God’s Science v. 3 Ch. 3-5 Science of Jesus etc.

Vol. 3 Chapter 3:

The Old Testament Also Supports, Individually,

Many Separate Aspects ff Science,

And Physical Evidence:

To be Proven Good, From God, You Must Pass Scientific

“Test”s, and Show Physical, Not Spiritual Things; Like …

“Fruits,” “Works,” “Signs,” “Deeds,” and “Proof”s


If almost each and every aspect of traditional Religion, often fails us? Then what can save us? As it turns out, nothing human beings have or do is really perfect. But finally, if anything, it is Science and practical knowledge – or in religion, the Science of God – that is most useful and effective.

The command from God to adopt a critical science of God, an outline of the exact nature of the Science God wanted, was outlined in at least three or four lengthy passages in our holy books; as we noted in previous chaptesr. As we just saw, in an earlier chapter, the Bible spent many words, rather exactly sketching out our Science by God. In several lengthy examples. Including a) Daniel 1.4-15; and b) 1 Kings 18.21-39; in c) Malachi 3.10. And as we will see here d) Ex. 4.3-7.15. Examples where the Bible rather exactly described in fact, what is today known as the core of Science: the Scientific or Experimental Method. In these examples moreover, it is clear that God not only wanted us to learn science; but he even commanded us specifically to apply it to our religion, our Christianity. While furthermore of course, we should not be resting on old accounts of such experiments; but should be conducting such experiments, even today. Since science does not rest on old accounts, even of early science; but demands that old experiments be reproducible, replicate-able, in our own time; to be considered totally reliable.

In any case though, the most useful, first outline of the Science that God wanted us and preachers to have and use, can be gotten from those three or four lengthy descriptions, found in the Book of Daniel; in 1 Kings; and Malachi. But these lengthy – and sometimes rather complete and reasonably accurate descriptions of basic scientific or experimental method – as complete as one could expect, three thousand years ago – important as they are, are not even necessarily the more extensive body of evidence for Science in the Bible. The fact is that in addition to Daniel, 1 Kings, Exodus 4-7, and Malachi, in addition to supporting “science” by name, the Bible also supported at random, dozens, hundreds of various separate qualities, virtues, and stressed important things. Things that turn out to be features, parts, of Science. For example: the Bible tells us about the importance of “observ”ing nature. Of evaluating different people and ideas, by their observable, “visible,” empirical results. Or as Jesus said, their “fruits, “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” and “proofs.” And it is clear that most of the time, the Bible did not mean merely “spiritual” “fruits”; the Science of God firmly demanded that people and doctrines attributed to God, “prove” they are good – by getting real, physical, observable, material results, here on this physical earth.

Consider for example, a) the moment that Jesus told us to b) “observe” the lillies; that amounts to Jesus supporting observation of material, physical things in Nature. Which of course, is a major element of science.

Especially, b) it will soon be time, here, for everyone to carefully consider the dozens of times, God stressed this extremely important word: “fruits.” God mentioned this word continuously, throughout the entire Bible. In fact, finally God tells us to evaluate preachers, religious leaders, as true or false, by observation of the success of our crops; by looking to see if following a given saying from priests, attributed to God himself, results in real material evidence. Or results in – in a major, key word that God used hundreds of times – “fruits.” (See the Bible passage, mandating priests to bring the first fruits of the people, to the LORD, somewhere). Indeed, God warns constantly about false prophets, bad priests; and tells us that “by their fruits you shall know” them.

Eventually, all of the major elements necessary for the Science of God, are separately mentioned and supported, hundreds of times, in the Bible. Like “test”ing; like “observ”ing material nature; like looking for verifiable material results, or “fruits.” Indeed – d) to zzz) – literally dozens of the major elements of Science, are supported again and again, throughout the entire Bible. Old and New Testament both.

The Bible overall therefore supported science. First, in several lengthy, detailed descriptions of it and of experimental method; as we noted by looking at major examples of this, in Daniel, in 1 Kings, and in Malachi. But it is also time to look at the hundreds of times that God mentioned and supported, independently, dozens of what are the major elements of science. It is time to note the many times that God supported “observ”ation of the things of Nature, for example. Especially everyone should note the hundreds of times God demanded that we evaluate everything in religion, Christianity, not by “faith”; but according to the “visible,” material, physical good it produces, here on this material “earth,” in a timely way (“soon”): God tells us to demand that those who say they are from God, prove it. By demonstrating “observ”ble, “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “prosper”ity, and “deeds.” And among other things say, by visible, material “proof”s.

So? In addition to the seventy or so arguments from the Bible, in favor of science, over faith? Let’s begin to look at dozens more arguments from the Bible, supporting the different aspects of science.


God’s Science Point # 72


Must be Produced;

Exodus and Moses Example

As a significant example of some thing, or quality that the Bible supported, that turns out to be part of Science, consider the rather significant literature in the Bible, demanding “proofs.”

Often these single words, isolated references, are supported by lengthier passages behind them somewhere. We will see here that a long passage on Moses and the snakes for example, mentions the word “proof” explicitly. (While the lengthy passage on Elijah in 1 Kings, does not mention the word; but it is clear enough that this is what calling for “wonders,” “signs” means: it meant that God wants us to follow those who get visible material results.) And this longer passage, on Moses, is often the implied reference, whenever the text used the word “proof” again.

Since the time of Moses, until this very day, the people particularly – and God himself – have questioned the reliability of our holy men and priests. In the following text, various people are questioning the reliability of Moses himself. And note, God does not just tell us to follow Moses with total “faith.” Instead, God commands the religious leader, to produce real material proofs that he is from a great God; by working real material wonders, on demand:

“When the Pharaoh says to you, ‘Prove yourselves by working a miracle,’ then you shall” (Ex. 7.9).

(Cf.: “The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, ‘When Pharaoh says to you, Perform a wonder,’ then you shall'” Ex. 7.8 NRSV).

Once again, we see here essentially the same simple but recognizable, early science of God, that we have seen in several major example already; in Daniel, Malachi, and in the story of Elijah in 1 Kings. The pattern, the model that God is consistently even ordering us to learn, is this: many a priest or religious leader, has often posed as being able to produce physical, material results. So that to prove he is a priest, really from God, therefore, he should simply be asked to perform material wonder, now, in front of witnesses. God himself tells Moses himself here, to work material wonders. To prove he is from God. And it is said in the Bible, that Aaron in fact did exactly that; in Ex. 7, Egyptian magicians are pictured turning their staffs into snakes; but Aron is pictured as turning his staff into a larger one, that eats up the other snakes:

The LORD said to Moses and Aaron, “When Pharaoh says to you, ‘perform a miracle,’ then say to Aaron, ‘Take your staff and throw it down before Pharaoh,’ and it will become a snake.” So Moses and Aaron went to Pharaoh and did just as the LORD commanded. Aaron threw his staff down in front of Pharaoh and his officials, and it became a snake. Pharaoh then summoned wise men and sorcerers, and the Egyptian magicians also did the same things by their secret arts: Each one threw down his staff and it became a snake. But Aaron’s staff swallowed up their staffs” (Ex. 7.8-12 NIV).

Note that God here once again is very very different from what we here from priests today. Here God – as in example after example from the Bible itself – a) does not sermonize about how unnecessary such proofs are. Or b) ask for “faith.” Nor does c) Aaron cite past miracles. Nor d) does God tell the priest to decline from working material things. Nor does God order the holy man to e) generate endless excuses, explanations, as to why he cannot or will not work material wonders. Nor does God tell the priest to f) tell us that he has “spiritual” things instead. Rather, instead, God merely, firmly, once again, simply tells Moses – or by extension, any man of God – to simply, produce a physical wonder. To prove he is really from God. (Or we will show, a God who promised “miracles”; those who do not support miracles, explicitly, openly, presumably, would not have to furnish them). And Moses and Aaron simply, do it. No excuses. While if they had not done it? Then no doubt, they would simply have been declared to be false prophets.

This is the same pattern we have seen here in the Bible over and over again: it is the science of God, as usual. Though this time, centered around the word “proof” or “prove.” So that the word “prove” or “proof” harks back to this particular incident, particularly.

Several shorter biblical passages in fact, subsequently invoke the concept, by invoking this key word: “proof.” And though the passages are often much shorter than the extended Mosaic example, their meaning is consistent with it. One random example, part of the very same pattern of demanding “proof,” is found in Psalm 30. In Psalm 30, we are all but told in fact, to believe only in a God who can “prove” that he is real and powerful, by working real material deeds, wonders:

“O Jehovah, prove yourself my helper” (Ps. 30.10 NWT). (See “proof” below).

This fits perfectly, God’s science; and even hints at extending it perhaps even further than we might extend it here, for now: even to the point of demanding that God himself produce miracles on demand, before we believe in him. God had clearly promised us many very, very material, physical wonders and miracles; so that it seems clear to the authors of these parts of the Bible at least, that the simplest way to find out a) whether God is real, and even b) whether someone is really from a real God … is to just ask them to work a material miracle or a wonder, right in front of us, right now. If they can do this, then we might suggest either that a) God is not real. Or in any case, b) we might to suspect that whatever human agents are involved here, priests or prophets, are not really from God. Just as Ezekiel said.

Note that if our holy men cannot work wonders, then a hundred or more parts of the Bible emphatically do not tell us to “have faith” in such holy men anyway; but instead, God commands us finally to simply conclude that these would-be holy men, were not holy at all; or that they were not from a real God. And as we see this, in example after example after example, from the Bible itself, it becomes abundantly clear that our modern priests, and their faith-based theology, that we always heard in church, were simply … not true. They were false. They were not really what the bulk of the Bible actually said. In point of fact, in actuality, God promised many material things from real priests; and indeed, therefore, we can tell who is really from God and who is not, by the material good they produce. Indeed, the demand for real empirical, physical results – even “proof”; and not endless “faith” – is the predominant command from God. Far from just following holy men with “faith,” rather, we are supposed to ask them to materially “prove” they are from God; by delivering real material wonders (Ps. 30.10 above). It is this message – not “faith” – we will see here, is actually what most of the Bible, really stressed: not faith, but scientific testing. Far from telling us not to scientifically “test” him, and/or priests that claim to speak for him, with science, God consistently commands us to demand from priests, real material evidence that they are good. Especially by demanding real material works, wonders, from them.

Today, priests deny, whitewash, twist this side of the Bible and of God. No doubt, because this is the kind of test that nearly all our priests themselves, would fail. Today, most priests a) stand behind “the Bible,” implying its promises of physical things; but though they implicitly promise physical miracles, regularly and reliably, they do not really produce them. Ask your own priest to work a miracle in front of you and expert witnesses, here and now – and observe what happens. You will probably hear incredulity; and then a host of sophistical excuses. But you will likely, not see a physical miracle in any timely way. Even though we were firmly promised precisely, that.

When asked to produce what they promised, preachers generate dozens of excuses, apologetics. Many priests b) today have become “spiritual,” and have really just given up on the physical side of life; to promise only spiritual things. Particularly, among the spiritual preachers, many say that we should not ask for such material wonders any more, but only ask for mental or spiritual things, like “faith.” But actually, we will be showing here (in our chapter on over-spirituality vs. God’s materialism especially), the Bible itself, often promised real material results; not just “spiritual” things. And c) in fact, God often told us again and again (if not consistently?), that we should even declare preachers and holy men, as good or false, on the basis of their material – not just “spiritual” – productivity. As d) assessed by Science.

This the Bible said, hundreds of times, in dozens of ways. But for now, lets all remember from now on, this example from Exodus; where specifically God even e) all but flatly, baldly, curtly, commands that those preachers and others who claim to have be leaders from God, simply “prove” it. By demonstrating real, timely, visible, empirical results.

And specifically and especially, we are to apply this examination, to holy men. Here, Moses himself is having trouble convincing people that he really is a spokesman (or in effect, a priest) for a real God. To fix this crucial problem, God instructs Moses – as he will instruct so many others – that he must “prove” that he is from God. By working a physical, material wonder or a miracle. Even seemingly, on demand. And furthermore, this kind of assertion, we are starting to see, is repeated throughout the entire Bible. So that amazingly, something like this – demanding that religious leaders produce real, material results; even wonders, if they promised them – and not faith and spirituality, not following endlessly without material evidence – is the predominant message from God. This is a theology that is repeated over and over again, in example after example, in passage after passage of the holy text. Rather than threats of punishments for those who doubt, who do not have “faith” (as parts of Paul implied; 2 Corin. 13.3) actually, most of the Bible told us explicitly, over and over, to simply doubt and reject, any preacher or God, who could not produce real material results. In a timely way, here on this material earth.

The demand for empirical, physical, material wonders from preachers – not endless faith and spirituality – therefore, we will see, was actually the predominant message from God. And one key part of this strong, constantly-repeated command from God, of his command to us to honor real material science, is the repeated, specific command, that holy men “prove” themselves to be good. By producing real material results, right now, in front of us. This basic concept and terminology, is found in Daniel and Ezekiel; while the command to priests to “prove” their claims specifically, is found in Exodus and Psalms and Isaiah, for instance. And it is found explicitly not only in Exodus and Moses, above, but also in Isaiah. And finally, it is found in the New Testament too; when Jesus tells a person who has been physically healed by Jesus, to present himself as “proof” to a priest.

It is important to establish that this theology, from the Old Testament, was continued in the New. But for now, let’s wrap up our survey of the Old Testament. In Isaiah for example, the king and the LORD, tell those who claim that they are holy men, explicitly, to “prove” it. By a) predicting the future accurately; or by b) working powerful material deeds:

“Set forth your case, says the LORD; bring your proofs, says the King of Jacob…. Tell us what is to happen… or declare to us the things to come…. Do good, or do harm, that we may be dismayed and terrified” (Isa. 41.21-23).

Once again, the science of God is affirmed by yet another example. Presumably, the King of Jacob, is on the side of the “LORD,” when they both seem to demand that someone who claims to be a priest, or from God, work wonders to “pro”ve it.

Looking Ahead, to the New Testament,

And Modern Priests

This is a chapter, a book, on the Old Testament; on ancient times, not the New Testament, or modern times either. But we might put in a brief note on what happened to these Old Testament principles, later on.

No doubt, many preachers today do not want to obey, or be submitted to, this side of God. And so they will try to get around the whole science of God. Typically, many preachers try to say that any such command from God – that holy men produce material “proof” of their status – was say, found only in the Old Testament, and in Judaism; but not in the New Testament and Christianity. But in fact, to a) thus hint that something in the Old Testament has been effectively canceled by the New testament, is very close to – and perhaps it simply is – heresy; going against God. While b) in any case, will find that the “New” Testament also continued the science of God too. To be sure, the New Testament – particularly the parts written by Paul – continued the material promises of God, more equivocally; at times concentrating more on mental or “spiritual” things. But finally we will find, that the promise of physical rewards was so utterly firm, so adamant, so repeated, in the Old Testament God, that the New could not simply abandon them. Not without utterly abandoning God himself. So that at most, these things were semantically finessed, by various word-“twist”ing exercises; but without ever being obvious. And without openly rejecting God’s material side.

To be sure, this is a side of God, that most preachers today, would probably fail to satisfy; so that by this standard, we would have to reject most preachers today. If you ask your own preacher to work a miracle right now, in front of you and expert “witnesses,” likely your own minister will fail, or refuse. So rather than be exposed as simply false, most ministers have tried to come up with explanations, excuses, for their inability to meet such standards today. And indeed, there are too many such explanations to answer all of them here (see though our responses to a hundred or so, in our “Sermons As Excuses” writings). But we might note – and reject – one of two common sermons, here and now. Among dozens of others, for example, many preachers who secretly feel that Jesus and the New Testament, had the right to more or less cancel the promises of the Old Testament God. That Jesus – or perhaps Paul? – gave us a “new covenant” or contract with God. Many believed that Christianity, Paul, had the right to cancel or “fulfill” or change (or “twist”?) the old promises of wonders, the old God. While many think that the old materialism, was simply, legitimately dropped, abrogated, transformed, by the “spirituality” of the New Testament. Many therefore believe that they can simply preach Jesus and the New Testament, – and spiritual results. While ignoring any old things …like the Old Testament, and the materialism of God. But to those who think this, we might as well now begin to note that none of these various arguments are entirely valid; it is not a good thing, incurring no penalty, to so entirely drop the Old Testament God, after all. There are penalties for being over-spiritual. As we will see in our chapter on that subject (after James 2.14 ff).

Among other objections to the attempt to suggest that the New Testament “fulfills” and discharges/cancels the old promises, we might note that though Jesus himself at times hints at “spiritual” wonders, Jesus never quite canceled the old promises of material things; or indeed he could not do that, without turning his back on God himself.

Indeed, we will examine evidence, in an entire chapter or even a book on Jesus himself, that Jesus overtly, deliberately continued God’s materialism and this very science. And indeed the very same command to “prove” things,” is also found in the New Testament as well; and it is even delivered by Jesus himself, in person.

First, remember, as a general principle, that a) Jesus was often said to be working not just “spiritual” wonders, but real material wonders; physical miracles. Like making real, eatable fish and bread, appear in empty baskets. And furthermore, let us now add that b) those material wonders were at times explicitly presented in the New Testament, as “proof” that Jesus was from God.

Note in the following examples for example, that clearly, Jesus was not just working spiritual wonders; Jesus himself seems to be working very, very physical, material wonders: curing the physically sick, those with real, actual, leprosy. As indeed generations of preachers insisted:

“And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean” (Mark 1.44; Luke 5.14).

Jesus is pictured as working many material wonders. And furthermore, as proof that he was from God. Here for example Jesus himself – here, loyal to the tradition of the Jews, and God – not only healed a man of leprosy, but then explicitly orders the healed man, to present himself to the priests, and donate it seems, as a “proof” that Jesus was working material wonders.

“And immediately the leprosy left him, and he was made clean. And he sternly charged him, and sent him away at once, and said to him, ‘See that you say nothing to any one; but go, show yourself to the priest, and offer for your cleansing what Moses commanded, for a proof to the people” (Mark 1.44; Luke 5.14).

Once again, the Bible – and now specifically Jesus himself – follows the science of God. More specifically note, c) once again, the keyword “proof” plays an important role; just as God once did, Jesus orders those who have experienced such proofs, to present their testimony, their witness, themselves, to “pro”ve a connection to a powerful God.

Thus the science of God is once again confirmed. This time by Moses. But then also by Jesus himself. And by the way, the concept of materially “proving” that we are from God, was central. In light of these several examples, that give in effect the background of the biblical use of the word “proof,” we might next therefore, begin to tie in many other Biblical references to “proofs”; as being also, likely, references to the earlier usages; and thence to the science of God. Like this next quick example; when Jesus proved he was resurrected, as they said. Jesus in this case, they said, “proved” his resurrection, by many appearances and so forth:

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

(Cf. “But the cares of the world and the delight in riches choke the word, and it proves unfruitful” Mat. 13.22; God wants prosperity, if not excessive “care” or “craving” for excessive “riches”).

(Demands for “signs,” “miracles,” might repeated here in the category of “proofs” too. Though these topics pose special problems, and will get separate discussions; Jesus having problems with “signs,” etc.. Finally though, it is becoming clear enough, what the real direction of God really was.)

Those Who Reject or Fail This Science –

God Calls an “Abomination”

What should we say about our preachers today? Can they past the tests that God here requires? Many millions of sermons have asserted that preachers, holy men, are simply, reliably, getting the “proofs” God required; they are getting lots and lots of huge physical results, even miracles. And yet however, God told us to adopt real “science”; while real, independent science – independent of what preachers claim about it – cannot confirm that ministers are walking on water; or making bread appear out of thin air. Even though they often promised to deliver “all” and “whatever” we “ask”; even all the wonders that Jesus worked, “and greater things than these.”

Other ministers to be sure, deliver incongruously, millions of other different sermons; sermons that suggest that they are perhaps, not getting physical miracles today; but asserting that they do not have to get real material wonders any more; but only spiritual results. Like helping others have more faith in their mind or spirit. But later on here, in our writings on Over-Spirituality, we will be finding that nearly all these and many hundreds of other common sermons that we have heard over and over in churches all over the world, were just simply, false. Here we will be seeing especially, that the central pillar of contemporary theology – that religion only needs to get primarily mental or “spiritual” results, is absolutely contradicted by the Science of God. Where God continually promises real, material, physical – not just spiritual – results. And where indeed, far from telling us to continuing following such leaders with total “faith,” the Bible ultimately concluded by telling us to label such religious leaders, an “abomination.” If they cannot produce real material “proofs.”

The command from God to preachers – that they must often prove they are good, by producing material wonders – was extremely strong and direct. While finally it concluded by saying that if those many preachers who say they stand behind “God” and the “Bible” – including implicitly, its promises material “miracles” – cannot however actually produce material wonders, then far from asking us to just continue to follow our preachers and their picture of God with total “faith,” or trying to live on “spiritual” results only, instead the LORD firmly and repeatedly commanded us to simply … “rebuke” any such priests; as being false prophets, false priests.

Indeed, God calls such priests, an “abomination.”

How strongly worded, was the apparent command from God to preachers? To produce physical material results? Finally, God repeats over and over, the promise that those who are truly good and are truly following God, have to produce real empirical results, and even “proofs” of that. Or else finally, we are to simply reject any and all such priests, as being deceitful priests. As being even, finally, an “abomination”:

“The LORD your God will make you abundantly prosperous in all the work of your hand, in the fruit of your body, and in the fruit of your cattle, and in the fruit of your ground…” (Deut. 30.9 RSV).

“Set forth your case, says the LORD; bring your proofs, says the King of Jacob…. Tell us what is to happen… or declare to us the things to come…. Do good, or do harm, that we may be dismayed and terrified” (Isa. 41.21-23).

And if they can’t do that? Then: “You indeed, are nothing and your work is nothing at all; whoever chooses you is an abomination” (Isa. 41.24 NRSV).

So here we have it once again; in our fourth or fifth major example, once again God firmly notes that God promises many material – not spiritual – things. While this promise is so firm, that we can tell who is really from God, and who is not, by their material fruitfulness. Indeed, it even seems that we and leaders have the right and even obligation, to periodically call preachers before them, and demand that the preacher produce a real material wonder, in front of expert witnesses. While, if the preacher cannot do that – as probably, none whatsoever can – then, far from continuing to follow them faithfully, instead we are supposed to simply call them an “abomination.” And reject them; firmly and publicly noting they are false, bad persons. False prophets. (An “abomination” is a very, very severe term of rejection, dislike, from ancient times; it was used to convey very, very strong disapproval, even abhorrence, from God. It is a term used by God to describe false priests, homosexuals, and women speaking in church; putting these three things on equal footing.)

But finally, what do we do, if even the many asserted physical miracles of even Pat Robertson turn out not to be supported by real science? If “all” preachers, seemingly almost every preacher in the “world,” fails this examination from God? Then after all, there is one scenario in the Bible, that seems to fit and explain this; and to tell us what to do: the Apocalyptic scenario. Precisely.

Facing the Apocalyptic Conclusion

Probably the passages above, on “proof” – where God or a LORD curtly demands real, physical “proofs” from would-be, self-proclaimed holy men – represents the more extreme biblical formulation of the Science of God. There, God adamantly levies a very simple but very powerful test, to expose false things in religion. It is strong, and simple: just ask your preacher or holy man to work a giant, spectacular miracle, right now, in front of you and reliable scientific witnesses. Here and now, live. If he cannot do that, then consider him forevermore, simply a false priest, a deceiver.

No doubt, few if any priests today can pass this test. Indeed likely, if this is applied to our holy men, they will “all” be found false. But this note, is exactly as the Bible foretold.

Today, everyone should be applying these tests, this science, to our holy men today; so why aren’t they? To date, many priests are a) aware of this aspect of the holy books, the test that the Bible said we should apply to them; but surely b) most of them know they themselves cannot past this test. And so c) just as the Bible forewarned, our many false holy men have dozens, hundreds of clever, “sophist”ical arguments, to try to “whitewash” this situation, or “twist” what the holy texts said, into something different. Preachers are desperate to avoid this test, by intellectually defeating or disappearing he passages of the Bible that demanded it; our holy men have advanced hundreds of arguments to try to void this test – because no doubt, nearly every single priest and minister on earth, will fail this test, if repeated often. Try it yourself in fact: ask your own minister to work a miracle, in front of you; and see how often he succeeds. Those of us who have tried this, have seen ministers fail over and over; while they deliver however many sophistical speeches to assert that they should not have to meet this standard at all. But indeed, we have heard and seen everything – except for the promised material results.

Our Bibles made huge promises – and even at times told us to evaluate our preachers, according to whether they make good on those promises in a regular, reliable way, or not. Yet we find here that our priests are not telling us about this test; or they are trying to deny the Bible ever said any such thing. Even though we are showing here, in an entire book full of hundreds of examples, God very, very definitely did establish this examination for priests, this science.

So what should we now, finally say, about our holy men, of yesterday and today too? It would seem here, that probably every single priest on earth, is now found to be false. Since they stand behind a religion that promised huge, reliable miracles, or material results – and yet they themselves, cannot produce them. But how could this shattering conclusion be true? How can we face conclusion that finally, every single Christian preacher on earth is basically, false?

Possibly the major point of our books here, is that believers, even preachers themselves, can at last find the courage to humbly face this humbling conclusion – by being told that amazingly after all, the Bible itself authorized this awareness. Finally we will have been showing here, there is a series of prophesies in the holiest texts, that seem to fit this situation to a T. There are parts of the Bible that exactly explain precisely this very situation. One Apocalyptic “day” remember, we are to discover, precisely this. One Apocalyptic day, remember, we are supposed to find that the whole “world,” and even our preachers and angels, had been deceived or deceptive, had falled to “illusions” and “delusions” and “false promises,” in their “worship” (Rev. 13), in their vision of “Christ.” One day, after all, you are supposed to discover that “all have sinned”; that even our holiest preachers have betrayed us, and the truth. And probably in that moment, our Heaven itself is supposed to simply, collapse (2 Peter 3).

If the whole world therefore, and our “worship” too, has been in the grip of false promises … of miracles? And/or a false spirituality? And if we now therefore see a false promise, a series of false prophesies, in our own traditional Christian preachers? Even the holiest ones in heaven itself? Then amazingly enough, after all, the Bible itself authorized us to come to this conclusion, and simply … accept it. Because one Apocalyptic “day,” we are supposed to see precisely that: we are supposed to see God reveal to us, that “all” our holiest men were sinners. And God is supposed to show us that because of the many false things in our holy men, false things in their vision of Christ, the whole world was in effect, in the grip of a false Christ.

This to be sure, is a very hard thing to believe; but the Bible told us too, that many would not be able to “face” God as he really is; or “bear” what he really finally had to say. But if it is hard for those trained from infancy to learn to see and believe and accept the countless signs of failure, falsity, in their holiest men? Our point will be that many more might find the strength to face this shattering revelation … on knowing that surprisingly, a) facing it is exactly what God wanted. The faithful, the believing, should be able to face and accept this at last, knowing that surprisingly enough, the admission, the uncovering of great flaws in our holiest men, does not deny our God … but follows him far more closely than our preachers ever did.

Furthermore, ordinary believers should at last be able to simply accept the failure of miracles, of our holy men … because this not only fulfills God’s Plan; but also b) because we can now show there is an extremely positive reward for this. Since, even as our traditional heaven of “faith” in “miracles” (and spirituality) is shattered, the reader should after all, be starting to see a positive reward: a strong, clear, “second” view of God. A stronger, second appearance to Christ. Who we see, supporting Science. The Science of God. And when the formerly blind believer, begins to follow not just preachers, but this vision of Christ? To follow not just blind faith in old and fallible answers, but also follow practical sense and science? Then the individual believer should become far more effective in life, and on the job. Far more fruitful. The believer should become fruitful enough to begin to help not only him- or herself in everyday life, with better critical thinking skills – and out of that, a better job and a bigger paycheck. At the same time, a believer based at last on not blind faith but the Science of God, being more fruitful, can begin to contribute more to the promised, new heavenly kingdom of good, here on this material earth.

To help this, all of our holy men, should begin to confess their individual sins – but even more than that, begin to “confess the sins of the church,” as the Popes have tentatively, imperfectly begun to, c. 1998-2001 AD. Every preacher should confess serious shortfalls, in the traditional religion of Faith, and of the magician-like Christ of miracles specifically; and then preachers should help guide their flocks, to the better, more fruitful, Science of God.


God’s Science Point # 73


Material, physical things, rewards, fruits, were definitely promised to true followers. By the Bible. In countless passages, long and short, both the Old and New testaments. The scientific materialism of God, the a) scientific method we are seeing here, is described and prescribed to all believers in the Bible itself; not only in many rather long descriptions, as in Daniel, 1 Kings, and Malachi. But furthermore, as we are about to see in our present chapter, b) the absolutely central, key importance of Science to God, is also confirmed and then expanded, as the Bible began to employ and advocate, many different terms, concepts, relating directly to science. As we will be seeing in our present chapter, God began to expand and detail our understanding of science, of the art of assessing and obtaining material things, by presenting to us, dozens and even hundreds of times, many key terms related to science. Like for example, God telling us to demand “proofs.” Or as we now add here, God repeatedly also commanded us all to observe … unusual or significant physical events; or “signs.”

Most preachers today constantly speak as if God never promised anything physical or material; but only stressed “spiritual” things like faith and hope. But the materiality, the physicality of most of God’s promises, his rewards, and of his science, is actually found over and over, particularly in the Old Testament. Specifically, as part of the stress on looking for and getting real, physical, material results from real religion, are God’s constantly commands, throughout the entire Bible, that real holy leaders produce real physical “fruits” and “works” and empirical “proofs.” But among other key demands from God, in particular, one well-known theology, one well-known (if widely disobeyed) command, was that those who are really from God, will demand, get, or see, “signs.” There are many, many parts of the Bible that say that a true prophet, and a true believer, must (among other things; as one of several things) produce unusual or significant, material wonders. Or often specifically, “signs.” To prove that he or she is genuinely connected to a real and powerful god.

Many preachers do not want the people to discover this side of God. Bad preachers are very proud people, and do not want to be submitted to this science of God – and thereby found out to have been false, very seriously inadequate, themselves. Therefore, bad preachers constantly attack the science of God, or specifically what is sometimes called “the theology of signs.” While, typically, preachers have fixed on one or two lines in the New Testament that, taken by themselves and out of context, are open to an anti-“sign” reading. But we will see that if Jesus at times seemed to say he would produce no signs, at the same moment he allowed that at least one sign would be given even to a faithless generation: the “sign of Jonah,” thought to be his own resurrection after three days interment. So that our book on the Science especially of not just of the Old Testament, but of the New Testament and especially Jesus himself, will show that Jesus’ own remarks on this subject, are ambiguous at best; though ultimately they stress physical evidence; since Jesus was pictured continually in the New Testament, working many, many very, very physical wonders, or signs.

A demand that those who claim to be from God, show real, visible, “signs,” is written all over the Bible. In fact, we will note now, a) God not only allowed us to demand signs from holy men; b) finally in the story of Ahaz for example, the biblical narrator, in part God himself, was even “weary,” and even it seems, angry and exasperated, at those who are merely faithful, and do not demand real science, and real signs, as proof that our alleged holy men are real.

The story of Ahaz, in Isaiah 7, is probably the most useful, but also most amusing passage in the Bible, advocating “signs.” This passage not only confirms the science of God; in fact God is quite, quite, even amusingly adamant and exasperated about those who do not follow it. In this example, Ahaz indeed does precisely what most of our spiritual preachers do today: he quotes the part of the Bible that seemed to tell us not to “test” God. But here at last, God very firmly, adamantly tells us all, that those who do not want to “test” God, or who do not want to ask for “signs,” are very, very wrong, deceived, bad people:

“Again the Lord spoke to Ahaz, ‘ask a sign of the LORD your God; let it be deep as Sheol or high as heaven.’ But Ahaz said, ‘I will not ask, and I will not put the LORD to the test.’… ‘And he [Isaiah?] said, ‘Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also? Therefore the Lord himself will give you a sign. Behold, a young woman shall conceive and bear a son, and shall call his name Immanuel” (Isa. 7.12-14)

Our faith-based preachers have often told us, in their radical overemphasis on faith, that we should not ask God, preachers, for proofs that they are from God. To try to prove this, we are constantly read the part of the Bible that, taken by itself, seemed to tell us we should not “test” religion or God. Yet that isn’t what the Bible itself actually, finally said. In the above passage on Ahaz in particular, note that a) God himself explicitly addressed the assertion that we should not “test” God. And b) in direct refutation of it, God tells us to ignore that, and ask for material “signs” of him: “ask a sign of the LORD your God.”

That single line alone – “ask a sign of the LORD your God” – should surely, just in itself, have been enough to end anti-sign, anti-science arguments. There God not only allows, but God himself even firmly, adamantly commands us – with exclamations points, and with clear signs of exasperation at those who do not listen – to ask for material proofs, visible “signs,” before we believe. The advocacy of a science, one depending on visible evidence – or here, “signs” – could hardly be more clear, or more firmly expressed, than in this example. Here the text gets clearer and clearer, on God’s demand that we follow science, and even deeper and more thorough regarding finally, amazingly, on God’s attack on faith.

Did God really begin to attack, note problems, in “faith”? Indeed, he did. Here the main character “Ahaz” clearly represents people based on faith; Ahaz clearly stands for those many of people and preachers, who in the past and even today, insist that we should follow God based on faith, and not physical proofs; or here, specifically, that God should not be asked for “signs.” Yet in this passage it is clear that Ahaz, in refusing to “test” God, and to ask for “signs, is obviously, simply, going directly against God. The fact is, God explicitly and strongly commanded Ahaz to ask for signs.

God has just commanded us to ask for a sign. Therefore, when Ahaz refuses to ask for them, he directly goes against God’s command. Those who refuse to ask for “signs,” therefore, go against God. Furthermore, this incident not only confirms the importance of “signs”; it also confirms what we will have been saying here about God’s final support for “test”ing as well. Ahaz here, in defense of his all-too faithful, anti-evidence theology, quotes the very line that faith-based preachers love: he quotes the part of the Bible where it says we should not “put the LORD … to the test.” Yet powerfully, obviously, directly confirming what we said about testing earlier, God himself clearly does not approve of using that “test” line, the way so many preachers use it. God obviously does not approve of the “not put the LORD to the test” line, to forbid asking God, asking preachers, for physical proofs. Because indeed, God had just very strongly commanded us, to ask for signs. Then too, the passage quotes the apparently anti-“test” quote … and then indicates that it did not mean what preachers thought. Finally in fact, God is even “weary,” even apparently angry and annoyed here, at Ahaz and others, for that argument. God is extremely angry at the faith-based theology, that refuses God’s by-now often repeated commands, that the faithful put God’s power to the test by scientific “test”ing.” And specifically here – by asking for signs.

God himself is not only strongly supporting testing; he is explicitly doing it over and above the “not … test” line. Furthermore, God is even extremely angry, at those who refuse to see this, and obey. So what must we finally begin to say therefore, here, about the million, the billion faith-based persons and preachers, who have refused to acknowledge and obey God, to obey the Science of God? What should we now begin to say, to those millions of preachers (millions, worldwide and throughout history) who assure us constantly, that we should never apply “test”ing or science to them, to their religion, to traditional Christianity? What should we now begin to say, especially to those many people who quote the “not test God” passage to allegedly prove that God did not want us to apply science to all of life? Finally, we must tell the millions of such people, that they have been the foretold, “deceived” persons under a “strong delusion,” under an “enchantment,” following “false prophets,” bad “interpretations,” and in effect, a “false Christ.” Such persons have presented themselves to us and to themselves, as true believers; but they have followed – or have been actually themselves been – the enemies of God. They have believed themselves to be – or have deceitfully posed as – the followers of God. But … in they end they have betrayed God; and have not followed even his most strongly worded commands, to look for “signs,” and to honor the Science of God.

Here, in the dialogue between Isaiah and Ahaz – and God – God has very, very firmly addressed – and attacked – not one, but two of the very most popular sermons stressing “faith.” Ahaz had just explicitly expressed the very, faith-based theology, and the very quote that we still hear from most pulpits today: that preachers and holy men should not be asked to prove themselves by material a) “signs”; because God told us never to b) “test” him. Or adding to this now, many said we are not to ask for material “signs.” But it is clear that here, in the story of Ahaz, God adamantly did not approve of these two common sermons. Elsewhere, we will have showed that the common “thou shalt not put the LORD to the test” sermon, was simply false. In the meantime, here we find that the story of Ahaz strongly confirms our idea. Very far from approving of the very, very common sermon against “test”ing, in point of fact, God becomes “weary,” even apparently angry at those who deliver such ideas.

Those millions of preachers who insisted that God told us not to “test” him, or ask him for “signs,” should at long last note, this part of the Old Testament very, very, very carefully. Because in point of fact, the Bible says the exact opposite to what countless preachers have taught. God not only explicitly commands us “to “ask a sign of the LORD your God”; actually, God himself seemingly becomes at first very, very angry at those who do not follow.

Or then finally, after feeling extremely angry for a while, our representatives for God, feel “weary” with speaking to those faithful persons who do not understand, or do not listen to God and his science:

“Hear then, O house of David! Is it too little for you to weary men, that you weary my God also?” (Isa. 7. 12-13 RSV & NRSV)

To sum up: a) God not only heartily approves of people asking for real material signs, asking for proofs from him; b) God actually commands people to ask for such proofs: “ask a sign,” God himself firmly, explicitly commands believers. Next, confirming this a first time, c) God obviously does not approve of those who, like Ahaz, try to use the line that we must not put God to the “test,” as an excuse for not asking for material evidence. Here the text quotes that line … and indicates the this usage of preachers directly goes against God’s clear command; to indeed “test” him, and “ask a sign.”

Furthermore, that’s not the end of it: d) finally, God (speaking through Isaiah himself) is even actually angry, at those who do not obey the science of God; most translations use exclamation points in the text (!) to convey the sense of anger and impatience of God. At those who refuse his repeated commands to “test everything” in religion; and to “ask” for “signs.” Or at best, after being extremely angry at those who do not follow, God and his representatives become “weary’ of the faithful, who claim that men should not ask for signs from God.

Far from punishing those who ask for such things, God seems at best “weary” and even angry at those who do not ask for such things. God is extremely angry at those who are faith-based; who do not ask for material proofs, and “signs.” Indeed, God even somehow seems eager to begin to punish those who do not ask for signs; and honor God, by honoring the results.

Now this is for you, O priest. And for the millions of faith-based “believers.” And their “ministers.” Few passages in the Bible show God being as angry at anyone, as he is angry at you. So that surely, you will be punished for your disobedience, in some subtle ways.


God’s Science Point # 74

Material “Prosperity”

Is Promised

To Those Who Really Follow God

Science of course, depends on focusing on visible, physical things; not invisible spirits. Or when it examines mostly invisible physical forces – like electricity say – science deduces their existence, by observation of visible evidence; like sparks. Science is generally not interested in things that cannot be proven by any physical evidence.

A concentration on observable, physical, material things, is a major part of science. And if in the past, our priests said they were immune to science, because they work with non-material, invisible, supernatural things … in fact, what nearly our priests have said is not quite true. Those who really know God, know that he himself often concentrated on very, very, very physical, material things.

In fact, those who say they know God, are supposed to prove it … by delivering, demonstrating, among other things, real material “prosperity.”

It is often claimed in sermons and homilies, that a story like the story of Job, tells us that often God does not send prosperity to us, to good people; but often even sends suffering and privation instead. But here as usual, our preachers are reading and following, only part of the Bible. In this case, they are ignoring the end of Job especially; where God finally, in the end, seems pleased to give Job even many, many riches, in point of fact:

“And the LORD blessed the latter days of Job more than his beginning; and he had fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she-asses. He had also seven sons and three daughters” (Job 42.12-13).

Note that God is giving us here – even the “suffering servant” Job – real physical riches. Not just spiritual things, but things as massively physical as “fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, and “a thousand yoke of oxen.” Furthermore, God once again confirms the basic scenario or theology being outlined here: if we are good, God rewards us not with suffering, or even merely mental or spiritual goods; but with real physical rewards. Those who really understand and follow God, may suffer short-term; but over the longer run they should get very, very physical rewards. Those who really understand and follow God, who are really good (Job having been called a good servant by God himself, earlier), should not meet material poverty, and suffering. Nor should they be content with just “spiritual” succor. Instead, they should get very real, very tangible, physical goods as part of their reward. As real, as physical, as “fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, a thousand yoke of oxen.” (Which alone, at present-day value would be worth say, upwards of $3,000,000 USD; three million dollars).

Today to be sure, promises of “prosperity” are overdone, and many falsely exaggerated promises are continually made, of miracles and material rewards, by televangelists, and what has come to be reviles, as their “prosperity gospel.” Yet in spite of the incredible and culpable, evil misuse of this doctrine by televangelists, promises of specifically, “prosperity” in fact, join promises of dozens of other material things, by different names, throughout the entire Bible; including will see, even “money,” “riches,” long physical “life,” “food,” “fruit,” victory in physical (as well as spiritual) battles, etc.. Or in any case, lots of specifically, an obviously very-physical “prosperity.”

This prosperity God even often promises us, indeed, as a solemn oath or contract or “covenant.” While being “holy” by the way, is actually defined as following this specific theology, this contract:

“The LORD will establish you as his holy people, as he promised you on oath, if you keep the commands of the LORD your God and walk in his ways …The LORD will grant you abundant prosperity – the fruit of your womb (cf. “their fruit does not mature”), the young of your livestock and the crops of your ground – in the land he swore to your forefathers to give you. The LORD will open the heavens, the storehouse of his bounty, to send rain” (Deut. 28.9,11-12 NIV).

“I will extend prosperity to her like a river” (Isa. 66.12).

“I will give prosperity, says the LORD of hosts” (Hag. 2.9).

God (here at least), clearly thinks of physical things as good; and he constantly promises them as a reward, to those who follow him. He says this in dozens, hundreds of ways. And by way of many extended examples. But also, we are now noting, by way of many keywords. Here we have just noted God promising physical rewards under the rubric specifically of “prosperity.” This is just one of dozens of such keywords that God continually used, to firm up his promise of material results, material rewards. To those who truly hear and obey him.


God’s Science Point # 75

“Fruits” In the Old Testament;

Jeremiah Especially

The Old Testament promises those who are good, “fruits”; and eventually even tells us to evaluate holy men by them. “Fruits” mostly meant, a) whatever material good we produce. Originally it meant particularly b) a tenant farmer’s rather literal fruits, like grapes and wheat; or a shepherd’s herd. Later on in the New Testament, the c) disciples hinted that this might be extended to include “fruits of the spirit,” or pleasant ideas and spirits, like “hope” and so forth. But originally, in Old Testament books like Deuteronomy, the emphasis was on real, physical, material goods. (This idea relates to many scholarly findings: see for example Dr. M. G. Kline’s comments on the “Ten Commandments,” pp. 1251-52, in The New Bible Dictionary, J. D. Douglas ed.; Eerdmans Pub., Grand Rapids Michigan, 1962-74. Where Dr. Kline sees specifically the Ten Commandments, as reflecting a typical “suzeranity treaty” between “lord”s and followers who were basically, vassals. Though “Feudalism” proper many might say, did not fully exist in Old Testament times, and was only fully developed in more Medieval times, here we note that most historians acknowledge various related phenomena, in very early times; specially “serfdom” is often said to have existed from ancient Greek times. While we here find the basic idea of a similar “covenant” between a “lord” and his followers, throughout the Bible itself. So that we, following others, say that in effect, the social contract or covenant, of a sort of “proto-Feudalism,” is the basis of Judeo Christianity; and of early civilization in fact. Since it is simply an agreement of the people, to follow a leader, and contribute part of their “fruits” to him; in exchange for the benefits of central social management; armies and granaries and so forth).

The emphasis by God, on “fruits,” came from the nature of early civilization, and their economies: formed of kings and landlords, and subjects, farmers. The economies worked this way often: farmers, shepherds, the ordinary people, in return for protection from the local “lord,” were to give to the clerics of the lord, periodic payments, taxes, tribute (note Abram giving to the Pharaoh), sacrifices. Since the subjects were mostly farmers and shepherds, they would make payments to the nobles, in the form of a portion of their crops; particularly their “first fruits.” This is the background, the root, of Judaism and Christianity. As this surfaces in the Bible, especially in books like Deuteronomy: the lord or God, in speaking of “fruits,” a) encourages us to following and obey him; which means in part b) to “work” to grow, develop physical fruits; and then to give fruits, especially “first fruits” of the season, to good priests; for them to take to the lord; or to the lord directly (as Abram does; the root of us success; he even gives his wife to a local lord or Pharaoh). In c) exchange for that, the lord promised to give us the advantages of a central government supported by taxes, tribute: to protect us from invading armies, insects; to open his granaries to us in times of famine (as the Pharaohs did for example). In short, Judaism and Christianity was a reflection of the standard covenantial agreement of early proto-feudalistic, tenant farmer civilization. An arrangement which eventually became deified; with the idea of an ideal “Lord” God in heaven, dignifying, deifying, the whole economic arrangement.

But in any case, most important for immediate purposes, eventually our Lord tells us d) material goods – fruits, works – are extremely important. So important that finally each and every aspect of religion, every saying or writing alleged to have come from God, must prove that it is really good and from the lord … by demonstrating that following that saying alleged to have come from the Lord, produces real, material results; “fruits.” Produces them … and then brings some of them, one day or another, to the local lord, and/or god. While the advantage of this, the lord told us, was that the lord in turn, would do materially good things for us: he would not kill us; he would protect us from invading armies; he would give us central government and a strong people; prosperity, many descendants … and thus allow us to be more materially productive; to get many fruits for him, but also us.

The whole thing was essentially economic, having to do with furnishing food especially – always a priority, in early, subsistence economies, where many people often died from famines and disease. And being physical, centered around crop production, it could all be rather systematized. In ancient times, as today, there were many conflicting lords and credos however; and it was hard to know which one to follow. So some kind of regulatory science was needed. So first, aa) the Bible warned that there were often conflicting and unreliable statements being reported as being from “the LORD.” Indeed, the God of the Old Testament (and later, often, even Jesus in the New) again and again told us this, in seventy, a hundred and more types of quotes, and by way of detailed and varied language and illustrations (being noted here and now), that there are always many false things in religion; even false things in saying that appeared to be from “Christ” or the “Lord.” So that and bb) amazingly therefore, though obedience to and faith in your Lord was a great virtue, still, we needed to make sure that various commands issued in the name of the “lord,” were really from him. And in effect, we could tell which commands were really the true commands of the lord … by looking to see how materially fruitful it was, following this or that command. And looking to see whether this or that prophesy, really came true or not.

The early formula for civilization, was a sort of proto-feudalism, proto-science, in part from Mesopotamia many have said. And it is the root of Judaism and Christianity. Which can be found in the writings of prophets like Jeremiah. Who was most concerned however, that there were many false, competing lords, false doctrines out there. Jeremiah warning that many subjects, believers, followers, would often follow the wrong idea of the Lord.

But by the way, there is a surprising twist in Jeremiah: Israel and Judah were very often overrun and destroyed by larger, more powerful neighboring empires; Israel being destroyed by Assyria in 722 BC: Judah or Jerusalem by Babylon, in 586-7 BC. Jeremiah (born about 640 BC?) was apparently a Jew living in the era when Egypt and Assyria and the Babylonian Empire were often contending with each other, with Israel in the middle. In his time, Babylonians had taken over part of Israel and Judah; Jews tried to revolt in 598 BC, but were defeated by Nebuchanrezar; while the Babylonians destroy its temple and king, or the house of the Lordl the “First Temple,” in 587 BC. In that era, many jewish prophets – like one “Hananiah” (Jer. 28.15) – of course urged loyalty to jewish tradition, their lord and god and Israel; but Jeremiah, while claiming obedience to the tradition of the jewish Lord god, also urged his people to give in to the Babylonians. Probably because their empire was more powerful, and would soon destroy Israel and Judah; Jeremiah correctly prophesying the fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians, the destruction of its Temple, in 587 BC.

This was a rather amazing new message for the Bible; Jeremiah accepted by the Bible (if not some of his contemporaries) as holy … even as he urged that Jews give up in part on their own kingdom – and religion? That they ignore some of their prophets, loyal to Jahweh, as “false.” As he urged all to submit an alien king and religion. Asserting that many of the prophets of Israel were illegitimate. Amazingly however, the Bible tells us that all this was approved of by “the LORD,” taken to mean God himself.

While indeed, today Jeremiah is found in the Bible itself, and seems to be approved of by God. Even as Jeremiah attacks those prophets and others, who defend Israel and Judah:

“An appalling and horrible thing has happened in the land: the prophets prophesy falsely, and the priests rule at their direction; my people love to have it so, but what will you do when the end comes?””(Jer. 5.30-31 RSV).

“Am I a God at hand, says the LORD, and not a God afar off? Can a man hide … Do I not fill heaven and earth? Says the LORD. I have heard what the prophets have said who prophesy lies in my name, saying, ‘I have dreamed, I have dreamed!’ How long shall there be lies in the heart of the prophets…. Therefore, behold, I am against the prophets, says the LORD, you steal my words from one another. Behold, I am against the prophets, says the LORD, who use their tongues and say, ‘Says the LORD” … when I did not send them” (Jer. 23.23-32).

“I was like a gentle lamb led to the slaughter” (Jer. 11.19).

“Do not trust in these deceptive words: ‘This is the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD, the temple of the LORD’…. Behold, you trust in deceptive words to no avail” (Jer. 7.4-8).

“How can you say, ‘We are wise, and the law of the LORD is with us’? But, behold, the false pen of the scribes has made it into a lie” (Jer. 8.8).

“Behold, I will refine them and test them” (Jer. 9.7).

“As for the prophet who prophesies peace, when the word of that prophet comes to pass, then it will be known tat the LORD has truly sent the prophet” (Jer. 27.9; Deut. 20.18 ff).

“Behold, the days are coming when I will make a new covenant … not like the covenant which I made with their fathers; no longer shall each man teach his neighbor and each his brother, saying, ‘Know the LORD,’ for they shall all know me…. Thus says the LORD, who gives the sun for light by day and the fixed order of the moon and the stars [i.e. heaven] for light by night…. If this fixed order departs…, then shall the descendants of Israel cease from being a nation before me for ever…. If the heavens above can be measured, and the foundations of the earth below can be explored … then I will cast off all the descendants of Israel for all that they have done, says the LORD” (Jer. 31.31-37).

“I will give to every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings” (Jer. 17.19).

“Both prophet and priests are ungodly; even in my house” (Jer. 23.11).

“As for the prophet who prophesies peace, when the word of that prophet comes to pass, then it well be known that the LORD has truly sent the prophet” (Jer. 28.9; Deut. 18.20?).

“Thus the LORD the God of Israel, said to me: ‘Take from my hand this cup of the wine of wrath, and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it’” (Jer. 25.15).

“Thus says the LORD of hosts, the God of Israel…. Now I have given all these lands into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar, the king of Babylon, my servant” (Jer. 27.4, 6).

“The captain of the bodyguard who served the kind of Babylon, entered Jerusalem. And he burned the house [temple] of the LORD and the king’s house and all the houses of Jerusalem; every great house he burned down … And … carried away captive some of the poorest” (Jer. 52.12-15).

“In all of its cities, there shall again be habitations of shepherds resting their flocks” (Jer. 33.12).

Though …“Behold, days are coming, says the LORD, when I will restore the fortunes of my people, Israel and Judah” (Jer. 30.3).

This series of speeches in Jeremiah, may be (alongside Isaiah) even the major, primary Old Testament text, used by the New Testament. The experience of Jeremiah, was no doubt useful in a later-day Jerusalem, which c. 25 AD also found itself, as usual, occupied by a foreign power: in this case, by Rome, and therefore by Greco-Roman culture. In this moment, many Jews, like Jeremiah before them, were no doubt attempt to collaborate, assimilate, into the invader’s values; in this case the values of Romans, Greeks. And indeed, the ideas of Jeremiah, were used in founding the new religion of Christianity; a religion that at once claimed total obedience to the old Lord God and his religion, Judaism … even as however, it in effect allowed (in a way typical of Hellenistic things) that a Roman centurion, might be a good man. Even as it suggested that God might abandon Israel itself, the Jews, because of their sins. To create a “new covenant,” and another, separate religion: in this case, Christianity. One that would meld together the tradition of “God” and the Jews, with the gentile population, of Greeks and Romans, etc..

In the time of Christ, when Jews were tying to deal with Roman occupation, and possible assimilation into Greco-Roman culture, and many wondering how to deal with this, Jeremiah formed a useful model. Jeremiah had probably been a mostly loyal Jew – but one who however was facing the fact that Israel was as usual occupied, a vassal state, of a larger empire. And its rebellion against Babylon, was about to be defeated once again, by it. Rather than remaining devout loyal to Israel, Jeremiah actually … allowed for a departure from some traditional Jewish ideas, in favor of the values even of invading empires. This experience with Babylon, in the time of Jeremiah, was used by the New Testament to partially frame its position regarding the occupation of Jerusalem by Greco-Roman civilization, in the time of Jesus.

To be sure, it had been a moment of huge changes in the holy traditions. But Jeremiah went on with it. And his words and concepts, can be seen repeated over and over, in the acts of Jesus. Jeremiah a) actually urging cooperation with – or in Christianity, love for – apparent “enemies”; even allowing for b) even the destruction of the “temple” or house of the Lord. (In Jeremiah, the destruction of the First Temple; in Christianity, the change from Judaism to Christianity; or even the destruction of the second temple, 70 AD). All this c) allowing even the destruction of Israel/Judah. Which was d) justified in part, by suggesting that Israel/Judah had often sinned against the old Lord – and thus the Lord was punishing the nation he had pledged to protect from enemies (but not sin and error?). The people being said in effect, to have violated their agreements or “covenants” with the Lord. So that there might even be g) a “new covenant” to replace it. One which might or might not, have Israel as its center. Some parts of the above promising to “restore” Israel; other parts suggesting that God might finally, in an era when things would be “measured,” just give up on Israel itself, and its people and tradition; and favor other nations, other peoples. Arguments which were quite useful to the new, rather Hellenistic offshoot of Judaism, Christianity; which was to excuse the destruction of Israel in 70 AD by Rome; even as it almost acknowledged the goodness of Roman centurions, of Greeks, and moved the capital of its own “Judaism” from Jerusalem, to Rome.

