlier, that if faith is the first indispensable key, still somehow we must have the right faith; faith in the right thing, the right idea of Christ.   While here even Paul, the most vociferous spokesman of “faith,” tells us that even if “works” are not necessary for our salvation, still somehow  “love” is more important, or is more necessary somehow, than faith. (While James adds “works.”  And Peter tells us we need “virtue” too.).  Faith quickly leads us to some other things therefore.  And perhaps therefore, it is the indispensable first key; but then when the door is opened, many other things are required.  In particular – and amazingly – Paul above even goes so far as to suggest that there are ultimately, “greater” things than faith.  Again:
“Faith, hope, love abide, these three….  But the greatest of these is love” (1 Corin. 13.13 RSV).

Here, Paul says there is something more important than faith:  it is love.

More, Various Problems with Faith


There are other problems with faith as well:  h) it is hard to get.  Apparently even the apostles felt they did not have enough.  Since they asked for more:
“The apostles said to the Lord, ‘increase our faith’” (Luke 17.5 RSV).
Preachers love this passage; they love faith.  And they often speak as if the only possible thing that could be wrong with faith, is just that we need more of it.  Here we feel that preachers are mistaken, and are following a false Christ.  But any case, since this is technically another complaint about faith, we mention that here.

Clearly though, not having enough faith, isn’t the only or major problem with faith, by far.  The greater problem, the Bible noted above:  the much bigger problem is … having faith in the wrong thing.  Or we now add, related to this:  i) not having enough “knowledge” about the Bible and God, and therefore believing  the wrong idea of Christ.  Indeed therefore, here is yet another thing, another previous virtue that one must have, just to find the right faith in the first place:  you must have “knowledge.”  How indeed, could you have faith in God … if you had never heard of him?  If you had no knowledge of him?  How could you faithfully fulfill his commands, or believe in him … if  you had not heard about him?  Therefore, just to get to faith, you need as a prior condition it seems, some “knowledge.”  (So that priests who stress just faith, are false in yet another way:  they are the foretold false priests, without “knowledge”; q.v.).

Here we might just begin to note, enumerate, many random signs in the Bible itself, of problems with just faith, in fact.  Once again we might note for example, that j) the word “faith” is mentioned only about 6 times in the whole Old Testament.  While furthermore – as we will see elsewhere –  the most extended discussion on faith, reveals that the whole stress on faith, shockingly, was originally an idea not from God, but from Satan (in Job 1).

We will say more about this startling, even shocking problem with faith, elsewhere.  But briefly, note that the entire Old Testament, and its God, mentioned faith by name only 6 or 7 times; and there are problems with most of those mentions.  The most shocking problem of all, being that … the whole stress on faith, seems to have come not from God himself, but literally, from Satan.  As you read the following excerpt from the book of Job, notice that it is not God himself, but it is literally the devil, that suggests that God should stress faith:
“ There was a man in the land of Üz [related to Öz, or“soul” in Turkish?], whose name of Job; and that man was blameless and upright, one that feared God….  Then Satan answered the LORD, ‘does Job fear God for nought? … Put forth thy hand now, and touch all that he has, and he will curse thee to thy face” (Job. 1.7-11 RSV).
Here note, the whole idea of a stress on faith, the whole idea of a test of faith, comes not from God himself, but literally, from Satan.  By name.  [No doubt, the whole stress on faith was so alien to the Old Testament, than any mentioning of it had to be inserted with after all, an honest if subtle red flag attached to it.  So that the stress of “faith” is inserted into the text; but it is offered as after all, a speech from the wrong side of a Midrash debate. SP?].

There are therefore surprisingly many, utterly shocking problems with “faith.”  Not the least of these problems, was that the Bible tells us at least indirectly, that it was literally Satan himself that loved faith.  Indeed, no one loves faith more than Satan, above.  Because no doubt, among other thing those who have much faith, lack the critical attitude needed to avoid becoming gullible, and to avoid following, all-too-faithfully, false religious leaders.  The false religious leaders that Satan, after all, loves.  Thus faith handily delivers the masses over to what Paul called “another Jesus” than the right one; or in other words, to the anti-Christ.  Or here in Job, to “Satan” himself, by name, no less.

Faith therefore, is often associated with utterly shocking problems and the most horrible sins.  For these and many others reasons therefore, k) we will be showing here that ultimately therefore, even the Bible itself came to stress Science, over faith.

The Bible often warned there were many false Christs out there; so that therefore, we should try hard to find the right idea of Christ.  While here at last we find him, or we begin to see his outline.  But here, Christ himself does not stress faith as the very greatest or most important virtue, at all; actually, only the false Christ and Satan, do that.  Instead, we will be showing here, God, as seen here and now, begins to stress … science.  By name, and by full description.  This to be sure is an apocalyptically different, heaven-shattering view of  Christ.  But one “day” after all, we are supposed to see a second appearance of Christ; one that roughly accompanies the dissolving of our traditional heaven.  But that shows us another, “new heaven and a new earth” (Rev. 21).  And a real kingdom of God on this material earth.

So:  The Science of God is Better


Christ as we present him here and now, stresses science, even over faith. Christ as we see him now, tells everyone that especially, we should not have very much “faith” in holy men, preachers, and angels.  Or in their verbal pictures of, their sermons and homilies about, Christ.  Our priests and ministers, deacons and bishops and popes, have often been presented as if they themselves, were the best followers of Jesus; and that it is not they themselves, but everybody else, laypeople, who are to be found to have been bad., in the end  But actually,  Christ as we are about to “see” him here and now, delivers a quite different message than what we heard proclaimed by our preachers & religious leaders. Christ as we will see him here and now, a) warned continually about bad or “false” things not just in everyday non-priests, in lay or secular people; instead, he notes sins especially and first of all, in all holy men and preachers and prophets; and in every aspect of religion.  Jesus warning constantly about “false prophets,” bad “priests,” bad “angels,” false “doctrines,” “false apostles,” and so forth.  Furthermore, Jesus in his own time continually noted sins not just in b) other religions than Christianity; but c) in Christianity itself: in his own apostles; in those who call his “name,” calling “Lord, Lord”; in the “prophets” of his own time; and even in the idea of “Christ” that many see.  Furthermore, d) the false things Christ saw, we not just in the his own time, in the very “foundation” as Paul was to call it, of what came to be called Christianity; e) the false things offered even in the name of Christianity Jesus said, were to persist, even after Jesus; “false prophets” and “false Christs,” Jesus warned, “will” come even after Jesus.  While finally, f) the false things, even the False Christ offered under the rubric of Christianity, were to persist … to the very end of time.  Until Judgement Day.

Countless apologetics sermons, have assured millions of churchgoers that of course, none of these many “false” and deceitful elements exist in your own church; that these warnings are for everybody else, not for you yourself.  Or your own corner church.  Yet Christ as we present him this very “day,” comes to note that Jesus firmly predicted that such sins and errors would persist in even essentially “all” our holiest men and angels particularly, even to the end of time.  “All have sinned.”  And if there were to be a very few, an “elect,” a few elders, a few hundred thousand worldwide who were protected from such sins and errors?  Then after all, it was to be a very small number, that was able to walk through this very narrow gate.  Not the millions who belong to the major recognized churches.

For centuries, our churches have assured us, that Christ’s references to bad things in religion, were only meant to apply to other religions, or other times or eras; perhaps to a g) future moment when many are found  “falling away” from allegedly good, present doctrines.  While h) we were assured that if such things existed in the early days of historical Christianity, c. 30 AD-120 AD, they were soon weeded out.  So that from fairly early times, we had a pure and good Church well established; without sins or errors in it; presenting itself as “spotless” to God and man.  But again, we will have been seeing here, that is not quite really, what Jesus said.  That image is not quite really, the right Christ.

The fact is, Jesus and the Bible warned us continually, that there would be false things in our holiest men and angels, even in the very angels in heaven itself (Isa. 34.4; Rev. 12.7, 13.3 – 12; 2 Peter 2.4; etc.).  The Bible warned there would always be sins in “all” those even in heaven itself; Satan himself after all was often an angel, in heaven.  Sins in the very angels … and even in our holiest men’s sayings, “word”s, about God and Christ.  Indeed, so many false words were issued in the name of Christ that finally, our holy men all over the world, are to be found by you, to have presented traditionally, not the real Jesus; but a “False Christ.” 

The whole world is to be found to have been deceived in what it “worship”s (Rev. 13); even in its best and allegedly holiest idea of Christ.  So how can we find the right vision or appearance of Christ, after all?  Here we will begin to more fully, more accurately present Christ.  From a careful look at simply, the Bible itself. 

Christ?  What does he really look like?  To reveal Christ, in our many volumes here, we will have begun to look particularly at the parts of the Bible that preachers have found it hard to honestly “face” or “bear” (q.v., Bible).  Paul warned that those of his own time, only say “part” of the truth.  So the main method of our present volumes, is to simply ask, what parts did they leave out?  As it turns out, of course, “preachers” as we will call them  – meaning priests and ministers and deacons and all religious leaders of every stripe and variety – have always particularly suppressed, censored, “whitewash”ed, and “twist”ed, a particular set of quotes from Christ and God.  Specifically?  Your own preachers have always suppressed, or whitewashed and twisted, any and all “parts” of the holy books, of Jesus … that warned of longstanding continuous sins particularly, in holy men and preachers.  In preachers themselves … and in the “priests,” “prophets,” “apostles,” “angels,” “churches,” etc., that they have “all” followed, all-too-faithfully; all too religiously.

Preachers are often thought to be very humble.  But the humility of holy men is superficial and misleading; actually, deep down, priests and ministers are almost the most proud and vain of all human beings (Zech. 13.2 ff?).  Because after all, they are presenting themselves as the reliable spokesmen of God; as the voice of God on earth.  While essentially their basic vision of life is as vain as it gets:  in spite of their own superficial humility, they see themselves as following the only true vision, while everyone else in the world is bad and evil.  While, in their vanity and arrogance, they are “blind”; blind to the deep sins .. deep in the heart of what they deem as “holy.”  As we will be showing here.

But now Christ comes again; to sit at the feet of these priests, and “refine” them.  But what does Christ say, in this second appearance?  Reading our Bibles more closely, or with particular attention to the God, Christ of the Second Coming or the Day of the Lord, what do we see?  Obviously we see God … exposing longstanding sins even in holy men and angels especially.  While, since so many sins are found in our most “sacred” things, obviously, from this alone, we should suspect that God did not intend us to be so entirely, uncritically faithful to our holy men.  Or to the Christ they presented to us in Church. 

While indeed, the second and better appearance of Christ that we begin to present here, does not stress “faith” so much at all.  Rather than that, our five major points are these:   aa) Christ and God warn constantly, that there have always been huge sins and errors, even particularly in our holiest men and angels; in their personal failings, but also even in the allegedly sacred and holy, “inspired” doctrines that were in their care.    So that obviously therefore, bb) Christ as we see him now, does not stress “faith” in holy men, and/or in their images of God.  Far from it:  instead, cc) Christ tells us to adopt a critical science of God; in order to find out what is true in our faith, and what is not.  And dd) if we find countless sins and errors in our holiest traditions?  Then after all, this fulfills prophesy; this conclusion is authorized by the Bible itself.  Since one Apocalyptic “day” in fact, we are supposed to see, precisely that.  In order to furthermore ee) see a “new heaven and a new” earth; and a second coming.  But if this seems too painful, too disillusioning, to different to “face” or “bear”?  Then after all, one of our major goals here, is to show that believers and preachers should at last be able to find the strength to simply face the countless signs of sin in their own holiest churches, at last; on being told that after all, this does not really deny or contradict, the Bible itself.  Indeed, when Science and Reason begin to notice a lack of miracles, when theologians begin to note apparent sins in our holy doctrines, all that is at justified in terms that should be acceptable to the most Fundamentalist believer and Bible-thumper.  Because here we show that … all these shattering conclusions and insights after all, do not really destroy or fight the Bible itself.  Indeed, what we find here fits the Bible completely; what we see here even explains and fits the Bible and Christ far better than the conventional Jesus of all-but-blind faith. 

So what does the Real Christ therefore, finally, really say?  In the End?  Does he stress “faith”?  Far from it.  Rather than urging us all to just “blind”ly trust and believe and have faith in our holy men – or, in their sermons, their ideas, about God and Christ – actually, here we will see Christ himself as he really is:  firmly warning us that there are many false prophets and bad priests and false Christs; firmly telling us, therefore, with even Paul, to test everything in all alleged religious men; testing them with science.  Far from being faith-based, we will see that Christ actually insists that Christianity is now supposed to be science-based. And in particular, we are supposed to very, very carefully, scientifically examine especially, our holiest men and preachers.  And their holiest doctrines, dogmas, sayings, sermons, homilies, and writings about God (etc.).  To find out whether they are actually true or not.  By looking to see if following them, delivers real, actual, visible, physical benefits.  Or in the words attributed directly and specifically to Christ himself, in person:  we are supposed to look at holy men, to examine not just their “spiritual,” but their real, physical, material productivity.

Or finally, let us now use the vocabulary of science, that is attributed to specifically Jesus himself:  that is, we are to continually examine specifically, our holy men and angels, even our “apostles,” and “priests,” and “Christs.”  According to specifically, their  i) “fruits,” j) “works,” k) “signs,” l) “deeds,” or m) “proofs.”   As measured and n) “observed,” by what, as the Old Testament God or father made clear, was real Science (Dan. 1.4-15 KJE; Mal. 3; 1 Kings 18.20-39).  While indeed, the God or Christ of the Second Coming in particular … is a partial return to the Old Testament god, and his firm “judgements” after all.  So that the vocabulary of the Old Testament also makes at least a partial return here, too.  Especially in the Christ, the God, of the Second Coming.

In effect we will be showing here, o) neither God himself in the Old Testament, nor Jesus, nor Christ himself, really stressed “faith” as much as our preachers have.  It was p) not God or even Jesus, that really put such stress on belief, or faith; rather it was primarily our often-unreliable apostles, like Paul and our even less reliable preachers, who stressed faith.  While in dramatic contrast to our all-too-human and fallible holy men, we will show that overall, taken as a whole, the Bible itself, even Jesus himself – and certainly Jesus or Christ of God, as he is to appear in the Second Coming – constantly warned about massive sins in especially our holy men. Sins in our holiest preachers and bishops and popes.  Sins even in the highest apostles like Paul and Peter and John.  For that matter, Paul confessed himself, that he was not “perfect”; he was a “sinner”; that he did “evil” (q.v.).  While the Christ/God of the Second Coming in particular, comes specifically and especially, to chastise, correct, “refine” – and if necessary, very firmly punish – specifically and especially, preachers, holy men, clerics.  In part for recent sins; but just as much or more, for errors they have always made, false ideas they followed and perpetuated, from the very first days of Christ; when so many came to develop and follow a False Christ; and when they tragically, put that false image, that false Christ, in the very center of historical Christianity itself; presenting it to us for centuries, as Christ himself.

Now it is time though, to finish many of the events, predicted for the End.  For the second and better appearance to be made manifest.  And for even very dramatic confrontations of self-proclaimed holy men, to begin.  First it is time to first try to quietly, patiently, correct; refine.  But q) as that quiet approach inevitably fails in many ways?  Then it is time for dramatic action.
What kind of dramatic action will be needed now and then, today?  God demanded that we begin scientific testing of our holiest men and their writings and sermons; testing them by “observ”ing  s) not their “spiritual” “fruits,” but the physical material good they produce.   Or do not produce.  And we are to observe their physical fruits with, specifically and by name, “science.”  While furthermore t) if our holy men cannot produce and demonstrate the material wonders they promised?  Then, far from following them with total faith, instead, we are supposed to deduce either that our present holy men are inadequate and “false”; and/or that u) the original promises of physical miracles were partially false, or exaggerated. 

Or indeed, the Bible warned that one “day,” we are to find that the whole world, and even its religion or “worship,” were in effect living in a kind of a false dream, an illusion or delusion.  There are many related terms used here; but as we assemble them here, we find that in effect, they all add up to the same picture:  we are to be found to have been living in, captured by, “enchanted” by, a mental or spiritual “delusion” especially.  We have been given a mental picture, a mental delusion; formed of the images and false hopes, from the lies, the false promises, of false religious leaders (Rev. 13).  But one day we are supposed to discover this.  On this day we are to be shown among other things, that the “Christ” that governed the world, was part of an “illusion,” or “delusion,” or a “lie,” by “false prophets” and false or bad “priests.”  That the life of the “spirit” that he offered us was a mere “false spirit” or “dream”; mere “empty words,” “false promises,” empty “consolations”; an illusion thrown on us by “false prophets,” supporting a “ False Christ.”  In effect, the main ideas is that we are found to have been trapped in a mental delusion, a lie; one related to the illusions of stage magicians, and Magic; really we were in effect, in modern terms, hypnotized (or in Biblical language, “enchant”ed, or “possessed”), by constant lies; into living in a world of lies and false promises (or miracles and so forth?).  Since such things are close to things associated with Magic and Sorcery, the false religious illusion we find ourselves to have been caught up in, “snared” in, is described in the Bible as allied with and akin to, various elements of Magic.  The false religious delusion in which were are ensnared, is therefore found to have been worked on us, by false priests and holy men … in association with “magicians,” “augurs,” conjurers, “sorcerers,” “witches,” “necromancers.”  Elements of Magic, magicians, are closely allied to the “false apostles,” the false and bad “ministers.”  In effect, we are supposed to find, in the end, that our priests were really false, magician-, sorcerer-priests.  They specialized in building up a fantasy world, to entrap us all; by gathering everyone in the world together in small groups, once a week; and repeating to them the same phrases, over and over, hypnotically.  To all of us.  Presenting these hypnotic phrases, as the world of the Lord, the word of God.  Though finally, Revelations says, that although these false priests and the false Christ, allied to magicians and Magic, are found to have successfully fooled nearly everyone, the whole world, into faithfully believing their false promises, finally of course, all these “angels” and others are to be exposed; as having been working all along, Revelation said, for of course in effect, “Satan” himself.

And what might that massive illusion or delusion be?  In part, many suggest that the traditional, widespread promises by traditional churches, of physical “miracles,” were a massively widespread, entrancing, compelling, but ultimately false promise or delusion.  One that indeed, captivated the whole world, up to about 1945/50 or so.  But just as foretold, that would be an illusion that is even now waning.  As we see a second and better vision of God; Christ supporting – and being supported by – Science.

Is this really the real Jesus of the Bible?  In fact, it is.  As we will show here, by way of hundreds of bits of evidence; quotes from the Bible itself.  Remember that for example, although there are about two or three hundred statements that mention the word “faith” in the Bible, by far, most of them – two hundred or so – are not voiced by God or by Jesus themselves.  Faith was primarily mentioned, only by the less reliable apostles and “scribes” and apostles, that were so heavily involved in writing our Bibles (see our book on False Priests).  Or specifically, the main voice that by far, talked the most about “faith” by name, was Paul.  But Paul, we will have noted elsewhere, was a self-confessedly im- “perfect” and “sin”ful apostle; who saw things only in “part”; who was often a “fool”; and who often did “evil,” even according to this own testimony.  (Q.v. in a concordance.  Also see footnote on Paul; and our book False Priests).  Or in any case, the documents issued in the name of Paul seem finally to have, himself, finally begun to … edge away from, his more faithful statements.  To quite rightly, sagely begin to warn of some pitfalls in faith, after all.  And then too, though Paul contested some of them, other gospels like the biblical book by James, began to note rather clearly, some literally, physically fatal aspects of over-faithfulness, and over-spirituality.  Or, since Paul differed with other authorities like James and Peter, perhaps after all some might simply … side in part with them after all; against Paul.  Or in any case, smoothing over any over-dramatic oppositions, we might simply begin to introduce a balanced theology; that at last finds the balanced, median position, between these two or other related, contesting extremes.  Which might be:  discovering, reaffirming aa) our traditional religious Christ as Lord; but bb) seeing him meeting, advocating, not so much faith, as practical science.   Or seeing cc) Christ as in effect, advocating faith … but only faith in things at least reasonably well suggested, confirmed, by empirical observation.

Here we will foreground Christ in any case, as occasionally mentioning faith; but finally putting rather more emphasis on following things well proven by physical, material evidence.  Of the three hundred or so statements in the Bible that mention the word “faith,” only six or seven were voiced in speeches by God himself in person, in red-letter parts of the Old Testament.  Nor did even Jesus talk that much about faith; Jesus mentions faith by name, about two dozen times.  So that it was not directly, Jesus or God that stressed faith at all.  Rather, it was Paul.  While a) Paul was, by his own admission, not entirely reliable, “perfect.”  Even according to his own testimony.  While we will find in an entire separate book on Paul’s faith, that finally even Paul actually began to call attention to problems with it.  So that even Paul, turned finally, provisionally, to the science of God.

In any case though, let’s leave Paul and his faith aside for a long moment.  Let’s leave that subject for a separate book.  And for now, as seems proper, let’s concentrate for a while, just on … Jesus.  On Christ himself.  As seems proper.

It is said that Jesus began to appear to some of the early Christians, in the days immediately after his entombment, as they met a “stranger,” who read in a meaningful way, from the holy books.  While indeed, we will see in future books on resurrection, this is one practical, realistic way that Jesus, Christ, can be “resurrected,” and can reappear in any time.  That is, as we begin to re-read the holy books, re-read the words of especially Jesus himself, we can begin to get an mental picture of him, the ideas of him, the spirit of Christ, in our minds.  Or see that spirit, in others who follow the words well.  As we will note in our later books on scientifically-verifiable versions of biblical immortality, resurrection, this may be one of the ways that Christ is resurrection; or for that matter, how he re-appears on earth.  By his thoughts and words – or even “spirit” – at last being adequately re-embodied, re-presented, by a stranger.  A stranger who has however, taken on his words, his spirit – and become “one with” Christ. 

Many priests to be sure have previously claimed to have done this; in “imitation of Christ” as they said.  Yet we suggest that the reason their promised kingdom was never completely fulfilled, was that our preachers never quite … did this well enough.  They never quiet really, “full”y understand more than “part”s of the text; parts of Jesus.  In particular, our preachers failed to produce the ideal “kingdom,” the “wonders” promised … because they saw only the parts that seemed to mention “faith”; while they completely failed to see or accept, the other parts that we will be noting here:  the parts where Jesus rather firmly backed … science.

Thus our preachers have never really seen Christ well enough at all; and have never successfully, fully embodied him, and his ideas.  But if there is anyone out there who really wants to more fully, follow Christ at last?  To really, more fully embody his thought?  Then any such reader, should … begin to notice at last, not the ever-faithful side of Jesus that has been all-too-well, all-too-exclusively followed by others.  But rather, anyone who wants to really truly follow Christ should … at last try to “see,” to hear, to follow, the part of the text that preachers have not been able to see, or “bear”:  the parts where Jesus 1) constantly warned that there have always been huge sins, particularly in our very holiest men and prophets;  or Jesus himself  2) constantly warning about following holy men, even a “Christ” too faithfully.  And to at last see, believe, and taken into their hearts, Christ; 3) Jesus telling us to be suspicious of many religious ideas, and instead to carefully “observe” priests and their effects in the physical, material world; to observe the physical, material good or harm that they do, their “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” and “proofs.”  Observe and evaluate their physical material fruits; as compared say to science and technology.  Before even beginning to follow them.

