Letter #9 - Temporary Physical Beauty, the Renassaissance of the Woman as Queen of Civilization, and Selective Breeding

"He looked at her as a man looks at a faded flower he has gathered, with difficulty recognizing in it the beauty for which he picked” – Tolstoy (Anna Karenina)

"And you're sorry that the ephemeral beauty has faded so rapidly, so irretrievably, that it flashed so deceptively and pointlessly before your eyes” – Dostoyevsky

"I'd rather be thought of as smart, capable, strong, and compassionate than beautiful. Those things all persist long after beauty fades." – Cassandra Duffy

“Beauty is the first present nature gives to women and the first it takes away.” – George Brossin

My daughters, beautiful and strong and intelligent…

I have always stressed your intellectual development and placed emphasis on critical thinking, ethics, and dedication to self- and family advancement and self-discipline.  While physical beauty is ephemeral or temporary, the qualities that you will, or have, developed within yourself will be the pillars of the life you live, the contributions you make to society, and the example you set for your children.  The goal for families like our own, those that have emerged out of the lower economic working class, should be to advance our position and the position of our children while strengthening the economic, moral, political, intellectual and social structure of our local communities (which if undertaken by enough small unit families within enough communities can bring positive national reform).  As women, you are the leaders of society, culture, and family…while you are also the force behind building and strengthening the pillars of future generations.  This responsibility is not an easy task, especially in a society of consumerism that is morally degenerated by the mass produced images of sexism, the exploitation of physical sexuality, and false images of how a so-called real woman is depicted (usually half naked, or in a sexually degrading position, or stereotyped as over-hysterical).  In a population of working class masses divided by race, ethnicity, religion and economics….the controllers of capital have found one further element to divide working class populations in order to prevent them from collective advancement and positive reform, and this is the splintering (and eventual break down) of the family unit by pitting man against woman and father against mother.  These destroyers of culture are slick in their mass production of promoting loose morality, “free love” and violent pornography, and the infamous individual dramas that are so heavily glamorized in the flood of media entertainment (which is often subconsciously and consciously mimicked by youth and uneducated adults alike).  The boundaries of these inorganic norms and values become more damaging and destructive to family units, communities and nation with each decade.  Yet, we can’t honestly blame the complete degeneration of a society of these owners of mass capital (who poison the minds of Americans through mass production) without first taking responsibility of our own intellectual and educational conditions and developmental voids which have left ourselves and our children vulnerable to such heavily repeated and glamorized images of desensitized degradation. 

You, the women, are the solution.  Physical beauty is temporary and fades with age.  Therefore it is vital for you, as a leader and example to society, to build your confidence, self-worth, mental stamina and moral discipline to be as strong and powerful as can be possibly attained.  Never stop evolving mentally or intellectually.  There is nothing more pathetic, and damaging to society, than a woman who has been forced to rely solely on physical beauty (and sex appeal), who is left empty, insecure, uneducated and lost after that exterior beauty and sex appeal has faded away.

The falsehood of fast fame based on physical beauty:

Take a look at the amount of your peers that are pursuing modeling, dancing or singing paths with irrational expectations of possible fast fame and fortune with nothing substantial to fall back on.  Pursuits in useless, short-lived areas such as these are a fool’s path that, in the vast majority of cases, results to exploitation or lost time (and money).  It is much wiser to build your intellect, devise your long term plan, and develop self-worth and further confidence that will outlast physical beauty.  Of course, there will always be that half-wit liberal voice in the wind crying “Let them shoot for their dreams!” or “You never know until you try!”  Is it even possible to explain to a sleeping dreamer the harsh realities and challenges of the real world ahead?  Modeling is based on consumerism, as singing and dancing is.  These fields are usually only accessible at the lowest levels aimed at exploitive consumerism based on sex appeal or individual exploitation.  Do you know how much pay that a half-dressed woman who shakes her ass and chest in a music video gets paid?  What is worse is that our ignorant American youth who pursue to be exploited by modeling and the various entertainment fields have no understanding of the actual economic structure of these fields, nor do they understand the demographics of ownership.  There are so many con-artists with ulterior motives in these so-called entertainment fields, each licking their lips for the lost lower economic girl with no educational development.  So-called professional photographers will eventual work to persuade you into skimpy swimwear and soon after out of your clothing with promises of modeling fame and fortune; while the unaffiliated lower parasites of music and acting industry, who lie about their connections, promise the world while trying to rub up against and seduce women.  Intelligent and confident women do not get bamboozled in this manner.  It is better for your future and the future of your children to build yourself mentally, morally, and economically in order to stand on your own and not be vulnerable to such exploitation and empty promises of fool’s gold.  Young women with well-developed mental stamina and strong confidence are usually immune to the false lures of this crooked path.  Sadly, it is usually the young women who are led into adulthood without positive mentorship that have been left uneducated, emotionally undisciplined and intellectually deficient, and thrown into the adult world while unaware, in symbolic Little Red Riding Hood fashion, of the social ills and traps waiting.  What is worse is when a vicious cycle develops.  One of the most despicable and lowest trends of our current society can be seen with these mentally diseased mothers painting heavy make-up on the faces of young girls (as young as 2) and dressing them in modeling outfits while prancing them across a beauty contest stage.  These poor girls first lesson in life focuses on the importance of a deteriorating physical shell, and many of them will be doomed to emotional insecurity.  My daughters, the futures are yours and the decisions of the future are yours.

The male suitors:

Sometimes I wonder just how much women truly understand the heart, minds and souls of men and, in return, how much men understand women.  I assume the answer falls with the mind and intellectual understanding of the beholder.  I, as a father and a man, feel that I understand women to some extent.  I have studied women since I was born.  I studied my mother for many years and came to understand a particular form of strength within women that does not exist in men, especially when it comes to their children.  I have studied, and gave thanks, for the strength, discipline and wisdom of your mother.  In my early youth and early adulthood, I chased the pretty girls with their physical beauty and hollow minds, as I also had no substantial thought process or education in my head.  Without intellectual development and understanding of society or history, I myself did not understand what the most prominent and most vital qualities of a woman were.  This pre-self-education epoch in my youth provides much mental thought today in my older years as I can now see my errors in those physical beauties I pursued in romance.  The largest error was that these pursuits were solely based on physical beauty and temporary romance and were not designed for longevity, mutual interests and goals, or mental stimulation.  How many young couples have made a life-long commitment and brought children into the world based on temporary physical attraction or illusionary romance, with no other structural bonds between them, which have resulted in divorce and the disbursement and separation of the children (which hinders development and advancement)?