The words issued by Jeremiah has been originally issued by him, to justify Jews cooperating with occupying armies and states, and other cultures. In order for Jeremiah to urge cooperation with Babylon, he had to a) say that God himself condemned much of the tradition of Israel, its prophets, as false. And that argument, accepted, amazingly, into the Old Testament, was useful to b) Christians, early disciples. To justify their essential obedience or loyalty to (faith in?) Judaism … even as they made a slight move away from Judaism, toward cooperation with gentiles like the Greco-Roman occupiers. Even as they began the formation of what would in point of fact eventually be perceived as a new and separate religion, Christianity. One at once claimed loyalty to the old Judaism, even as eventually it became known as a rather different religion, to some extent distinct from its origins.

The ideas of Jeremiah, his attempt to assimilate with other cultures around Israel, proved useful to early Christians. Indeed, the whole life of Jesus himself, seemed to constantly allude to Jeremiah above. (Or to put it in a more conventional way, Jeremiah foreshadowed, prophesied Jesus). Jesus, as presented to us in the New Testament, constantly quoted and acted like Jeremiah: aa) criticizing the holy men of Israel – in the case of Jesus not just “false prophets,” but also “scribes and Pharisees”; bb) Jesus like Jeremiah alluding to the possible destruction of the “temple.” Jesus cc) warning of false prophets, and telling us to evaluate them, uncover them, by their “fruits.” Jesus dd) regretting the “cup” of wrath that he and Israel must drink. Even as ee) jews like himself go to their deaths. Jesus ff) and his followers being “shepherds” in the ruins of the Jewish state. Jesus gg) like Jeremiah cooperating with an occupying army; Jesus to be sure, hh) looking ahead, as Jeremiah did, to a “day” when the God would restore Israel and Judah proper. Though ii) both Jeremiah and Jesus suggesting that after all, God might one day or another, simply abandon Israel, for other peoples.

Jeremiah had in effect produced a justification for Jews at least temporarily giving in to larger, neighboring civilizations. And amazingly, even for rejecting elements of Jewish tradition, prophets. And amazingly, his ideas were accepted into the holy books, as holy and true. God himself is pictured as approving of all this; and Jeremiah being accepting into the Bible, as a sacred prophet in his own right. Even as he said that there were many false things in the other prophets of Israel and Judah. Even as he urged cooperation with other ways of life. So that amazingly, the Bible itself supported Jeremiah, and his … partial abandonment of the most ancient traditions of Israel. These sayings of Jeremiah were used to justify a) some rather new ideas in Judaism; after the Babylonian Captivity, and the Destruction of the First Temple. And b) many of the ideas of Jeremiah, were invoked by early Christians; the picture we have of Jesus as written by his disciples, had Jesus copying many events referred to by Jeremiah centuries before; alluding to a “cup” of wrath he must drink; alluding to a “new” covenant; and so forth.

Indeed, the writings or sayings of Jeremiah, which dealt with the occupation or destruction of Israel by a foreign power, which dealt with the facts of collaboration, were extremely useful to the first Christians, to explain and contextualize the more recent defeat of Israel/Judah; the annexation of Jerusalem by Rome, Pompey, c. 63-4 BC; the governance of Jerusalem by a Roman governor, Pontius Pilate. Who partially accepted all this, as the “cup of wrath” they must drink; but who also looked forward to a “day” when God would come to earth again to restore the fortunes of Israel. Though to be sure, there was enough collaboration there, to hint that … on that “day,” Israel itself might be cast off. Since it had failed too often. So that a “new covenant” between the people and the Lord might come; one that indeed, might cast off Israel (Jer. 31.31-37).

In any case though, there are several features in Jeremiah, that seem to apply not only to a) the time of Jeremiah; and to b) the time of Jesus; but also c) the time of the Second Coming; the “day” when again, as in the time of Jeremiah, and then Jesus, significant changes are made in our holiest traditions. Changes which to be sure, appear “new,” but in a sense are not new at all; having been predicted, foretold, previously partially enacted, thousands of years ago and more.

In particular, we are interested here in the elements that are of interest to us here and now, are the elements of Jeremiah, which begin to insist in effect, on a critical science of God: aa) warnings that even the holiest prophets of Israel often erred and were false; the bb) insistence that therefore, we don’t have too much faith in them, but cc) instead evaluate them by their “fruits”; and dd) evaluate even the holiest men, by whether the things they said “come to pass.”

All of which leading perhaps to a “day” when ee) we allow innovation in religion; even to the point of ff) a “day” when our heaven itself is demolished; and gg) a “new covenant” is established; a truer kingdom. Which is at once the realization of old Jewish ideas, even as it sublates them into a higher, “second” “appearance” of God. One that however, is quite loyal to the old Bible; to Jeremiah and Jesus, for example.

. . .

Based on these precedents, in fact, we are even here and now coming to a new vision of Christ. One totally consistent with the Old and New Testaments, however, even as it seems “new” and revolutionary. In our new vision, we see here and now that Christianity, was never supposed to be based forever on absolute faith in the prophets of Israel; or on total faith, in Faith. As you might say. Contrary to what we always heard in church, Jeremiah warned that even the holiest prophets of Israel were often bad and evil. Therefore, our religion was not supposed to be “faith-based” as they say today, at all. On the contrary, the Bible often told us – as in the book of Jeremiah – that a mature person, should be aware that even the holiest prophets of Israel often failed, and were false. So that finally the Lord himself constantly demanded that all alleged holy men – here, “prophets,” but also we will add, priests, who in effect support old prophesies and promises too – demonstrate that they are truly from God. Priests must proven they are good, by demonstrating real, material proofs; working material wonders. Here, Jeremiah echoes In Jer. 28.9, Deut. 18.20 ff: believe a prophet or holy man, only when the things he promises visibly “come to pass.” Or – our specific point here at last – only when we see “fruits.”

Those who really follow God, are supposed to be producing “observ”able “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs,” “prosperity.” Or, as now we now add to this list of related words for material results, specifically, “fruits.” Which will be visible as the reward of those who really follow God. So that we and prophets, are known as good or bad, by the “fruit of” our “doings” (Jer. 17.19)

By which we will eventually establish here, the Lord did not mean primarily the “fruits of the spirit” that Paul cleverly hinted; but rather, he most often meant, by far, real material results. Even at times, real, actual, literal fruit: grapes, etc..

A man who is really from God, it was firmly stated in Jeremiah, as in much of the Bible, should be able to produce, show, bigger crops of grain and real, actual, literal fruit; like grapes, and so forth. And in any case, the Lord rewards you in accordance with your fruits (and deeds, for that matter):

“I will give to every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his doings” (Jer. 17.19).

Here of course, Jeremiah is not speaking alone; the entire Old Testament constantly emphasized “fruit”; insisting that those who were really good, would show good fruits. This finally, is the background meaning, of hundreds of other Biblical references to “fruits”:

“Fruit of your ground” (Deut. 7.13).

“And the LORD blessed the latter days of Job more than his beginning; and he had fourteen thousand sheep, six thousand camels, a thousand yoke of oxen, and a thousand she-asses” (Job 42.12).

“Trees bearing fruit” (Gen. 1.12).

“Your vine in the field shall not fail to bear” (Mal. 3.11).

“The fruit of vineyards and oliveyards” (Jos. 24.13).

“And Judah and Israel dwelt safely, ever man under his vine and under his fig tree, from dan even to Beer-sheba, all the days of Solomon. And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots, and twelve thousand horsemen” (1 Kings 4.25, 6 AKJV).

At its more metaphorical, “fruit” might mean … our own children; the “fruit of your loins”:

“Fruit of your body ” (Deut. 7.13).

Eventually to be sure, as civilization progressed, and food crops were not the only crop that mattered, the definition of “fruit” changed slightly. But only slightly. We will show here that the sense of “fruit” remained overwhelmingly, physical, not spiritual. Even after the New Testament, even after the very very spiritual Paul and his “Fruits of the spirit,” the Old Testament physicality is supposed to partially reassert itself. In the “day”s of the end, especially. (Days which were sometimes said by the apostles to have started around the time Jesus died).

But in any case, the emphasis on material fruits, will lead finally to a science that would examine and correct, not just everyday believers; but that a science that is authorized as an “authority” to correct even priests and bishops, prophets and peoples; and even the angels in heaven itself.

Note here and now, that the classic covenants with the Lord God, were never just one-way; it was never just that tenant farmers and shepherds were alone, supposed to produce fruits, and then deliver them to the lord and his storehouse; it was not just that the people were to deliver such fruits were given to the lord, in exchange for, after all, his protection. But rather, in effect, the covenant was a contract, that imposed obligations on two parties; the lord promised things in return. He promised that in return for others following him, he would in turn, give followers various benefits; like protection from foreign enemy armies, and so forth; and the advantage of central government and “storehouses” to store food for famines (as the Pharaohs did, with Moses). While indeed, the Bible so firmly promised things in return for our faith or devotion or fruits, that this in fact, was probably the central promise and core of the Bible. Not the faith of priests: never-ending loyalty even in the face of nonperformance by our lord.

Though ultimately a god can do anything he wants, and violate any covenant it would seem, in general though, even the Lord seems to have accepted the nature of contracts: that something is promised in return for something else. In this case, in exchange for his followers giving the Lord and his army, his clerics, some of their crops and services, the Lord of the Bible normally promised to “prosper” those who followed him; to give us “fruits” too, in exchange for our own fruits to him. This was promised to us, in a series of promises that in effect reflected (and were all but one and the same as) roughly, mutual landlord/tenant obligations. The mental framework that was later to develop into classic, European, medieval feudalism. But that framework was never entirely abandoned in the Bible itself. Nor in everyday life: similar relations continue, in the obligations of government to citizen, and then citizen to government (paying taxes and so forth).

Indeed, the fact is, God himself never abandoned that basic framework; not in old contracts, and not even in the “new” either. The fact is, any “God’ that abandoned that contract, would be so different from the old, that he could not be said to be “God” at all. Since the Old Testament constantly insisted on this.

Indeed, since God promised us material wonders, rewards, in exchange for our obedience – spectacular victories in battle; food when we are starving from his storehouse; etc. – God even finally told us that we could finally tell whether we – or especially priests – were really following the lord, in part, by “measur”ing how much material benefits we, the subjects, the tenants, the followers, are getting.

And so indeed, God outlined and authorized, for old covenants and new, the science of God: which said that holy men especially, therefore, to prove they are really following God, the right lord, must produce and demonstrate their own fruits; they must prove scientifically that, in exchange for our devotion to them, they are giving us many things to us.

And if “prophets” – or by extension, the preachers that follow them (Jer. 5.31, 6.13) – cannot demonstrate those fruits? Then far from our continuing to following them and their idea of the LORD with total faith and loyalty, instead, we are supposed to simply deduce – as Jeremiah did – that our preachers, and the prophets they followed, were simply false. Were following a false Lord, or a false idea of the Lord.

These passages outline devastating, even heaven-shattering model for Christ and Christianity. But it is a model constantly proven good, constantly approved by God himself, the Bible itself. Being approved first a) in the Old Testament; in the Biblical acceptance of Jeremiah for example. Even to the point of accepting the destruction of the First Temple. And b) then it was approved and repeated next, by Jesus. In a way we might suggest, accepting even the destruction of the Second Temple, 70 AD. While this model was framed in such a way, as to be radically c) open for another “day” too; the day of a second appearance of Christ, as well.

And so we see once again – this time, under the topic of “Fruits” – yet another rather complete outline of the heaven-, temple-shattering, but fully authorized, science of God. The science of Religion. The science of Christianity. Scientific Christianity. Which has always been commanded, ordered, by God himself. By the Bible, itself. Even over and above, the authority of “prophets,” for example, as Jeremiah emphasizes. And therefore of course, since priests follow the prophets of the Bible, then this science clearly, easily, has authority over all priests and ministers.

While other parts of the Bible make it clear, we have authority even over “angels”; over all messengers said to have come from God. The angels who, the Bible often specifically noted, sinned and erred, in their personal behavior, but in their messages too. Satan himself, after all, being an angel; with angels in his employ (Rev. 12.7). Even the angels of the churches it seems (Rev. 2.1-4; 2.12-14; 2.18-20; 3.1-2; 3.7-9; 3.14-17).

“To the angel of the church … I have not found your works perfect” (Rev. 3.1 – 2).

“To the angel of the church in Peragamum … I know where you dwell, where Satan’s throne is; you hold fast my name and you did not deny my faith even in the days of Antipas my witness, my faithful one, who was killed among you, where Satan dwells. But I have a few things against you…” (Rev. 2.12-14).

The Bible itself did not find the churches or their “works” to be good, even in the very beginning. Or, a translation of the Bible just as well might have said, God has not found even the holiest churches’ “fruits,” to be perfect.

Therefore indeed, harsh “judgement” falls first of all it seemed, not on everyday people, but on the very “household of God” itself. (As Peter noted).

All because of poor fruits.

The God that warned of false things in our holiest men, and demanded fruits, by the way, especially of holy men, was never totally abandoned in Jesus. Jesus continued the tradition. In central phrases, like this one:

“Beware of false prophets…. You will know them by their fruits…” (Mat. 7.15).

What happens in the end, to those who stressed “faith,” and did not bear good fruits? Read what Jesus said about the end, when those believers who constantly used his “name,” “Lord, Lord,” and the household of God itself, the “dear friends” of even Peter, (1 Peter 4.12- 17, 2 Peter 3.1-3.14 NIV), are “thrown into the fire”:

“Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire…. Not every one who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of my Father. On that day many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name…. And then will I declare to them, ‘I never knew you; depart from me, you evildoers’” (Mat. 7.21-24).).


God’s Science Point # 76

End Time,

Judgement “Day” …

We Are Judged, “Test”ed, By “Fruits,” “Works,” Deeds

Against our millions of very, very spiritual and faith-loving preachers, the “despisers of the flesh,” we now conclude here that physical, material things, like “fruits,” are very, very important to God, in our survey of the Old Testament. From the beginning, a) God made the material earth or world, and said it was “good” (Gen. 1). While b) God constantly promised very, very material things to good people. Indeed, c) God’s promise of material rewards to the point that we can see who is good and who is not, who is a true prophet or holy men, and who is not, by seeing whether he predicts real physical events; and whether he produces real physical wonders. As God told us many times, and in great detail, how can tell who is really quoting God correctly, by scientifically examining his physical “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.”

Finally, to expand on what was said earlier, we might note that this kind of “judge”ment, we were told constantly, would hold particularly, in the End Time. Or the “Day” when we are submitted to God’s “judgement.” In that moment, in the end the Old Testament often said, we are to be judged not just or even primarily by our “faith” or spirit; but by our “fruits” and our “deeds.” Not just by our thoughts, but especially by the “fruit of your doings”:

“God will punish you according to the fruit of your doings” (Jer. 21.14; 32.19).

Regarding the End, see also “fruits: above; and “branches” cut off and burned in fire, in the End Times, that are not “fruit”ful; that are dead “wood.”

There are finally therefore, hundreds, even thousands of passages in the Bible that promise real physical rewards – specifically fruits – to those who follow God. Those promises were so firm, that finally, many dozens of passages told us in great detail – in passages like Dan. 1.4-15; Mal. 2.1 – 3.5; 1 Kings 18.21- 40 (the story about Elijah); Deut. 18.1-20) – that we are to use science, to evaluate things in Religion as being from God or not. By their real material results. While now we add, specifically in the end of time, all of us ourselves will be “judged” not by so much our thoughts or spirit, as by our material “fruits” and “work”s. Or in yet another Biblical word, by what we have “done.”

Looking Ahead to the

New Testament:

Jesus and Paul

And Faith

Therefore, is just having the mental sensation or spirit of “faith” even in the “Lord,” really enough? As noted in our very cursory, brief introduction on Faith, the a) entire Old Testament mentioned “faith” by name only about five or six times; faith was not so important it seems, to God himself. As against Paul. While then too, the b) gospels, the stories of Jesus, mentioned faith by name, only a few dozen times. So that finally, c) it was only the Apostle/St. Paul, that really stressed faith.

It is not really God in person, by name, nor Jesus, but instead, Paul who really stressed faith. And indeed Paul in fact, mentions Faith hundreds of times. And Paul offers pages of what are often taken for long, sustained arguments in favor of faith it seems. But indeed, only Paul does that; not God himself, in person. While Paul admitted that he himself however, saw things only in “part,” and was not yet “perfect.”

It is primarily the self-confessed, all-too im-“perfect” Paul, that stressed faith. While for that matter, we will note later in our separate sections on the New Testament, and Faith, that even the radically, typically over-spiritual, over-faithful Paul, eventually admitted the importance of material things, proofs. And the importance of “test”ing our religion. Paul even acknowledging the importance of physical things like our “body,” our “flesh,” and material “work” and “works.”

For that matter, even the most vociferous spokesman for faith in the Bible, Paul himself, knew that in the end of time among other times, God will judge us, “we” believers and holy men too especially. By “test”ing with fire, our “work.” Examining us not just by what we have merely said, but particularly, as may stressed, by what we have “done”

“Test what sort of work each one has done…. If any man’s work is burned up, he will suffer loss” (1 Corin. 3.13).

All our lives, we should have been “test”ing our holy men and angels, their words, with science. While finally in the End, we are all to be judged in very large part, not just by what we thought or felt, or by our “faith.” But instead, we will be “test”ed to see what sort of real “work” we have “done.” (Confirming what we noted earlier). And by the way, it becomes clear that the “work” that we have “done,” should ultimately be very, very physical. Not just spiritual. The way we are “test”ed, the Bible made clear in the Old Testament – and we will see, much of the New Testament too – is in large part, with the very, very physical tests of real Science.

The Origins of the Bible, the Lord,

In the Deification of Tenant Farmer Land/ “Lord” Relationship

By the way, for example, this, the main idea of the Bible, came in large part, as an extension of some very real events or occasions, with ancient land “lord”s and kings, in ancient History. The above End Time scenario for example – a “day” where we are asked to present our “fruits” to the “LORD,” to be “judged” as good or bad – we suggest, is almost certainly an extension of a sort of ancient tax- or debit- or rent-collection day.

There was probably a real day once a year or more – around the time of harvest especially (around the Festival of Booths, etc.) – when the farmer subjects and tenants of the local “lord,” were expected to show up at the appropriate palace or administrative temple, to pay the local Lord, a part of their fruits, their harvest. As payment to the lord, in exchange for his protection and administration. That payment – usually by giving a portion of our agricultural products, our harvest or “fruits” – was variously called tribute; or a “tax,” or a “sacrifice”; or a tithe; or a payment on debt; a payment for protective services (armies etc.). Or just … giving some of our “fruits” to the lord.

In this day, when we bring our taxes to the lord our god, we might see the lord himself, and give to the lord directly himself …or not. The priests were in effect, normally clerks for, ministers for, the lord, in such collections. Those clerics would evaluate and weigh our payments of produce, and then determine whether we had adequately paid our “debts,” whether we had produced enough “fruits,” or not. Then the cleric would often record the results, on a table, or in modern language a “book.” In which were recorded our works and deeds, our fruits. And on the basis of that, we were judged to have been good enough, or not.

The day when we, tenant farmers (Zech. 11.4 – 13.5) – bring our fruits to the lord, is outlined fairly well, in places like those from Leviticus and Numbers especially, below. A list which unveils a rather new, concrete, historical meaning, in a sequence of quotes, like the following:

“When you come into the land which I give you and reap its harvest, you shall bring the sheaf of the first fruits of your harvest to the priest” (Lev. 23.10 RSV).

Bring … the first fruits of your harvest to the priest” (Lev. 23.10).

“And she shall wave the sheaf before the LORD, that you may find acceptance; on the morrow after the sabbath the priest shall wave it” (Lev. 23.11).

“And the priest shall value him” (Lev. 27.8).

“Weigh them before the chief priests” (Ezr. 8.29).

“All your offerings, shall belong to the priests” (Ezk. 44.30; cf. 44.31).

“And this was the writing that was inscribed: MENE, MENE, TEKEL, and PARSIN”; NUMBERED, WEIGHED, DIVIDED (Dan. 5.25).

“A holy portion, for the priest” (Num. 6.20).

“The priests shall blow the trumpets” (Num 10.8).

“The priest shall make atonement for all” (Num. 15.25).

“He wrote them in a book and laid it up” (1 Sam. 10.25; Cf. Rev. 1.11).

“Then he took the book of the covenant, and read it” (Ex. 24.7).

“Court sat in judgement, and the books were opened” (Dan. 7.10).

“Stand this day all of you before the LORD your GOD” (Deut. 29.10).

“This is the day” (Ps. 118.24).

“Were judged by what was written in the books” (Rev. 20.12).

“God will punish you according to the fruit of your doings” (Jer. 21.14; 32.19).

We assert here that days when tribute, tax, sacrifices were collected by the clerics of the lord, particularly around the times of first fruits (vegetables in the spring?) and harvest, are a very large part of the origin of the idea of a “day” when we are asked to present our “fruits” and “works” and “sacrifices” to the “Lord,” to be “judged.” Originally, all this had a very, very real, very concrete meaning. Specifically: in exchange for the protection and services and good will of the local “Lord” or god, his mostly farmer subjects were supposed to give that local lord, some kind of percentage of their income; as payment, tithe, tax, or “sacrifice.” And in a predominantly agricultural economy (as most were, until about 1900), that would usually mean … agricultural produce; often literally “fruit”, like grapes and so forth. Specifically, the “day”s when such payments were particularly due – the days when we presented the most, and were judged by our fruits, and rewarded or punished according to the goodness of our works and fruits – we suggest here, is the original meaning of Bible accounts of a “day” when the “Lord” “judges” us by our “fruits.” (See various Jewish harvest holidays especially; the Festival of Booths, etc.. And other moments when we sacrifice to the lord, and give the sacrifices to priests, etc.).

Originally therefore, all these end time predictions of an Apocalyptic “day,” were really for a sort of tax day; usually conveniently organized, for farming, agriculture-based societies, around spring and fall harvests; when farmers would have the most significant produce or “fruits” to deliver. Such a day might now seem anti-climatic. But to be sure, “day”s like this were of course extremely important in ancient subsistence economies, in agricultural, proto-fealty societies. The whole, proto-feudalistic system of government and civilization, depended on farmers and shepherds supporting a local “lord,” so that he in turn could finance central government, schools, armies, and public works … that would in turn, help the people “live” and “prosper” or “flourish.” And so, important as such days were, eventually such tax days, harvest festival days, assumed a central place in records and holy books. Though eventually – especially if the local lord was killed, and such days broke down (cf. the death of Jesus), these “days” came to be taken as something slightly different; or to be generalizable, abstractable or extendible into, some kind of final reckoning “day.” A “Judgement Day,” and/or a “Day of the Lord.” At the end of time. When Israel was overrun by its enemies, and its local administrative structure to some extent broke down, or was replaced by a different “lord god,” collection mechanisms were often uncertain, and enforced largely by threats. Threats of some kind of irregular, special day of reckoning, of punishment or rewards, some “day.”

In any case, whatever the meaning of the “end,” and of the “Day,” there is no doubt that the “fruits” and “sacrifices” that were often demanded from us, on many days, were in large part, originally, real actual literal fruit; the tribute of an agricultural economy, to its governing body. Often, offering fruit was all not just physical, but even literal: actual fruit and agricultural produce were to be brought to the LORD, in the Bible. So that right from its origins, there is a very, very physical meaning to showing our “fruits” to the “Lord God.”

No doubt, as we will see, many Christians and especially priests, had a hard time pointing to real material fruits to their work. In part due to the intellectual nature of their work; but also we will show, to their frequent lack of needed physical productivity. No doubt, not just the people but even priests, noticed that they were not always getting all the wonderful material miracles, the physical victories in battle and so forth, that they promised; even disciples of Jesus at times could not walk on water (Mat. 14.30 vs. John 21.7, Luke 5.7, 9.44); and some like Paul at times wondered, “do all work miracles?” While Jesus himself after all, was physically executed, and no perfect kingdom appeared on earth. And therefore, to try to escape being found, judged short in their fruits, many persons like Paul were eager to hint at many, many dozens, hundreds, thousands of possible explanations for any occasional lack of material results from priests and their lord (see Sermons as Excuses). One of the main ones, being that such things as the Lord demanding “fruit,” should be re-read, perhaps, as mere spiritual metaphors or “figures” of speech; as speaking of, calling for really, say, “fruits of the spirit.” Not real, physical fruit. Preachers it was in effect being suggested, did not have to deliver real material, physical goods; but only kind words, sermons, and kind ideas or consoling spirits, like “hope” and “love,” and “faith.” But we must suggest here, first, that this was not the original meaning that we have found in the Old Testament. In the sayings of God himself. Nor will a good or true religion, we will be showing here, fail to deliver very very physical material things. Every true religion or any central credo which presents itself as “all” or the core of what we need to live, we will find – just as God suggested continually in the Old Testament – must be forever and daily responsible not just for the mind or spirit, but for the material side of life. Indeed we will see, the apostle James early on, began to see the first tiny hints, of the massive physical damage, the physical deaths caused, by an emerging spiritual, faithful religion of priests, who did not regularly take care of the physical side of their people (James 2.14 ff). Priests who left the people to be defeated, killed, in the physical arena of battles, famines, plagues, and so forth; beginning with the physical execution of Jesus himself, and of many of his followers; and then, right after the New Testament closes, the destruction of Jerusalem itself, in 70 AD. Followed by … we will show, millions of even larger disasters, in the hands of our spiritual, faithful, ascetic priests, who no longer took care to deal with the physical side of life.

God has warned continually, about sins and errors in our holiest men and prophets; even the prophets of Israel and Judah. Even in those who claim to be Jews or Christians, working in the name of “Christ” or the “lord.” Finally indeed, God warned that we should continually examine our holiest men and angels, and every one of their doctrines, every one of the words they wrote and say, were from the Lord God. To see if following them actually brings real physical prosperity, or not.

As it turns out, that is the real standard, for a good, true Christ, a good, true Christianity: prove that it is good, that it really understands and follows God, not by producing simple sermons and mere words. But by producing real, physical wonders, in front of live witnesses today; and as verified by real, no-nonsense science.

Indeed therefore we will see that – exactly as foretold – even our present-day Christian priests have sinned and erred horribly. They have not understood or really followed, the Bible itself; or God himself. They never should have become so spiritual and faithful; they never should have taken the sense of the Bible, its request for “fruits” for example, to be all that metaphorical. The fact is, from the very start, from the day it was pronounced by the mouth of God himself, the sense of the demand for “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proof”s, was a demand not for just or primarily “spiritual” things; but for real, actual, physical, material things.

And any future, better Christian… will see this one apocalyptic, heaven-shattering “day” no doubt. Perhaps even today; after reading and understanding this very book. One day, anyone who really reads his Bible honestly, and really see, will know God firmly said that any real Judaism, Christianity, any credo that really follows the Lord, should be able to take great, continuous care, not just to produce mental or spiritual sensations, but even more than that, take care of even more, the physical side of life. Any Christianity that is genuine, to be a “full” and complete vision of God, and a complete and adequate guide to “life” as we will see here, must concentrate far, far more on the physical side of life; and not just charity hospitals and soup kitchens. Indeed, whatever good spiritual or mental work may have, the Bible said it must “prove” that it is not just “empty words” and “dreams” (Ecc. 5.7), hot air, the “East wind,” mere sermons and spirits; such things are the foretold false ideas, mere “false dreams” “false spirits,” or “delusions,” “illusions,” “empty promises,” “false prophets” and false prophesies the Bible warned about. Those countless priests and ministers who produce primarily sermons, words, but not deeds, fruits – not as many as science and technology – are simple the foretold false priests, “enchanterers” and “sorcerers,” who have trapped us all in web of mere words, deluded spirits. We must abandon them, or ask them to change.

Finally God told you this: don’t’ even trust priests, but follow only those who get, ultimately, real material, physical results. And one day you will see God expose the false priests; the sins in angels; and God punishing those many who “deceived” themselves and the whole “world,” (Rev. 13), by speaking falsely for the lord.

What we call “religion” today, and think of as tending only to the spiritual side of life – leaving the rest, the physical, to the “other,” secular life – was actually once, the more balanced credo or core, of a functioning and materially productive state. But when the Jewish state was destroyed, the real mechanisms for the supply of not just spirituality, “empty consolation,” but real material goods … was no longer there. And what was a well-rounded creed, that included both reverence and science and practical sense, was destroyed. At this point, and from then on, the once-balanced, adequate credo of the “Lord God,” was taken over by clerics, and reproduced by rote, without understanding. Without really understanding the mechanisms by which it worked; particularly, the importance of our own physical work. Though Deuteronomy noted the importance of the “work of our hands,” though the Ten commandments told us to do physical “work” the vast bulk of our lives, intellectual bookish/spiritual clerics disdained that. And disobeyed that. And were left thinking and hoping, to this very day, that whatever physical things they needed, if any, would appear out of thin air, by direction action of mental prayers and spirit; by “miracle.” Never realizing – and at times even actively denying – the side of God that told us to develop practical knowledge and science, and do much of the “work” ourselves, with our hands. Priests having the words, but not the material sense; not understanding how to get the “power” of it.

So that indeed, our very most spiritual ascetic preachers, who have always thought they are “first” with God, are now found in the end, to really be “last,” even in their obedience to God himself. To the Bible itself. Since they ignored and disobeyed, more than half their own Bibles. The parts where God emphasized the importance of practical knowledge and science and work.

No doubt Paul – and later, a practical Protestantism – suspicious of priests’ promises of physical miracles (“do all work miracles” Paul asked), decided to limit the application and sphere of religion, to mental and spiritual things; and leave the rest – leave physical life – to real scientists and businessmen, and a far more advanced and productive idea of physical life. But when Paul and Protestantism did that, they even further … limited both the sphere and the sense of religion. Leaving it with the reputation of absolute verity and holiness … but without the substance; with only empty words, and no real sense of how words should be linked to actions, work, to produce wonders.

On the Final “Day,”

The Second Coming, The Second Appearance – It’s

What We Have “Done”

Suppose however, we sit down now, and invoke another appearance of Elijah, even another appearance of the LORD himself. As foretold, to correct and “refine” our preachers, the modern heirs of the priestly tribe of Israel, the tribe of Levi. In order to bring many people – especially priests – to a “second,” “fuller” understanding of, “appearance” of, the “Lord.” Even in part, here and now. By getting them to at last “see,” the “full”er text of the Bible itself. And God himself. (cf. “Idealist” interpretations of eschatology).

Related to God’s calls for real physical “fruit,” note that we are often to be evaluate in life by our fruits. But also in the End Time, we are judged not by our “faith,” as much as by our fruits; or as this is frequently said in yet another way by God, by what we have “done.” Our deeds.

The Bible warned constantly that there have always been false things, even in the very heart of all that we thought was holy; in Judaism; in Israel; in Christianity. And so we are commanded by God therefore, not to continue to have faith in them, but to continually apply a science of God, to expose them. But although this is supposed to be happening all the time, finally there are a few particular, special occasions, many special “days,” when this sort of thing might happen, in particular.

In particular, throughout the Bible there was a special “day” often mentioned. Originally it seems like, it was a “day” once a year or so, when we are to be brought before the king or the LORD. See here our lengthy writings on the “Day”; which was probably, a tax or payment day; original meaning of the Day of Atonement, Judgement Day. In the old, proto-feudalistic days of the Old Testament, we had mainly agricultural societies; in which most people were farmers, working on land in some way owned or controlled, by the local king or land “Lord.” In return for the protection of that “Lord,” the farmer peasant, was to present some kind of payment – usually a tax or “sacrifice” or “tribute” – to the LORD. Particularly, typically, the subject of the king, being a farmer, would present a portion of his crops; his “fruits.” And hopefully, those fruits would be judged, weighed, and found adequate. Eventually in any case though, all this was .. generalized, deified, into what preachers think of as a rather cosmic “Day of the Lord.” Or Judgement Day. A “day” when we are to present ourselves at last to the LORD, with our “fruits.” To be “judged” as adequate or not, good or not. Particularly, at the End of time.

No matter what the real meaning of the “day” might be, in any case, note, on one “day” or another – perhaps indeed on some special “day” of the year, or even at the end of time, some might say – we are to present ourselves to the LORD; to be “judged” by our “fruits.” Whatever the exact origin and meaning of this day, note that in any case, on that “day,” we are to be examined by the Lord, not so much for our “faith” or our pious “thoughts” or even “spirit.” Instead of being accessed as good or bad, by our spirituality … instead, we are to be examined and judged, just as much or more, with an eye to our material “fruits.” Or, as the Bible often said too, by our material “deeds.”

Against our very spiritual preachers, the Bible says over and over, in seventy or a hundred places or more, that we are to be examined throughout life, mostly according to the material wealth or wonders we produced. And since it is physical, it can be “measured” with science. Indeed, note that the Bible is full of references to people being judged especially in the End, not by their spirit, but by the concrete things they produced. In the End especially, the LORD judges people in very large part, not just by their “spirit” or “faith,” but far more than that by looking to see whether they produced real, material goods: “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “proofs.”

“And the dead were judged out of those things which were written in the books, according to their works” (Rev. 20.12 KJV).

And we are also all judged, as we now add, “deeds.” On the final “day” especially, we are judged by God, not by our faith or spirit … but by what material good we have produced. God’s emphasis on this, including not just countless references to “work,” and “fruit,” but also to what we have “done”; our deeds:

“Test what sort of work each one has done” (1 Corin. 3.13).

“And all were judged by what they had done” (Rev. 20.13).

A preacher’s alleged mental or “spiritual” accomplishments therefore – like “faith,” “hope” – are therefore, just not enough for most priest or ministers to be considered good, according to God. God demands real, material achievements (short- and long-term, to be sure, we will find). And indeed, our material fruitfulness, is largely (if not exclusively) what we are judged by, in the end. By God:

“And all were judged by what they had done” (Rev. 20.13).

Shockingly, once again, this means that what God firmly said in the Bible, absolutely, firmly, directly contradicts what our priests always told us in Church. Or to put it another way: our priests today and for some time, have absolutely, directly, gone firmly, against God.

Here and now, and elsewhere too, we will have begun to “see” over and over, another, better, second appearance to Christ; one quite different from what we heard in church. Here we will have begun to see, in seventy or a hundred or more examples, that the Old Testament – and later also next, to some extent the New Testament too – constantly, clearly, intended to found Judaism – and eventually Christianity – on things that were physically productive. Indeed, Judeo-Christianity was so focused on material wonders in this world, God was so focused on giving physical rewards to those that followed him, that God said we could measure the goodness of someone, by empirical, material science. Here we just shown that our God, the Lord, was so focused on getting material things, that we were to be judged almost solely not on our faith or spirit, but on our real material production. Our real, literal “fruits,” or agricultural crops, especially.

Indeed, in the end, one “day” or another, we were to be judged, not so much just by our “spirit” or “Faith”; but by our “fruits.” Or also, by what we have “done”; by our material “deeds” (q.v., in a concordance. And in our footnotes).

. . .

According to God, we and holy men, are to be continually evaluated in their lifetime – and now it seems, judged in the end, in large part – if not exclusively – not by our mental “spirit” or “faith.” But by the real material good we have done or produce. The long-and short-term “prosperity” that we have created.

What will happen therefore, on the last day, to our many very, very spiritual people and priests? To all those who assured us that the heart of Christianity was not materialism, but spirituality?

Our holy men today, should consider in particular, that special, last “day”: the Day of the Lord, Judgement Day. That day at harvest time, in spring and then at the end of the year. Or that time when note, we are to be “judge”d by God, not even so much by our “faith” or our “spirit,” but according to our material “fruits,” “works,” ”signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.” As assessed by “observ”ing material things with our literal “eyes”; and by real “test”ing and “weighing” and “measur”ing, and “science.”

Will our very, very spiritual priests, who tell us that material things are unimportant, who in fact often cannot demonstrate real material results to their “spirit” and “word”s, really hold up well, in this moment of judgement? Our very, very spiritual priests today, should keep firmly in mind, that the final day confirms what we saw throughout the Old Testament: that God told us that real religion, that is really from God, is to be known by the material, physical – not even so much “spiritual” – good it produces. And furthermore, individuals – even particularly priests; even particularly the “sons of Levi,” and the “household of God,” even particularly the “prophets” and saints and even the angels in Heaven itself – are to be “judged,” in the end, according not to their thoughts, in their mind or spirit, but by the material prosperity that they produced.


God’s Science Point # 77

Work and Works in General

(cf. “Works” Plural)

Here, we don’t want to be distracted by the fatal, “faith alone vs. works” debate. Indeed, we would like to make a point about work here, entirely aside from and distinct from this notorious, infinitely divisive debate. But to some extent, a) God wants us to “work” for a living. In the old Testament, God wants us to work … b) to produce material goods for ourselves and others – “works” in one sense. As Adam for example did, living by the sweat of his brow. While in fact, c) God said we are to be judged in the end of time, on judgement day, it becomes clear, not by just by our faith, but just as much or more, by our works.

And furthermore, d) we are showing how God told us we ourselves can evaluate others in part, as good or bad, as holy or not, in part by their physical productivity; their work, their works. Perhaps some people can be saved, just by having faith in God, without doing any visible material good or works. But as it turns out, there are many false spirits out there; no one can ever be entirely sure they are really, truly following the spirit of God himself, and not the false spirit of a demon. Unless in part (as a necessary if not sufficient criterion), they are producing physically good, material works. Fruits, signs, deeds … and “works.” Regarding the infinitely devisive debate between Luther’s Protestants, and the Catholic Church, on being “saved” or declared “righteous,” on the basis of “Faith alone” as they say, or faith and good works? We will not make any determination on this question, here. Except to suggest this: that while some few, might be saved just by having faith in God himself, finally, as a practical matter, the Bible suggest that no one can be even remotely sure that what they are having faith in, really is God himself, and note a false idea of God, a False Christ. Unless or until his or her devotion is at least partially proven, by demonstrating good material results. As the Bible said many times, in many different words: not until they have demonstrated “fruits,” “signs,” “deeds,” “prosperity” – and now we add, “works.”

Earlier, we found that God used many fairly long narrative examples, to teach us that we must evaluate would-be holy things, by their material results; according to a strict scientific method. In our present chapter, we are also adding here, that in addition to extended examples, the Bible also used several key words, spread throughout the entire Bible, to convey this same basic idea. The key words that refer to the importance of evaluating people by their physical, material results, as evaluated by concrete, empirical evidence, include the demand that people show and be evaluated by their “fruits,” “signs,” “deeds,” “prosperity,” “proofs.” We will have been seeing in our chapter here, that as for ourselves, when we want to know whether a given man is from God, God tells us to look for, ask for, evidence of significant material gifts – even wonders/ And finally, since e) these works are – in the Old Testament – physical, and visible, they can and should be seen and evaluated, by “science”; specifically our Science of God, as outlined here.

To be sure, f) the whole issue of faith, vs. certain kinds of “works” of course, became an issue in the New Testament, for Paul, c. 55 AD. But some suggested that Paul was concentrating mainly just on one single kind of work; Paul insisted that males did not have to undergo a literal operation or “work,” of the circumcision of their penis; they did not need that to be considered saved, he said. But from his attack on that specific work, many have claimed that later Paul suggested that no “works” at all, were necessary for our salvation; that God would accept us, and declare us good; all we needed to have to be accepted by God, was to have “faith” or confidence in, loyalty to, his rules and laws (except the Old Testament law requiring physical circumcision?).

At least once specific “work” became a major item of contention with Paul therefore. While later, g) historically, after 1515 AD or so, the issue of “works” became a major issue or argument within Christianity. And a disagreement on “faith vs. works” in fact was partially responsible for splitting Christianity in half. When the Catholic monk, Martin Luther, noticed that the Catholic Church was suggesting that we could in effect, give money or services – “works”? – to the Church, and buy benefits for ourselves or others, in purgatory. Or get ourselves or others into heaven; by contributing money or works, to the Church. Luther was offended by the idea that somewhat might be essentially a bad person, and yet go to heaven anyway; if he just paid enough money to the Church. Thus, buying his way into heaven. Paul had apparently been offended by a similar idea; Paul and Luther apparently agreeing that its was the feeling of loyalty or “faith” in our hearts to God, that was more important; than cold hard cash. In pleasing God, and going to heaven. So that Luther or some elements of Protestantism – if not the Bible itself – began to use the phrase “faith alone,” can save us. Though to be sure, the Bible itself never used the term “faith alone,” except to condemn it in the Book of James.

Complicated as this issue is, here and now is not the place for us to revisit that old, complex, and infinitely devisive argument: the old Protestant/Catholic debate, on “faith” vs. “works.” Which focused around some writings mainly by the apostle Paul; who we note as im “perfect” here in any case. Still though, while avoiding talking much about this extremely divisive subject – which is not quite relevant here in any case – we need to however briefly h) call attention to the many times the Old Testament – our subject here for now – said that our practical “work” was somehow, important. Like in the way we suggest here: we are not claiming here that the Bible claimed that work was or was not, the only thing necessary per se, in itself, for our salvation. Rather we are only claiming this, as many Protestant ministers do, in a way that meets Catholicism halfway: that we might or might not be saved just by “faith alone”; but in any case, just as even Protestant ministers now say, a person who really have faith, will of course, obey all the other commands from God in the Bible. While in the Bible, God often told us to “work” with our “hands.” Or we “shall not eat.” Then too, related to this, as a result of this, i) again, our main point in regard to the thorny issue of “work,” is that those who have faith in the right idea of God, will of course evidence this, by producing good material works. So that even if good work was not strictly necessary to be saved, as a practical matter, it is necessary in evaluating spirits, those said to be from God. It is a necessary “sign” that someone might be from God. Whereas without this, with allowance for very obscure material accomplishments, a person must be considered to be probably, not from God himself at all.

Those who claim to be from God, must “prove” that, the Bible says; by producing significant material works.

As part of that, God often commanded us to do real, physically useful “work.” God aa) often told us to do physical work, a job. And indeed, bb) God told us we would be blessed by God, by way of the “work of your hands” that you do:

“The LORD … blessed you in all the work of your hands” (Deut. 2.7; 16.15).

“The work of their hands” (Acts 7.41).

Even cc) the very faithful apostle Paul knew that our own physically effective work was important:

“Work with your hands, as we charged you” (1 Thess. 4.11).

In fact, dd) our faithful preachers who stress “faith” and attack “work,” have often misrepresented the Bible totally; even to the point of misrepresenting the Ten Commandments. This they do as usual, by quoting and emphasizing only the part of the commandment that tells us to be spiritual, and to “Honor the Sabbath” one day a week. While however, they leave out or fail to stress, the part of the same commandment, that told us to do “work” the vast majority, the rest, of the week:

“Six days you shall do your work, but on the seventh” (Ex. 23.12; 31.15; Lev. 23.3; Deut. 5.13).

In fact, ee) the Bible repeats the idea that we are in large part rewarded by God, we find prosperity, only if we obey the command to work:

“If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thess. 3.10; confirming James 2.14 ff).

Finally and most importantly ff) even the very, very “faith”ful Paul, also knew that in the End Time, on the final “day” of “judgement” especially, we are evaluated, even “test”ed, in part by our works:

“Do you not know that God’s kindness is meant to lead you to repentance? But by your hard and impenitent heart you are storing up wrath for yourself on the day of wrath when God’s righteous judgement will be revealed. For he will render to every man according to his works” (Rom. 2.6).

“Each man’s work will become manifest; for the Day will disclose it, because it will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test what sort of work each one has done” (1 Corin. 3.13).

Even the very, very spiritual Paul, who more than anyone emphasized spiritual things like “faith,” who suggested we can be made “righteous” specifically, by faith apparently by itself, finally himself however acknowledged some kind of mysterious importance, to practical “work.” In the sense of physically efficacious work. At the very least, it seems necessary, for Paul, to prosper in this life. But more than that, Paul supported our point, the Science of God, as he admitted that in the “end,” even God himself evaluates us as good or bad, in part, by “test”ing what sort of “work” each person has done.

Here we would simply sidestep the whole explosive, land-mine issue of faith vs. works. To simply say that we may be saved by faith alone; but as a practical matter, no one can even begin to even think about being sure that what you have faith in is the right idea of God and not a false spirit; until that idea produces real, physical, empirically-verifiable, physical results. Until your “work,” produces useful “works.”

While for whatever reason, gg) even Paul’s “God” confirms that in the End, we are judged by God himself, not just by our thoughts, our spiritual ideas and feelings and words; but – as the literature on the End time said over and over and over again – by the “works” that we have “done.” Our deeds, and fruits.

Even hh) Abraham, who was they say Paul’s best example of a person saved by faith in God, eventually produced many “works”: many children, and much material wealth. Not mere words, or faith. While ii) the apostle James argued – some say, against Paul – that Abraham was saved not by faith, but by works (James 2.14-3.17.) First, by being willing to actively sacrifice his own son on the alter to God. But for that matter, the Bible says that Abraham eventually even completed the specific “work” of circumcision, late in life. So that even if Abraham was in some sense saved, pronounced “righteous,” just by a mental act, having faith, finally even Abrahams’ faith was proven for us in effect (and even for God?), only when it created good works, physical goods, in the end.

Many ii) preachers, who cannot get all the material miracles they promised, next tried to minimize the value of any and all material results; to emphasize only “spiritual” “fruits.” The production of just ideas, sermons, spirit, mood; things in the mind or spirit only. And indeed, Paul especially, of all the people in the Bible, more than anyone, emphasized such things. Indeed, Paul even issued statements that were open to the reading that all these things – including the demand for works and fruits – could be metaphoricalized; Paul mentioned “fruits of the spirit” for example. Yet to be sure, the old God was so adamantly physical, that even the most spiritual remarks in the New Testament, could not become adamantly, unequivocally anti-material for long; and even Paul, calling for “fruits of the spirit,” did not say that was all a good man had to produce. Indeed, Paul was active physically healing people it was said by others of him, in Acts; and he himself said he at least worked with his “hands,” when he wrote his epistles; and then said we were “made for good works” and so forth.

In any case, for that matter, though jj) here we do not want to address the ecumenically divisive issue of faith alone vs. works here, not only Paul himself, but also another major apostle, St. James, seems to have taken the trouble to address a common (mis?) understanding of Paul that no practical work, or physical accomplishments, were necessary.

Indeed, the apostle James greatly reigned in Paul’s attack on works. In very no-nonsense language:

“What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? So faith by itself, if it has not works, is dead…. I by my works will show you my faith…. Was not Abraham our f ather justified by works, when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? You see that faith was active along with his works, and faith was completed by works…. You see that a man is justified by works and not by faith alone…” (James 2.14-25).

“Do you want to be shown, you foolish fellow, that faith apart from works is barren?” (James 2.20; ref. to Paul calling himself a “fool,” and differing with the church in Jerusalem, headed by James?).

Could James have been criticizing Paul? Some suggest he did. Indeed, we have suggested that even the holiest men – like Paul – could make mistakes. While James indeed, right after discussing Paul and/or faith vs. works, and attacking one reading of that, explicitly made the point that even holy men often made “mistakes”:

“Let not many of you become teachers, my brethren, for you know that we who teach shall be judged with greater strictness. For we all make many mistakes“ (James 3.1-2).

In fact, the Bible never mentions the phrase “faith alone,” except in James; where James condemns it.

To be sure though, again, we will not stay within the argument between Paul and James much here; indeed, we simply sidestep it here. By suggesting that even if faith in God “alone” did save us, as a practical matter, no one knows – even the person himself – whether his idea of God is the right one. Unless he produces good works. First, as even Protestant ministers acknowledge today, a person who has faith in the right idea of God, will of course, want to follow all of God’s other commands; and the command to “work” was among them:

“The Father who dwells in me does his works. Believe me that I am in the father and the Father in me; or else believe me for the sake of the works themselves. Truly, truly, I say to you, he who believes in me will also do the works that I do; and greater works than these will he do, because I go to the Father. Whatever you ask in my name, I will do it…. If you ask anything in may name, I will do it. If you love me, you will keep my commandments” (John 14.11-15 RSV).

Jesus himself, we will see, seemingly allows us this option: to stress not even on faith in Jesus himself; but on “works,” on material evidence. Jesus also noting that those who have faith in the right idea of God, will show evidence that, by a) wanting to do good works; and b) getting them done, too. And then too, we add, c) those who really follow God will want to do all his commandments – including the one to “work” 6/7 of the week.

To all that we now add here, even Paul knew that in the end, God evaluated us not just by our feelings of faith or otherwise, but by our “works.” While we ourselves though, emphasize here the finding that even if we are saved by faith in God, even just by itself, still, as a practical matter noted over and over in the Bible, no one can even begin to be sure he or she is following the right idea of Christ say, unless he or she sees physical evidence or outcomes; until it proves fruitful; until it produces “fruits,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.” Or here, “works.” These are some of the many words that the Bible used for essentially the same thing: showing good physical results.

As we will note in a larger section of Faith, faith in God alone might even save us; but how do you know your faith is in the right idea of God. For that matter, kk) to say that faith in God can save us, was surely not to say that just Faith in itself, faith in anything at all, was good That is, consider this example: you might have faith say, that you yourself are Napoleon; but that faith, clearly would not be good. You cannot be saved just by any faith; but faith in the right idea. But how do you know your idea of God say, is the right one? Unless by material evidence.

So there is a critical qualifier or two, on all assertions that we are saved by “faith” alone: for one, you must have faith in the right idea of God. And finally, God says in his Science, you cannot know that the given mental picture of God that you are following, so faithfully, is the right one. Unless you at least see material works from following it. As the first part of a “proof.”

This furthermore, has been a chapter, mostly just on the Old testament. When we look soon, at the New, when we look in far more detail into Paul vs. Jesus’ “faith,” we will find this causal impression is confirmed. Indeed we will find, Jesus himself, finally told us not to have too much faith in himself; but to believe and follow him, only if he (and those who cite his name), got real material “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’” (“that you may know and understand that the Father is in me and I am in the Father”; Jesus, in John 10.37-39).

Incredibly, arguably, as we will see in our later writing on the New Testament, and Jesus himself, Jesus was even perhaps suggesting here that if we are to have “faith,” then it is not even so much faith in Jesus; but should be faith in works: “believe the works.” At the very least, we are to believe or have “faith” in Jesus, only if he gets real, fruitful works. So that finally we see, whenever the Bible called for “faith,” it means faith in things reasonably well proven by material evidence; faith in science. Indeed it seems, science has some authority even over holy men and faith; it, solid material evidence, is to determine, whether a would-be holy man is to be believed, or not.

As we will see.

What Happens in the End,

To Religious Leaders,

“Shepherds” of Men?

Over and over, dozens, hundreds of times, God guaranteed that a real holy man, should be able to produce, show, many very material proofs, signs, works, deeds. To prove that this alleged holy man was really good. And if even a holy man does not do that?

Consider for a moment, even a very, very, very holy man. Consider even a “shepherd” standing next to God himself (Zech.). What if even such a very, very, very holy entity, does not provide material good? Does not produce a material “kingdom” say? Then, far from continuing to follow him loyally, faithfully, instead, God himself told us over and over, to simply disregard that alleged holy man, as false. And what is more, if the very highest shepherds in Heaven itself did not meet that standard? Then in the end, not only the “shepherds” of sheep and people on earth, but also even the very highest “shepherd”s in heaven itself, will on that final “day” be struck down by God:

“Every shepherd is an abomination” (Gen. 46.34).

“Death shall be their shepherd” (Ps. 49.14; cf. Paul “to die is gain”).

“The shepherds also have no understanding” (Isa. 56.11).

“The shepherds are stupid” (Jer. 10.21).

“Their shepherds have led them astray’ (Jer. 50.6).

“Should not shepherds feed the sheep” (Ezk. 34.2).

“But the shepherds have fed themselves” (Ezk. 34.8).

Behold, I am against the shepherds; no longer shall the shepherds feed themselves” (Ezk. 34.10).

“I will set over them one shepherd” (Ezk. 34.23).

“I am the good shepherd” (John 10.11).

“Woe to my worthless shepherd” (Zech. 11.17).

“Awake, O sword, against my shepherd” (Zech. 13.7).

“Strike the shepherd” (Zech. 13.7).

“Like the stars for ever and ever” (Dan. 12.3).

“I am the root and the offspring of David, the bright morning star” (Rev. 22.16).

“How you are fallen from heaven, O day Star” (Isa. 14.12).

“Though your nest is among the stars” (Obd. 1.4).

“The stars will be falling from heaven” (Mat. 24.29, Mark 13.25).

This is a lesson from God. One in very, very, very dramatic contrast to the moral most preachers – the shepherds of men – take from the Bible. But just as foretold, in the End, things turn out to be, often, exactly the opposite to what we thought: many things we thought were the “first” with God, are found to be actually, “last.” Many people and things thought to be the “last,” “first”; those we thought to be “noble” are found to be “fools.” And so forth.

Preachers, our shepherds with Christ, often tell us that the sudden reversal of what we thought was true, means that secular, wealthy people that seem to be “first” today in wealth and prestige, will actually be “last” when God arrives; and that materially poor preachers will be “first.” But when Christ for example said that the first will be last, God was speaking often, to the religious; specifically to his own, very reverent apostles. Indeed, God’s most adamant criticisms, were not of or to the ordinary people … but of religious leaders; prophets and priests.

So that indeed, in the end, even the very highest stars in our spiritual heaven, turn out to be bad. Even the highest stars and “shepherds” in Heaven itself, are to fall. Indeed, we are to mentally see very, very “noble,” persons, proven to be “fools” in the end.

Indeed, even now, we are beginning to see very, very, very spiritual priests, our former shepherds, falling from the heavens. While perhaps, ordinary working people, ordinary farmers and mechanics, who seemed to be “last” with God, doing their merely practical jobs – along with “secular” technicians and scientists who were also thought to be “last” with God, by priests – now suddenly, in the end, turning out to be “first,” after all.



God’s Science Point # 78


With “Wisdom,” “Fire,”


How about scientific “test”ing? Preachers always quote the misleading part of the Bible, that seemed to tell us not to “test the Lord your God.” But here we noted a rather extended example in Malachi, of God describing in some detail, how we are to ask for material wonders from God, to “put me to the test, says the Lord.” There are dozens of places where the Bible called for “test”ing (q.v. in a concordance; see also our section on Malachi). Related to the End Time especially, there might be one more kind of science-related “test” moreover in the end, that might in some cases, be a rather more important part of what the “test” that God wanted. When we “test” things with “wisdom.” And related to that, with “fire”:

We ourselves are to test things with wisdom: “Tested by wisdom” (Ecc. 7.23).

God favors those who have wisdom: People “… in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom … and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace” (sic; Dan. 1.4 KJE).

Normally of course, “wisdom” would relate to science, or complement it. As we see in the quote above from Daniel.