Or as Christ warned, and then commanded:
“False Christs and false prophets will appear” (Mat. 24.24 NIV).
“Beware of false prophets….  By their fruit you will recognize them” (Mat. 7.15, 16 NIV).
Ultimately we will see, Jesus carried this very, very far.  There is more than one passage in the New Testament, that seems crafted to be open to the reading, that Jesus was ultimately modest, even about his own status as the true Christ.  Jesus most of the time (99% of the time) not ever firmly telling others that he was the Christ, but instead merely asking others “who do you say I am.”  While Jesus in the end, seems to have offered statements that have two or more meanings; that are ambiguous or equivocal, polysemic, in present texts; but that are at systematically, consistently open to the reading, that Jesus does not even insist that we believe with faith, that he is the Christ.  That suggests that it is more important, to follow the one who does great works.  Or even, forget personalities, and follow material results.  As Jesus said more than once, even his own reputation – as the promised Christ or not – is to depend not just on this spirit, thought, and words.  But on proven visible empirical evidence:
“’How long will you keep us in suspense?  If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.’  Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe.  The works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness to me….  If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works…’”  (John 10.24-25, 37-38; spiritual things in 6.28 vs. miracles, 14.10-12; Isa. 41.24; Deut. 2.7, 16.15; James 2.14 ff).
Since the days of Babylon, God or the angels have “confused” the language or “tongues” of men.  So that it is hard to find an unequivocal message in the Bible; indeed we will see, the Bible is written in a very complex language, that seems always deliberately systematically, open to at least two rather different perspectives on life:  that of the faithful preachers, but also that of the good but practical, materially productive person.  And though it is not entirely obvious just from one or two quotes – or even several hundred – what the prevailing message of the text will, if anything, ultimately be?  Still it is easy to prove that the Bible is systematically and therefore deliberately open, to the reading, to the vision we will present here; the vision that has Christ advocating not blind “faith” at all. But that has Christ insisting that we do not believe in anyone, not even Jesus, unless or until we see real material, empirical, scientifically verifiable results.

Surprisingly, Jesus even in one quite defensible reading, explicitly tells us not to have faith in him.  But to trust, like any good scientist, only to visible, physical, empirical results:
“Do not believe me; … believe the works” (John 10.37-38 RSV). 
Here Jesus commits an act of great humility; he declines to identify himself as Christ (as earlier he notes that all of us are gods; John 10.35-36).  And he even tells us, amazingly, not to have faith in him:  “Do not believe me,” says Jesus, for the moment.

Rather than having faith or “belie”f, even faith in Jesus, instead we are finally told even by Jesus himself, to believe primarily, in material evidence:  “believe the works.”

This is to be sure, a startling, even heaven-shattering vision.  But if so, then note that precisely because of that as well as many other things, this appearance of Christ begins to fulfill biblical prophesy.  Far more fully than any other vision of God, or biblical explication, or theology has, in the past.  This vision we will show, can be shown to be fully compatible with every single word of the Bible; even those that seemed at first to stress faith.  While it at last, begins to open up the entire half of the Bible, or of Christ, that priests after all, have always failed to see, or that they could not obey:  the half where Christ commands us all, not to have too much faith; but to honor physical material evidence.  To be not a priest, in effect; but instead, say, a …religious scientist.  An advocate of not blind faith, but the fuller, better, “Second” vision of Christ:  seeing Jesus at last, as the advocate of … The Science of God.

The New Vision, the Second Appearance of Christ –
As a Religious Scientist


In church therefore, we were raised with a first, simplified – and substantially wrong – idea of a Jesus.  In church we were given pictures of a Christ that constantly stressed only “faith” and prayer and spiritual things.  We were given this first vision of Christ, by preachers who were concerned that an uneducated population, would follow Christianity, well before the population understood the reasons for its principles.  But while we ask children to simply obey and follow their parents, follow  the rules, before children understand the reasons for those rules, still, even children can understand much.  And should have much explained to them even as they are growing up.  While one day after all, they are supposed to acquire fuller judgement … and understand the reasons for the rules; suddenly the rules make material sense; so that therefore, the rules the laws of God, do not have to be followed blindly, with total faith.  And in that moment, we assert, part of a major prophesy is fulfilled; they are coming to see a second, more “mature” vision of life, and in this case, the more mature vision of Christianity.  And a heaven that, we will show, makes sense (see our books on the sense of immorality, miracles).

In any case, in our more educated age, now it is time for our public – and even our preachers – to reread our Bibles a little closer with us in this very book.  In order to come to see the “reasons for our faith” at last, as Paul said.  While in this way, we thus see another, second vison, “second” “appearance” of Christ.  Even … here and now. 

Many preachers have resisted anything “new” in religion; calling attention to Paul’s (?) warnings about “strange new doctrines.”  So we will need to defend ourselves against that charge.  First:  how “new” is our presentation of Christ here?  Part of a) our new, “second” vision of Christ here, borrows from other theological efforts before us, of course.  While b) Jesus and others did not object to the new; they and even Paul, often referred to their vision as “new.”  (See Paul’s “new covenant”).  In c) some ways to be sure, our present, new vision of Christ seems really still “new” to many; and startling.  Even shattering.  Shattering enough, to fulfill prophesies of an apocalyptic shattering of heaven itself (2 Peter 3; Isa. 34.4 ff.; Rev. 21).  But all that after all, has always been in the old Bible, all along.  And again, has long been known, to a small segment of theologians and others. 

What we find here to be sure, d) will be startling to ordinary churchgoers  – and it will be starling to many priests and ministers too.  In fact, it will require that many priests revise their vision, their understanding, of God.  But if so, then after all, if we cross priests, we are consistent with the Bible here too:  the Bible itself often warned of false things, even in our holiest men and angels  – and therefore, the preachers who follow them (Isa.).  And it also warned that many who – like the Apostles – thought they were first with God, would one day be found to be – or should even try to be – “last.”  While 3) when the second coming of Christ occurs, Christ is specifically to come to sit down with the very “household of God,” the “sons of Levi,” one of the sources of priests; and “refine” even them especially; even painfully.  Refining even specifically preachers; till they at last see things, God, more “full”y. 

Do some preachers object?  Then remember this and do not be deterred from it:  the Bible itself is full of indications that it is not just ordinary people, but especially preachers, that need strong corrective measures from God; that they even more than others, need to be educated.  In a “new,” more “refine”d, vision of God and Christ. 

With luck, our preachers have just enough true humility, to accept chastisement from the Bible; and enough flexibility, to be refined.


Jesus Does
A “New” Thing?
Many preachers will object to any new, different vision, any new coming, of Jesus.  Just as the Pharisees objected to the first coming of Jesus.  Many today, will quote the part of the Bible especially, where Paul is warning against “strange new doctrines” (Heb. 13.9).  But perhaps a) we do not even have a doctrine here; but a vision, a revelation.  While b) this is not really so “strange” or “new” after all; such things as we have done here, have been said before; if not quite so forcefully? 

Or then c) too, Jesus told us that he could and would, do “new things”:
“Behold; I do a new thing!” (q.v.).
Related to this, expanding this, d) we are supposed to see a new coming of Jesus one day.  Which will of course be totally true to the Bible … but will see strange to many.

So what, by the way, has much the longstanding “new” vision of Christ been?  Jesus was already partially announcing the “new,” even in his own time.  So that the outline of the “new,” Second coming of Jesus, as we find it here, was already largely continued in, outlined within, the accounts of the first coming of Jesus, contained in the Bible itself.

What does the second appearance of Jesus look like then?  It is basically like the first … though with a different emphasis.  Consider therefore, the first coming, first of all.  Most of us, even as nominal adults, still have a fairly simple mental picture of Jesus in our minds, from what we heard in Church and Sunday School.  That is, we have a mental picture of Jesus as a nice guy in a robe … a) forgiving sinners; b) walking on water; multiplying the loaves and fishes, and working other miracles.  And c) to be sure, many will have an image of Jesus asking for “faith” in himself, or God.  Deeper down, some of us d) who read our Bibles closely, might have noticed after all, the many times Jesus worked wonders … and used them, cited them, as physical evidence that he was a great man of God; even the son of God.  But most people have been told to ignore such things, and concentrate just on “faith”; so that the Christ of at best miracles, but mostly faith,  would be a quick outline of the “first” appearance of Jesus, to most of us.

That is the first impression most of us have had of Jesus; his first coming.  But as it turns out, that is not really all the Bible said about Jesus; if you read closer, you can begin to see a “second” and – to many – a rather different, new image, of Jesus.  In our present book, we will have begun to read our Bibles a little closer than normal sermons and Sunday School lessons and Catechisms.  So that as we look especially now at what Jesus himself said, at words attributed to Jesus in person, we will suddenly “see” here, a whole layer of the text, a side of Christ, that your preachers missed, or left out of their sermons.  (Or that preachers chose to “twist” and “whitewash”?).  A Jesus who did not stress faith so much after all.  Who instead, constantly warned about false things in holy men and angels; and told us to therefore, apply science to find out which ones were really from God, and which ones were not.

This is an appearance of Jesus, to be sure, that contradicts many parts of what most preachers teach.  Therefore, this appearance will be painful for preachers to try to “face” or “bear.”  Indeed, rather than face their own sins and inadequacies – and even harder, the inadequacies of their own churches and traditions – some preachers will try to simply suggest, that they are never supposed to confront this new evidence at all.  They will generate many apologetics, excuses, trying to tell their flocks that no one should try to see this side of Jesus at all.  Some preachers will at last “see,” and be saved.  But many preachers may for example try to warn that this vision of Christ is one of the foretold “strange new doctrines.”  But in fact, we will try to defend our vision here (and in other books), against all major counter-arguments.  And to start with, against the objection that this picture of Jesus is a “strange new doctrine”?  We will note now, that this vision has actually been known in academic literature, for some time.  While indeed, it is found over and over, in the Bible itself.  So that the Christ we present here, is not really “strange” at all.  In fact, our vision of Christ, advocating science … is far truer to the Bible itself, than those millions of sermons insisting that Jesus, God, stressed “Faith.”

To be sure, our vision of Christ, of God, is very significantly different than what many heard in churches for so many years.  Indeed, our vision seems even heaven-shattering.  But if so, then after all, one “day” we are supposed to see second “appearance” of Christ; one that is so new, so different, so powerful … that it shatters our traditional “heaven”; and gives us a new heaven on earth; and a new vision – a Second Coming – of Christ.  While indeed in fact, we suggest here that our presentation of a second side to Christ and God – their scientific side – amounts in effect, to at least partial “fulfillment” of perhaps the longest series of prophesies in the Bible itself; that one “day” or another, we are to see the Lord, again, in person, on earth.  And in that moment, we are to be “judged” not by our words or our faith … but by our concrete, physical works.  (Or the works our words inspired, or reflected).  While in effect, we will suggest, when you meet this new, scientific Jesus … you are in effect, at least experiencing a preview, and perhaps the very substance, of the foretold … second appearance of the Lord.  And if preachers have been disappointed at “naturalistic” understandings in the past, we will note here that since our Science brings our vision, our understanding, down to earth so to speak, sees God in physical matter, on this world or “earth,” even in our physical material “flesh,” then after all, this begins to fulfill prophesies of Jesus returning – probably to the “flesh” again for example; and coming to this material “earth” after all.  And if this at first seems too humble, and disappointing, remember that after all, religious conservatives – Pharisees – also found the first coming of God to “flesh,” in Jesus, disappointing too.  And they killed Jesus precisely, for daring to claim to be God coming down to matter, flesh.  Though in the end, it was the greatest event in history, to that time.

At first then, it seems impossible or heretical.  To see a second coming of Jesus, that comes down to this physical earth.  And yet however, it seems to be at least partial fulfillment of the old promises, prophesies.  In the end, the faithful believer experiences pain, fire, dis “illusion”ment.  But even as we see God merely on earth, in flesh … after all, we are witnessing the greatest event in history. 

So let us take that second look for Jesus himself, here and now.  In and among the things of this material earth, again. 

 And if it seems new?  Then after all, Jesus was authorized to a) show us a “new thing”; and indeed, even b) to show us a “new heaven.”  While then too, after all, things which appear new, are often really, just unexpected aspects of what was there all along.  As Jesus or John say, in 1 John, regarding the “new commandment” to “love your neighbor,” such things appear “new,” but were there from the very beginning:

“This is the message we have heard from him….  Beloved, I am writing you no new commandment, but an old commandment which you had from the beginning; the old commandment is the word which you have heard.  Yet I am writing you a new commandment….  He who says he is in light and hates his brother is in the darkness still” (1 John 1.5-2.7-9)

“And now I beg you … not as though I were writing a new commandment, but the one we have had from the beginning, that we love one another” (2 John 1.5; from Mat. 22.40, Mark 12.30, Luke 12.27, John 15.12 & Rom.  13.9).

The vision we have here of Christ in fact, is not really new at all; it is totally composed of quotes already found in the Bible itself.  But to be sure, the second appearance of Christ, here, stresses parts of the Bible that our preachers neglected, and disobeyed.  Here we will be noting at long last, the many parts of Christ that did not stress faith; but stressed, instead, science.

As we will be seeing, Jesus himself, in person, only uttered the word “faith” 21 times, in the entire New Testament (versus nearly 200 times, by Paul).  While of the 21 times the word “Faith” was used by Jesus, even there, references to “faith,” we will show, referred ultimately, to faith in things reasonably well proven by experience; faith only in things we see “come to pass” in real daily life.  So that ultimately we found, even those references to “faith” by Jesus, referred in effect, to faith in things reasonably well proven, by science.  Or in effect, Jesus referred to “faith” … in the science of God.

Does this seem like a “strange new doctrine,” as warned about by Paul?  First we will note that Paul himself, has some problems.  But in any case, we can respond to this, with much the same language that the New Testament used, when noting a “new commandment” from Jesus (to “love your neighbor as yourself”; the Golden Rule):  this is seemingly “new”; but at the same time, it is really just a clarification, refinement,  the distilled essence, of some of the oldest ethical and religious ideas; of the Old Testament, and many other philosophical systems besides.

So, this is both “new” and not new; just like 1) the “new commandment” that Jesus was giving us (including the Golden Rule in effect:  love your neighbor as yourself).  And indeed, it is both new and not new – just exactly like the 2) the “new heaven” that God produces for us, in the end

Chapter 2
The Science of Jesus:

The Second and Better “Appearance” to,
The Second Coming of, Christ


What will the Second Coming of Christ look like?  At first, and in some ways, we would expect the Second Coming of Jesus to look exactly like the first.  And yet at the same time, indeed, Jesus warned that a) many of the earlier words of Jesus and God, will have since been distorted, misrepresented, by many.  So that the real coming of God, will look different from what people expect.  While then too, b) in the Second Coming of God to earth, surely Jesus or God, will utter a few words, sentences, that he did not utter, in the first coming?  So that his appearance will be somehow, the same; but clarified, and expanded. So that in fact c) there will be at least the illusion of something “new” in this appearance; though finally it is not exactly new, but totally, simply, the extension or distillation, of the old and traditional.

Superficially though, the second coming of God is at least seemingly, superficially different than the first vision of Christ. 

And so how is it different from the “Christ” that we met in countless sermons and in Sunday School?  The vision of Christ and God that we got, overwhelmingly in churches all over the world, was a Christ who spoke continuously, about “faith.”  But we will have found that in fact, the loudest spokesman for “faith” in the Bible, was not Christ, but the apostle Paul.   While in contrast we will find here that Jesus himself, in person … mentioned “faith” by name, far, far less than Paul.  Jesus himself verbally, in person, explicitly mentions “faith” by name, only 21 times in the entire New Testament it seems; it is only Paul, who mentions faith by name, it seems, about two hundred times. 

And in fact finally, Jesus just as often or more, seems to have followed the Old Testament God … emphasized the fact that real religion, real Christianity, is supposed to get not even so much just mental or “spiritual” results, like “faith”; but far more than that, real religion, real Christianity, is supposed to get … real, material results.  In the key words of Jesus himself, his science, the world is full of “false prophets,” and even “false Christ”s.  Therefore, to find out who is truly from God and who is not, we are supposed to examine all holy men and angels, not by their faith or words, but by their real material – as Jesus says in his own words – real physical “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs,” and so forth. 

For some time, the whole earth has been lead (mislead?) by a “vision” of Jesus by priests; a vision that insists that the only and best access to God, Christ, is through all but blind, total “faith.”  And there are many sermons insisting that Jesus told us to ignore “signs” and so forth.  But here we will show that on “second” glance, we find that real religion, real Christianity, is supposed committed to getting real, “observ”able, material, physical results, here on this material earth.  To a degree that in effect, our religion, and/or Christianity, is not supposed to be based on “faith” at all.  Instead, it is supposed to be based on demonstrable material proofs … to the degree that Christianity is supposed to become …an empirical science.

Christianity actually, is supposed to be based on examining everything in religion, scientifically, to see if it really produces real, material results, or not.  And if this or that aspect of religion, including Christianity, does not produce “observ”able material results, then far from continuing to follow it with total “faith,” we are supposed to simply conclude that this or that aspect, was simply, not actually from the Lord at all; that it was a “false” doctrine or saying. 

This of course, is a shocking, apocalyptic vision; it directly contradicts millions of sermons, and the opinion of the whole world; which believes religion is to be based on faith in religious “authority” like priests and so forth (cf. Paul, “authority”).  But here we find that matter how holy or sacred the source of information on Christ was said to be, no matter if a given description of Jesus, was uttered by the very best preachers on earth, the “first” rank of preachers – or even by the holiest man or angel in heaven itself – if following a statement said to be from God, does not get real, material, physical results, here on earth, in a timely way (“soon”; “at hand”; “presently”), on this material “earth,” then, far from continuing to follow it with strong “faith,” instead, our new, second appearance of Jesus himself, as outlined here,  tells us that we are not supposed to follow the old vision with faith; but if it cannot be shown to produce real material results, it we supposed to simply deduce, that the saying, no matter how holy it seemed, was not really a saying from the Lord at all.  That in fact, the statement was a “false prophe”sy; a “false dream”; an “illusion” or “delusion” or “empty words,” not really from God at all; but from “false prophets,” “false spirits” posing as the Holy Spirit.  Or false sayings, presenting in effect, the foretold false “Christ.” 

And if the whole earth was following that?  Then after all, one “day” we are supposed to discover that the whole earth was “deceived” by a false idea of Christ, and/or this Christ’s assistants (a “false prophet,” an evil “magician,” and so forth).

Many billions of people have previously known, from “child”hood, a first, simple vision of God, or Christ. The one taught in nearly every Sunday School and churches:  the preachers’ vision of Christ, as stressing “faith” and “spirit”uality.  But here and now, you and everyone, can come to see a second and better “appearance” to Christ.  Just by looking now, finally, at some parts of the Bible that … our preachers did not look at closely enough in church.  The parts where finally the Bible itself tells us, Christ himself tells us, to follow not “faith,” but to follow instead, a Science of God.  One that we will describe, here and now.

In our earlier books, we will have examined about 134 Bible-based arguments, for Science, and against Faith.  Our present sequence of arguments from Jesus himself, therefore starts at a number like #135; to indicate that this argument for science, is part of an earlier series; and is one of finally, nearly two hundred arguments against faith, and for science, from the Bible itself.
God’s Science Point #137

Jesus Himself, Warns About Many
False Things in
Holy Men, Christians
(# 137)  Today, nearly everyone thinks that Jesus Christ himself stressed “faith” above all other things.  But in fact, even most “Christ”ians do not really know their Bibles well enough.  Few ordinary people really a) read it thoroughly at home.  Because to be sure, b) the Bible is a very difficult book to read.  And easy to misunderstand.  Therefore, though most adults try to read the Bible ourselves, now and then … most find it too difficult. Our c) Bibles were just too hard to read, by ourselves, unguided.  So instead of reading them ourselves, independently, most Christians just trust mostly to what preachers, authority, churches, told us about Jesus. 

Where did we get the idea of Christ Jesus, that most of us have today?  Most of us just went to Church, and listened to whatever the preacher told us, the Bible and Jesus were saying.  And so d) if any people read the Bible much at all?  Then they read it … the way our preachers guided them to read it.  But e) in this case, the masses have … in effect, followed their preachers faithfully; relying on them to interpret what the sacred texts said.  But we will be showing here and elsewhere, that f) this was not right.  Because while the Bible at times seemed to trust preachers and their sermons, overall, the Bible itself told us not to trust them too much.  Because “all have sinned”; even our holiest men and preachers and angels. 

(135)  Not just the Old Testament, but now we add specifically Jesus himself in person, it seems … often warned about false prophets, false priests, and so forth.  So that in effect, Jesus warned us not to have too much faith in holy men.  Or in people who say they are following Jesus, the “Lord”: 

“Beware of false prophets….” (Mat. 7.15-16 NRSV).

“”No every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven”  (Mat. 7.21)
Looking Ahead – To the Science of Jesus
But if even our holiest preachers can often be false, then who and what are we supposed to trust?  How can we know the truth, and know God?  Finally, following the Old Testament God, Jesus himself finally told us, not to entirely trust and have faith in religious leaders, like “prophets”; but instead, to examine them carefully, and find out if they were good or bad.  According to their physical fruits:
“Beware of false prophets….  You will know them by their fruits” (Mat. 7.15-16 NRSV).
This might be the most important few words in the entire Bible.  In them, Jesus did not really stress “faith” in holy men or their idea of God; instead, Jesus warned constantly that there were sins in our holy men; and in their idea of Christ.  So that instead of having faith in them – or their vision of, their description of God – finally, Jesus and the New Testament told us to use a kind of critical Science; to look at holy men and determine which were true, and which were false. 

Many preachers will try to sermonize, that when Jesus referred to false things in religion, in priests and prophets, Jesus only referred to a) other religions than those that call themselves Christian; and b) other religions particularly, of long ago.  But clearly that is not the case.  Clearly c) Jesus spoke of bad things in religion, that “will” come even after the time of Jesus himself.  And furthermore, Jesus firmly warned d) that bad things in holy men, would include even those who think they are following Jesus “Christ”; e) even those who use his name, calling on he himself, “Lord, Lord.”  So that f) we should not just follow even the millions who present themselves as, or think they are, “Christ”ians; but instead, we should carefully examine even Christians in particular, with Science; to see if they are good or false.  Though even then g) not until the “day” of the End, will God reveal who was truly Christian, and who was not.  And h) in the meantime, indeed, only Christians who know this, it seems, could be called anything like “wise”:
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.  You will know them by their fruits.  Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles?  In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.  A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.  Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.  Thus you will know them by their fruits.  Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.  On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?’  Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.  Everyone then who hears these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man” (Mat. 7. 15-24 NRSV).

(See far more on “False” Christs, “brethren” “apostles” etc., in our book on False Priests).
Preachers do not want to face this.  Remember though, that the priests of his time were among the greatest enemies of Jesus; it was they more than anyone, that wanted him arrested and executed, for heresy:
“The chief priests and the teachers of the law were looking for some sly way to arrest Jesus and kill him” (Mark 14.1).

“The priests in the temple profane” (it); (Mat. 12.5).
So amazingly enough, we will be finding here that in effect, Jesus and God did not really stress “faith” in preachers or holy men.  Or, more importantly, in their ideas about, the image of, God that they give in their sermons and homilies.  Even those who do “deeds of power” or miracles, are to be carefully examined, to see if their deeds are true.  Far from telling us to trust, have faith in our holy men, Jesus often warned that the religious world – even “Christ”ians in particular, those who thought they were following Christ himself – would always have “false” things in them; would be following a false idea of Christ.  Therefore, today, rather than just trust to the many sermons that told us that Jesus and God were mainly about “spirit” and “faith,” suppose instead, now that many of us are adults, we begin to read our Bible more closely ourselves for a while. 

Since Jesus warned about priests, preachers, even Christians especially, suppose here and we start looking at particularly, not what we heard in church from alleged Christians, but what Jesus himself said, in the Bible itself.  Not what others – like your preachers; or like even an apostle like Peter and so forth – said about Jesus.  But what Jesus himself said.