My beautiful daughters, the male suitors will be coming to court you with sweet words and flowers.  I have no doubts.  The moral of the story above (about your father) is to be wary of a handsome face and a dashing smile with only foolishness, immaturity, ignorance and emptiness behind it.  Without inner substance, there is nothing but plastic.  Without a passion for future development or the desire to better themself, there is only plastic.  A Ken doll is unable to properly raise children, nor can it reform a future society, nor can it provide and protect for you or your family.  Without mental and intellectual substance, the Ken doll can only look handsome.  One thing I have never been able to figure out is why women allow the condition of men to remain so base and so uncivilized in nature.  Perhaps it is because many women have lost the identity of who they really; mothers of civilization and leaders of society.  In our current culture, it is the male that pursues the female most of the time.  One element of social reform would be for women not to settle for barbaric, immature, foolish, ignorant or selfish suitors.  By rejecting these weak character traits in suitors, men would eventually reform themselves to achieve levels expected from the leaders of our society, the women that they seek to win the hearts of.

This brings up the wolf.  Men have been, and always will be, physically attracted to your beauty and your body, and many men, especially in this degenerated society, will say all the nice and romantic words that can they conjure upon their lips to have you.  I hope by the time you analyze this letter that you understand this game, can identify the wolves from the good men, and have come through your youth with a better understanding of such ridiculous social norms and values (of dating).  Once again, develop your mind and make men respect you for more than your physical body and your physical beauty.  If only you could hear the way a good majority of men speak of women in a room of only men listeners.  Disrespectful could not define it.  Perhaps this is men’s way of showing off and proving themselves to other men, but it is uncivilized at best.  Keep in mind that there are multiple levels to the wolf.  I strongly advise you to research sexual assault and rape statistics, news reports and crime trends.  Always protect yourself.  While the stranger who grabs the young women from the bus stop is real, the wolves you know and work alongside of, with sweet words and intoxicating liquors, are more numerous in number.  I pray God gives you wisdom and protects you as a woman in this Sodom and Gomorrah culture.  It can look so innocent.

A man desires a woman in two ways: 1) physical attraction and 2) her characteristics, attributes, and qualities.  As we have noted, physical beauty fades with age just as physical attraction loses magnetism.  It doesn’t mean that physical attraction evaporates altogether, only that it diminishes over time.  It is animalistic in nature.  The attraction to inner-characteristics doesn’t diminish, and the characteristics that a man is attracted to can clearly illustrate the characteristics of that man.  For example: there is an old humorous saying about “liking bad girls”.  What does this tell you about a man’s mind state?  What does it tell you about the characteristics he desires?  What does it tell you about the characteristics he is made of?  A man who like “submissive” girls?  Many men have control issues.  Do not tolerate anything less than equality in a relationship.  From the other side of the perspective, there are many men in this world, hopefully a growing number, that value intelligence, morality, humility, honesty and other positive life-long qualities.  Read the characteristics of men closely, my daughters, because suitors will mask their true characters during the early phases of courting or relationships.  You, as a woman and future mother, should want your self-worth, intelligence and character to be what attracts, and demands respect, from a suitor….instead of simple outer beauty and sexuality.  Why be one-dimensional?  Enjoy the youth and the beauty you have, but build your inner-character and mental strength for your entire life.  Mere beauty does not demand respect.

A mentally and intellectually developed, emotionally disciplined, and confident woman, one that does not concern themselves with the petty judgments of others, is not denied respect in society.  She is impossible to deny respect!  Do not tolerate foolishness from men, nor pettiness from anyone.  Do not waste time with a dead beat man without a solid work ethic, without morals, without well thought out rational plans, without desires to better himself, and without a livelihood.  To do such is the same as self-destruction.  Build yourself and set personal development goals to the highest levels and work hard within society to a position where you will never be forced to solely rely for your subsistence on a man (economically, domestically, emotionally, or elsewise).  Too many “empty” women find themselves emotional slaves to a man.  He becomes all they have, because they have nothing in themselves.  When a man breaks off relationship or betrays the relationship…the woman is often left in social or economic disarray, sadness, and depression (sometimes with children to take care of).  It is also this emotional bondage that keeps women in abusive relationships where she is disrespected, beaten and demoralized.  Look at the reports of domestic violence in today’s society.  Look at all the news reports of husbands murdering wives, wives murdering husbands, Husbands or wives murdering children (to get revenge as a jilted lover).  This trend is a sign of weak character and weak emotional discipline, not to mention serious moral disease).  It is a sickness.  I pray neither of you ever place yourself anywhere near a position of such uncivilized depravity and mental captivity.

You, the woman, should be respected, protected and honored above all else in society.  You are the temple that creates life.  Yet, the owners of capital and their mass produced inorganic popular culture (through television, music, radio and internet) has fooled our previous, and the current, generations to view women as mere meat, property, sexual objects and a weaker gender when you, the women of our nation, are the concrete pillars of society, the Queens of this planet, and the mothers of human civilization.  Look around you and see how our future mothers are willingly defiling and disrespecting their physical bodies, the temple through which life is created, with piercings, ink and depravity.  How did an entire society come to this low point?  It is upon you and your peers to break this vicious cycle of uncivilized tricknology, and teach the daughters of tomorrow through your actions in this generation.  Every man and woman should protect the righteous and learned woman; woe to the uncivilized devil that strikes one of our mothers of civilization and shameful disgrace should rain down on the man who allows this crime to occur within his awareness.

Selective Breeding:

I’m sure this is an awkward sub-title concerning the main topic of this letter, but it is an area I thought worthy of consideration.  A week ago EJ and I were working some home educational assignments on science and covered the concept of selective breeding.  Some of the examples we discussed were the Kentucky Derby and pedigree dog shows (both events worthless to society).  I explained to her the process of selective breeding by explaining that the most successful horse breeders only breed horses with the best qualities they are looking for: examples could be long legs, strong skeletal structure, or long necks.  Whatever the combination of physical traits is that make the fastest and most physically strong thoroughbreds, these breeders ensure that both male and female being bred possess those strongest qualities.  Anyone who has studied 6^th grade science should understand how dominant and recessive genes work in reproduction.