Especially Churches

“Test”ed by “Fire”

More importantly though, here at the end, might be the testing of our works and our beliefs, on Judgement “day.” When we are perhaps judged by wisdom, judgement, and/or “fire.” When the holiest men in particular, preachers, are “judged.” And are “refined,” and so forth. By “fire.”

Finally, the “test”ing of even priests, the household of God, by fire, especially in the End Time, is often mentioned over and over.

As it turns out, the Bible often rather fully described full empirical testing that is to be applied to holy men; in Daniel, Malachi, and – as we will see soon – the accounts of Elijah (1 Kings 18). Indeed, Malachi confirms our vision … and begins to refer to further tests, by Elijah specifically, at the End of Time. As follows, Malachi also described a crucial – and scientific – “test,” that must be applied to holy men and priests, just before the “great and terrible day of the LORD comes”:

“Lo, I will send you the prophet Elijah before the great and terrible day of the LORD comes. He will turn the hearts of parents to their children and the hearts of children to their parents, so that I will not come and strike the land with a curse” (Mal. 3.5; the last word in the Old Testament).

If the events of the End – or here, just before the End – are to come in part from Elijah, then after all, we have here re-presented the prophet Elijah. And here, we have Elijah in particular firmly advocating a science of God. While remember in Elijah, that was involving “fire” explicitly, moreover:

“’Answer me, O LORD, answer me, so these people will know that you, O LORD, are God, and that you are bringing their hearts back again.’ Then the fire of the LORD fell and burned up the sacrifice” (1 Kings 18.37-8).

While as for that fire? Malachi confirms that fire is to fall not even so much on the people, as on the priests (Mal. 2.4) and their sacrifices in 1 Kings. Or even first and foremost, on the holiest men; on the “household of God”; Peter; also Mal. 2-4. And it is not the pleasant fire of the spirit only as many claim; but a fire that after all, is painful, and can even destroy.

In a gentler spirit, Malachi suggests that our priests will be “refined” by having their feet put to the fire; that they will finally adopt a better theology, the right kind of “offerings.”

Though finally of course, we are assured that one day, God will use “fire” to destroy heaven itself, and “all” those host in it. For longstanding sins in the holiest beings, saints and angels and apostles, in heaven itself:

Originally, this probably referred to the moment Elijah brought real, actual fire from heaven (Greek Fire? Burning oil, poured from a high place?). Or it might have referred to, to the kind of volcanoes and the pool of magma, that were well known to Romans and ANE – Ancient Middle Eastern – culture. From the days of Herculaneum and Pompeii especially; Greece and Italy having many active volcanoes, just a few miles from Israel. But for once we might for once see our subject as a metaphor (as in theology, eschatological Idealists would, and as Mal. 2-3 sees to see it). We can present the “day” of “fire” as a metaphor for … part of the kind of physical testing that believers and holy men especially, are supposed to undergo, all the time. But more specifically and narrowly, it is perhaps best seen as a “day” – and perhaps a moment at the end of Time especially – when we or God himself, at last, in a particularly vivid and perhaps painful way, “see” the importance of reason and science, even to God. It is a moment when we at last, painfully apply science and reason, “judgement,” “wisdom,” to “test” our childhood beliefs in miracles, and spirits. Since this day involves reason and judgement – which are related closely to science – we suggest here, that this “day” related to and perhaps identical with, the moment we at last apply science and common sense realism; to our lives and religion. Applying this wisdom, the blind believer attains “judgement” at last. Though to be sure, this is painful: as a formerly blindly faithful follower, applies his or her own better, “mature,” “full”er, “second” adult, “science”-based judgement especially, to “test” to much of traditional religion, to critically examine common ideas about Christ, the believer will see that many things he or she believed to be sacred and holy, were simply, false. As foretold, our childhood heaven of miracles and spirituality too, collapses.

The “day” when judgement is attained and applied, can be every single day of our lives. Every day, we are learning. And every day, we are tested, examined, for our fruits. But all of this, many feel, is supposed to happen especially one “day”; a day called Judgement Day. The Bible often speaks particularly, of a “day” of “judgement”; which however has two meanings: in part, it involves the Lord’s judgement or assessment of us. But also, when we at last see the Lord more clearly, fully, in the Second Coming and Judgement Day, and hear more vividly than ever, the judgement of the Lord, all that also informs us at last of what the fuller truth really has been, all along.

In any case though, it is all involving somehow, incidentally, “fire.” But that fire is not to fall so much on nonbelievers, as much as on even believers themselves. Even “Zion” or Israel/Judah. As it did in the past, in Lamentations, etc.. Even specifically, the Christian churches that were begun by Paul and John:

“The LORD has given full vent to his wrath; he has poured out his fierce anger. He kindled a fire in Zion that consumed her foundations. The kings of the earth did not believe, nor did any of the world’s people, that enemies and foes could enter the gates of Jerusalem. But it happened because of the sins of her prophets and the iniquities of her priests” (Lam. 4.11-13 NIV; Deut. 32.22; Jer. 7.20 & 21.14, etc..).

“For the sins of her prophets, and the iniquities of her priests, that have shed the blood of the just in the midst of her [cf. Eucharistic blood], they have wandered as blind men in the streets” (Lam. 4.13-14 KJE).

“But I will punish you according to the fruit of your doings, saith the LORD: and I will kindle a fire in the forest thereof, and it shall devour all things round about it” (Jer. 21.14 KJE).

As God came in “fire” in part, in holy words, but also literal fire from heaven for Elijah for example, there are probably a hundred predictions in the Old Testament, of God returning, in a Second Coming, in “fire.” Though we are writing about the old testament here, it is worth noting that this figure was continued in the New Testament, by Paul; as he noted himself again, that he himself was laying “foundations” for future Christianity; but that “fire” would test apparently, even his own foundations (1 Corin. 3, etc.; see “work”):

‘By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames” (1 Corin. 3.10-15 NIV).

What is this “fire” and “test”ing at the End especially? We suggested here throughout, that it is at least in part the spiritual/mental “fire” and “testing” of our old ideas of God, by more mature, fuller judgement, and especially by “wisdom,” or better by the science, of God.

Ministers of course acknowledge, have “face”d only parts of, this “test” by “fire” in the end time. Typically, they are normally quite over-selfconfident, too sanguine about it. Ministers typically speak to themselves and their flocks, as if they themselves are sacred and perfect; so that this moment of illumination and pain, and burning off dead “branches” and “tares” or straw, will happen to everyone else, other than themselves and their own flocks. The moment of fire, they assure themselves and their followers, will burn only other sinners; not they themselves; they themselves and their followers, their church, are assured of passing through this moment, untouched. Passing though any such “fire” as handily, as the three dancing figures in the furnace of Daniel (q.v.). But everyone should by now know, from what we are saying here and elsewhere (in future books like False Priests), that the Bible often warned about false things not just in everyday people, but in preachers and holy men especially. While appropriately, everyone should also note that the “test” by “fire” that comes in the End Time, in the Day of the Lord, (Mal. 2-3 etc.) was said by God himself, to be intended specifically and explicitly, to be applied especially to preachers. To the “descendants of Levi” for example. Levi’s who were in effect, in ancient Israel, one of the hereditary tribes of certain kinds of priests or early rabbis:

“Indeed, he is coming, says the LORD of hosts. But who can endure the day of his coming, and who can stand when he appears? For he is like a refiner’s fire…; he will sit as a refiner and purifier of silver, and he will purify the descendants of Levi [priests] and refine them like gold and silver, until they present offerings to the LORD in righteousness” (Mal. 3.2-3 NRSV. See also New Testament and Peter, on fire coming to the “household of God”).

Clearly God himself is to come with “fire,” to test and “refine” even especially, holy men. In the second coming. While indeed, we are coming to a “second” look, a second appearance of Christ, even here and now. As we see Christ advocating not blind faith, but Science. Which affirms that as foretold, essentially all our priests were deceived themselves, and then deceived the whole world in turn.

Yet if our heaven itself is destroyed in the fire of wisdom, or science, then after all, that simply affirms the Bible itself.

In any case finally, “test” is another word from science, that is supported by the Bible. As we noted earlier in connection with the extended discourse on this in Malachi 3, if God ever said “you shall not put the Lord your God to the test,” that is better translated in many Bibles as telling us rather, not to test or “tempt” God’s patience, by rash acts. Not only is “test”ing God with science allowed in the Bible; as we noted in the section on Malachi, finally God himself commands us, to “test” even God himself. By giving some of our agricultural crop, to his storehouse, and then looking to see whether this results in God giving prosperity in turn, for us:

“Bring the full tithes into the storehouse, that there may be food in my house, and thereby put me to the test, says the LORD of hosts, if I will not open the windows of heaven for you and pour down for you an overflowing blessing. I will rebuke the devourer for you, so that it will not destroy the fruits of your soil; and your vine in the field shall not fail to bear, says the LORD of hosts” (Mal. 3.1-10-11).

Here God not only a) allows scientific “test”ing; he b) commands us to use it. And furthermore, he c) orders us to apply scientific testing to religion itself; even d) to God himself:

“Put me to the test, says the LORD” (Mal. 3.10).


God’s Science Point # 79


Other, Random Places Where the Bible

Values Material Evidence:

“Things Our Eyes Have Seen”

What was said above, would seem to be enough to conclude our survey of the Science of God, and to conclude our re-presentation of the re-appearance of God, now clearly advocating science. Clearly the Old Testament and God himself, supported science, even a) at least once, by name (in Dan. 1.4-15); and b) by description of the experimental method; and then c) by God constantly advocating, individually, the various elements involved in science. Like evaluating even holy men, by the material, empirical evidence; their physical, material “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proof”s. Even (with some qualifications), “test”ing. These keywords are probably the main topics by which God discussed and advocated science; aside from the extended examples, to which they often refer.

But of course we will also see later on, that there were also dozens, hundreds of other places and ways, that God told us to honor “observ”ing material nature, and science. There are hundreds of examples of this, noted in our footnotes. But to mention just one among hundreds of such cases: for example, God demands that even the religious person in particular, keeps in mind, the “things our eyes have seen”:

“Take care and watch yourselves closely, so as neither to forget the things that your eyes have seen nor to let them slip from your mind all the days of your life….” (Deut. 4.9).

Later on, outside the Old testament, Paul and others will at times, try to make statements that hint that we can at times ignore visible evidence. But those statements are highly qualified we will find here. Those for example, who “walk by faith and not by sight,” do so, because they are “far from God.” While even Paul tells us that even invisible things, are know to us by visible evidence. The invisible wind, is known by the physical leaves it blows around. So that finally, we can know and confirm even invisible spirit, forces, only by visible, material evidence. And because they effect physical, material things. As we will see.


The Great Authority of the Science of God;

Commanding One Reading of the Bible – and

The Fate of Preachers, Holy Men,

In the End

For centuries our preachers have insisted that the basis of religion, of our life, should be “faith”; faith in the vision of God given to us by priests and ministers and other holy men. Here and now however, it is becoming very clear, that nearly all our preachers in the past, made very, very serious mistakes, when they talked about religion. So what should preachers today do? They should simply admit, publicly and continually, that preachers in the past made very, very serious mistakes; that indeed, until today, nearly all of Christianity, as foretold, has been following a false Christ; a false idea of Jesus stressing “Faith” (in miracles and spirituality); whereas today, we have a “new” and better “appearance” of Jesus, stressing science.

This science, this new appearance of God, has very, very great authority. According to the Bible itself, it has enough authority, to simply, publicly declare essentially all preachers until now, to be largely false. Because they backed “Faith” and “spirituality” as the core of Christianity; while the new vision we now clearly see of God, clearly warned that “all have sinned,” including priests and ministers especially and specifically; they and their most holy moments. So that therefore, the Bible itself, finally backed not “Faith,” but Science. So that in essence, most of our churches and preachers, gave us a false vision of God and Christ.

Does this new appearance to God, have much authority? What if our science for example, next says there are no miracles? Will our science have the authority to just say the Bible itself is wrong?

In our present book, we honor the Bible; every single word. We do not say it is wrong; we regard it as the holy word of God. We cite the Bible, as our main authority, over and over, in this text. To be sure, the Bible seems to have at times, warned even about itself; certainly it warned constantly about the holy men, the apostles and others, that wrote our Bibles. But finally, we have found that there is at least one way of reading of the Bible, reading it for its advocacy of science, that is consistent with what the holy book itself said … as well as with what experience and science teach us.

But how much authority does this “new,” second vision of God, of his Science, have? What if we find promises of giant, spectacular “miracles” in the Bible … but then science says our holy men today cannot work such giant miracles? Does this science have enough the authority to just say that parts of the Bible itself are false? Especially, promises of giant miracles? Finally, we will be showing that there is a way to read the Bible in such a way that its “miracles” are seen as metaphors in effect. Metaphors though, not so much for “spiritual” things, as metaphors for wonderful but recognizable natural and technological events; things in nature. If the “Lord” makes “fire” fall from the heavens or the “heights,” then after all, that could describe either meteors; or many ancient weapons, like burning oil and pitch; or “Greek Fire.” And amazingly, we will find that many translations of the Bible – like the RSV, or Revised Standard Edition – are worded in such a way, that they are absolutely consistent with such a naturalistic reading.

Here, have honored the Bible; every single word. We have constantly quoted it as authority in fact. Therefore, we do not say that any part of the Bible – in say, the Revised Standard Edition – is false. But all those many believers who honor the Bible, should note that from what we are seeing here, first of all, a) this vision or new appearance to Christ and God, has at the very least the power to at least compel this particular reading of the Bible: to assert that all apparent Biblical promises of giant “miracles,” are better read as promising “wonders”; reading these wonders as being in effect, not spiritual metaphors, but misunderstood natural events. An furthermore, we will find, b) fortuitously, many translations of the Bible – like the Revised Standard Version, which is our default text here – seem written in such a way that they compatible with this kind of scientific reading. When we in later works, look very closely at the wording of many allegedly supernatural and miraculous events, we find that the wording is far more aa) equivocal and ambiguous, than many preachers thought. Indeed, bb) most Bible translation for some time, of what many thought were “miracles,” do not absolutely, unequivocally suggest that something supernatural happened. Instead, cc) most Bibles have left open the possibility that more natural – if wonderful – events were occurring. Many Bibles are written in such a way as to leave open specifically a reading that accounts of “miracles” were metaphors for spiritual things; or were metaphors of natural and technological events. If the “wind” caused the sea to part for Moses, then after all, science today affirms that often tides push the sea back, leaving little pathways through tidal pools; and in the Mediterranean specifically, the town of Venice Italy, knows that an occasional severe wind, can cause an “Aqua Alta,” (SP?), or “high water,” that is many feet higher than normal (as many as 15 feet?). Or correspondingly, on the opposite side of the Mediterranean, many feet lower or higher. Depending on which way the wind was blowing. While the Bible itself narrates the incident in such a way as to leave open the possibility that after all, the “wind” did indeed, push the sea back temporarily. Enough for Moses to use his staff as a sounding stick, and then locate a dry path through the tidal pools.

Does science say there are no supernatural miracles then? In our present book, we can honor both science, and the Bible, simultaneously; even its promise of “wonders.” But to be sure, at the very least, the Science of God is after all, based at least half, on science. And it cannot firmly claim anything that is absolutely contrary to what physical evidence says. Therefore, a) it compels a reading of the Bible, that does not take accounts of “miracles” at face value, as supernatural events; but read them as having been probably, more natural or technological events. But b) furthermore, eventually readers will note that here we also found that the Bible itself, seems to be a rather self-critical document. The Bible was often warning about bad and false things, even in its own authors – even as they were in the act of writing their most “inspired” doctrines, in the Bible itself. So that ultimately the Bible seems to authorize us to, at the very, very least, suggest that certain “miraculous” readings of certain elements of the Bible, could be firmly, adamantly disallowed; and could even be said to be simply, false.

To be sure, nearly all our major churches promised us many huge miracles, in the past. Could so c) many preachers and churches, have been so wrong, for so long? The fact is, as we have seen here, we are empowered by the Science of God, by the Bible itself, to simply say, that most of our priests and churches – indeed, essentially “all” of them; and indeed, all of Christianity – have been “deceived” and wrong. To have been even simply, Apocalypticly – exactly as foretold – followed a “False Christ”; following a false idea of Jesus. When they believed and said that Jesus was a “miracle-worker”; or was “faith-based”; or just a “spiritual” leader.

The Bible confirmed over and over, that “all have sinned,” even our holiest preachers. While it also warned that one day or another, God was supposed to reveal, uncover, huge sins and errors in our holiest men and angels. Enough that even the whole “world” and its “worship” are one day, to be found to have been deceived. So that ultimately, we are fully justified here, by the authority of the Bible itself, in coming this conclusion: that the traditional, priestly, ecclesiastical vision of God and Christ, that dominated the whole “world” and its “worship” as well (Rev. 13), could indeed have been simply, substantially, false; could have been the very “illusion,” “delusion,” magical “enchantment,” that the Bible itself warned about over and over again.

If we now find that our holiest religious leaders and traditions, were simply wrong, sinning, when they backed “faith,” especially in “miracles,” is a conclusion authorized by the Bible itself. This conclusion in fact, absolutely follows the Bible itself. And simply fulfills most of the ancient biblical prophesy: exactly as foretold, we are finding that the Bible, God, are now showing us that a) “all have sinned,” b) even our highest saints and priests and ministers. They c) “deceived “themselves, and the whole “world,” and d) even its “worship.” Indeed, even e) their vision of Christ, was false; misleading us all in effect, with a “False Christ.” (And for that matter, with false prophesies – promises of miracles. And with “magic” too: their vision of making bread appear out of thin air, is, in spite of priestly denials, simply the “Christian” version, of belief in Magic.)

So finally, amazingly, the Bible itself authorizes us to come to even this shattering, Apocalyptic conclusion: that the whole world was deceived, even in its “worship,” even in its “Christ.” But even as we come to this heaven-shattering conclusion, note that we here do not abandon the Bible or God for a single second. Every word of this was fully authorized by the Bible itself. If the whole world, even our religious worship, was deceived, even in its vision of Christ, all that is finally, exactly, as the Bible itself foretold. And furthermore, exactly as prophesied by the holy book itself, all this happens when we begin to see a “second” and “fuller” “appearance” to Christ. And furthermore, all this is to the good. Since as we at last put back together Religion and Science, we are also reuniting after all, spirit and matter; spirit and flesh; word and world; Heaven and Earth. As foretold.

If Science now begins to find some elements of our past religion, to be extremely unlikely? Then what should be the reaction of preachers? Our newly-refined preachers should simply, begin to quote to their flocks, the parts of the Bible that after all, continually authorized this conclusion. They should adopt the Science of God in large part; and continue to “confess the sins of the church”; expanding on those confessions, of whichever church they currently lead or follow. Preachers should not word to defeat the words of God again; they should simply admit all this. Even as, on the infinitely more positive side, they should announce simply, “a” rather “new” and yet fully biblical, better “appearance” of or “to” Christ. A new appearance, in the Science of God. A science which gives us a new vision of Christ; which “appears” first, in our mind’s eye (like the resurrection of Jesus when scripture is read, on the road to Emmaus). So that when we read about the Science of God, of Christ, that forms at least a spiritual/mental vision; a preview – or perhaps even the full substance – of the foretold, second appearance of Christ. Involving the demonstration of sins in our holiest men and angels; the “dissolving” of Heaven itself; followed by however, an amazing new future for all of mankind; as the re-union of Christianity and Science, Word and Flesh, re-creates a Heaven that joins to the earth again, at last.

As we will see.


Optional Afterward

What should we now say about any very “faith”ful priests, that hold to past doctrines all too religiously, therefore? What should we say and do with them now, in the end? As we examine (“test”? “judge”?) their words and works, carefully? As foretold, here in the end, God is revealing many sins in our holiest men and angels. In particular, our priests often a) supported faith; and b) spirituality; while they often c) opposed science, and “test”ing religion. But in the end we find that our holiest men were often simply, fatally, wrong.

Can we say our holiest men were often wrong? Ultimately God himself told us “all have sinned,” even our holiest religious leaders, and angels, in Heaven itself. And therefore God himself firmly told us, we are not to honor holy men, unless they get real – not just in the past, but live, in front of we ourselves, today (as real science demands) – material, physical fruits, works, signs, deeds, proofs. But today, our priests and ministers are not doing “all” the wonders they promised; they are not literally walking on water at all, for example. So that there is every evidence that either the original promises issued in the name of God were false; or that our present-day priests are not good; not good enough to make good on the old promises. While in either case, we should not be following priests very faithfully at all.

But what is fruitful? What does show the greatest signs of at least being close to the old giant promises? Of raising the dead to life? Of making things fly through the air? And so forth? Perhaps nothing on earth shows signs of being able to do anything like that … except for science and technology. Which can point to the automobiles that it built; the rocket that it built; the medicine that is saving lives, reviving clinically dead persons … right now.

This would mean that the only thing on earth that passes the test, certifying it as being from God, is not any priest with his promises of giant miracles, or even religion. But rather, ironically, the only things on earth that really seems to pass the exam, are … the humble scientists and technicians. (Or the science-based theologian; who, to be sure, would have to admit that no one at all however, is presently good by the full standard by which God tests us all.). The people priests thought were “last” with God; even as they called them (sometimes undeservedly) “Godless atheists.”

Surprisingly, in the end we will show, exactly as foretold, many things are reversed, from our traditional expectations. Our priests have been highly revered; they have strutted around, praying proudly in front of congregations; dressed in fine robes, sermonizing and pontificating. They have presumed to present themselves as our priests, as our “teachers,” as our “fathers.” (Even though Jesus himself old them not to). And in their pride, they have promised us huge, amazing, incredible material things; spectacular miracles. But no one today whatsoever, is walking on water, or making bread appear out of thin air, etc.. So what finally, should we say about our many preachers? The priests and ministers of nearly every Christian denomination? The priests, prophets, the “worship,” that has dominated the whole “world”? Finally the conclusion, may seem obvious to many: incredibly, shatteringly, traditional religion, traditional Christianity, was the false religion, the false worship, that God warned about. But if so, then now we know enough, to correct this. Even here and now we have begun to see another, new, “second” and better “appearance” to God: we have begun to see the real, the better, the “full”er outline of God … as advocating not faith, as confidence mostly, overwhelmingly, in … material evidence; confidence in science.

To be sure, Science in the past, was not advanced enough, to verify many things that seemed to exist, but we did not yet know enough to fully explain. We knew that human beings had minds or spirits for example; but to this very day do not know all the details. So that to be sure, for many years, we had to simply accept the existence of some things, for which there was no firm verification. But as we will see today, today’s science has recently become much more advanced; and relatively new sciences like Psychology, can confirm the existence, even of the mind or spirit. So that finally – as we will be showing elsewhere – religion, Christianity, should begin merging now, with real science. Though it should be somewhat conservative scientifically, and base itself not on the latest scientific speculations or theories, but only on classic, well-founded science.

What mechanisms are there, in religious tradition, that can make such a change possible? Among others are countless warnings from God himself, in the Bible itself, that indeed, “all have sinned” mightily – but especially priests. Here we will have been finding that our priests and ministers sinned not just in their personal behavior, but also in their holiest “inspired” doctrines. Among other sins, they were secretly Prideful; by presenting themselves presumptuously as our leaders, as the voice of God, they constantly asserted in effect, they are “first” with God. Though we now find that indeed in the end, as foretold, they are largely, actually, “last” in the eyes of God. Since likely they a) failed to produce all the wonders they constantly promised. While in any case they b) simply denied major elements of the Bible. Especially the parts warning about holy men. Though our priests mentioned those things at times, humbly, they gainsaid those occasional proclamations of modesty … by after all, continuing to present themselves as the voice of God.

But after all, God was very, very, very serious about his warnings about “false” and bad things, even in the heart of those who cry their alleged obedience to the “Lord, Lord.” God was very, very serious about using science to uncover these false things. And when we now at last, really hear and follow? We find that it reveals precisely what we were told it would reveal: that our faithful preachers, all over the world, have been wrong … and even, evil. Since they failed to understand, obey, repeat, and meet, several key parts of the Bible, and of God. They have dominated the world, by controlling discourse; by setting their false churches on every block, haranguing the population every week; and allowing only their own voices to speak in them.

But here and now, in our present book, we will have presented five or six places in the Old Testament – extensive passages – where God took the trouble to adamantly but carefully, in great deal, outline a science of God; which he then orders believers to learn, and follow. Then, in addition to that, we have just presented a half dozen more major keyword topics, by which the Bible further emphasized the importance of evaluating specifically holy men, by material, empirical evidence. Therefore, there really can be no doubt whatsoever: whatever apostles like Paul might have seemed to have said about “faith” later on, God himself meant for us to base ourselves ultimately, not on faith in holy men, but on a rigorous, no-nonsense, real, empirical evidence, and science. God, the Lord, tells us to apply this test of fire (cf. fire from heaven, in Ezekiel): asking priests to prove that they are from God. Not by producing more and more spiritual words and “empty promises,” but by producing real material things. If our priests stand behind a tradition that claims that God works miracles, then ask your own priest or minister to produce one: ask your priest to work a giant, spectacular miracle, right in front of you yourself. Right now. When he cannot do that, then you are to pronounce him false, a deceiver. And you are to walk away from him.

No traditional priests or ministers at all of course, none whatsoever, can pass this test; by such a standard, essentially all priests are instantly exposed as having been largely false. If priests today do not often issue verbal promises of miracles, still, nearly all Christian priests today, present themselves as representatives of Christianity; of the tradition… that in turn, promised miracles; even “all” and “whatever” we “ask.” Indeed in effect, nearly every minister who prsents himself as “Christian,” or from the Bible, who does not explicitly, loudly, repeatedly denounce miracles, allows himself to be perceived as supporting, offering them. But we will find that none of them actually produce all of the wonders they promised; none of them are literally walking on water for example.

In effect, as foretold, every single “Christ”ian priest and minister today, is largely, false. Since every one at least implicitly presents himself as part of a Tradition that promised miracles. Yet none of our ministers actually delivers, what was promised.

Priests and ministers are infinitely, Satanically clever; they have tried continually to escape exposure; in part by denying this science, this testing procedure. But how have they escaped it for so long? How have they escaped churchgoers simply … reading their Bibles themselves? And discovering this test? And then exposing all holy men on earth, as false? This they have done, by several controlling mechanisms and devices. First, a) they never mention this sciece, to churchgoers. And by b) “whitewash”ing their failures; mentioning past allegations of miracles, as if things in the past, proved their abilities today. And by c) mentioning these passages, but “twist”ing one quote after another, from the Bible itself. And by d) using parts of the Bible, that hinted at possible excuses, apologetics, for gross failure in religion; failure to provide the material things promised. In particular, preachers use apologetics. Though we will review most of the most popular excuses for the lack of miracles, and find that essentially all of them are mere sophistries; false arguments. (As we find in our book on sermons as excuses for the lack on miracles). Many will have said that God withholds miracles, to test our “faith” for example; or to give us just “spiritual” things; but we are adamantly finding those two massively popular arguments or apologetics false, here and now. Likewise, the twenty or thirty other major sermons delivered in churches to explain or excuse the lack of miracles, are also false.

“Who can stand” when God applies this test? (From Malachi). Finally there is really no alternative presented by God, than to simply find nearly every preacher on earth, essentially, false. There is no prophesy in the Bible, that can be used to describe what we really see worldwide, except this one: as prophesied, God is now exposing massive, evil sins, deceits, in essentially every single holy man and priest and prophet and “angel” from God; essentially “all” of them. All over the entire earth. Even those in heaven itself. And all of then are now, falling from a heaven that is itself is “dissolving,” exactly as foretold.

Why haven’t priests seen this yet, and simply stepped down? Probably in part, a) most priests are very, very, very proud. Under a superficial and deceptive humility (q.v., NIV or other translation; New World?), priests have always had a massive Pride and Vanity, a lack of being Humble: they have always believed that they themselves are the reliable voicepieces of God. And b) they like their standing in the community; they love to stand in front of congregations, to be seen praying in public, and representing God to the people. So that they do not want to do anything that would hurt their standing in the community. Or perhaps there is another reason: c) they themselves know that there have been many sins and errors and deceits perpetrated in the name of religion and God; but they feel that after all, false religion is a “white” lie; false promises of miracles, heaven, keep many potentially evil men and women, quiet and tame. Priests know from “confession”s, that people secretly do many bad things. But the People will not steal and tell lies, even when they are starving to death, if you tell them that God will honor and reward their good behavior, even after death, in heaven. So that if promises of miracles are a lie, many preachers will tell themselves, they are a white lie. A lie that does good. Or indeed, d) since in the end, our culture holds together and produces real goods, thanks to these myths … perhaps in a sense, they are not really, fully lies or deceits or illusions at all. As we might argue later (in our books on Immortality and so forth; which find truths in these things).

But to be sure, if the old promises are true, they are true in a different way then they were presented to us by priests: no one is actually making bread appear out of thin air; or walking on water; or making real, actual “mountain”s move just by faith and a prayer, as preachers told us all for centuries. While moreover, far worse a we will seen, the millions, billions of people who were taught to absolutely believe such Magical ideas and enchantments, to believe in conjuring in effect, were very, very seriously mislead by in effect, Magic and magicians; and never learned to think and act effectively. Indeed their lives were disabled by illusions and delusions. They were not motivated to develop productive job skills, because they were told that the way we get things, is to pray, and wait for things to appear out of thin air. So that the very theology that pretended to introduce them to long “life” and “riches,” actually introduced billions of people to deceptions, illusions, material dysfunctionality; then poverty, and death. (Which theology then, in turn, simply glamorized). As we will see in our writings on Miracles.

There have been therefore, exactly as foretold in the Bible itself, huge, massive, and literally fatal sins in essentially all our holiest men and angels. But to be sure, our holy men have not been able to “face” or “confess” their own sins, or the sins of their own tradition, their own prophets and angels; they can only see the sins of everybody else.

Nor have our preachers been able to really, really see and accept, the many, many parts of the Bible, of God, that criticized they, themselves. Instead, our preachers have continually denied those parts of the Bible. Either they simply did not read them; or they “twist”ed their meaning, thinking they were straightening them. But while our millions of bad preachers thus evaded detection, by themselves and others, it is time, here and now, to expose them to the “fire” of God, after all. By using the “test”s described by God, to show them their massive sins. But to be sure, this is best done in person, not in a book; done live, in front of witnesses, by churchgoers themselves.

In the meantime, until they are all publicly confronted by churchgoers themselves, and others, many preachers will simply continue telling themselves and others, lies, excuses, and false sermons. Rather than fixing all this by simply, publicly, repeatedly “confessing their sins,” and the sins of their tradition, by confessing that they themselves were simply not getting all the miracles promised, that they themselves were not entirely “sacred” or “holy” or “perfect,” instead our priests have in the past been vain and proud; and tried to hide, whitewash, their many failures and shortcomings. By various stratagems; including … producing various specious, false theologies, that would excuse material failure; like that of “faith” and “spirituality.” While as for the many parts of the Bible that contradicted that false theology? Priests became specialists in “twist”ing the words of the Bible around. To appear to support them, and their lack of material results. Rather than our priests simply, honestly for once, confessing their inadequacies, and the inadequacies of their most holy and sacred tradition.

After many years, many centuries of deceitful and vain priests however, we are here and now at last, exposing it all. By showing over and over, that the real theology of God, of the Bible, was not predominantly, “faith-based.” Indeed, God could hardly be clearer, more adamant, in his support of science, than the above example. Over and over again, in passage after passage, it was God’s advocacy of science, not faith, that was the really greater, larger, dominant, and consistent pattern commanded by God. Throughout most of the Old Testament – and most of the sayings of Jesus too – it was a science, not “faith,” that God stressed. Indeed, not just priests but we ourselves, believers, are to be judged as good or bad, as good – or even an “abomination” – according to whether, we can produce real, material fruits. Finally it was only St. Paul, really, that stressed “faith”; while even Paul finally, we will see, rescinded or retracted, his own remarks. Paul confessing that he himself was “not yet … perfect” when he wrote his half of the New Testament; etc..

Rather than simply confess their physical inadequacies openly, repeatedly, systematically, to the public, preachers instead have always tried to cover up the shortfalls of their Tradition. To do this, among other things, they stressed “faith.” Or they have commonly claimed that they are only required to produce “spiritual” fruits. While as for producing “works” and “Fruits”? They claim that all the Bible requires them to do, is to talk; to do the “work” of an “evangelist.” (“Evangelical” being word derived, we might note, from “angel”; “ev-angel-ist.” While God warned that all the angels one day would “fall”). Or preachers have called attention to the one or two parts of the New Testament, where Jesus noted that some did not believe even in material fruits … and therefore, called for some “faith.” Yet though as it turns out, some tiny amount of faith is necessary, it is finally not more than a “grain of mustard seed.” (Mat. 17.20). A grain that is to be allowed to grow, only in the soil of … repeated empirical verifications. And the production of real material goods.

God himself, we are revealing here, was clearly not as spiritual as our preachers; God was very materialistic. Note that in Deuteronomy for example, those who are truly good, are to be rewarded by physical things: in Deuteronomy, “God will make you abundantly prosperous in all the work of your hand, in the fruit of your body, and in the fruit of your cattle, and in the fruit of your ground…” (Deut. 30.9 RSV). As it will become clearer and clearer, such promises were for real material things; and were not really intended to be just or primarily “figures” or metaphors for spiritual things.

How much clearer, how much more adamant, could God himself be, about the necessity of demanding signs, proofs, from holy men? It is hard to imagine anything stronger, more definite, than the many quotes we have listed above. So that finally, it is impossible to doubt … that God himself stressed science, testing, asking for “signs.”

So why have our preachers stressed faith, not asking for material signs? Why have all our preachers gone so strongly, directly, against God and his most direct commands? The reason no doubt is this: preachers know perfectly well, they themselves are not good enough to produce “all” the many material things that their tradition promises; they cannot literally, actually, physically walk on water. Nor can they make much bread appear in mostly empty baskets. Nor can they move real, actual “mountains” with just faith and a prayer. And indeed, preachers know perfectly well, that the minute we apply the science of God to they themselves, and their holiest tradition, either a) that tradition and promises, or b) they themselves, are immediately proven substantially false.

And so that is the main reason why our disciples and preachers and bishops and popes, try to ignore, disappear, or “twist” the old science of God, and make it go away; to replace it with a blind “faith”; it is largely because they themselves are vain, proud, and are desperate to avoid having their own material inadequacies and falseness exposed. And so, rather than stand up and face and confess all this, they have for years, centuries – and quite successfully – striven to avoid such passages; by never mentioning them in sermons. Or, when they mention them, they tried to “twist” and top-spin their meaning. Over the decades, centuries after the execution of Jesus himself, our disciples, priests, ministers, evolved dozens of statements that seemed to be based on the Old Testament phrases; but that “subtl”y “twist” their meaning. That suggested that the old phrases and promises could be taken to be just metaphors for mental or “spiritual” things only. If God promised real edible “bread,” they reintroduced the old phrases, but then next to them, suggested that just the promise of bread makes us feel better, and is good enough by itself; that “hope” is “bread indeed.” As they say, slightly misquoting Jesus, out of context?

When Jesus was physically killed, and then Jerusalem was burned to the ground, it was evident to many believers, that something had gone wrong in their religion. Either a) the old promises of physical rewards – like an eternal kingdom, God himself, in Jerusalem – were simply false. Or b) the promises of miracles were exaggerated. Or c) our Christian leaders themselves, were just not good enough to make those promises come true. Or even d) their Jesus, was simply not the true Christ that would make those promises come true. Or e) at the very least, there was an apparent delay, some wrinkles, in realizing the full promises. But rather than “face” the very real signs of very, very severe problems, sins in their promises, versus their actual performance, instead, f) the disciples and “Christian” “scribes” that wrote our Bibles (the “scribes,” as Jesus said, of the “kingdom of heaven”), just added a new section to the old holy books. To the Old Testament, they added a New Testament. And in their addition to the holy books, they claimed to be following the Old Testament God exactly; but they took many old phrases, and … subtly changed them. In particular, we will see, they took the old promises of and demands for, real material, physical things, and subtly recontextualized them. So that the old promises of material things from God, could now be read in at least two ways; as promising aa) either physical things, bb) or spiritual things too. (Or even, spiritual things only; as they were in effect presented in churches). While at the same time, authors of the New Testament like Paul, even suggested that the “law” of the “Jews” – actually, the laws and writings of the Old Testament God himself – were somehow “fulfilled” or even replaced. By a “new covenant,” a New Testament, and new idea of God: Jesus, as pictured by his (rather Hellenized, Orientalized, Platonized, over-spiritual, ascetic/priestly) disciples. But to be sure, many have suggested to this very day, that doing this, they in effect, were simply, going against God. Even as they pretended to honor him. So that our holy men were all essentially, apostates, word-“twist”ing “sophists,” as writing merely “according to the wisdom given him”; 2 Peter 3.15-17. Then compare this to Paul’s attacking Peter, as Cephas).

Gradually, the disciples to whom the books of the New Testament are attributed – disciples like Peter, who Jesus himself called “Satan” in Mat. 16.23; and Paul, who admitted that he was not yet “perfect” – dictated a new testament or holy book to their followers and scribes; a new religion. One which often quoted much of the Old Testament God, and claimed total obedience to him; but that after all, was written under the influence of Greeks and Romans, and rather Hellenized Jews like Philo and Paul especially; and that many would say, slightly revised the old promises. Giving us phrases that could be read as physical, or spiritual. That could be read ad simply repeating the old physical promises… or spiritualizing all that.

And given these two choices, later generations of Christian priests, when they could not get all the material wonders that the Bible promised, when they did not see a perfect physical “kingdom” around them for example, would focus mainly on the spiritual side of the new texts. All but giving up on the old God; and suggesting that after all, Jesus “fulfilled” and discharged the old promises; and was “full”y all we needed; he and his “new covenant. But of course, this was all too subtle and sly. And in effect, committed apostasy and heresy; the heresies for instance of Marcionism and Gnosticism. Of too completely abandoning, going against, the Old Testament God.

And yet to be sure, we will note, though Jesus himself at times mentions spirituality, faith, Jesus himself was often pictured working very, very physical, material wonders. So that finally we will show, even in the New Testament, even Jesus himself – and even some would say, the overspiritual apostle Paul – supported the science of God. Finally, if they called for faith – it was largely, really, faith in science. As our “second,” “fuller” look at Christ himself will reveal.


A Good Appendix:

After the Old Testament:


New Testament End

That concludes our survey of Science in specifically, the Old Testament. But let’s begin to look next, at the New Testament. Particularly, the New Testament vision of the End.

Many traditional believers, might think or hope, that somehow believers do not have to face, or accept, or use, Science. To stay this day off, some might argue that the New Testament, Jesus, and Christianity brought all that painful fire and the destruction of heaven, the second coming, already. (As “Preterists” might say). Indeed, Paul declared with great Pride, that he “laid a foundation as an expert builder” for our churches (1 Corin. 3.10); one that he almost suggested, was eternal and could not burn. But as it turns out, a) not just the Old Testament, but also the New, called for a Science of God. Even b) the occasional spirituality of the New Testament and Paul, was not offered as the final word on religion; the final appearance of God. Most of Christianity properly believes that the “Second Coming,” was not in the past; but is always due and pending, for each of us, even today. And in that End? We are to be judged not just or even primarily by our spirituality; but by our real material “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “proofs,” and “deeds”; what we “have done.”

Not just the Old Testament, but also the New therefore, supported the idea that Religion must be evaluated, according to Science, by looking at, “observe”ing its real, material, physical results, the prosperity it produces, here, in a timely way, on this material earth. And indeed, this is the way we are evaluated in the pending End in fact, according not just to the Old Testament, but also according to the New. To verify this, let’s look ahead to the New Testament and Paul, for a second.

Paul seemed to suggest he had built an eternal foundation; but then on the other hand, in another reading, he might be taking to have distinguished what he had done, and the truer foundation laid by Jesus himself.

Here Paul presents at last his own version of a kind of “test”ing:

“By the grace God has given me, I laid a foundation as an expert builder, and someone else is building on it. But each one should be careful how he builds. For no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ. If any man builds on this foundation using gold, silver, costly stones, wood, hay or straw, his work will be shown for what it is, because the Day will bring it to light. It will be revealed with fire, and the fire will test the quality of each man’s work. If what he has built survives, he will receive his reward. If it is burned up, he will suffer loss; he himself will be saved, but only as one escaping through the flames” (1 Corin. 3.10-15 NIV; cf. the burning of the temple, c. 70 AD).

“Fire will test what sort of work” the churches have done; test even their foundations (1 Corin. 3.13).

The New Testament tried to follow the Old, as much as it could. However to be sure, it did not quite really, fully trust the “Jews.” Or ancient thoughts. And so Christianity changed Judaism somewhat; to become after all, a manifestly distinct, different religion. But at the same time, Christianity very very often, in ordinary sermons, claimed – and at times genuinely sought – total obedience to the Old Testament god; who was essentially the God of the Jews. And so, whatever “new” and different ideas early Christian disciples and scribes, decided to “patch” onto the “old” material (q.v.), had to be done very subtly, and with great hesitation, “fear and trembling.” Or indeed finally, it was all done … only very, very indirectly, and tentatively. Specifically we will see, the way this was consistently done throughout nearly all the new testament … was by presenting passage after passage, that presented the traditional old testament, materialistic view … but then somewhere alongside that, or within it, a slightly different, spiritual metaphoricalization of that. In such cases though, some of the authors of the Bible seemed aware that they were at least hinting at, offering bits of, a different god than the traditional one. And of course, many had some fear and hesitation about that. In the case of the passage above, for example, Paul offers us a passage on “test”ing with fire, that at times suggests that a) he Paul, was laying a fire-proof foundation. But look at the phrase “for no one can lay any foundation other than the one already laid, which is Jesus Christ.” One the one hand this might be taken to mean that whoever lays any foundation for a church, is in effect building on Christ; b) but it more likely can be read too, as suggesting that perhaps Paul and Christ, were laying different foundations; and so we need to look carefully to chose, on which foundation to build.

That this “Fire” moreover applies to everyone – and especially to preachers, to those holy men who many feel are closest to God – is confirmed over and over in the Bible. As for example, the moment, when Peter verifies that the “fire” was already coming, to those “beloved” by God; to indeed the very “household of God”:

“Beloved, do not be surprised at the fiery ordeal which comes upon you to prove [test] you…. For the time has come for judgement to begin with the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God?” (1 Peter 4.12, 17).

To be sure, the latter is from the New Testament – which was written in language that consistently, poetically equivocates around such issues. And so the New Testament version of all this, is open to two major readings at least. But God himself had so often spoken in favor of those who do material work, and God himself had warned so often about really evil things most of all in believers, apostles, that here in Peter, the reading that seems at first to favor the spiritual life of preachers and even believer, and seems to attack the material life of even nonbelievers … does not however, clearly and firmly say that at all. In fact, we will note here the only thing that Peter notes with certainty, is only that a) fire is already falling on believers or holy men, the very household of God. While any attack on ordinary practical people, and even nonbelievers in his idea of God, can only be phrased by Peter as an open question: “what “ will be the fate” of them, he merely asks.

Priests and alleged believers of course, don’t like to face or admit their own sins; or especially, the sins of their own traditions and prophets and churches. But the Bible in fact, is perhaps normally more critical of preachers and holy men, than of ordinary people. And especially, it is priests and prophets that are mentioned as deserving “fire” in the End of Time. Conservative preachers though are human; and have a natural vanity and pride. In spite of a certain superficial, misleading humility, deeper down they have an immense pride and vanity. They like to stand in front of congregations like their conservative predecessors the Pharisees, and be seen in the first rank, praying in public. And presenting themselves as the voicepieces of God. While preachers naturally, when they see problems or shortfalls in their religion, with miracles and so forth, have dozens, hundreds of standard sermons and homilies and religious sayings, to blame you the churchgoer, that blame everybody else, for such shortcomings in the real performance of their religion. But we will show elsewhere, in our sections on the New Testament, that while these newer additions to the Bible, at times hinted at dozens of ways of excusing any lack of material results – and even subtly rejecting God’s materialism – finally, though the New Testament constantly hinted at such things, it also had to offer a reading that would allow for the importance of material things after all.

The new testament to be sure, offered a consistent reading, a level of meaning, throughout, that would justify a spiritual priesthood that never got real material wonders or fruits at all. But at the same time, the new testament could never absolutely, firmly say this, without all too obviously going flatly against the old testament God. And so … thought the spiritual level, was constantly hinted at, but overall could never be said to have entirely, definitely, edged out, canceled, the old materialism. Normally, 99% of the time, when one remark in the Bible seems to stress faith, there a) is a more physical statement stressing a physical wonder or work within a few lines or passages from it. While b) 97% of the time (estimating from the RSV), even those individual phrases in the New Testament that seemed to stress spiritual things, can be found to be ambiguous, ambivalent, even just in themselves. To be open to … an reading that would allow for the importance of physical things, too.

Trying to evade their own responsibility and sins however, spiritual preachers, to avoid detecting the “beam” in their own eye, their spiritual eye, preachers will often quote just the parts of the Bible that seem to support them. For example, take the case of 1 Peter. Where it says, they claim, that even if preachers are to be found partially wrong in the end, still, at least it will be worse for other, non-preachers:

“For the time has come for judgement to begin with the household of God; if it begins with us, what will be the end of those who do not obey the gospel of God? And ‘if it is hard for the righteous to be saved, what will become of the ungodly and the sinners?’” (1 Peter 4.17-18).

But as usual, this passage is far more open to materialistic readings than our preachers taught. This passage in fact, has been consistently, egregiously misquoted by preachers for centuries. Our many sinful preachers should at last be taught here and now, to note some of the fine points of Biblical language. Preachers should learn here and now, a fine but extremely important point of Biblical semantics, linguistics, here. And what is that point? The point is that often, the Bible presents ideas, with a question mark after them. Which turns out to be extremely significant; it means that technically, the Bible is not supporting that idea firmly at all; but is only asking about it. Asking us what we think.

Preachers have nearly all missed this. But note that technically speaking, Peter above, is not really asserting any firm statement at all above. Preachers think (or claim) that Peter said above, that a) even if preachers and saints are to be submitted to “fire,” then if good preachers are to experience chastisement, fire, then surely, other non-preachers, ordinary people and those who don’t follow the gospel, are to be punished even more. But technically note, the text does not say that. Instead, the Bible only asks a question about that:

“What will be the end of those who do not obey…?

Often the Bible does this. “What” indeed would happen, whenever a given theological position is uncertain, or when those who edited or translated the Bible wanted to say something, but could not commit to flatly saying it, because of possible conflicts with other parts of the Bible? In the case where there appeared to be two conflicting ideas in the Bible, the authors of the Bible would try to present language, that could be taken … either or both ways. Particularly, whenever there was a question regarding a) God’s materialism, vs. b) priestly spirituality, the text would present the priestly, spiritual position. But only equivocally. Present it not in the form of a flat statement … but in the form of a leading, but to be sure, open … question. In this case, note that the Bible does not firmly, definitively say that if priests are found bad, then those who are not priests, who do not follow the gospels, will of course be found to have been worse. The Bible itself in fact, never says that at all; it merely asks “what” will be the end of others who are not priests. And indeed, it could not say that … without contradicting all the warnings about holy men in particular, from God. Or for that matter, the Bible could not firmly say that priests will be judged better in the end particularly, without going against Jesus suggesting that a Good Samaritan, who was not really even in the Jewish tradition or religion, might be a better man than a rabbi or a priest (Luke 10.33 -37, 17.16).

Indeed, the New Testament often becomes studiously ambivalent, open to two readings, particularly when it comes not only to especially the issue here: the importance of materialistic people and God and their practical physical “work” and “Fruit,” vs. the spirituality and faith of priests. But also the Bible resorts to great ambiguity when it comes to the question as to what and how God will “judge” people in the end; who he will find true and good, and who he will find false. This the Bible did, to try to keep priests especially, from becoming over self confident; and failing to look for the beam in their own eyes. And for the sins of their churches and holiest leaders. And to leave the final opinions of God after all, ultimate, and for God himself; not for anyone on earth; even priests especially.

So again: why didn’t the New Testament speak unequivocally, “clearly,” flatly assuring us that priests of course would do much better than everyone else, on the days when they are judged, tested, with fire and so forth? Why didn’t the Bible just firmly tell us, flatly, that priests will always be better than ordinary people? There were, we have shown here, several very good reasons for that. One was that a) the Bible in fact, very often made the opposite point: that priests and holy men were often bad and false. Among hundreds of warnings about priests and holy men (found in our footnotes, and then our book on False Priests), remember among other things, that it was specifically priests for instance, that had Jesus arrested and executed. And the fact is too that no doubt, b) no one but God himself, really knows how this or that person is to be “judge”d in the end.

The status of our holiest men is if anything, all but doomed it would seem. Since one c) day in fact, God is supposed to reveal sins in our holiest men, and come to submit to fire heaven itself. And for those who thought this uncovering of sins in holy men, the destruction of them in heaven, was in the past? Note that Peter clearly said that the heaven that was to be destroyed, was his own “present” heaven; therefore, the Christian heaven itself.

“The present heavens … are reserved for fire” (2 Peter 3.7).

“That day will bring about the destruction of the heavens by fire” (2 Peter 3.11 NIV).

“The day of the LORD will come like a thief. The heavens will disappear…” (2 Peter 3.10).

“Come near, you nations, and listen, pay attention, you peoples! Let the earth hear, and all that is in it, the world, and all that comes out of it! The LORD is angry…. All the stars of the heavens will be dissolved and the sky rolled up like a scroll; all the starry host will fall like withered leaves from the vine, like shriveled figs from the fig tree. My sword has drunk its fill in the heavens; see, it descends in judgement” (Isa. 34.1 – 4 – 5 NIV).

Far from guaranteeing that our holy men are wholly good, and will fare better than others in the end, the Bible at most left that an open question; or indeed, it constantly warned that they would be found to have committed huge sins.

What is more, we now finally, shockingly, d) we are seeing here and now, that prophesy was true. We are seeing here and now, that priests definitely did commit a number of huge, egregious, culpable errors. Exactly as foretold. And what is more, now we are in a position to name those sins more exactly. Especially, they committed the aa) sins of Pride and Vanity; to that they were incapable of seeing the sins and errors in themselves, and especially in their own churches and traditions and prophets and apostles. That God constantly warned about. While bb) specifically all our priests sinned, in their exaggerated faith and spirituality; and their frequent opposition to the “world” of practical people and science. Which put our priests in direct opposition to God. To, as we have shown here, the predominant message of the Old Testament and real life.

So that the New Testament does not prevent … the collapse of Peter’s “present,” Christian heaven.

. . .

Preachers – nearly all religious leaders; priests and ministers and ayatollahs and gurus – love to stand in front of congregations, and pray in front of everyone; enjoying the prestige, as they present themselves as the voicepieces of God, of absolute holy truth. Priests are superficially humble. But deeper down, there is a great vanity and pride. They love to read the parts of the Bible to us, that seem to tell us how great priest are. The part that, taken by themselves and “twist”ed into their own interpretation, seem to assure us all, of how perfect priests are. While preachers love to stand in front of congregations and present themselves as the Voicepieces of God. Or even, as the “infallible” voice of God. When questioned, to be sure, they sometimes seem humble. But then they proudly love to assure us all that the Bible itself says that, in spite of minor imperfections, they themselves of course, are reliable guides; are the voice of God.

Our preachers have loved to tell us, that the Bible commands we must absolutely trust and have faith in our holy men, or their sermons about, their verbal pictures of, God. We must never question them, they say; and especially we cannot put them, or “put the Lord your God to the test,” as they claim. While finally, when under attack, they love to assure us that they themselves especially cannot be scientifically “test”ed, etc.; least of all with “fire.” But finally, we will have found out here that … that is not what the Bible itself really said, overall.

What we constantly heard in every church, from preachers, was that a) we must follow our religious leaders with all but total “faith”; and b) that we should give up on material things, and be “spiritual.” But what we have found out here, was that these two ideas, were not really what the Bible itself really said at all. Especially, first of all, the Old Testament, and God himself. Far from emphasizing faith, God himself constantly warned about bad things, even in the holiest prophets of Israel and Judah; and therefore of course, in the priests that follow the prophets all too religiously, all too faithfully. The blind following the blind.

God constantly warned about huge sins in our holiest men and angels. And told us that one “day” in fact, we are supposed to notice this in a particularly dramatic way. While indeed, many of us are noticing that, even here and now. To “day.”

. . .

In particular, far from stressing “faith,” God himself only mentions the word “faith” in the Old Testament, about six or seven times. While at that, several of those occasions referred to God’s faithfulness to us; not ours, to him. (While another referred to our faith in an ox). While God constantly warned about errors in our prophets, priests. And told us finally, not to have too much faith in them, but instead, “test” them continually, with real science. To find out which things they say are true, are really from God, and which are not.

There are many false prophets and false believers out there. So, when the people ask (as in Deuteronomy 18.20 ff), how are we to know which ones are really from God and which are not? Ultimately God tells us to test them with science; specifically, not by asking them to repeat a loyalty oath to God; but by actually producing real material proofs; that they are able to give us the material prosperity that God promised to those who truly understand and follow him. The real, physical “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs,” “prosperity,” physical “wonders” or even “miracles”; as “observe”ed with our physical – not spiritual – “eyes,” here in a timely way, before we ourselves and reliable “witness”es, as confirmed by real “test”s and … “science.”

While here we add that finally God commands that our priests be submitted, even first of all, to “fire.” Which might mean the “fire” of strong, scientific, critical examination.

So in the “test” of “fire,” there may be yet another verification of a useful kind of scientific “test”ing. And by the way, it also allows, demands, yet another “test”ing of specifically, not just everyday people: but testing precisely, the holiest men in particular. And as a matter of fact, we might even be “test”ing – and refining – a few priests, even here and now. Helping them to see some parts of the Bible, and of God, that they did not see – or obey – before.

Not only are priests to be subjected to “test”s and “fire”; any priest who wants to be truly good in fact (if there is any such), should in fact, even actively seek to be “test”ed; because that is one way that a priest is finally, made better, and is “refined.” As was noted above, in Malachi 2-3. A priest – or similarly, a “child” – who wants to be good, should even actively seek the test that was applied, say, to Daniel, and others. Like Elijah, as we will see.

So indeed, let our priests and ministers, who have followed heaven and those in it, all too faithfully, all too spiritually, should at last read the parts of the Bible they could not “face” before; as quoted in our books here; and learn the science of God. To face their own sins, the sins of their holiest men, at last. And be more refined, at last. As they will be; when they cease emphasizing “faith,” and begin to stress, far more, proven empirical, physical results, as verified by real science. As commanded by God himself.