What did he say?  Did Jesus tell us, first of all, to have “faith” in the sense of trusting to religious authority, like your preacher?  Your church?  Remember, first of all, that Jesus implicitly did not stress faith in holy men (and their ideas about God; their “God” or “Lord, Lord” or even their “Christ”).  Since Jesus constantly warned us first of all, that there were many false things in religion; a) “false prophets” and so forth.  Among many false things, Jesus did not have full confidence in the b) bad priests and religious authorities of his own day; especially the c) “scribes and Pharisees.”  Who were in effect d) among the “priests” of his day.  The “priests” … that after all, sought to have Jesus arrested and killed.  For heresy against their sense of religion. 

Jesus never had total faith himself, in the religious leaders of his own time; instead he warned many of these false things were to be found among them. And especially significant:   e) Jesus firmly said that there would be sins, even among those who thought or said they were Christians, following Christ.   Jesus first of all warning that there would be aa) many who came in his “name,” and bb) who cited his name, and cried “Lord, Lord,” that would nevertheless be false, bad, or deceived believers.  Indeed, we will add, cc) Jesus noted sins in many of his highest Christian apostles; to the point of calling the apostle/saint.  Peter himself, “Satan” (in Mat. 16.23). 

So how reliable did Jesus himself regard any and all persons with notable “faith”?  Consider perhaps the most important class of people that seemed to have great faith at times:  like the Apostles.  Peter for example, expressed great faith or confidence in Jesus in Matthew 16; great confidence that Jesus was the son of God; but then Jesus found flaws in Peter; flaws so considerable, that dd) Peter began to tell Jesus that Jesus was wrong; and finally Jesus called Peter “Satan” (Mat. 16.23).

The Catholic Church at times calls itself “the Church of St. Peter”; and indeed possibly its major cathedral, is the Cathedral of St. Peter, in Rome.  And our priests like to quote over and over, the part of the Bible, that seems to tell us that Peter is wonderful, and should be the founder of a wonderful Church; that he is a “rock,” and cannot fail; and will never loose in the war against Hell.  Here is Jesus on Peter, asking Peter who Peter thinks Jesus is.  And here Peter affirms that for him, Jesus is the Christ.  While Jesus in turn suggests his Church will therefore be based on Peter:
“ ‘Who do you say I am?’  Simon Peter answered, ‘You are the Christ, the Son of the living God.’  Jesus replied, ‘Blessed are you, Simon son of Jonah, for this was not revealed to you by man, but by my Father in heaven.  And I tell you that you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades will not overcome it.  I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven; whatever you bind on earth will be found in heaven, an whatever you loose on earth will be loosed in heaven’” (Mat. 16.15-19 NIV).
This is the part of the Bible that priests quote to us in church, over and over.  And yet however, we will be showing here, that the great sin of priests, is that they quote and see and obey, only misleading “parts” of the Bible (as Paul suggests?).  That they leave out particularly, parts that … warn about priests.

But let us at last see Jesus, more “full”y; let us go past the misleading parts of the Bible that priests quote.  To see for example, what happens right after Jesus seemed to lend full support, authority, infallibility, to his disciple, Peter.  Lets look at what happens … in the rest of the story; in the next part.  Where amazingly, shatteringly, the Bible, God, says a series of things they never really pointed out adequately in church.  Where a) Jesus tells his disciples, not to tell anyone he is Christ; b) Peter “rebukes” Jesus, or tells Jesus he is wrong.  And c) Jesus in turn, calls Peter, “Satan”:
“Then he warned his disciples not to tell anyone that he was the Christ.  From that time on Jesus began to explain to his disciples that he must go to Jerusalem and suffer many things at the hands of the elders, chief priests and teachers of the law, and that he must be killed and on the third day be raised to life.  Peter took him aside and began to rebuke him.  ‘Never, Lord!’ he said.  ‘This shall never happen to you!  Jesus turned and said to Peter, ‘Get behind me, Satan!  You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men’” (Mat. 16.20, 21-23 NIV).
Here, amazingly, shockingly … Jesus is telling us not to have much confidence even in the holiest men; even in the apostles.  Here in fact, first 1) Jesus tells others not to say he is the Christ; a command that obviously, they disobeyed.  While then 2) the apostle Peter, the founder of the Church, turns on Jesus.  And says Jesus is wrong.  Wrong moreover, on a major item of doctrine (the necessity of Jesus’ death).  While next, 3) Jesus finally calls Peter, the found of the Church, “Satan.”

These are amazing parts of the Bible; parts where Jesus himself warned us strongly against even his closest disciples, calling the founder of his church “Satan.”  But you never hear this part of the Bible very clearly announced, explicated, in his church.  For obvious reasons. 

Many preachers, if confronted with this, will try to produce excuses for this part of the Bible that says very unflattering things about the Apostles, and those who follow them, like our preachers.  To try to smooth this over or “twist” or “whitewash” this, preachers will tell us next, that the apostles themselves might be personally flawed, in their behavior; but that they were at times “inspired”; so that God could use imperfect men, flawed in their personal lives, to do his perfect work.  However, we will show elsewhere, that God warned that even inspiring “spirits” were often false too.  As we find in our book on False Priests).  While common sense would suggest that we should not be following holy men who were, even once and for a time, called explicitly, precisely, “Satan” by Jesus himself.  (While for that matter, note that among the apparent sins of Peter, is calling Jesus the “Christ”; Jesus tells him not to tell anyone that).

This neglected passage, is perhaps the most informative passage in the Bible.  And the most devastating for conventional Christianity.  But our priests never fully quote it or explain it.  For obvious reasons.  Since here, the Bible shows one of our holiest men, the founders of the church, often rebelled against Jesus, “rebuk”ing him, or telling Jesus he is wrong.  And then it shows the most devastating moment for conventional Christianity:   Jesus telling us that even our very, very holiest men, apostles and priests, are often “Satan” himself.

It’s easy to guess why preachers would not really talk about these parts of the Bible. But honesty requires any preacher who really wants to see God, to face them at last.

.  .  .

Shattering, disillusioning as this may be, for that matter though, there is eventually an even greater shock in store for many believers:  Jesus noted there would be many “false Christ”s too.  And though most preachers think they have gotten past this … they have not at all.  The fact is, it seems clear that this means that many who think they are following “Christ,” after all, may not be following the right one, or the right idea of Christ, at all; but may be following a false idea of Christ.  Jesus even warned often, about false things even in the Apostles that wrote our Bibles.  As we will see in our book on False Priests (q.v.).  While Jesus warned explicitly and specifically about, for example, the Apostle Peter; even naming Peter “Satan.”  Jesus himself therefore claiming that the very founder of the church, would be “Satan.” 

Thus finally, it seems clear that whatever we told us in church, there is no special protection, even if you think you are a “Christ”ian.  Since you may be simply – and probably are simply – deceived, mistaken, in your belief.  Deceived by false, deceitful holy men. (While we will find that there is no guarantee that the Holy Spirit will guide you to the right idea of Christ either; many people having received the spirit, and yet erred after that, in the Bible itself; see our comments on that).

Thus first of all, at the very least, Jesus himself did not have as much confidence in his apostles and followers, as his followers like to think.  Indeed, Jesus even suggests that the very best of them are really, working for, or are one with, “Satan.”  To use Jesus; language.

To try to get around this, preachers suggest that we must have faith in Jesus.  But surely, faith in Jesus means faith in what he says; and here, he tells us in effect, not to have too much faith in holy men; even the ones that wrote our Bibles.

Seeing sins and errors in essentially all his followers, even his closest apostles – to the point that they were even at times characterized as “Satan”ic by Jesus himself, Jesus himself therefore, in effect, clearly did not stress “faith” in our holy men or their works, or their vision, their sermons, about God.  Especially the God of the Old Testament did not stress faith, as much as our preachers stressed have.  While even Jesus constantly warned about false things, in our holiest men and angels – and our most canonical apostles, like Peter. 

Jesus constantly warned about our holy men; and did not really stress faith.  And so thus in effect, by the way, we have already found one thing that – as foretold – has been false, in “all” our preachers:  almost all our preachers all over the world constantly presented themselves as the reliable voicepieces of God, and therefore emphasized “faith” in their ideas, their sermons, about God.  But now we find here that God did not say that at all.  God did not stress “faith” that much.  Therefore, our preachers’ presentation of God stressing “Faith,” is one of the first messages of preachers, that we find, was wrong.  And if nearly all our holy men made this enormous mistake?  Then thus we find – as foretold – that indeed, the prophesy was correct.  Essentially “all” our holiest men, make a huge mistake.  Just as God warned (Rev. 13; Isaiah; Jeremiah).  Even the disciples that wrote our Bibles.  Jesus calling Peter “Satan” in Mat. 16.23; James noting that “we” all make mistakes, including presumably himself:
“Not many of you should presume to be teachers, my brothers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.  We all stumble [“we all make many mistakes” RSV] in many ways.  If anyone is never at fault in what he says, he is a perfect man….  But no man can tame the tongue.  It is a restless evil, full of deadly poison” (James 3.1-2, 8) NIV).
Then too, Paul criticized Peter as a “hypocrite.”  And then criticized himself, as not yet perfect, even as he was writing half the New Testament:
“Not that I have … already been made perfect  (Php. 3.12 NIV).
Jesus himself also noted that all his disciples would abandon him (q.v.).  And told them not to think of themselves as “first” or mighty.  Etc…

Already therefore, with merely the first one or two of twenty or thirty unexpected characteristics of Jesus, that we will be noting here, already we find that …there is something in the Christ of the Bible, that very strongly contradicts our priests; that finds that, as foretold, our priests have been following the wrong idea of Christ.  Christ did not endorse priests as strongly as priests say or think.


Preachers Can Give
A False “Appearance” to Christ;
Presenting a “False Christ”
Or, more startlingly, we should even say that the fact is, as foretold, the whole earth, even our preachers, the “household of God,” has, as prophesied, been following … a false Christ.  Everyone, nearly all our preachers worldwide, has thought or said, that Jesus stressed “faith” for example.  (And related qualities like “spirit”uality).  But we will find here that in point of fact, Jesus constantly warned about great sins and errors in holy men and preachers.  And therefore, he actually told us not to have too much “faith” in them; or their sermons and homilies on God; or their “Christ.”  Not at all.  But finally and most startlingly, if priests and prophets often err, then after all in effect, they likely will have erred in the picture they offer us, of Jesus Christ. 
Jesus, the New Testament, often warned us not to have too much faith in holy men; because “all have sinned.”  And in fact finally, even the picture of God and of Jesus himself, that holy men, preachers gave us, can be false.

These false things, are to be found in and among those who say and even genuinely feel, they are Christians.  Jesus himself noting that many would come in his “name”; many would have constantly cried “Lord, Lord”; and yet, even these would be false.  They have been hypocritical.  Or mistakenly following a false idea of Christ.  Or  not following him close enough, through misunderstanding him.  As Jesus warned, the whole earth would one day be found to be deceived by false prophets (according to John, perhaps speaking for Jesus, in Rev. 13 etc.).  But the worst aspect of the sins of holy men and priests, is that ultimately their errors and distortions, present a distorted and false vision of everything in religion; including presenting and supporting finally no doubt, a “false Christ.”

Fact is, Jesus warned that many “false Christs” would appear after him:
“There shall arise false Christ’s” (Mat. 24.24  A & RV).

“False prophets and false Christs” (Mark 13.22).

So if there can be so many bad things in our holy men – or to use one of the words the Bible used so many times, “false” things –  then could Jesus have really wanted us to follow our religious leaders, so loyally?  With total “Faith”?  As we will be seeing here, finally, Jesus himself did not stress “faith”; not as much as his im-“perfect” apostle, Paul.  Indeed finally, Jesus himself, differed quite a bit from Paul; in that Jesus stressed not “faith,” but stressed a kind of science.  Jesus telling us not to follow unreliable priests and prophets and holy men (like Paul?).  Jesus telling us instead, to learn to apply a critical testing procedure, a crucial Science of God, to our holiest men and angels and priests and ministers.  To see if they are actually good or not; as determined in large part, by whether following their words, as Jesus finally said, produces real, physical, empirically-verifiable, “observe”able,  “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.”

God’s Science Point #138

Real, Material, Physical
(# 138)  Jesus warned that there have always been huge sins and errors even in our holiest men; and therefore, implicitly, we should not have much “faith” in them, or in the picture they have presented even of Jesus himself, of their idea of “Christ.”  Indeed, because of this, far better, second introduction to Jesus, emphasizes not his “faith”; but his critical science.

And probably the best simple introduction to the science of Jesus, is the following, simple statement Jesus made, about “Fruits.”  Here notice, Jesus does not tell us to follow religious leaders; he says the opposite of that.  He warns that there will be many “false prophets” after he himself; and that we are therefore supposed to examine them carefully, by looking to see if they great “fruits,” or as we will see, real physical results: 
“Beware of false prophets….  You will know them by their fruits” (Mat. 7.15-16 NRSV).
Jesus here warned that a) there are always many false prophets, false persons, deep in religion.  B) Therefore, we should in effect not have much “faith” in holy men (other than in Jesus himself; Jesus as he exists apart from all human characterizations of him).  Instead of having faith, b) we are supposed to examine and evaluate all alleged holy men, one by one, and all apostles and churches.  By looking to see if they get real, empirically verifiable results, or not.  If they do produce the wonders they promise, then they might be good (barring temporary false miracles).  But in any case, if they cannot produce the miracles they promised then they certainly can be found false, “quickly.”

Telling us to evaluate even prophets – and we will see others – by their “fruits”, clearly refers back to the God of the Old Testament, and his science.  (As outlined here in our section on that).  This and many other indications will show that Jesus quite often, firmly advocated not faith; but a critical science of God.  Like the science of Religious Studies, or something more refined.  

Here, we can clearly at last begin to see a second Jesus; clearly related to the first, but clarifying some aspects and emphases.  Now and then we see Jesus overall mentioning the need for some faith; but only as much as a “grain of mustard seed.”  While warning us most of all, that our holiest men were often not trustworthy.  But notice too, incidentally, that our second vision of Christ, is not just a) warning us about false things in holy men, and prophets.  Or b) then especially, telling us at last, firmly, not to have much faith in them.  Or telling us c) to evaluate them as true or false.  By especially, observing their material …”fruits.”  But some of our other major sub-themes are linked here to all this.  Like d) the moment of “fire.”  And e) the moment we “mature.”  He is also warning us here, that even those who think or say they are following “Christ” we will found wanting. And parts of them, their ideas, are dead wood, un “fruit”ful “branches,” because our fruit does not “mature”; so that those branches (also “tares,” “weeds,” “chaff”) even of what we thought were Christianity, must be thrown into the “fire”:
“Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing but inwardly are ravenous wolves.  You will know them by their fruits.  Are grapes gathered from thorns, or figs from thistles?  In the same way, every good tree bears good fruit, but the bad tree bears bad fruit.  A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit.  Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire.  Thus you will know them by their fruits.  Not everyone who says to me ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter into the kingdom of heaven, but only the one who does the will of my Father in heaven.  On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and cast out demons in your name, and do many deeds of power in your name?’  Then I will declare to them, ‘I never knew you; go away from me, you evildoers.  Everyone then who hears these words of mine and acts on them will be like a wise man” (Mat. 7. 15-24 NRSV).

“I am the true vine, and my father is the gardener.  He cuts off every branch in me that bears no fruit, while every branch that does bear fruit he prunes so that it will be even more fruitful…. This is to my Father’s glory, that you bear much fruit, showing yourselves to be my disciples” (John 15.1-2, 8, NIV).

“They have seen these miracles, and yet they have hated both me and my Father.  But this is to fulfill what is written in their Law:  ‘They hated me without reason.’” (John 15.24 NIV; citing Ps. 35.19, 69.4; note having “reason” here, means personally seeing material evidence, and not believing it).

“I have come seeking fruit on this fig tree….[;]  if it bears fruit next year, well and good; but if not, you can cut it down” (Luke 13.7, 9).

“Their fruit does not mature” (Luke 8.14).

“He came seeking fruit and found none” (Luke 13.6).
This series of quotes might serve to present the core of the Science of God, as outlined by Jesus.  Here, Jesus does anything but tell us to have faith in holy men, or their vision of God.  Quite the opposite.  Jesus warns us that priests, prophets, would-be “disciples” (John 16.8 NIV) are often false and dangerous.  And therefore, far from having faith in them – or implicitly, their vision of God – instead, we are supposed to examine their material “fruits” closely; to see if they are producing real material results, or not. 

And if our holy men are not producing real material results, “fruits”?  Then far from following our holy men and preachers, instead, we are simply supposed to say they were false. While this series of quotes on “fruit,” also links that to the themes that we inter-relate here:  it all related to the “day” we “mature” and so forth, too.  To the day when we repay our land-“Lord”s, with part of our harvest fruits.  And all that in turn, to the end time; the day we are judged one day or another, by the Lord; and we will see, we are judged not so much by our faith, as by our “deeds,” … and our “fruit.” 

Parts of Paul that toyed with the idea that we are saved entirely by faith; but while much of the rest of the Bible hints at that at times, in the end it and the book of Revelation, have to reconcile Jesus and Paul, to God; by having God the father it seems, “judge” us in the end, according to our material “deeds,” and “fruits.”
God’s Science Point #139

Not Paul’s Spiritual “Fruits,”
Or Just Jesus’ “Bread Indeed,” Etc.;
But Real Literal Bread;
Real Material Goods


(# 139)  To be sure, our preachers do not want to “face” or admit or obey, this side of the Bible or of God.  Because a) this demand by God – that holy men prove themselves, by producing real material, physical results, here on this material earth – was a high and difficult standard. One that most alleged holy men, preaches, probably cannot meet.  Those preachers who constantly promised regular, reliable, huge miracles – “all” and “whatever” we “ask” especially, often did not want to be held to a strict standard of proof, or be thrown into the “fire.”

Many scholars now note that early Christianity in fact, had many problems producing real material results.  Though it was said that Jesus worked many physical miracles or wonders, still, not every promise of God seems to have been met, in Jesus’ first coming.  Jesus himself for example, was said to be the foretold God come down to earth one “day”; and yet he did not, as God was supposed to, stay and defeat all enemies; instead he was physically executed by mere men.  And though he was said to have been physically resurrected, he stayed on earth only 40 days.  While then too, the physical “kingdom” promised in Jerusalem, did not appear; instead, Jerusalem was burned to the ground, history records, in 70 AD.  While then too, many early Christians did not find the promised “prosperity,” but instead were executed, tortured to death.  Martyred. And if the Church often claimed it was the foretold kingdom, the church was never quite “full”y as good as what the Bible promised earlier; where there was “no more crying,” where the “wolf” lies down with the “sheep,” and so forth.

Many Bible scholars now note therefore, that in spite of many alleged material wonders, still early Christianity did not fully deliver on all the physical promises of God.  And so, early Christians were faced with some evidence, signs, that parts of their religion were simply, false. 

Of course, many could not face this.  So soon, after the execution of Jesus, many alleged followers, the apostles, attempted to generate some explanation or excuse – an “apologetic” or “defense” – for their apparent failures.  Or, among other possible responses to these problems, many gave into temptation, to a) simply give up on, deny, the material side of God and Christ.  Particularly when Judaism and Christianity, suffered huge physical defeats.  Particularly when Jesus himself was physically killed, c. 33 AD.  At that time, many said great material “miracles” were being worked … but they began to shift the emphasis in Christianity; away from physical results, to promising say, mental or “spiritual” things.  If following God did not deliver real material results, or physical “bread,” as it did with Moses, at least it could deliver they say, mental goods or “bread”; like “pride,” and “hope” and “faith.”

This has been called the “spirutalization” of Judaism.  And owes much it seems to the Greeks, and Plato.  However, there were problems, even heresies, in saying that God never promised physical things, but only primarily mental or spiritual results.  The problem was that this contradicted most of the rest of the Bible.  Which clearly promised real material things, over and over again.  While any attempt to suggest that those promises were just metaphors for spiritual things, we will be showing, could not be sustained, for many reasons.

But there were many incredibly anxious moments in early Christianity, when, now and then a promised material wonder seemed not to show up; when say, no real, material, physical, “kingdom” was evident.  And when there were many other further failures.  As when at least some early Christians did not get material “prosperity,” but were even martyred, or executed.  In times like these, apostles like Paul and others especially, all-but gave up, on the material side of Judaism and Christianity.  But, rather than abandon Christianity altogether, they began to ignore, disobey, and disbelieve, in the material side of God.  And to try to “fix” Christianity, by … spiritualizing it.  Suggesting that material things were not really important; that God really concentrates on giving us mental images, thoughts, feelings of the “heart,” and “spirits”; not material things. 

The fact is, early Christianity failed to achieve one material goal after another – right after, for example, the physical execution of Jesus in particular; and then after his allegedly successful resurrection, the sudden disappearance of Jesus into “heaven” (after 40 days, according to Acts).  And so, many early Christians began to “doubt” that their religion was true.  Particularly when Jerusalem itself – which was supposed to become the ideal capital of an “eternal,” ideal kingdom – was instead, burned to the ground, in 70 AD.  And when Jews were forbidden later, even to live in the ruined city (by the Roman emperor, Hadrian, c. 135 AD?). 

Judaism and its God, had basically promised that a good man would get real, material prosperity.  Even Job became wealthy again, later in life.  Yet early Christianity did not get all the material prosperity it promised; and so early Christianity appeared false to many.   In spite of an occasional alleged physical miracle, early Christianity experienced the catastrophic material failure of many of its major physical goals.  And it was no doubt because of that – as we suggest here – that many early would-be Christians began to think that either that religion was false – so that many began to simply leave the religion.  Or undoubtedly, many like Paul secretly thought that Christianity had to change; to come up with some way of dealing with material, physical reversals. 

At the time, Jerusalem was just a few miles south of the crossroads between all of Africa, Asia, and Europe.  Therefore, there were many of what scholars call “ANE” or Ancient Middle East influences around; even some far Asian influences; indeed, influences from two or three continents, went through this area.  Paul for example, lived in Tarsus, in Asia Minor; and he apparently wrote Greek, and advocated God supporting “Greeks.”   Therefore, though the God of the Bible often warned about other gods, it seems almost certain that other, non Jewish traditions joined with Judaism, to form Christianity.  Likely, among other innovations, Christianity admitted “Greeks” just as Paul asked; and changed Judaism in a way that Greek tragedy and Stoicism (and Buddhism, etc.) would suggest.  Greek myths and even histories (as of Socrates, the noble suicide) having in fact a ready explanation for any deaths of high gods:  martyrdom.  

Most of Judaism promised that those who are good, get long life and prosperity; not death.  So Judaism did not really have the full resources, some would say, to deal with an allegedly good person, who dies.  But Greek and Roman myths did.  They were very, very familiar with the idea of the “martyr.”  Suggesting that many of our “heroes,” after all, had tragic flaws; or were badly treated by the Gods; so that even a hero, could suffer and die prematurely.  Or more importantly, that after all, it was good to die for others.  Roman civic religions also of course, told us that it was good to die for the good of the rest. 

It is narrated in Acts, that Paul said he was a Roman citizen; so Paul in particular might have been influenced by Roman ideas of martyrdom.  Which would at last, furnish one good explanation as to why a good Jesus, might die:  die to save the rest of us.  Which eventually combined with some other ideas, to form the idea of Jesus dying for our sins, and saving us that way.