Understanding what we know about DNA, recessive and dominant genes, and human reproduction, I began to contemplate human reproduction.  When you reach the point of considering a family, hopefully long after you have developed yourself into a well-rounded intellectual with solid morals and a contributing, self-sustaining position in society, I would have to recommend to you that you consider this scientific method.  When that period in your life arrives and you consider a relationship perspective to create a family around and birth children to, you should consider the following:  1) Hereditary diseases.  If a perspective mate comes from a family with a history of heart disease, lung disease, kidney failure, or any other health defect or life shortening disease, why would you birth children with him and risk those diseases being passed to your children?  2)  Weak DNA.  You should observe weak bone and muscle structuring (injuries), poor hearing or vision, trouble with breathing, weak immunization systems (meaning always catching colds), allergies, and any other notable weaknesses in the physical longevity or the ability to work and contribute to society and provide for family.  Why wouldn’t you consider hereditary health defects?  You must ask yourself how smart it is to create children with someone whose parents and their parents before them have developed problems with their ankles by their late 30s, or who are constantly sick, or whose hearing and vision had deteriorated early in life.  These are weak strains in DNA and are defects.  I am not telling you to base your choice solely on these considerations, but you should at minimum consider it to some extent.  3)  DNA/Mental capabilities.  I would say you SHOULD base this consideration on your decision in this field.  Not including the ignorant and the uneducated, there are book smart people and there are people that are naturally imbued with intelligence (common sense, IQ, the ability for mental reflection, understanding and critical thought) that is carried in the genes.  While conversing with your potential perspective, try to gauge his natural intelligence level.  Oh, what a fun and innocent second or third date it would be to conduct separate IQ tests together (just for fun, of course).  Why would you want to create children with a man whose hereditary intellectual genes are deficient or below average?  Do you want your children to stare into space with a blank look on their face as drool drips from their bottom lip?  Like I said, you are the queens of humanity and civilization.  It is you, the mothers of the Earth, who create life and you DO have a choice on how the DNA of that life is constructed.  I do not think many men or women consider this, probably because they are so caught up in the mass produced bullshit pumping over the movie and television screens promoting silly temporary romances based on temporary physical beauty that will one day fade away…..instead of self-building, family building, community building, nation-building, and humanity-building.

 

Letter #8 - Monotheism, Judaism and Islam

It has been awhile since I wrote a letter and I have owed you my letter on the other two Abrahamic religions for some time now.  As you know, those two religions are Islam and Judaism (Judaism being the oldest of the Abrahamic religions, formed approximately 500-600 BCE with historical ‘written’ origins stretching back to Hebrew writings from approx. 2000 BCE) while Islam (600 CE) exists as the youngest of the three religions.  The religion of Christianity, being the middle creation, stands as the most different in nature and ideologies from the other two.

The similarities and positive attributes of monotheism are large in scope, and there can be no question that both Judaism and Islam, unlike Christianity, are monotheistic religions in structural ideologies.  The key positive attributes of monotheism is the undivided worship of one God, an unseen creator or creation force that encourages collective servitude, collective morality, and collective worship under one entity, unknown and unseen to humanity.  The ideology alone suggests moral structure, collective efforts, and brotherhood under one creator and as one creation.  Monotheism discourages the often experienced division which man-made religions (and greed) tend to have on humanity, whether worldwide or within man-made nation-state borders, that cause destructive conflict in the name of multiple Gods.  It should be noted here that man, in natural form, has even succeeded in dividing up monotheism and causing conflict among themselves when there was no necessity for division (other than greed or power).  These man-made divisions can be seen in all three Abrahamic religions to some extent, but a main example of this division in Monotheism is the Sunni-Shite division in Islam: a division that was originally caused over the political election of a caliph (leader) following the death of the prophet Muhammad in 632 CE.  The split was based between Muslims holding the view that the next leader should be a follower of the traditions of Muhammad’s teachings and those holding the view that the next leader should be a direct blood relative/descendant of the prophet Muhammad.

Many modern Christians have been so heavily indoctrinated to avoid even learning (a basic understanding) about other religions, especially Islam, that the average American Christian today does not even understand that the word “Allah” is actually the word “God” in the Arabic language instead of some vastly different alien God possessing different attributes that oppose the God described in the Torah and New Testament.  The Quran actually teaches about the same God and the same prophets that are written about in the Torah, Old Testament, and the Quran even teaches the same accounts of Jesus (only as a prophet), yet over the last decade we have seen highly covered media events of Christian Americans burning, defecating on, and immorally disrespecting this book, likely out of ignorance during a decade where national sentiment was inorganically shaped through media towards Islam-phobia in conjunction with foreign government regime disposal, military occupation, and replacement puppet regime building in Iraq and Afghanistan.  To burn, befoul or defecate on a book that contains the same accounts of Old Testament bible prophets that are held sacred by both Christians and Jews, what does that say about a Christian’s reverence for Christianity or any other religious moral structure of a human being who behaves in such a foul manner?

Looking deeper into Torah and Quran scriptures we find that the similarities between Islam and Judaism stretch beyond basic monotheism. The books both share accounts of Abraham, Isaac, Ishmael, Moses, Noah, Jacob, Esau, Lot, and the Hebrew Tribes.  The accounts are basically the same in content, only different in format as the Old Testament is a chronological history while the Quran uses these accounts with repeated moral lessons.  A major difference centers on the status of Jesus, whom Muslims consider a prophet and the Jews consider neither prophet nor God (as Christians believe Jesus was either God in human form or God’s son or a manifestation of God – are all of the above).  Since the time of Jesus was after the creation of the Torah, he is not mentioned in the Torah nor the later Old Testament (although Christians will certainly attempt to associate vague prophetic passages to prove the divinity of Jesus); while Jesus is heavily quoted and taught about in the Quran almost 600 years after his alleged crucifixion.  Again, the main difference in these two scriptural formats are that the Old Testament Torah (and afterwards) is a chronological history of the Hebrew people and the establishment of the Kingdom of Judah, while the Quran is a collection of surahs that, using the accounts of the Old Testament prophets, repeatedly teaches various lessons of monotheism, the encouragement of zakat (providing for the poor), the prohibition of polytheism, the admonition of excess pride and excessive religion, and many other moral lessons.  As your historical study will show you, the Quran collection was written over different periods of war and peace on the Arabic peninsula, and this is the reason why you will find teachings that contain passages on violent fighting in the name of God and others that teach living in peace with Christians and Jews.  Sadly, those who slander Islam concentrate on the war-time surahs in order to attack Islam while at the same time Islamic (political) extremists often use the same passages to justify violence against foreign occupation and, in worse cases, against civilian populations.