While in the meantime, let the example, the appearance of say Elijah himself, here, pour his fire of science down … on even our holiest men and angels. To refine them. As we have re-presented Elijah, above, telling us all firmly, once again, to follow only religious leaders that demonstrate solid physical results.

And so it is, God himself said, in the Old Testament, to the very End of Time. Or indeed particularly in the End; when we are to be judged not so much by our faith at all, but by our physical, material fruits, works, signs, deeds. While as for our priests? We can guess, just from seeing their words, they cannot pass this test of fire; since they denied so many parts of the Bible. Since their very “Faith” denied the test, of the science of Daniel, Elijah, Malachi, the Deuteronomist; of the Old Testament god, God himself, the Lord. Our priests constantly invoke the name of the lord; but they never really “saw” him, or obeyed him, “full”y enough.

But perhaps after all, from our very book here, even to “day,” even our priests will come to “see” more “full”y at last, a “second,” more “mature” vision, “appearance” – a preview and perhaps the very substance of … the promised Judgement Day. The Day of the Lord. The promised, foretold, Second Coming. Which we begin to see finally, better than ever, clearer than ever, not with the all-but-blind faith of preachers, but with the Science of God.

God’s Science Point # 80


The Main Contractual Promise From God;

Of Material Results, for Support of the Lord

Our priests are very spiritual. But God himself is so heavily involved in the material universe, fruits and works, that the very core of the Old Testament, the contracts or covenants God made with us, promise that if we follow him, we will get not so much spiritual, but material things:

“The LORD will establish you as his holy people, as he promised you on oath, if you keep the commands of the LORD your God and walk in his ways…. The LORD will grant you abundant prosperity – the fruit of your womb, the young of your livestock and the crops of your ground – in the land he swore to your forefathers to give you. The LORD will open the heavens, the storehouse of his bounty, to send rain” (Deut. 28.9,11-12 NIV).

Preachers have constantly told us that God and religion were about “faith” and other spiritual results; not material things. But that is not right. Here we are finding that God himself continually stressed physical, not spiritual, things.

In fact, we just found that so firm were God’s promises of physical rewards for following him, that God constantly told us, in many very detailed examples, that the standard by which priests and holy men were to be evaluated as true or false … was by their material results. As evaluated, by science. God’s material-results-based theology or vision, and his related, materialistic science, is expressed directly in Daniel, Deuteronomy, 1 Kings on Elijah, and many other detailed accounts; where God describes religious science, and tells us to follow it. But not only does our God a) mention by name, and b) specifically describe scientific method, the experimental method; he also c) supports, independently, many things which are in effect, the elements of science. As when for example, God commanded us to furnish “proof”s; and ask for “signs.”

But furthermore, the science of the Bible, is a direct outgrowth not just isolated elements, but I an outgrowth of the core ideas of the Bible. Of one of the central ideas on which the whole theology of the Bible was founded: the assertion that God was making a series of contracts or “covenants” with mankind. God was making a series of contacts with various elements of mankind – particularly people like Abraham, and people like the Jews – that if they followed him, then God would give them many material, physical things. Like protection from foreign armies; “everlasting” possession of land; and give them many material children; and so forth (Gen. 12.1, especially 17.1-16; 22.17).

More? Problems

Many theologians have noted that the Old Testament, Judaism and Christianity, was based largely on a series of promises. Or as they were called then, “covenant’s. Very firm promises that God firmly made with some men. Promises which were actually termed contracts, or covenants, between God and us. And importantly, in these contracts, which God promised us, that if you were good, if a) you really followed God’s commands, to honor him and give him sacrifices, and so forth, b) then God would in turn, contractually, deliver to you, many real material benefits and goods. If your followed God, then the lord promised to give you prosperity, fruits, works, many children, many signs, better crops or fruits.

God stressed giving his followers very material things, note. And indeed it was in part this series of promises, covenants, that eventually leads to interesting conclusions; indeed, the covenants are one more major support for, the science of God. Because note that in effect, in the covenants, God’s promised or prophesy of material rewards to those who followed him, was so firm, that it almost could be used to identify who was really from God, and who was not. That is to say, c) God had continually promised to prosper those who followed him, and to defeat and impoverish all those who opposed him. And therefore, logically, d) you should therefore be able to simply look at how well someone was doing materially, to tell whether they were following God or not. That is, if someone said that he himself was from God, then you should look to see if he was materially well off. If he was, then you might begin to suspect that he was indeed, a true follower of God. But if he did not have (or eventually, could not deliver) or produce, real material, physical results, prosperity – or if he just delivered sermons, words, excuses; or just spiritual things – then you could safely deduce, that he was not really from God at all. Which e) was in effect, half way to the science of God.

Indeed, the science of God owes something to – and is supported by, among other things – the core of early Biblical theology: the covenants. Or more informally the promises of the Lord, whether formal/contractual or not, to materially prosper those who followed him.

To be sure, there were eventually some wrinkles and problems with the covenants. However, all this at various times, had been the firm promise – even contractual promise – of God.

Problems with the Covenants

To be sure however, though God had firmly promised material wonders to those who followed him, and though God even founded a science of God based around similar ideas, finally no doubt, there were many problems with that contract. Particularly, many followers complained, that they were following the Lord, and yet … they were not getting all the material wonders that he had promised.

And so many passages in the Bible attempted to deal with this problem, that had seemed to suggest to many that God was not real. Most a) passages at first, suggested that people were not getting the things promised … because they had not fulfilled their end of the contract: they had not really followed God. Therefore, they were not getting rewarded, because they had been bad. They had not fulfilled their end of the contract. But b) next, there were some believers like Job, that even God himself were good and “righteous,” “upright”; and yet even very good men like Job, who were following God, at times did not get the things the Lord promised. In this case to try to answer this, it was suggested that God was temporarily withholding his promised material rewards, in order to “test” Job’s “Faith”; to see if Job would follow the lord, out of total faith, even when the Lord was not delivering the things he promised. And yet however, there were problems with this suggestion, we will note: finally there had often been no provisions for that sort of thing in the original contracts; so that in fact, this whole idea of a test of faith, was presented only very tentatively in the Bible itself; with a sort of red flag attached to it we will show: The Bible presenting the theory of the Test of Faith … but presenting it, as it happens, as an idea proposed originally not by God himself, but by Satan (Job 1).

As will be seen in fact, there were countless complaints from the people that the lord himself, was often not honoring his end of the contract. That even people who were very Good, like Job, were still not getting the things God promised. Making many people believe that the Lord was not as good or real as his clerics claimed.

Our clerics however, did not despair; they merely generated dozens more proposed explanations, as to why even good people might not get the things – wonders, prosperity, miracles – that God promised. Among dozens of other explanations they proposed, our clerics suggested that God never really promised physical things at all; or that in any case, the only important thing in life is not material “possessions,” but mental or “spiritual” well-being.

Eventually, dozens of these excuses for the lack of material wonders, were widely accepted; especially the new stress on “Faith” and “spirituality. Indeed, they became the new core of Religion, Christianity. Though to be sure we will eventually show, none of the common sermons designed to explain the lack of prosperity for good followers, seems valid or true to the Bible itself; or to honest logic. As we will find (in Sermons As Excuses). Especially, we are seeing here, the two main apologetics arguments: that a) God was withholding his promised benefits to test, strengthen, our faith. And now we add, the mostly New Testament argument, that b) God was not giving us physical, material things, because after all, material things were unimportant, and even evil. Instead, God was giving us mental or “spiritual” rewards; “fruits of the spirit” as Paul called them. Which Paul asserted, were much better than mere physical rewards. Even though God himself had previously promised them. But c) indeed, we will be finding in a separate section, that there are major theological and biblical errors or sins, both in the massively popular stress on “Faith”; and also on the equally popular and influential pillar of Christianity: the stress on “spiritual” instead of physical things. The major problem or objection being, that God had very, very, very firmly, repeatedly, contractually promised physical, material things, to those who followed him. So strongly, that d) in fact, there really was no valid excuse or explanation, not honest and true apologetic, for any lack of material rewards. While indeed, the authors of the Bible knew this; and so they advanced their hints of possible explanations, merely as hints, suggestions … but not firm statements.

In fact, e) we will find here over and over, that the Bible is so firm in its promises of very, very, very physical rewards – or especially, wonders – to all those who follow God … that finally, the Bible itself tells us indeed, to found a “science” of God on those promises. The promises of God – in the Old Testament especially, but not exclusively – are often so firm, and so physical, that we can – and must – observe and evaluate many things, as a first test, by their material fruitfulness; including especially, evaluating our holy men. With materialistic science. Indeed, the promises of material wealth – or specifically we are noting here, “prosperity” and wonders – are so very firm (having been presented as the word of God, no less), that we should indeed, be able to determine whether a holy man is really from God, by simply asking him to produce material prosperity for us. Or even some would say f) if a holy man stands behind the Bible, including its promises miracles, then we can simply ask him to produce a miracle for us, here and now; or else he should simply be declared a false prophet, a false holy man, a bad or false priest. Following a false idea of God or a false, inadequate lord.

. . .

To be sure, g) our preachers proposed many, many dozens explanations for why “bad things happen to good people,” or to people who are following God. And many such explanations are hinted at in the Bible itself. However, we will show here eventually, that none of the most common sermons that attempt to explain away any lack of material results, are really true to the Bible itself, or true to honest logic; all are sophistical, or heretical. (See Sermons as Excuses).

To be sure though, h) alongside objections to classic apologetics for the lack of miracles, there were also many scholarly, academic debates, on problems with God, and his covenants. And some problem examples. What about for example, the good man … who had his wealth stolen? Would we say that he had his wealth stolen, because he was really, secretly, bad? Or would we say that God would see to it that his wealth was eventually returned? In fact, that was roughly one of at least two or three apologetics proposed in Job: God was not just testing his faith, but in any case, God would at least, eventually prosper Job. Indeed, Job is pictured getting “twice as much” as he had before, in the end. Though to be sure i) next people began to object that no matter how good they were, many did not get rewarded even later in life; many allegedly good people, priests, died poor. To try to answer this, yet another apologetic was developed by priests: that such people would get rewards after death, in heaven.

To be sure though, it has often been easy for some scholars, to think of dozens of other situations, that it would be hard for this system of ethics, the prosperity, physical covenant gospel, to deal with: j) what about the person who was just born physically defective? Was he being punished because he was bad and evil? Though to be sure, there is a Biblical answer to this: a Biblical theology might suggest that his ancestors at least, had been in some way, cursed; with bad genes. Indeed, the Bible suggested we can be punished for the sins of our fathers. (Even unto three generations?)

But then, many might raise k) another example objection: what about the very rich man, who stole his money? An objection, an apparent exception to the covenant science, which people in the Bible itself complained about: where it seemed that God was not honoring his contract or covenant, but allowing the evil to prosper. But here the Bible would answer even this somewhere; to the effect that God would eventually punish such a person, some “day.” Or then too, perhaps those who steal, are often caught and punished just by regular police; while as for the tiny remainder who get away with crimes? Indeed, many believers in the Old Testament bemoan this very problem; in Lamentations and so forth. So that eventually, many priests generated the idea that even if someone was unfairly rewarded in this life, they would eventually be punished either in this life. Or one “day.” Perhaps in an afterlife. (An afterlife which we will suggest, is very material; in our writing on Immortality).

To be sure, there are many difficult subtleties in this kind of ethic; there l) may be martyrs who themselves do not get prosperity, but instead find physical death. But to be sure, there are answers for such things. One might be simply that martyrs were actually not really following God. Or another one would be, who die for the material good of their children say.

So that finally, though many objections are raised to this part of the Bible, to contractual science, there are many potential answers to individual objections too.

Or m) in any case, we might just simply say that even if there are found valid objections to this theology, still in any case, this is the core theology of the Bible; in the covenants, like it or not. Whether the covenants were true or not, still, they are in any case, what the Bible finally, deep down, asserted as its core truth.

Or indeed, we might even note that n) God’s honoring his covenants, and the way he honored them, was often questioned by many people in the Bible itself. As when God is about to destroy the cities of Sodom and Gomorra … and yet Abraham notes there might be some fifty innocent persons in the city. So that God does not here seem to be punishing just the wicked, but also the innocent. To try to square this up, God agrees not to destroy the city, if there are fifty, then 45, then 40 … and finally even ten good people in it. But finally the number does not go below ten (Gen. 18.16-32). And eventually God destroys Sodom. Possibly, with some innocent people in it. Making people wonder, whether God really followed his own promises very closely.

To be sure, there are many possible objections to covenants. And so o) in any case, though our science of God might borrow elements from covenant theology, we do not quite fully commit here to such a covenant theology; no doubt, the science that we support, borrowed elements from the ancient covenants… but then “refined” them too. Though it has perhaps been useful here, to at least mention the covenants, the firmly made promises of God to physically prosper us, as one of the many, early, simple constituents of what will eventually be, a much more complicated and sophisticated science. (Cf. modern Pragmatism, Utilitarianism, and a Christian hedonistic calculus). Beyond simple covenants.

To be sure, p) we would not wan, to here and now defend the notion that every single thing that happens to us, is really our own fault, or even the corporate responsibility of our people, our ancestors. Still, we would suggest that insofar as we can, with our own free will, determine a degree of our own lives, then within that sphere, it would seem that our own will and efforts, our work, play a significant role in determining our rewards. To be sure, at times it seems bad things happen to us that are not our fault exactly – a meteor hits our house say, at random. But aside from that, the covenant theology seems to find something true in it: it is true that ordinarily, all other factors aside, in real life we do often get rewarded for our hard work; or punished for not working. If we don’t get a job, many of us don’t get a paycheck. No doubt there are some inequalities and injustices in the pay scale, but overall as a simple rule, to some extent, we are rewarded in real life, in large part (if not totally), by our own work. And punished for lack of it. Just as parts of the Bible often noted.

In any case though, our purpose for the time being is not to here defend the covenantial view of the universe; but only to note parts of it, which might reflect on the theology of the Bible. And which might be thought by some, to contribute in a positive way, to the science of God.

To be sure though, again, the science of God itself, as we apply it, contains many parts of – but also many refinements on – ancient covenants. Indeed, q) even conventional theology often asserted that we or God can even simply negate or cancel ancient covenants, for a “new covenant.” Indeed, r) some say at least one “new” idea was found in the New Testament: while it is clear that the Biblical God would almost seem to hold everything accountable; even the fall of a sparrow; the portions of the New Testament noted with an element of slack, or “grace,” or “forgiveness,” in that cold hard equation or judgement, some would say. Though to be sure, one wonders at the solidity and reliability of any god, who offers covenants that can easily be simply canceled, or abrogated, by that god.

But in any case, that covenantial God, seems to be the God we have, in the Bible itself; in the Old Testament, itself. While furthermore, in spite of many objections and apologies, that God still holds sway, we will show, in the rather spiritual and faithful, New Testament too.

God holds sway, to the End Time. To the very day of the destruction of heaven itself. As we will be seeing, in our works here.

God’s Science Point # 81

Apply Science to Priests, Ministers,

Holy Men Specifically

To be sure, the Science of God is a complicated subject. For now, we don’t have time to deal with all the problems presented with suggesting that ordinary people are judged by their “works.” So perhaps indeed, we might merely suggest that requiring “works” of some, is the standard not just for ordinary or “lay” people, but also especially for holy men.

Indeed a) nearly all the examples mentioned of the science of God, are applied explicitly to holy men; it is the biblical standard by which we know someone is from God, or not.

While then too b) if this standard for priests, is higher for priests than others, then indeed, the Bible stipulated that priests were to be held to higher standards than ordinary people. (See James, on “not many of you should be teachers”; “for we all make many mistakes”).

So that perhaps some would say, the science of God is not applied primarily to everyday people, but mainly to priests and prophets, to any and all kinds of holy men.

In any case though, our holy men have much to answer for. Especially for their “Faith” and “spirituality.” As we will see more fully, as we conclude our discussion of the Old Testament’s materialism … and move on to a discussion on the New Testament’s spirituality; and the “faith” that was largely popularized not by God himself, but by the apostles, like especially, Paul.

There have been scholars who have noted that there were great changes, in the transition from the Old Testament, to the New. From God, to Jesus. Or even more, Jesus to Paul and the apostles. Scholars who in fact, suggested that it was not Jesus who founded what is presently called Christianity; but apostles like especially, Paul.

We would suggest that the creation of Christianity, as a separate religion distinct from Judaism, particularly its eventual repudiation, renunciation of material things, was a gradual process. Including three major steps. Beginning with a) Old Testament materialism, b) next Jesus himself (after Philo, his slightly older contemporary in Egypt) began to equivocate on the issue of material things vs. spiritual things; while c) finally Paul and the apostles, the new Christian priesthood, began to adopt the model of eastern, Hindu/Buddhist asceticism, and to emphasize spirituality, faith, over allegedly mere material “possessions,” “flesh,” the “world,” and so forth.

But we will suggest, that the Jews themselves often considered that the Christians had gone too far; and were apostates, heretics. While indeed, in spite of constant defensive sermons to try to prove otherwise, we will have to say that indeed, the exaggerated anti-materialism, especially the faith and spirituality of Christian ministers, the priesthood especially, did in fact, simply, go against God.

Chapter 4


Preachers’ Physically Fatal



Spirituality in the New Testament – As

Opposed to the Healthier

Materialistic Science

And Orientation,

Of God

God’s Science Point # 82


One Priestly Attempt to Explain Any

Lack of Physical Miracles

There and dozens, hundreds of major themes in the Bible, that speak against traditional religious authority, and/or in favor of a more objective, disciplined, Science of God. Here was have come to about the 81st reason or so. Though this turns out to be a very, very major theme in the Bible: the dangers of spiritual Christianity. The dangers of false spirits, especially. And the danger of the traditional religion of our priests: the literally, physically fatal side of priestly over-spirituality. Man as it turns out, if he does not live by “bread alone,” lives by physical material literal bread and food, however, at least in part. And as St. James and others began to note, any religion which – like the sermons we heard in nearly every church – that over-emphasizes spiritual things, and neglects the physical side of life … turns out to leave us literally, physically suffering, and finally starving to death. So that? Amazingly, the Bible itself began to speak against one of the core elements of traditional Christianity: the Bible began to note problems, sins, in the spiritual side of life; in spirituality, itself. While the Bible began to direct us, here as in many places, back to the physical, material side of life and God. The material side that can be examined and improved, with Science and technology (properly used).

To date, even most of our preachers, in these modern/postmodern times, have already begun to deal with some of Science. Nearly everyone today, knows that the careful examination of the physical world, by practical experience and Science, strongly suggests or even proves, that the old promises of regular, reliable miracles for example, just don’t seem to come true or “come to pass” (Deut. 18.21) reliably. Even our preachers, have now and then heard of this. So how have our preachers tried to deal with this challenge to their religion? Among other ways their many sermons have tried to deal with this, is to suggest that material, physical things – like physical miracles – are relatively unimportant; that religion is really about not delivering material goods, but giving us satisfying, mental or spiritual experiences, sensations. Christianity is not about the physical “world” and mere material “possessions,” they often told us. All physical things eventually get old and die, and are relatively unimportant, we were told; whereas we were told our mind or spirit, is potentially immortal. So that we should not worry so much if our preachers do not deliver the physical wonders they promised (even “soon,” fully two thousand years ago); indeed, there are even parts of the New Testament itself, that seem designed to be read – in part; by some – as assuring us, that our physical, material lives are unimportant. What matters more, is our “spirit,” and our “spirituality” particularly. In our present books however, we will have been finding in effect, that this “spirituality” in effect, has been massively overdone. That God definitely did make many, many very, very material, physical promises. To the point that that if our preachers cannot deliver on them, then far from continuing to follow them, enjoying the spiritual sensations of “faith” and “hope,” instead, we should simply reject our preachers as “false.” And move on to the more honest and accurate vision of God; to the Science of God. Which simply, frankly, openly confesses a real, significant material failure in our traditional priests; especially confesses their inability to fully deliver on their promises of material “miracles.”

Probably every priest or minister, has now and then probably tried himself, to work physical miracles now and then. But found that he could not perform miracles very reliably, if at all. In the past, science and everyday experience, commonsense, have suggested to many of us, that there was something wrong in the heart of our Religion, our Faith: especially, its promises of “all” and “whatever” miracles we “ask” for; that did not seem to come true or “come to pass” (Deut. 18.21) in real life. So how have our preachers deal with this? Preachers in fact, have delivered dozens – even thousands – of very different sermons, designed to try to explain why today, we don’t see regular, reliable, giant miracles, every time we “ask.” But among dozens of other explanations for the lack of lots of giant miracles on demand, today, the main answer that preachers have semi-privately/secretly settled on, seems to be to take the old promises of physical, material wonders, as being mere symbols, metaphors, or prefigurations, for mental or “spiritual” wonders.

So for example, if Moses and even Jesus were sometimes said to have gotten real, literal, physical food from heaven, parts of the New Testament itself, began to hint that those promises might be just early metaphors, symbols, for some “fruits of the spirit.” For the way that say Jesus himself, brought us himself and his ideas, his spirit; as sustaining food, or “bread indeed.” So if we don’t see many huge physical miracles today? Preachers follow a “spiritual” or “allegorical” reading of the Bible; to imply that physical accomplishments or miracles, are not important. Physical, material things, “possessions” in this “world” they say, are not important; and/or in any case, the promises God made of them, can be interpreted to be, mere symbols, allegories, of the satisfying mental sensations, thoughts, or spirits, that preachers can give us. Even if they do not deliver the miracles promised, they can at least deliver the “hope” they will come; they can deliver the spiritual sensation of “Hope.” For example.

So how have preachers to date, attempted to deal with any apparent shortfall of physical results; of miracles and so forth? Most fundamentalists, a) simply deny that any such shortfall exists; for many years they pointed to cases of alleged physical miracles worked by themselves, almost every week, on TV, to millions. But b) other pastors seem more aware that even if there were occasional miracles, still, they themselves cannot work them reliably. Paul himself even came to coyly question miracles; asking “Do all work miracles?” While part of the Old Testament suggested there was only one day in history, when the LORD hearkened to the voice (and requests) of a man. Though these passages seem to contrast with others, still, they do at least, begin to modify our understanding of what once seemed unequivocally positive promises. As we will see.

So that finally, to try to deal with an apparent problem – even a massive falsity – in the middle of their religion, c) eventually our ministers came to generate hundreds of apologetics arguments to try to explain or spin this problem. And prominent among them, was the argument that … God never really promised real material things at all; that he only promised spiritual things. That the old apparently material promises, are just metaphors for mental or spiritual wonders. If God seemed to promise real, eatable “bread” for example, that was just a metaphor for God giving us the sustaining “bread” of faith and hope for the future.

And yet however, in this chapter we will be noting specifically, problems with the “spiritual” explanation (/dodge). We will have been showing here already, that the Old Testament God himself was normally very, very materialistic. The Old Testament god was so materialistic, that he even allowed and encouraged his religion, to be based on the principles of scientific materialism; evaluating people and even priests, as good or bad, according not to the mental sensations they delivered, but according to the real material fruits, works, signs, deeds, proofs, prosperity, they delivered.

So the Old Testament God, was actually, extremely materialistic; indeed, he made the whole material universe, the earth, and said it was “good.” While we will show next, that even New Testament Christianity began, by promising lots of amazing, very material wonders. The fact is, not only Old Testament Judaism, but also very early Christianity, was so firmly based on the promise of very, very physical wonders from our holy men, that God himself told us to base our religion, our lives, on that. That the world of physical things – and his promises of physical things for us – were so firm, so good, that life, even our religion, could and should be based around material things … and the knowledge that examined them closely: science and practical knowledge.

No doubt, the material promises of early “lords,” were sometimes exaggerated. And no doubt, it was hard for their clerics, priests, to deliver on all the physical wonders promised or prophesied in the name of this or that Lord. Many, many promises of huge physical miracles had been made and recorded in the name of the Lord God for example; promises that our holy men could make bread appear out of thin air (as Moses found “manna”); that just the sound of our trumpets could destroy stone walls (Cf. Jericho though, vs. many trumpets in the night, mimicking a larger army, and scaring people away). Promises that our lord and god – and we believers – could make “mountains” fly through the air. When he wanted to, for us. And that we could just “ask” for such marvelous, gigantic physical wonders, “whatever” we wanted, and get them.

But some mature persons have suggested there were problems with our priests delivering such spectacular, gigantic, amazing, wonderful things to us. Some have suggested that a) though such things were said to have happened in the past, today, we don’t often see our holy men walking on water. Or b) delivering even “all” and “whatever” we “asked”; all the “works that Jesus did, and “greater things than these.” Though our holy men, clerics, promised many, many things in the name of the lord, by the time of Jesus, c) many even in the Bible itself, were beginning to doubt or question – as Job did – the promises of material prosperity. And d) many were beginning to question especially, some of the larger material promises at least; the ability to walk on water and so forth. Indeed, e) St. Paul especially, began to ask a leading question about miracles; when he asked, “do all work miracles?”

Today, f) many scholars concentrate on a particular physical miracles; noting that there would have been doubts about say, the promised “kingdom.” About the truth of God, and divinity of Jesus; when Jesus himself – said to be a lord who was a god, come as prophesied to miraculously save Jerusalem, and set up a real “kingdom” on earth – was instead, himself physically captured, and executed. (As the Romans around him jeered: he could not save himself). And g) we add here, still more doubts would have been raised, when instead of the promised prosperity, many early Christians found death by torture; martyrdom. When, in spite of many reports of numerous physical wonders like resurrections, still, some of the specific, bigger material things promised by clerics, did not seem to be showing up: like an ideal, “eternal” God living in, establishing a real “kingdom” in Jerusalem for example. Avery real, physical kingdom which, we will see, was not just promised by “the Jews,” as apologist priests claim, but was promised by the Old Testament and God himself. This prophesy or material promise, most scholars today agree, was promised of Jesus; but Jesus did not deliver it. Instead, Jesus himself was captured and physically executed; and Jerusalem itself was burned to the ground, in 70 AD, by Rome. Suggesting to many, that Judeo-Christianity were not fully delivering reliably, on all that they promised.

And so, at exactly the time when the New Testament was being formulated, Judaism had suffered some enormous physical reverses; even above and beyond, critics would suggest, the usual problems of priests; their inability to walk on water very regularly or reliably. So that, just when the New Testament was being written, there was great doubt about the physical promises of God and Judaism.

But rather than just totally abandon Judaism – as to be sure though, many no doubt did – still, many tried to defend the old material promises; by various arguments, or what Paul called “apologetics”; reasoned defenses.

There were eventually dozens, hundreds of explanations, excuses, that came to be hinted at in what was to become the New Testament. (Suspiciously many; as if someone was over-eager; protesting their innocent too much; as if someone had a guilty conscience; where there was smoke, there must have been a fire). It was said … though, among many other things (see Sermons as Excuses for the Lack of Miracles), that the old physical promises of the lord, should not be taken literally; taken at face value. It was hinted that after all, real religion, God, could deliver at least “hope” for future rewards; and “faith” and “love.” And that was good enough.

Here though, suddenly, our whole idea of God was … shifted. Suddenly the Old Testament God who constantly promised material “prosperity,” we were told, was just speaking metaphorically. That the lots of huge, amazing, wonderful things were just metaphors for really valuable things: mental or “spiritual” sensations, spiritual things. Hope and Faith.

The New Testament to be sure, could not quite dramatically, directly, openly dump the old physical promises, and the old God. It could not do that, without being obviously seen as apostasy, heresy: going against God. So rather than do this openly, it did it “subtl”y. Instead, it just presented … another reading of the old promises. Alongside the picture of Jesus making real actual “bread” appear in the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes, it produce too however, Jesus telling us that just his act of sacrifice, and his spiritual thoughts and ideas, were really sustaining; were “bread indeed.”

Indeed, under the influence of people like followers of Philo no doubt, the New Testament was very, very carefully worded, in such a way as to hint that the old testament promises could be completely metaphoricalized, spiritualized; with phrases in it to hint that although the old physical promises were still technically on the books, still, that religion could and should become more “spiritual.” And we should stop really thinking, in religion at least – in the recitation of old promises of the old Jewish Lord – about material rewards any more. And start thinking more about philosophical consolation; resignation and hope. Spiritual things. And countless preachers picked up these things … and taught Christianity more and more, as a “spiritual” “faith”; not a series of physical promises of physical rewards.

And yet however, it is time to dramatize a) just how completely, radically, this spiritualization and metaphoricalization, changed – some would hint even in the New Testament, semantically “twist”ed – the whole nature of Judaism, and its idea of God. And b) not for the better in every way.

The New Testament, on Spirituality,

Vs. God’s

Material Promises

Our priests for centuries, have concentrated on delivering only thoughts, words, sermons, and spiritual things. But today, we should give a closer reading to the very passages that seemed to be very spiritual, and to give up on the material “world,” the material side of life. As it turns out, our priests as usual, have been reading misrepresentative parts of the Bible. Reading the parts that seem spiritual especially … while ignoring the parts that call for real material help.

Many sermons have tried to stress spirituality … by using parts of the Bible that seem to allow that. By using the following part of something that Jesus said, for instance; a part that seemed to tell us not to worry about things to “eat,” or “drink,” or clothes to “wear”; because mere non-religious “Gentiles” only, worry about such things.

“Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth…. You cannot serve God and wealth…. Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin… Do not worry, saying, ‘What will we eat?’ or ‘What will we drink?’ or ‘What will we wear?’ For it is the Gentiles who strive for all these things” (Mat. 6.19, 24, 28, 31 NRSV).

Once again though, our priests have been, as foretold, deceitful; in particular, as usual, by quoting only a misrepresentative part of the Bible. But let us now, look at the fuller quote. Which looks quite spiritual at first … but then, on second glance, looking at the “full”er text, re-emphasized the importance of material things:

” ‘Do not lay up treasures on earth…. Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow; they neither toil nor spin.…. O men of little faith? Therefore do not be anxious, saying, ‘What shall we eat?’ or ‘What shall we drink?’ or ‘What shall we wear?’ For the Gentiles seek all these things; and your heavenly Father knows that you need them all. But seek first his kingdom and his righteousness, and all these things shall be yours as well” (Mat. 6. 19, 23, 30-33 RSV).

There has been therefore – as foretold – a massive, systematic fraud perpetrated by priests in churches all over the earth: they read only mispresentative parts of the Bible to the people, while ignoring the more balanced, overall message. Especially they read the more spiritual parts … while ignoring or effacing and denying, the other part of God: the part that promises to take care of material things.

Nearly all our preachers are deceitful in this way: at first, in church, a) preachers read the Bible to you in a way to radically over-emphasize the importance of spirituality; leaving us however with only half of Jesus. A false Jesus in fact. A Jesus that seemed to be telling us to not bother about what we eat, or drink, or wear. But b) if we read on for ourselves, we will see that actually, finally, as regards material necessities, the “full”er text actually, on second glance, is found to admit that, aa) our heavenly Father knows that we need such material things. And bb) he promised that if we are good, “all these things will be given to you as well.” Preachers cc) then insist we must learn to follow them perfectly, to enter the “kingdom,” and only then do we get rewards. And since no one can follow them perfectly, then they say they never have to produce material things at all. But this clearly is dishonest; God normally gave even rather imperfect followers (like Moses) material rewards in short order.

To be sure, dd) no doubt some we need to learn to control some mental and spiritual things; we need to control your destructive impulses, so that we can sit down in school and learn things; and that temporarily putting aside material demands – for an education – has some great usefulness. But in any case however, they this is a temporary process; squelching material wants is not really an end in itself, finally; a good education of the mind is supposed to allow us to succeed in the real world, and get material rewards later. So that indeed, the same passage that preachers often quote, as the great patriotic song of spirituality … actually speaks of spiritual discipline, as only one, first step, of a larger, fuller process; a larger process that is, in fact, supposed to produce real material results. That is supposed to get us food, and drink.

c) Here we have a typical example in fact of the great sin, the great deceit, of nearly all preachers: they present only half of God; only a first, misrepresentative part of God. Our typically over-spiritual preachers, concentrate only the spiritual side of God and truth; but that is only the ear of the elephant. The fact is, preachers are only dealing with half the deck; and they are only seeing – and obeying – only half of God. They know and follow, only half of God’s Plan. And half the Bible at most. (Even far less, actually).

d) Specifically, preachers have been deceitful and evil, in presenting only the spiritual part of the Bible; while failing to adequately deal with, represent, the practical side of life, that leads to not just spiritual, but also physical rewards. Typically preachers do this, by systematically (and surely, at least semi consciously) presenting only misrepresentative fragments of the Bible; those parts especially that seem to stress spirituality. While our priests leave out – and deny; disobey – the parts of the Bible, the side of God, that addressed itself to real knowledge; that leads to real material rewards.

So here indeed, the very spiritual angels … turn out to be rebels, against God. Following false “spirt.” The e) priests, the very angels of the LORD, turn out to be misrepresenting God and Christ to the people; presenting in effect, a false Christ. They typically ignore, disobey, at least half of the LORD; ignoring, disobeying particularly his calls to practical knowledge. Our preachers going against God, as God called for things that get not just spiritual, but also material results.


We will be noting here that a) there were many theoretical, theological, biblical, historical pitfalls, in any attempt to asset that religion should be “spiritual”; in particular, that goes firmly against the materialism of God himself, in the Old Testament. (And to a lesser but real extent, the New too). But b) not only does spirituality go against God, the Bible; in actual physical practice, the over-spirituality that is typical of preachers, is literally, physically, fatal, when we try to follow it in real life. As the experience of ascetics began to show us. And as the apostle James, began to warn.

It was especially writing credited to the apostle James, that began to notice severe shortfalls, in our alleged holy men. Of absolutely key importance: the New Testament letter of James, noted the key, severe, fatal limitation in preachers: that they gave us primarily sermons, “word”s, and ideas or “spirits”; but they criminally neglected to help us take care of the material side of life. James noted that preachers give even physically starving people, only sermons, words, are evil; and leave them starving to death (James 2.14-26). In that way, the Bible itself began to note the fatal narrowness and limitations, even of the most allegedly holy priests: they give us thoughts, spirits, words, sermons … but they fail to take care of the physical side of life. They claim to be “all” we need in all of “life” … but then, if we turn our lives over to them, our lives are ruined. Since they don’t really know enough to manage the “full” range of what life requires.

To be sure, no doubt, food is not all we need in life either; many people are over-spiritual; and “all” they need – in addition to the common sense they already have – is a little spirituality and so forth. And indeed, parts of the Bible said this: “man does not live by bread alone, but by every word” that comes from God:

“The tempter came and said to him, ‘If you are the Son of God, command these stones to become loaves of bread.’ But he answered, ‘It is written, “One does not live by bread alone, but by every word that comes from the mouth of God'” (Mat. 4.4 NRSV).

No doubt, much of the population is over-materialistic. But what we are beginning to note here, is that if many people are over-materialistic, there are many – priests in particular – who have the opposite flaw: they are over-spiritual. Note that if we do not live by bread “alone,” then this suggests that we do live by physical bread, in part. And any religion that pretends to be “sufficient” to rule our entire lives, must become far more capable of dealing with that part of life, than the religion we typically have from priests. Indeed, the religion we currently have from priests, is so narrowly defined, so narrowly aware … that to impose it on the people, or to tell them to follow it (as priests often do) would literally be – and in real life, really is – literally fatal to them.

Is it possible? Is the narrow, unscientific spirituality of priests … a false, fatal religion? In fact, soon after the death, execution of Jesus, St. James began to notice that in fact, those preachers who give us only “spirit”s and “words” – but not instruction on how to get real material food for example – were in effect, actually evil persons. Whose leadership lead us not to the full prosperity they promised … but to starvation (see James 2.14-26).

Read this part of the Bible, very, very, very carefully. It is in many respects, the most important passage in the entire Bible. Because it describes the chief, fatal limitation, of priests; and of their religion. Which is … that priests give us primarily spiritual things, like sermons, and “faith”; but they do not responsibly deal with the full demands of life, including even material necessities:

“What does it profit, my brethren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? If a brother or sister is ill-clad and in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? So faith by itself, if it has not works, is dead’ (James 2.14-17).

In the future of Christianity, this quote from James, is perhaps the key passage in the entire Bible. It is the major key, to the major, fatal sin or error, in the religion, the false or one-sided Christianity, that has long dominated the priesthood. The great sin of priests is partially, this: priests are extremely narrow in their sense of life and God; particularly, they are usually massively over-spiritual. They are used to thinking that we have enough material things (thanks to working people and business people, and the work they do); they feel that they are over-materialistic, and need more spirit. Or even that “all” anyone needs in life in spirit. But what we will be noting here is that if it is possible to be over-materialistic, we now note here that, critically, it is also possible – and extremely common, even typical, in our priesthoods – to be over-spiritual. As St. James began to see.

If man does not live by bread “alone,” he lives by real material bread, in part. And preachers who do not help us take care of material works – like getting food – then, are evil bad priests. Who do not really “see” or take care of, all of man, and all his needs. They claim to be sacred and holy, and know “all” we need to know; but if we follow them, we – like James – will discover that their vision of God and good is too narrow; not “full” enough. That they (as Paul confessed) saw only “part” of what we need to live. And that therefore, while they pretend, vainly, to be “all” we need in life, they are actually just proud, vain people; whose vision of God and Good are hoplessly inadequate to deal with the full demands of life. Whose vision of good is so narrow and inadequate in fact, that when they are allowed to lead themselves, or lead others, we – like James – will find, they actually, literally lead many, into ignorance, narrowness; and out of that poverty, dysfunctionality … and starvation. And real, literal, death.

St. James began belatedly to see parts of this; he began to see that when a person is already starving, and a religious person gives him only kind “word”s, or hopeful thoughts, “spirit” … he is still forgetting something; failing to take care of something. The material side of life in fact. And therefore indeed, the preacher is literally prone to delivering nice sermons – giving words, spirit – to even literally starving people; and leaving them to starve to death. For lack of the thing that preachers forgot, or denied: lack of material things.

But furthermore, this is not even – as we will see in separate book-length treatments – the tip of the iceberg, of the evil that is in the over-spirituality of priests; their culpable lack of knowledge of the “full”er scope of what God wanted, and what we need to live. The fact is, we will find, not only do priests at times, merely a) as James noted, passively fail to materially feed already-starving people. As we will find that, b) by their constantly reiterated attacks on the science and practical knowledge that otherwise feeds us – priests attacking them as “worldly” thought, etc. – by their rigid enforcement of their own narrowness, spirituality, on others – priests do not merely simply allow already-starving people, to starve to death; priests actively imposed on billions of otherwise-functional people, the narrowness of mind, that actively lead them, to ignorance of the things they needed to stay physically alive; to a fatal narrowness that, in the world outside the priesthood, lead literally to real material poverty … and physical death.

What we are talking about here then is literally a matter of life and death; and preachers have been on the wrong side. The fact is, our preachers did not realize, that the kind of religion that they have been narrowly attempting to impose on the masses – and that unfortunately, they have often been all too successful in imposing on them; their narrowly focuses sermons, dissemination of “words” and “spirits” – is actually, a) not only not what God really, “full”y asked for. (Since it neglects God’s focus also on practical knowledge and science). But also … b) the religion, the teaching we get from priests, that we are asked to conform our entire lives to, is so narrow, and so against God, that … it has lead millions, billions, to poverty and literal death. As we will see.

Here though we note merely this: that God, James said, that a priest who gives us mere kind words or sermons, is by no means good. While we will show too that those who give us even “spirit” – just as James note – do not guide us to the life God wanted, either. But at best leave the starving to starve. Or worse – and far more often we will find – they are bad, false shepherds, that actively lead us to … literal physical death.

If man does not live by bread alone, neither does he live by mere spirit … or words either. No matter how many sermons you have heard about the sufficiency of the “word,” by priests; their words after all, were often untrue, and false. Or in any case, their sermons, their mere words, were never, by any means, enough.

More on James

Against Spirituality

God often commanded us to honor and observe material life. And amazingly, God himself finally told us not to be too “spiritual.” Early on, the Apostle James, the “brother of Jesus,” began to outline problems with, sins in, spirituality. And the importance of being more effective in the material world.

Could there be problems in the very spirituality that has always been presented as perhaps the very heart of all that is good and holy? In fact, shockingly, the apostle James, in the Bible itself, began to show how those very “spiritual” persons, with lots of “faith” in this or that, but who do not see good in material life, or who cannot get real material works, are not just wrong, not really from God, but are even physically deadly. Physically fatal. To themselves and others.

Shockingly, James suggested that very spiritual persons, who take care of spiritual things only, dot not take care of physical necessities for example. And so they leave many of us to starve to death, for lack of physical material necessities like food or bread. Amazingly, shockingly, James began to note practical limitations in the very heart of the emerging and triumphant Christianity.

James began to note in effect, first, a false, deadly habits in precisely, the most spiritual people, or priests. Specifically, James said that they neglected or even opposed, the material side of life. Those many millions of very spiritual preachers – those persons who offer us sermons, thoughts, good wished, spirits, but not material food – James began to show, are literally, often, deadly. The often deliver mere words, good wishes, spirits, to physically starving people for example; thus spiritual priests lead the people to literal, starvation. And death.

Spiritual preachers, by their example, and at times – when they have great earthly power, by their commands – lead people not to God, but to physical death, suggested James. Because of their failure to help us provide the real material things, like food, that we need to live. The very emphasis on spirit, non-material things, inevitably leads to neglect of physical things; including physical necessities. As James said, spirituality therefore often, say, fails to help starving people who need physical food, for example. Leaving starving people, their physical bodies to die prematurely. For lack of physical food. While we will find that actually, James’ example, of a priest leaving a physically starving person, to starve to death, is just the smallest sign or hint, of the huge, massive, physical disaster caused by spiritual priests. James’ example is just a tiny, first warning flag … of what was to become in many respects, the greatest disaster and evil in the history of mankind. As we will see.

Over-spirituality, James began to see, is extremely dangerous and destructive. (As the Church often found out in practical examples, as ascetics flagellated and starved themselves to death). Worse though, that’s not the end of it; we will find here, beyond what James noted, that spiritual leaders not only do passive damage, in that they fail to help others already in physical need; actually, spiritual leaders often actively lead others to physical privation, poverty, starvation, and death.

What happens indeed, when over-spiritual preachers tell us that our own jobs, physical “work,” are unimportant – and say, many people quit their practical jobs? Quit the work that gave them a paycheck, or food to eat? What happens then, is that people fall into poverty and starvation (or are helped by charity. So that other still-working men and women have to pay for their upkeep).

So, amazingly, the very spiritual persons, who pretend to “save” us, to guide us to “life” and “prosperity,” actually guide us to ignorance, failure, poverty, starvation, and death. As James began to see.

The moral in James therefore, is to show why real physical material results, are extremely important; to show the practical consequences when we neglect them. Here we are told to continue to value material results, not just solely or simply a) because God demanded them. The fact is to be sure, God does demand them. And b) he demanded them in part because they are the primary index of who is really good in religion, who is conforming to what God really said. But finally, c) God demanded that we pay attention to material productivity … in part because in the natural course of things, human beings need material things, to live. And any very spiritual theology that neglects our physical needs, James noted, leads us into physical poverty and physical death.

To be sure, we should not be simplistic about this. There are parts of the Bible that suggest that we should “seek first” the kingdom of heaven, of spirit, first in our lives. But those sayings usually tell us that if we do that, later material things will be ours as well (q.v.). While here and now today we can make sense of this. For example: as children we go to school and develop our minds or spirits; but all that is in order that later we can get a good – materially productive – job.

So to be sure, some attention to the development of our mind or spirit, is necessary. Still, we should not forget that even in the Bible, there is supposed to be a material payoff for that. The payoff, the proof of our goodness in the end, is not just having good thoughts or spirits, as an end in itself. Indeed, just nice thoughts can be mere “illusions,” “delusions,” “false spirits” after all. So how do we know that our spirits, our thoughts, are Good? Godly? Finally, we have to test them against the real world, says the science of God. The proof is in the pudding: we know that our thoughts are good and true, that they are really from God, if and only if they are ultimately, materially productive.

While note here: being just preachers, and giving people just good thoughts, spirits – but no physical food – says James, does not produce good physical fruit. In fact, it seems to lead people to physical death.

Once again therefore, James affirms that physical life is important; to the point that the primary proof that something is truly from God, is not whether our preachers approve of it; (or even that it reflects part of the Bible?). Instead, over and over – as we are now finding here, in seventy or a hundred or more different types of statement in the Bible – the real “test” as to whether something is good or bad, is to look for its material fruits.

Amazingly then, the primary theology and command of the Bible and of God – the basis of real Christianity – was never supposed to be “faith.” Instead, the Bible said, we should trust and follow (or if you must, have faith in) only those holy men who lead us to material prosperity; to our long-term physical survival.

While as for those who do not do that? In contrast, we should “rebuke,” denounce, all others; all those who do not lead mankind to short- and long-term, very, very material “prosperity,” “fruits,” “works.” When religious leaders do not lead us to material prosperity, we should not follow them; no matter who they are; no matter how high or “holy” or “sacred”; instead we should “rebuke” them, as “false,” bad, evil.

At first it seems impossible; it is just the reverse of what we hear in many churches. But James was among the first to have begun to partially show that not only were physical “works” important; but to show the literally fatal consequences for those who did not try to get them. James telling us that those who follow mere words, promises, sermons, with total, blind, without demanding real scientific proofs, often suffered and even physically died.

James began to see the problem, the great sin in Spirituality. Starving people were not helped, by mere hot air, “empty words.” God said; and a Religion, that gave people only spirits but not physical sustenance, was left the people starving, for lack of physical food. But St. James did not see the entire, more massive extent of the evil of extreme, religious anti-materialism. James merely told us of one mild example; where priests were just passive, and merely failed to help people already starving. In a case where priests therefore were merely failing to help people already in bad physical shape. But where they were at least not worsening their condition; just failing to make it better. But beyond what James saw, we will soon call attention to those over-spiritual, anti-materialists who …do not simply neglect already physically destitute people; but who, far worse, actively lead many people who would have done well … into physical disaster. The fact is, hearing spiritual sermons, many people who are already doing OK in physical life, will begin to abandon material sense. There were those for example, who had practical jobs, food, who, when they heard the End was coming, or heard the call of a “spiritual” life, quit their jobs to wait for it. But then were left starving to death (in Bible somewhere?).

The Apostle James therefore, saw only the tip of the iceberg. James did not quite see the full extent of the massive evil, in over-spiritual religion. James say that often a) the over-spiritual religious person, will fail to help people who are already in lack of material things; food and drink. And so he will by neglect, let others physically die. But James did not go on to notice and talk and warn about, actually, the far, far worse damage done by spiritual leaders: that b) they often actively lead people to material poverty, and death. By telling people to neglect their practical work and jobs, for just “spiritual” things … the over-spiritual man can active lead millions that might have taken care of themselves physically … to physical dysfunctionality.

Is this possible? Can even priests lead even millions of people, to follow false religious “spirit”s? Did the Bible ever affirm that it is possible for this to happen? In fact the Bible constantly warned about “false” and bad “priests,” “false spirits,” “false prophets,” false Christians (crying “Lord, Lord.”) Who would mislead even, the whole earth; “all nations, all tongues.”

God normally gives us positive reasons to follow the material life; but here in James, he began to show the very negative consequences, to those who fail to heed his fuller message.

God’s Science Point # 83

Even “Good Works” of Charity,

Are Not Enough;

The Partial Harm Done

Today, what we get from most preachers in church, is mostly a) words, sermons, liturgical words and so forth; conveying b) ideas or hopes or “spirit”s. But do we ever get things, or the power to get real material things? We c) might at most, get some words, that promise material miracles later; that promise bread out of thin air. Yet these promises don’t seem entirely reliable for our daily meals. In fact, d) in tacit or partial recognition of this, rather than wait for meals to fall out of heaven for the poor, some churches run soup kitchens; or other practical charities, so that working volunteers, can be given food by other people, and cook it, and feed a few poor people, a few meals. But useful as such actions are, note, only here is the church tacitly giving up on spirituality, or miracles; in most sermons, the preacher continues to speak as if the material things we need drop out of thin air. And in any case, e) the people in church, still don’t get much guidance at all, regarding learning how to practically take care of the physical, material side of life, ourselves, here on earth, from preachers. Either the minister just talks about “spiritual” things, not material things; or indeed, we add, whatever good is done in soup kitchens, is massively undone, by the preachers’ systematic attack on the practical knowledge that otherwise would have helped us more.

In soup kitchens, church charities and “good works,” we are given a fish for one day or another; but we are not taught to fish for ourselves; we are not taught the knowledge, so that we can feed ourselves for the rest of our lives. Indeed, most priests explicitly or implicitly assert that “only” “spiritual” and religious things are important; and so though they claim to be “all” we need in life, they make no compromise with, or impart, the practical knowledge we need to take care of ourselves in material life. So that when our lives are dominated by priests (as many foolish women, Irish Catholic women especially, allow themselves to be), our lives are soon reduced to narrowness and ignorance and dysfunctionality; by the very priests that proudly present themselves to us as the very voicepieces of God.

64) When we complain about the insufficiency of their narrow spirituality, many preachers will imply that a) if they have to get any material results at all, b) they take care of this, by just say, sporadic “good works”; like soup kitchens and so forth. And indeed, good works of that sort are necessary … but not sufficient. Soup kitchens to be sure, they can help keep people from starving; and they are another useful physical work, to be done in fact. But they are not remotely enough for a priest to be considered good; or even merely, not evil.

The fact is, we were promised much more than soup kitchens, by God. How much more were we promised? At the very least, a) the Bible often promises at least the “prosperity” (see above) that a normal good worker would get in real life. Indeed, b) the fact is, perhaps the Bible itself – and certainly most of our preachers – promised far, far more material things even, than normal prosperity; they even often promised huge wonders, even miracles. They promised the power to walk on water; and make bread appear out of thin air. And so forth. While finally, in the sum of all their promises, c) they promised an ideal “kingdom.”

Soup kitchens then, are not “all” that was promised by God. Nor even charity hospitals. Indeed, “good works” were not all, either. So that none of these is enough to “ful”fill the (often even contractual) promises of priests.

And indeed we will find, the little material good done by priests feeding some of the poor directly in soup kitchens, is massively undone, by their systematically attacking practical “secular” and “world”ly “knowledge” and “science”; which if they had not been attacked by priests, might have fed far, far, far more people than soup kitchens. Given their historical record to date. Given the record of increases in agricultural production, medicine and so forth, it seems like that our priests’ constant attacks on “reason” and “knowledge” and so forth, held back the sciences that might otherwise have saved even more people from starvation and disease; far more than the priests took care of with charity hospitals and soup kitchens.

As it turns out, the priestly attack on – and destruction of – the “mind”s and “reason” of billions of human beings, in the name of “faith” and “spirituality,” turns out therefore, to have been a massive crime against God; one that in point of fact led billions of human beings to ignorance, insanity, magical delusions, poverty, and disease. (As we will see in The Harm Done).

Mere sermons, words, then, were by no means enough. Nor were even minor “good” works of charity. Though good works help some, and are mentioned in the Bible, finally if we are to have a religion, that is not just a religion, but a credo, a master plan, to guide us through all of life? Including not just the spiritual side, but also the physical side? We need a religion that is every bit as effective as all of science, technology, and “secular” or practical knowledge has been, in farming, and feeding and clothing us, from day to day. As it turns out, we need a Christianity that deals not primarily or spirit; or that deals only sporadically with the physical side of life; we need a credo, a plant that addresses and takes care of the physical side of life, every single day, day in and day out. Which present-day “spiritual” religion, as it turns out, cannot do.


God’s Science Point # 84

Empty Words

The Bible also warned more generally, about those who produce only “words,” “spirits” … and not material results. While we find here that priests typically, furnished more prayers and sermons … than the real material prosperity that God said those from God, should furnish.

Indeed, many will find, our many generations of priests, in failing to adopt science and become materially productive, have fallen; fallen far, far short of what God wanted from them. Among other things, our many generations of priests insisted Christianity is supposed to remain forever, a mere “faith,” giving us mere “spirits.” A vision of God that to be sure, represented parts of especially, Paul fairly well; but such ideas have never quite represented the “full”er outline of God correctly; God as outlined in the whole Bible. The fact is, in the overall Bible, we are given a very different vision of what God wants from us, than what we hear from priests. Far from telling us to honor priests and follow them with total “faith,” even when they do not produce material results, actually, God ordered us, again and again, to demand real material results from our holy men. As proof they are from God.

It is easy to see why our holy men tried to hide this part of the Bible: because as soon as we apply it, we now find that our priests – and our highest holy men – quickly are found to fail this test, too. So that our holy men are now found false in yet another way: they did not deliver the material wonders they promised. Now and then Apostles for example, were said to work wonders, but other times, they did not work them so reliably. In fact, look at a few bad things that happened to early Christians: a) Jesus himself was physically executed; and then was not on earth for more than 40 days; b) then many early Christians were tortured to death. And c) finally, no clear physical “kingdom” appeared; but instead Jerusalem, the capital, was burned to the ground.

Clearly then, the reason priests do not want us to discover the science of God, is that as soon as we do, we being unveiling bad things in priests. Like the above.

So what did priests do? Faced with masses of evidence of chronic shortfalls in their actual performance, versus their huge, spectacular promises, what did Christianity, priests do? Rather than simply deduce that their promises were false, priests like Paul tried to state that after all, God never promised real material things at all; but only spiritual things. The old promises of material things were in fact, often metaphoricalized. Seen to be mere metaphors for spiritual things. Which were more obtainable than … bread out of thin air.

And as for “fruits”? They were spiritualized, metaphoricalized, by people like Paul. And as for “works,” often, among other strategies (see Sermons), preachers will imply (see St. Paul especially) that just delivering sermons, mere words, is sufficient “work.” Indeed, what preachers deliver today, is not the promised fruits, but far more … just talks. Speeches. Sermons. Indeed, the defining characteristic of preachers as we call them here, that gives them their name, is that they “preach”; that is, they mostly and merely talk, for a living. Rather than producing material goods.

Today and for centuries, our average churchgoers have been content enough with preachers that produce by far, talk, words, sermons; and not material goods (and only a very few “good works”). But are sermons, really enough? Are they really all the “work” a real holy man is required to produce? Is the “fruit of your lips” really enough?

Finally, the Bible warned over and over about in effect, preachers: those who deliver mere “words,” speeches, promises … but not real, material results.