But then there was another idea that came out of  – or at any rate, could be found in – the Greeks and Romans and Egyptians, and other cultures all around – and continually passing thru – Jerusalem.  Related in part to the idea of “martyr”dom, to the idea that a few good, loyal (cf. “faith”ful; especially to Pater Familias) men, might say, Stoically sacrifice their own material lives, for the good of their fellow soldiers, citizens, was the idea found in Paul and others, that if religion or following a Lord at times, did not give us personally,  real material gains, right now, here in this lifetime, but instead even brought us suffering, material poverty, still perhaps after all, it could teach us a kind of mental or “spiritual” resignation or strength (cf. Marcus Aurelius, the Stoic Roman emperor; who sounds quite Christian at times.  And early Buddhism, asceticism, etc.).  A sort of philosophical calm, or acceptance of physical privation.  Which justified suffering, by various “spiritual” arguments; suggesting that after all material “possessions” were unimportant; that suffering and affluence, are just things in our minds or spirits, and therefore, the root to being happy in all situations, is just to change our minds.  To be happy wherever we are, in any situation (as Paul said).  While taking consolation in being linked to … long term developments; sacrificing for those who come after us.  And a world to come.

When Christianity seems to fail physically, then, Paul and others began to change Christianity in this way; along some rather Roman/Greek models, that could modify Judaism, by explaining, incorporate, physical deprivation and suffering.   Paul himself was a Roman citizen; no doubt he was I with Greek tales of suffering heroes.  And perhaps, early forms of Stoicism.  Then too, he was trained he said, as a “Pharisee” – and the Pharisees believed in life after death (as compared to the “Sadducees,” Acts 23.8).  So that their might be a kind of triumph, even after physical death … fame, life after death.  According to many cultures outside of Judaism.  (Cf. Platonicism too).  So that it would have been fairly natural for a Paul, trained as a Roman and Pharisee (compare the word “Pharisee” to “Pharaoh”, and “priest”) …  to imagine an adaptation of Christ’s words, that would allow that Jesus might still be considered a living hero, to have left a good “name” at least, even after his physical, material death.  So that even the material death of Jesus was not a total defeat, Paul was able to claim, in effect. 

In any case, for whatever reasons, after huge material defeats – the physical death and disappearance of Jesus; the non-appearance of a physical “kingdom” –  Paul especially, was to begin to suggest, hint, that Christianity was not a total bust; since he suggested, it did not really have to get real material results; but only mental or “spiritual” results.  IT gave us hope for the future. 

Thus Paul – who was credited with opposing Christianity, persecuting it, at first – eventually came to be thought of as supporting it, albeit with some new ideas that were allowed only among the “mission to the Gentiles,” if not to good Jews in Jerusalem.  In any case, almost a generation after the death of Jesus (from the crucifixion of Jesus, c. 33 AD, to Paul’s career, flourishing by 55 AD), Paul especially, like a good Roman (and like many inte-testemental/ apocryphal texts), began tried to hint (rather against the original covenants of God, some Jews might have thought?) that one could suffer huge material defeats, deprivation, martyrdom … and yet still be considered a hero.  But the problem was, that this seems to contrast greatly, with the God of the Old Testament, and his “laws” and decrees.  Especially his stipulation, that those who are truly good, will not find poverty and death, but material success.  That indeed, we are to be judged in the end not by our thoughts or spirit, as much as by our real, material “fruits.”

So this great problem confronted early Spiritualists, like Paul:  how do poor, suffering Christians, account for, God’s promises of physical rewards for being good?  And how do they get around God – and even often Jesus’ – constant insistences, that real Religion must show real material “fruits”?  Here, no doubt, the clever Platonic, metaphoricalizing, allegoricising philosophy and learning of Jesus’ contemporary, Philo, helped Paul: Paul began to suggest that Christianity could take all the old physical promises, as mere metaphors for mental or spiritual things.  That if God had promised “fruit” to us, the typically over-spiritual Paul, often began to hint that the only “fruits” a preacher or believer should get, were metaphorical; “fruits of the spirit”: 
“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace” (Gal. 5.22).

“The fruit of light is found in all that is good” (Eph. 5.9).
Arguably, some such mental fruits had at times been mentioned, even in the otherwise massively materialistic Old Testament:
The fruit of steadfast love” (Hos. 10.12).

“The full fruit of the removal of his sin” (Isa. 27.9).

“The fruit of your lips” (Hos. 14.2).

(Cf. though “The fruit for which thy soul longed has gone” Rev. 18.14; longed for material things though).
And indeed, the disciples who are credited with writing our New Testament, had Jesus himself, vacillating between a literal, physical understanding of the promises of God – Jesus producing material miracles, even real material “bread” in the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes.  As versus a metaphoricalized/spiritualized version of this:  Jesus giving us hope and so forth.  And calling that “bread indeed” (q.v.).

But what about all the earlier, very material promises of God?  Peter – who supported Jesus as the Christ, but who often had his differences with Jesus, as noted above (Mat. 16.23) –  right after speaking of Paul, began to complain about unnamed people who “twist”ed the meaning of  scriptures. And finally, after many spiritualizing themes in Paul, the Bible ends however, with a Book of Revelation … that has God or Jesus  after all, returning to this physical material earth; to deliver apparently very material rewards.

Jesus himself – and all of Christianity for the next two thousand years – was seemingly to vacillate between promising real material wonders, and spiritual hope and so forth.  But Jesus we will be showing here, leans furthest toward finally, in the end, God’s materialism:  insisting that real holy men must be judged by their real physical, material fruits, works, signs, deeds, proofs.  And if this Jesus or God is for a while lost, we are to see him again in the End in particular; as the Book of Revelation hints. 

To be sure, for many years, after Jerusalem suffered huge material defeats  – occupation by Rome; the execution of many of its leaders, etc. – rather than say Judaism was totally defeated, Judaism was instead changed, updated, Hellenized.  Specifically, aside from the idea of “martyrs,” it was Platonized,  spiritualized, metaphoricalized; by Paul and others (like Philo slightly before him).  Judaism was spiritualized … to form Christianity.  Yet to be sure, how true was spiritualization, to the original God?  Or even Jesus himself?  We will add soon, that Jesus over and over again, worked apparently very real material wonders, even miracles; bringing not just the “bread indeed” of his thoughts and spirit, but also real material bread, loaves and fishes.  Indeed, God himself had often promised to us, over and over, primarily physical, material things, often even literal fruits:
“Trees bearing fruit in which is their seed” (Gen. 1.12).

“Bless the fruit of your body and the fruit … of your ground” (Deut. 7.13).

“You shall eat the fruit of vineyards and oliveyards” (Jos. 24.13).

“The fruit of their way” (Prov. 1.31).

“All kinds of fruit trees” (Ecc. 2.5).

“Fill the whole world with fruit” (Isa. 27.6).

“The trees of the field and the fruit of the ground” (Jer. 7.20).

“The farmer waits for the precious fruits of the earth” (James 5.7).

“And the earth brought forth its fruit” (James 5.18).

“An offering of first fruits you may bring them” (Lev. 2.12).

“Bring … first fruits of all fruit of every tree’ (Neh. 10.35).

“Eat and be full, and you shall bless” (Deut. 8.10).

“A man full of talk be vindicated?”  (Job 11.2).

“I hope you will understand fully” (2 Corin. 1.3).

“With the best gifts of the earth and its fullness” (Deut. 33.16).
Real Judaism, real Christianity, therefore, is supposed to get not even primarily just mental or “spiritual” fruits or effects; but real, material results; including better agricultural products.  Including even more food … or even, literal “fruit.”  Eatable food we can physically eat.  (Cf. Jesus’ killing the olive tree; as dead wood?).

To be sure, then, when Jesus demands “fruits” from “prophets,” there will have been many – who cannot point to such results – who try to say that he means, just mental or spiritual results; Paul’s “fruits of the spirit.”  And yet however, we will have been finding here in our writings on the Science of God, that ultimately God demands real, physical, material results.  Including enough physical food to eat (James 2.14-26).  Including even, literally, “fruit.”  More real, literal “grapes,” and so forth.

While Jesus we will see, constantly was said to be working real material wonders, works; as his fruits.  No just or even primarily “spiritual” things – like creating “love” and “hope” and so forth.  But real material goods.  Including real “bread.”
“Taking the five loaves and the two fish and looking up to heaven, he gave thanks and broke the loaves….  They all ate and were satisfied, and the disciples picked up twelve basketsfull of broken pieces that were left over.  The number of those who ate was about five thousand men, besides women and children” (Mat. 14.19; 15.29-39; Mark 6.30-44, 8.1-21; cf. Luke 4.1-4).
As it turns out, all such “miracles,” such episodes, are open to many different readings.  But a millions sermons assured us in church, that Jesus was often – specifically here – miraculously giving us real, actualy, physical bread “loaves and fishes.”

No doubt there are parts of Jesus that seem to stress spirits.  But we might add, Jesus constantly warned about “false spirits,” going out of his way to exterminate them.  So that mere “spirits” are not necessarily entirely good; indeed, many are plainly evil (Mat. 8.16; 10.1; 12.28; Mark 1.23; 5.2; 6.7 etc.).  While finally John’s Jesus, said to lend his authority to Revelation  (Rev. 22.16), and perhaps to all of John’s writings, warns in 1 John 4.1 (1 John 1.4-5), that many false spirits can infect Christianity; that many might even appear we add to be the Holy Spirit.  So to find out whether a spirit really is from God, we must “Test the spirits to see whether they are from God, because many false prophets have gone out into the world” (1 John 4.1).

Thus, though Jesus in life mentions both a) physical but also b) spiritual things, in the end, we will see he ends up … promising primarily, very physical rewards.  Or else, he would have to be found a false Christ, in violation of, rebellion against, God.  Who definitely promised them.

To be sure, what happens here is the historical foundation of a  “religion”; a separated part of human endeavor devoted to priests, clerics, specializing in spirituality, as abstracted from, divorced from, the power of the earlier religious state.  Whose clerks had been not only spiritual, but also devoted to the practical needs of a kingdom.  The forming of a mere quasi-government, a “religion,” was necessitated particularly as the religious nation of Israel was continually overrun by one foreign empire after another (the Assyrians, Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Romans, Arabs, Turks, etc.), and could not put its religion into “power.”  Could not put its religion, its God, at the head of a state.  But as a “religion,” of clerks who only spoke of a powerless and even dead king, devoted only to imagining future power, or valorizing the imagination or spirit as almost an end in itself, the religion of Christianity, had the form of religion or better said, some of the sense of Judaism or a state religion … but lacking a sense of its physicality, they end up denying, lacking, the “power” of it.
[Footnote:  when “religion” as such appears, as a mere typical occupation, a specialization – the part of culture that devotes itself to the mind or “spirit,” or some would say to dreams – it gains in focus, it finds an occupational specialization; you can be a “priest,” and never deliver anything physical, but just talk about ideas, ideals, spirits.  But a “priest”hood and a “religion” is achieved at the cost of losing its sense of wide or “full” responsibility to practical administration; and thus loses its sense of how “power” is important, and is needed in daily life.  Finally, powerlessness and poverty, living just in thoughts and dreams and spirit, are at times even advocated.  Though of course, those Jews and Christians who failed to establish a religious state in Israel, and those who later failed to run their respective states around the world, looked forward to a “day” when at last, their religion returns to “power,” and runs a state.  Though a note of caution here:  those trained for generations as priests, in spiritual matters, are not really apprised of a full mind, a “full” spirit, that knows that it can and should take care of practical matters; and they simply do not know how to do it.  While indeed, their “religion” has become far too narrow, to deal with wide, “full” responsibilities, or “power.”  Thus, if they are given full authority or power, they do not know how to handle it; and their sense of God is far too narrow – being only priestly and spiritual, not “king”ly or practical – to effectively manage a kingdom.  Unless or until their “religion” is considerably broadened, and made more “full,” by the infusion of the wisdom of the Gentiles and “secular” persons; by much practical knowledge and science.

In the meantime to be sure, after some alleged material wonders, but also many material failures, Judaism lost power of a state or kingdom, and became a mere religion, by three gradual steps; from the very brief period of the 1) Davidic, kingdom Judaism of the David/Solomon Godly kingdom, to 2) Jesus, who reflected an expectation of a return to power, but who was killed, and then made a mere ideal; to 3) the disciples but especially Paul, who in the half of the New Testament that he wrote, all but completed the absolute spiritualization, priestification, Gnosticism of it all. 

Speaking of Jesus as a “priest,” after the tradition of Melchizidek, Paul began speaking at times as if a good, godly man did not have to deliver real material goods or fruits at all, but only spirits, sentiments, prayers, hopes and dreams.  The “fruits of the spirit” only.  But to be sure, we will be finding that a mere “religion,” that knows how to deliver only spirits, words, but not material results … is far too narrow; not “full” enough, to give us all we need to live.  As James noted, it is narrow, and neglectful (and even disdainful) of physical necessities, to the point of being literally, physically fatal (James 2.14 ff).  So that in effect, “religion” is the foretold evil creation, that leads us into trying to live just on thoughts, spirit, trying to fill our belly with the “east wind,” without food; on what are in effect, “false spirits,” “illusions,” “delusions,” “empty promises,” “lies,” “false promises,” “false prophe”sies, and so forth.  Mere words, sentiments, as opposed to deeds and material results.

Thus religion was created; drifting very far – even fatally far – from a responsible connection to the “world” and practical responsibility.  And it will take a science of God, to get the attention of mere religionists, clerics, to give them respect for the physical life that God after all made; and to widen their sense of what people need to live.  Enough that a cleric or priest or minister, might not be any longer a kind of idealistic half-wit, but a person with a “full”er mind and spirit.  Enough to … help join, take care of, both the spirit and body; heaven and earth, word and world.

Jesus himself they say, often called for and exercised real, physical power.  But when Jesus was physically executed, no real Jewish physical kingdom appeared, nothing but the quasi-kingdom of a church or a religion, a quasi- or “shadow” kingdom, relatively powerless within or under the real state governed by Rome.  At this point, with the dreams of real power defeated, their would-be pretender to the throne killed (possible illegitimate son of the king?), his followers would have to find employment elsewhere.  But they could not give up their emotional/ spiritual attachment to their former lord, and his ideas and ideals.  And rather than call him a material failure, they chose to call him, make him into, a successful projection (or “image”) of ideals. But by making Jesus into a mere ideal, abstracted from physical power, they made him into a mere “image,” a mere ideal, incapable of dealing with the “world.”  The “world” therefore, was demonized by the new “Christian” priests.  If priests could not get real results in the physical sphere, they blamed that not on themselves, and the narrowness of their knowledge, but on everybody else; the secular “world,” the physical earth or world.  (The formation of a Christian priesthood, which did not work physically in any obvious way, was probably the major controversy, around Paul; was one of the movements around him that was being criticized; Paul finally joining it however; beginning defend himself and mere spirituality constantly, by saying that he was “work”ing in some sense with his “hands,” when he wrote letters for example).

But become spiritual, becoming a mere “religion,” (q.v.); Christianity drifted away from God and a full picture of the good.  This drifting away from God’s materiality, could not be done abruptly and strongly or dramatically, without charges of heresy, abandoning God, being universally accepted. (Regarding “religion” see:  “this man’s religion is vain” James 1.26; “as befits women who profess religion” 1 Ti. 2.10).  But by the natural gradualism of time and history, all this was done gradually, by steps; first, after the a) very material Old Testament, came b)  the Gospels; with Jesus still promising a material state.  But Jesus himself did not write anything; and c) as Jesus was subsequently described by disciples, in the gospels after his death, the disciples wanted to legitimate his material failure; their Christ was equivocating between promising material things … but also beginning to entertain the idea that just giving people mental or dream- or spiritual “bread” was all anyone needed to do.

To be sure, the transition to spirituality, could not be totally made, without obviously crossing the very materialistic God of the Old Testament.  And so it was all done by equivocal (cf. “double”) language.  The Bible being written, translated into language, phrases, that can be read as promising either a) spiritual or b) spiritual things, only.  Depending on whether you took it a) literally, or b) as “figure” of speech.  In the case of Jesus, Jesus himself was depicted promising both a) real material bread and fishes, to physically eat; but then b) suggesting his own thought and body, were “bread indeed.”  Thus presenting, at one level of the text, the possibility that all the materiality of God could evaporate, and be taken as mere metaphor for spirituality.  God now was seen by priests often, as being not responsible for material things, the “world”; but giving only mental or spiritual things.

But we will have seen, thus our priests became lost in mere spirits, dreams, ideas, delusions, empty words; and lost the “power” and sense of it all.  Having – as even Paul worried – the empty “form of religion,”  (2 Tim. 3.5), but “Denying” or simply lacking, its power.  Have nothing to do with them.”

This equivocal line was open to many interpretations; but consider this meaning for a moment.  At the very least, it suggests people will be hypocrites, saying things in words, that they do not do in deeds.  But beyond that; claiming things in words (miracles?) they cannot do in deeds.  Thus, having a false, “vain” religion. 

To fix this, is not merely a matter of just, arbitrarily, putting “religious” priests into charge of government; that would be a disaster, since their sense of God is not full enough, to realistically and effectively deal with material life.  They think that the way bread appears, is by direct action of the spirit only:  one prays, and it appears out of thin air by “miracle.”  They have too little appreciation – and even systematic resistance and opposition to – the idea that our own material practical “work” is important.

Regarding Protestantism:  by 1515 or so, it seemed to many educated middle class persons, that Christianity, Catholicism, could not deliver miracles, and/or had a flawed sense of practical “work”s; that if we wanted material bread, we had to bake it ourselves.  That whatever “salvation” religion by now realistically delivered, it was not physical; that salvation being taken care of far more effectively, by practical farmers and the new, increasingly effective manufacturers.  Therefore, Christianity was simply false or inadequate in its material promises.  Though it seemed to do some good in para-psychological “spiritual” training; teaching us to quiet our passions, lusts, greed, anger and so forth.  So, rather than reject Christianity totally, it was simply cut off from any remaining pretensions of connection to material “works” totally; and was turned even more that in Paul, into a mere specialization in mental or spiritual things.  Material “works” were attacked as not even being any part of religion; but of our jobs.  Religion were not the business of religion anymore.  Instead, they were taken care of (and far more effectively) by a now-rigorously separate sphere:  the world of jobs and business. 

This rigorous separation of priests, religion, from practical works, had the effect of intensifying religion’s ability to deal with things of psychology and spirit, training youths to control their lusts and anger and so forth, and giving the old “hope.”  While freeing practical businessmen from magical ideas about physical reality, and enabling them to ho about their more practical work unhindered by “clericalism.”  Further cutting already-impractical priests off from material pretensions; and leaving them as however, somewhat effective specialists in spirituality, in a “faith,” a “religion.”  In “hope” and “love.”  To some extent, this was advisable due to huge material mistakes in believers.  But by thus simply putting a firm partition between “religion” and “practical life,” and “work,” religion was after all, further truncated, denatured, stripped of its body.  Half of religion was rejected:  its material promises, miracles.  And it was again, more than ever, following Paul – the Protestant saint – turned into a mere specialization in spiritual things only.  This worked, in that Protestants were no longer submitted to the already-vague and impossible and inefficient material sense of some religions, churches; pray-and-get-miracles.  Religion was left to do what it did best.  It was relegated to the part of life which it handled well enough.  While as for the practical side of life, it was taken care of far more efficiently, by our job, by businesses; unhindered by crude, physical, magical thinking.  But useful as this ever firmer partition was, between word and world, heaven and earth, spirit and matter, this new mind/body dualism haunted Descartes.  And split the existence of man in two.  So that finally, to heal this rift, we need a realistic materialism in religion/Christianity; or a unifying, spiritual/physical science of God.]   

Many people, all of society, simply split “life” into two spheres, the physical sphere best taken care of by practical persons and businessmen; while the spiritual or mental, which became the specialization of priests, religion.  But to be sure, this meant that the existence of man, was schizophrenically split between two entities, Heaven and Earth; God and Man; Word and World.  And neither half was sufficient in itself; which however the attempt to travel from one to the other, or for the two to work together somehow, was obscured and denied.   

And for Jesus himself, here?  On this issue?  Spirit or Matter?  Word or World?  Spirit or Flesh?  Spiritual “bread” or real material food?  Priests or Ordinary Working people?  Priest … or Carpenter and Fisherman and Healer?  To be sure, Jesus attempted, alluded to both.  And in fact, we now here more clearly see him, in our “second” glance at the Bible and Christ, as attempting their unity; Jesus being claiming to be “word made flesh,” God on Earth; as we will add soon.  And if his being was split by his followers – priests and common people alike being guilty of this, on the two different sides – finally, it is time to begin to rejoining them again, here and now.  Thus beginning after all, to “dissolve” a purely spiritual “heaven”; and to bring it down to mere with the Earth.  In part, by way of seeing , re-establishing the lost link, between religion and science.  Which alone can see and re-establish in turn, the lost link between heaven, and earth, word and world.  Bringing heaven down to earth again at last.  As foretold.

And this is accomplished in turn, in large part, here, by at last seeing, by way of a “second” look at the Bible and Christ … the scientific side or appearance, of Jesus. 

In the current division of life, there are religious vs. secular people; and what ordinary secular people lack is a sense of spirituality.  But on the other hand, many millions of over-religious, spiritual people, lack physical sense and practicality.  Each side of the split, has its strengths and inadequacies.  Each needs the other.  So let us learn to put them together, far more effectively.  And this is done by … seeing the “full”er scope of Jesus; his spiritual, but also his practical, side.  Furnishing not just spiritual “bread,” but also material things too. 

The apostle James we will see, was particularly concerned with helping this, in James 2.14 ff; regarding those spiritual people who give only kind words, but no literal food to starving people; thus leaving them starving.  Or even worse we will show, actively leading materially healthy people, to physical privation and death.  (As we see in our book on Over-Spirituality).

In the meantime, let’s try to re-establish Jesus, or the Christ, as seeking not just a mental or spiritual kingdom, but real physical things, too.  Like first of all, material “bread.”  But then of course, all the other material “wonders” and “prosperity” he also promised.


God’s Science Point #140

Other Physical Miracles:
Healing the Blind
(# 140)  Many preachers have taught or acted as if, Religion, Christianity, is supposed to get just mental or spiritual “fruits”; Paul’s “fruits of the spirit”; giving us “faith” and “spirit” and “hope.”  Yet in the Old Testament, God made it clear that the good people who followed him, were supposed to get real, physical results.  And now we add, in spite of Paul’s rather priestly spirituality, the New Testament Jesus himself, was constantly pictured as working real, material things.  If many no longer believe he was raising the physically dead, he was at least furnishing real physical things, like bread and so forth.  As it seemed.

Indeed, in our “second” glance at him here, Jesus is not found to be just a “spiritual” person. Actually, he is pictured as God made “flesh”; God taking material form, a human body, on this material earth.  Furthermore, he is pictured not as delivering merely spiritual goods, but real material wonders.  Or “acts” or “deeds of power”; which are sometimes called, translated as, “miracles.”  Healing real, literal, physical blindness and so forth.  Just as he was often pictured delivering real, actual, physical “bread” (above).

No doubt, some of the more miraculous seeming physical promises of Christianity – promises that we can walk on water and so forth – have been discredited in the minds of many, because of their seeming exaggerations:  promises of powers to make bread appear out of thin air, and move real actual “mountains” just by faith and a prayer, are widely disbelieved in our time, even (secretly) by most educated ministers.  So that in fact, many persons have simply decided, with some good reasons, to a) say that promises of miracles were just false; or b) miracles are better read as metaphors for spiritual things; or we might suggest c) miracles are better read as either false, or as metaphors for natural and technological things.  But in any case, the Bible promised these. 

And often note, they are quite material.  Though they are called “supernatural,” they are not just spiritual; but rather, real, physical, eatable bread often appears out of thin air and so forth.