Differences and Discrepancies

The brief overview of the two monotheistic religions of Judaism and Islam would seem to show two religions that could easily be the same religion, so what is the difference and why does such animosity exist between the two?  The answer is simple: Judaism is a monotheistic religion based on an ethnic monopoly on monotheism and based on the covenant between the Hebrew-Jewish people, referred to as the chosen people of God, and God.  There is an ethnic barrier around Judaism, as Judaism is about a specific ethnic group (spread throughout the Earth) and the ideological theology of that religion centers on that specific ethnic group.  If a person is not racially-ethnically Jewish, they are gentile.  There have been many modern gentiles that have ‘converted’ to Judaism, but they are not ethnically Jewish and never will be.  These converts, often wealthy, will never be fully accepted by the Orthodox or many of the other demographics of the ethnic religion.  A gentile born into the world may be born under any religion and eventually can convert to a different religion while a Jewish person that is born into this world is born both into an ethnic race ‘and’ a religion based on that ethnic race.  As I have told you many times, I respect all sections of humanity and have no hate for any specific section of our human family while at the same time I demand my human right to be able to analyze any form of religion, political occurrence, or history.  I tell you this once again because there are those in this world that often use political and social smear tactics, accusations of anti-Semitism, against anyone who rationally and honestly speaks on topics such as the Jewish religion or the modern nation-state of Israel (and does not paint these entities in a positive light, whether falsely or honestly).  This tactic, which stems from what the great Jewish academic Dr. Norman Finkelstein terms the Holocaust Industry, has become very tired and nearly exhausted (especially in educated circles).  The anti-Semitism smear tactic is specifically used to defend the modern nation-state of Israel in areas of irrational U.S. foreign aid funding (under massive U.S. debt), Israeli human rights violations against Palestinians, land confiscations and home demolitions, illegal settlements, and the Israeli government’s exemption from the non-proliferation treaty.  If you criticize this government, even with facts and rational arguments, the counter-result is usually smear tactic accusations of anti-Semitism.  Yet, it is important to distinguish tactful political criticism of a nation-state government from blind hateful speech against individual civilian ethnic groups.  These acts are not the same.  History is filled with many atrocities and injustices, and each group must understand and accept the responsibility for their ancestral and current historical actions, and the ramifications of those actions, in order for the collective human race to move forward in positive manner.  It is very important to analyze history to the best of our ability.  God gave each of us the ability for critical thought and the use of that ability, and when conducted justly and with clear eyes the application of critical thought is not a hateful act even though the lessons learned are often painful.

Gender discrimination is evident in both Judaism and Islam.  In Orthodox Judaism, there is the current discrimination issue of women praying out at the Western wall.  Is this a World Jewish issue or an Israeli issue?  In Islam, Woman and men are segregated during prayer.  I can understand the Islamic view of gender segregation during prayer due to the physical (animal) nature of man.  Women are beautiful, and stir physical elements within man, that are distracting (from the path of spiritual/moral discipline towards the diversion of more physical base desires) and that distraction deters from inner reflection and outward prayer to God.  This is the physical weakness of man, even though through continuous mental and spiritual discipline men can overcome the majority of base physical desires.  This is one faucet of fasting as it mentally disciplines a person to control and master one of the most basic physical needs, although excess in areas of this exercise is dangerous and unhealthy.  While I understand Islamic gender segregation during prayer, I would also support an occasional joint prayer between men and women in order to exercise and promote joint collective humanity.  In Islam, as it should be in all cultures, the modesty of a woman is a very important element.  Depending on faction or geographic region, the requirements of this modesty varies greatly: from the free choice of the proud Muslima in the U.S. to the strong Afghan women clothed in heavy black material from head to toe, and to the stylishly modest young Muslima of Saudi Arabia, with their bright colored silk head scarfs and stylish materials that cover arms and legs.  Can there ever be moderation in modesty?  As I once studied an older Afghan Muslim woman dressed in heavy wool garb carrying basket in the unbearably hot Afghan desert, I personally thought to myself that this mandated modesty was physically too much.  In similar manner, I have contemplated the loose dress of the American female, sadly noticing that our women, and especially American girls as young as puberty, run about public places barely dressed; a contemplation which consistently brings strong concerns as to the large amount of sexual assaults and rapes that take place in the United States.  The mass producers of popular culture and fashion styles call these scanty clothes: the newest style.  Is there a co-relation between immorality and these inorganic popular culture fashion styles, along with a lack of spiritual and physical discipline in American culture?  Personally, I believe female modesty of dress is very important to the overall structure of a healthy society, as females are the mothers of the Earth and their bodies are the temple through which life is created.  Women are not lesser than men in any form, and in reality the woman could be considered the most important gender within humanity.  Without the woman, the man (and humanity collectively) has no chance to develop or survive.  It can be argued and questioned whether Western culture, or more specifically the creators of inorganic popular culture, created the ‘Women’s Liberation’ movement as a required social evolution, or purposely designed to splinter the basic family structure and to hinder collective family advancement.  I would have to assume the answer lays somewhere in the middle.

A last thought concerning women in Islam is on the Quranic teachings of taking more than one wife.  This is often a point that is attacked in the West when Christian Zionists or xenophobic voices slander Islam.  Once again we must return to the historical point that several of the Quran surahs were produced during times of war, and in many of these early peninsula conflicts we find small numbers of Muslims greatly outnumbered on the battlefield against the Christian and Jewish tribes that were attempting to extinguish the new religious movement.  The taking of more than one wife in Islam was originally a community effort to provide support to the widows and orphans of fallen Muslims on the battlefield, not a pleasure-based motive as is perceived by modern Western Christian culture.  Although, what once may have been a noble effort for collective protection and provision, has certainly been tarnished over the centuries of history by various Muslim leaders and communities around the globe. Concerning this, I can only refer to the concept of cultural relativity and attempt to study the phenomenon in unbiased manner. 

An Orthodox Muslim would respond to my contemplations on Islam with the argument that it does not matter what my thoughts are, that all Islamic regulations are God’s divine law passed down through the last prophet (the gentile prophet).  We now arrive at the meat of the problem with the religion of Islam, which is overall a good religion with very positive moral elements.

Muslims believe that every word Muhammad spoke in the surahs were directly from God (Translated Allah in Arabic, the language spoken where Islam originated), a belief shared in some extent or another by members of all man-made religions.  Therefore, any attempted modifications made to cultural or social elements viewed as outdated norms and values from a 21st century Western perspective, such as excessive mandated dress codes, the taking of more than one wife, the restriction of music, and so forth are met with resistance and rejection leaving the most important moral pillars of monotheistic Islam guised as a religion wrapped in 7th century Arabic culture because:

A) Any modification would be going against the words of God divinely passed through the last prophet.

B) Any modification would challenge the assumption or belief that every word spoken by Muhammad was divinely issued by God (Allah).  Therefore, while the pillars of Islam are morally positive, we are still faced with 7th century Islamic mandated rules on women’s dress and music that discourage 21st century Americans from investigating the more important moral values of monotheism, zakat, the proper treatment of parents, the importance of modesty and humility, brotherhood and prayer (inner self-reflection), and most importantly improved collective morality.

Again, the Muslim will respond to my statements that these things are unalterable, because they were divinely revealed through the last prophet, and that I can follow the rules or burn in Jahannam (hell fire).  My daughters, I believe no organized religion to be 100% divinely revealed, and quite frankly believe that all human beings have the God-given ability to bring positive change to human society without the human conjured requirement of physical divine intervention from a creator outside of nature (a perfection created by that creator).  A creator that has created the many magnificent heavens and the marvelous earth, and all the mysteries and science in between, clearly does not error.  I hold the belief that divine positive revelation can develop naturally within man through spiritual contemplation, prayer, education and reflection.  The quantitate rules of natural science does not need to be stretched or bent in order for positive divine revelation to develop through humanity (God’s creation).