Today a) preachers deliver mostly sermons, words, or ideas or “spirits”; but not real material goods. (Not as well as the full productive economy.) And our preachers insist their words are absolute truth; from God. But b) actually, the Bible itself, we will find now, constantly ordered priests not to deliver just mere sermons, words; but to deliver real material results.

Indeed, it is all too easy, to promise things in words; to promise miracles. But of course, it is far easier to deliver words, promises … than the actual miracles, the actual deeds, you promised. There is a kind of danger in grand speeches and promises; as they say today, “talk is cheap”; it is easy to verbally talk and boast about your abilities, and what you say you can do; but it is much harder to actually, really make good on those grand promises. And actually, materially deliver what you say. Anyone can give grand verbal speeches, promising the people that they will make bread appear out of thin air, and give you to the power to walk on water; and many people will be taken in. But remember, many people – including priests – sound good on paper; and make grand speeches, and huge promises; but then, when it comes time to actually deliver the material goods the promised, they cannot do it. It was all just “hot air,” as they say today.

This is a very common problem or sin. And finally the Bible itself, warned about it. As it began to warn about “Empty words,” empty or spirits or false spirits that will dissolve:

“Let no one deceive you with empty words” (Eph. 5.6).

“For when dreams increase, empty words grow many” (Ecc. 5.7).

“From my mouth; it shall not return to me empty” (Isa. 55.11).

“The spirit will dissolve like empty air” (Wis. 2.3).

c) Preachers, when accused of this – when accused of delivering just empty words, empty promises of material things, but no real results – will then typically assure us, in one common sermon, that if they deliver just words that are attribute to Jesus and God, then those words are not “empty”; since these are the words of God, and God said his words would not “return to” them “empty” (Isa. 55.11):

“For as the rain and the snow come down from heaven … until they have altered the earth, making it bring forth and sprout … so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth; it shall not return to me empty, but it shall accomplish” (Isa. 55.10, 11).

Preachers always assure us this quote means aa) that any word they say is from God, cannot be empty; no matter how unproductive it seems. Because it is from God or the Bible; and therefore, even if a promise of miracles say, seems empty, eventually it must come true. Because it is from God, and God’s word’s never return to him empty.

bb) But the Bible itself is radically polysemic; nearly all its phrases have two or more meanings. And in light of what we know now, there is another, “second” – and better, exactly opposite – way of understanding this “no return to me empty” phrase. In light of what we have just found out here, regarding the real predominant message, theology of the Bible, the way we should understand this quote, another way. As per Deut. 18: if there are any words, that are alleged to have come from Jesus of God, even in the Bible, but that are words, promises, that do not come to pass in real life, that are not materially productive, that do not result in visible material fruits, then we must not continue to simply follow them with total “faith” … but instead, we must simply deduce, that those words were not really from God, at all.

That is: if – as the Bible says – words that are truly from God, do not return empty, then any word that does return empty, any promise or prophesy that is not fruitful … we must deduce, was not really from God at all; was not something, a word, that God actually said. Any promise or saying that does not come to pass in a real and timely way, is a) not really what scripture said; or b) is false scripture.

Here, we return this formerly “twist”ed saying around, to its proper position. This phrase, rather than a) telling us to follow what is said to be from God with total blind faith, and far from ordering us to continue to follow all “words,” “sayings, even scriptures attributed to God, b) instead this phrase, fits in with the predominant message of the rest of the Bible, just noted here: we are to examine every word attributed to God, to see if it is not “empty”; that is to say, to see if it gets real material, timely results. If it does get real material results, if it returns to God not “empty,” but with “fruits,” then, we are only them to say, to agree, that those words really were from God. But if they do not, however, then … we are not to continue to follow them with total blind faith; but are to simply say that those words were “false,” “empty words”; words that were not really from God, at all.

Since indeed, that is how the rest of the Bible tells us to treat mere words, promises, prophesies: we are to believe in them, if and only if, they do not return empty, but bring real material – and not spiritual, not mere word – rewards.

Preachers to be sure, will often assert that when they deliver words attributed to Jesus, sermons, those are special “word”s; and they are enough; they are “full” or adequate or special. Along these lines, it is thought that Jesus himself was often called the “word” (John 1). But actually, we will find when John says, “in the beginning was the word, and the word was God and the word was with God,” (John 1), it is a) not certain the “word” refers to Jesus himself. It might b) refer to the Bible itself for instance. While in any case, c) John is not consistent with the other gospels; and d) indeed, John reverses or modifies the account of the beginning, in Genesis: where God himself said, that “in the Beginning,” “God” – not the “word” – made heaven and earth. John in effect changes God we will find; into a bookish cleric’s idea of God; as a “word,” and not as a real being.

e) In any case, let’s note the original Greek text; which actually said “in the beginning was the LOGOS (John 1). And the Greek “logos,” we assert here, is really better translated here, not as “word,” but by its closest English cognate: “Logic.” Meaning Reason.

Indeed consider the very, very, very close resemblance between the word “logos,” and our English “logic”: logos/logic. In fact, we assert here, this resemblance is no accident: our English word “logic” is descended from the Greek term, “logos.” And indeed, “logic” is the better translation; the logic of things. Thus, the New Testament was not really enshrining the “word”; but was telling us that God is Logic, Reason. Not mere words.

Priests therefore, were not quite right. Not even in their understanding of the Bible itself. Based on their limited understandings, many priests verbally promised us heaven. In many fine words and speeches. Priests indeed, sermonized constantly. Indeed, the bulk of what they did for us, sermonizing; delivering words. And though they assured us their words would results in material “miracles,” actually, God himself actually told us that mere words, are not entirely reliable; that many words can be “empty.” And indeed we will find, our preachers made many huge, verbal promises to us; and our preachers delivered lots and lots of speeches and words. But did they often really, actually, walk on water? Did they make real, actual “mountains” move? As we will see later, in our writing on miracles, preachers do not walk on water much today; we have heard millions, billions of fine “word”s from preachers; many huge promises, and incredible speeches. But, as they say today, the “proof is in the pudding”; when it comes to actually delivering real, actual, physical, material goods…? Our preachers, we will see, never quite delivered as much as they promised.

And so we must say of our preachers, ministers, and priests, of their “words,” their “spirit,” their “heaven”:

“They rely on empty pleas, they speak lies” (Isa. 59. l4).

“The spirit will dissolve like empty air” (Wis. 2.3).

“The heavens will vanish like smoke” (Isa. 51.6).

This seems shocking and abrupt. But God himself told us remember, that there have always been sins in our holy men. And that one “day” we would see this, abruptly.

And what should you be seeing, now? You should suddenly begin to see and understand at last, all those many, many warnings in the Bible itself, about persons who deliver words, speeches … instead of material goods. Warnings about say, among other things….

False “tongues.”

Warnings too, about mere …

Empty and False “Promises.” (And false “prophets” and false prophesies).

And mere “false dreams” that are told:

“Tell false dreams” (Zech 10.2).

While, as for the “hope” and “consolation” that just being promised things gives us? About promises in themselves, without performance?

“And give empty consolation” (Zech. 10.2).

To be sure, our preachers’ speeches, their “tongues,” their sermons, often “promise”d us many huge wonderful things: all the miracles we “ask”; the power to “move mountains,” and make bread appear out of thin air; the power to be immune from poisons, and walk on water; and all the things that Jesus did, and “greater things than these.” Yet we are finding here, that God told us there would be many false promises in religion; many empty words. And therefore, we should ignore their words … and look for real, material results. Or, as regards to sermons specifically: “talk is cheap” as they say; the “proof is in the pudding,” they also say; “put up or shut up,” as they say in New York. Or as the Bible itself warned over and over: there are many false prophets; by their fruits you shall know them.

Finally the Bible and pop culture both tell us that indeed, there are many “big talkers” and “liars” out there. So we need to know that all mere verbal promises and assurances and promises, like sermons, are only “hot air” as we say, or “pie in the sky.” Words, promises are only hot air. (Or in Biblical language we will see below, mere “East” “wind” (the wind in Israel, that comes from the desert). Words are just words, promises are just empty promises, hot air … unless and until, someone actually delivers the real material things the words promised.

God constantly warned us about some dangerous pitfalls in language, speeches, sermons: there are many liars out there; many false prophets; many people who like to string us along, forever, with empty words, empty promises. The are many prophets who predict things … that “do not come to pass. While indeed, until about 1968 or so, the bulk of preachers, all over the world, constantly promised to us huge, amazing “miracles.” And yet, when we use science to look at what they actually, materially produced? Their results are not quite as advertised.

To try to justify themselves, preachers have come to say that even if they do not deliver the material goods promised, still, their promises raise nice images, the “spirit” or “hope,” in our minds. And that was enough; such promises, hopes, give us “consolation.” But actually, when you raise a hope in someone’s mind, but then do not actually deliver materially, that is called a “false hope.” Or an “empty consolation.” Or a mere “delusion” or “illusion,” a “false dream,” or a “lie.” And when you give up practical actions, for false dreams, false hopes … you can ruin your life. (As we will see in our writing on The Harm Done).

Knowing all this, God himself therefore told us to be suspicious of words, sermons; and to look hard our prophet’s – and preachers’ – actual material works. But then, what happens when we at last actually do this? What happens when we actually do compare our preachers’ promises, with our preachers’ actual deeds and works, today?

Do you really see preachers today, producing all the works they promised? Like …miracles? When indeed, was the last time you yourself, in your own experience – in what you have seen “come to pass” in real life – actually saw your preacher, say, actually, really, materially, walking on water? Many preachers tell us in words, that they and God will give us “all” and “whatever” we “ask”; including the power to move “mountains.” And we read in words, in the Bible, that this was often done in the past. But when did you see your own preacher, today, actually, litearally, moving real, actual, physical “mountains”?

We have heard a thousand sermons promising such things … in words. But we ourselves, have never, ever, seen any preacher at all, in our own time today, actually do the physical deed: we ourselves have never seen a preacher move a real, literal, actual, physical “mountain.”

So what should we now say, about preachers? And their many fine promises and sermons? Their many fine … words? And their hopes and consolations?

Biblical science therefore tells us that we should be wary of sermons; which can be very, very “empty,” even when they seem to be full of the “word of God.” Which can be mere “empty consolation”s.


God’s Science Point # 85

84) Not only the Bible of course, but also a) practical sense – and b) simple honesty too – demand that when you promise something in words and prophesies and promises, you should really produce it. Your should produce real material results; not just empty words, empty promises, or hot air.

Finally indeed, we will find, the Bible and common sense tell us, that is someone is found to just promise something in words, sermons, but does not actually deliver it, then … we should say, that person, no matter how holy he seems, is actually, simply, “lying.” See indeed, all the Biblical warnings about “liars.”

God’s Science Point # 86

85) Today and for some time, some preachers have come to suspect that many of their old promises, are not coming to pass in real life; many of their promises of miracles. And so, they have tried, since at least the time of Paul especially, to turn the language of the old promises around; by “twist”ing the meaning of the old phrases; reading them as metaphors for spiritual things. Or – like the often-unreliable Peter (Mat. 16.23) – stretching, “twist”ing the meaning of such terms as “soon,” to mean … thousands of years. But to do this, is not only “twist”ing words; it is, say, “double-tongued.” Here though, we use the term in a way slightly different from the Bible? What we mean here, is that when they find their old promises are empty, many preachers try to give the old words, a twist; to give them two or more, often opposite, meanings. But this in effect, we will find, is to play dishonest word games; to be “double-tongued” in effect. But what good is a Bible, whose definite meaning, can never be determined? That seems to say two opposite things, in the same breath? That seems to promise something “soon” … but then might mean, in a thousand years for example?

How can we follow a document, a Bible, which can say, promise two exactly opposite things – soon, and not soon all – often in the very same sentence? What good is a document, a word, that is so “double” (or duplicitous? Forked-”tongue”d?), that while it might seem to promise us something “soon,” it might also be playing word games with us … and mean to promise it, actually, seven million years from now?

When people began to complain to him, that the things promised in the name of God and Jesus seemed like hot air, that even things promised “soon,” dozen or more years ago – even thousands of years ago – had still not come to pass, in their own time, Peter suggested that “soon” might mean thousands of years in God years. And yet however, what good is a word attributed to God, if it’s meaning is so vague and ambiguous, that you can’t tell if it is promising something today … or a billion years from now? How can you use a document, a word that is that equivocal, as a firm guidepost to life? How good is a “Stop” sign that might mean stop … or might mean speed up?

So that, finally, attempts to finesse problems in religion – like the chronic lack of miracles today – by stretching the meaning of “word”s – like stretching the meaning of “soon” into its exact opposite; to thousands of years – gives us a document, that is stretched, like a bad “patch,” to the tearing point. A document that does not speak straight, but is speaking with forked tongue; speaking in double – or duplicitous – ways. A document that some have said is “poetic”; but which is often giving us poetry, equivocation, when actually we need clear, unambiguous prose. Which appears to give us one thing … but then secretly takes those promises away in the fine print; in word games.

Those who play such word games with us then, we might say, are being double-tongues; or simply, duplicitous. Using a “forked” tongue. They are indeed, being bad, evil in any number of ways; for that matter, we might add, they are among other evils, “bearing false witness.” Since they allow themselves to appear to promise, witness to one thing … but are actually then, dodging out of those promises. And delivering in effect, as we will see below, not just “double” think, but also mere “false prophesies”; “False dreams.” As opposed to the truth. Delivering “empty promises.” Delivering in fact, the foretold “lies,” and “illusions.” And so forth.

There are, therefore, in any case, many, many Biblical phrases used to describe the sin that occurs, when preachers or others, give us mere sermons – or words – instead of deeds:. Words can be ambiguous and uncertain; even “double.” Or duplicitous.


God’s Science Point # 87

Words, Sermons, Spirit, as Empty “Wind”

86) Especially, the effect is, that it is all too easy just to promise things in words; just to keep people off your back; and to keep them off your back, by just delivering more and still more words; delivering in fact, sermons week after week, year after year, century after century. But finally God himself warned about that. As God warned say, among other things, about “empty wind.”

Especially, the drying or desiccating, “East” wind:

“Scorching wind shall be the portion” (Ps. 11.6).

“Like clouds and wind without rain” (Prov. 25.14).

“Seven ears, thin and blighted by the east wind” (Gen. 41.6).

“Utterly wither when the east wind strikes it” (Ezk. 17.10).

“The east wind dried it up” (Ezk. 19.12).

“Fill himself with the east wind” (Job 15.2; Hos. 12.1).

“A great and strong wind rent the mountains.… But the LORD was not in the wind” (1 Kings. 19.11; cf. however, “When he gave to the wind its weight” Job 28.25. “He makes his wind blow, and the waters flow” Ps. 147.18. “The east wind, the wind of the LORD, shall come” Hos. 13.15 … but to destroy?).

“When the speech of a despairing man is wind?” (Job 6.26).

“Behold, all is vanity and a striving after wind” (Ecc. 1.14).

“The prophets will become wind” (Jer. 5.13).

“This was for the sins of her prophets and the iniquities of her priests…. They wandered, blind, through the streets, so defiled with blood…. The breath of our nostrils, the LORD’s anointed, was taken” (Lam 4.13-14, 4.20).

“God sent an evil spirit” (Judges 9.23; 1 Sam. 10.14, 19.9).

“For when dreams increase, empty words grow many” (Ecc. 5.7).

“They rely on empty pleas, they speak lies” (Isa. 59.4).

“With empty oaths they make covenants” (Hos. 10.4).

“Tell false dreams, and give empty consolation” (Zech. 10.2).

“The spirit will dissolve like empty air” (Wis. 2.3; “I went away full, and the LORD has brought me back empty” Ruth 1.21).

“He awoke and rebuked the wind” (Mark 4.39).

What does wind – and then, the “east” wind – mean? Importantly, “wind” or “breath,” is the Greek term (usually, “pnema”; as in our “pneumatic,” “pneumonia”), usually behind, translated as, the word “spirit” in the Bible. Yet while we are told by preachers that “spirit” – or “wind” – is all we need to live, note what the Bible said about some spirits, and “wind.” Particularly, the “East” wind. Israel, note, was located at the north east corner of Africa; when the wind came from the “east,” that means the hot air from Africa. Which was extremely hot and dry; and which rarely carried moisture that would turn into rain for the crops. Therefore, the “east wind” to Israel, meant … dry, hot air. Instead of saving water.

Thus, when preachers or others, give us only sermons, but not works, we are given mere hot desert air from Africa; instead of real deeds. Instead of moisture, and rain; or from all that in turn, eatable “fruits.”

As it turns out then, all those many generations of preachers, priests and ministers that gave us primarily speeches or sermons – or even, “spirit” as it turns out (James 2.14-26) – did not give us all that a true many of God is really supposed to give us. And indeed, they made this mistake, precisely because … they were bookish, and fixated on the written “word”; while neglecting to note the word’s constant references to the things of, the importance of … learning from the material earth.

While those who do not learn to tie words to referents; link words to deeds? “Word” to world? Who give us only half of what we need? Who give us only the “word”; or a mere flattened, “wood”-like symbol of bread, and water and flesh? Or even worse, mere sermons or words, only? What does the Bible say? What do you read?

The Bible adamantly tells us that, while we do not live on “bread alone,” but in part on the “word,” on the other hand, we do need some literal food, real bread, after all. We cannot live on “windy” words (Job 15-16). After Job has listened to one excuse or apologetic for the lack of material miracles, after another, Job says:

“Should a wise man answer with windy knowledge?” (Job 15.2).

“Then Job answered: ‘I have heard many such things; miserable comforters are you all. Shall windy words have an end? Or what provokes you that you answer? I also could speak as you do, if you were in my place; I could join words together against you, and shake my head at you. I could strengthen you with my mouth, and the solace of my lips would assuage your pain. [But] If I speak, my pain is not assuaged…. Surely now God has worn me out; he has made desolate all my company. And he has shriveled me up…. Men have gaped at me with their mouths” (Job 16.3-7, 10; see Shakespeare on those who offer too many explanations; obviously, excuses).

In fact, the endless sermonizing of preachers, the endless speeches, the endless excuses, rationalizations, and verbiage, the endless stream of words,” God himself finally said, finally are not enough; and are to end. And they and their “wind” and “spirit,” are to be brought up, judged, short. As we will see after God, in James. And then by the Science, the better judgement, of God.

Part ?


Mature (See Earlier Listing, Above)

One day, we are supposed to “mature” in our vision of God. But what is that “mature” vision like? In the past, preachers who saw pieces of the puzzle, who began to see some problems with the material promises of Judeo-Christianity, incorrectly concludes that to be mature, is to reject the old physicality; to be “mature,” is to be spiritual. Just to “grow in our faith.” But from what we find here, that clearly was not right. Because not only does strong priestly spirituality 1) go against the God of the Bible, adamantly; but 2) worse, that departure is regularly punished; in that such excessive spirituality is often physically debilitating; and even often, physically fatal. As James began to note.

So what finally is the real answer to all of this? Finally we will show – as many other scholars are beginning to accept – it is not more and more faith and spirituality; or more and more adamant promises of miracles either. Instead, it is a return to, and then a build up of, the more cautious … science of God. Which indeed might find many ancient material promises exaggerated … but does not reject them all, totally. Which can see some value even in spiritual things … but also the dangers. And which can phrase itself in a way that, amazingly, is totally consistent with the Bible itself. More consistent in fact, than our preachers’ one-sided and radically incomplete acceptance of only parts of the text, and of God.

James and Jesus were not the first to warn about problems with false holy men giving us just words, spirits, but not deeds; the Old Testament God had also warned in advance, about over-spirituality; about those clever clerics and scribes and those clever with words; who would give us clever words, in effect, instead of real material food.

No doubt, to see this, is a great change or shift of emphasis, in religion itself; to shift it from blind faith in spirituality and so forth. But finally one day after all, our religious thinking is supposed to change. To first of all, again (see our first pages) “mature”;

“Be babes in evil, but in thinking be mature” (1 Corin. 14.20; also 13.11. Revised Standard Version or “RSV”).

But what is “matur”ity in Christianity? a) Preachers have often taught that “mature” Christianity always means, just spiritual Christianity; moving up from promises of material “miracles,” to learning to be philosophical and resigned, content with quieting our minds and passions, to be satisfied with a purely mental “peace.” But while most preachers think that this “spirituality” – and more “faith” – is what is meant by a more “mature” Christianity, b) that isn’t what we found here: actually, the more “mature” religion that Paul called for, is not “spirituality”; it is, actually, the science of God. As practiced in part already by many theologians, religious scholars, and so forth


God’s Science Point # 88


First, we need to take our over-spiritual preachers, and remind them of the materialistic side of God himself.

Against our over-spiritual priests, and one reading of the New Testament – which oppose material possessions, riches – in the Old Testament are many, many promises of many material things; even … “Riches.” And a very physical, material “prosperity”:

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

To be sure, the normally very, very materialistic God, has a slightly ascetic side; at times promises “riches” … but other times, he seems to tells us not to be “greedy”; and not to “crave” riches and “possessions” and so forth:

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

“Good name … be chosen rather than great riches” (Prv. 22.1; see name as immortality).

But indeed, we will have been seeing here that the Old Testament was quite concentrated on material things. It was instead, we now add, primarily parts of the New Testament that began to attack material things especially:

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

“How hard it will be for those who have riches” to get into heaven (Mark 10.23).

c) To be sure, no doubt, it is possible to be “greed”y or “crav”ing; to have too much desire for material things. And d) at times, preachers will try to drop all promises of material rewards from religion altogether; and assert that they only have to deliver mental or spiritual gifts, spiritual “riches.” Yet finally, e) science says that those ideas which do not bring material success, are mere “illusions”; and f) even above, note, those seeking the kingdom of heaven, are eventually supposed to get “food,” “drink,” here on this material earth.

To be sure, at times spiritual things are spoken of as riches; “assured” ideas:

“The unsearchable riches of Christ” (Eph. 3.8).

“Riches of assured understanding” (Col. 3.3).

“Treasure in heaven” (q.v.).

“God who is rich in mercy” (Eph. 2.4).

Yet in any case, the Bible also often clearly spoke of real material rewards, here on this material earth, in our own lifetime:

“Now Abram was very rich in cattle” (Gen. 13.2).

g) To be sure, the “son” Jesus might have temporarily turned against this side of God, some might say (like the Prodigal son?):

“Woe to you that are rich” (Luke 6.24).

“Come now, you rich, weep and howl for the miseries” (Jas. 5.1).

Yet overall, the Bible often promised material things. At least a moderate “prosperity.”

And then too, note below, whatever we are to have in spirit, in “heaven” … remember that God told us that one day, heaven itself is supposed to dissolve. Heaven might be proof, safe, from being eaten by “moths” – but not, apparently, from being dissolved by … God himself, it seems (in Isa. 34.4 ff, Isa. 65-6; Rev. 21; 2 Peter 3; Mark 13.31; as noted in our “Destruction of Heaven”). While the new heaven … comes down, to deliver real material rewards, on this material earth. As we will see.

So, in spite of brief outbursts of asceticism in parts of the Bible, finally God concentrated overwhelmingly, overall, on promising lots of wonderful material things, here on this earth; even riches. Thought to be sure, balancing the promises of asceticism, with riches, we might expect say, merely prosperity. Or what we “need” as many say.

Though look at parts of the Bible that promise so many material things. Like this:


God’s Science Point # 89


“Turn it into money, and bind up the money in your hand, and go to the place which the LORD your God chooses….”


God’s Science Point # 90


“… And spend the money for whatever you desire ….”


God’s Science Point # 91

“Oxen, or sheep …”


God’s Science Point # 92

“…Or wine or strong drink…”


God’s Science Point # 93

“… Whatever your appetite craves; ….


God’s Science Point # 94

“…And you shall eat before the LORD you God and rejoice, you and your household (Deut. 14.25-6; 12.7; cf. though a similar, more critical passage on this same thing … somewhere).


God’s Science Point # 95

Indeed, the Bible, God, was not as spiritual as priests; many material things were promised. Like? Victories in real material battles, and so forth. Examples of most of the material promises of God are in fact, too numerous to list here; check a concordance to find hundreds of examples of each.


God’s Science Point # 96

Ascetic priests often present us with sermons valuing poverty, the “suffering servant” Job for example. But even Job we will note, though he suffered for a while … was originally quite wealthy; and was blessed with twice as many things as he once had, in the end. (Quote here end of Job; his camels, goats, etc.).


God’s Science Point # 97



Indeed, of course, the main appeal of Christianity, the way it attracted millions, billions of followers, was mainly its promise of material prosperity …and even especially, material wonders … or miracles.

Over and over, every week, the whole population of the earth was told that Jesus and God worked amazing physical feats all the time: that Jesus walked on water, and made bread appear out of thin air and so forth. And all that was continually, in sermon after sermon, promised to us, by preachers; if we just trust and followed them. Here the Bible constantly promised us real, physical wonders.

(And if these promises were later removed? By “twist”ing the meaning of such promises, and reading them all as mere spiritual metaphors, “figures”? Then after all, that would be an example of word sophistry; of over-spiritual word-“twist”ing. Better said, the Bible itself in the New Testament, began to offer mental or spiritual equivalents, to the old material promises of “water,” and “bread,” and so forth. And yet however, finally the physicality of real life, and the evident physicality of the Old Testament promises, and a God determined to take care of the physical side of life, is so strong, that the New Testament is perhaps best read as never quite insisting on the total spiritualization, metaphoricalization, of all the physical promises of God. As we will be seeing in our sections on Science, clearly there are dozens of good reasons to hold that God really meant a true religion, to take care of the physical side of life. While in partial acknowledgment of this, even many preachers today, do not say that the Bible is entirely metaphorical/spiritual/ allegorical. Indeed, there are many classic theological arguments against that. Instead, at most, many suggest that the Bible offered both physical and spiritual things.)

The Materialism of

Jesus, and the

New Testament

Christianity, it becomes abundantly clear, was originally, quite materialistic; and its spirituality, is just a temporary phase; it is not supposed to be “faith-based” or spiritual, forever. Judaism began with promises of real material prosperity; and if Christianity was spiritual for a while, it was clearly supposed to come to be based on science, producing real material works (if not the “work” of circumcision; as Paul noted).

And finally, we are even judged, by the materialism of God, particularly, in the End; as our old heaven is destroyed, we are judged not just by our thoughts or spirit, but by our fruits, works, “deeds.” (Q.v., above).

Preachers like to assert that being poor and so forth, even suffering, is what God really wanted for us. And to try to prove this, they begin with a) Job. And then b) the “suffering servant”; who may be another reference to Job … and/or they say, the c) Christ who suffered and was killed for us.

And yet to be sure, while there are hints in the Bible that would allow for a temporary or partial poverty at times (rather like Weber), eventually – even “soon” – real religion is supposed to bring real material prosperity.





God’s Science Point # 98

A Promised Material “Kingdom”:

A Largely Material Kingdom of David, and to Come;

Not Just a Spirit “Within You”;

The “Second” and Better Vision, Coming,

Of a Kingdom

97) Among thousands of promises of very physical rewards for those who are truly good, there were many promises of a real, physical, material “kingdom,” here on this material earth. (Isa. 11, 65-6; Rev. 21; etc.). The materiality, literalness, of this kingdom, is often debated today. And there is an all-too-familiar sermon, that tries to convince us all that God never intended to form a conventional, “earthly” kingdom here on this earth (cf. our remarks on the Temptation of Christ). But it seems clear enough to scholars today, that in the Old Testament, the model “Kingdom” that seemed eternal to many (especially in the days it flourished), was the literal kingdom of David and Solomon. Israel and Judah were continually being overrun and then governed, by larger, neighboring empires (Babylonia; Assyria; Egypt; Greece; Rome; later the Ottoman Turks; the English. To name just a few). So Israel longed for its own kingdom. And the model for that, was the very brief period in Jewish/Israeli history, when the Jews had a relatively strong, rather autonomous, independent Jewish nation or kingdom; headed by David; and then his son, Solomon. No doubt, many of the statements promising or declaring an “eternal” kingdom, were based on statements originally written in this period. And while that kingdom collapsed soon – in the days of Absalom – then the old proclamations of an eternal empire of God, headed by the house of David, were extended, or projected, as prophesy: as hopes for yet another one in the future. If the “eternal” kingdom of David and Solomon collapsed immediately, that must mean that there would another extension or embodiment of it, a future kingdom headed by a “shepherd” son of David. A future kingdom is based very largely on, the kingdom of David and Solomon. And furthermore, just as the original was here, on earth, so too (with a brief pause), eventually, we are to be given be a rather real, material, concrete kingdom, on earth (Rev. 21, etc.). Probably centered, as David’s kingdom, in Jerusalem.

To be sure, as someone as noted (H.L. Mencken?), every part of the world, almost every king, has proclaimed itself as an “eternal” kingdom. But there have always been problems with them; all collapsed sooner or later. Many, many ancients proclaimed that their own kingdoms were “eternal”; -and yet all these eternal kingdoms eventually fell. As History now notes. Indeed, in part the proclamations of an eternal kingdom of Israel or its Lord, probably were a) hopeful statements of ancient prophets; b) taken later to refer to the kingdom of David and Solomon. Which probably declared itself eternal … but which however, like so many others, soon collapsed. One might have thought that such things would discourage people from making such claims and promises again. But c) people read the old promises. And if they did not see anything eternal around them at present? Then eventually c) the old, previous proclamations ..were presented as perhaps, not false; but as projections or predictions – or prophesy – of yet another, more eternal kingdom. To come “soon.”

To be sure, many, many kingdoms probably declared themselves to be the new promised kingdom of David. Even d) the coming of Jesus Though when Jesus was physically executed, rather than becoming a real king, and when e) Jerusalem was burned in 70 AD, f) people hoped another kingdom would come “soon” however (Rev. 21 etc.). Though g) when many years passed and Jesus did not return, finally, people began to give up on a material kingdom. After many defeats and delays, in the arrival of any such, indeed, h) there developed hints that a sort of metaphorical, spiritual, quasi “kingdom” could be substituted. That say, i) this or that church, could be considered the kingdom. But to be sure, j) our various “spiritual” kingdoms, our churches, did not seem entirely good. As even one Church after another failed to be quite “full”y as good as the kingdom previously announced/prophesied, and Protestants and Catholics began fighting for example, finally, k) many people began to cease to believe in these old promised kingdoms and other miracles, altogether; c. 1789-the present.

In any case though, originally, the majority opinion in the Bible, we are seeing here, is that not just “spiritual” success, but real, material success, were actually supposed to come to those who were really good; who were really following the right idea of God. Indeed, material success was supposed to be the main test or standard, by which sayings in religion, Christianity, could be evaluated, as being from the Lord, or not. While among the many material things we should expect, was specifically the promise of a real material kingdom; that was what was originally envisioned. Not just by “the Jews,” as many apologists like to say; but even by Jesus and many books of New Testament Christianity too.

A massively successful material kingdom therefore, was promised. It was said that Jesus had refused such a think, in the Temptation; and yet however we will show that Jesus refused only to form a kingdom based on a request by Satan; he did not refuse the general idea of one however under different leadership; he could not do that without turning his back on the 9/10 of the Bible that definitely promised such material things.

A material kingdom was promised therefore. To be sure, when so many self-proclaimed eternal kingdoms collapsed, the New Testament played around for a while with metaphoricalizing all this – Christ for a moment positing that the “kingdom of God is within you” (which has two opposite meanings, by the way). But even the new testament, could not entirely turn its back on the old God, without obviously committing heresy. And so finally the last book of the Bible – Revelation – seemed to end by mentioning the idea of a spiritual heaven in the sky; but then reasserting the old promises of a kingdom on earth … by having heaven itself come down to earth (Rev. 21 ff?). To give us a material kingdom, on earth. As it seems, clearly.

Real material results therefore – even a material kingdom; even Heaven on earth – were again and again, the real standard by which all were to be measured. And yet History shows us that there would have been seemed to many, to be many obviously huge, catastrophic failures in conventional Christianity, in the area of delivering on material promises. Like a) the collapse of the kingdom of David and Solomon; like b) the physical torture and execution of Jesus. Like the c) burning of the would-be capital of that kingdom, Jerusalem, by Rome, in 70 AD. And d) Romans (Hadrian?) forbidding Jews to live in the city. And the e) non-appearance of any other ideal kingdom, in the ftwo thousand years since.

Many, many very, very extravagant – and very material – promises – like the promise of an ideal and “everlasting” kingdom, “soon,” and here on earth – were often made, by this or that Lord, in the name of God. But the non-appearance of any really durable kingdom on earth, no doubt suggested to many early Romans, Jews, and Christians – as it suggests to many scholars today – that Judaism and Christianity, especially in their promises of a real, perfect “kingdom” “soon,” on earth – were at least, a partial failure.

Huge, very physical promises, were definitely made, constantly, by our lords and holy men. Promises preserved in holy books, like the books of the Old Testament. And at the center of those promises, was the vision of a wonderful perfect “kingdom.” Headed by David … or when that failed, by a relation of king David, in Jerusalem. Yet as History rolled on, those promises, often came to seem false to many. Especially right after f) the physical execution of Jesus, and his disappearance into heaven 40 days after resurrection, it would have appeared to many that Christianity had been proven to be in part, a physical failure. Though g) it was said that many apostles and others were still working physical “miracles,” Jesus himself was physically executed. And h) some early Christians were not getting the promised material prosperity, but instead, poverty, and execution by torture; martyrdom. While i) no very firm material “kingdom” of God on earth had appeared; Jerusalem remaining in non-Christian, non-Jewish Roman hands; until in fact, shatteringly, Jerusalem was burned to the ground in 70 AD.

Judged by material standards therefore – as the science of God demanded – Judaism, and Christianity had, it seemed for the time being, failed; they were “false.” So that indeed, many apostates and scholars, now seem to reach the shattering conclusion, that early Christianity was in part, it seems, simply false. Since, although many prophesies and promises might seem to have come true, to be “fulfilled,” with Jesus, and though parts of the Bible might hint that “all” prophesies were fulfilled with Jesus, still, History records that not all of them were fully fulfilled; especially, the promise of a strong material kingdom of God, here on earth. Indeed, j) while many Christians say they believe that Jesus fulfilled all prophesies, on the other hand, k) they incongruously also believe that the “full” prophesies – like the full kingdom of God on earth – remain to be completely fulfilled; that they are to come only in a Second Coming. (See “kingdom,” and writings on eschatology like Looking into the Future, David Baker, ed.; Baker Academic Pub., 2001).

In the time of Paul especially – c. 50-64-70 AD; twenty years after Jesus, with still no free Judeo-Christian kingdom fully in sight – many believers and priests, would probably have begun to doubt God and Jesus; to doubt their physical promises. And so, they would have experienced a great, shattering, painful crisis: they would have wanted to either, a) leave, abandon Judaism or Christianity, as simply false. Or b) they would have to re-interpret, revise, change, rewrite, “twist,” the oldtime religion, Judaism, and its promises. In such a way as to somehow deal with the old, apparently failed, promises of material rewards; like a material kingdom.

And in fact, soon, aa) a “New Testament” was added to the Old; thus revising the Old. And it was a testament that to be sure, at times and in places, can be read to be backing off some old (and even some new?) promises of material rewards, including a material kingdom, from God. The New Testament began backing off these “subtly.” By bb) suggesting that there had been partial (some even said total) fulfillment of the old promises; after all, at least some material miracles had occurred in the time of Jesus. But then, many would have to “face” the obvious fact that no firm material kingdom was around.

When – as the Bible narrates – Jesus was physically killed; many of his followers martyred; and – as History tells us next – especially, when Jerusalem itself was burned to the ground by Rome … believers would be faced with the choice of ceasing to believe; or re-think Christianity. What to do here, indeed, when Christianity seemed to be a massive material failure? Many thinkers in the New Testament, began coming up with dozens of different explanations, apologetics. To try to explain any apparent lack of material rewards, a full kingdom.

There were many, many hints at an explanation for, an apologetic for, the apparent material failure of Jesus. Among dozens of such arguments in the Bible itself, was the hint that suggested that cc) the kingdom would come, “soon.” But dd) when it did not come soon, and instead Jerusalem was destroyed? Then that guess was revived again; “soon” might mean “thousands of years,” as Peter or Paul opined. Or ff) maybe as late as at the end of time. Or some began gg) telling us that if the kingdom did not come, that was just a “test of faith”; that we should just hold on and continuing believing, having faith, even when our religion, our idea of God, did not seem to be delivering the material things it promised (See our notes on the Temptation of Job …as an proposal of Satan, however). Or hh) by suggesting that the old promises of material miracles, were not to be taken literally; that they were just metaphors for spiritual things. Yet we are finding here that the Bible itself did not stress “Faith” that much; and it promised not just spiritual, but material things.

Christian apologists, to try to prove that Christianity was not simply false, even when it did not deliver all the material things promised, developed many, many attempted explanations/excuses for all this. And their arguments, repeated endlessly by priests, have convinced millions; indeed finally, they created Christianity; which persists, and even dominates the whole earth, almost to this very day. But of course, even many ancient people rejected the old Apologetic arguments. It would have been hard to believe Judeo/Christianity’s promises – when Israel/Jerusalem were effectively annexed, occupied by Rome; and when local Jewish/Christian leaders like Jesus were executed. Or later especially – when Jerusalem itself was burned to the ground in 70 AD. When that happened, no doubt even many Jews and Christians, would have begun to doubt the material promises of their God; even whether their God really existed at all. Since, in spite of many alleged miracles – faith-healings and so forth – many of the main things he promised – like an ideal kingdom of God in Jerusalem – were not coming true.

Most Jews did not believe Jesus at first. And then, especially with the execution of Jesus, and his disappearance 40 days later, and then when still in the time of Paul, Christ had only provisionally appeared (on the Road to Damascus), early Christianity especially, would have experienced an extreme crisis of credibility. And eventually, because of the non-appearance of the “full” promised kingdom – many of the Jewish public and others, would be receptive to either … simply abandoning Judaism, and/or Christianity entirely; as false. Rejecting Jesus himself as the projected “false Christ” or false savior. Abandoning Jesus Christ, as just another failed, would-be savior of Jerusalem; another one who did not do what he promised, or that had been prophesied.

In any case, God himself was quite materialistic. And his kingdoms were places here on earth. Preachers here, to try to destroy, deny the physical kingdom, try to suggest that only “the Jews” wanted a material kingdom. But in fact, the Old Testament and God, did. You can see the materiality of promised kingdoms, written all over Old Testament references to it, by God himself. Including say all of Isaiah. Isa. 65-6 especially, was the foundation for the very physical Rev. 21. Where God and heaven itself, comes down, to be a material place, here on this material earth.

So if the “kingdom” ever was for a while in spirit, in heaven, one day it is supposed to come to this material earth.

To be sure, many churches have claimed to be the foretold heaven on earth; but none were ever quite fully as good as God promised. While the only ideas that show the best “signs” or evidence of producing the material kingdom promised, is not the spirituality of churches, but the physical accomplishments of science and technology. Which therefore indeed, in spite of occasional errors, must be accounted the essence of what God wanted us to do.

The Materialism of the End


God’s Science Point # 99


98) When early Christianity apparently provided some material wonders, but failed to provide all that had been promised in concrete material form, believers, apostles, rather than concluding that there was something false in the heart of their religion, began generated dozens of hypotheses, as to why material rewards were not being fully realized, as had been promised. Even in the face of so many apparent proofs that their religion or leadership was partially, materially false, many would want to go on. Indeed, Jesus’ immediate followers, the apostolic followers of this “Lord,” were like followers of any lord of the time; they were used to working for this man. And they hardly knew what to do, when their leader was executed. Except perhaps to … go back to their old jobs. And/or also, hope it was all a bad dream; that he would be “resurrected”; or would come back “soon.” Which might mean that many hoped he was not really dead, but hiding, and would return. Though others thought he had died, but would be resurrected. Indeed, there were reports in the holy book that Jesus had been resurrected after three days; brought back to life for 40 days at least. Though then Jesus disappeared again, into heaven.

The Jewish tradition proper, did not stress resurrection: Jews believed mostly that when you die, you were dead. Few if any went to heaven. Most went to “Sheol,” a word related to the root word perhaps of our “Hell.” A place where you do not really live however; or have a merely “shadow” existence.

But when their lord Jesus, pretender for the throne of Jerusalem, was physically killed, many Or many would no doubt hope for – and even help work? – some allegedly small change, a small revision, of the old promises. To try to re-read (and eventually re-write?) the old promises; so that they could explain all this. So that their religion would just remove, “old” parts of the oldtime religion, and make it all seem more true again. Suddenly a strong element of belief in resurrection entered into the Jewish tradition. And yet to be sure, it was so foreign, that those who held it were not regarded by many as real Jews; and indeed this new group began to split off, to form what became in effect another, different religion: Christianity.

There were many different accounts of the nature of resurrection though. Some more plausible than others. As the Apostles gathered around after the death of Jesus (on the road to Emmaus for example), they listened to re-readings of holy scripture. Until they came up with a new understanding … that suggested that somehow God lived on in scripture; or reappeared in a sense, when scripture was read. (In that his memory and spirit, though, was invoked by reading, if nothing else?). So that in effect, they began to suggest that their Lord lived on in spirit; his thought lived on … in scriptures; writing; holy books; the Bible. As particularly the new Rabbis would have experienced, when Jerusalem itself and the Temple were destroyed 70 AD; and they carried holiness away from the temple itself – which was now destroyed in any case – to the countryside; by way of a few sacramental objects … and the holy books. So that in this era, Judeo-Christianity would have become a religion not of the temple; but of “the book.” Or “the Word.”

Yet at times, Jesus was said to have been very physically resurrected from the grave.

Spirituality Grows

Increasingly therefore, in post-Jesus, post-Jerusalem Israel, emphasis was not on a material Jesus or Temple or kingdom; but on the survival of their legacy, their ideas – or “spirit.” Surviving now, through books, or the “word.” (Cf. Emmaus).

But what about the old material side of God? To try to deal with that, the writers of the New Testament tried tried to come up with a re-reading of the old texts; one that would be willing especially, to back away, partially, “subtly,” from the old holy promises of material things.

Soon in the New Testament, Christianity appeared; a new sense of Judaism, that was trying to deal with huge material failures in the Jewish system. And it did this by in part, coming up with the idea that even if it did not produce material results for a time, still Judaism still could linger on, in our memory and mind and spirit; thanks to its old hopes having been preserved in the holy books. Thus it was thought that Judaism or Christianity, could go on. At least as a memory, a spirit, a dream, a word, a church.

But while the dream thereby could go on … still many might ask, why should it go on at all? Was there any good reason … other than a misplaced loyalty of old diehard followers, apostles? Many might have begun to suggest the old dream however, was still partially good. For many reasons hypothesized in the NT. First, because one “day,” it might yet produce, make good on, the old material rewards. It might even yet produce a “kingdom.” One “day” (part of the meaning of the Day of the Lord; Judgement Day, and so forth; q.v.). While then too, perhaps a general sense of some obedience to authority was useful, to keep civilization working.

And so, even if Christianity had apparently failed materially, for the time being, still, in the meantime, apostles like Paul began to suggest the Great Apologetic: that this was just a temporary failure. And a mere test of faith. That we should not note the material failures; but just have “faith” in the old promises; that it would produce them eventually; even “soon” as some said in the New Testament.

The Apostle Paul especially, developed the “faith” apologetic. To the point of suggesting that Faith in itself, was a good enough result, fruit, from religion. As he suggested, hinted, that even if the new religion of Christianity, did not produce all the real material results promised in the old books, still after all, it produced pleasing mental or “spiritual” sensations; like “faith,” and “hope” for future rewards. Sensations that felt good, in themselves. While seeming to hint that at least some promises of material rewards – like “fruits” – could be sometimes interpreted as … being metaphors for just mental or spiritual things; “fruits of the spirit,” like the “hope” that Christianity gave us.

And so spirituality was born. But what about those old promises of material things? What do we do about the Old Testament especially? With its very material promises?

To try to deal with the materiality Old Testament, dozens of arguments were advanced in the New. Among others; it was said that the old promises of material things, real “Fruit” for example, might be re-read as being just metaphors, for spiritual things. Like “Faith” and “hope”; now called the “fruits of the spirit.” And if the Old Testament (and even Jesus often) promised real actual bread? Then a new interpretation of (or “twist” on?) the word “bread,” was introduced. Alongside verbal pictures of Jesus delivering actual material bread, in the Miracles of the Loaves and Fishes, were introduced statements that would suggest all that was just metaphors, for spiritual things: alongside that old promise, it was said by Jesus that he himself, or his body, or his thoughts or spirit – were the “true” bread. Bread indeed.

So what was done with the old material promises? They were turned – some would say, “twist”ed – into metaphors. For spiritual things. Finally we will see, that many parts of Jesus’ utterances, try to open up the possibility that we should take the old promises of material things, as mere “parables,” “figures” of speech – symbols, metaphors – for spiritual things. If our priests did not give us real material bread, at least they gave us the “hope” for it. And hope felt good in itself. (Even “false hope,” to be sure however; as we will note).

And so the old promises of material things – like a material kingdom – were metaphoricalized. And yet however, we will find, neither Jesus nor even Paul, could fully, openly take this move … without dramatically going against God. Who was so resolutely material earlier. So that we will find that any writing in the New Testament, that appears to advocate strict spirituality, can be read at least two ways; as being physical or spiritual, for example.

Because indeed, God had promised material results. And any thoroughgoing spiritualization, would just be against God. So that indeed, extreme spirituality, giving up on the material “world”entirely, was eventually partially (if not completely) condemned by the Church; as it condemned “Gnosticism.” (Though the church allowed an almost equally spiritual, dualistic, “asceticism,” to be sure).

Eventually to be sure, no doubt, practical experience had taught many monks and priests, that though many can promise big material things, in real life experience, material results were not so easy to get; that material miracles were much harder to obtain, than parts of their tradition might seem to imply. (See our writing on Miracles; and Sermons as excuses). And so many priests were looking for a way, of edging away from some promises of material rewards, by God. Yet to be sure, this was extremely hard to do; as massively reiterated and detailed, as such promises are in the Holy Books; the Old Testament.

Priests though, did eventually all but give up on the material side of life. And they got away with this, by becoming the spiritual profession. With the appearance of the profession of … “Priest.” As opposed to the old holy leaders, priests were (and are) no longer expected to fully deliver all of life; including material things. Instead, their occupational specialization and responsibility, was that they were expected to deliver only spiritual things. Abandoning the full responsibilities outlined in the Bible, they did not have to help us get bigger material crops; they just had to make us feel good; give us “spiritual,” “metaphorical” “fruits”; like “faith” and “hope.” That by itself – parts of Paul were written to suggest or hint – was all priests were expected to deliver to us; or at least, just spiritual fruits were enough for now (1 Thess. 1.3; Php. 1.6; Tit?. 1.9, 4.5; Rom. 4.6; Eph. 2.9; John 6.28; Rom. 11.6).

Thus we have the (controversial) appearance of the Christian “priest.” (Cf. Pharisee; etymologically related?). And their spiritual “religion,” Christianity, that has persisted to this very day. Yet finally, we will be finding here, St. Paul could only hint at this position, in some parts of his writings. Because after all, Moses some said never really himself had or mentioned “priests” (rather, judges, Levites, etc.). While Jesus himself had not explicitly started a priesthood; but has “apostles.” So that Paul had to justify this: referring to Jesus himself as a priest after the “order of Melchizidek SP?//).

It was extremely hard to found and justify a Christian priesthood. Especially one based on spirituality. Not only because of a paucity of biblical references to them – and even explicit opposition to the idea at times. But also because, and especially because, most of the Bible said that real holy men, are supposed to get material, physical results; not just spiritual things. While to say anything else, would have gone flatly against God. (As indeed we will see, all those priests who went on past Paul, actually did; as we note in our book on the Over-spirituality of priests. And there was a great sin in that. We will see eventually that those who produced mere mental spirits, have been bad. Since even the most pleasant thoughts or ideas that we have, if they do not lead to more material productivity, are merely the foretold “illusions,” “delusions,” trying to fill your belly with the “East Wind” and so forth. Indeed, when mental ideas or sensations, re offered in stead of actual things; like the idea of bread, instead of real bread, then as James noted, that is literally, physically, fatal.)

After the death of Jesus, and the collapse of Jerusalem and the “Second Temple,” Judaism was deeply traumatized; and to try to cope with this, it became spiritual. While parts of the new spiritual, philosophically resigned but “hope”ful Judaism, became Christianity. Christianity was a new variant of Judaism – that, after the collapse/burning of the material kingdom, Jerusalem especially – did not stress real material results so much. That tried to justify itself, apart from material rewards. After the material execution of Jesus, and his disappearance into “heaven” 40 days later, a rather chastened, hypothetical, philosophical /Stoic /spiritual, martyr-oriented Judaism, was beginning to appear. One that tried to make the best out of even material “poverty” and “suffering”; partially in the “hope” of future rewards. But partially out of asserting that perhaps after all, physical things, “possessions,” are not important: while good spirits, hope and love, are all one needs in life..

The image of staying loyal, faithful to one’s “lord,” even in the midst of sacrifice, martyrdom, of physical defeat, hoping however for spiritual rewards or a future kingdom, came to dominate and define Christianity. Yet too be sure, it will be one of the major points of our books here, to note that Christianity could not obviously, fully abandon, the old material promises … without all too obviously, going against the old God. The fact is, God had made far too many clear promises of such material things, far, far too many times. God promised material wonders so many times, that no priest could give up on the material side of God … without really, giving up on, going against, disobeying, the better part of the Old Testament. And since Jesus himself often cited God as wonderful and holy, and since some of the early Christians were Jews who did not want to abandon their God, it was simply not possible for Christianity to entirely distance itself from the old materialism. And so, though priests and religion today are thought to be especially, essentially, “spiritual,” still, technically, as a matter of fact, today most preachers agree that Christianity, the New Testament, promised both a) material things, and b) spiritual things.

And in fact, Jesus himself was often pictured, continuing to promise real material things, they say; and as working very material, physical miracles.

And if physical things at times do not arrive, if instead the Christian got suffering, pain, and premature physical death? Then there were many new hinted apologetics that attempted to explain and justify that. Yet to be sure, we will have been showing here, even those new, spiritual, pro-death apologetics … could never state themselves clearly or unequivocally. Because after all, in spite of many demonically ingenious or “subtle,” “serpent”ine “twists,” they remained deeply in conflict with the old God himself. And his strong materialism and science. So that finally, even the very spiritual and philosophical apostles, living on a dream, a Holy Spirit only, and not a physical living leader, could not ever quite entirely give up on the old material promises. Or clearly go against them.

Indeed, among thousands of simple apologetics for the lack of miracles, a simple common sense one offered itself: that if God had not yet delivered on his material promises, he would however do so, “soon.” So, while Judaism and Christianity failed physically short-term – failing to produce a full material “kingdom” for example – it nevertheless managed to hold on. In part, by various apologetics. Some priests all but insisting, often, like Paul among other things, that its “spiritual” results were good enough. But others holding on to the material promises a while longer; asserting that some day, the material promises would be made good; that some day for example the “kingdom” might yet be produced. Even “soon.” Thus the new Christianity changed from the strong materialism of Judaism, to become, somewhat spiritual and anti-materialistic, like many then-contemporary eastern religions and priesthoods (q.v.; Buddhism, Jainism, the various “lord”s that gave up their material kingdoms; like Chandragupta).

(And to be sure, we will show later, that a delayed materialism, combined in culture with practical knowledge and work – was ultimately, in History, somewhat materially productive. Though to be sure, the new “spirituality” in its most extreme from – asceticism and “world”-hating – was perhaps, not quite as productive as hoped. Unless or until it learned to at least partially work with, join hand-in-hand with, practical knowledge and science; and hard practical work. As when our monks planted vegetable gardens; and even contributed to science; like Gregor Mendel. Or when our children, educated in nunneries, went out next to get real jobs after all, in the practical world.)


God’s Science Point # 100


Jesus Again

(See Above; in the “Flesh”)

99) Extreme, ascetic anti-materialism, that “hate”ed the “world,” and “flesh,” in fact, has always been literally fatal. So that though our priests became rather ascetic – and have to beg others for material food, money, in their collection plates and bowls and baskets – there was always in the Bible itself, a less extreme credo or path. One that found a way to compromise between utterly rejecting and renouncing and “hating” the world of material things and our own material bodies. Compromising with after all, the traditional materialism of common sense … and the old God. And among the many more moderate compromises, probably those who would defer real material results for a moment – but only if they came really, actually “soon” (a few years? Two or three?)- was somewhat better than giving up on the world entirely.

And then too, those elements of Christianity that continued to see God in material things in the past, and that hoped to see them more again in the future, seem more sane to us today. Remember for example, that it was sometimes said in the Bible, that the great achievement of the first coming of Jesus, they say, to have been God, spirit, come down to join with, manifest himself in, even material “flesh.” For God, spirit, to appear as a walking, talking – material – human being (in part):

“Jesus Christ has come in the flesh” (1 John 4.2).

While in any case, the Old Testament often spoke against those who despise the flesh (cf. “despisers of the flesh”). And those who eat human flesh too. And it said that spirit enters flesh.

“The fool holds his hands, and eats his own flesh” (Ecc. 4.5).

“You shall eat the flesh of your sons” (Lev. 26.29; Isa. 49.26; Jer. 19.9; Mic. 3.2; Zech. 11.9; John 6.51 ff).

“I will pour out my spirit on all flesh”

(Jol. 2.28).

“For no man ever hates his own flesh” (Eph. 5.29)

Some very spiritual writers, like Paul, often put down the “flesh,” which rots off our bones at death (Job 19.22; Ps. 56.4; Jer. 12.12, 17.5; Dan. 2.11; John 6.51-63; Rom. 7.18-25; 8.44-6-13; 1 Corin. 3.3, 5.5; 2 Corin. 12.7; Gal. 2.20, 4.29, 5.13-19, 6.8; Php. 3.3; James 5.3).


“No man ever hates his own flesh” (Eph. 5.29).

Finally in fact, it was the very essence and major accomplishment of Jesus, that he was spirit, God, returned to material “flesh.” The unification, the merger, of the preachers’ spirit, with matter, again.

Thus if “flesh” was ever bad, the coming of Jesus they say, in effect, at least partially redeemed the material world … and (much of?) flesh.

While furthermore, perhaps the highest accomplishment and goal of religion it seems to us here, and the vision the Bible seems to envision in the End Time especially, is to re-join matter and spirit – and heaven and earth; word and world – again.