To be sure, many people leave Christianity behind as false, in large part because it seems obvious to many, that its promises  – especially, promises of miracles –are simply, false.  While indeed, surprisingly, we will find that Jesus himself might seem to allow this (below).  But in any case, in miracles, the Bible  – and Jesus – firmly promised material things, once again.

Today, many with good reason, might not believe in miracles.  But let’s look at them to at least establish that Christianity originally made very, very material claims and promises of very, very, very physical things.

Many, many very, very physical miracles, are described and promised in the Bible; in very, very graphic detail.  So that there is no doubt that whatever the Bible may have promised in the way of “spiritual” things, it also promised us very, very, very material rewards.  But for that matter, many scholars today suggest that “miracles” are either just false, or can be re-interpreted as being garbled metaphors in effect, for obscure if wonderful, things in nature and technology.   While the Bible itself seems to allow that:  the Red Sea “parts” magically for Moses, in many priestly accounts; but in the Bible itself the “wind” blows the sea back.  While today we know that the wind can do such things in the Mediterranean (see the “aqua alta” – SP? – which causes floods in Venice, Italy; caused in part by winds, that can pile up the water ten feet or more).

Likewise, if you know enough about God’s material world, the miracles of Jesus can be seen as less supernatural, more natural, that priests thought.  Consider for example, the picture of Jesus healing not merely the “spiritual”ly “blind,” but apparently healing the really, literally, physically blind.  Often with some rather physician-like, hands-on actions.  Like putting a sort of “clay” paste or poultice or salve, in the eye of a blind person, and washing out the eye, to heal it:

“As he passed by, he saw a man blind from his birth…. ‘I am the light of the world.’  As he said this, he spat on the ground and made clay of the spittle and anointed the man’s eyes with the clay, saying to him, ‘Go, wash in the pool of Siloam (which means Sent).  So he went and washed and came back seeing” (John 9. 1, 6-7).

Many early medicines – and some medicines to this very day – are made out of various “earths,” natural materials from the earth, mixed with water.  (See also the “powder” in Numb. 5, added to water). 

So many might now reasonably not believe in “miracles”; and if various “works” like miracles are false, then indeed, we will add below, Jesus suggests that we don’t need to believe in Jesus any more.  However, perhaps we can see the old wonders as more natural or technological events; in which case, they seem more defensible.

Many might suggest such things should be taken as being strictly metaphors, for spiritual things.  And indeed, many parts of the Bible were offered, which offer metaphorical, spiritual equivalents.  As in Isaiah, above, where helping the “blind” to see, is really just a metaphor for helping those who do not understand things, at last understand.  And yet at the same time a) for centuries these were presented to us by priests, in large part, as promises of physical wonders.  While b) indeed the texts seem to offer both spiritual and physical things, physical bread and healing from blindness.  While furthermore, c) James reminds us that a religion that can give us only spiritual things, and cannot take effective care of the physical side of life, is literally, physically fatal.

In any case, in the Bible, Jesus often seems (in one reading clearly partially allowed by the text), to be performing some very, very, very physical actions; described in some detail in fact.  Washing his disciples feet for example.  And promising, beyond miracles, at least a normal physical “prosperity,” say.  Though Jesus seems to back away a bit from prosperity; valorizing the “poor.”

Still, the Bible offers one reading, clearly, that tells us that Christianity was never supposed to be just “spiritual,” and to deliver only spiritual or mental things; or for example, to cure only mental or spiritual “blind”ness, or cure just the inability of people to understand this or that doctrine.  

If a) the wording of the Bible also offers a spiritualization of this or that physical event, then to be sure, it consistently offered both a physical literal promise, and a spiritual one.  (Jesus’ “light”enment enables us to “see” or understand).  B) The fact is, Judaism and the Old Testament God, were always committed to very, very, very physical, material results.  C) To the extent that indeed, those who did not demonstrate such results, were to be rejected, and considered to be false prophets, false priests.  As we found in our writing on the Science of the Old Testament, too.

 But we also are now finding that, though the New Testament of Jesus seems at times to have wanted to distance itself from material promises, promises of miracles especially, still, it could not give up on physical results entirely without offending, obviously going against, the Old Testament God.  So that at worst or best, the New Testament presents phrases that can be taken either way; as promising either spiritual vision, or real material cures to physical blindness; or preferably, both. 

And f) if for a long time Religion, Christianity, did not deliver (or could not point to such real material results?  If Christians were physically killed, martyred for example, instead of experiencing the promised material “prosperity”?  Then after all, there are a number of conclusions about this.  There are many better ways of dealing with this, other than simply all but dropping the material side of life altogether. 

Though to be sure, the other ways of dealing with religious failure in the material sphere, are painful for religious people to contemplate.  One method, often accepted even in conventional Christianity, was to suggest that aa) if Christians have not always gotten their apparent material due, one “day” in particular, in the Second Coming, God is supposed to finally deliver them.  To deliver a real material “kingdom.”  Not just on earth, but coming down to be a real place, here on this material earth, as it seems (Rev. 21).  Less conventionally, more apocalyptically, we conclude that bb) those religious persons who experienced such material shortfalls, were not really Christians as they had thought; they were simply say, following a false, over-spiritual and therefore one-dimensional, idea of Christ. Though we might also combine these two thoughts here, to suggest cc) those who at last see the second vision of Jesus as a scientist, those who learn the science of God, will see the “full”er picture at last.  And thus armed with fuller knowledge at last, a second and better, “full”er appearance of God and truth, be able to get better material results at last.  Including a material kingdom.  Once they know how to work effectively to make it happen.

To begin to see this physical side of Christ, we need of course, first, to note the physical side of Jesus; his material wonders, or better, the “prosperity” he promised. 

Next, to further at last, in our second glance at the Bible, “see” God and Jesus’ demand for real material “fruit”s, let’s note Jesus next, also demanding real material “signs” from all would-be holy men.  Signs in effect being related to material wonders; wonders being in effect, “signs” that one is from God.  Though let us now pursue the same Christ, though under this “different” rubric:  “signs.”  Just to begin to put the parts together.


God’s Science Point #141



(# 141)  In the Old Testament, many various persons (Dan. 1.14-15 KJE, Elijah in 1 Kings 18.20-39, etc.) had insisted that any would-be holy men, have to prove that they were really from God.  By demonstrating, producing, “fruits.”  Or as they also said, great material “signs.”  Which in effect said essentially the same thing as promising “wonders” or “fruits”; just using slightly different terms.  Since in effect, producing wonders and fruits, were a “sign” that one had real material powers; and therefore, really was from God.

To be sure, Christianity at times had trouble proving that it could work material miracles, or deliver on all its promises.  And therefore, our priests began to try to back away from the earlier material promises.  To do this, among dozens of other methods of backing away from the material side of God, preachers today often tell us that Jesus specifically and explicitly, did not think we should demand “signs” from holy men.  And in fact there are parts of the New Testament, that seem to have been written, translated, in such a way as to at least allow – in one of two possible readings of the passage – to indicate that indeed, “signs” were no longer required of holy men.  In particular, preachers today like to use the (very equivocal) passage where Jesus seems, in one interpretation, to have called those who asked for signs, an “evil generation”; and when Jesus next, at first, appears to tell us that often no “signs” would be given such as they: 
“Teacher, we wish to see a sign from you” (Mat. 12.38).

“An evil and adulterous generation seeks for a sign, but no sign shall be given to it” (Mat. 12.39).
This part of the Bible by itself, to be sure, seems at first, to indeed allow the conclusion, that here a godly person might simply chose not to give signs.  But God warned us that our holiest men would often be false; and specifically even Paul told us that holy men like himself, often saw only “part” of the truth, and of God.    So why don’t we look on past this, and try to see what the rest of the passage tells us; to try to get the larger picture, the reality  of it all.  And here we find that as a matter of fact, all our preachers, as usual, are being dishonest, or too narrow; they left out the next part of the passage … where Jesus agrees finally, to produce a real material sign, it is said; the sign of Jonah, of his own resurrection:
“No sign shall be given to it except the sign of the prophet Jonah” (Mat. 12.39).

This is often understood to be referring to his resurrection; so it seems that a) here Jesus relents … and promises a sign.  His resurrection.  A wonder that is consistent with, seems to further, more ancient promises.  As the possibility that one might be interred for three days, and yet still come out alive.  Like Jonah in the belly of a whale; or Jesus dead three days.

Furthermore, b) though to be sure it is curious that Jesus here says that only one sign will be given to this generation; the rest of the Bible pictures him as working dozens of huge wonders, signs.  While of course, c) the Old Testament God even orders us to ask for signs.

And so, when preachers read this passage as speaking very firmly or unequivocally against the need for signs, as is typical of preachers (as noted by Paul), they are being dishonest or inadequate; and as Paul anticipated, the specific form that their dishonesty takes here, is that they have quoted mere misleading “parts” of the Bible and God. Typically, they quote the part of Jesus, where he tells us that he will not show many any “sign”; but then our preachers do not tell us about the other part of the story.  In this case for example, if Jesus seemed at first to be telling us that often “signs” are not given; especially to an “Evil generation,” note now however, what Jesus said next:  that aa) at least one great sign was given to even to them.  Even to an evil generation. 

Even an “evil generation” is given a sign; the sign of … a literal, physical resurrection. Jesus returning to physical life after being buried three days in the darkness of the earth, as Jonah was buried in the belly of a whale.  This sign of “Jonah,” is usually interpreted by preachers to be a reference to the physical wonder of Jesus’ own resurrection; Jesus coming up out of the grave after three days; rather as Jonah was three days in the belly of the whale, to be vomited up on earth again finally.  

Indeed though, it is curious that Jesus here should say that only one “sign” would be given his “generation”; since Jesus was pictured working dozens of physical miracles.  Which surely would be a “sign” of his significant powers, if true.

By way of a slight amendment or qualification to our thesis by the way:  in any case, to be sure, cc) just producing signs is necessary, but not in itself, entirely sufficient, to be declared good.  Since there are false prophets who produce signs, wonders  (Mat. 24.24).  Yet still, though producing signs is not sufficient by itself to be ruled good, it is one minimum requirement that must be met.  Though those who produce signs might be good or bad, those who do not even produce any such signs at all, can be ruled out as being good, right from the start.  That is, showing signs is not all a great man must produce, but it is a necessary part of the minimum of what he must do. 

Specifically, Jesus himself, as we are at last seeing him here, constantly reaffirmed that all good men, to prove they are really from God, must get real material results.  Including especially, signs.  All alleged “prophets” are required to show not even primarily just mental or “spiritual” effects; since spirits, thoughts, can be mere, even deadly “delusions,” “illusions” etc..  But more than that, Jesus said they must demonstrate strong material results. Including “fruits.”  But for that matter – as the Bible adds in a massive number of references – specifically, they must produce “signs”:
“These signs will accompany those who believe” (Mark 16.17).

“Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe” (John 4.48).

“This was now the second sign that Jesus did” (John 4.54).

“Because they saw the signs which he did” (John 6.2).

“The people saw the sign which he had done” (John 6.14).
Jesus is pictured in the Bible as working physical material wonders, miracles (see below) – or here, “signs” – over and over.  Jesus working signs, wonders, indeed, is the most salient or striking feature of the gospels. 

Furthermore, as it turns out, though parts of the New Testament seem to have been written by the apostles and scribes, to allow a reading that denigrates such things, though part of it was written in such a way as to leave spiritual priests a reading that would suggest that Jesus deplored those who asked to material signs from priest, finally we will see, Jesus spoke of his signs as the main way people gain confidence or faith in him.  So that ultimately, even “faith” is based on some material evidence; signs.


God’s Science Point #142

Signs and Faith
(# 142)  Countless preachers’ sermons focus on one single moment in, one tiny part of, the many things Jesus said on signs.  A moment in the non-synoptic gospel of John.  A moment that to be sure, can be read – as it is in fact, endlessly read today in churches – as suggesting that Jesus deplored people asking priests, holy men, for physical evidence, signs.  Here is the part of the Bible, preachers like to quote over and over, when people ask the preacher for a sign he himself is from God:
“Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe” (John 4.48).
This passage has been continually presented in churches all over the world by preachers, as suggesting that Jesus was tired of being asked for signs; that he was here putting down those who asked for them, because they did not have “faith.”  That the people were impiously asking for material proofs, instead of following faithfully, is the moral drawn from this passage, by millions of preachers’ sermons.  But of course, we are finding here that the Bible overall did not say that.  So that this all-too-common,  priestly, spiritual, faith-filled reading, though provisionally available, was not the best or final reading indicated by the Bible overall. 

A million sermons have claimed that Jesus is complaining here, that people wants signs, proofs; and therefore, they are not following “faith.”  Faith it is suggested, does not demand proofs.  But note that we have devoted an entire section or two of this book, to showing that this type of interpretation cannot stand.  First, because a) God himself often told us to even “ask a sign.”  As God said not just here, but in a thousand other parts of the holy book.  Then too, b) the Bible noted many limitations on faith.  While then too c) the anti-sign theology cannot stand, even from just a look at just this passage itself. Because  according to many, Jesus next in fact, promises a sign – his resurrection – to others.  While d) now we add especially, that the wording of this passage, strictly speaking, does not make it clear that Jesus is complaining here, about being asked for signs.  He merely comments that people are asking.  And indeed in a way, affirms again here – as in many other places – that people would not – and should not – follow, be convinced, without proofs, signs, fruits, deeds (cf.?).  Indeed note:  Jesus here affirms our primary thesis:  that belief, faith, is to come only after proof, evidence, signs:  “unless you see signs, you will not believe” or have faith.

While we might also note that as usual, our misleading preachers quoted a misleading part of the text; and did not tell us the rest of the story, the “full”er story.  In this case, note that right after Jesus says “unless you see signs, “ he himself goes on to produce a sign.  To help people believe:
“When the man heard that Jesus had arrived in Galilee from Judea, he went to him and begged him to come and heal his son, who was close to death.  ‘Unless you see miraculous signs and wonders, Jesus told him, ‘You will never believe.’  The royal official said, ‘Sir, come down or my child dies.’ Jesus replied, ‘You may go.  Your son will live.”  The man took Jesus at his word and departed.  When he was still on the way, his servants met him with the news that his body was living….  This was the second miraculous sign that Jesus performed, having come from Judea to Galilee” (John 4.48-54 NIV). 
Preachers who rightly question “miracles” often use this passage, to suggest that Jesus let them off the hook, and was weary and dismissive of requests for miracles, or signs, to prove they were from God.  But strictly speaking, note, there is no indication in this specific text, that Jesus was weary of such requests, or that he rejected them.  Indeed note, when asked, Jesus simply performs the wonder, as promised.  While the rest of the text does not in an way, denigrate or minimize this “sign.”  Which indeed, the text calls a wonder or “miraculous.”



Again, the many bad preachers, who cannot point to material results, still will try to claim that Jesus finally called for faith without evidence, signs.  Among the texts they like to cite, are the ones where Jesus noted that he has worked many physical miracles, “signs,” … and yet still, many people did not “believe.”  From such examples, preachers have often concluded, that Jesus means that a) all the evidence and proof in the world is not enough for some people; and that b) therefore, the conclusion must be that evidence is no good; that c) faith is the answer.  We d) must even totally forget about material evidence, and just belief, without any material proofs at all for what we are asked to accept.

But consider the key examples preachers use, here; the moments when Jesus did note that to be sure, Jesus had often worked many signs; but still others do not believe him, in spite of his reputed miracles or proofs.  To be sure, there were such moments:
“Although he had performed so many signs in their presence, they did not believe in him….  ‘He has blinded their eyes’” (John 12.37, 40 from Isa. 6.10).

“So they asked him, ‘What miraculous sign will you give that we may see it and believe you…?  You have seen me and yet do not believe” (John 6.36).

“Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe” (John 4.48).
e) Consider the last quote especially:  “unless you see signs and wonders, you will not believe.”  Here, our preachers assure us, that Jesus meant to despair that we are so materialistic, and unfaithful, as to demand material proofs before we believe.  But aa) technically, this text merely says that people will not believe unless they see signs; it does not say this is good or bad.  Indeed in fact, Jesus could not have objected too much to being asked to deliver signs … since right after this request, he is said to have furnished such a sign; healing a man’s sick son.  Jesus therefore complied with the request to furnish signs.  Suggesting that the request for evidence, after all, was not evil.  Since Jesus himself complied with it.

The wording here to be sure, is very slightly ambiguous; it could be taken as one of two exactly opposite readings.  Most preachers try to say that bb) here, Jesus is bemoaning the fact that people will not believe without signs.  But we note, it could also mean the exactly opposite of that:  Jesus is noting – approvingly; or with acceptance – that people need signs, before they believe. 

So which of these two, is the right reading?  Note the context:  right after saying this, Jesus is said to have duly performed a wonder; healing a sick son (John 4.48-54): 
“When he came to Galilee, the Galileans welcomed him, having seen all that he had done in Jerusalem at the feast” (John 4.45).

“And at Capurnum there was an official whose son was ill.  When he heard that Jesus had come from Judea to Galilee, he went and begged him to come down and heal his son, for he was at the point of death.  Jesus therefore said to him, ‘Unless you see signs and wonders you will not believe.’  The official said to him, ‘Sir, come down before my child dies.’  Jesus said to him, ‘Go; your son will live.’  The man believed the word that Jesus spoke to him and went his way.  As he was going down, his servants met him and told him that his son was living….  And he himself believed, and all his household.  This was now the second sign that Jesus did when he had come from Judea to Galilee.” 

The Bible clearly is at pains to produce evidence, “signs,” and even to carefully enumerate and document them.  And if the man believes first the “words” of Jesus, it is no doubt because the reputation of Jesus – citing real material cures – preceded that word (as we know from John 4.45, above).  Indeed, why would a man beg Jesus to heal his son … unless he had heard of many actual cures by him?  Which is to say, heard of real empirical results, previously?  Then too note that the father’s “belie”f is strengthened, redoubled it seems – and that of his household begins – only on carefully uncovering (the times’ idea of) real material proofs.

Again and again, material evidence is offered; “signs” carefully documented and enumerated.  Why would so many wonders, signs, have been presented to us in the Bible … if God did not want us to believe him because of signs?  If signs were unimportant?  Is the Bible full of unimportant things?

While finally, note, this account is in the Gospel, of John – while the gospel of John ends with John noting he had presented much evidence … “In order that you may believe” (John 19.35; ‘That you also may believe.”  Witness however not to the resurrection, but to the dead body; or that the dead body disappeared, John 20.8).

Therefore once again – strikingly, amazingly; even in the ambiguous passage – still, the same pattern holds:  that whenever Jesus begins to call for faith, this was never a call to the pure faith, based on little or no material evidence, that Paulists often seemed to have asked for.  Or that preachers inevitably do ask for.  Again and again, actually, Jesus only asks us to believe, to have faith … only after he tells us, and provides an opportunity, to gather at least reports of empirical evidence of his powers, first.

It is clear therefore, that most of the Bible did not think of belief, faith, as something that is total; something we must come to without any assistance from empirical evidence whatsoever.  Normally in fact, the Bible assumes that we will come to belief, only after seeing significant physical evidence for what we believe.  Like Doubting Thomas.

While moreover, here once again in yet another example, Jesus affirms that people are not expected to believe, unless or until they see some physical evidence.  Though to be sure, other parts of the New Testament hint that we should have faith without evidence, finally we will find, no part of the Bible can really firmly say that … without firmly going against the God of the Old Testament, and against many other parts of the New Testament too. And right after blessing those, John notes that such miracles, “are written that you may believe” (John 20.31).
“Now Thomas … said to them, ‘Unless I see the nail marks in his hands and put my finer where the nails were, and put my hand into his side, I will not believe it…’.  Then he said to Thomas, ‘Put your finger here; see my hands. Reach out your hand and put it into my side, Stop doubting and believe.’ … Because you have seen me, you have believed; blessed are those who had not seen and yet have believed.’  Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book.  But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God” (John 20.24, 25, 27-31 NIV).
Eventually to be sure, Jesus notes that he had worked many signs and yet people still don’t believe; and so he begins to ask for some faith; but only as much as a mustard seed.  And only after having produced material evidence.  So that finally, we will show here, this is the real pattern or meaning for calls to faith; God asks for faith, as we will see here, only after having already worked, they say, many visible wonders and signs already.  So that the predominant pattern in the Bible, regarding “faith,” is … signs and evidence first; then confidence, faith.  If an individual believes before seeing a miracle himself, still Jesus’ reputation for miracles, has preceded him.

And by the way, did the Church disapprove of Thomas?  Who doubted, and asked for evidence?  It could not have disapproved of him too much; since it made him a saint.
Thus the way is open for all of us, to become Doubting Thomases.  To not believe or have faith in any alleged holy man, not even in Jesus himself; unless or until we see or hear reliable material evidence of his ability.

Furthermore, the standards for such evidence are much higher today, than in the past.  Today, with the advance of science, even words in the Bible alleging past wonders, cannot be fully confirmed, unless or until … we see holy men today, working, replicating, similar results.  (Since there can be problems even with “scriptures,” the Bible itself said; due to the “false pen of scribes” and so forth.  See our writing on “scripture”).

Here to be sure, we try to honor every word of the Bible.  But if so then note that among the many words, are the words “test everything,” even priests, with “science.”
Many priests assert that Jesus above, in the incident with Thomas, “blessed” those who had not seen his resurrection, but still believed; John has Jesus saying “blessed are those who have not seen” the specific evidence, of the resurrected Jesus walking and talking; (the story of Thomas, also in John; John 20.29), but who believe.  Here though note that being “blessed” in the Bible and today, does not necessarily mean approval.  Today we bless people who sneeze; not to give approval to their sneeze, but to hope they will be better blessed in the future.  In the Bible even evil people are blessed for that reason; not to approve their deeds or lack of them, but to hope they will be better in the future. (1 Corin. 4.12; Rom. 12.14:  “bless those who persecute you”; though perhaps “you” faithful need to be persecuted to be sure).  “Live in harmony with one another; be sympathetic, love as brothers, be compassionate and humble.  Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult, but with blessing” (1 Peter 3.8-9).

We will see that parts of the bible seemed vaguely, to some interpretations,  to suggest that Jesus said that holy men did not have to get real material signs. Finally though we will show that Jesus firmly promised real material proofs.  And not just in his own lifetime, but in our time too; “whosoever” asks; and “whatever,” and therefore wherever, we “ask.”   Real material results are to be produced on demand, essentially, or in scientific experiments we will find.   While rather that continuing to follow those who do not produce them, Jesus and God, firmly, finally told us that if our holy men and preachers and priests, who do not get them, then far from listening to their excuses or apologetics, finally we are simply supposed to declare them to be, simply the foretold false prophets, false priests, following a false idea of Christ; a false Christ. 

And if by this standard, we find that the whole earth has followed false priests?  Or a false idea of Christ?   Then after all, one “day,” God is supposed to reveal to us precisely that; that the whole earth has been following a false idea of Christ, after all (Rev. 13, etc.). 

Asking for physical “signs” from holy men, is important therefore.  Said not only God, but also Jesus.  Here Jesus cannot say otherwise, without going against the God who after all, even commanded us to “ask a sign” (in the incident with Ahaz, etc.).

Jesus could not give up on signs as strongly as priests do; not without crossing God.


God’s Science Point #143

“Deeds,” Things we “Did”
Are Important Proof of our Fidelity to God


(# 143)  Until today, this very day, our priests and ministers have insisted that the core of Christ, is “faith”; and that we are to be found good or bad, according to that; according to how much “faith” we have.  But suddenly, it is time to reveal another, totally different view of God and truth.  The fact is, God and Jesus over and over told us that our holiest men often sinned and erred; and therefore, we should not entirely have faith in them; but as Jesus told us, we should evaluate them as good religious leaders, or false ones; by visually “observe”ing their “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “proofs.”  And now we add, “deeds.”  Jesus note, was often said to have worked “deeds,” meaning physical wonders.  In light of that, read the following:

“What good deed must I do….  ‘If you would be perfect, go, sell what you possess and give to the poor…’” (Mat. 19.16,21).