I have previously critically analyzed the discrepancies of Christianity and have pointed out the ethnic monopoly (to exclude the majority of humanity, which is gentile).  People take offense to criticism of their religion (because most humans are emotionally invested in their indoctrination, and many are quite obsessed with their individualism and emotionally need to believe in an continued existence in an afterlife), but as a father whom God has blessed with beautiful and intelligent daughters and has also blessed with the ability for critical thought and analysis, I would be a parental failure not to share my personal views based on my studies on each of these influential religions. 

The main instability that lacks verification with the Islamic ideology that the prophet Muhammad was divinely given each surah by God (Allah), and thus these laws can never be changed or adapted to modernity, centers on the New Testament, and the fact that Saul/Paul authored over half of the New Testament while the synoptic Gospel accounts of Jesus (and those gospels accounts of Jesus that were not included in church canon) have unverified authorship.  How can a rational person believe in the divinity of writings and declare them directly issued from God, when there is no evidence of the human author who spoke or wrote the words?  We already know that human beings are susceptible to lower base desires and error.  Many Christians, Muslims and Jews believe in evil spirits and demonic possessions, but do not pause to question the authorship of the Torah, Old Testament, New Testament or Gospels.  Is this rational?

At this point we have two considerations concerning the references to Jesus in The Quran, which offers the question on whether everything taught by Muhammad with divinely issued from God (Allah) from outside nature:

1) The possibility that both Saul/Paul and Muhammad were both divinely instructed by God on the accounts of the New Testament.  This would seem to be a problem because Saul’s alleged vision came from Jesus, while Muhammad’s instruction came from Gabriel and God with the teachings that Jesus was only a prophet, not God’s only son or God in human format.

2) The possibility that Muhammad was familiar with the teachings of Judaism and Christianity.  Judaism and Pauline Christianity had strong economic-political influence on the peninsula of Arabia where Islam formed.  I am unable to believe in the validity of Saul/Paul’s self-proclaimed vision on the road to Damascus, as I require more than a self-proclaimed vision of Jesus (who I already rationally accept as a great human teacher) by Saul; and I hold the view that Saul purposely created Pauline Christianity for the gentiles in order to maintain the ethnic monopoly on monotheism.  At the time of Jesus, Jerusalem was a great center of trade at the center of commerce between Egypt, the European Roman Empire and the East.  Many gentiles were becoming interested in monotheism at this time (Egypt and Europe were polytheistic in nature), and the revolution of Jesus’ teachings greatly enhanced the regional gentile interest in monotheistic Judaism even.  Let’s face it, being reputed as a special ethnic group favored by God has its economic and political incentives.  If the more populous gentiles were allowed to take over majority membership of the Judaic religion through mass conversion, what would the result be?  The monopoly would be dissolved.  I am unable to validate the New Testament and consider it created by political design.   

Muhammad’s first wife, Khadijah, was the daughter of a great trader in Arabia and often traveled with her father, trading with the Jewish and Christian tribes where she could not have avoided learning to some extent the Christian and Jewish religions.  I hold the belief that it was Khadijah that taught or familiarized the prophet Muhammad with the core values and beliefs of Judaism and Christianity, and that Muhammad, through natural revelation, developed the positive ideology of submitting to one God, the great moral lessons repeated in the Quran, the moral cleaning of the Arabic peninsula, and the morally pure early structure of Islam.  Therefore, despite viewing Muhammad’s teachings as excellent, if I believe that a portion of the basic teachings of Islam are based on Saul’s writings, I am unable to accredit the Quran as completely divine (outside of positive natural inspiration).

3) An alternate pro-Muhammad consideration could possibility that the divine revelation revealed to Muhammad was pure, and corrected the inconsistencies and corruptions of Saul’s writings which placed an emphasis on Jesus’ divinity for the gentiles to worship.  There is no question that Muhammad’s teachings took the religion of Islam back to the roots of Hebrew monotheism, and left Christianity the oddity of the Abrahamic religions.

My daughters, religion plays a very strong role in humanity and international politics.  I encourage you to study deeply into these religions from a rational and detached position in order to better understand the human element, to develop self-reflection, and to be able to predict and understand the views and actions of humanity.

Letter #7 - Economic Sequestration and the Annual AIPAC Conference

Today begins the annual three day AIPAC lobbyist conference in Washington that epitomizes one of the most debilitating areas in American representative democracy governance, both in domestic and international policy making.  Over half the U.S. Congress will attend the most powerful lobbyist group’s gala, along with Vice President Biden.  Just days after the implementation of economic sequestration, all U.S. congressional representatives and cabinet members in attendance at the AIPAC conference will make further promises of economic and military support to a foreign government while American jobs are reduced, especially within the government, military and at the state levels.  I would like to be able to point at the large amounts of foreign aid, and the political foreign policies of the U.S., as an evenly laid problem across the globe, but I feel that if I even attempted to do so, it would be a gross misrepresentative of what is occurring, as the center of concentration seems to be focused on one foreign nation-state, that which is represented by the most powerful lobby in the United States.  Again, I will shout from the mountaintop and repeat what has already been observed.  The U.S. has provided the nation-state of Israel with over 3 billion dollars a year since the beginning of the 1950s, and in the face of American domestic budget reductions, you may or may not choose to tally up that total amount.  In addition, Egypt has been awarded over 2 billion dollars a year since Mubarak became leader of Egypt, in order to buy security for the south flank of Israel and protect the water and oil pipelines, and the Dimona nuclear facility, in the Negev.  In the aftermath of the Egyptian so-called Arab Spring, and the election of President Morsi, of the Muslim Brotherhood, U.S. policy makers have dangled the economic ‘carrots’ to the new regime of Egypt in order to attempt to continue the security to Israel’s southern flank.  Just over the weekend, the first weekend in March 2013, Secretary of State John Kerry was in Egypt and released 250 million dollars of “carrots” to the new regime, which is the first payment in an annual 1 billion dollar U.S. funding plan (which is a reduction from the annual aid given during the Mubarak regime, but is pending until the new regime in Egypt bends the knee.  Keep in mind that the first F-16s and Abram tanks, from a deal made with the Mubarak regime, were recently transferred to Egypt.  I will admit that there were a few congressional members that attempted to halt these transfer, but they did so for the wrong reasons (because they worried that Egypt under Morsi could not be bought).   Of course, U.S. foreign aid alone has not placed the United States under the levels of debt which has resulted in sequester.  Ten years of military occupations in Iraq and Afghanistan were notable contributions to that massive debt, and many domestic programs which the American people must reflect on and eventually reform.  The opening of the military occupation in Afghanistan, which was followed by heavy economic costs of state rebuilding, was in the aftermath of 9-11.  I do not divulge myself to conspiracy theories, but I also do not doubt any levels foreign or domestic political intrigue after studying the brutality of human history.  Iraq was a military intervention, occupation and state reconstruction heavily pushed by the lobbyist organization of AIPAC on behalf of their foreign masters.  The same political, and economic, push on U.S. congressional votes has been implemented towards Iran, and will be a heavy topic during the annual AIPAC lobbyist conference occurring over the next three days and beyond.