Elements of the Bible condemn the “flesh”; but finally, given the many times that God embraced the physical; they times he said he made the physical universe and said it was “good”; the time he made our physical bodies and said likewise? The times God told us that he “fills all things,” in heaven and in this material “earth” as well? Finally, the condemnation of “flesh” cannot really hold up to the rest of the Bible, if it is meant to condemn the physical side of life. Instead finally? Many have read any occasional attack on “flesh,” to be say, merely an attack on our lower animal passions – like gluttony, rage, and so forth. And not as a hierarchically dualistic attack on all of physical nature. (An example of this nuanced approach, can be found in the Glossary, of the NAB – New American Bible, Pub. P. J. Kenedy & Sons, NY, Collier-Macmillan Ltd. London, 1968, 1970 ed.; Glossary of Biblical Theology Terms, Copyright 1970 by Benziger, Inc.; see the glossary terms “flesh,” “world,” etc.).


God’s Science Point # 101

The Materialism of the Second Coming

100) God indeed, has often been very, very material in the past; appearing they say materially, here on earth. As Jesus was said to have been God made “flesh” in his first coming, for instance. And furthermore, one “day,” in the Second Coming, we are supposed a) to see our LORD “face-to-face,” in this material reality, again; see b) God return in a material way, to this material earth, again (Rev. 21). As we see more fully next, God and even the New Heaven appear on this material earth, and in the flesh.


God’s Science Point # 102

Heaven Comes Down to Earth

101) And in the Second Coming too, by the way, c) the spiritual “new heaven,” and the new earth, are supposed to merge. As heaven comes down to earth, d) realize at last the foretold ideal kingdom of God on earth:

“Then I saw a new heaven and a new earth; for the first heaven and the first earth had passes away, and the sea was no more. And I saw the holy city new Jerusalem, coming down out of heaven from God, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband; and I heard a great voice from the throne saying, ‘Behold, the dwelling of God is with men. He will dwell with them…” (Rev. 12.1-13).

It is not spirituality, therefore, that is the greatest moment and ambition of Christianity. It is instead, the demolition of the old spiritual heaven; and then return, the re-merger, of the new heaven and this material earth.

The realization of heavenly ambitions, dreams, here on this material earth.


God’s Science Point # 103

Spirit Re-Enters Flesh

102) In the end too, we are supposed to see God “pour out my spirit on all flesh.” So that in effect, heaven and earth come together in yet another way: our old “spirit” and flesh, are to come together again. Spirit is once again, to find a fleshly, material home (and thus redeem flesh?):

“I will pour out my spirit on all flesh” (Jol. 2.28; Acts 2.17).


God’s Science Point # 104

How it Happens?

The Meaning of the End

103) God therefore, was a) often very material in the past; even in the “flesh.” And b) he is supposed to return from heaven, to this material existence again, in the Second Coming. But how do we get our very, very spiritual preachers, to learn to be prepared to see the materiality, the materialism, of God once again, clearly? Or, if our preachers are always partially prepared for the second coming of God, for a God in and among material things here on earth, then how can we help make it all happen more fully, for everyone?

How can we assist the Second Coming of our seemingly obdurately spiritual God, to this material earth? In the past, our preachers were not so useful in this; because they did not know much about material life, science, they were not very effective in the physical world. And in consequence of that, they often came to become rather “spiritual,” and even “hate” material things altogether; despising their own flesh and bodies, even. Most preachers in fact, mostly all but give up on the material side of God. And told us to merely “have faith” in holy men, preachers, angels; and to look only at “spiritual” things; at “heaven.”

But it should now begin to become clear, from what we are showing here, that our preachers have always been over-spiritual; and they were mistaken, when they all but gave up on the material side of life; and even began to “hate” “secular” and “worldly” people, and science. When our preachers forgot to constantly integrate practical knowledge and science of physical things, into their thinking about God, in fact, they abandoned half of the Bible, we are showing here. They forgetting and began to disobey, the God who told us to observe the material world constantly; and to learn science.

Indeed, our holy men long since, forgot the God that “fills all things,” heaven “and earth.” If preachers think of the earth, or getting material things at all, they think of it (as we will see in our writings on Magic in Christianity), in purely miraculous or magical terms: one I just spiritual and prays, and then whatever material things we need appear by miracle; out of thin air. As if by magic; like a rabbit out of a hat. By the direct action of spirits. But the problem is that priests’ ideas of how to get material things, was influenced, we will see, by belief in Magic. Our priests did not sufficient know how to get God’s material promises … by way not of magic, but by the science of God; (and as part of that, our own practical work).

But while most priests all but gave up on the material side of life and God, we will have been finding here and elsewhere, the first steps to a solution to all of this; the first way in fact, we can begin to see and to assist, the return of God, religion, Christianity, from heaven and spirit – to this material earth. By first of all, noting that a) God himself always told us the material side of life was extremely important. Indeed, b) God told us all – priests especially – should learn and c) be evaluated by, real material science.

And then too finally though, d) if for a time our holiest men and angels drifted off this planet, to become ethereal and spiritual, then it is time to recall to them that one “day” or another, when they “mature,” they are supposed to … begin to at least see ties between their disembodied ideas, and this material earth. To learn to see – and even help build – the ties between heaven and earth.



God’s Science Point # 105

Addendum: Looking Ahead:

Seeing Supernatural



Natural Events;


104) God is not as spiritual as our preachers. Indeed, God even opposes the spirits; and the spirituality of preachers specifically. In many ways.

Among others? Many, many physical, material things were described, approved, and promised to us by God. Even huge miracles. To the point that God told us to base Christianity not on faith, but on science; on observing what “works” (as we might say, punning seriously), what “comes to pass,” in the physical world.

What finally, about the old promises of many seemingly material “miracles”? Many, many were promised in the Bible. So that here indeed, are many, many more … huge material promises.

To be sure, if we apply science now to the Bible … doesn’t science say that promises of miracles are just totally false? So that our science must now find parts of the Bible to be false?

In fact, a) when we first apply that science at last, to miracles, we will see them – the common idea of miracles at least – at first dissolve. Science says that things don’t just appear out of thin air, the way priests usually spoke of miracles, (bread appearing out of thin air, etc.). But b) then, when we begin to apply science to the Bible, to understand its “wonders” more exactly, we begin to see, reconstruct the old wonders … in a “second,” much better, clearer, more solid, more material, way. As we see them not as supernatural miracles; but as natural wonders.

Indeed, today and for some time, scientists have been coming up with alternative, naturalistic descriptions of apparent miracles; descriptions that are consistent with the Bible, but also with science. By seeing ostensibly supernatural wonders, as corresponding more to what we see in natural life, that can be confirmed by science.

For example, note, regarding an allegedly supernatural miracle, like Moses parting the Red Sea? Actually, note, the Bible itself says a “wind” pushes the sea back. While we know from studies of the Mediterranean ocean, that the wind sometimes does push the “aqua alta” (SP?), or “high water,” in Venice, a dozen feet or more higher than normal (thus causing flooding.) So that indeed, we will find, there is a natural, scientific explanation for every miracles. One that can be made absolutely consistent with every word of the Bible. (Especially if you, say, consider “talking to God” to be a metaphor for, say, mentally consulting your memory or impression of what knowledgeable people have said is good, or from the LORD).

Many are at first disappointed at such naturalistic interpretations; which produce less spectacular things than priests promised. But the problem was, that though priests promised more spectacular things, they did not deliver them. Whereas, our more natural descriptions, promise no more than can be provably delivered or seen. We are more honest than priests; we promise no more than we can provably deliver.

And in fact, aa) there are huge advantages to such naturalistic understandings of “wonders,” “miracles.” First, we can in fact see all the miracles of the Bible in this way; so we can remain absolutely true to the Bible itself. Furthermore bb) we are not proving the Bible to be false; we are proving it scientifically, to be true.

Then too, cc) when we use science to cross-reference, triangulate the old “wonders,” we begin see them as foretold: more “full”y; and here on earth. When we see them in full biblical but also natural terms, spirit begins to touch the earth. Many preachers might tell us that Paul touched pieces of cloth, and people carried them around the world to work “miraculous” cures; but perhaps we can now match up that old idea, to say that when we see healing people with handkerchiefs or cloths touched by Paul, healing others, that is better seen as … people accepting sterilized bandages from Paul; to use on other’s wounds. Etc.. Thus we see the old wonders more vividly than ever.

So there are many advantages to seeing wonders, in a natural – or scientific – way. At first, such understandings of wonders seems to destroy our old religion. Yet note here that in such reconstructions of miracles, we are not denying the Bible; in fact we are finding every word of the Bible to be really, scientifically, materially, true. Indeed we will find, we can use science to understand the old wonders in a way consistent with, obeying, every word of the Bible. Including dd) its command to honor science.

While best of all ee) the end of all this, we will see, is not reductionistic; but rather the partial fulfillment of prophesy: we are beginning to get a “second,” better, more “mature,” “full”er understanding, vision, knowledge, of God and good, at last.

ff) To be sure, when we first applied the old, crude science to religion – in early physics, later positivism, scientism – science was too crude to deal with the wonders of religion; and could only “debunk” then, or declare them false. Or separate itself from religion; thus splitting the mind of man. Declaring that science and religion are two, unrelated spheres of man’s mind; spheres that could not be related to each other. Thus leaving our minds split into two dissociated spheres.

And thus indeed, the old split between religion and science, split the mind of man. As religion separated itself from science, it began to dualistically, schizophrenically split the two halves of the mind of man; his “mind” or “spirit,” his “word”s, versus his “world,” his “earth.” Thus we lived “double” lives (cf. “doubleness” in the Bible); lived by two different standards, that seemingly could not be reconciled. Thus our own thoughts and abilities, were often divided against each other; and thus was split our “heaven” and “earth,” “word” and “world,” “word” and “flesh.” And with such a mind divided against itself, our abilities were correspondingly compromised, divided against themselves.

But today, at last, we can begin to fix the old split or rift between the “mountains” of science, and religion. When we begin to use the science of God. Specifically, when we use parts of it to correlate the Bible to science, old words to things “seen” today, we are in effect seeing End Time prophesy come true; we will next see our old “heavenly” disembodied ideas, suddenly appear embodied again, here on this material earth, again.

To be sure, the naturalization of miracles for example, is at first a shocking and disillusioning idea; finding our holy men’s ideas of miracles was false. But one “day” we are supposed to be shocked and dis”illuion”ed, dis”enchant”ed, to see sins in our holiest men and angels. But indeed, to see life and miracles this way, to see religion “reduced” to mere “mundane” material, “flesh”ly things on this earth, is as disillusioning and unbelievable to many very religious people today … as was, precisely, the sight and claim by Jesus, to scribes and Pharisees, that he Jesus, who seemed to have mere human “flesh” and material “body,” was God on earth.

God’s Science Point # 106

105) Indeed, no doubt many priests today, will be disillusioned and angry, to find that their ideas of miracles, say, were wrong. And they will be angry at, they may even want to kill, the person who tells them that … what God promised was to some extent only what we see around us in the natural/technological universe already (or in the foreseeable future). And indeed perhaps, many priests historically wanted to silence or kill especially and particularly, anyone who claims that “flesh” can be sacred, or can be God. Indeed, it was our preachers’ conservative predecessors, the “Scribes and Pharisees” and “priests,” who finally lead the attempt to kill Jesus. The priests killed Jesus. For precisely, daring to say that … Jesus, a material being, might have God inside of him; inside of a mere material, physical, body (John 10.32 etc.). That somehow, God might exist in material “flesh.” And so?

“The chief priests and the scribes were seeking how to arrest him by stealth, and kill him” (Mark 14.1).

“The Jews took up stones again to stone him. Jesus answered them, I have shown you many good works from the Father; for which of these do you stone me?’ The Jews answered him, ‘It is not for a good wok that we stone you but for blasphemy; because you, being a man, make yourself God’” (John 10.31-33).

“The high priest tore his robes, and said, ‘He has uttered blasphemy’” (Mat. 26.65).

“Our chief priests and rulers delivered him up to be condemned to death, and crucified him” (Luke 24.20).

The priests, more than anyone, were directly responsible for murdering Jesus Christ, in the first coming. It was they who lead the charge against Jesus, for going against their idea of religion; for “blasphemy.” But especially, and particularly, it was the priests who killed Jesus, for claiming to be the Lord, God, though he was also a physical man, in the flesh. But while the priests once killed Jesus himself, especially and particularly for claiming to imply there might be a God in material nature, a God in even material “flesh”? Perhaps this time however, we can remind our priests of this one, of their past sins. And now ask our priests to hold back a little this time. If we try to reconnect God and flesh once again; this time partly by way of the Science of God. If we once again dare to say the thing that so many have opposed: that spirit, God, good, might be found in real material things, in this physical earth. In a way that can be subjected to scientific scrutiny.

But to be sure? It was the priests who killed Jesus the first time, for a related claim. No one should be surprised if the priests are among the main voices trying to kill Jesus again; as he attempts to become flesh. In the Second Coming.

Once again.

Perhaps most of our priests are a little better, today? But no doubt, a few of the more thuggish preachers will be every bit as bad as their predecessors; and then some.


Looking Ahead to the New Testament;

The Materialistic

Side of Jesus Himself;

Working Material Wonders;

Demanding “Works” & “Fruits”

In our present section, we have limited ourselves to speaking primarily of God himself, in the Old Testament. But of course, there are dozens more major elements of support for a science of God, beyond the Old Testament; in the New Testament. In the sayings especially of Jesus himself. (And, though to a much lesser degree, even the very faithful and spiritual and priestly Paul).

Jesus himself constantly reiterated, supported, the main science-based theology that had been outlined in key passages in Daniel and Ezekiel and Deuteronomy, above: that real religion is supposed to demonstrate real material results. To the extent that in fact, real religion, sayings that are really from God and not poseurs, can be separated from false sayings, false priests …. by looking to see whether they in fact got real material results. Or in this case, as God says in yet another way, specifically: “fruits”:

“Beware of false prophets…; you will know them by their fruits” (Mat. 7.15-16; Mat. 7.19; Luke 3.9).

c) To be sure, the often very, very spiritual Paul – who was often right on the edge of anti-materialistic, anti-God Gnosticism, asceticism; and indeed, some might say, often over that edge – at times, to be sure, tired to all but disappear this command from God; by suggesting in one level of his text, that this could be metaphoricalized, spiritualized; that preachers did not have to produce real material goods, bigger crops; but only mere mental or spiritual work; “fruits of the spirit.”

Most preachers today, indeed, try to say, or speak as if, they only need to produce just spiritual “fruits,” to be considered good, Godly, sacred. Citing St. Paul:

“The fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace” (Gal. 5.22).

But aa) there is nothing here, note, that says that spiritual fruit is so entirely important. Or that bb) only spiritual fruit is important. Or that cc) a priest can be judged good, if he produces only spiritual fruit, and … not any material results. (Elsewhere, too, a spiritual quality like Faith merely “abides” along with Love and so forth).

While indeed, dd) it constantly evident, we are seeing here and now, that in the vast bulk of the Bible, God tells us in dozens of detailed descriptions, in full detail, and in a wide and detailed and varied vocabulary – here, in his demands not just for “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs,” and so forth; but also “fruits” – that preachers must produce, demonstrate, real material, physical results. Or here, as God tells us in yet another way: fruits. And often it is clear that means real, material, literal fruit: more grapes, more grain, bigger crops (above; from Deuteronomy and Job, etc.).

So that many priests more properly maintain that Christianity promised both spiritual things … but also real material fruit, material things and fruit, too. Though priests today, unfortunately, do not stress material things as much as God did, to be sure. And this is therefore one place where our priests have left, departed, disobeyed, God; in their neglect, disobedience, of the science of God.

But now we have come here and now, to begin to expose the sins of our priests; and to “refine” them. So that they will learn how to truly, more fully, see God at last. Here, in and among the things of this material earth. As foretold, as prophesied, by the Bible itself. By God, himself.

All this book, is offered in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit; in the name of God.


The Second Appearance, The Second Coming of God

In Science

NEXT: Section 2: New Testament Science?

Chapter 5

A Brief Intro to Science in

The New Testament:

New Testament Spirituality, vs.

Passages Emphasizing Observing Material

And Not Spiritual – Things;

The Separate Elements

Of Science, Practical “Knowledge,” and


And/Or Advocating Invisible But Real, Scientific

“Logic,” “Reason,” the “Mind,”

Originally the Bible and God were extremely materialistic. The stronger emphasis on “spiritual” things really began, around the time of Jesus and Paul. In part it began, probably because many of even our early rabbis had trouble giving us “full”y “all” the material things, wonders we “asked.”. Especially after the periodic collapses of the Jewish state or kingdom, when foreigners like Babylonians or Romans, took over Jerusalem, and Jews and Christians were not favored, but were often even taken into exile, or slavery, or vassalage, etc..

In such times, no doubt to be sure, there were problems among preachers, getting some of the larger, more spectacular material things promised by the Old Testament; with miracles especially. But also even with fairly normal physical things. Especially the firm promise of a material kingdom, in much of the Bible, would have seemed to many believers, to have been simply false. Problems with old promises of a kingdom, would have been accentuated, when Pompey annexed Jerusalem, c. 63-64 BC. While even Christians might have questioned the ability even of Jesus to given them physical things … Jesus was physically killed; and then resurrected for only 40 days. At this time, it would appear to many that Jesus particularly, was not really “full”y fulfilling the old promises. When he did not come as God was foretold, to live “himself,” in Jerusalem forever; but instead, was physically executed. When the ideal physical “kingdom” promised in much of the Bible, did not appear. But instead Jerusalem – as history records outside the Bible – was burned to the ground, in 70 AD, by Roman occupiers. (See references to “fire” in the New Testament? None proven to refer to 70 AD however it seems.).

In the time of Jesus, Judaism and Christianity suffered many giant physical defeats. In addition to the physical death of Jesus; the non-appearance of a physical kingdom; and then the physical deaths of many early Christian martyrs; and then occasional problems by apostles, not getting all the physical wonders God promised – “do all work miracles” Paul asked; the apostles asking why they could not heal people at times, as Jesus did. So that no doubt, even the most loyal followers, would have begun to Doubt; doubt the material side, the physical promises, of Israel and Jesus. And for that reason we suggest, not too long after the death of Jesus, many of the disciples like Paul, began to try to especially, back away from physical promises somewhat; and to emphasize, alongside the old physical promises, a “new” line of promises: extolling the virtues of “spiritual” things instead.

From the time of Jesus to today in fact, for whatever reasons (the occasional lack of material miracles, or not), many preachers in any case, for whatever reason, all but give up on the material side of life; or in any case, they stress mental or “spiritual” things only; like “faith” and “hope” and “love.” Things in the mind or spirit.

Today, many preachers hardly ever stress “miracles” or prosperity; but instead, they stress mental rewards from religion, only. And yet however, even if they do not explicitly denounce the physical promises of God, still, merely by stressing “spirituality,” many preachers and holy men, in effect, have hung up on the material side of life and of God. His promises “prosperity,” “riches,” physical health and long life; his miracles and “wonders.”

And in fact, in a later, book-length treatment, we will have to address dozens, even hundreds of quotes from the Bible itself, that seemed to support “spirituality”; many of them from particularly, Paul. (See our book draft, on Over-Spirituality). But while we don’t really have time or space here to address this issue, in a single chapter, in a simple introductory book, we might however just briefly begin to simply note, a few of the hundreds of times the Bible itself promised real, material, physical things. In a way that seems rather clearly, not metaphorical. Or in a way that in any case, was clearly presented to a billion believers, as being very literal, physical promises. While we will find that there were literally fatal problems with spirituality in itself, moreover. Following James 2.14. Nor do even all the practical “works” of the Churches, from supporting soup kitchens to hospitals, make up for some physically crippling, massively deadly things in their spirituality. As we will see in our separate works on this subject.

In the meantime – what about the many parts of the Old Testament especially – but also the New – that seemed so firmly based on physical things? What about indeed the physical side of God and the Bible? How do preachers deal with those old, very physical promises? The fact is, parts of even the New Testament itself, it seems, began to suggest that if God had once promised physical, material things to us … perhaps after all, sometimes the material things promised are not showing up, “fully.” And so our apostles began trying to come up with explanations for that lack. Any explanation except for the obvious one: a) that they themselves, our holy men, and/or their promises, were simply false. Among other explanations that are still delivered to us as sermons today, it was suggested that b) God was temporarily withholding his promised material things, to a) “test our faith” as they said. And/or that c) God will give us the material things “soon”er or later. But then, when some good people died, and still had not received the things promised? Then our holy men just generated yet another different explanation: that d) God would give us what was promised, after we were dead. In “heaven.” Never mind that God said that heaven was to be destroyed. Though finally, one or two explanations were widely popular; and in fact have defined Christianity as distinct from Judaism, for two thousand years: the idea that God was withholding material things from us, to strengthen our “faith”; and/or the idea that e) God never really thought that material things were all that important; that God stressed spiritual things instead.

We will find that the Bible itself hinted at dozens possible explanations for the occasional lack of material wonders. But we will also see, however, that the Bible itself never really firmly, unequivocally presented, validated, any of the many proposed explanations. In the Old Testament for example, the whole idea of a Test of Faith is indeed presented in the Book of Job; but there note, it was presented “under a cloud,” with a red flag warning on it. Indeed, the whole idea of a Test of Faith is pictured in Job, not as an idea from God himself, but literally, as an idea from Satan (Job 1.8-12).

The fact is that none of the many dozens, hundreds sermons that attempt to explain any occasional lack of material wonders from our priests, are really that firmly advocated by the Bible itself. Indeed, all of them, whether from the Old or the New testament, are presented very hesitantly, and with warnings and provisions attached. Indeed we will see, almost none of the most common explanations for “unfulfilled prophesies” and promises, as they call then, really stands up to a close inspection of the Bible itself. After either a closer look at the individual promises, or to the rest of the Bible itself, or to honest reason and logic. Including especially, the common suggestion, near the core of traditional spirituality, that f) say, God’s promises of apparently material wonders, are best read as being mere metaphors, for spiritual things.

Do priests sometimes have problems, making bread appear out of thin air, today? When you ask your priest to do this for you, does it really happen? Or do you hear lots of eager and anxious explanations, words, instead? And so, for example, if Moses and Jesus were sometimes said to have gotten real, literal, physical food or “bread” for their people – “manna”; the Miracle of the Loaves and Fishes” – eventually the New Testament especially began to suggest that perhaps these events, are better seen as being just “figures” of speech, symbols or metaphors; “parables” or “allegories.” Things that were not really, just literally true; but were should be taken to be just metaphors, for spiritual or mental things that God gives us.

The giving of physical food to us, by God, might be converted to, interpreted as, mere spiritual metaphors; to the idea that the thought and spirit of Jesus, are the real “bread” from heaven. Perhaps indeed, God sometimes does not give real, actual, literal “water” to the physically thirsty in the desert; but he can be said to at least give his mentally invigorating dreams and hopes; which some might say, are “bread indeed.”

And yet however, though many preachers all but give up on promising physical wonders, and stress instead only mental or spiritual things, we will have been showing here that actually, a) God constantly promised things that are resolutely, really, physical. While b) indeed, God himself intended to found religion, Christianity, on a science. A science that is supposed to base religion firmly, not on producing just mental or spiritual sensations, like “hope” or even “faith.” But that is supposed to base our faith, on observation of proven, material things. While indeed we will show here, c) any religion that does not take great care of the material side of life in fact, is inadequate and unbiblical … to the point that finally, it is literally, physically fatal. (As James began to note, in James 2.14-26).

The Material Earth or

World Again (See Above)

We will therefore have been outlining here there – in seventy or hundreds of ways – that God made, promised, and valued, the material universe. Against God, many preachers often tell us that valuing material things, the “earth,” is bad. But a) indeed,

“In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth…. And the earth brought forth vegetation, plants yielding seed… and trees bearing fruit. And God saw that it was good” (Ex. 1.1, 12).

If God ever b) “cursed” the “earth,” and made it a hard place to live for Adam, note that the earth was cleansed once in the Flood of Noah; and c) the “world” was “overcome” and “redeemed,” “reconciled to God, once again they say, by Jesus:

“… For in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities; all things were created through him, and for him. He is before all things, in him all things hold together…. For in him all the fullness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things … on earth…” (Col. 1.16-20)

“For ‘the earth is the LORD’s, and everything in it.'” (1 Corin. 10.26).

“Do I not fill heaven and earth? says the LORD” (Jer. 23.34; Ps. 139.7; 1 Kin. 8.23-9.2; & St. Paul; italics, mine.)

“It is the glory of God to conceal a thing: the honor of kings is to search out a matter. The heavens for height, and the earth for depth…” (Prov. 25.2-3).

“… For his glory is manifest in the things he has made (Rom. 1.20; Ps. 19).

” … In the earth” (Isa. 26.9; 42.1-5; 65.16 ff. Gen. 1.1-10. Ps. 37.3-11; 1 Corin. 1.28; Rev. 21.2-11; Rom. 1.20; Wis. Sol. 14).

For the importance of using evidence from the “earth” – as science does – to discover what is good, see our references above, but also some new ones: Isa. 6.3, 29.4, 42.1-5; Ps. 89.11, Ps. 104.24; Ps. 115.6; Ps. 115.16; Job 28.2-25; John 12.25 vs. 12.47 & 3.16; 1 Corin 1.28, 10.26; Col. 1.16-20, Col. 1.19-20; Isa. 65.16; Isa. 26.9; Ps. 37.3; Gen. 1.10; Rom. 1.20; Ps. 37.11; Matt. 8.3-4, 6.33; Isa. 1.18, 1.21-24. For more on the importance of observation of nature, and specifically “science,” Prov. 1.22; Dan. 1.4-15 KJE; Mal. 3.10; 1 Thess. 4.21; Mat. 7.20; Deut. 18.21-22; Prov. 25.2-3; 1 John 4.1; Job 28.2-25; Jer. 31.35-7; John 10.17-18 NAB, John 14.10-12; Mark 2.10-12; Rom. 14.1, Rom. 8.28 NWT, ref. Ps. 145.17; John 9.3; Isa. 7.10-14, Isa. 1.21-24; Rev. 2.2, 11.1; Titus 2.16. And technology and practical knowledge, in Catholic Bibles: Wis. Sol. 1.1-7; 7.16-17; 8.5-17 vs. 13.1-14.7; 16.17; 19.11-21. Also 1 Kings 4.29-33; Dan. 2.60-81.

The earth was always partially good.

And soon, in the End, we are coming to see things, as they were “in the beginning.” We reconceptualize (cf. Rorschach Blots, the face/vase pictures, etc.), we “see” the earth become good, again. As it was in the beginning. In the End especially, we see a partial return of the Old Testament God – who loved this material earth. And who descends to live on this physical earth, again.

Here we will start a new list of numbered arguments; the larger list will continue (with say a # 106?), in the next separate volume, Vol. 4, The Science of Jesus.



[Note: This sequence of numbers, are tentative numbers; our master number sequence

of arguments for science, ending above, with 105 or so, in continued with 106, 7 etc. in

Our books on arguments against faith in Paul etc, and then on The Science of Jesus]

Many Things Are Promised – Very

Vividly, Graphically Presented

As Material Things

In the Bible

The Apostle/St. Paul and others, to be sure, at times have seemed to many, to speak as if religion, God, should forget about the physical side of life. To concentrate on spiritual things, like faith and hope. But God himself, clearly did not promise just spiritual things to us. The fact is, God constantly promised us many, many, very material things. Goods that are described in graphic detail. In a way that begins to make it clear, that God was not promising just mental or spiritual sensations, or things in our “heart,” like “hope”; rather, God was really, actually, promising us real material things. Not just spiritual things. In the Old Testament, those who follow God are promised more cattle and goats and sheep; more physical material land; longer physical lives. And indeed, even Job in the end receives such things (q.v.).

That God promised us not just mental or spiritual things, but real, material, physical things, will become clear enough, in our own examination of the Bible here. While indeed, furthermore, this was the way the Bible was often presented by countless preachers, to billions of people. If we can find any old sermons that have not been destroyed or hidden away, or if the older among us just consult our memories, we will find b) that most (if not all) of our preachers’ sermons, clearly took the Bible as promising very real, very material things. Like “prosperity” and so forth.

Judaism and Christianity both, it will become clear, originally made many very, very, very large material promises; that is, promises of very, very material, physical rewards for following God. In fact, countless preachers, prophets claiming to speak for God, eventually assured us all, that God promised us not only “prosperity” and so forth – but also even huge, gigantic, physical miracles. The literature of Christianity was once jammed full of promises of gigantic, physical wonders, “miracles”: we were promised over and over, that if we just trusted and believed in our preachers, and/or their idea of God, we would, like Jesus, get the power to walk on water; the power to make real, actual, literal bread appear out of thin air. Etc..

Throughout history, huge, gigantic, amazing, incredible – and very, very physical – wonders, miracles, were constantly promised to us by our holy men.

[To be sure, though, no doubt these promises were so gigantic, so huge … that at times, at least some priests found difficulty actualy producing them; giving us “all” that was promised in the name of God. While no doubt, we will find, many holy men today will have wished that those old material promises, had never been made; that the larger promises of “miracles” for example, were not really there in the holy books. Because, we will see, few of us today, have ever seen many of the specific, Big Miracles that were so often promised to us.

Have you yourself, for example, ever seen anyone really, literally, actually … walking on water? Or making bread appear out of thin air? Have you yourself really, honestly, seen these exact, specific things? Surely God wants us to tell the truth; so tell it now.

The fact is, that most people, if they are honest, will admit at least privately, that they themselves, have never seen anyone at all, perform the exact miracles that the Bible seemed to have promised; “all the works” that Jesus did, and even “greater works than these”; even to “whosoever asks.” And therefore, many preachers no doubt, would wish that these old promises were not there, or would just go away. Yet to be sure, there is no doubt that major elements of Christian tradition, firmly made such promises. Of huge, gigantic, physical miracles.]

No doubt, many preachers privately wish many of the old material promises had never been made; and indeed many have striven to make those promises go away; many have “twist”ed the language of these promises, to suggest that they can be taken as mere metaphors or figures of speech; metaphors for spiritual things. And yet however, we will be finding here that … indeed, God – and/or in any case, many preachers – promised many very, very, resolutely, adamantly, physical wonders. Not just spiritual things. Things furthermore, that can be literally, physically seen with our literal physical eyes … and verified or not, by real, classic, empirical science.

Preachers often suggest these promises are just metaphors for spiritual things. But we will be developing many arguments here, to showing the promises of God could not be just metaphorical, just spiritual. In part, by just a) a simple argument: there are thousands of promises of things in the Bible that seem very, very graphically physical; would God deceive us? Indeed, b) God even develops these into a very physical science.

And there are better arguments that God promised physical things, not just or primarily spiritual things; see c) also our arguments against Spirituality in itself for example.

And, among many arguments for the physicality of God’s promises, consider … the detailed way God tells us to use your physical eyes, for example.



“Observe” “Visible” Things Carefully,

With Your Literal, Physical “Eyes”

How important were material things to God? Not only are we told to evaluate all of Christianity according to how materially productive they were; we are told how to do this. Not only, were we to observe material productivity, by scientific method, in Daniel and 1 Kings 18 for example (as noted above). But also the Bible begins to advocate many things associated with science; like empirical observation. For example, we are told specifically, to “observe” material nature, in point of fact, even with our literal, physical “eyes.”

Many spiritual preachers’ sermons, constantly point to a few parts of the Bible that seem to stress thinking only about spiritual things; and things that are “invisible.” But actually, it is visible things that the Bible mostly talks about. As it tells us to focus on, to value, things that can be proven, demonstrated. Or –as we note now – that can be physically “observe”d. We are constantly told to “observe” the material things of the earth. “Observe the ravens” Jesus said. And ….

“Let our appearance … be observed by you” (Dan. 1.13).

“I observed animals” (Acts 11.6).

“Observe the lilies” (Luke 12.27).

Related to empirical observation, we were told implicitly to observe things in “Testing” (above).

To be sure, preachers will insist that God is concerned mainly with things that are “invisible.” But that’s not true. While as we will see below, in our discussion on Rom. 1.20, even invisible things, are known through things that are visible. As the invisible wind is known, by the visible leaves that are blown around.

So Jesus commanded us to “observe” the physical world.




108) We are to observe the physical world … using our literal “eyes.”

a) Over-spiritual priests have constantly told us that we should never observe material, “visible” things; and as part of that, they constantly told us that our material “eyes” were unreliable. Indeed b) they claim, using our physical eyes, valuing what we see in the material existence, would make us spiritually “blind.” And to try to prove this, our priests quote parts of the Bible that tell us to focus our attention only on things that are invisible; like “spirits” and so forth (q.v.?). Telling us to use, they say, our spiritual eyes (reference?).

Here though, we might note that a) Jesus himself was a physical person for a while; one that walked around the world, in a physical body … with physical eyes. And b) Jesus constantly denounced physical “blindness” as something bad. While much of the time, that means real physical blindness; blindness of our literal eyes. Indeed, c) Jesus remember, was often pictured curing literally, physically blind persons. For all the world as if Jesus thought that being physically blind was bad.

There are parts of the Bible that seem to hint that our physical eyes, the “lust of the eyes,” are bad; if our “eye offends you, pluck it out.” But are our very spiritual preachers, who use such quotes to assure us that looking at the material “world” is unimportant, really obeying Jesus? Is d) looking at physical material things, with our literal eyes, is bad? If so, then Jesus was bad … for having eyes himself. And Jesus was bad, for healing physically blind people, so they could see the bad things of the world.

e) In the Bible, many pages have accounts of holy men, apparently looking at physical things. They often explicitly in fact, many preachers say, declare that they are accounts of what this or that holy man, has visibly seen:

“We declare to you what was from the beginning, what we have heard, what we have seen with our eyes, what we have looked at and touched with our hands, of the word of life” (1 John 1.1; though seeing only a “word”).

“I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees thee” (Job 42.5; Job, after seeing Leviathan).

h) In fact, we are even told not to ever forget things our “eyes” have seen:

“But take care and watch yourselves closely, so as neither to forget the things that your eyes have seen nor to let them slip from your mind all the days of your life….” (Deut. 4.9).

And it seems clear, from the accumulation of examples and other reasons, that God does not speak just of our “spiritual” eyes; he means our real, literal, actual eyeballs. To call our natural “eyes” or eyesight bad, therefore, seems against much of the holy text.

i) So what about finally, the very spiritual folks? That seem to quote the Bible as opposing our literal eyesight? That quoted especially the part of the Bible, where is tells us to “walk by faith and not by sight”? Who constantly ordered us to ignore what our “eyes” tell us. Were those preachers really good preachers? Good shepherds? Maybe it is time to note all the other parts of the Bible, that told us a very different story from what we heard in Church. And also, finally, suppose we take a closer, fuller look at the “walk by faith and not by sight” quote? When we do, we will see; see that in fuller context, the fuller quote, does not really support walking without physical sight. If fact in one reading, the text actually said the opposite of that: the Bible actually said, that those who “walk by faith and not by sight,” are “far from God”:

“… We are away from the Lord – for we walk by faith, not by sight” (2 Corin. 5.6-7 NRSV).

Those many, many Christians who say God commanded us to “walk by faith and not by sight,” therefore, are not really reading their Bibles right. Walking just by faith, we will be seeing here, is not actually that admired in most of the Bible. (See our writing on Faith).

The Bible more fully suggests that walking by faith and not being able to physically see, is in fact bad. Indeed, the Bible often speaks as if being physically “blind” is not good at all. Indeed, ask those who walk by faith and not by sight, to simply put something over their eyes, and try to get through life that way; to see if practical experience with blindness reveals it to be truly blessed … or not.

Many might still think, that we must walk by faith; because Jesus, God, is not visibly here on earth yet; “face-to-face.” So we all must walk according to things, a God “not yet seen” and so forth (see Paul, below; Rom. 1.20). Yet to be sure, we will see that those who learn to use their real physical eyes today, to “observe” nature as God commanded, even today, can already come to see much of God, good, even in many of the material things around them. Since the visible world is evidence of God’s grandeur. (See the many quotes on the visible material things considered good; like Job believing in God, thanks to visually seeing impressive things, like “Leviathan”).

j) To be sure, there is a rather shocking quote in the Bible, that tells us that if “our eyes offend us, pluck them out” …

“If your right eye causes you to sin, pluck it out” (Mat. 5.29, 18.9; Mark 9.46; cf. castration; cf. Gal. 4.15).

Yet this is only if our eyes cause us to sin. While in any case, few Christians really do this. Possibly this is to be taken as rhetorical therefore.

Ordinarily, Jesus seemed not to admire physical blindness all that much. Not only does he go out of his way to cure both physical and spiritual blindness; but …

k) Strikingly, those religious leaders who today constantly tell us how good it is to be physically blind, or to “walk just by faith,” should note that Jesus himself often severely criticized especially religious leaders, for being “blind” in some way. Like the “Scribes” and “Pharisees.” But also his own “Servants” and “dedicated” ones:

“You blind guides! You strain out a gnat but swallow a camel!” (Mat. 23.24).

“Blind guides is what they are” (Mat. 15.14 NWT).

“Woe to you, you blind guides” (Mat. 23.16).

“You blind fools!” (Mat. 23.17).

“Who is blind, but my servant? … Who is as blind as my dedicated one?” (Isa. 42.19).

(See also the blind following the blind passage).

l) It is not true therefore that we are not supposed to value our real, material eyes. And if many have not valued them? Then noted that finally, in any case (relating perhaps to those many spiritual persons who are blind to material things today, of their own will or otherwise) one “day” in the end, the eyes of the blind, are supposed to be opened, cured:

“Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened, and the ears of the deaf unstopped” (Isa. 35.5 RSV).

“Blind men followed him…. Then he touched their eyes and … their eyes were opened” (Mat. 9.27-30).

Here note, Jesus heals the physically blind … for all the world as if being blind was bad; and curing it was good. And note that in the end, the “eyes of the blind shall be opened.” For that matter: in the End, God comes to earth again; and therefore presumably, since God is on the physical earth, people will be able to physically see him. (While we suggest that in some ways, this end is upon many of us even now).

So good people are to “observe” things and use their actual “eyes” to do it; and not let that “offend” them. Let those who think their eyes are unimportant, who are offended by what they see, pluck their own eyes out to prove that they are not hypocrites. But then even if they do, while we might acknowledge their sincerity, we might question their wisdom.

And it is often the most adamant believers, that are blind by the way: the text notes that it is often God’s own “servants,” his “guides,” even those most “dedicated” ones precisely, whose eyes are closed, and who are “blind”;

Yet though so many religious people are blind to – or offended by – God’s material world, perhaps, as they read this, the spiritually blind, are even now, having their eyes opened; even, here and now. As they read the very words on this page. When they read things like this.

So let’s continue.



“Invisible” Things …

Are Not As Important

As We Were Told

109) Preachers often tell us that we should ignore physical things, and what our literal eyes tell us; and just value what our spiritual eyes say. But that only presents to us what parts of the holy texts seemed to say; it isn’t what the bulk of the Bible says.

Related to the importance of “observ”ing material nature with our physical eyes – and against the very faithful, those who apparently love physical blindness, who hate their real literal eyes – note too that even the things that are “invisible,” are known, the Bible finally tells us, through the things that are “visible.” Invisible things are known to us, because of their effects on the things that God has “made.” Even invisible spirits, are finally proven, made manifest to us, by things that are visible. As air is seen or perceived, by the visible leaves it blows, or the cells on our arm it stimulates. Or as in Rom. 1.20:

“For what can be known about God is plain to them, because God has shown it to them. Ever since the creation of the world his invisible nature … his eternal power and deity, has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made” (Rom. 1.19-20).

In this central quotation, Paul here acknowledged that we know even the otherwise-“invisible” spiritual world, through observing the material things it effects. Example? We know that someone is mentally, spiritually unhappy, by the way their visible face looks for example. Likewise in fact, we know of all spiritual things, only because they surface in, or effect, material things.

So we need to use our literal eyes, even to understand “invisible,” spiritual things. Said God, himself.

In any case, note that at the very least, God says he values not just “invisible” things, but also “visible” ones. Indeed, they are part of him:

“… For in him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or principalities or authorities; all things were created through him, and for him. He is before all things, in him all things hold together…. For in him all the fulness of God was pleased to dwell, and through him to reconcile to himself all things … on earth…” (Col. 1.16-20).

In God we will note in a separate section, are all visible things on earth. (See also Wisdom of Solomon? All things singing the praise of God).

Those legions of over-spiritual preachers then, who condemn our physical eyes, and observing the physical world? Who tell us that only our “spiritual” eyes are good? What is their source? And what do they do with all these other quotes? Finally, there are just too many parts of the Bible that plainly value the material world …that the over-spiritual preacher no longer has a case.

But if any preacher still insists? Then let him literally, pluck his own material eyes out of his own head; to prove his sincerity. Suggests the Bible.


The Spirit That Relates to Material Nature

And Science:

“Reason,” “Logic,” Practical “Knowledge”;

“Come let us reason together”



Human Wisdom?

110) If we must stress “invisible” things? Then how about practical mind, science, reason, logic, knowledge? Which seem just human; but are often from God.

Priests constantly tell us that their spiritual knowledge from heaven is the only good one. And they distinguish what they know, Religion, from human knowledge; which they (mistakenly we will see), think the Bible condemned as “secular” knowledge. (Which is better seen as knowledge of the century – French ”siecle” – of Christ? SP?). But our priests misunderstand the Bible’s condemnation of “secular” knowledge or thinking; it did not refer to practical thought at all.

Amazingly, in the Bible, at times even wisdom or guidance, even explicitly from “human institution”s, was considered important by God:

“Be subject for the Lord’s sake to every human institution, whether it be to the emperor as supreme, or to governors as sent by him to punish those who do wrong….” (1 Peter 2.18).




God clearly in fact tells us to have some kind of good “knowledge”; as distinguished from false knowledge. But which knowledge is the good one? Preachers often assert that … God only advocates their own “spiritual” knowledge. But there are many arguments against that all-too-common assertion. Indeed, our whole book here is an argument against that. (Also: spirituality is related to “Gnosticism,” Gk. “gnos” the root of our “know”; gno/kno? And that “knowledge” is often condemned by churches).

Clearly the Bible tells us to observe the world. And finally it tells us that (thereby?) having “knowledge” of material things, is important.

Preachers try to say that God advocating “knowledge,” meant just “spiritual” knowledge; which they say is the only knowledge of God. But we find, when the Bible advocated “knowledge,” actually means more than spiritual things; it often meant knowledge of material nature. Or again, it in effect once again referred in part, to science. (Which we will show, is also knowledge of God, since his will is manifest through nature).

Solomon particularly, for all his occasional errors, was celebrated by God, for his knowledge of nature. His knowledge of nature is spoken of in the Bible, as if it was very good and important thing to have:

“The Lord is a God of knowledge” (1 Sam. 2.3).

“There are varieties of gifts, but the same Spirit” (1 Corin. 12.4).

“And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and largeness of mind like the sand on the seashore.… He also uttered three thousand proverbs; and his songs were a thousand and five. He spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of the wall; he spoke also of beasts, and of birds, and of reptiles, and of fish” (1 Kings 4.29-33).

Of course too, practical experience over thousands of years, proved that observing physical nature, knowledge of nature, was a very good thing. Thanks to this kind of knowledge, humankind was able to improve agriculture for example (q.v.; along with the Bible’s advocacy of a hundred practical trades); and feed billions of people.

Priests like to note that Solomon and practical wisdom, science, occasionally made mistakes. But for that matter, so do priests and spirituality.

In any case, we can and should look to practical knowledge for some knowledge of good and God. While we find that “knowledge” of nature in particular, has made us incredibly “fruit”ful. Would priests deny that … and take it away? And leave us all starving? Every time a priest attacks practical “knowledge,” in effect he tries to lead us there (as James began to note; see our writing on Over-Spirituality).

Preachers constantly assure us that only spiritual knowledge is important. But actually, many forms of knowledge are valued by God, even more.

Including specifically, say, the practical knowledge of tradesmen. And of “science,” explicitly and by name:

“He has made know to us in all wisdom and insight … the manifold wisdom of God” (Eph. 1.190-3.10).

“With knowledge and all craftsmanship” (Ex. 31.3).

“Filled with all knowledge” (Rom. 15.14).

“Children in whom was no blemish … and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace” (Dan. 1.4 King James Edition).

“Understanding … science” (Dan. 1.4 KJE).

There are so many places in the Bible that advocate practical knowledge in fact … that finally we must say this: there was a great mistake and Satanic sin in most priests, churches. And that sin … was to attack or ignore, or fail to adequately teach, practical knowledge and science; of farming and milling, housebuilding and medicine and so forth. Which we will soon be showing are – instead of the priests’ “spirituality” – actually the primary means by which we get the “prosperity” that God promised.

Our churches took the materialism of popular, ordinary culture, as a given; or even as a blight. And they constantly asserted (rhetorically?) that we should give up our “materialism” and so forth. And yet we are finding here, that valuing material reality, is actually at least 50% of what real Judaism and Christianity were always about. Practical knowledge and “work”ing to produce material goods, fruits, we will be showing here, are at last, the missing piece in the puzzle of God; the piece our priests never really saw. Until we see the central importance of these qualifies in God’s Plan, the words and promises come up “empty”; we have mere words, spirits … which we will see are mere meaningless “illusions” and delusions,”rote” ritual and ciphers. Which in themselves, never come to the very material “fruit”ion that was the actual core promise of God.

God tells us to have “knowledge.” (See also knowledge of nature in Solomon, above?).

a) Against priests who attack secular and other knowledge, many parts of the Bible tell us knowledge is important:

“Fools hate knowledge” (Pr. 1.22).

“My people perish for lack of knowledge” (?).

“Ye have taken away the key of knowledge” (Luke 11.52).

“Fools hate knowledge” (Prov. 1.22).

“The Lord is a God of knowledge” (1 Sam. 2.3).

“My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge” (Hos. 4.6).

“Every man is stupid and without knowledge” (Jer. 10.14).

“The prudent are crowned with knowledge” (Prov. 14.18).

“Supplement .. virtue with knowledge” (2 Peter 1.5).

“Filled with all knowledge, and able to instruct” (Rom. 15.14).

“Teach me good judgement and knowledge” (Ps. 119.66).

“My people go into exile for want of knowledge” (Isa. 5.13).

“Filled him with … ability and intelligence” (Ex. 31.3, 35.31, 36.1).

“An intelligent mind acquires knowledge” (Prov. 18.15).

b) Indeed, we are supposed to know “all” knowledge (except knowledge of evil):

“Skillful in all wisdom, and … knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach” (Dan. 1.4 KJE).

“Search out by wisdom concerning all” (Ecc. 1.13).

“He has made know to us in all wisdom and insight … the manifold wisdom of God” (Eph. 1.19-3.10).

“Filled with all knowledge, and able to instruct” (Rom. 15.14).

See also “many gift”s; and “all” scripture is inspired.

c) Priests then try to tell us that the only knowledge that is good, is knowledge of God. But while the Bible indicates that is important, as it turns out, knowledge of God is supposed to be much broader, “full”er, than priests’ spiritual knowledge; it is supposed to include knowledge of God’s science.

Note especially, the importance of practical wisdom, which can be seen particularly, as God talks about “knowledge.” There the Bible is clear: we are to know not just or even primarily, religious knowledge, but especially practical knowledge.

d) More specifically, the Bible often speaks of practical knowledge of specifically, farmers, and tradesmen and so forth.

“With knowledge and all craftsmanship” (Ex. 31.3).

Agriculture and farming: Adam to dress garden, in Gen. 2.15, God the patron of Jer. 5.24; Requires wisdom Isa. 28.24-9; requires diligence, Prov. 27.23-27; young farmers exempt Deut. 20.6. Farm work mentioned: Binding of sheaves, Gen. 37.7; Churning Prov. 30.33; Fertilizing Luke 14.34-5; Gleaning Lev. 19.9-10, Grafting Rom. 11.17-24; Irrigation Deut. 11.10-11; Mowing rained upon Ps. 72.6, Rowen (second crop) Amos 7.1; Planting vineyard Prov. 31.16; Plowing 1 Kings 19.19; Pruning Lev. 25.3; Reaping time of 1 Sam. 6.13; Sowing a warning Ecc. 11.4, After ground is smooth Isa. 28.22; Iron instruments of Amos 1.3; Cart wheels Is. 28.27-8; Winnowing barley Ruth 3.2. Implements: including Ax, Deut. 19.4; Axe Sharpening 1 Sam. 13.20-1, Axes of iron 2 Sam 12.31; Bit Ps. 32.9; Bit in mouths James 3.3; Bridle for the ass, Prov. 26.3; in your lips 2 Kings 19.28; Cart 1 Sam. 6.7-14; Cart wheel Isa. 30.24, Fan Mat. 3.12; Fork, a file for, 1 Sam. 13.21; Goad Judge. 3.31; Harrow of iron Sam 12.31; Mattock Isa. 7.25; Millstones Jer. 25.10, Hard as a, Job 41.24, Operated by women Matt. 24.41, and prisoners Judg. 16.21, Men forced to grind Lam 5.13; Plow Luke 9.62; Plowshares 1 Sam. 13.20; Shovel Is. 30.24; Sickle Deut. 23.25; Sieve Isa. 30.28. Products: Apple Song 2.3-5; Barley Ex. 9.31, 1 Kings. 4.28, John 6.9; Butter Prov 30.33, as a food Gen. 18.8, Butter and honey Isa. 7.15, 22 … etc… Business Ex. 22.25 ff; Neh. 5.1-13; Mat. 25.21 … and dozens more. Craftsmen, Ex. 30.25-35, 1 Sam 8.13; Ezek. 5.1; 1 Sam 13.20-1; and dozens more. Listed p. 217-20 Holy Bible, Gold Seal Edition, Nat. Bible Press, Phil., 1943).

God often spoke of practical knowledge, crafts. And amazingly, though priests think of such mentions, as incidental, or merely useful as metaphors for spiritual things, these things we say here, are far, far, far more important than priests thought, in God’s Plan; over the centuries, practical knowledge of nature, evidenced in crafts and science and so forth, have historically been probably the major element, contributing to the progress in material prosperity of humankind, that God promised. (Though supplemented by a good morality). So we can and should look to knowledge of nature, and the practical knowledge of how to make things that are useful from nature; for good and God.

Indeed, ironically, shatteringly, if the things that get real material results in this life are from God – as God often told us above – then practical knowledge is more from God, than religious knowledge.

e) No doubt, to be sure, kings like Solomon, and others with practical wisdom, occasionally made mistakes; but so do priests, and spirituality. In any case, the Bible often spoke highly of Solomon, often. And did not disapprove of the side of his knowledge, his “wisdom,” that was devoted to understanding nature:

“And God gave Solomon wisdom and understanding beyond measure, and largeness of mind like the sand on the seashore…. He also uttered three thousand proverbs; and his songs were a thousand and five. he spoke of trees, from the cedar that is in Lebanon to the hyssop that grows out of the wall; he spoke also of beasts, and of birds, and of reptiles, and of fish” (1 Kings 4.29-33).

“Children in whom was no blemish … and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace” (Dan. 1.4 King James Edition).

“Understanding … science” (Dan. 1.4 KJE).

Finally therefore, it seems clear to us here, that even more than “spirituality,” God wanted us to have practical knowledge and science. We therefore – unlike most priests – are not to despise – or separate ourselves from – practical wisdom. Not as much as most priests have done. While all our priests from now on, need to preach far less spirituality; preach a far more balanced theology; one that knows that we need much more than priests’ “religion,” or their “spirituality,” to get through life, and to get the material “prosperity” that God promised; we need even more than that, much practical knowledge. While indeed, we are finding here that God endorsed practical knowledge. Even endorsing “science” we will see, it seems, over blind faith in traditional religious authority. While God indeed ordered us to do practical “work” 6/7 of the week. God naming and respecting many practical trades, too.

f) So what should we say about priests … who typically assure us that their spirituality is “all” God wanted; and that we should never “compromise” their spiritual ideas, against practical considerations?

At times the Bible told us not to call anyone a “fool”; but then other times, the Bible called many people fools, itself – and especially those who “despise” or lack “knowledge” and “wisdom.” And if priests constantly assured us that God did not mean to embrace practical wisdom, here we find that the “wisdom” and “knowledge” in particular that we are not to despise, that we are to embrace … is practical knowledge. Technical skills and so forth are mentioned by God … and have been found in the course of History to have been most directly responsible for the progress, the prosperity, of mankind. While in contrast, ironically, we are finding priestly, spiritual knowledge, the “knowledge” of Paul , was, by his own admission, quite “imperfect.” And indeed even less perfect than that, when we examine the success rate for priests praying for miracles for examples (as we do in our writing on No Miracles).

It seems clear then, that wanted us to have aa) practical knowledge – of farming, milling, technology, etc.. And bb) science. And cc) a “mind” of dd) “reason” and ee) “logic.”

Indeed, we will find (in our writing, the Harm Done), those with mere “spirits” and even religious “minds” do not have enough to satisfy God. The priestly theology is far too narrow. And those who have that, are lost in mere delusions in fact. Unless or until, they also acquire practical knowledge … and the science of God.

Indeed those many millions of priests and others, who only have “religious” knowledge (see “your religion is in vain”), do not have enough to satisfy God, and to help us live. Indeed, their “spiritual” theology is narrow to the point of being false … and literally fatal (James 2.14-26).

g) While those millions of spiritual priests who constantly attacked such things, led billions of people in the wrong direction.

h) So that therefore, we will see later, there is a great evil in just accepting religious authority as absolute, with total “faith,” never questioning; since “spirit”s and “hearts” can be “deceived” and “false.” Because any kind of idea or “delusion,” can occur in our minds, or in the minds or “hearts” of other, therefore, we should not just follow the authority of others; we need a critical mind, a kind of science, to discern which spirits and feelings are really from God, and which are not.

When someone says he has an idea or “spirit” in his “heart” from God, how do we know it is really from God, and is true? How do we know it is not just an illusion or delusion? Finally, science says, we must “test” our ideas against material reality to see if they work.

i) We will also see that the mind is not engaged and informed by realistic, practical knowledge, gained by such testing, then we will find, those minds are always vulnerable to be lost in the foretold “illusions,” “delusions,” “enchantments,” “lies.” Ideas that seem pleasant in themselves, that give us nice mental sensations like “hope” and so forth; but that do not bring real material results, are just the foretold “illusions.” That indeed is the definition of “illusion,” “delusion,” “enchantment,” “empty dreams,” false dreams: ideas that do not correspond to material realities. Like opium dreams; Lotus land fantasies. Such spiritual sensations and feelings of the “heart,” might be pleasant for a time; but if ideas do not lead to real material accomplishments, they are mere illusions, delusions; leading us to neglect practical things, and to starve to death for lack of real material accomplishments, and material food.