“The wonderful things that he did” (Mat. 21.15).

“If you ask anything in my name, I will do it” (John 14.14).

“Now Jesus did many other signs” (John 20.30).
And in the end (q.v.), we are judged not just by what we thought or faith we felt, but by what we have said and “done.”

While Jesus cites his own deeds (in this case wonders, “deeds of power,” miracles), as proof that he himself is good:
“ ‘Then he began to reproach the cities in which most of his deeds of power had been done, because they did not repent.  ‘Woe to you, Chorazin!  Woe to you, Bethsaida!  For if the deeds of power [works] done in you have been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago…’” (Mat. 11.20-21 NRSV).


God’s Science Point #144

(# 144)  Christ’s emphasis on real material deeds, fruits, signs, continues on and on, in one major Biblical theme after another.  And into minor themes too.  It is phrased dozens of ways, in many specific demands.  As the demand for example, for “proofs.”  This was one word used by the Old Testament; to note that all prophets must show real material deeds, wonders, to “prove” themselves (q.v.).  And this language is continued too, by Jesus.  Jesus often noting that those who said they were good, should show material “Proofs”: 
“For a proof to the people” (Mat. 8.4; Luke 5.14).

“Presented himself alive … by many proofs” (Acts 1.3; cf. ressurection).

Here Jesus once again affirms the core demand of the God of the Old Testament, that those who claim they are from God, must prove it by producing real material results.  Or this in this case, “proof”s:
“Bring your proofs, says the King of Jacob” (Isa. 41.21).

“Prove yourself by working a miracle” (Ex. 7.9).
No doubt to be sure, by this standard, essentially all our priests and ministers, every one, will be found lacking, false.  Few if any ministers can really work, specifically, “miracles” on demand today.  So it is easy to see why preachers do not want this standard to be discovered or popularized; by this standard, all preachers are proven at least partially false.  However, rather than disguise their inadequacies, our priests need to at last be honest, and acknowledge this failure.  And therefore, their own humble inadequacy.

And if probably every single preacher on earth will fail this test, still, to be regarded as partially good – if not ever absolutely holy or sacred – henceforth, a man of God should be able to show, demonstrate, at least some kind of material prosperity, created out of his work.  That would be enough to let him qualify as not say, a satanic false deceiver preacher; but merely, call him, a marginally acceptable one.  But a preacher we will find, must know much science, to even see and point to his material success.

Over and over again in any case, Jesus reaffirmed God’s Old Testament message in many different ways, using many different terms.  In our second look at Jesus, we find that he affirms again and again, that holy men should be regarded as really from God, only if they produce real, timely, physical results, verifiable by real science, here on this material earth.  This appearance to Christ, is reaffirmed again and again, in many different key terms throughout the entire Bible itself; including the vast Biblical literature on specifically “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds.”  And now we add, in references to “proofs.”

All these concepts, are elements of science, of the Science of God.  Which, like all sciences, works primarily from observing (ultimately) visible material evidence.  And demanding real empirical “proof” of something, before believing it.  While we will be seeing here that this indeed is the usual pattern throughout the Bible:  to ask for or see real empirical proofs, evidence, before believing.  Even Doubting Thomas it is claimed or hinted (q.v.), sees the resurrected Christ, before he believes.  While if Jesus seems to “bless” those who have not seen but believe, to be “blessed” does not mean to be approved of.  While the text concludes that after all, the many material wonders narrated in the text, are citied in the Bible, “so that you may believe.”  So that the text explicitly says that material evidence is given, before we believe.
God’s Science Point #145

“Observe” Things in Nature,
With Your Literal Eyes
(# 145)  Spiritual preachers often suggest that they don’t need to get physical results; that they should only be required to get spiritual results.  Which they say, is supported not only by the Bible’s support for “spiritual” things, but also by its attention to “invisible” results.  But a) we will have noted problems with spirituality; especially, “false spirits” and “delusions,” and so forth.  While in addition, we now add that b) the Bible notes even the things that are invisible, are known through the visible material things, that they invisible things effect  (Rom. 1.20).  We know spirit is real, by the visible material things that it moves.  As our (until recently) invisible mind or spirit, causes our visible hand to move.  Or as even the very spiritual Paul said, in Romans:
“For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities – his eternal power and divine nature – have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made” (Rom. 1.20 NIV).
This is in part, like the book of Job, partially an allusion to an Argument for God, from Design; that surely from the greatness of creation, we can deduce that there was a great force – a great God many say – behind it all.  But it also could mean that we know that invisible spirits or forces (like magnetism) are real, not by seeing them directly, but by the material things they move.  So that even “invisible” things, should be manifested by visible evidence.

At times, c) preachers will act as if they want to put out our literal, physical “eyes” (“if your eye offends you, pluck it out”).  Because they do not want us to value what we see with them; but only with our “spiritual” eyes.  But that is not what we see in the second look at Christ; where suddenly we now see that Jesus values not just our inner spiritual vision, but also, often … our literal “eyes.”  First, that is clear in that Christ heals physically blind people; heals their eyes.  Clearly implying that Jesus thought that physical blindness was bad.  And that being able to physically see, was good. That their eyes were valuable.  As we see in countless examples, like this one:
“And as Jesus passed on from there, two blind men followed him, crying aloud….  And their eyes were opened.  And Jesus sternly charged them, ‘See that no one knows it.’  But they went away and spread his fame through all that district” (Mat. 9.27, 30-31; also 20.30-34; Mark 8.23 ff; John 9.6, 11.37).

“Who from the beginning were eyewitnesses” (Luke 1.2).
Jesus often also observed nature, and things in life, clearly, with it seems clear, his eyes.  Which is part of science.

While indeed, we now see that Jesus finally not only obviously observed things around him with his eyes; he ultimately told us explicitly to “observe” nature too:
“Consider the ravens” (Luke 12.24; “observe” in some other translations?).
[At times, to be sure, Jesus told us that if our “eyes” offend us, we should “pluck them out.”  But the meaning of this is obscure.  Most of the time, Jesus seemed to think that physical blindness was bad.  Perhaps by the “pluck” remark, he meant that nothing that is visible, is really offensive.  In any case, it seems unlikely that any serious, real holy man would thus maim peoples’ eyes, maim or “mutilate” the “flesh” as other parts of the Bible condemned; rather than healing them.  It would be curious indeed, if the Christ – who is supposed to heal the blind – should instead be pictured convincingly as the very opposite of that:  causing physical blindness, by urging people to pluck out their eyes.  Though the Christ of many priests,  seems to do precisely that.  Suggesting that they are simply, following a false idea of Christ; a false Christ.  And would be better advised to at last see, our second appearance of Christ.]
In parts of the Bible, it suggests that the normal process of believing, is being offered physical proofs, evidence, signs … and only after that, being required to believe:
“And he saw and believed” (John 20.8; believed, in the empty tomb).

“Have you believed because you have seen me?” (John 20.29).
While those who have seen evidence with their eyes, are commanded by Jesus to tell others:
“When John heard in prison what the Messiah [or ‘John having heard in the prison the works of the Christ’ in other interpretations] was doing, he sent word by his disciples and said to him, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?’  Jesus answered them, ‘Go and tell John what you hear and see:  the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them’” (Mat. 11.2-6 NRSV).


God’s Science Point #146

(# 146)  There are dozens of ways that Jesus stressed the importance of observing visible material results. Among those dozens of ways, was in a complicated and controversial literature or theme, on the importance of visible “works.”  Paul and others to be sure, were sometimes to come to appear to attack some specific works – like the necessity of physical circumcision, we will have found here.  But finally God – and now, our second vision of Jesus – affirms that we are evaluated by God, finally, not just by what we thought in our heart or spirit, but just as much, by our physical “works.” 

Most translations of the Bible, have Jesus working many “wonders” or “works”; and most offer them in fact, as proof that Jesus was a man of great abilities, worthy of being followed.
“Let your light shine before others, so that they may see your good works and give glory to your Father” (Mat. 5.16?  Note double meanings:  is our “light” our only “work” … or is it the light that illuminates our physical works?).

“Where did he get his wisdom and these deeds of power” (Mat. 14.54 NRSV).

“The whole multitude of the disciples began to praise God joyfully with a loud voice for all the deeds of power that they had seen, saying, ‘Blessed is the king who comes in the name of the Lord!’” (Luke 19.37-8 NRSV).
And of course, especially?  The New Testament is full of accounts of apparently physical miracles, from Jesus (q.v. above).
God’s Science Point #147

Verify Who is Good, Who is From God –
By Their “Works”
(# 147)  Indeed, John’s Jesus confirms that we are to know who is from God and who is not, who has the “authority” to be followed and who does not, by the “works” he does:
“When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘My son, your sins are forgiven….  But so that you may know the Son of Man [part of Jesus’ second manifestation?] has authority on earth to forgive sins’ – he said to the paralytic – ‘I say to you, stand up, take your mat and go to your home.’  And he stood up, and immediately took the mat and went out before all of them; so that they were all amazed and glorified God.…'”  (Mark 2.5,10-12 NRSV).

“He will show greater works than these” (John 5.20).

“I have testimony greater than John’s.  The very works that I am doing, testify on my behalf that the Father has sent me” (John 5.36 NRSV).

“We must work the works” (then heals the blind; John 9.4 NRSV).

“Very truly, I tell you, the one who believes in me will also do the works that I do and, in fact, will do greater woks than these” (John 14.12).

To be sure, parts of the New Testament might be seen as a question or even attack on Jesus’ works (Mat. 6.16, 7.22, 11.2, 11.2 ff., 13.54, 22.3-5?  Mark 6.2-14).  But finally, many accept that Jesus did many works.  And Christ even chastises those who see works from him, but still do not believe in him:
“ ‘Then he began to reproach the cities in which most of his deeds of power had been done, because they did not repent.  ‘Woe to you, Chorazin!  Woe to you, Bethsaida!  For if the deeds of power [works] done in you have been done in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago…’” (Mat. 11.20-21 NRSV).
In fact, Jesus’ stress on “work”s is so strong that amazingly, finally, Jesus told us to follow him, only if he and his followers produce real material, physical “works” and wonders.  Christ finally tells us that his own source of authority, the reason to follow him, is not faith.  But instead, we should follow him only if he and his followers produce physical wonders, works.

For centuries, our preachers have excerpted misleading parts of the Bible, to give us all, give the world, a Jesus, a Christ, that seemed to stress very strong, all-but-blind faith in preachers, holy men, and their view of God.  But here and now, we reveal a “second” and better, “full”er view of God and Christ; one who explicitly warned against much faith.

And amazingly, finally in fact – and exactly contrary to what our preachers told us in every church – we might close with an incredible and for many unbelievable moment.  We might close with a moment where Jesus himself firmly tells not to have faith even in Jesus himself:  “Do not believe me” says Jesus.  Do not have faith in Jesus.  Not unless or until he and his followers, produce all the works the Bible promised:
“ ‘Do you say of him whom the Father consecrated and sent into the world, ‘You are blaspheming,’ because I said, ‘I am the Son of God’?  If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father” (John 10.37-38 RSV).
Here, amazingly, incredibly, and exactly contrary to what the whole world heard from its preachers in sermon after sermon, we hear Jesus telling us not to have faith in him; “do not believe,” says Jesus. Do not have great faith.   But instead, believe in Jesus himself, only insofar as he and his followers produce solid, proven evidence that following them results in physical prosperity; “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” and “proof”s. As evaluated by real “science”; and “observ”ing what “comes to pass” in a timely way, “soon,” “at hand,” in front of reliable “witness”es, here, on this material, physical “earth.”

Incredibly in fact, here we begin to see a new Jesus; a Jesus who did not even want to say he was the foretold “Christ,” and would normally not “plainly” say that he was; a Jesus who does not want us to just faithfully follow even he himself:  “Do not believe” says Jesus.  Instead, Jesus left it to his works, his historical legacy, future fruits, “works,” to speak for him, to answer the question of whether he was actually the foretold messiah or Christ, or not:
“If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works” (John 10.37-38 RSV).
“ ‘How long will you keep us in suspense?  If you are the Christ, tell us plainly.’  Jesus answered them, ‘I told you, and you do not believe.  The works that I do in my Father’s name, they bear witness to me’” (John 10.24-5 RSV; 14.11-12).
Amazingly, the Bible told us repeatedly, that we should not even begin to consider anyone as “authority,” until or unless they bring us real, timely, physical wonders, prosperity.  Or indeed Jesus himself finally told us, don’t believe even in Jesus; but believe in works.  Believe in things well proven, by material, timely, physical results, prosperity produced, here, on this material earth.

The New Testament is often open to more than one reading; especially, almost the entire New Testament equivocates between the Old Testament idea of a religion that delivers material goods, and a New Testament/oriental ascetic/Gnostic religion, that promises only spiritual things.  But finally, those who wrote or edited our Bibles knew that the New Testament of Jesus, must always be systematically open to the reading that allows, demands, a science of God, a materially-productive religion; or else the New Testament would have gone too far away from the Old Testament, and God; the New Testament would be guilty of disobeying God.  And so, though the above, final passages by Jesus himself, are open to more than one reading, finally – to avoid charges of heresy or going against God – those who summarize the meaning of the above in sermons, must present the reading that has the above passage, stressing not “faith” at all; but that has Jesus himself deferring to the authority, the evidence or “witness,” of physical works, deeds, proofs.  To the point that, incredibly, Jesus even allows us not to believe in Jesus himself; but only in things that provably work; that get physical results.  First Jesus tells us here that a) we should not believe even Jesus himself, if he does not deliver real material works:
“If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me” (John 10.37 RSV).

Then, amazingly, next, the text goes even further.  Next:   b) Jesus even seems to allow that he might be said to have done works, and yet we are still not required to believe in him.  Rather, instead, we should simply believe, have confidence, in whatever works:

“If I am not doing the works of my Father, then do not believe me; but if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works” (John 10.37-38 RSV).

Amazingly therefore, in the end it is not even certain that we are to believe even in Jesus himself.  Or, if we are to “believe” in Jesus at all, in the above, we are to believe in him, only insofar as following him produces physical results.  Finally, keeping in the mind that the Old Testament god firmly endorsed only those holy men that get real physical results, here Jesus himself had to reaffirm that, or be accused of going against God; Jesus here uttering a statement that, however else it might be taken, also had to be open to the main theme of the Bible and God:  that “authority” comes from … a record of proven physical results.  Or as Jesus says here, “works.”  

The Old Testament had noted over and over again, that there were always many false things, throughout religion; even among Christians, and those who followed “Christ” or the “Lord”; and therefore, God had warned, constantly, in the Old Testament, that far from following holy men – even a Christ – with total faith and loyalty, instead, we are supposed to examine each and every holy man and priest and minister, every alleged man of God; and we should not ever confirm them as being good or from God, unless they deliver real, physical results, prosperity, in a timely way.   God said this over and over in the Old Testament; and since even the rather spiritual New Testament claimed to follow “God,” then ultimately, even the New Testament must, in at least one reading, give in to that; to God’s materialism. 

And does Jesus himself endorse science?  Though Jesus himself does not here mention “science” by name, Jesus in effect alludes to science; in that Jesus tells us to “observe” physical wonders, “works,” “signs,” deeds, “proofs”; and finally to follow even Jesus himself, only if following him gets real, material, physical results.  Or as he says in t his particular instance, “works.”   While finally, since science is the best, most refined way to access material results – and since science is advocated by name, and by full description, by God (in passages like Dan. 1.4-15 KJE) – finally, Jesus himself also had to speak in a way that, among other readings,  endorsed, in effect, science.  Or, if you prefer, our Fuller Science of God.

The original, Old Testament, had been firmly based on the core idea that if we obey the Lord (cf. the Lord of Heaven, and the local land “lord”), then we would get physical prosperity.  To be sure, it seems clear that by the time of Jesus, elements of that core promise, were in doubt. No doubt, many people prayed, and followed religious rules … and yet somehow, often, like Job, did not get the promised prosperity and so forth; but instead found poverty, disease, and death.  Indeed, Israel itself had often been overrun, and its people taken into slavery; while Jerusalem itself had just been taken over by Rome, c. 64 B.  So that, by the time of Jesus, there would have been many who would have doubted whether the total devotion to a “lord,” was really all that reliable.  Indeed, this crisis of faith or confidence in “Lord”s, would have been particularly strong, right after Roman senators began to object to the Roman lord or “Caesar,” Julius Caesar, and his claim to be emperor, or even a God.  And likewise, when Jesus was claimed to be a lord and God, but was then executed, there would have been widespread cynicism about all the old leaders, lords, who claimed to be gods; even about Jesus.  And in this climate, amazingly, Jesus – rather like Pompey or Brutus or other Roman Republicans, slightly before, in Rome – at times seems to claim to be a god, or from God; but other times seems to question his own divinity.  Though, in this situation, many generations of preachers have insisted that the only answer, is just to have total “faith” in Jesus and our “Lord,” Jesus himself finally seems to leave open even the question of his divinity; to be verified, confirmed – or potentially, even dis-confirmed – by whatever science and material evidence should determine. Jesus here telling us to believe in him, only if believing in him gets real physical works.  Jesus even modestly – but incredibly – suggesting that we do not need to believe in Jesus himself at all.  But believe instead, in whatever works in physical life.

This is a startling picture of Christ.  But finally, it is the only picture, appearance of Christ, that is consistent with the entire Bible; as surveyed exhaustively, in our book here.  Here, we have examined the three major elements in the Bible … in our various sections on:   the 1) Old Testament; and 2) the works of Paul; and 3) the statements attributed to Jesus himself, in the New Testament.  To be sure, it was the Old Testament that was firmest in its support of science; but after all, that is to say that God himself supported it firmly.  And if for a while, many believers – particularly in the era of Jesus – secretly doubted the “Lord’s” physical promises, and sought to spiritualize or metaphoricalize them, ultimately, all believers have to support God’s science … or else be found guilty of going against God.  So that finally, Jesus – and even the very spiritual and often even rather secessionist apostle, Paul – had to support not total or blind faith, but faith only in things well proven, by physical “prosperity,” “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs”; as “observe”d in the material “earth,” in a timely way, “soon”; observed by real “science” and even “test”ing.   Because – as God constantly warned – there are many “false” things in religion; even “false Christs,” as Jesus himself warned, finally, we are never supposed to have very firm, total “faith” in holy men – or in their sermons about God – at all; instead, we are supposed to “test everything:” in religion and Christianity, with “science.”  God warned that there are always false things in our holiest men, and many of their allegedly holiest sayings about God; so that, even if we might be saved by “faith alone,” faith in God in some sense, still we cannot be sure that a given saying really is from God himself, unless or until we examine or “observe” its physical “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” deeds, “proof”s.  As Jesus himself said. 

So that now, suddenly, we see an entirely different Jesus than the Jesus we met in churches all over the earth:  a Jesus who does not really stress faith at all;  but who stresses, instead, the science of God.

The whole world for many centuries it seems, followed a view of Christ, stressing “faith” in miracles and spirituality.  But suddenly now, we see a “second” and better “appearance” or a Second Coming, of God and Jesus.  One that comes to this physical earth.  But in this coming, at last, God, Jesus, demands a stress not on “faith”; but on science.  Faith or confidence only in this well proven by material, physical “works.”  Without invoking the controversy of “faith vs. works” that tore Christianity apart c. 1515 ff., we might say that Jesus and the Bible ultimately say that even if faith in God might alone save us, still, God warned that we cannot know which things really are from God; until we look to see, and observe, whether following each of those many individual statements that claimed to speak for or from God and Jesus in the Bible, brings real “fruits,” deeds, “signs,” “proofs.”  Or as Jesus said here in the end, we do not have to follow or believe in or have faith in Jesus himself; but we should indeed not even consider following even Jesus himself, unless that produces … positive physical “works.”   

Amazingly, incredibly, shatteringly, Jesus himself finally begins to tell us, it seems in one reading, that we do not have to believe even in Jesus:  “do not believe me,” says Jesus.  Instead, we are to believe only in whatever produces real material, physical works.  Or as the rest of the Bible said, we are to believe only sayings that produce real physical “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.”  As “observe”ed and confirmed, with real “science.”

So in the end, we see a “second” Christ.  Who … corrects nearly all of our priests and ministers; a Christ that tells us that the emphasis on “faith” is wrong or dated, for another era; that tells us, here and now, that religion, Christianity, are supposed to be based not on faith, but on a science of God.

To be sure, this seems to shatter our traditional heaven; but one “day” or another, after all, our old heaven was supposed to be shattered; and replaced after all, with a new heaven that … comes back down to this physical earth. 

And so all is as foretold, authorized, commanded, by the Bible itself; by God, himself.
“When John heard in prison what the Messiah [or ‘John having heard in the prison the works of the Christ’ in other interpretations] was doing, he sent word by his disciples and said to him, ‘Are you the one who is to come, or are we to wait for another?’  Jesus answered them, ‘Go and tell John what you hear and see:  the blind receive their sight, the lame walk, the lepers are cleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, and the poor have good news brought to them’” (Mat. 11.2-6 NRSV).
Finally, we are to believe only in things well proven by works heard and seen.  Though preachers were later to try to metaphoricalize, spiritualize all these physical events, it is clear that they were originally presented to us in the Bible and Church, often, as real physical events.

The question behind the emphasis on “faith,” is really this:  how, why, should we follow Jesus or Christ?  How do we find, know the truth, and God?  Or, what is the “authority” of Christ.  Many preachers tell us that we should not ask for “signs” or wonders; and they insist that the Bible told us that we should follow preachers and their vision of Christ, solely on “faith.”  But that isn’t what the Bible really, fully, finally, said.

Should we just give up on say, church authorities?  To defend themselves, many churches, preachers, love to quote the parts – or interpretations – of the Bible, that seemed to stress “authority.” 

The Apostle/Saint Paul especially, seems to have told us to honor authority, many would say:
“Be submissive to rulers and authorities” (Titus 3.1).

“Be subject to the governing authorities” (Rom. 13.1).

“These [bad men] … indulge … and despise authority” (2 Peter 2.10; Jude 1.8).
Yet in Paul, our holy men are admitting to “boasting” a little too much of their own authority:
“I boast a little too much of our authority” (2 Corin. 10.8).
While the rest of the Bible notes that authority is even given to often bad people, or even monsters:
“Authority to the beast” (Rev. 17.13; also Rev. 13).
So the Bible itself, at times supported various kinds of authorities … but other times, true to its radical equivocality on such subjects, it delivered a rather different, even opposite message or voice; warning that many “authorities” are bad. 

It is worth mentioning “authority,” because the subjects of authority and faith, are related; authorities are people that we decide to trust, or have faith in, or loyally follow, sometimes even when we do not understand the rational basis of what they claim.  Therefore, the matter of “faith” and “authority” are related.  But if they are, then it is time to note that the Bible often questioned and doubted and condemned, many authorities.  Not only is a) a monster or beast given too much authority in the End Time; we will have often noted here earlier, too, that b) Jesus himself often questioned the religious authorities of his own day – like the  “scribes and Pharisees.”  While Jesus also c) warned in effect of false religious authorities that would persist in religion, even Christianity, until the end:  “false prophets,” d) “tares” or weeds; e) dead and un-“fruit”ful wood;  and so forth.   While then too, in general, regarding “faith”fully following authorities, f) Jesus himself did not support faith as strongly as our preachers do; not even faith in himself.  Indeed, Jesus himself said over and over, that there were always many “false” things even among “Christ”ians; and therefore, we should have faith and confidence in Jesus, or his followers, only to the extent that they can demonstrate proven, material, physical “works,” “fruits,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.” 