As these military events, underscored by private sector profiting, have led us to our current economic dilemma, we can look across the domestic United States to see several repercussions from reckless policy making in Washington.  Some of the largest domestic areas where Americans have been hit are on the federal and state levels.  The military is taking a large economic reduction, slated for the next decade, which will cost many American family leaders their careers due to the downsizing.  While many leftists do not support the military, it must be mentioned that the military is only an instrument of the government and it is Congress, vulnerable to influences through representative democracy, who votes for utilization of the military on behalf of the nation.  Using one branch of the military as an example, the United States Marine Corps is slated to be cut 1.4 billion dollars for the remainder of FY13 and 2 billion dollars each fiscal year for the next 9 years.  American civilians working for the U.S. military are beginning a furlough process significantly reducing work hours and income.  At the state level, states will also feel the trickle down cuts and there will be reductions in state law enforcement areas and education.  While the American streets are flooded with drugs and crime, the spending reductions at the state levels will result in early lost jobs, the inability to appoint civilian review boards, the early release of criminals, and suspended sentences.  The reason why this area is economically impacted is because when state facilities are filled to capacity and it must be noted that since the emergence of private prisons that the building of state facilities has been drastically reduced, the state is required to pay the private sector prison for housing the surplus inmates.  We will not discuss the issue of the so-called war on drugs that fill the prisons and drain the state budgets here, but even though this incarceration may be aimed to reduce employment rates on paper, create near slave labor, and generate profit for the shareholders of private sector corporations….each American should be teaching their children about the social-economic trap in advance.

As we come full circle through the economic condition of the United States after decades of irrational foreign aid amounts to Israel and policies solely on behalf of Israel’s protection, military occupations and the costs of rebuilding Israeli friendly regimes in places of the toppled regimes, we again prepare to watch our Congressional Representatives at the annual foreign lobbyist conference making promises of loyalty and economic-military assistance to Israel as if we have not been drained for half a century now.  While the nation begins our sequester, AIPAC aims to exempt Israel from U.S. foreign economic and military aid, and gain U.S. promises of support for a unilateral Israeli strike against Iran, or even better situated for our so-called ally…have the depleted U.S. military take on the economic, political and human costs of doing it for them (as we were hoodwinked into Iraq).

Here, we will once again briefly focus on the flaw of representative democracy and the vulnerability of corporate or foreign manipulation.  Each congressional representative represents a vote, and some are even strategically placed on important Congressional sub-committees that deal specifically with foreign policy or fiscal budgets.  While the average American, if they care to pay attention at all, is allotted one House representative and one Senator for their specific geographic location in which they may write or call (and talk to an intern), the lobbyist organization are able to work every House and Senate member (vote) across the board until they influence (or purchase) enough votes to accomplish their foreign government’s intent (such as foreign aid amounts, sanctions against other nation-states, and eventual U.S. military action).  And sadly, the human element is vulnerable to greed and individual career security (at the cost of the collective), and therein lies the vulnerability of representative democracy. 

The few Americans who will watch the AIPAC conference over the next three days will clearly see this process at work, even though it is a parasitic process that continues year round in Washington, and not just three days of televised lobbyist conference.

When is enough “ enough”?  How long will these Congressional representatives continue to sell out the United States of America?  How long will our fellow Americans walk about with no concerns for the future?  There is nothing worse than an empty headed American adult with no concerns for domestic or international events which directly impact their children’s future. 

Letter #6: 1.7 billion dollars, F-16s and a Superbowl

February 3, 2013 was a Super Bowl Sunday and the attention of the working class American people was focused on the big game, new commercials, Beyonce’s halftime concert, and personal inner-circle Super Bowl parties.  The Baltimore Ravens beat the San Francisco 49ers in a game decided in the last moments, and on Monday the talk in the work centers of America was concentrated on that game, Beyonce, and all the Super bowl commercials that seemed to be as humorous to five years as they were to adults.  What was not discussed among the American workers on Monday was the transfer of four F-16s to the nation-state government of Egypt.  The transfer was part of a 1.7 billion dollar ‘security’ agreement between the U.S. and Egypt, an agreement made during the rule of Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, in which the U.S. would deliver a total of twenty F-16s and two hundred Abram tanks to Egypt.   Congress, influenced by AIPAC during the ‘American bought-and-paid-for’ puppet years of Mubarak, approved this deal prior to the 2011 Arab Spring.  With Mubarak forced out of power in Egypt and Mohamad Morsi, a member of the Muslim Brotherhood, placed into power, a few members of Congress began to question this agreement.  After all, it is still uncertain whether Morsi will be a bribe taking puppet like Mubarak, an isolationist, an aggressor, or, what seems most important to our U.S. Congressional representatives, a friend or foe of the nation-state government of Israel.    There were some political attempts to halt the transfer.  One such attempt was made by the Senator out of Kentucky, Rand Paul, but the Senate voted 79-19 against Paul’s amendment on the passed House Resolution 325.

Why did the U.S. send F-16s to Egypt?  From a political analysis view, it appears that this is an attempt to accomplish two things at once.  1)  Support and Assist Egypt to solidify power for President Morsi in the face of civil unrest similar to what occurred in and around Tahrir Square during the Arab Spring during the final days of Mubarak’s regime.  Protesters and police have continuously clashed in the streets, in some cases caught on video and distributed on the internet, and the presidential palace in Cairo was firebombed.  2)  Pull Morsi into military reliance on Western funding using economic and military ‘carrots’.  One oddity that occurred prior to the Senate vote was that the pro-Israeli lobbies, especially AIPAC, were pushing Congressional members to support the first transfer of this agreement to Egypt.  The reason for the pro-Israeli lobby support is aimed at pulling the new Morsi regime into U.S.-Israeli pockets (paid for by the U.S.) in order to ensure that the new regime protects the Southern flank of Israel, the Negev, where there are vital water and oil pipelines, along with the supposed Israeli nuclear reactor facility located at Dimona (even though Israel has never signed the international non-proliferation treaty).  We must look at U.S. foreign aid and history to understand the previous ‘hook-up’ between Egypt and Israel, paid for in full by the American tax payers and international loans taken out by previous U.S. administrations.  After the assassination of Anwar al-Sadat in 1981, Hosni Mubarak became leader of Egypt which began a new era in U.S. foreign aid.  During Mubarak’s reign, from 1981 to the Arab uprising of 2011, Egypt received over 2 billion dollars a year in annual U.S. foreign aid, only second on the annual recipient list behind the three billion dollars plus a year that Israel had received from the U.S. before and during this period, and continues to receive each year.