Indeed, we will find, the great mistake and Satanic sin of priests, churches, was to attack or ignore, or fail to adequately teach, practical knowledge and science; of farming and milling, housebuilding and medicine and so forth; which actually, were aa) the primary means by which we are to find out which ideas are true, and which are delusions. By observing which ideas work in real life, and which do not. And bb) they are the primarily means by which we get the prosperity that God promised.

j) How then, does religion really work? What kind of “knowledge” and “wisdom” did God want us to have? And how does that lead to prosperity? Priests knew just “part” of the picture; they knew only about “spiritual” knowledge. But actually, we will find, to know the “full”er vision of God, you need not just spiritual knowledge and so forth, but also practical scientific knowledge. Indeed, aa) a spiritual truth, like learning to “love your neighbor as yourself,” is just part of the whole picture. To see how religion actually leads to prosperity, you need to also know the next stage of the process: that bb) once we thus get along with each other, we can work together; in cc) the larger enterprises – families, companies, countries – that dd) alone create the complex economies, that ee) can deliver complex consumer goods … and finally, deliver real prosperity.

k) To be sure, the spiritual truths, morality stressed by priests, is part of the process … but only part of God’s plan. Thus priests, who knew God and spirituality and (an abortive) morality … never quite had “full” knowledge of “all” you need to know, to follow God, and to experience his promised prosperity. But now at last, those of us who now know the science of God, have the better, second, fuller, more mature – and more fruitful – vision of God.

It is a vision of God, much bigger, “full”er, than the one taught by priests. And indeed, we will find here, God warned that all his holy men – like priests – are to be found lacking, sinning. For this reason indeed, God himself returns to earth, not merely as a priest … but with many other titles and roles; as a “lord,” and “king,” and a son of “man.” As someone who knows heaven … but also the earth. Who can link heaven and earth. While our vision of God, as it links religion to science, begins to do that.

l) With all that in mind, we might read the warnings about “knowledge so-called.” Where the Bible warned against those who despise wisdom and knowledge; against those who even think for sure, that they already know who is wise in the first place. In church, we were always taught that such warnings were directed only at “secular” people; priests often taught that their own spiritual wisdom was all we needed in life; and that practical or “secular” wisdom and knowledge were all but bad and evil. But now, we are reading the Bible now, not as attacking secular people and their knowledge, but as attacking those priests who fought practical education, technology, science, and practical knowledge.

m) And indeed, if there is true knowledge, vs. false knowledge – knowledge falsely so-called – then here at last we have a way here to distinguish them; to separate the sheep from the goats, false from true knowledge at last: it is the science of God tells us which knowledge is false and fatal, vs. the knowledge that makes us prosperous and so forth. If some people are lost in the “vanities” of the mind, remember it was the preacher, Ecclesiastes, who said “all is vanity.” While in contrast, the godly knowledge or science that we are outlining here, is manifestly useful, practical, productive; and anything but “vain.”

So we have at last the real knowledge. But what was the false knowledge? It is “Religious” knowledge, we find, that is not really from God; and indeed, we will see, religious knowledge often qualifies as being “vain”; and as causing people to “perish.” As we will see, in our writings on the Harm Done. While in contrast, practical and scientific knowledge are precisely dedicated to things that are materially fruitful, and not vain.



Physical Knowledge, Seeing God

How important is observation of material nature? And does it really lead to God? In fact, in the Book of Job, Job says that he only began to more firmly believe in God, to believe that God is a being that really does wondrous things … when he looked around him and saw the awe and wonder, of physical nature. Including awesome creatures, like “Leviathan.” (A crocodile? A hippo? A whale?). Which were so close to God, that Job in fact identified God with them:

“I had heard of thee by the hearing of the ear, but now my eye sees thee” (Job 42.5; Job, after seeing Leviathan).

And note, God did not condemn Job for identifying God even with his creatures; God earlier explicitly calling Job good, and “blameless.”

Job’s statement, a) might be regarded as an early form of one early attempted proof of God; one that is now called the “Argument From Design.” The argument from design, argued that the wonder and complexity of Nature, its wonderfully complex “design,” suggested that there must be a designer for all these wonders. To be sure though, here b) Job does more than that; he seems to even identify things in Nature, as God.

There are philosophical questions about either position. Still, here they are in the Bible itself. Adding to our countless other types of ways, that God told us that observing physical nature was extremely important. Indeed, God says here as in many other places, that one of the main ways – indeed the main way? – that we know God, and even the Holy Spirit, is by .. “observ”ing, with our literal eyes, the wonderful nature, the material universe, even the creatures, that he has made.

Thus there are many thousands of statements in the Bible, describing the wonders of the earth, nature. Indeed we will add, thousands of pages of the Bible are filled with verbal, written pictures of apparently material people, in physical settings. For all the world as if, after all, thinking about material things, could save us, or give us spiritual insights, etc.. Or finally, as if we might almost even “see” God already … in the wonders of nature. As Job said he did. (See also writings on Solomon; Wis. Sol, below).

Was Job wrong when he said that when he looked at the wonders of nature … he had seen God with his eyes? Would our spiritual preachers like to address that? Make explicit their differences with God, here?

Here indeed, is a very, very, very close association of God with his own creation; even, incredibly, an identification of God with his own creatures. (Cf. identification with the alter human creature, Jesus too. Cf. immanentism?).

Some spiritual theoreticians might condemn this a “immanentism”; the belief that God is “in” nature, in his own creation. But when they do, they apparently go against much of the Bible; like the Book of Job.


And of course, recall Daniel supporting young men of “science.” (Above; at length). Which in many ways is quite mental, in the mind or spirit. Since it involves thinking, and reason and logic; invisible things.




Or if we value invisible things? Spirits? Then among the ones God supports … is our Reason. One of the roots of Science:

“Come, let us reason together (Isa. 1.18).

Jesus often used rational, logical arguments.

See related words that advocate “logic.” Indeed, God’s name Logos, we suggest, is better translated not as the “word,” but as … Logic.




(Adding to “Reason” & “Knowledge” Etc. above?

And “Logic” and “Wisdom” Below)

A science of timely, empirical results therefore, is actually what the bulk of the Bible calls for; not spirituality and faith. Amazingly. This is found not only in the full description and naming of science, in sources like Dan. 1.4-15; but also in the constantly advocacy, throughout the entire Bible, of the many individual components of science; from Christ and Job and Solomon telling us to “observe” Nature; to God telling us countless times to evaluate men by their real material “fruits”; to the advocacy of “reason.” To God’s supporting countless other aspects of science.

For another example? Yet another aspect of this picture? Related to God’s explicit advocacy of science, is his advocacy of a practical “mind”; complementing its earlier advocacy of “reason,” “knowledge.”

To be sure, preachers often attack mind, “wisdom,” and “knowledge.” And assert that the Bible attacked them too. This is because nearly all preachers think in effect, rather dualistically; that the whole universe is divided into two spheres; the a) good, “spiritual” realm, and the b) bad, material “world,” with “worldly” people in it. Preachers believe that God is a spirit, who ordered us to be “worshipped” only or primarily “in spirit.” While, like their early predecessor/contemporaries, the material-world hating Gnostics, they deep down believe that the reason that they and their spiritual ideas are not triumphant, the reason that the promised kingdom did not appear, is because the material “world” and materialistic “worldly,” “secular” people, are keeping them from triumphing. Or who think that indeed, the whole of material existence is bad; that only mind or spirit is good.

Given this word vs. world, spirit vs. flesh dualism, preachers often come to attack anything that has to do with material prosperity; including practical “knowledge,” and the “mind.”

Many monks once lived secluded, spiritual/intellectual lives. They were among the few literate people in the community; and acted as clerics for the local lord. In their, rather bookish, cloistered world, they came to think of the life of the “word” and “spirit,” to be the best sort of life; and anything else to be crude and materialistic. Indeed, the “world” outside the monastery or the ecclesiastical community of preachers, was full of people who did not develop their minds or spirit or knowledge of the word; but who thought in terms of material gain. Such people were looked down on, as if they were vulgar, stupid animals or “beast”s.

And so preachers, clerics, became quite dualistic: they favored the a) “word” and the “spirit,” over b) the crass world of “matter,” “world,” and “possessions.”

But to be sure, there was a problematic realm in between all that; a realm of thinking, spirit … but thinking, spirit, knowledge, dedicated not as a spiritual end in itself, but dedicated to … success in the material world. Which is to say, there was the realm of practical “knowledge” of science and the trades.

So what did monks so with the in-between realm, of science and practical knowledge – and the practical “mind”? That realm, the crossover, between word and world; thought and action; spirit and flesh? The realm where there are many books, and much thinking and mental activity or “spirit” … but that at the same time, attempts to use that thinking, to get real results, in the material world?

Many clerics were religious monks, and did not much like or understand their great rival in the intellectual sphere: science and practical knowledge … and the life of the practical “mind.” And so they looked into their holiest books, the Bible, to try to find ways, hints there, of how to condemn their great rivals; intelligent practical men with minds devoted to getting real material results; with their knowledge of the world and nature.

And to be sure, there were placed in the Bible (which was written or edited in part by clerics), that could be – or in any case were – taken to attack the world of practical knowledge. Relating to the Biblical use of such terms, that might be thought to relate to science; as a) “world,” false b) “knowledge,” c) “reason,” the d) “secular” life, e) “philosophy,” f) “logic,” … and perhaps the g) “mind.”

It has come to be thought by many preachers, that many references in the Bible to these words, these concepts, were intended by the Lord to condemn … practical knowledge and science. And to assure us that only spiritual knowledge was good; was true knowledge of the Lord.

To be sure, we are finding here, our clerics, and their (hierarchically dualistic/spiritual) attack on the material “world” for example (q.v.), were horribly wrong. Many better theologians eventually note that preachers should not construe attacks on the “world” of vulgar people in the Bible, as an attack on the whole material “world” for example; since God originally made the material earth, and said it was “good.” And if God ever cursed the material “earth,” he was said to have cleansed it twice over; once with the Flood of Noah; then when Jesus “overcame” and “redeemed” the world. While indeed we find here that material nature is the will of God; so that preachers should not attack the material “world.” While as for St. John’s attacks say on the “world” – which really seems to mean just all practical people who are secular, and not very religious, Christian; often, all people who are not priests? Even that was questionable, as we will soon see. So that finally, one Bible glossary right tries to suggest that the only “world” a Christian should “hate” would be … say the “world” of only excessively greedy people (NAB glossary; see “world,” “flesh,” etc.). Perhaps we will add, whatever the bad “world” might be that John condemned for example, might even be narrowed, to just the “world” of Jesus’ time; the world, the crowd, that directly killed Jesus. (Which would, ironically, include priests, we will see; since it was spiritual priests who had Jesus arrested for heresy, and executed).

In any case, ordinary churchgoers today have probably heard one or two sermons attacking the “world,” and Reason, and science. And the “mind.” And the above forms the reasoning that produced such sermons. To attack all those things in life which seem to frustrate their own promises, preachers often attack – in veiled language; as the “world” and so forth – other professions. And other ways of thinking. And especially our spiritual preachers found terms in the Bible, that could be construed as an attack on … their great rivals; practical knowledge, science, and so forth. To support their attacks, preachers can and did find parts of the Bible, that seemed to attack non-religious people, and practical people. And even their knowledge and their thinking spirit. Their life “world”; and their “reason”; their “mind”s; their “knowledge”; their “wisdom.” Each of these words, in fact, was found in the Bible. And preachers to this very day, use them to try to prove that God himself condemned practical thinking and knowledge. (Never mind that Jesus himself was a practical fisherman; never mind that the Bible supported practical trades constantly; etc.).

In order to attack their great rival, science and practical knowledge, our very spiritual clerics have long fashioned sermons around Biblical references to the “world”; to false “knowledge”; but also among other things, to ..

a) The various “vanities” of the “mind.”

To be sure, the Bible itself does appear to have some negative things to say about some things people occasionally have in “mind”:

“Look, you have some evil purpose in mind” (Ex. 10.10).

“The mind of the wicked is of little worth” (Prov. 10.20).

“Divination, and the deceit of their own minds” (Jer. 14.14).

“Prophesy out of their own minds” (Ezk. 13.12).

“A beast’s mind be given to him” (Dan. 4.16).

“Your wisdom and your knowledge led you astray” (Isa. 47.10).

Preachers typically use these quotes to try to prove that God didn’t like the practical “mind” of scientists and practical persons.

b) And to try to firm this up, preachers also find many quotes that seem to attack “knowledge.” While preachers often spin this, as an attack on – they claim – practical “knowledge” and science. Thus converting the whole following list of quotes, into an ostensible attack on practical education, science:

“Knowledge puffs up, but love builds up” (1 Corin. 8.1).

“As for knowledge, it will pass away” (1 Corin. 13.8).

“For our knowledge is imperfect” (1 Corin. 13.9).

“Unless I bring you some revelation or knowledge” (1 Corin. 14.6).

“What is falsely called knowledge” (1 Ti. 6.20).

c) And of course, as the centerpiece of the priestly attack on the material “world,” the preachers fixed indeed, on the parts of the bible that attacked the “world”; or say for present purposes, some “worldly” forms of “wisdom”:

“Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Corin. 1.19, Revised Standard Version of The Holy Bible, pub. Thomas Nelson & Son, New York, 1952).

So to be sure, our countless over-spiritual preachers were able to find parts of the Bible, some words in it, that could serve as a springboard for their attack on practical knowledge. But finally we need to ask, whether this is what the original text really meant?

In particular, we need to ask: specifically which “knowledge,” was the Bible attacking? Which things of the “mind,” are being condemned here? It is really – as some like to imply – practical knowledge? Knowledge of physics, mechanics, business, and so forth? Actually in fact, it is hard to tell what the Bible meant by such words. But given constant support for “science” in the Bible, it seems unlikely that science was the “false knowledge” referred to. If anything, the false knowledge condemned was most often, rival religious ideas; ideas of false “prophets” and so forth.

While any bad things in “mind”? Were just sinful bad thoughts. Thus the Bible did not condemn the rational or scientific “mind” for instance.

a) Yet, though many priests, may secretly “hate” the “world” of physical life and practical people – and their “reason,” and their “logic,” and their “mind”s; outside their monasteries and churches, outside the ecclesiastical community – finally, that “hate” is not fully consistent, with all of the Bible; or of God. As we will be seeing here, God actually had words of support, for much of practical knowledge, reason, wisdom, minds. [While indeed, often, if God attacked “knowledge,” “reason,” “wisdom,” “mind”s … he might just as well have been attacking the minds, knowledge, wisdom … of over-spiritual, over-religious people; of priests.]

b) In fact, the Bible says we should have a “mind,” first of all. To be sure, at times that seems to be just a religious mind; the a) “mind of Christ,” etc.. (q.v.). But even the mind of Christ himself, we are noting here, includes not just spiritual things, but also knowledge of … practical things, and science. As we noted above.

So when you read the following, remember that Christ advocated a “mind”; and a preeminent part of that mind is dedicated to the science of God:

“Be transformed by the renewal of your mind” (Rom. 12.2).

“I serve the law of God with my mind” (Rom. 7.25; “But with my flesh I serve the law of sin”).

“With all your soul, and with all your mind” (Mat. 22.37).

“We have the mind of Christ” (1 Corin. 2.16).

“The wisdom of God” (1 Corin. 1.24).

“I will pray with the mind also” (1 Corin. 14.15).

“I would rather speak five words with my mind, in order to instruct others, than ten thousand words in a tongue (1 Corin. 14.19; “Tongues are a sign not for believers but for unbelievers”).

“Have this mind among yourselves” (Php. 2.5).

“When I was a child, I spoke like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child; when I became a man, I gave up childish ways. For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall understand fully…” (1 Corin. 13.11).

“Complete my joy by being of the same mind” (Php. 2.2).

“An intelligent mind acquires knowledge” (Prov. 18.15).

“Be babes in evil, but in thinking be mature” (1 Corin. 14.20; also 13.11. Revised Standard Version or “RSV”).

“I am with you, as is your mind so is mine” (armor-bearer to king; 1 Sam. 14.7).

From these quotes, it should become clear that aa) the Bible did not attack the “mind” as such at all. Far from it; having a good “mind” is a core value in the holy book.

c) Furthermore, note that if we are supposed to have the “mind of Christ,” then after all, we have been proving here that the mind of Christ … valued science; evaluating things by “obsev”ing, even with our real literal “eyes,” real material “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs,” “wonders.”

d) To be sure, today science and intelligence sometimes attack much of Religion. Especially, science attacks priests’ promises of miracles; which science suggests do not happen in real life (as per our writings, in No Miracles). Science and the rational “mind,” often also seem to suggest that the preachers’ “spirit”s are not real either. For this reason, (rather than concluding that parts of their own religion might be false), preachers often want to suggest that the Bible meant to attack the “mind” of worldly and practical people; and of science. And/or attack at least, some kind of “mind.”

And indeed, we should note now that there are some parts of the Bible that could be used to support that contention:

“Following the desires of body and mind” (Eph. 2.3 RSV).

“In the futility of their minds” (Eph. 4.17).

“Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Corin. 1.19, Revised Standard Version of The Holy Bible, pub. Thomas Nelson & Son, New York, 1952. But note, this is phrased as a question; and is technically not a statement at all therefore).

But likely the target in such quotes, was not the mind itself… but only certain types of bad thinking. Note that the text indeed is not attacking the mind, above, but certain “desires” of it; or certain kinds of mental “futility.” While furthermore, the exact identity of bad thoughts, which thoughts are bad, is not much specified. But there is no reason to say it is likely the thoughts of science. More likely, if anything, it seems we should not focus on “desire” and “futile” things; which could be almost anything (including, by the way, our preacher’s own spiritual desires and futility).

While in any case there is nothing here clearly, about science and practical thought, as being the wrong type of thinking or “mind.”

No doubt indeed, there are some “follies” and “vanities,” in the “mind”s of worldly people on this earth. And that is what the text was directed toward. Though to be sure these warnings could even be directed at over-spiritual priests; remember that God often warned of bad things, futile “empty dreams,” in religious people too. Along these lines, consider the seventy or more times the Bible warned about bad things deep in holy men and angels and churches. As noted in our writings on that subject; like False Priests.

e) While again, the Bible consistently supports practical science elsewhere. Indeed in fact finally, it begins to support, explicitly, a practical “mind” that should be “fruitful.” A mind that must be paid attention to, even over and above, or in addition to, a “spirit” that “prays”:

“My spirit prays but my mind is unfruitful” (1 Corin. 14.14).

Preachers usually try to assert in their anti-science, anti-education sermons, that the only valid, good “mind” or “knowledge” or “wisdom” we are supposed to have, means just solely, conventional, spiritual knowledge of God; as they know God. For many preachers, the only good knowledge is spiritual knowledge; or reading the Bible. And if the Bible tells us to find God in the “world”? Or in practical knowledge of the things of the world? As Job knew God at last, through observation of Leviathan? Many preachers have ignored, disobeyed – and constantly attacked, disobeyed – that side of the texts.

f) In their attempt to find small parts of the Bible that would support their attack on the world or material universe – that by the way, God made and said was “good” – and in their efforts to defend themselves from attack on their religion by intellectuals – preachers often focused specifically, on references to the “mind.” Preachers construing Biblical references to the vanities of the “mind,” as essentially God’s attack on intelligence, critical thinking. As well as on the science that – particularly from the 17th to the 20th centuries – was suggesting that some aspects of religious belief – like belief in miracles –was false.

Trying to defend Religion against Science, many preachers, c. 1950-60, say, therefore attacked the intellectual, rational “mind.” In part, as being worldly; not spiritual and “faith”ful. If they saw the mind as having any use at all, they saw it as best concentrated on the “spiritual” things, etc.. But finally we are finding out here, that actually, God advocates a kind of practical, “mind” which is right next to the “spirit.” A “mind” that should be “fruit”ful.

Thus, even in its discussions of the “mind,” the Bible again begins to confirm, complementing what will be our finding here; that God wanted us to have rational, logical, knowing, scientific “mind”s. Indeed, as we will find, the will of God is known through observation of material things he has “made” (Rom. 1.20 below). So that the best way to know God, means first, knowledge, observation, of nature; science. And an escape from the “futility” of, if anything, the too-spiritual mind condemned by the Apostle James.

g) In fact, Christ’s “observ”ation of nature, is extremely important in the Bible. Indeed we will eventually say here, than in effect – as Job suggests – knowledge of Nature, is in effect also knowledge of God; since his will is manifest through nature. Even “invisible” things are known through observation of things that are visible, in this material world. (Rom. 1.20; as we will see). While especially the wonder of nature …encourages us to speculate that some great force or structure – or god – exists behind or within it.

More specifically, finally, as regards our “mind”s? Finally God demands that even the religious mind in particular, keeps in mind, the “things our eyes have seen”:

“Take care and watch yourselves closely, so as neither to forget the things that your eyes have seen nor to let them slip from your mind all the days of your life….” (Deut. 4.9).

Against our very “spirit”ual preachers, God himself even suggests that just a religious “spirit,” is by no means enough; we need a “mind.” A mind that is “fruitful” moreover. While that turns out to be a mind that includes, remembers, the things its eyes have seen, in the material world. Which is part of science.

Then too (as we will note in a separate but related section on Reason) the Bible even explicitly says we should have the related faculty, of “reason”:

“Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD”

(Isa. 1.18, RSV).

“My reason returned to me” (Dan. 4.36).

Always be prepared to give a reason for your faith (Peter).

Christ himself, often used reason or logic in his arguments. Implying that reason is indeed, good.

So that finally, an intelligent, informed, reason-based, empirical “mind,” is supported by God himself.

While for the frequent assertion that religion, Christianity, must be based on “faith”? That assertion will be examined in a separate section. For now though, we are looking at dozens, hundreds of quotes from the Bible … that firmly assert that God wants Christianity, religion, to be based not on so much on faith at all; but on science. Or specifically here: on the rational and empirical, “mind.”




Related to God advocating the mind of Reason, note that one of the very words that is often taken to be one of the names of God – “Logos” – is really best translated, not as “word,” but as “logic.”

So that finally, it seems, God said that we are to follow logic:

“In the beginning was the Logic of things, and the Logic was with God, and the Reason was God” (John 1.1; translating “Logos” more correctly as its closest cognate, “logic”; or reason; as correct word or characterization; as the logic of things. Including say, material taxonomies, etc..).

“Logos” is usually translated the “Word.” However, the English word that most closely resembles “Logos” is obviously, “logic.” And we will be showing elsewhere at greater length, that this resemblance is not in this case, misleading; deep down, “logos” is perhaps really about, describing the chief, defining characteristic of a thing; its unique logic or essence. This came to be associated with “words,” in that a good term, the right name, aptly describes or names the essence or characteristic logic of a thing. (So for example: submarine; carburetor; sublimation).

And so we suggest here, a) Logic was so important to, so intrinsic to God, that “Logic” so to speak, was God’s middle name.

And that seems verified, by b) the fact for example, that Jesus himself often used logical arguments. (Whatever some critics might say about it).

While then too c) this would fit, dovetail into, be confirmed by … the Bible’s advocacy of “reason,” and other related terms.

So that clearly therefore, God wants us to have practical sense, science – and now we add, reason and especially, logic.

To be sure, d) there are many warnings in the Bible, about forms of false “knowledge; even some kind of bad, “worldly wisdom.” But what were they? Regarding these forms of false knowledge, we will find that many of them are basically, false religious ideas; not scientific logic and knowledge.

While indeed, we are finding out here and now, over and over, that God favors science and reason; that over and over again, in spite of all those preachers who stressed faith and spirituality, God actually, earnestly desires all of us to move beyond “blind” faith and spirituality … to develop our rational – and now we add, even “logic”al – minds.




Confirming this? The Bible also often calls for “wisdom.” And in the context of the present discussion, it is becoming clear that this does not mean – as preachers often assert – just or primarily “spiritual” or religious wisdom.

a) But first though, let’s establish that the Bible stressed “wisdom.” Which is easy enough; indeed, the Bible mentions it over and over; and even says that those who have no wisdom, are “fools.” Indeed, those without “wisdom” are often even fated to “die” prematurely:

“Fools despise wisdom and instruction” (Pr. 1.7).

“Who is the wise man” (Jer. 9.12).

“Fools die for want of wisdom” (Pr. 10.21).

Preachers to be sure, like to try to b) claim that by “wisdom,” the Bible refers only to their own, priestly, spiritual wisdom. The only wisdom we need is the wisdom of God; which our preachers (pride-fully) claim is their own aa) spiritual wisdom. Though clearly we will find here that the Bible advocates science. So that its Wisdom must include that. As indeed we will see next by considering the rest of the Bible; but even particularly the “wisdom of Solomon.”

Preachers are slightly closer to the mark, when they suggest that when the Bible advocated “wisdom,” it meant say, bb) the “Wisdom” of the “wisdom books” of the Bible. Like the – by the way, notably scientific/practical – Ecclesiastes; the apocryphal Wisdom of Solomon, etc.. Or cc) the “wisdom” of Solomon referred to in the Protestant bible. But we will note, such references we will find below, are to a wisdom that is often quite practical and scientific. Like Solomon’s wisdom … which involved, remember, knowing the nature of “trees” and other things in nature.

Many preachers say (with great Pride and Vanity by the way) that only their own, “spiritual” knowledge of God, is true wisdom and knowledge. And they have claimed in a million sermons that the Bible’s references specifically to such terms as “mind,” “reason,” intelligence, “knowledge” and “wisdom” and “logic” and so forth are just related to their own spiritual (/Gnostic) mindset. While our preachers have often said that none of these terms in the Bible, are related to science. To support their claim, preachers try to say specifically, that practical and scientific forms of mind, reason, logic, knowledge, wisdom, are actually the forbidden, “worldly” wisdom mentioned in the Bible. While, to support this claim, preachers constantly mis-quote those one or two parts of the Bible that seem to warn about the vanities of the mind and so forth. But we noted above, problems with they way our preachers mis-quoted condemnations of the “mind” for example.

Preachers indeed, often assert that only their “spiritual” wisdom is good; that the only true wisdom is the wisdom of the Bible, or from God. And that means God as they traditionally define him; as religious, not scientific. But we are finding here that the Bible constantly advocated science; so that we should definitely link any biblical references to any good knowledge, to science, logic, reason.

And c) if the Bible at times seems to condemn some kind of false knowledge? Then which knowledge is it, exactly? Given what we have found here, it is not so much scientific knowledge (which to be sure at times fails); but more often than not, when the Bible condemns false knowledge, it seems to be specifically, knowledge of a religious, not scientific nature. We should note now, that the Bible warns over and over, that even much religious “wisdom” turns out to be fake. Consider indeed the Bible warning about bad things even in St. Paul’s “knowledge” (1 Corin. 13. 9ff. See our entire book on False Priests).

The fact is, we be finding in our books here, that the Bible warned continuously that religious people make lots of mistakes in themselves – and implicitly therefore, in their alleged “wisdom” too (1 Corin. 4.10? Rom. 1.29).

So therefore, what is the right spirit, knowledge, wisdom? It is clearly not just endlessly repeating, religiously, what this or that person claimed was true, or was the word of the Lord; we are to examine, begin testing all alleged truths … with, as God commands, the full armory of science; including the “spiritual” resources of … not primarily religious “belief” and so forth; but real, critical “logic,” “reason,” the “mind,” and practical “knowledge.”


God On the Material Earth

Our holy men have often insisted that they themselves, speak authoritatively for God. And specifically, that their “spirituality” – especially their faith, love – are “all” God himself says, we need in life. But we are finding out here, that what we heard in nearly every church … was not quite true. No doubt, some mental or “spiritual” qualities are required of us by God; but those spiritual qualities include … practical, scientific, materially useful reason and logic and knowledge; even more than love and so forth.

And indeed, against all our very spiritual priests, God directs us to address most of our life – 6/7 of our week (as we will see; the real import of the command to “honor the Sabbath”) – to practical “work.” Here, on this material earth.

Preachers typically, assume a stance of exaggerated, rhetorical opposition to everyday, practical, working, physical life culture; telling us that our ordinary concerns – making a living; buying a house; putting a meal on the table for our family – are crass and overly materialistic. But in fact we will be showing here, the bulk of the Bible has a God that is overwhelmingly concerned with this “crass” physical, material earth. Indeed in fact, the God of the Bible is quite … materialistic, more than spiritual. To say anything else, is … too priestly/Gnostic. And against the Bible, itself. (And against common sense and life too).

In fact, to complement our outline of how God wants us to have a practical, material science, let’s look for a while at some of the ways God was very, even overwhelmingly, concerned with – and in a favorable way – not the spiritual, but with the very, very physical and earthly and material, side of life.

In the beginning, we will note (from Gen. 1), God made heaven “and earth.” And he did not condemn the earth; but said it was “good.”



And in Genesis too, God himself was apparently pictured as being on a rather material setting; Eden.



It is said too that God made an important, at least partially material being – us. “What is man that thou [God] are mindful of him?” God seems mindful of material men. While again, related to this, Jesus was God, spirit, made “flesh,” become a man.



And it was said that we – even our physical looks? – are made in the “image of” God; (“imago dei”).



God Fills All Things

Related to Job and countless others, finding good, God, deeply, intimately, in Nature – is the quote where God “fills all things,” in heaven “and earth.”

And so therefore, we must here conclude that those countless priests, whose eyes are only on heaven or on spirit … never really saw at least half the Bible; or half of God. (And we will add because of that, the priest never sees, indeed, how heaven comes down to earth). Our priests never remotely described God adequately or “full”y, we will show; because their hierarchical dualism of their minds, assured that their minds were not prepared to see the greater scope of God. Not prepared to see God, in and among material things.

But one “day” to be sure, they are supposed to see it. And they are prepared for it partially. In their expectation that one “day,” God returns to “earth,” after all. Which is one of the greatest of our many examples here, of God after all, in flesh, in material things. As we will add, soon.



Jesus is “Flesh”

And if God himself was often in rather material settings … finally we say, God became man, a very material physical human being, in Jesus.

Religious conservatives and spiritual ministers alike, today, should remember that their conservative predecessors, the Pharisees, suffered from the particular blindness we are describing here in preachers: they could not accept as God, a mere physical man, like Jesus. Here, our preachers today fail in much the same way: when they fail to see God in material things, they might be expected to repeat the sin of the Pharisees: to finally, when God comes down to earth, to fail just as the Pharisees did: refusing to acknowledge God come down to mere “flesh.” To mere human form.

Nor are our very spiritual preachers, like to value the things that a (note in part, very physical) man, Jesus, told them – and will again one day tell them – about God and good … in this physical world.

Ironically therefore, there has been a very, very great sin, in especially, our very, very spiritual, religious persons, (including essentially all priests). They have always been rejecting seeing God in material reality, in one form after another. And this has always been their very, very great, heretofore unnoticed, sin.

And it is one of the very worst sins of all. Remember, failing to see God in human beings … was the sin that led priests earlier, to execute Jesus. For daring to be, assert, God, good, in mere matter; in material “flesh.” (See our remarks, on the meaning of condemnations of the “flesh,” in Paul and Over-Spirituality?).

. . .

There have always been priests, Pharisees, who are very spiritual … and deny God in material things. But we are beginning to see now, they were totally wrong. So what about these over-spiritual people after all?

What about those many spiritual people, that constantly assured us they were better than everyone else? That they alone were the voice of God? What about that is, about our priests?

And what about all those many millions of people that priests have lead? The very, very spiritual people … who we must now call stiff-necked people, who stubbornly refused to follow – and see – God? Who refused to see and hear and follow God’s constant commands … to learn to use their “eyes” to “observe” the material universe or world that God made? What should we say about the priests who lead so many millions of the willfully “blind”ly people? Who created and lead the servants of God, that thought that by ignoring physical nature, they were acting for God? Who created legions of the blind?

In fact, we will have to find here, that our preachers had not really read their Bibles closely enough; ignoring the material side of God and life, our over-spiritual preachers were in effect, following a false idea of Christ; following a false Christ. Because they failed to see in the Bible, the dozens, the hundreds of commands, that told us all to become in part, scientists. To become observers of material existence, and nature. Priests instead, tried systematically to incapacitate our actual eyes. And to “hate” even the material “world” often.



The “World” –

Is Condemned?

Which World? Material … or Religious?

Our preachers especially love to assert, that the Bible condemns the “world”; and when it does that, it condemns the world of practical people making money and so forth. And among the possibly relevant quotes they use is especially the following. Which they assert continually, means that they themselves are very holy and truly wise; whereas any “wise,” worldly philosophers – and/or scientists? – will be found to be fools by God, in the end:

“Professing themselves to be wise” religious “wise” men became fools too; “wise” only in their own minds, their “own conceits” (Rom. 11.25, 12.16).

One d) of the most popular sermons by preachers, is that one. The one that suggests that scientists, logical and rational people, practical people of affairs, think they are smart or “wise”; but their wisdom is false. And yet however, the Bible is not often, apparently, very specific about which forms of wisdom are being condemned. Indeed, from what we are finding here, it seems quite likely that is is not science, but the rabidly anti-scientific “wisdom” and “knowledge” of priests, that is false wisdom. Especially since God advocated science countless times, from our evidence above. And since it often, on the other hand, noted sins and errors in religious men, and their thinking.

In any case, e) we will be showing soon enough in fact, that the Bible warned countless times, about sins and errors even in our holiest men; and their ideas. Or implicitly, in their religious knowledge. Consider – among hundreds of examples of false ideas, false knowledge in religious workers – that Jesus himself warned about false ideas, even in his own most religious followers, his apostles. Jesus warning that his apostles for example, would think of themselves as “first” – but might well be found to be last, in the end. Because of their “vanity,” we suggest. Indeed, because of their dysfunctional ideas, which they held too all too proudly and “vain”ly.)

For that matter, see our book-length treatment of the Bible’s countless warnings of mistakes in our holiest men and angels … and implicitly, in their religious ideas, knowledge; their in-effect false wisdom. (In our book on False Priests).

No doubt then f) to be sure, in the end, God will “destroy the wisdom of the wise” (1 Corin. 1.19). But whose wisdom, which wise men, are to be found fools? In which “world”; the secular world of practical men … or the “world” of priests themselves?

Indeed, if the Bible even condemns … those who have “seemed to be wise in this world” (1 Corin. 3.18), then after all … priests are often very highly esteemed – thought wise – in the world.

In their ongoing, proud attempts to prove only themselves and their own spiritual ideas to be best, “first,” spiritual preachers, priests and monks, particularly love to quote the parts of the Bible that seemed to attack the “wisdom” of the “worldly”; which, they tell us, attacked secular “wisdom,” the wisdom of everyone outside their monasteries and rectories, as truly foolish:

“Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world?” (1 Corin. 1.20; Revised Standard Version of The Holy Bible, pub. Thomas Nelson & Son, New York, 1952; Greek “kosmos”).

“For the wisdom of this world is folly with God” (1 Cor. 3.19).

“Do not love the world or the things in the world” (1 John 2.15).

“Whatever is born of God overcomes the world” (1 John 5.4).

“The whole world is in the power of the evil one” (1 John 5.19).

“Deceiver of the whole world – he was thrown down” (Rev. 12.9).

“Demas, in this present world” (2 Tim. 4.10; Gk. “aion” or “aeon” or age).

In such quotes, there was clearly some kind of apparent “world,” that opposed Jesus. And that Jesus opposed in turn. But who or what that “world” was, is not clear.

We will offer elsewhere, our own lengthy explication of what the Bible means by “world.” Briefly though, if anything, we are finding here, whatever “world” it was that was deceived and bad, could not be the material “world”; since we find here and elsewhere, that God made that material world and said it was good (in Genesis 1 ff. While if John attacked the material world, then after all, John’s gospel is not “synoptic” many scholars note; it is not quite in tune with, synchronized with, what the rest of the Bible said.)

c) Nor could the “world” that is condemned, clearly be the “world,” say, of all practical people; of all concerned with finding material “prosperity” here on this earth or world. Since God often supported that world … and those people; God often indeed, promising them “prosperity.”

d) Perhaps indeed, these parts of the Bible are simply inconsistent with the rest of the Bible. Or more likely, we will say here, it is best hypothesized that either this part of the Bible has been mistranslated; or that God meant to attack the “world” of say, very excessively greedy persons; or especially, that God meant to attack the “present” “world” (2 Tim. 4.10 above), or “generation,” or “aeon” or “age,” of Jesus’ day. Especially.

So perhaps it is best said that whatever “world” it is that was bad, the only world that was certainly referred to, was the world of Jesus’ time. And we don’t live in the world at all. Indeed, Jesus was said to have redeemed the “world”; so we live in a post-Jesus world. A world that had the advantages of Jesus; a world that was redeemed, made substantially good, two millennia ago.

e) So that the totally bad old “world” is in fact, long since gone; what particularly remains is reform in the preachers’ own “heaven,” in fact.

f) Again too, as we noted in connection with the “mind,” while some forms of “knowledge” and “wisdom” and thinking, that might be bad, futile, on the other hand, there are some good forms. There might be bad “desires” and “futile” things in some wisdom; but the Bible as seen here, did not mean to condemn all wisdom. Indeed, the Bible advocated science – and therefore its “wisdom” – over and over.

g) And scientific knowledge, moreover, is manifestly not “futile” or “vain”; since it is materially productive.

h) In fact, God seems to regard “the earth” as being in accord, with wisdom:

The “LORD by wisdom founded the earth” (Prov. 3.19).

i) Indeed, the churches rightly condemned the hierarchically over-spiritual, dualistic, Manichean/Dualistic, Platonic philosophies, that would try to say that only spiritual things could be good, and all material things are bad.

And so it is. Whatever the “wisdom of the world” might be, that the Bible condemns, it is not science, or reason, or logic, or practical knowledge. Likely, we should say stipulatively, it was just the primitive, false “wisdom” of Jesus’ time only. (See notes on the “flesh” above).




This section has been focused on the Old testament especially; but we might add a note on the New, here. That advocated, as wisdom … “whatever.”

Whatever. Ultimately we are not supposed to honor just – or even primarily – traditional religion, but science … and other things, “whatever” things, “all” things, that are good and fruitful:

“Whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is gracious, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things” (Phil. 4.8).

“I can do all things in him who strengthens me” (Phil. 4.13).

“By their fruits you shall know them” (q.v. above).

All kinds of knowledge are good then.

But if we are to ask, what is the most fruitful knowledge, in material terms, historically? Is it a) the priest praying for bread, miracles, out of thin air, that is most successful in bringing meals to our table, on a day to day basis? Or is it b) the priest who never delivers any material things at all, but only mental sensations or “spirit”s? As we will see, neither of these, the two main branches of conventional Christianity, are really productive in the sense that God demands. And that finally, neither of them, ironically, are what God really championed. Instead, c) what really gets real material results – and therefore, is to be said to be truly from God, the real “mature” “knowledge,” is not priestly promises of miracles; not spirituality; but is … practical knowledge and science.

Ironic, shattering as this is, this is in fact our conclusion: according to the standards of the Bible itself, religion, Christianity, were never supposed to be based on a) praying for miracles, or b) spirituality; but instead, they were supposed to be based on c) what brings real, material results. And ironically, it was not prayer for miracles, that did that; nor spirituality. Ironically, the branch of human endeavor, that most perfectly matches what God called for, that seem to be the knowledge and wisdom that God championed … was practical wisdom, and science.

In fact, if anything, as proven by their fruitfulness, God favors science, its “mind,” “knowledge,” “reason,” and “logic,” over religious ideas; as we will see. Ironically, therefore we will find, the practical men and scientists, that were closer to God … than the priests. As we will see. And if there is any future for religion at all, it is a religion, a Christianity, that has learned to become, a science.



Material Results

Are Required;

Results “Soon,”

“At Hand,” “Now”

Real preachers therefore, we are finding here, are not supposed to be as “spiritual” as they have been until today. The fact is, they are supposed to be able to a) observe the material earth with their literal eyes; and b) thus learn how to do practical work. And thus to bring us real material gains; fruits. Real material results, prosperity, here on thus material sphere. And we will see, these results are not supposed, as some assert, to come thousands of years from now. Rather, those results are supposed to come in a timely way: “soon”; “quickly,” “at hand,” “without delay.” And so forth.

In the past, an occasional preacher or two has acknowledged that Christianity is supposed to get some material results. But he often claimed that real results don’t have to happen right away; but only, say, at the End of Time. Actually though, in most of the Bible, many material rewards are to happen in a very timely way. As the Bible says, doens of times. In many different ways.

Material results are supposed to come …

a) “Soon,” for example:

“For they will soon fade like the grass, and wither” (Ps. 37.2)

“God … will soon crush Satan under your feet” (Rom. 16.20).

“And beyond, I am coming soon” (Rev. 22.7).

God repeated this in a half dozen other ways. Just in case you were deaf and dumb, and did not hear or see the first time, just to make sure there is no mistake, God often promised rewards, not only “soon,” but also …

b) “At hand,”

c) “Without delay,”

d) “Quickly,” even

e) “Now.” Or at the very, very least in …

f) “A generation.” *

g) While in fact, in much of the Bible, many holy men work miracles in a timely way; even on demand. Here and now; in our lifetime. Even on demand (like Ezekiel, above).

To be sure, not doubt most priests could not really get results quite as promptly as that. And so, many tried to delay the due date … by suggesting that such promises were only to be made good much later; in a Second Coming, or an ideal “kingdom.” But note, even the “kingdom” was often promised “soon.” A kingdom where there is no more “pain,” and no more “tears”; where the “wolf” lies down with the “sheep,” and so forth (Rev. 21? Isa. 11, 65-6).

Many huge – and note, often physical – promises were made. Furthermore we now add, they were not promised eventually; even the kingdom was promised “soon.” But to be sure, no doubt many Christians noted that a physical kingdom did not appear soon at all; indeed instead, Jesus was physically killed; and Jerusalem was burned to the ground, in 70 AD. So that, it would have seemed clear that the priests of the day were not getting results “soon” at all.

No doubt it was because of the failure of a material kingdom to materialize, that St. Peter and others, began to try to generate statements, that could be read (among other readings) as … backing away from the old promises of material wonders. To try to explain or excuse the non-appearance of a physical kingdom and so forth, Paul and others for example, attempted to hint at many different apologetics: especially that we were supposed to get just a “spiritual” kingdom. Or that if God was withholding his promised benefits, to test our faith (q.v.).

For his part, the Apostle Peter attempted to hint that the meaning of “soon” might not be what we thought. Peter speculating that “soon” or without “delay” might mean thousands of years, to God (2 Peter 3.8-9).

But can we read Peter that way … and still be following the God of the rest of the Bible? Who promised material things … and delivered them in a timely way? Indeed note that right after Peter warned of people “twist”ing the meaning of scripture, we have this strange moment … when Peter himself tries to semantically stretch or “twist” the meaning of “soon,” to mean thousands of years. (Insert quote here?).

Here, note a fine point of semantics: here Peter strictly speaking is not making any firm statement at all; he is merely asking a question. So that Peter’s statement is quite ambiguous; it does not firmly say anything, technically speaking. But to be sure, it was a leading question; that was easily construed by the next eighty generation of preachers … as rather firmly suggesting that “soon” might well mean … thousands of years.

Which seems to many of us today, to be “twist”ing language just a little too much; to be playing too many semantic tricks on people.

Simple honesty you would think, would require that people – especially holy men – don’t play word games like this with us. When honest people say “soon,” they mean soon. To get an idea how dishonest this is, to start “twisting” the meaning of “soon”, imagine a simple example: how indeed, would you feel, if you paid a furniture dealer for a couch, and he promised to deliver it “soon” …; but you still don’t have it, a month later? And then, when you called the furniture dealer up, he did what St. Peter did: he told you that when he said “soon,” he meant … in God years. He meant that he would deliver the couch in say, a thousand years. Obviously, people are “twist”ing words with us here; playing word games. And just as obviously, this is not honest.

Ask your priest: if someone did that same kind of thing, to he himself, wouldn’t he resent it? And wouldn’t he know that he was being cheated? Wouldn’t he know that someone is defrauding, playing word games with him? If you ask your priests this, and yet your priest still insists this is fine, then indeed, then make this sort of deal with him in everyday life: buy something from him, and promise to pay him “soon.” Then months later, tell him you meant by “soon,” thousands of years. Keep doing this to your preachers … till he learns better. Till our priest learns to be honest. (See our writing below on empty words, etc..). To stop playing word games on us.

Obviously, our holy men are trying to get out of their responsibilities by playing word games with us; indeed, Peter himself mentions that even holy men “twist” the meaning of words too much (2 Peter 3.16); many speculate Peter was warning, after all, about himself. And could even an apostle do something bad? The fact is, remember, Jesus himself warned about Peter. When considering Peter, we should that he once turned on Jesus himself on the matter of the necessity of the crucifixion; and then Jesus himself warned that Peter was bad; often so bad, that Jesus called Peter, “Satan” (Mat. 16.23).

Aside from the kingdom, many material things were described as being produced in a timely way, in a thousand parts of the Bible. So that there are a thousand parts of the Bible, that tell us all, in so many different and various and repeated ways, that wonders, fruits, are supposed to arrive in a timely way. When God promises a victory in battle … it happens within a few days; not centuries later. When God condemns someone, they die soon. When Elijah asks for “fire” from heaven, it happens the second he calls for it. And so forth and so on, throughout the entire Bible. (Excepting only the kingdom?).

So that finally, we can triangulate only one clear message: the Bible really, actually meant that real holy men are supposed to present real material results … and in a timely way; “soon.” Many, many things were thus specified to happen right away. And the Bible described this too many times, and in too many different ways, for anyone to hope that we just misunderstood him in one phrase or two. Just to make sure that no one can misunderstand (except St. Peter?), God says what he wants to say, hundreds of times; in a dozen different ways. Just so there can be no mistake.

h) Consider Jesus for example. Not only does the Bible use dozens of words, that explicitly describe things happening, in a timely way; word like “soon” and “at hand” and so forth; finally it also pictures wonders arriving in a timely way, too. Particularly in the case of Jesus: when sick people ask Jesus for help … note that Jesus normally cures them rather quickly; within a few minutes or hours.

Jesus therefore does not normally do what our priests do today; he does promise the people he will heal them “soon” and then walk away from them, leaving them sick or blind; yelling back at them that by “soon,” he meant thousand of years from now.

As an even better example: notice that Daniel’s experiment, for example, gets results in ten days, or slightly more.

i) To be sure, our infinitely resourceful preachers here, have generated dozens of sermons, to try to excuse any lack of timely wonders. But we will soon find that all of those sermons that try to delay wonders, are false – even to the Bible itself. First for example, note that the statement attributed to Peter – that “soon” might mean thousands of years – actually, is not what the statement itself definitely said; because that remark, we noted, was phrased as a question; not a statement.

To be sure though, hundreds, thousands of different sermons have been generated over the years; to try to explain or excuse, any apparent lack of miracles, for example. And/or their timely delivery. (See dozens of such sermons refuted, in our writing on Miracles). Specifically, to try to get out of timely performance, preachers will tell us that we are not seeing miracles right away, because we are an “Evil generation.” Which was what Jesus called those of his time, who were asking indeed for a “sign.” And yet note, Jesus did not refuse even the evil generation, a “sign” fairly soon. Jesus producing the miracle of Jesus’ resurrection, it was said.

j) Aside from the Bible constantly picturing God delivering things in a timely way, and aside from him promising them “soon” and so forth, there is another major indication that wonders really should be arriving in a timely way; when Jesus promises to us, “whatsoever” we “ask.” Note here, the logical implications of this statement; if we are supposed to get “what”ever we “ask,” then logically we could simply ask for this or that miracle, “right now.” Which would mean that … we should get a miracle, right now, if we ask for it.

k) While then too, (as noted above) the Bible requires science … and real science normally, optimally, requires real material results, in a timely, testable, “observ”able way. If something is not observable or testable in our lifetimes, then we should not regard it as firmly proven to have been from God, or to reflect ultimate truth.

No doubt to be sure, not all material efforts reap rewards right away. Consider Max Weber’s famous book on Protestantism and the Spirit of Capitalism; which suggested that Protestant spirituality in effect, was just a way of telling us to be frugal for a time … in order to accumulate capital for later, greater gains. In the same way, we noted here, in education at least, the development of the mind – at least in practical education – builds knowledge capital. That will be materially fruitful later in life. And so there would be just one justification for a small degree of spirituality; that a temporary concentration on mental things, could lead to greater material results later on. Indeed, even science is rather mental, fixed on abstract entities of the mind or spirit. But to be sure it is the better model of spirituality now: because all that is supposed to be tied to empirical results; testable in this material life. Usually, over the short-term too. Though a very few long-term programs might be allowed; with short-term data to back them.

In any case, the best model for a moment of abstract, invisible thought … is still today especially (when science has expanded) more like science, than … monkish spirit.

Because clearly God himself – the God at least of the Old Testament – unlike world-hating monks, wanted our minds and spirits, closely focused on the material, physical side of existence. As it turns out, there were good reasons for that; as James began to note, even in the very spiritual New Testament, any religion that forgets about the physical side of life, or neglects it, leads us inevitably to physical dysfunctionality. And to premature physical death (James 2.14 ff).

The over-spirituality of most preachers, therefore, is a sin; a sin with very real, even literally fatal consequences.

With that in mind, we will look eventually, at one particular spirituality quality, that seems most at war with God’s physical science: we will look right at “faith,” specifically. As part of carrying on our look at the Science to God … in specifically, the New Testament. And the thought of especially, Jesus.

This concludes our first 124 bible-based arguments, for the Science of God, over faith. No doubt, one or two of them will be quickly “disproven.” And yet? Critics must disprove every single one of them; since if even a single argument against Faith is true, that is enough.

Can critics disprove all 124 of our points, here? For that matter, no doubt the present author will be able to answer any given, subsequent objection. Every reader who believes he had heard a cogent objection to our books and argument here? Should check the Internet. To see if the author or others have responded with a counterargument, a defense, after all.

The fact is, here we have begun to survey 124 arguments or so, against classic “faith,” and for a Science of God; this is an immense argument in effect. And there will be more to come. As we move on, in our next volumes, to examine the New Testament first; and then other related subjects. Ultimately, there are literally hundreds of Bible-based and rational arguments, against classic faith. And for a Science of God.

[Next, insert as an addendum for this Vol. 1, the chapter on No Faith, from Vol. 2, the Science of Jesus?]






Looking Ahead To Paul,


And Our Apocalyptic Conclusion

What should we say therefore, in the end, about our preachers? The “shepherds” of men? And what should we now begin to say, about the major theme in centuries of their sermons: that Christianity is supposed to be based on “faith,” spirituality, not material proofs or material deeds? We will have been saying, first, that all our preachers did not read their Bibles honestly and “full”y enough. Which meant finally, that they have not really followed God.

The Word “Faith”?

Mentioned Six Times in the Old Testament

Our pastoral shepherds emphasized spiritual things like “faith,” over and over again in church. But as it turns out, the whole Old Testament mentioned “faith” by name (in most translations), about six times or so, only. Even in the New Testament, Jesus mentioned faith a few dozen at most; and Jesus too, finally, stressed science, “fruits,” “works,” “deeds,” “proofs,” even “miracles.” So that finally indeed, it was not God and not even Jesus, that emphasized spirituality; as it turns out, it was primarily, the apostle Paul.

It was not the Old Testament God, or even Jesus himself, that really stressed “faith”; it was really only Paul who really stressed “faith,” over signs. The entirely Old Testament mentioned faith by name, about six times, in most translations. Jesus mentions it about a dozens times to be sure; but Jesus also was pictured as performing many material works, wonders. Finally, it was really just the apostle Paul, who mentions “faith” by name, a hundred times or more; in page-long discussions on that subject.

It was a) not really God himself then, or b) even Jesus; but c) Paul, who was responsible for the present emphasis, among preachers, on faith. While furthermore, we will soon find that d) if Paul stressed faith, Paul confessed that he himself was not yet “perfect,” even as he was writing his half of the New Testament. While then too, e) remembering no doubt that the Bible warned continuously, that there were always false things, empty words in our holiest men and angels; and f) remembering that God therefore, told us to use a science to discover who was truly good, ultimately even Paul – backed away from “faith”; and told us to “test everything” (1 Thess. 5.21). Even Paul, the most vociferous supporter of “faith,” finally noting many problems with, sins in, faith; and even Paul finally, arguably, telling us to “test everything” in religion, as we will see once again, with science.

We will get to Paul – and indeed to all the times the Bible mentioned “faith” – in our separate sections on the New Testaments and “faith.” But for now, in our section on the Old Testament, let’s just note that in most translations, God himself mentioned Faith only six times, in the entire Old Testament. While even there, twice “faith” apparently referred not to our faith in God, but God’s faith; even his faith in us (Hab. 2.2; Ps. 146.6).

While in any case, we are seeing here, dozens, seventy and more, kinds of themes, where the Bible stressed not “faith,” but “test”ing and “proof,” and Science.

God himself no less – that is, in statements in the Bible attributed by name, to “God” or the “Lord” or some such, specifically – clearly commanded, constantly, consistently (except in parts of Paul’s writings?), that we should not have so much faith. God himself constantly warned that there would be many false religious leaders: bad, “false” “angels”; “prophets”; “priests”; “apostles”; “church”es; false “gospels”; “false spirits” and therefore false inspiration; bad “saints” in “heaven”; “false Christ”s; bad religious “shepherds.” Even those who stand next to God himself, in Heaven itself, are to “fall” one “day” (Isa. 34; Rev., etc.). So that clearly therefore, God implied that we should not have too much faith in even our holiest men and angels; neither in them, nor their sayings about God. While finally God in fact, told us to constantly examine and “test” our holy men; by constantly looking for and demanding from them, real, “observe”able, timely, material results: “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs.” As confirmed by “test”ing – and explicitly and by name and full description – “science.”

God mentions faith by name, six times in the entire Old Testament. While he mentions science and the attributes of science – observing material “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” with real “science” and experiments – seventy or a hundred times. Or more. While God warned constantly of false bad things, even in Israel, and its prophets and saints.

So what was God himself telling us to believe or have faith or confidence in? Clearly, he was not telling us to have full confidence in our priests and prophets. Or faith in spiritual words either. Instead, God was constantly warning us that our holy men and their words were often unreliable; and therefore, we should test them continually, with material science.

By the way it is presented, the demand for proofs, signs, was clearly intended by God to trump, outweigh, “faith” in “prophets”; and holy men; and priests and their sermons.