So what about the question of authority?  Normally, preachers might respond here, that we might follow – or have faith in – someone who is presented to us as a good leader  … or authority.  It is often said that the solution here, is to follow good, Godly men.  But which ones are those?  When Jesus warned that even those who come in his “name,” “Christ” and “Lord,” are usually sinners. 

To be sure, God himself at times – or Paul – told us not to despise authority.  And many told us we are told us follow Jesus, as authority.  To be sure though, Paul hinted that there might be ringers; “false” ideas about Christ out there; “another Jesus” than the right one. 

While then too, Jesus himself, often, would not clearly say what his own authority was. When asked where even his own authority came from, Jesus was often ambiguous:
“By what authority are you doing these things?” (Mat. 21.23; Mark 11.28; cf. John 8.28).

“Neither will I tell you by what authority I do these things” (Mat. 21.27).
Jesus himself it seems, was far, far less assertive and authoritative, than preachers believe, or as they present him in their sermons.  Jesus himself normally did not strut around, self-confidently, explicitly, clearly, unambiguously declaring himself to be the voicepiece or son of God.  Instead, Jesus himself mostly only asked others who they said or thought he was.  While in fact, he left it to his “works,” as he said, to speak for themselves. 

The authority of Jesus was often questioned by those around him.  And Jesus was often rather evasive about answering those questions.  Or in fact, if anything, Jesus at times (if not always) suggested that he indeed had no authority on his own:
“I do nothing on my own authority” (John 8.28; from other parts of the Bible, telling us not to rely on our own ideas?).
Perhaps here, Jesus alludes to … deferring to God himself, as his authority. But he does not clearly say so, here.  Indeed, he told us above, explicitly, he would not tell us what the source of his authority was.

Suppose though, the source of his authority is from God.  Finally in fact, if Jesus said he had any authority at all – or indeed, if any would-be holy man has any authority at all – that authority exists and should be respected, it seems, only insofar as he follows … a) God himself.  But in that case remember that b) God himself in turn we found in the Old Testament and New, told us that we should not even begin to have confidence in, faith in, anything said to be from the Lord … unless and until, it has (partially) “pro”ven itself as being good, as being from God … by producing real material, physical results.  Producing physical goods, a timely way, here on this material earth. 

“Beauty is as beauty does” as they say; or as they also say, “the proof is in the pudding.”  Jesus knew the thought behind these common phrases:  it was that words are, talk is, cheap; that there are many big talkers out there; many “empty” words, idle “boasts,” “false promises,” “false promises.”  Many promise many huge things, miracles, in words, sermons, but cannot deliver them in real life.  Therefore Jesus himself finally warned that we should not believe mere words, sermons; but believe only those who produce real, visible, material results.  (Even the things that are invisible, are known by their visible results; Rom. 1.20 etc.).

And in fact, finally, Jesus made this point, in relation to “authority.”  While he did not fully tell some the source of his authority, he did tell others, who have the perspicacity to see it in the text.  To “prove” or establish his own authority, Jesus himself often told us explicitly, that he does that by performing a material “work,” as empirical proof of his special ability.  While finally, Jesus seems to point to the source of his “authority” to many of us.  And the main thing that proves, validates even Jesus himself, Jesus says, is the quality of the physical wonders produced by him.  As Jesus seems to rather clearly say here:
“When Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, ‘My son, your sins are forgiven….  But so that you may know the Son of Man [part of Jesus’ second manifestation?] has authority on earth to forgive sins’ – he said to the paralytic – ‘I say to you, stand up, take your mat and go to your home.’  And he stood up, and immediately took the mat and went out before all of them; so that they were all amazed and glorified God….'”  (Mark 2.5,10-12 NRSV).

“Now when John heard in prison about the deeds of the Christ, he sent word by his disciples and said to him, ‘Are you he who is to come, or shall we look for another?’  And Jesus answered them, ‘Go and tell John what you hear and see:  the blind received their sight and the lame walk, lepers are cleansed and the deaf hear, and the dead are raised up, and the poor have good news preached to them’” (Mat. 11.2-5).
Where does the “authority” of Jesus, if any, come from therefore?  Jesus himself explicitly and simply says:  so that we may know that Jesus (and/or the Son of Man) has authority … Jesus performs a material, physical wonder. 

So for all practical purposes, the authority of Jesus himself, he himself says, comes from his demonstrated works; his demonstrated ability to provide material wonders.  That is how he gets – or shows, proves – his authority. 

No doubt, many preachers will object that of course, all authority ultimately comes from God.  But the Bible constantly warned there were many false things in holy men and the things they say about God, the “Lord.”  So how do we know whether someone, or a given word, really is from God?  With so many false things in our holiest men and angels, how do we know something is really authoritatively from God?  Fortunately, the Bible itself told us how:  we are supposed to carefully, scientifically examine “all” our alleged holy men, all preachers and all alleged angels, priests and prophets, churches, and all their works, all their holiest doctrines and dogmas. To see if following their doctrines is materially, physically, fruitful.  And produces physical “prosperity” and so forth.  Or as Jesus himself and others around him said:  we should believe religious persons, only if they produce physical, literal “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proof”s. 


God’s Science Point #148

But Do We Reject at Least
Material “Mammon,” “Riches”?
(148)  Did Jesus himself therefore, really want a religion that was based not just on spiritual results, but even more, on real, material, physical results?  It seems clear that he did, from the above.

To be sure though, the New Testament especially, was edited in such a way, as to seem to allow a spiritual priesthood, in at least one reading; a priesthood unconcerned with getting physical results, but only spiritual ones.  And in the service of that, at times in fact, Jesus appears to attack “mammon.”  Which is Aramatic, for “riches.”  Jesus here seeming, preachers believe, to set up a solely spiritual priesthood, opposed to riches, material possessions:
“No servant can serve two masters.  Either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other.  You cannot serve God and mammon” (Mat. 6.24; “money” NIV).

“Unrighteous mammon” (Luke 16.9-13).
But there is a problem with this statement by Jesus; and that is why the word mammon, an Aramaic (/Classic Arabic) word, was left untranslated in our Bibles.  Why?  No doubt, it is because our translators fear that if translated clearly, if we picture Jesus too clearly condemning “riches,” then a shocking conflict or difference between Jesus, and God himself, would become apparent.  Because God himself had often supported material “prosperity” and even “riches”; God promising and furnishing Abraham and Job for example, with massive crops, riches.
“Now Abram [Abraham] was very rich in cattle” (Gen. 13.2).

“Do not revile the king even in your thoughts, or curse the rich in your bedroom” (Ecc. 10.20 NIV).

“Riches and honor come from thee” (1 Ch. 29.12).

“I delight as much as in all riches” (Ps. 119.14).

“Riches and honor are with me” (Prov. 8.18).

“Reward … is riches and honor and life” (Prov. 22.1).
To be sure, too much pursuit of riches as such, can be bad.  It can amount to greed.  So:
“Boast of the abundance of their riches” (Ps. 49.6).

“If riches increase, set not your heart on them” (Ps. 62.10).

“For riches do not last for ever” (Prov. 227.24).

“Give me neither poverty nor riches” (Prov. 30.8).

“And his eyes are never satisfied with riches” (Ecc. 4.8).

“All his riches can never offset the guilt” (Hos. 12.8).

“Riches do not profit on the day of wrath” (Prov. 11.4).

“Violent men get riches” (Prov. 11.16).

“A good name … to be chosen rather than great riches’ (Prov. 22.1).

“Delight in riches choke the word” (Mat. 13.22).

“How hard it is for those who have riches to enter” (Luke 18.24).

“Your riches have rotted” (James 5.2).

“[As if] You could attain the gift of God with money!” (Acts 8.20).
No doubt, desire for material things can be overdone; when it progresses to the point of Greed for things we don’t really need.  And so, even though God himself had often promised riches – even “money” (Deut. 14.25 ff) – as a reward for being good, gradually a spiritual priesthood appeared; one that denied/modified the physical part of God.  And that told us that material “possessions” were bad and evil. 

And yet to be sure, if there are problems with too much materialism, there has been a problem with too much spirituality; our spiritual priests condemned money … aa) even though God had often promised it.  And bb) even as they themselves asked for money every week in the collection plate.  Even as they asked for it to keep their churches running.  Since after all, a certain amount of money, physical things, is necessary, just to stay alive.  So that ultimately, our very spiritual priests … were hypocritical; and finally keep asking for the very things they constantly condemn.

Our own position here, in fact, would be that this is one of the great sins of preachers:  to see the vice of over-materialism to be sure, but not to see their own vice, the vice of over-spirituality.  To be sure, the pursuit of material things, can be overdone; but so can the denial of material things too.  So that ultimately, we advocate a balanced theology; one that sees the great importance of both spiritual things but also, at least equally, material things too.  Though of course, we should not pursue material things, riches, with great Greed, still, priests typically sin in the other way; they attack material things far too much.  To the point that they go against practical sense – which tells us we need material food or bread for example – and even, finally, they go against God himself.  Who made the material earth and said it was “Good” (Gen. 1); who promises material wonders, even “riches,” to those who are good; etc..

So if Jesus himself now and then appeared to attack material things, “riches,” very, very strongly, finally, the scribes who have been in charge of our Bibles, could not quite allow that attack to be too extreme or too obvious; here, they left the attack on mysterious “mammon” untranslated.  Because after all, if understood clearly, this statement puts Jesus in direct denial of part of God’s word, and promises.

Rather that let Jesus and spiritual priests seem to be very, very obviously rebelling against God, disobeying God, the priests who control our Bibles, left the obvious conflict of spirituality, against God, veiled.  By use of tricky semantics, tricks of the “confusion of tongues,” of language.  But one “day” the confusion of tongues, of “Babylon” or “babble,” is to be lifted.  As it is in part, here and now.

No doubt embarrassed by occasionally direct, readily-apparent conflicts between Jesus and the spiritual Christian priesthood, and the God of the Old Testament, those who have been in charge of our Bibles, left that conflict obscure.  Or better, they simply compromised the two conflicting positions; to suggest that after all, material things are good and extremely important … but they are not everything:
 “And his eyes are never satisfied with riches” (Ecc. 4.8).

“All his riches can never offset the guilt” (Hos. 12.8).

“Riches do not profit on the day of wrath” (Prov. 11.4).

“Violent men get riches” (Prov. 11.16).

“A good name … to be chosen rather than great riches’ (Prov. 22.1).
Particularly, a “good name,” means that one has been favorably remembered, and therefore likely has made a continuing contribution to culture, over the long term; as opposed to having just stolen money for short-term gains. 

And indeed, in this there is a kind of immortality, we will show.  Though finally, even these long-term gains, eve immortality, the survival of one’s name in a material culture, we will show, is ultimately far more material, physical, than many over-spiritual people have thought.

So that indeed, the attack on “mammon” needed to be blunted, considerably.  Since otherwise, it foregrounds our priesthoods’ often violent disobedience against God.  A God who valued material things; even promised at times, “riches.”  If not exclusively.

Or is this the solution:  a lesson in how almost every line in the Bible can be read at least two ways.  Here:  most priests take the phrase “unrighteous mammon” to say that a) all riches, money, is unrighteous.  But the same phrase could also be read to say:  b) we might seek physical possessions; but not excessive riches.  Or it might mean c) we can seek physical possessions … just don’t seek mammon, money, by unrighteous, dishonest methods.  While we can enjoy riches gained honestly; gained without hurting others.

Then too, in fact, the Bible often tells us to make money; as Jesus tells a story about a servant who should have used his silver talents or silver dollars well; to make even more money. 

Indeed, the Bible allows us to make money; it just tells us to compromise or temper our  pursuit of money, with support for social welfare; alms for the poor and so forth.  So that in the end, we will be esteemed, for helping others materially.  And thus, get a good, eternal name and so forth:

“Use worldly wealth to gain friends for yourselves, so that when it is gone, you will be welcomed into eternal dwellings” (Luke 16.9 NIV).
No doubt, love of material things can be overdone.  And so here, love or “making friends,” it is rightly suggested, can be more beneficial than greedy pursuit of wealth for its own sake.  Still however, note that … even these passages allow that money can be used for good; and that it can help others.

Accordingly we here, in the Science of God, do not advocate pursuit of gold and so forth for its own sake, say.  Rather, we pursue material power, in order to preserve the long-term survival of humanity; and to expand our understanding of the universe of God.

While in any case, our balanced theology, joins earth and heaven; Old and New Testament; secular and religious; God and Jesus; and does not any longer have “two masters” any more, the false and infinitely destructive Manichean dualism found in our preachers.  Instead, our balanced, heaven-and-earth theology, now finds that both are just parts of the same existence, the same, single God.  As, in spite of spiritual priests, God’s frequent emphasis on material things, science, proves.

No doubt, many people think of Jesus as very, very spiritual; putting down physical possessions and so forth.  But remember, if for a while, at times, in one strain or theme in the Bible, Jesus emphasized spiritual things, finally in the “second” major theme, Jesus was pictured getting many material things.  Working many physical miracles.  And if he told us to be spiritual at times, after that, we are supposed to get real material things.

The New Testament to be sure, contains two voices.  And one of them is extremely spiritual, and rejecting this physical life it seems.  And in one passage, the New Testament even seems to directly invert the Old Testament 1 Kings 18.21-40, to suggest that if there are two voices, one must go with the spiritual voice after all:
“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal.  But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy….  No one can serve two masters … God and Money.  Therefore I tell you, do not worry about your life, what you will eat or drink; or about your body, what you will wear.  Is not life more important than food, and the body more important than clothes?  Look at [“observe”] the birds of the air; they do not sow or reap or store away in barns, and yet your heavenly father feeds them….  Will he not clothe you, O you of little faith? “
But we have said here and elsewhere, that the Bible in fact entertains not one but two voices; and that if we see the spiritual voice seeming to prevail for a while … it will be corrected soon enough, by the other more materialistic voice of God.  While in the above case?  The extremely spiritual passage above, is immediately countered, with a passage that appears to guarantee that however, God will take care of our physical needs too:

“So do not worry, saying ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’  For the pagans run after these things, and your heavenly Father knows that you need them….  And all these things will be given you as well” (Mat. 6.19-31 NIV.)
Relating to this, are the hundreds of passages in the Bible where God promises us material “prosperity”; where good persons are rewarded with good crops, cattle, and so forth.  And if the original, first passage above, seemed to stress a seemingly spiritual “Heaven”?  Finally even Jesus himself will come to refer to the destruction of Heaven itself (“Heaven will pass away”).

Typical, misleading, over-spiritual priests therefore, just quote or stress the misleading, spiritual parts of the Bible.  With passages like the above, they love to quote just a part of it; the part that tells us to forget material things, and think of treasures in heaven.  But our preachers omit and do not obey, the other parts of the Bible; that tell us that after all, our priests are also supposed to take care of the physical side of life; so thoroughly, that it seems automatic; not a thing to worry about.

But how was that to happen?  Priests essentially teach either that aa) the material side of life is unimportant.  Or that bb) if it is important, then the way one takes care of the material side of life is this:  one is morally good … and then whatever physical things we need, appear magically, by miracles, out of thin air.  Yet history taught us that this vision of the physical side of life, did not work:  many people were good and followed their priests … and yet often got plagues, and starvation.  Many pray … and yet somehow, food does not appear out of thin air, as in the priestly vision of things.

So that obviously, there has been something wrong, in our priests’ theology.  Something that we need to correct, right now.  First, we need to note that … God himself did not concentrate just – or even primarily – on spiritual things; but also just as much or more, on physical, material needs. 

So that our priesthoods, which do not realistically address such things, are not really following God, or producing all the “works” they are supposed to.  While we will see, even religious “works of charity” and promises of miracles, were far, far less productive, than modern agriculture and medicine and hard work.  So that judged by their “fruits,” preachers were not as good or true to God, as practical working people, we will find.


God’s Science Point #149

In the End Time Especially,
We are “Judged” by What We Have
“Done,” “Deeds”;
In the Resurrection, The Second Coming,
The Last Judgement
(# 149)  Our preachers have normally spoke of religion, as being primarily about our “spirit” and ‘faith.”  But actually we find here, God told us that a real religion, takes care of not only the spiritual side of life, but the material side too.  Indeed, it is supposed to provide great “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds.”  Indeed, we – and preachers – are to be judged as good or bad in the end, not by our spirituality, but by our material works, it seems.

The great importance of our physical deeds, fruits – and say, “works” – holds or appears, emerges finally, especially (but not uniquely), one “day,” in the “end.”  This appears in Revelation, the last book of the Bible; which is about the End of Time; the Second Coming, Judgement Day, etc..

The book of Revelation is a surreal assemblage, that seems to attempt to summarize and reconcile, most of the various prophesies of the Bible.  It is full of all-but-indecipherable, symbolic images; and it is not entirely certain what it really predicts.  Millions of people have used its vague imagery, to support this or that opinion about life.  And it is not even entirely sure who wrote it.  Though part of it suggests that “I, John,” wrote it (“I, John” Rev. 22.8).  But another part suggests however that “I, Jesus … the bright Morning Star” (22.16), sent an angel, who relayed the information about the End, to John.  So that here, in Revelation, we might have statements in effect, some would say, by Jesus himself.  Which should be quoted or mentioned in our section here, on statements said to have been expressed by Jesus himself, in person.

In fact it seems, Jesus did make – in Revelation and elsewhere – many predictions about some rather apocalyptic developments that were beginning in his own time; but that were to be completed many would now say, only in some time after Jesus.  Jesus made many statements, promises – about a “son of Man” and a “kingdom,” about many “false prophets” and “false Christs.’  Statements, promises that many would say, were a) fulfilled completely by Jesus in his own time; but that b) others would suggest, would come only after his death.  Or perhaps even c) at the End of Time.  In this end of time though, d) the images, characters, are rather surreal, and not clearly outlined.  So it is not certain that Jesus himself in person, is the major player here at the End; indeed at times, e) Jesus seemed to suggest that it would be God himself, that would be our ultimate Judge, in the end. 

There are many sides to God – at least three are acknowledged in the “Trinity” for example.  But perhaps in effect, we see here and now, rather as Jesus himself suggested, the rather more materialistic God of the Old Testament returning, here and now.

For example, finally:   how are we “judged,” in the End?  Amazingly, the science of God holds to the very End; and especially in the end of Day of Judgement in fact.  When we are “judged” not so much by our faith, as much as by our “deeds”; what we have physically “done.”  God in the Old Testament especially, always told us to look carefully at the physical “fruits” and “works” of religious workers; and to use empirical data to evaluate the truth of holy men’s remarks attributed to God.  And now finally, we should add, the Bible told us the importance of our physical, material deeds would hold through the very End Time too. 

To be sure, many preachers and others, have thought that God was largely or primarily “spiritual.”  And they have “seen” God, Jesus, as a “spiritual” being, emphasizing spiritual things, like “faith.”  But that is not what we have seen here. 

And if the Christ we now present here, seems to shatter the vision, the image, the idea of God and Jesus that you got in church?  Then after all, what we are saying here, by that very fact, can be read as the realization, “fulfill”ment, of prophesy.  Remembering again, that one shattering “day” especially, a day of “judgement,” in the end, you are supposed to suddenly see another, second vision, second understanding, of God.  One  day, you are supposed to be resurrected or brought before God, it is thought; to be “judged.”  On a day related to what is now called, Judgement Day, or some such.  A day when many religious ideas, even the image of “Christ,” even many of even priests’ ideas of God, are found to need “refine”ing.  And so, if our new presentation of Christ, has been in many ways shattering, disillusioning, seemingly unconventional; if it seems to go against nearly all the holy men and saints … then after all, our presentation here has been in absolutely true to the Bible itself.  And to God himself.

Over the centuries, our preachers normally insisted that the essence of religions – and Christianity – is “faith.”  By which they meant, in effect, in actual practice, millions of churchgoers should totally follow the idea of God given to us by preachers in churches all over the world; their vision or image of Christ stressing very strong “faith.”  But here we will have begun to reveal, realize, another, second, better image of God and Jesus.  A God that emphasized not faith in spiritual things, but confidence primarily in things proven by physical fruits, works, signs, deeds, proofs; as “observe”d not with our “spiritual” eyes, but our real, material, physical eyes.  As confirmed by examining “everything” with “science.”  An image found throughout the entire Bible; including not only the Old Testament God, but also the New Testament Christ. 

In the end, Revelation shows many, many God-like figures.  But it is hard to know which ones are good and from God.  And curiously, the figure of Jesus does not seem to occupy more than 10% of the story of the end, at most.  Indeed, the images of the last book of the Bible, Revelation, seem more Old Testament; full of real “kings,” and a god that seems to “judge” rather severely.  While indeed it seems, in the End especially, we are to be “judged”; and not primarily by our spiritual faith … but by our physical fruits, works, signs, deeds, proofs.  

Until today, our preachers often insisted that you would be judged according to how much “faith” you had … in fact the Bible is quite explicit; we are judged mostly not just or primarily by what we have thought, or felt; but by what we have “done.”  Our deeds.  This was a frequent message, in the Old Testament.  And we will find, this message, this God, was confirmed by Jesus.  While finally, this God  – who emphasizes “deeds,” things we have “done” – reappears, in the End time, especially.  To indeed, evaluate us and preachers, as good or bad, as fruitful or dead “wood,” “branches,” weeds or “tares,” wheat or “chaff,” sheep or goats … not according to our spiritual faith, but according in large part, to our material works, and deeds.

First, remember, the Old Testament said this of the end, over and over:  we would be judged by God.  And not so much for our faith, but by our, especially, “deeds”:    
“For they shall eat the fruit of their deeds” (Isa. 3.10).

“Punish you according to the fruit of your doings’ (Jer. 21.14).

“And according to the fruit of his doings” (Jer. 32.19).

“Let us not love in word or speech but in deed and in truth” (1 John 3.18).

“The fruit of their way” (Prov. 1.31).
The Old Testament God, who judges us not by our faith, but what we have done, re-appears in the last book of the Bible, Revelation.  And thus in effect, in the End Time:
“And all were judged by what they had done” (Rev. 20.13).
In our section on Paul and his Faith, we found that it was Paul who, far more than almost anyone else in the Bible (by volume; see however also John), emphasized “faith,” and spiritual things.  But in the End of Time particularly, on Judgement Day, if in Paul, we are judged not even so much by our thoughts or spirit, but by our deeds; what we have done.”  Even the very spiritual Paul, eventually shows that on the way through life, and then in the End, we are judged not just by our thoughts, but especially the “work” we have “done”:
“Test what sort of work each one has done” (1 Corin. 3.13).
To be sure, the very spiritual Paul at times seems to hint, to some, that the only kind of “work” that is required, is that of a priest.  But in the context of the rest of the Bible, it is clear that God means, that those who are really following God, should be examined to see if they got real, timely, material, physical results, here on this material earth.  Or not.  And if they did not?  Then we should not consider that they are really from God.

While indeed finally, after a) our review of the Old Testament God, and his science, and b) Paul and his Faith, we now suddenly find, in our present section on specifically Jesus himself, that c) Jesus too knew, that in the End in particular, we and preachers, and their statements about God, are to be evaluated not by our faith as much as by the material, physical things they have produced.  Or in the words of much of the Bible, regarding the End especially:  the “work” we have “done”; our “deeds.”  As finally, not just the God of the Old Testament, but also the Christ of the New Testament, affirmed, regarding the return of God to earth:
“Then he will repay every man for what he has done” (Mat. 16.27).
Jesus here reaffirmed our Science of God.  Affirmed in turn, by seventy, a hundred, and more, OT – Old Testament – texts.  And many NT texts too.  Confirming that in the end, we are judged not just or primarily by our spirituality, our faith.  But instead, we are to be judged as good or bad by God, true or faithful to him or not … according to the evidence of our material fruits, works, signs  … and “deeds”; the things we have “done” or “did.”  As Christ himself began to say, above.  As we see him here and now, more “fully,” at last. 