How do these types of foreign aid ‘carrot’ gift baskets work?  A co-worker asked me the following question: “What would we do with those F-16s if we didn’t give them to Egypt?”  I must admit that this question elicited a short delay of silence from me because I suddenly realized that she honestly didn’t understand that the U.S. government didn’t just build their own F-16s and have them sitting around in stock, but purchased them from the private sector.  In the case of the F-16s and the tanks, the U.S. government is required to purchase them from Lockheed Martin.  Many people will argue that these types of military foreign aid packages help to maintain jobs inside of the U.S., but the fact remains that these purchases are paid for by the American taxpayers, and increased national debt under international financiers, in order to promote private sector profit.

The Foreign aid process is one of the very few times each year that Americans actually witness pure bipartisan cooperation in Congress.  Democrats and Republicans will argue to the point of almost shutting down the government over domestic cuts, but hold hands when it comes to dishing out billions of dollars in annual aid to nation-states that are economically well off, such as Israel, or nation-states that could be an enemy in the distant future.  Similar to the transfer of the four F-16s to Egypt in the shadow of the Super Bowl, the annual federal budget proposal, which contains proposed amounts of outgoing foreign aid, is released annually under the shadow of Valentine’s Day when most Americans are distracted.  Foreign lobbyist groups, who are allowed to influence all members of Congress while individual Americans are only allowed to call on their regional representatives, are prominent in shaping (or maintaining) this annual budget proposal concerning foreign aid.  The lobbyist presence behind the scenes can be detected by researching the top recipients in U.S. foreign aid over the past fifty years.

On Monday morning after the Super Bowl, all throughout American work places, garages, shipping hubs, and offices across the United States, no one conversed about the transfer of F-16s or the overall subject of foreign aid.  The conversations were dedicated to the Super bowl, a fourth and goal no call by the referees, Beyonce’s halftime outfit and the power outage, the Budweiser horse who loved his original owner and all of the other dumb ass television commercials that encouraged excess consumerism within a nation that doesn’t seem to see poverty, unemployment, or domestic government cuts caused by climbing international debt collecting above its own national structure.

Letter #5: Christianity

My daughters, many people that I love, like, respect and even admire will find what I write to you about in this letter as offensive and an affront on their ‘individual’ core values.  This is a result of decades-long religious indoctrination and mental conditioning.  When religious indoctrination is questioned or challenged in truth, parties involved often become ugly, vicious and, at times, even violent.  I have no choice in the matter because you are my daughters and if I avoided the subject entirely, or pretended that it was not important, I would be failing in my duties as a father by possibly leaving you vulnerable (in my absence, should it ever occur) to religious indoctrination, lies allowed to subsist through ignorance, and manipulation.  The following are some of the areas I have studied concerning Christianity.  I encourage you to verify what is written here, research and scrutinize the historic facts available to you, and through critical thinking develop your own opinions and ideology concerning this subject.  

Looking closely at the religion of Christianity, in all branches, there are many flaws in the foundations that comprise it, discrepancies in the religious historic value, and bloody blemishes on its organizational history.  While the majority of Christians are righteous people in nature and an overall caring, passionate people, it is incredulous that the majority of followers are willing to base utterly important decisional support, especially when it comes to community and national interests that will impact the future of their children, solely on the core delusional beliefs of this religion.

One of the largest ideological flaws concerning Christianity, which will be argued vehemently by Christians, is the individualistic nature of the religion.  Perhaps the origins of the religion were not as individualist as the Christian ideology has become in modern times, as we can easily discern several areas of the religion that have developed with additions and through translations over the centuries through the lips of kings, empires  and preachers.  The basis of the Christian ideology centers on individual salvation through the acceptance of Jesus, an individual who very little written history exists on, as a person’s “Lord” and savior.  Christians will often use the terms God and Jesus in the same sentence while applying both to the same creator, while others have grown accustom to praying directly to Jesus as God.  Was this purposely planned in the creation of this religion?  According to most Christians, Jesus, who was either God’s only begotten son or God in human form, or both, died on the Roman cross for the sins of all mankind.  This centrist Christian ideology is termed ‘substitutionary atonement’.  From a conscious and subconscious view, individualism can be seen in the divinity of one human being among all others who died as an individual sacrifice for every individual human’s sins.  This ideology is morally damning from the perspective that it discourages individual responsibility for individual and collective actions.  As previously mentioned, and evidenced by many criminals on death row for crimes against humanity, the ideology of this salvation and forgiveness is readily available and embraced in the aftermath of transgression.  A healthier, more collective, mindset would be one that teaches our children that they are responsible, and will be held accountable by God and peers, for their actions toward their fellow human beings and the society that they belong to.  The former slave Frederick Douglass once remarked that the most brutal slave owners were the most devout Christians on Sunday.  It is evident by the amount of surviving American slave narratives that slave masters would rape female slaves, beat and murder their male slaves (if required), and exploit fellow humans with forgiveness, and the biblical Ham justification, waiting for them each Sunday at the pulpit.  This statement by Douglass illustrates how little the Christian substitutionary atonement ideology has changed over a century and a half.  Even today, how many Christians, lukewarm or otherwise, transgress, on various levels, Monday through Saturday night and then pray and ask forgiveness on Sunday morning.  These transgressions can be minor in scope such as gossiping or tiny lies, but they are still damaging to a collective community or society, or they can be larger in scope such as adultery or criminal transgressions against fellow human beings.  A true man or woman would not consistently seek forgiveness for their transgressions; they would shoulder their own Roman instrument of death and take responsibility for their deeds and actions.  The following question may be conceived as offensive to many Christians, but I ask Christians and non-Christians alike: When was the last time you heard a Christian pray for a collective good?  Is it as often as individual prayers?  It is usually for individual wants or needs, or in close proximity of the individual.  The modern Christian for the most part, especially in America, seems to pray to God and Jesus only when they want a job, or are in some trouble, or someone is ill, or they need some fast food forgiveness.  When the waves are life are smooth and a good sailing wind is consistent with no problems, their worship and appreciation is usually focused elsewhere.    Overall, the subconscious ideology of Christianity is individualistic in nature.