So should you yourself now therefore, go to listen to yet another sermon, from a priest, telling you otherwise? Should you no go on, following your priest, with total faith?

What did God himself say? In the Bible itself?

. . .

For all the marginal value of faith – for all the times following holy men without material evidence of what they say, has some marginal utility – and for all the hundreds of times faith is advocated by St. Paul, finally, in the Bible itself overall, “faith” did not figure that large. Not outside of the writings of St. Paul. While we will eventually see, in our examination of the New Testament, that even Paul finally warned us not to have too much “faith” in religious leaders and their ideas about God; because indeed, religious leaders are often false. Ultimately we will show that even Paul finally began to stress material “work”s; “those who do not work shall not eat,” etc..

While again, finally, even Paul told us to “test everything.” Which in its clear echoes of “put me to the test,” did not merely in effect by “test”ing, tell us to, say, mentally interrogate or try a preacher or a sermon, to see if it was spiritual enough; that could not be the message at all. Given the context of the overall Bible’s constant, overwhelming emphasis on material testing, scientifically provable results.

“Refine”ing Preachers …

With Science-Based Theology,

Religious Studies?

Miracles as Natural and Technological


Is it possible that nearly all our preachers, worldwide, are essentially false? Or deceived? And that they need now, correction? In fact, we will note here than in many ways, the Bible said over and over, that essentially “all” holy men have sinned”; and that one “day” or another, we are supposed to last, see this. Or be shown it. And in that moment, though, even bad priests will have a chance, some say, to redeem themselves; or specifically, to have their vision “refine”ed, as it says in Malachi (q.v.). With fire. Though to be sure, this will be a painful moment; a moment when they have to face deep inadequacies and falsities, in their earlier idea, image, of God and Christ.

And indeed, we may be taking many priests through a preview – and perhaps even the substance – of this foretold moment, even now. As we indeed, find, reveal, essentially all our preachers worldwide, to have accepted a false, faith-based Christ. As we however, begin to sit down with them at last, here and now; to give them the “fuller” vision, of God. Indeed, a second vision – a second coming – of Christ. Who turns out not to be based so entirely on blind “faith” or “spirituality” at all; but on a fuller science. A science must closer to – some might say identical with – scholarly science-based Theology; Religious Studies; and so forth. Though we to be sure have our own version of that here. A version that aims at being totally consistent with … the Bible itself. That even in its most negative and disillusioning moments, can be seen to be not merely totally consistent with the Bible … but even finally, as fulfillment of it; as fulfilling any number of prophesies.

What things must we say to be sure, that while consistent with the Bible itself, must criticize, find fault in, the ideas that priests have had, of the Bible and God and Christ? What old ideas must we “refine”? To be sure, the fire is painful. And our priests must at last face questions about their deepest beliefs. Among other things, we must now find for instance, that … the former emphasis by preachers all over the world, on “faith” and “spirit,” were wrong; or culpably overdone. The fact is, God’s final stress, we are beginning to show now, is not just or even primarily, on faith or spirit. Rather instead, it was God’s – and even Paul’s – demand, that we “test everything” in religion with science. Or in the particular example that we are examining now, that we demand to see real material “signs.” Though parts of the New Testament seemed to attack signs, finally, it was honoring signs, and or other visible evidence, that was finally, the dominant, favored pattern in the bulk of the Bible. Even in the New Testament.

What we are finding here, just from our preliminary survey of the Old Testament, is that again and again, against our very faithful and spiritual preachers – who were not so faithful though, after all, to God’s material side – we see this message from God: we are to believe in holy men, believe they are really from God, if and only if they get provable, material results, or signs. The core message of the Old Testament, was adamantly not faith and spirituality; it was .. advocacy of science and material proofs. That is the real, core message found over and over, elaborated in great detail, in countless examples, throughout the Old Testament … and even we will soon show, the Bible as a whole; Old and New Testaments both.

Why though, to be sure, did Paul and others seem to, for a while, give up on, disobey, this prevailing science of God? Why did they seem to give up on the material side of God, to stress “faith”?

No doubt the reason was that Christianity in the time of Paul, was suffering huge material defeats. Though many Christians were said to be still getting many material signs and wonders, Christianity had just suffered some gigantic material defeats, in the days of early Christianity. Defeats, that the Bible does not foreground, but does indicate. First, though God had often promised that those who followed him, would get material victory over enemies, and a physically long life, a) Jesus himself was physically tortured to death. And though Jesus was said to have been resurrected, he then disappeared just 40 days after resurrection. Then too b) after the physical execution of Jesus many other Christians also did not find material “prosperity” – but were instead, martyred, executed. Then too, c) as regards the foretold, promised material “kingdom,” headed by our religious “king,” centered in Jerusalem? History outside the Bible, records that Jerusalem itself was destroyed, burned to the ground by Rome, in 70 AD. While the subsequent Roman leaders forbade Jews from even living in the town. So that in fact, not only had Judah been previously destroyed, by Babylon and Assyria; but finally Judah and Israel were effectively destroyed as a Jewish nation, in 70 AD.

At this time therefore, Christianity was not getting many material results; on the contrary, in the time of Paul for example, there was every indication that Christianity was a material disaster; by the standards of God, Jesus was a “false Christ.” Who had led the people not to prosperity, a real kingdom, but just to “empty” promises, empty words, empty false spirit; and to physical death.

Given the horrible physical defeats suffered by early Christianity, early Christians were confronted with either a) calling Christianity false; and giving up on Jesus. Or b) somehow, coming up with a semi-religious Jewish rationale, that could show that God himself told us to ignore these material signs, these enormous physical/material defeats. To be sure, it would have been hard for an honest person, to do this: the Old Testament and even the New, seemed to very, very firmly insist that we could measure the righteousness, the truthfulness, the goodness, of any would-be messiah, by his material results. While early Christianity did not get those results at all; but precisely the opposite of them. Though often Christians were said to be getting many material “signs” and wonders in the New Testament itself, the New Testament did not really clearly outline what happened after the physical execution of Jesus, especially 70 AD. It did mention however, the physical execution of Jesus; the fact that no real material “kingdom” headed by this “Lord” appeared. So that even in the New Testament thought, there was very, very strong evidence that for the time being, it was not materially successful at all; that it was not delivering material prosperity, always; but often, it was delivering poverty, and very physical Death.

To deal with this, would have been difficult. However, the Greek traditions, did have a way of dealing with this: many Greek tales championed “martyrs,” like the heroes at Marathon; and Socrates. Good persons who even physically died … but all in order that others should live. And Paul was apparently, trained in Greek; he lived in a Greek-influenced part of Turkey (Tarsus); and it is said that the New Testament writings in his name, were written in rather better Greek than the other books. Paul often quoting Plato, on the ideal “forms” in heaven; as opposed to the mere “shadow”s of eternal truths and forms, here on earth. While indeed, Paul often tried to allow non-Jews, Greeks, into the Religion of the Jews (St. Stephen?); speaking favorably of the gentiles and Greeks, who by “nature” did the right thing; Paul being given finally the “mission to the gentiles,” or non-Jews (including Greeks?).

If Jewish culture proper could not quite deal with a dead king, in any way than to see that as a defeat, Greek culture however, could deal with that rather easily. So that indeed, the “intertestamental” or apocryphal writings of the Catholic bible, were largely concerned with the joys of martyrdom. Thus preparing the way for the idolization of an executed, martyred king: Jesus.

Then too however, there was a particular way that Judaism was adapted, modified slightly; in order to make material defeats seem not so … final. In part, Egyptian and other ideas of a “resurrection” were added. While then too, it was increasingly claimed, by the new class or Christian clerics, priests, that finally, after all, perhaps material things, “possessions,” were not so important after all. That what was important, was our mental/intellectual – “spiritual” – side. SO that material defeats might just be temporary; or in any case, material success, the new clerics like Paul began to hint, might not really be so important at all. After the disastrous, apparent total material defeat of Jesus, Christian religious leaders began shifting religious language around (see scribes combing the “new” with the “old”), to try to turn the old biblical materialism on its head. To issue statements in the name of God, that did not directly, openly, contradict the Old God; but that were open to two readings; one of which suggesting for example, that being materially poor for example, might be OK; one the many possible meanings of “blessed are the poor.” A phrase that might be read traditionally, to say that a) the poor are blessed, in that one day they will get physical rewards. But that might also be read as a spiritual statement; as telling us that b) it is fine to be physically poor. One does not need material success, to be happy and good. But finally, of course, there were many objections by Jews and other conservatives, that this was “twist”ing the words of God around. That indeed, any such metaphorical spiritualization, was dishonest, “deceit” and word-“twist”ing “sophistry.” That any such Christian spirituality, in effect went against God. But in a “subtle” or sly, sneaky, or “snake”like way: by twisting the meaning of the old promises. By playing semantic word games with us.

In any case, it is easy to see why many early believers, would have been highly motivated, to try to disappear to modify, the old material promises of God. Christianity in the time of Paul had just suffered some huge, crushing material defeats; defeats that suggested that it was simply, false; that Jesus was not the foretold, real Christ, but was instead, just another would-be Messiah, just another of many, “false Christs.” Who promised to save Jerusalem, to make it capital of the world … but who failed to do that. Then too, though there are accounts in the New Testament of apostles working material wonders, there are also accounts of they too, suffering massive physical defeats. Though to be sure, the Bible for some strange reason, does not make clear, somehow leaves out, the execution of St. Peter and Paul; and the physical destruction of Jerusalem in 70 AD. Still, there are enough accounts of material failures – like the physical execution of Jesus – to motivate early Christians to either simply abandon their belief as false; or somehow rationalize these material failures. To back away from the materialism of God.

After huge material defeats, soon we see in Paul and others to be sure – and to some extent, even in the Apostles’ accounts of Jesus himself – our remaining religious leaders, begin to back away from the material promises and standards of the Lord. There were many reasons; but we suggest that it was especially their inability to make good on key material promises, that led many alleged Christians to begin to try to back away from materialism, and even the God of the Old Testament, or of “the Jews.” Increasingly, the ideology of the day, split in half; into practical knowledge, and Religion; and the new Religion, Christianity, was dominated by a new ascetic, spiritual priestly class. Which insisted that material things were unimportant. Which said that one could be a holy man, and yet not get so many obvious material rewards after all. Which even suggested at times that material defeat, suffering, was the real sign of a really holy man.

But if to be sure, the original materialism of God, was being weeded out of “Religion,” that materialism however, remained in … the people; in the sphere of their practical knowledge and orientation of everyday life. Though a new elite class of preachers was living increasingly, just by delivering mere words and ideas, and was increasingly telling us material things were unimportant, still, the average person still had a practical job, and “work,” producing material things like agricultural crops, wooden wagons, material houses to live in. So that the materialism of God lived on not in preachers; but in practical working people.

“Christ”ian preachers and holy men however, soon turned radically against the materialism of God. Many said early on that especially, Jesus Christ, even though he was physically executed and thus did not get all the material rewards one would think, was still a very good person; indeed, son of God. While – in a dramatic, complete turn-around from what God had continually said in the Old Testament – Christianity (especially its ascetic priests and proto-Gnostics) now suggested that physical “prosperity” and “riches” were not necessary any more, or even good; that it might even be good to be “poor,” and to experience “suffering,” even to be crucified to death on the “cross.” And Christianity tried to use the Old Testament to support it, or prove that the Old Testament supported this. By using the story of Job, the suffering servant. As an example of that; and of the “test of faith.” Never mind that a) Job was usually materially prosperous, in the beginning and in the end. Never mind that b) it was not God, but Satan himself, that proposed the test of faith, in Job 1.

The new “Christ”ianity, by various mechanisms, turned the old material promises of God on their head. Formerly it had been good and godly to be materially rich; now all that was precisely, reversed. It was good to be poor and physically suffering. And yet however, to be sure, the new priestly emphasis on the wonderfulness of material pain and poverty and death, might now be looked at more closely. All that would now seem rather obviously, to many of us, to be a very, very dramatic change or shift from – even a sly, and systematic, opposition to – what God had actually said. To the material success he had promised in the Old Testament; and even to some extent, in the New. It would seem to many in fact, that no religion or priesthood, could really achieve such a complete, total reversal of its own earlier message … without being accused of heresy, apostasy; of having actually, in spite of all holy assurances to the contrary, turning its back on, denying, going against, disobeying, God. It would be hard to look at all this, without suggesting that our very spiritual Christian priests especially, were following a false idea of Christ; and are therefore deserving not of reward, but of horrible punishment in the End, therefore.

Indeed, many Jews said that Christianity was heresy; was abandoning God. Many Jews – who after all, knew the Old Testament God better than most Greeks – simply said that the religion of Jesus – which seemed to allow and even encourage poverty and death – was so dramatically different from what God had said earlier … that Jesus or his ascetic followers, would have to be judged to be simply, bad, evil heretics; that Jesus and/or his followers, had so completely turned around the promises, words, of God, that Christianity was really in effect, against God. That Jesus Christ was simply the foretold anti- or false Christ. And indeed, that is why the Jews, had Jesus arrested and executed, simply; as a heretic. As a false Christ. For going against God.

Real holy men, according to God, remember, were supposed to guide us to material prosperity and victories; not to poverty, and death and suffering. While any priest or prophet or “Christ” who said or did anything different than that – be he Jesus himself – should be simply declared to just going against God. Uttering false words in God’s name. Pretending to be from God … but actually being from the Devil himself.

And indeed, if we accept God’s material standard of performance, as God’s definitive test for a good follower … does this mean that we ourselves must finally reject Jesus himself, as false? This is an interesting and important question. Finally we will suggest here, that to be sure, Jesus was said to have often been producing real material wonders. And though we will say here later, that these could not have been to be sure, “miracles,” per se, still, much of New Testament theology can be shown to produce, over the long-term, if not supernatural “miracles,” then at least material “wonders,” prosperity. If Jesus was said to have healed the blind, then perhaps after all, he did it. (Perhaps with medicine; a “paste” of earth. In a natural way. A way confirm-able today, with science?)

We might therefore suggest that words attributed to Jesus himself, were crafted in such a way that he could still be interpreted (in one of two major readings), as being still, technically, largely obedient to the materialistic God. He is still pictured working wonders, miracles, that in at least one consistent reading, seem adamantly physical. To be sure, those wonders were often presented in a way that lead many to see them as supernatural miracles; that modern science cannot support. And yet however, we and many other scholars of religion, have long shown that all the apparently supernatural “wonders” of the Bible, and New Testament, can be seen to have been … natural wonders, that simple readers misread. If Moses got water out of a rock … then after all, often old men drilled holes and channels in rocks, to get to water. Such tunnels were historically created, in and around Jerusalem itself. Father as we drill wells through rock, today. If Moses crossed the Red Sea, then after all, a “wind” blew it back enough to make that possible; while we can today confirm that at times, not only low tides, but also high tides and winds – like the Italian “Aqua Alta” – can make the water get low, or high. Varying the water by five or fifteen feet in fact (in high water floods in 20th century Venice, for example).

Indeed, the New Testament consistently, we will find, systematically, deliberately, made itself open to two different readings. One, that stressed spiritual things; but another, that allowed that even New Testament Christianity, is supposed to produce real, material, physical results. As judged by science. While finally at last, we can now produce a material account of Christianity, even its “miracles,” that shows material wonders, in a way indeed at last, consistent with the science of God.

Indeed, we can say that … the New Testament itself – rightly read and translated – never promised supernatural “miracles” at all, per se; but only natural wonders. The Bible never mentioned the world “supernatural” except once, in Paul; and there Paul, we will add, used the word only to condemn it; to note that the people in the wilderness had a “supernatural” spirit of Christ, and yet many still foundered, still failed; still became heretics, and were killed by God in the wilderness (q.v. in Paul).

Therefore, finally, we can accept the scientific materialism of God; and even reconcile the New Testament to it. Thus we can combine science and religion at last – word and world, heaven and earth, spirit and flesh. In a way totally consistent with the Bible itself. With God, himself.

Though to be sure, we must turn our backs on – or correct and “refine” – those many, many old, “faith”ful, “spirit”ual preachers.

. . .

Finally, our position will probably be more or less, that a) priests henceforth, must be able to show at least moderate material results; guiding people to health and prosperity, for example. Which we will show how to do here. However b) to be sure, science we will find, does not support claims by priests, that they can work huge, supernatural miracles, just by faith and a prayer. Therefore, c) if any priest insists that the Bible and Jesus, promised real supernatural miracles – like bread out of thin air – then we will hold him to the strictest standards, as outlined in the Bible itself: he himself should be required to produce such miracles, on demand, and in front of reliable witnesses, and as verifiable by science. Just like Daniel, Elijah, and others. He must either do this … or be firmly denounced on the spot, as a false priest. And very firmly punished; and denounced. (Though we might of course, stop short of the execution of him, that we see in Elijah?).

Priests though, have a second option, note. If a priest openly and publicly, does not interpret the Bible as promising supernatural things, but only natural ones … and if he thus renounces “miracles” per se, by name, repeatedly and publicly, then finally he or she should not have to such miracles (since he no longer promises them); but should only have to produce a normal material prosperity, for people. To prove that his vision of God is true to what he can actually, provably produce. And in fact, we can show preachers how to get at least moderate results, from the new science of God.

With the theology and practice they have had until this moment, be sure few any priests and ministers from Paul’s time to our own, would pass even this “test” of the Lord: produce real, demonstrable material “prosperity” for all those who follow them. Yet we will be finding here, that there is no doubt finally; this is the minimum, test, the standard, that the Bible itself told us we must now apply to all priests and prophets. Far from telling us to honor our holy men – or their ideas, statements, gospels about God – with the total “faith” (or “indomitable credulity” someone called it; in The Bible in Modern Culture; by Harrisville and Sundberg, 2nd ed, 2002) that preachers have demanded of us for centuries, actually, God himself constantly told us to demand not so much just “spiritual” things, but real material, physical “proofs,” “signs,” “deeds,” and as we will see, “works,” from our holy men. Before we agree that they might be from God. (While even then, some false prophets can work signs. So that finally, to be sure, passing this test, though absolutely necessary for all priests, is not sufficient to finally confirm them as good).

Or, as we “refine” this doctrine here: 1) all ministers must be able to demonstrate at least real material gains in their flocks, both short- and long-term. 2) Or if a preacher promises miracles, or stands behind promises of them, then they must produce them – miracles – here and now, before trained scientific witnesses.

No doubt we will find, that few if any preachers can really produce “miracles” reliably (as we will find in our writings on miracles); thus those many millions of preachers who promised them, must be found largely false. To be sure however, we will show that real preachers can produce a certain amount of more normal, natural “prosperity.” Teaching people to “love” one another, for example, helps them to get along together on the assembly line. To produce more products. Or to work together more cooperatively. So that ultimately, teaching people to “love one another as themselves,” actually does produce some material results, prosperity. Though to be sure, such results are not supernatural miracles; bread is not appearing out of thin air.

So that finally, we will find, we cannot support priests who promise “miracles”; but we can support some priests here, who hold to promises by God, of at least a more natural “prosperity.” And indeed, many priests might be confirmed in this theology. Though to be sure, eighty generations of previous, miracle-promising priests … must now be declared to have been the “deceived” false Christians that the Bible once warned about; “false” priests following a false idea of Christ; a false Christ.

As we will see. In our writings about the falsity of promises of “miracles.” And our writings on the End, the Destruction of Heaven. The moment we discover that most earlier priests were partially, false. Before we move on to the right, better idea of God and Christ. As worker of more natural wonders.

No doubt, this is painful; indeed it is perhaps, literally, Apocalyptic; or heaven-shattering. And yet to be sure, this is what the Bible itself calls for.

And then from now on, no priest is even supposed to even begin, even tentatively, to regard any given statement in the Bible, or from other priests, as being truly from the Lord, or God. Unless and until we and good scientists, find that following that statement, demonstrably brings real material “prosperity,” “fruits,” “works,” “signs,” “deeds,” “proofs,” “prosperity”; even ultimately, a real “kingdom.” Not just “spiritual” “fruits,” as we will see, here, over and over.

Our priests will need some refinements, to be sure, to see and accept this basic pattern or paradigm, this basic science. But that is what we are guiding them to, here and now; as we outline this science, here and now. In a way to guide priests; in a way that should be at last acceptable to them. Because it is outlined in a way totally consistent, with every single part of the Bible, itself.

Faith Alone Vs. Works

Here we will not spend much time on the infamous – and infinitely divisive – “faith vs. works” debate; which began with Paul, c. 55 BC, and came to a head after 1515 AD; eventually helping to split Christianity in half.

We can simply skirt this debate: our own efforts here, the science of God, does not depend on one side or the other of this particular debate. Our position here, on that subject, being that we might be a) we might be saved by faith in God alone, and not works; or b) by faith and works, or indeed, c) even just by works. But in any case, even if we are saved by faith in God alone, still, we must be sure we have the right idea of God and Christ; and not a false idea of them. But the problem is this: God warns us constantly that there are many false religious leaders out there; so how do we know that we are following the right preacher or prophet, and the right idea of God? How do we know which idea of God to have any faith in? Finally, God tells us the only way even begin do that, is, as a first step, observe the works of preachers. So see if they are getting all the physical wonders promised. If they are, then we might tentatively suspect they might be good (with come exceptions even here). If they are not, they can be rejected right away. And therefore, we should not follow them faithfully at all. But follow a more fruitful leader more faithfully.

In part, Protestantism seemed to suggest that we can be considered “good” by God, even if we have no significant “works” or deeds at all. Or even perhaps, no material proofs or results at all, either? If we only had “faith” in our “heart,” then that was thought to be enough to be proven good.

Briefly, we suggest here that to be sure, even if we could be saved just by faith in God, even such faith “alone,” still a) we cannot know that what we have faith in, is really God, and not a “false spirit.” Unless or until, we see it produces real, short- and long-term material results. If we have “faith” in someone who does not show signs, we might be following just be a chimera; or in biblical language, an “illusion,” “delusion,” “empty consolation,” “enchantment”; a pleasant but false mental, spiritual sensation. Therefore, we must ask for concrete proofs, real fruits. At least long term. No doubt, a mathematician for example, might not have any obvious material fruits; but long term and in the broader picture, it is easy to point to the fruits of math, in engineering and so forth.

To be sure, b) the Bible warned that some false spirits, false leaders, can produce short-term fruits; indeed a false Christ works great signs and wonders, we are told. So that we might say that if total lack of works would indicate a problem with someone, still in itself, to be sure, short-term profits are not always entirely enough to prove someone fully good. Because indeed, some false prophets can produce short-term wonders. But in this case, we merely need to consider … longer-term results. As in the case of the mathematician, above. Who to a superficial examination, is only pushing a pencil around to come up with mental sensations; but who of course, is ultimately (with luck) found to be productive, fruitful, though the agency of the others he talks to; engineers. To be sure however, we must always be careful about such persons; there is always the possibility that their thoughts, ideas, in spite of their own pronouncements, are not turning out to be fruitful, not only in the short-term, but even in the larger picture. A bad mathematician for example, might claim that his math, like good math, would find fruitful application. But he would be wrong or deceived.

Like the mathematician, what about other mental workers, like the preacher? To be sure, many read St. Paul in particular, as telling us that preachers and holy men for example, no longer need to get immediate material results. Or perhaps even, as not being required to get “works” in one sense, at all. Instead, many read Paul as telling us that a minister needs to obtain “fruits of the spirit,” and “faith.” Yet to be sure, while especially Paul began to move in a direction that could be taken to imply that producing “faith” was all a preacher should do – Paul in fact stressing “faith” hundreds of times, in very long discussions – finally even Paul, the main voice behind faith, could not move totally or unequivocally into this position. Paul could not progress into telling us that real religion did not depend on “works,” but only “faith.” Or that producing faith was the only “work” we are required to do. For many reasons that we will review at length, in a separate work. But briefly, a) again, after all, just producing faith in people is not enough because … often they have faith in false things. Thus faith is not even always good. And the mere production of faith is not enough. (As we see in our works on Over-Spirituality, and Faith). While then too, b) the rest of the Bible insisted on material results, works. So that we can prove our faith is not in something false; a mere mental phantasm. Or in biblical language, “empty promises,” “empty words,” the “East wind,” “illusions,” false mental “spirits,” “delusions.” Many things that the Bible warned about, often.

So did even Paul himself, many ask, really stress producing just faith, a mental spirit, as much as preachers do? Is that all the “work” we need to do? Many Protestants say that c) Martin Luther claimed that “Faith alone” was all we needed in life to be good; but Catholics note that the phrase “Faith alone” never appears in the Bible … except in James, who condemns it. Even Paul himself, the great proponent of “faith,” never used the phrase “faith alone” at all. To told us that faith was all we needed in life. Because, we suggest that after all, to do that, would be too obviously to go against so many sayings formerly accredited to God himself. God indeed, warned in effect, that often our faith could be misplaced; often people believed, had faith in, false gods. Therefore, in the same way that we might not trust a scientific theory, unless or until it is proven in material experiments, or trust a mathematical equation, until it produces fruits through the agency of an engineer, likewise, we will find, we should not trust the mental or spiritual sensation of having faith, and should not have very great faith in anything … unless or until, we see it produce real material results.

Having firmly promised material things over and over; God has told us even, that we should assess religion as true or false, precisely according to whether it got real material results, in a timely way (as we will see), here, on this material earth.

In fact, remember, the Bible only used the phrase “faith alone,” once; and that was when St. James condemned it:

“What does it profit, my breathren, if a man says he has faith but has not works? Can his faith save him? If a brother or sister is ill-clad in lack of daily food, and one of you says to them, ‘Go in peace, be warmed and filled,’ without giving them the things needed for the body, what does it profit? So faith by itself, if it has no works, is dead…. You see that man is justified by works and not by faith alone.… Faith apart from works is dead” (James 2.14, 24, 26).

“Faith apart from works is dead.” What more should we say here? The phrase “faith alone” is used by the Bible only once – and it is used there, to firmly condemn the concept. Perhaps we might say this: d) faith in God will get you a very long way, and perhaps it is even enough as some have said; but how can you ever know, that what you have faith in … is actually God? And not just your (or a bad preacher’s) false idea of God? Thus, even if faith in “God” would save you, still, just having faith, feeling faith, is not enough; you have to find out if what you are having faith in, is really God, or not. And that in turn can only be done, the Bible said, by observing material fruits.

To be sure, e) many people took statements from Paul, especially, to say the opposite of James. So that there is a contradiction in the holy texts; it might seem that we must accept either Paul, or James, but not both. Many people were eager, some say, to cast the books of James out of the Bible in fact. (Martin Luther was alleged to have James “a right straw-y epistle,” as perhaps destined for the straw fire; almost destined for the flames. But while Protestants in fact, kicked out many books that were in the Catholic Bible, finally they left St. James in). Finally indeed, we will show, Paul could not have firmly turned his back on the importance of “works,” without going firmly against James … and God. While in any case, we might add, f) finally Paul began to admit that even he himself might simply have made mistakes; Paul admitting that he himself was “not yet … perfect,” even as he was in the act of writing his own half of the New Testament.

Therefore, we have been showing here, over and over, that by far most of the Bible, told us that real prophets and holy men, must in effect not produce just “faith”; but should demonstrate real material results. To prove that their faith is in the right idea of God; in something real. Over and over again, we have seen here that the vast majority of the Bible – aside from most of Paul (but even there, not all even of Paul) – constantly told us, in hundreds of references, that we must not follow anyone in religion, follow no prophet, unless he shows real material “works.” We don’t have time here, to finally conclude the hideously long debate between Protestantism and Catholicism, on whether salvation is by “faith alone” vs. “works”; except to say in passing, that g) Paul’s remarks on works might have been directed at the specific religious ritual “work” of literal circumcision of the penis (his major subject); which Jews required. And perhaps he was right; that particular work was unnecessary, to be proven good. But indeed, it seems that if Paul condemned the necessity of “works” therefore, he was speaking mostly – or even solely; specifically, only – about the specific “work” or act, of literal circumcision. (Which “mutilates” the “flesh” and so forth). Which perhaps, some say, might indeed be a relatively minor and not terribly useful operation.

Especially though, what we suggest in passing here, in this endless and very problematic (and fruitless?) discussion, is that even if we might be “saved” in some sense, just by being faithful to God in our mind or spirit or “heart,” a reader should look up problems with deceived “hearts” and false spirits in the Bible though; in effect, our faith and spirit and heart can be deceived. We can feel total “faith” … and yet however, be faithfully following .. the wrong idea of Christ.

And so, when the people ask, when can we tell whether a prophet is really from God? Then we should say to them, if the things the prophet actually come to pass, in real events in the real world, then and only then, can we know that prophet really spoke for God. If the things that the prophet or holy man said, do “not come to pass” in the real world, then we should not follow or have faith in that prophet; the prophet was not really from God at all; the prophet spoke presumptuously (as noted in Deuteronomy). There are many false prophets in the world; you shall know them by their real, material fruits.

Just having a sensation of “faith” or “hope” in our minds or spirits, is often very pleasant in itself. But that sensation can be Satanically deceiving. Because we might be having faith or hope in something that will fail us; something that is wrong. The mental sensation of Hope and faith are not enough; we may be merely lost in false hopes, illusions and delusions; as the Bible warned; Hope is dope.

Just feeling good in our mind or spirit, is not enough; we must try to know whether the faith and hope that we feel, is for something that is real, or just a false image, a delusion. Or a false idea of Christ. We need to know we are following, hoping in, the right idea of God … or not. The Bible warned here, that h) just feeling faith and hope or something in our “heart” was not enough; because the “heart” is often deceived. There are many false sensations, false spirits, that mislead even our hearts. So that we must have a method, to find out whether the thing we want to believe and “have faith in,” is really the right thing. And how do we know that the prophet and his words that we want to follow faithfully, is really from God? Only by looking to see if his words predict real works in the real world, said God (in Deuteronomy, etc.).

In attacking “works,” therefore, perhaps Paul is best considered to have been mainly (and even solely) attacking one specific “work”: the act of literal circumcision. Attacking the idea that Gentiles needed to have a literal circumcision operation on their penis, to be considered good, or “righteous.” It is in regard only to that specific work, perhaps, that God “reckons righteousness apart from works” (Rom. 4.6; Eph. 2.9; John 6.28; Rom. 11.6). Or better, or best answer here might be that even if faith in “God” is enough, still, we can never be sure that what we have faith in really is God … without, as the Bible insisted, lots of evidence. So that all those who are simply, faithfully following preachers … are being mislead, by false prophets, bad shepherds.

But what finally, h) about the other types of “works”? As for, saying, the necessity of doing real physical work? At times, the very, very spiritual Paul at times tired to suggest that mere mental or spiritual work of priests, was enough (1 Thess. 1.3; Php. 1.6). Yet finally even Paul more or less acknowledged, with the rest of the Bible (and the Ten Commandments), that God commanded us to do “work.”

Finally, indeed, if Paul’s stress on “faith” is not to be found to have been simply wrong, or against God, we need a way to reconcile or harmonize Paul’s attack on “works” of the “flesh” and so forth, with God himself; with the Old Testament (and parts of the New) and its constant commands to get material fruits. One way to do this, to redeem Paul, might be to suggest that his attack could be understood to be limited. Limited to say, an attack just on the necessity of the specific work of literal circumcision. Otherwise, any great emphasis on “faith,” not “works,” seems to go against most of the rest of the Bible. Where God tells us “by their fruits you shall know them.” And where it is clear, from countless examples, that by “fruits” God often meant, for example, literal fruit; bigger crops of grapes of the “vine” and so forth.

For that matter, k) even if he is understood to merely attack just the physical “work” of circumcision, Paul seems to go dramatically against God; God’s earlier command to literally circumcise the penis. Thus any attack on works, goes to the point that finally, Paul must all but directly attack the Torah or God’s “law”; and “Moses,” and the old “covenant”; and declare a “new covenant.” Declaring the old sayings of God null and void; or “fulfilled,” and therefore, discharged. This attack on the law of the Old Testament and on God, was kept “veiled” in Paul, by obscurantistic language in Bible translations. It was said that Paul found fault with “the Jews”; or with the “law of Moses.” It was never clearly noted in church, that much of the law of “the Jews,” and “of Moses,” is also found in the Old Testament; where it was announced after all to all of us, as the laws, commandments, of God.

Unfortunately, that is is what, where any consistent attack on the importance of “works” and “law” must end up: these attacks end up attacking the God of the Old Testament. Who clearly called for real material “works,” “fruits.”

Therefore, what is the answer here? Finally, we might at last consider seriously Paul’s own warning about himself; that he himself was not entirely good, not yet “perfect,” even as he was in the act of writing his half of the New Testament. We will see, that even Jesus himself, told us to beware of false prophets and false apostles – and confirmed that it was only “by their fruits you shall know them.” While by “fruits,” we will have begun showing here, the Bible normally, in its predominant theology, meant real material physical fruit, material results; not even so much just “fruits of the spirit.”

Real Christianity, we will be seeing here, proves itself to be real, to be the real theology from God … by getting real, material, physical results, we will be showing, here and now. And as we will soon see, that emphasis was on real, material, physical works. Not even so much just mental or “spiritual” results – like “faith,” and “hope.” Even the often rather spiritual Jesus Christ, was finally pictured as proven to be son of God, only by many material miracles or wonders. While Jesus himself, again, warned that anyone who did not show real material fruits, is almost certainly, a “false prophet”; by their fruits, you shall know them. Because indeed, we will have confirmed here, mere “faith” is not enough; if you have faith in a devil, a false idea of God.

Can St. Paul himself, pass this test of God? It may be, to be sure, that Paul himself would simply fail this test. But if so, then after all, the Bible warned that even our greatest holy men and angels and “apostles,” even “all” those in heaven itself, were often bad (Isa. 34, Rev. 9-13, etc.); they and their most “spirit”- inspired doctrines. Indeed, we will therefore be finding here, the longstanding emphasis on “faith,” which has long been central to much of Christianity, must now be found to have been contrary to the dominant theology of God. To have been therefore, substantially, “false.” To have been in fact, part of the very “false” idea of God and Christ, the “False Christ,” that the Bible itself foretold, and warned about.

[This is a section about the Old Testament; but briefly, parenthetically, what about though, those who are weak, and cannot produce many good material things? There is the famous example in the New Testament, of the poor old woman who only had a penny or so to contribute to the church; should the old woman who has only a penny to give, be condemned as not being “fruit”ful? Jesus himself seemed to say that she was to be admired; because although she did not give much, she gave everything that she had. (While her heart was filled with devotion etc.?). From such an example, countless sermons have assured us that a relative standard of achievement, fruits, might apply. Those who give all they have, might be adjudged good enough, even if what they contribute is small. Though to be sure, there are problems with these examples. Ultimately, some might continue to suspect that such poor persons were somehow, not really quite fully “good” after all. Their a) obvious material fruits were not much; and so they would fail there. Unless b) it turns out that they had some unseen material gains, in some unexpected, long-term sphere. So for example, the poor old lady with only a penny to give … might have raised prosperous sons, say.

There are many possible solutions here, that would still hold the widow with the penny, to a tradition of works. We might find in other parts of the Bible, that c) everyone should mentally devote “all” that they have or do, to the good; and use their “talents” wisely, or for the good. While indeed, this is the usual explanation in church: the widow did not give much, but she gave all she had.

But then too, d) it seems likely that many who contribute little, are in many cases not working as hard as they might. And in fact, those who did not aspire to, attempt to achieve, greater works, to use their “talents” to the best of their ability, to achieve great material deeds … are at times condemned in the Bible. For failing to use their talents wisely, in the most fruitful way (q.v., concordance). So that by this standard to be sure, the widow might not do so well.

Finally, God in the Old Testament (if not Jesus?), often said more in favor of those who contributed, produced more. While God speaks of giving more material things to others, as good, rather than giving less. Indeed, God himself is admired because he did big things, by Job; and God does not refuse this adulation. Perhaps therefore, beyond the old woman who gives a penny, we might reserve some e) special admiration for those persons that history or personal experience call “great”; who contributed great deeds. Deeds that saved millions of people from starving, and from disease, after all. For those who contributed larger “works” to the material prosperity and survival of mankind. The Bible itself devotes lots of time to Moses, and David, not for their small accomplishments or fruits, but from their large ones; often explicitly praising them or lauding them, precisely and exactly for the large scale of their accomplishments. For that matter, f) would millions of people still be reading about Jesus himself today, two thousand years later, if all the “works” that he had done, was to give good people a single penny, once a week? If he was never alleged to have done great works, produced signs, wonders? It is g) curious that someone now and then, should tell us to follow religious leaders who do not produce signs; while Jesus himself was said to have produced lots of them.

No doubt there are people in life without great abilities; who cannot produce much. But they should produce all they conveniently can. And if they cannot do very much at all? To be sure sometimes it is not their fault; just do the best you can.

By the way, the Bible said that at Jesus’ birth were several wise men or magicians – “Magi” – from the East; who gave Jesus “gifts.” How much did they give him? The Bible recounts many material things. But scholars by the way, suggest that elements of the very credos of Christianity came from the kind of non-Jewish people that the New Testament Jesus himself often partially supported; “Samaritans,” “Greeks,” the “Magi”s, etc. While scholars suggest that this particular episode, of the widow, more than others in the Bible, seems to specifically derive from ascetic, eastern, Buddhist legends. Of indeed, a widow giving just two bits of money. (Classic German scholarly sources on this, are cited in English, in a somewhat controversial book: “The Original Jesus: The Buddhist Sources of Christanity,” by Lemar R. Gruber and Holger Kersten, Element Press, Shaftesbury, Dorset, Rockport, Massachusetts, 1995; pp. 104-105. That book citing to be sure however, very serious sources like Hans Hass’, “’Das Scherflein der Witwe’ und seine Entsprechung im Tripitaks,” Leipzig, 1922; Van den Bergh Eysinga’s “Indische Einflusse auf evangelische Erzahlunngen,” Gottingen, 1904; and especially R. Seydel’s two works, “Das Evagelium von Jesu in seinen Verhaltnissen zu Buddha-Sage und Buddha-Lehre,” Leipzig, 1882; and “Die Buddh-Legende und das Leben Jesus nach den Evangelien. Emeute Prufung ihres gegenseitigen Verhaltnisses, Leipzig, 1884).]

In its extreme relativism, its rather Eastern ascetic aspects, this episode does in fact seem like one of the passages most alien, to the materialism of most of Bible; and the most likely to have derived from earlier, Eastern ascetic, monkish sources.

Perhaps we might have pity on, and charity for, those who do not contribute many works; or who even depend completely on others. Still to be sure, there is a native sense that such persons are not fully “good.” Perhaps through no fault of their own, however. Still? History records persons of great accomplishments, fruits. And normally the Bible speaks of a similar status, as being better, after all.

Some may think of Paul, attempting to set up a widows’ fund, as stressing that someone like a widow who does little work, can be good, simply from a) giving what they could. Or even b) by just say, having faith. But finally we will show next, even Paul – who was the most frequent spokesman for faith in the Bible by far – knew the value of even money; material rewards; and the value of the “work” that plays a role in getting rewards. Finally we will show, even Paul often mentioned – even “boasted” like a “fool” as he says – about this own works. In the end, even Paul, the great champion of Faith, even curtly said this:

“If any one will not work, let him not eat” (2 Thess. 3.10).

“Test what sort of work each one has done” (1 Cor. 3.13).

“Let each one test his own work” (Gal. 6.4).

God “Will render to every man according to his works” (Rom. 2.6).


Today to be sure, our priests are extremely “spiritual.” And they regard material “works” as secondary. They ignore the fact that other, more practical people, the people with regular jobs, and technology, produce far, far more works than they do. In fact, many priests are essentially hierarchial dualists. They believe the universe is split up into two things: matter, and spirit. And that the “world” of matter is a gross illusion; whereas only the spirit is real. Therefore, such priests do not care much about material prosperity or even survival; but only about the spirit. And if the Bible, God, seemed on the contrary, to be very concerned with this material earth? Then our priests simply a) ignore that part of God. Or they b) suggest that all those apparent concerns, were must metaphors for spiritual things; like Paul’s “fruits of the spirit.”

Spirituality is today widely accepted by many preachers, as the highest god, the highest good. But of course, we find the Bible was very physical; and a Science of God is concentrated mainly on material, physical things. So that we will be finding here that after all, our very, very spiritual priests – our “over-spiritual” priests we will call them – finally, made many, many, very, very serious – indeed, literally fatal – intellectual and biblical mistakes. First of all we will have in effect noted here, that the Bible constantly spoke in terms of physical, material things, and their importance, in a way that does not seem metaphorical at all; so that spiritual priests ignored and disobeyed and “twist”ed, huge sections of the Bible itself. But then too we will also add, c) there are problems even with spirituality, taken just in itself: particularly, the problem is, false spirits. The problem is that God often warned that among many other bad and “false” things that deceive people, there are many, many spirits that are false. So that just blindly, faithfully follow “spirit”s, being “spiritual,” has its own special pitfalls. Among other things d) St. James began to note that a religion that gives us only kind words and spirits – but not material things like food – leaves us starving to death.

Finally too, we will see, e) there is no way to know if the spirit you are following is the right one, unless you compare what your spirit seems to tell you, to what seems to work, what is “fruitful,” in the material sphere.

So that even the spiritualist needs finally, the Science of God.

Though we don’t have space in this single volume, to produce a definitive refutation of spirituality, one of the chapters of one of our future books on a very relevant spiritual topic – Faith – is reproduced here, next. As an addendum or final chapter 6 to the present volume. The Bible’s alleged attachment to the spiritual quality of Faith of course, is the main objection to a material science of God. But next we will begin to show that, like many other spiritual things, “faith” has some literally fatal flaws in it.

/Final Addendum to Vol. 3 Pt. 1: Reproduce the Vol. 4 Science of Jesus chapter against Faith, as an addendum or final chapter here. If both volumes not published together , or as Vol. 3 Pt. 1 & 2/

Final Statement:

The High Status of Preachers

And Faith; Their Vanity and Pride

Far from assuring us that our holy men were totally reliable, far from telling us to follow our preachers with total faith, actually, God warned about huge sins in our holiest men, including preachers. And suddenly, shockingly, we have begun to locate some of those sins, even here and now. First, 1) our preachers always presented themselves proudly, in an often self-serving way, as the reliable voicepieces of God. But that was not right, that was a sin: the Bible itself warned that our holy men – including preachers – often sinned and erred. Then our preachers committed another, second major sin, as part of a massive doctrinal error: 2) they insisted that the Bible wanted us to follow a) preachers, or b) their views about God, their Christ, with total “faith.” But that also was in part, a self-serving “error”; actually, God warned us constantly that there were always sins in preachers and the holy men they followed; and therefore, God did not want us to be just blindly, faithfully following them at all. Instead, God wanted us to be continually, scientifically “test”ing them, to see where their claimed remarks from God were fruitful … and where they were not. These two errors in turn, furthermore, begin to suggest a core, moral error or sin in our preachers: among countless other sins in priests and prophets, the root sin in preachers and prophets, we suggest, is 3) the sin of … Pride and Vanity. (As suggested say, in Zech. 13.5; and in Jesus’ refusal to verify that his apostles would stand next to him in the kingdom; Jesus telling us that those who want to be “first” with Christ, should be humble, even “last”).

Preachers appear to be very, very humble – at first. Preachers though, if you look more closely, actually have a false, “hypocrit”ical humility. Preachers after all, remember, are presenting themselves and their words, as the very voice of God himself. While surely, there is nothing less modest than that. What indeed, could be less modest, than presenting yourself as the voice of God himself? It is hard to imagine anything more grandiose, more Proud, than that. Actually, there is actually a truly massive vanity and pride, underneath their superficial appearance of modesty; under their false humility. Preachers to be sure have advanced literally thousands of sophistical arguments, sermons, to defend their exaggerated claims over the centuries; no doubt they have several to try to prove they are really humble, here. While to be sure, they appear very humble, hesitant, at times. Still, deep down it seems they love to stand in front of congregations to pray publicly; they like the attention and status; the same as their predecessors, the Pharisees. They appear to be humble; they may think they are humble before the Lord himself; but before everyone else, they are even …not just fatherly, but more exactly often, “father”ly. Or in other words, patronizing.

Preachers often like to present themselves as humble; as “last” on this earth, this “world.” And indeed most of them don’t make a lot of money. Still, they have immense prestige. While a Pope for example, or a world-famous televangelist like Pat Robertson, even has some significant, real Power (and money; it is said that Pat Robertson has a fund, from contributions and investments, worth over a billion dollars). Therefore, it is not even true that preachers – by which we mean, all priests and ministers and religious leaders – are “last” in this world. The “bishop” after all, is a powerful and prestigious piece on the chessboard, and in life.

It is easy to see why our religious leaders therefore, might want to hold on to their positions; not just to help others, as they say. But also to maintain their high status in the community; to retain their power and prestige. Or to advance their ideology, their agendas; which to be sure, they think help others, than themselves. It is easy to see therefore, why preachers would not want the more self-critical parts of the Bible to be known; the parts where God warned about holy men and preachers. The parts that warned against faith in holy men. In part, preachers would want to “whitewash” and “twist” these passages; to maintain their own power, prestige, and Pride. Or to maintain the power of the ideas they support. The prestige of their special virtues: spirituality, and so forth.

We are seeing here though, that actually, what our priests told us in church, and what God really said in the Bible, were significantly different things. Against his priests, God himself constantly warned that even our holiest men and angels in heaven itself, and their holiest doctrines and sayings about the “lord.” So that finally the Bible warned about “faith”; and told us to continually test them all carefully, with science. To find out which of their sayings were good, and which were not. According to whether they got real material results, or no. So that our priests should have been learning critical Science; instead of flattering themselves continually; and strutting around in showy robes.

Eventually, what destroyed all our preachers, the tradition, was the massive Pride and Vanity. Which preachers never really saw; because it was disguised underneath a superficial humility. The preacher thinks he is “humble”; humble before God. Even humble before other men. But here’s the catch: if he is humble before God, he is not really so humble before other men; he indeed deep down, secretly, thinks he knows something better than they do. The preacher after all, thinks that he himself is the special agent of God himself. And like Paul, he secretly things that even his apparent religious “foolish”ness, is really “wisdom.” So that they think of themselves as wise. Even though the Bible warned them: “be not wise in your own eyes.”

Today, we think of Vanity and Pride as minor sins. Yet 4) finally, it was this very, very deep Pride and Vanity – thinking of themselves as the reliable voice of God – is what derailed our clerics, our preachers, and traditional religion. It was because of their very great Pride and Vanity, regarding their Religion, that our preachers were not really capable of seeing the “beam”s in their own eyes; because of their fierce pride, they have been unable to truly see or “face” – or publicly “confess” – the signs of flaws, shortcomings, errors, in the holy words that they attributed to an eternal Lord. In particular, specifically, our preachers have never frankly, openly faced and confessed, the Apocalyptic problem or failure, in the heart of their tradition: that a) our Judeo-Christian religious tradition definitely told us to evaluate our religion by scientific, physical, material evidence. But b) our religious tradition promised us not just many material wonders; it c) even promised giant, huge miracles. Even “all” and “whatever we “ask.” In effect, it promised miracles whenever we ask: since we might ask for a miracle “now.” Our Christianity pictured Christ as walking on water, and making bread appear in empty baskets, out of thin air; like a stage magician, like a conjurer, making rabbits appear out of empty hats. So that the promises of our holy men were ultimately, huge; fantastic. Some would even say, pridefully exagerrated.

Because indeed, d) the problem was, the fly in the ointment was that actual experience taught many of us, that such huge, giant promises were not entirely reliable. Real life experience, told most of us that often we prayed, and yet … the promised miracles did not arrive reliably. Our most important point in our books is that when our preachers promised miracles to us, and taught us to absolutely rely on those miracles, but those miracles did not arrive regularly, and reliability, “all” and “whatever we ask”ed for, the result killed millions of people, prematurely. When you tell people to absolutely rely on something, for their “bread,” their food, their health, their entire lives, and then what you tell them does not work? When they do not pursue regular jobs, farming, the pursuit of science and practical things, to stand and wait for bread and medical care to appear out of thin air? Millions would have become incapacitated, dysfunction, and would have been lead in effect into disease, starvation, and death. To the degree they believed, and trusted, and had faith in the promises of preachers; their promises of miracles.

Rather than face this, our preachers have tried to explain any occasional lack of miracles. To explain it, e) preachers and holy men have, over the centuries, generated dozens, hundreds of sophistical sermons and apologetics arguments. In effect, for centuries they have looked into the Bible, and found dozens of special qualities that perhaps, they thought, we were lacking; like “anointing” or “righteousness” or “sanctification.” Then they thought and taught that all we needed to “fulfill” the “promises” and prophesies, was just to acquire this or that additional special quality. And yet experience then taught us that even after acquiring this or that special quality, still promises of miracles did not seem reliable. Even as priests simply longer and longer lists of what we might to next to become better, we found that even if we were good, and did what we were supposed to, and no matter how good we were – no matter what we did in fact – the promised huge, reliable miracles, did not come. We might try to walk on water … and yet this promise did not seem to work. No matter how good we were; no matter how much faith we had. Seemingly, no one at all could replicate the massive miracles that we were promised. No matter how many clerical, priestly rules we followed.

The f) lack of reliable, giant miracles in our own time, then, was a major, repeated “sign” of a catastrophic, even Apocalyptic failure in our religious tradition. But g) to this very day, preachers ignore this, or go into Denial. Or do not talk about it in public.

Or h) eventually, holy men try to generate explanations, excuses. Among dozens of other apologetic excuses, eventually, our preachers, from the time of Philo, then Jesus, then Paul, began to try out the idea that after all, maybe real material things should be left to the practical “worldly” people; and religion should just concentrate on producing not physical riches and so forth; but mental or spiritual sensations. Love, hope for, faith in, future miracles; “faith” and so forth. But finally we will be finding that even this apologetic idea – that God never really promised physical things, but only spiritual things – was not true to the Bible itself. The fact is, the Bible definitely promised material things to us over and over. Especially the Old Testament, but also to an important degree, the sayings of Jesus himself in the New Testament. And to a lesser extent, even the very, very spiritual, Platonistic Paul.

This new emphasis in Judeo-Christian religion – spirituality; including spiritual things like faith – soon took over. But how good was it? And how good were our religious leaders, the clerics who had taken us to this point? Here and elsewhere, we will find many problems with faith and spirituality; among other things, they violate the science that God so often called for.

For that matter, i) our ministers violate much of the Bible; including especially the warning from God, not to be wise in their own eyes. The apostle Paul at times “boasted” about his status, his wisdom in effect; but then called himself a “fool”; but then finally again, hinted that his foolishness was wisdom. But if he and the millions of priests that emulated him, finally thus thought himself “wise,” then finally to be sure Paul, author of half the New Testament, violated the Biblical prohibition:

“Be not wise in your own eyes” (Proverbs 3.7 RSV).

By presuming to lecture, sermonize to the rest of us every week, preachers of course, deep down, think that they are better than others. They secretly, deep down, think they are “wise” after all. But in doing so of course, our preachers violated Proverbs 3.7.

How do they continue? Preachers have thought they were getting around this command from God, the same way they got around every other command from God: by looking just at the “part”s of God they wanted to see. Looking here next, at another part of the Bible: the part that seemed to tell us that however, after all, the doctrines of God, appeared to be “foolishness” to men; but were actually wise after all:

“I will destroy the wisdom of the wise” (1 Corin. 1.19).

“The foolishness of God is wiser than men” (1 Corin. 1.25).

“Let him become a fool that he may become wise” (1 Corin. 3.18).

Ultimately though, we will be showing here that our preachers really do think of their “foolishness” as being really wisdom. And in this way, every single one of our preachers, our priests and ministers, have always given in at last to one particular sin: to a massive Pride. Specifically, to the pride of thinking themselves and their religion, “wise.” Even though the Bible warned about that, so many, many times:

“I said ‘I will be wise’; but it was far from me” (Ecc. 7.23).

“The way of a fool is right in his own eyes” (Prov. 12.15).

“How can you say you are wise” (Jer. 8.8).

“Some of those who are wise shall fall” (Dan. 11.35).

“Wise in your own conceits” (Rom. 11.25).

“There is no man among you wise enough to decide” (1 Corin. 6.5).

“Claiming to be wise, they became fools” (Rom. 1.22).

“Claiming to be wise, they become fools.” Deep down, our preachers get the conviction, the faith, to presume to sermonize to us every week, because after all they think they know more than others do; they think they are wiser than the rest of us after all. But in this way finally, our priests committed the sin, violated the command from God, not to be wise in their own eyes. So that in this way, every single man that allows himself to be presented as a preacher, as a priest or minister, lives continually … in the mire of sin; of specifically vanity and pride. Thus the apostle Paul himself, author of half the New Testament, committed the sin of pride and vanity; thinking himself wise. But j) then far worse, next, all-too-religiously, all-too-faithfully following Paul or his half of the New Testament, came the whole of the entire Christian priesthood; every single man woman and child. Who followed the Bible religiously – including Paul’s part. The blind, following the blind.

So that finally the whole body of the many Christian priesthoods and ministers, long ago committed finally, the sin of . Vanity. And every man who calls himself a priest or minister, (since he therefore commits himself to, identifies himself as part of this tradition), commits this same dead sin today as well.

So k) how finally, do we get out of this endless mire of priestly Vanity? We need another, better form of knowledge; but one that is humble. That does not claim to speak infallibly for God. And science does that: science knows that all our ideas are fallible; and can be disproved or modified, at any time, by new discoveries and re-contextualizations.

But l) how can those who believe in the Bible, face the possibility that … the very core of their Tradition itself, was flawed, or false? That behind so much of the pretensions of preachers, were massive sins, like Vanity? Ultimately we pose this answer here: m) believers can at last find the strength to face this, on being told that after all, this was foretold, authorized, in the one document they are trained to revere: is Apocalyptic discovery, this second of awful realization, is described and authorized, in the Bible itself. By God himself. Note that the Bible itself said that one Apocalyptic “day,” God is supposed to show you, that “all” our priests and holy men sinned. While in that moment, your traditional Heaven itself of faith in miracles and spirituality, in priests and their vision of God, is supposed to collapse. But all in order for God to show us something better: the Science of God.

So let us now leave traditional preachers, and the incredible vanity of preachers, behind. To move on to something much, much better. Though humble, still. Let us move on to the Science of God.

END of Chapter 5

The Fuller Science of God

[Editorial/reader’s note: Next insert Science of Jesus chapter

against Faith as an Addendum?

Or Go Straight to Vol. 4 The Science of Jesus]

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 )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ 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 )


Connecting to %s