Here and now therefore, we suddenly see … a second and fuller, startling, upsetting second appearance to Jesus, to God himself.  And this “appearance” of God to be sure, is rather different than what the whole world has worshipped (Rev. 13).  Here we see a God who evaluates everything – even you yourself – not by your mere words, or thoughts, or even faith; but in at least equal and in fact greater part, by the things you have “done.”

Indeed, if the same John that wrote the Gospel of John, also wrote Revelation, then note that author, never used the word “faith” once in the gospel; while if at times the text might call for some mild faith, those calls are followed by the stipulation that their “labor” was accomplished, and now their “deeds will follow them” (Rev. 14.12-13).  And if many – if indeed the whole earth, and nearly all preachers – followed another idea of Christ?  A Christ of faith in miracles and spirituality?  Then after all, the whole world – and even “all” in heaven itself, by some accounts (Isa. 34.4 ff) – are to be found  “deceived.”  If  the saints are called to be faithful to Jesus (Rev. 13.10), there is no account here that any more than 144,000 managed to be that good (Rev. 14.3).   And thus if many “did not renounce your faith” (Rev. 2.13), “nevertheless,” God has some things ‘against you”; many bad deeds (2.14).  Bad deeds – which are done somehow, in spite of maintaining one is faithful – will follow you to the end.  To even, right now.  When you are in fact, finally judged.  As having been not as good as you thought you were; even if you were a priest, yourself.  As having followed, we find now, a false idea of Christ.  When you followed a model of Christ as stressing “faith”; in miracles and spirituality.  That was in fact, the foretold False Christ.

And if we here and now, to “day,” find that nearly all our preachers and churches, all over the world, in following an idea of Jesus as stressing “faith” in “spirit”uality and so forth, followed an at least partially false idea of Christ?  Then after all, what we do here and now, is to affirm, realize, fulfill prophesy.  One day after all – either the day we “mature,” and/or meet the Lord, and/or are judged; and especially one day in the End of our old “heaven” it will be found – you are supposed to discover, precisely, that nearly the whole “world,” all “peoples,” “tongues,” “nations,” have been following a false Christ.  Following a false Christ, and/or one of the false Christ’s friends and allies:  one of the many “false prophets,” bad priests, etc., that the Bible constantly warned about; that the Bible indeed warned would fool the entire “world,” all “peoples,” “tongues,” “nations.”  Our preachers too much have been fooled; since the Bible constantly warns about false things even in religion; even among those following a “Christ.”  Indeed, even our priests will have been fooled … since the world follows religion, and a false religion is “worship”ed by nearly everyone.  Which would mean, our preachers will have been fooled, “deceived,” too. 
Those who have read our books here however, will have begun to see things better; they will have begun to see a first outline, of the foretold second and fuller vision of the true Christ.  Of Christ as he, to be sure, acknowledges the “part”s of the Bible that mentioned “faith” and confidence in our holy men and preachers; but who also can be seen to present now, a “second” voice in the Bible.  Here we suddenly in fact see a second Christ; one who begins to move away from blind faith.  One who warns that “all have sinned,” even our holiest men and angels; they and their most holy sayings and sermons and homilies about God.  So that finally, the Christ, the God that we now see, begins to say, over and over, that we are not supposed to have very much “faith” at all in our holy men, or even their version of Christ.  The Christ we now hear, tells us instead, that we are supposed to know that all our holiest men are unreliable.  So that we are to examine “everything” in religion, with “science.”  To find out which things or people are good – and who is not.  (And who is really faithful?  Only those who question, examine, “everything.”)

So here and now, the individual reader can begin to see the outlines of a Second Coming, a second appearance of Christ.  And all this is in complete conformity with the Bible itself.  As foretold for example, a) no one can say the exact “day” or time this happens for your yourself; because indeed, no one can say when you, individually, will “mature,” and learn to “see.”  And b) as foretold, no one should say, “lo,” this is the Christ, or Christ is here (Mat. 24.23; cf. Mat. 28.20, 34-36-44); rather, we let events and evidence prove this, or speak for itself, it seems.  Or perhaps this is not a particular person, but rather an “appearance,” a “presence,” a “parousia”; and one like the “lightning” that is to characterize the Second Coming (Mat. 24.27).

At the moment of this writing, there is no individual person that should be today say, Nov. 14, 2010, proclaimed Christ.  But rather, what we should now all see is a mental or spiritual picture.  By now we should all have a vivid mental picture inside of us, of the real Christ:  the Christ of scientific Christianity and religion, of the Science of God.  The only Christ that fits all the many different parts of the Bible; the Christ that fits the Bible itself therefore, far, far better than the Jesus we heard presented in Church; far better than the simple image that stressed only “faith” in miracles, or spirit.  Though for that matter, indeed, we do not ignore, but rather include, incorporate, all the “spirit” and “faith” of the Bible here; but then we add all of that, as part of the science of God.  Noting that only when you add all of faith and spirit, to Science, do you really have the “full”est currently possible vision of Christ.

Faith?  In effect, we are to have some tiny amount of faith.  But only a very tiny amount; only as tiny as a grain of mustard seed.  A grain that, furthermore, is to be allowed to grow, if and only if, it find real material fruits.  So that indeed in effect, what is our Faith  really, finally supposed to be?  It is more properly … faith or confidence … in things that can demonstrate significant, timely, physical results. 

At first to be sure, this new or second vision of Christ, seems heaven-shattering, apocalyptic.  But if so, then it is in fulfillment of the Bible, and its prophesy:  one “day” our traditional heaven, we will find, is supposed to “dissolve” (Rev. 21; Isa. 34 ff; 2 Peter 3).   In order for us to see a “second,” better “appearance,” of the Lord. 

And now indeed, perhaps many will be about to see Him; to see the second appearance of Christ and God; in part, even here and now.

Exactly as foretold, as authorized, as commanded, by the Bible itself.  By God, himself.  

Indeed, the New Testament for a time, posed a kind and forgiving and spiritual Jesus; who did not “judge” us.  But?  The final book of the New Testament – perhaps embarrassed by the conflict between a spiritual Jesus and the God of the Old Testament – finally pictures not even so much Jesus himself coming to earth; but God himself, returning too.  And?  God himself does judge.  And judges us not so much by our words, and spiritual sensations; but by our fruits, works, signs, proofs … and especially, “deed”s.


“And all were judged by what they had done” (Rev. 20.13).
In the end we are not judged so much for our inner “faith”; rather we are judged by God by what we have “done”; our actual, physical deeds.  And the physical good we have created.

What does this mean?  It means that 80 generations of Christian preachers, have not been quite right.  So that finally?  The judgement goes in part, against … nearly all our preachers.  And in favor of a rather different sort of person, than a preacher.




Looking Ahead:

The First Outline of Christ of the Second Coming,
Second and Better Appearance of Christ Therefore


Our second look at Jesus therefore finds him, here and now, not advocating so much faith.  Not even faith in himself, as Christ.  We now see a second appearance of Christ; warning about the blind or strong faith/gullibility of preachers.  And instead, advocating a critical science of God.

 This to be sure, is a shocking reversal of what billions have heard, in nearly every church, worldwide.  Yet this new or second appearance to Jesus, it supported throughout the Bible itself; and this vision of Christ has been supported in our book here, by seventy, a hundred and more quotes; this view of Jesus is supported by hundreds of quotes from throughout the Bible.  Though there are of course, many different ways to look at Christ, and many different levels of meaning in the ancient holy texts, many “interpretations,” actually, this second appearance to Christ is not a mere “interpretation”; in our more educated era, this is an extremely important vision or “appearance” of Christ; one that should today, predominate, and reclaim the whole world. 

The world and Religion both, always need some help.  For centuries, Religion has been troubled by mental and physical conflicts with science and practical knowledge and “secular” culture; believers have been troubled by the seeming conflict between a religion that says it can make bread appear out of thin air, and a Science that says that such things, never happen today.  Even priests have at times been secretly troubled, by a Christianity that at times says that physical things like literal “bread” or food are unimportant …  while our practical experience and common knowledge, tell us all that those who do not get physical food, starve to death. 

These observations amount to noting apparent conflicts, between an ascetic, spiritual, or miracle-promising Religion, and Science; a larger conflict that has for centuries troubled and confused, hundreds of millions of people.  And at times, the conflict between Religion and Science became severe:  at times one side or another, began actively executing the other side.  Historically there have been countless executions of heretics or nonbelievers, by the faithful; millions have undoubtedly been killed in religious wars; while the Church restricting on science, of which jailing Galileo and so forth was just one tiny example, have caused many people great harm.  Many millions have been told by Christianity that practical “knowledge” or “wisdom of men” – like knowledge of farming and agriculture, medicine, and many other extremely fruitful and useful trades – is useless; and billions have been discouraged from learning practical trades and job skills; being thereby driven into ignorance and poverty and premature death, by the very people that present themselves as the agents of light, goodness, and “life.” 

Given the severe spiritual and often even physical conflicts between religion and science, even many of the faithful at times experience occasional self-doubts and regrets about their own religion.  While indeed finally, there is no way to fix these endless – and often litearally, physically fatal – conflicts.  Except, we suggest, by religion at last seeing the scientific side of Christ … and thereby, an all-too-faithful population changing itself into the better, “full”er, science of God.   As the Bible requires.  Which at last, once again and finally, will reconcile religion and science, heaven and earth, faith and reason.  Or of spirit and flesh.  Exactly as the first coming of Jesus did, for a moment.  Which as our second appearance finalizes.

This second appearance of Christ, will be a hard appearance of Christ, for many believers or preachers to face.  Because the second coming requires that many of the faithful spot sins not just in everybody else, in nonbelievers, but … in themselves.  The science of God requires that believers take a long hard and critical and scientific look at many of their core beliefs; including especially, their promises of physical miracles.  And when they do that, many will be shocked:  as we will find later, science says implicitly, that no preachers today can themselves work the specific, obvious, large miracles and wonders that the faithful reading of the Bible often promised; few if any preachers are literally a) walking on water, or b) making real bread appear out of thin air; or c) making real, actual “mountain”s move, on demand, just by faith and a prayer.  So, when we apply the science of God to traditional religion, many millions of believers and even many miracle-promising preachers, will have to come to the painful conclusion that they themselves, or their tradition, are inadequate; and have even been following a false idea of Christ. 

The meeting of religion and science, to be sure therefore, will be an extremely difficult and painful, “fiery” moment for millions to try to “face.”  It leads to a truly humbling conclusion; one that many preachers have been too proud to face for centuries:  that it isn’t just practical, secular, worldly people, who are often bad and evil; often, it is they themselves.  They themselves … and even their own holiest men and angels, and their holiest promises and doctrines.  When we at last apply science to religion, it will indeed, describe much of classic religion – like promises of physical miracles especially – as “unfruitful,” dead “wood,” “straw” or “chaff.”  But all this is of course, as foretold, and authorized, by the Bible itself. 

But this is a moment of awful realization and humility, of self-criticism, that until today, the religious community has entirely resisted.  Instead of really, actually facing this moment, for centuries millions of holy men have tried to come up with any number of excuses, explanations – apologetics – as to why, in spite of constant urgings from God himself, in spite of the warnings of the Bible itself, Christian leaders and ordinary churchgoers, should not be required to learn much practical knowledge and science; and should not be required to produce real physical results, to be considered good or Godly.  

The things science has said, found about religion, are sometimes positive; but in many ways, highly negative, and even shattering; and the science of God has to accept many of the negative findings, as the foretold “rebuke,” “chastisement,” criticism, by God. 

Many millions, billions, will have resisted this awful moment entirely, for centuries.  As will be seen elsewhere (in our book on Sermons as Excuses), over the centuries, preachers have been constantly told, and have believed, that the essence of religion, including Christianity, is “faith”; and that therefore, we were commanded by God to simply, faithfully ignore any and all negative data of their religion; and continue to follow it anyway, with total blind faith.  But of course, the unwillingness of believers to admit any criticism of their own religion, in part came not from God, but from their own natural human instinct and vanity; the natural vanity and pride of all human beings.  Who are typically unwilling to humbly “face” their own sins, and sins in their heroes.

But millions of believers have resisted this moment, rather successfully, for thousands of years it would seem.  So how can we get believers to at last see the sins in themselves, and even in their own sense of religion, and God?  Finally, it has been not much use, simply posing logical objections to many of them; they do not respect logic, or know much of it.  Nor scientific data.  So that finally, the only way to reach the lasts remaining hard core blind believers, will have been to – as we do here at last – phrase, frame these objections to them, in the only terms, that they understand and respect:  in the language of the Bible itself; by making our case, entirely in quotes from God, himself.

Amazingly though, here we have found that the Bible itself has seventy or a hundred quotes and more – in fact, thousands of quotes; seventy times seventy – to show that the very, very faithful … have committed countless sins and errors, according to the one document they respect:  the Bible itself.  According to the one authority they follow:  God, himself. 

And what have the most egregious sins of the faithful masses and preachers been?  Mostly we will have been pointing out here, that they saw, faced, or obeyed, only “part”s of the truth, only parts of the Bible; just as Paul said.  In particular, nearly all the faithful by definition, failed to see and follow, the voice in the Bible, the parts of God, that commanded them to be truly “humble”; in the sense of being critical even of themselves and their own holy men and angels; willing to look for the “beam” in their own “eye”s.    In particular, they also did not notice and obey, the countless commands from God to … learn and continuously employ, science to religion. 

Ignorance of, or even opposition to, science, practical knowledge, has been  probably the most egregious – and physically fatal – sins against God and the Bible, committed by nearly every believer on earth today.  But to be sure, there are dozens of other  sins against the Bible, sins against God, that believers have committed.  Among others:  they have failed to continually, publicly “confess” their inadequacies, the inadequacies of their traditions; instead of facing this category of sins, they have attempted instead, to generate dozens, hundreds, thousands of explanations, excuses, “whitwashing”s, for their own material failures.  They failed to “face” real criticism.  And they followed only “part”s of the Bible.  They failed to actually read their own Bibles closely enough; but instead trusted and had “faith” in … the religious leaders, prophets, that the Bible constantly warned about.  They did not “see” or understand the complexity of the Bible; they did not notice that thought the Bible itself as times hinted at apologetics for the lack of miracles and physical results, ultimately the Bible itself did not firmly, unequivocally commit itself to such apologetics, at times. 

The Bible to be sure, did present countless phrases, that were ambiguous; that could be taken more than one way.  To say more than one thing.  Many parts to be sure could be taken – and were taken by countless priests – to be explanations, as to why God might to a while withhold his promised material benefits.  But we will have been showing here, that there is another layer of meaning in the Bible, that our preachers and believers have denied; a “part” of it and of God, they have not acknowledged or confessed or obeyed.  A part of God they have denied, and disobeyed.   

Among other things, the billions of blind believers and preachers, have missed or ignored, the constant implication in the Bible itself, that there are huge sins in our holiest men and their holiest ideas; that many of their ideas come not from God, but from the devil, Satan, himself.  Including especially, the emphasis on faith.  In the Book of Job for example, the idea or scenario is presented, where Satan comes up to God, and suggests that God should let Satan torture, even a man that God himself said was “blameless” and “righteous”:  that God should let Satan torture Job.  Specifically, Satan suggests that Job follows God, only because God gives him material things; therefore, he is not following God on the basis of faith, loyalty.  Satan therefore devises a mechanism that preachers have followed for centuries:   Satan devises and emphasizes, the emphasis, the “test of Faith.”  Satan taking away Job’s prosperity, to test his faith; to see if he will be loyal, even when God does not give him physical things. 

This part of the Bible, proposed and developed by, literally, Satan, has historically been massively popular with preachers.  Indeed, the whole idea of a “test of faith” has been used as the Old Testament foundation for faith-based Christianity.  Until abut 1980 or so, many millions of preachers read this story in the Book of Job, in the Bible – and millions of preachers followed it exactly.  Producing countless sermons, on the goodness and necessity of the “test of faith.”  Sermons that were delivered to, and convinced, the major nations of the earth.  But what our religious leaders neglected to note however, was an at-first, apparently minor semantic subtlety to the text.  The millions of preachers who founded faith-based Christianity neglected to notice some subtleties in the Biblical text.  In this case, our preachers neglected to note that to be sure, though a sort of emphasis on “faith” was found here, and was in the Bible, this emphasis on the test of faith however was established, presented, not by God himself – but by the devil himself.  The “test of faith” was an idea proposed, developed, literally, by Satan himself.  So that all those who believed in the “test of faith,” were, literally, following Satan, not God.  They mistook Satan, for God.  As foretold, Satan came to them “disguised as the angel of light.”  And though this was foretold, they missed it. 

The Bible to be sure, is hard to read.  In fact, there is a particular feature of it that most readers and preachers miss:  that the Bible in fact at first presents a surface stratum;  a surface level almost throughout the entire text.  A level that can be read as – and has been read by millions of preachers  as –  a message from Christ, telling us that the basis of all goodness and holiness, is “Faith.”  On the most accessible surface “part” of the text, the Bible can easily be read as telling us to simply follow “authorities,” or the “Lord,” with total, “sheep”-like, “faith.”  This indeed, is the first surface of the text; and millions of preachers have seen and believed or repeated, this first impression of Christ. 

Preachers have taught, from the Bible, the first vision or “image” of Christ – as stressing apparently “faith” – to the entire world.  However, we are here and now showing that this first appearance of Christ, was not quite what our preachers thought or taught it to be.  Today all preachers, and all the people of the world, need finally – as foretold – to see a second appearance of Christ.  To see the larger, “full”er “appearance” of God and Good.  And we can get there in large part or in whole … by just reading our Bibles again, more closely.  Just as the disciples began to see a risen Christ, when they began to re-read their scriptures on the road to Emmaus, we likewise began to see a second, risen Christ, the Christ of science, when we at last begin to re-read our Bibles more carefully, here.

Is this the total end of “Faith”?  No doubt, simple “children,” at times and in part, need to be told, some of the time, to simply obey their parents, their “father” and “mother,” faithfully, loyally.  Children are often (if not always) too young to understand the reasons behind the rules, the laws; and so to some small extent, children need to follow the rules, the laws, just out of simple, childlike, sheep-like faith in their mothers, fathers, as it would seem to many.  And yet however, we might note here, even a child needs to experiment at times, as they say, to see why the rules are what they are.  Or even a child often needs to be told (if the parent knows), the “reasons” for their faith; the logic or rationale for the rules, the laws.  Those children who are not encouraged to ask or see the reasons, the science behind good religious rules, will continually suffer and rebel.  Because no real justification or clarity, light, has been given them.  Not fully understanding, not understanding the sense or logic of things, they will not really fully understand the law correctly … and will not really obey it therefore.  They may try to obey the “letter” of the law or of the Bible … without understanding its deeper, true meaning.  And ultimately, they cannot even really follow the law correctly; since they do not understand it.  So that therefore, we should not even rest content that at least children should be left with a religion of “faith”; even a child should be exposed often, firmly, to the side of God, that advocates “reason,” and “science.”  Even a child should be continually taught not just the laws and rules, but the rational, scientific reasons for them.  And if a preacher does not know the logical reasons for things?  Then he should learn them … or step aside during every sermon, for someone who does know these things, to speak.  (A pastor that wants to more about this, should consult not only our present book, but also our manuscripts for three or four or five more books).

And so alongside – or indeed, slightly above – the “first,” “child”hood Christ of “faith,” all adults and even children from now on, in every Sunday and church school and from every pulpit, should be presented with … the second appearance of Christ.  Christ advocating not blind, total, sheep-like faith.  But instead, Christ as a scientist and critical thinker.  The whole earth should at last be exposed to, come to “see,” the Christ who tells us even, not to believe too faithfully, even in Christ himself.  Unless or until, we see material evidence that he and his sayings, prophesies, promises, are fully good, and bring real physical “prosperity.” 

This “second” appearance of Christ, which we get in large part just from re-reading our Bibles again here – is almost certainly at least a preview, and even the very substance, of the foretold higher, “full”er, more “mature” “appearance” of Christ, that was foretold. And we insist, that exactly as foretold, it is not too far off, or too hard to understand, even for a child.  Even a literal child of four, can understand a simple idea of science; cause-and-effect; physical “fruits.”  And so every adult, can and must, be introduced by a new generation of preachers, to this side of God and good.  In every church and religious school.  Because without that, millions, billions, are left as they have been for two thousand years:  following Satan’s “faith.”  Following a false idea of Christ, with a total, blind obedience to it, and to badly- and half-understood rules and laws.  Which insured that bad laws persist.  And that good laws will not be understood and now be made to work successfully, fruitfully. 

This “second” “appearance” to God, is shattering and painful to face.  Yet must be made known to all.  Because until it is, in the meantime, a substantially false and often literally, physically fatal “image” of God, a false Christ, will continue to dominate the whole world.  As it has. 

Until this very day?


And how fruitful is this second appearance of Christ?  Christ as scientist?   God tells us over and over, to only consider following words alleged to have come from God, if time and History, the record of what “comes to pass,” shows that they produce real material, physical fruits, works.  While over the centuries, and especially today, we have found  that the core Christian traditions, that promised “miracles,” or failing that, spirituality, have not only not been reliably fruitful, materially, but at times even opposed the core idea of God:  that real religion should get real, empirically-observable results. 

But in contrast to the false religion, the false idea of Christ, that has until today dominated the whole “world”?  The record of Science and Technology, while not perfect, has overall been stellar; has vastly exceeded the record of priests who prayed for things to appear out of thin air.  Today, we don’t see anyone at all, getting miracles on the size and scale the priests promised; is anyone literally walking on water, today?  But in contrast, over the centuries, science and technology have guided mankind from the stone age, when so many died of starvation, disease, and exposure, that the average life-span of a man or woman, was about 35 years of age or less.  To the more advanced modern age; when we have far more advanced agriculture, and medicine; and when because of that, people live to be at least 67 years or more, on average.  While men move over the ground at 75 miles an hour and more; and even to the literal heavens themselves.  All thanks not to praying for magical powers; but working hard, with our hands and practical – scientific, technological – language.  Just as God told us to do.  Those of us who really, fully heard God.  As he stressed not blind “faith,” but “work”ing with our “hands,” learning practical “knowledge,” and …Science.

History has shown that science and technology are massively fruitful; but praying for miracles, or retreating into the dream-land of spirituality, were very ineffective.  So what should we finally say?  God himself, Christ himself we will have seen here, told us not to honor traditions that were not provably, materially fruitful, over the short- and long-term.  And yet even the most casual experiments and observation, we will have found (in our writing on “miracles” for example), shows that priests and others praying for miracles, and spirituality, was probably less than 1/7 as effective in giving us fruits, as … working hard with our hands, and with practical knowledge and science. 

So what finally should we say?  Finally, the old vision of Christ – emphasizing miracles and spirituality – was ultimately, a false Christ.  While the real and better Christ, was the Christ we now see here:  emphasizing Science. 

It is this Christ that is the truer one.  And it is not entirely a “new” vision either; that Christ was there, all along.  In the Bible itself.  Perhaps helping those few educated persons who could hear and obey him, in spite of our priests.  Helping guide us to as much prosperity as we have had to date.

While it is certain that it is this appearance of Christ, that is finally able to guide us all, to the promised “prosperity”; to longer “life”; and to the kingdom of heaven on earth; to the world of “prosperity.”  That the Bible itself promised us so long ago.

And so now at last we begin to see the second, better appearance of Christ:  Christ advocating Science, after all.









Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s