Of course, the original scriptural examples of the substitutionary atonement ideology derives from the New Testament, and since Paul/Saul wrote over 50 percent of that literary collection and the authorship of the synoptic Gospels are unverified (outside of Saul/Paul’s close affiliate Luke the Physician who is credited with the Gospel named Luke), the original Christian substitutionary atonement ideology should be accredited to him.  Paul was quite the genius, to be truthful.  All of the NT scriptural references to Jesus dying for the sins of mankind came out of the Pauline and post-Jesus text (Corinthians, Galatians, Peter) and were very vague in concrete meaning.    The one example outside of the New Testament examples is found in the Old Testament: Isaiah 53:12.

“Therefore I will divide him a portion with the many, and he shall divide the spoil with the strong, because he poured out his soul to death and was numbered with the transgressors; yet he bore the sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.”

 The verse is very symbolic and, in my opinion, could hold multiple meanings which were common throughout the long historic line of prophet rejections throughout the Old Testament.  Remember that Isaiah was written six to seven centuries before the time of Jesus and could be referring to any prophet or person.  It is irrational to base individual actions on an unproven and quite irrational substitutionary atonement ideology that may or not be referring to a man seven hundred years in the future who may or may not be a divine God in human form.

As with several areas of Christianity, this ideology has grown in scope throughout the centuries through over-philosophical minds such as Irenaeus (130 CE-202 CE), Eusebius Pamphili of Caesarea (263 CE-339 CE), Athanasius of Alexandria (296 CE-373 CE), Augustine of Hippo (354 CE-450 CE), Anselm of Canterbury (1033 CE-1109 CE), Thomas Aquinas  (1225 CE-1274 CE), the protestant John Calvin (1509 CE-1564 CE), Hugo Gratius (1583 CE-1645 CE), and a slew of many others between and throughout history.  The individualist salvation ideology that gained its origins from symbolic scripture in the first century of the common-era has been molded, built on with additions and ambitions, and altered by Christian philosophers for two thousand years.  Up until the Protestant Reformation in 16^th century Europe, the church could simply adopt the philosophical modifications on the redemption atonement ideology when they found those modifications useful; and decline, by labeling the modifying philosopher as a heretic, any modifications and philosophies which conflicted with established and accepted church doctrine and political interests.

It is incredible to truly study history and see our human ideologies, which are widely accepted as irrefutable and divine today, developed over time similar to a poem that is started by one writer, with stanzas added by multiple writers, and then concluded by two new authors.  These additions go further than the pen in the white images of Jesus and Mary which emerged out of the Italian Renaissance; Caesar Borgia (previously Duke Valentine) was the model for white Jesus while Mary resembles Mona Lisa.  These foolish discrepancies and illusions are easy enough to verify, what is baffling is that a good majority of intelligent people have never even though deep enough to question the distance and ethnic diversity between Rome and Jerusalem (at the time of Jesus). 

Another example of Christian ideological philosophies created by a human mind is the philosophical creation of the trinity (interestingly similar to the three points of the Roman crucifix to exclude the planted point) that matches the Christian concept of father, son and Holy Spirit.  Once again we see the ideology, assumed divine, built upon by human philosophers throughout history:

Clement of Alexandria (150 CE-211 CE) (The Stromata, Chapter 10),Tertillian’s (160 CE – 220 CE) ‘Against Praxeas’, The Nicene Creed (325 CE when Christianity became mandated in the original Roman Empire), the defending arguments by Athanasius (297 CE-373 CE) against claims against the Nicene Creed, Gregory of Nyssa (335 CE-384 CE), Gregory of Nazianzus (329 CE-390 CE), John Chrysostom (347 CE-407 CE), Augustine (354 CE-430 CE), Boethius’ “The Trinity is One God Not Three Gods” (480 CE-525 CE), Anselm (1033 CE-1109 CE), Aquinas (1225 CE-1274 CE), and the Protestant Calvin (1509 CE-1564 CE). 

Many of the names we see here are names previously posted for the human philosophical development of the Christian substitutionary atonement ideology.  Just to understand what an uncertain foundation Christianity and the trinity stands upon, the church as late as the 5^th century CE was still attempting to figure how to best package the product.  In 431 CE the Ecumenical council at Ephesus refuted the philosophical ideology that Jesus was two separate entities, one human and one divine while in 451 CE, an Ecumenical council at Chalcedon declared that Christ was two distinct entities united in a Hypostatic Union.  Obviously, my daughters, the more you look into a history and the development of religious ideologies (through human creation and modification), it is rather easy to lose track of what is concrete fact and what is philosophical contemplation.

In order to provide an example of the philosophical nature of these ideologies, I had included a passage on the trinity from ‘the Stromata’ by Clement of Alexandria:

CHAPTER X - The Stromata - Clement of Alexandria

“But who are the two or three gathered in the name of Christ in whose midst the Lord is? Does he not by the "three" mean husband, wife, and child? For a wife is bound to her husband by God. If, however, a man wishes to be undistracted, and prefers to avoid begetting children because of the business it involves, "let him remain unmarried," says the apostle, "even as I am." They explain that what the Lord meant was this. By the plurality he means the Creator, the God who is the cause of the world's existence; and by the one, the elect, he meant the Savior who is Son of another God, the good God. But this is not correct. Through his Son, God is with those who are soberly married and have children. By the same mediation the same God is also with the man who exercises continence on rational grounds. According to another view the three may be passion, desire, and thought; another interpretation makes them flesh, soul, and spirit.

Perhaps the triad mentioned refers to the called, and in the second place to the chosen, and in the third place to the race appointed to receive the greatest honour . With them is the power of God watching over all things which is indivisibly divided among them. He, then, who uses the soul's natural powers as is right, desires those things which are appropriate, and hates what is harmful, as the commandments prescribe: "Thou shalt bless him who blesses thee and curse him who curses thee." But when he has risen above these, passion and desire, and in very deed has begun to love the creation of the God and Creator of all things, then he will live a gnostic life, as he has become like the Saviour and has attained to a state of continence no longer maintained with difficulty. He has united knowledge, faith, and love. Thenceforth he is one in his judgment and truly spiritual, wholly incapable of thoughts arising from passion and desire, one who is to be made perfect after the image of the Lord by the artist himself, a perfect man, already worthy to be called a brother to the Lord as well as his friend and son. Thus the "two" and the "three" come together into one and the same thing -- a gnostic man.

The agreement of many, which is indicated by the number "three," with whom the Lord is present, might also be the one Church, the one man, and the one race. Or could it mean this? The Lord when he gave the law was with the one, that is the Jew. Later when he inspired the prophets and sent Jeremiah to Babylon and, moreover, called believers from the Gentiles by the teaching of the prophets, he brought the two peoples together. And was not the third the one which is made out of the two into a new man in which he walks and dwells, in the Church itself? And the law, the prophets, and also the gospel were brought together in Christ's name into a single knowledge. Accordingly, those who from hatred do not marry or from desire use the flesh as if it were not a matter of right and wrong,6 are not in the number of the saved with whom the Lord is present. “- Clement of Alexandria

Is this not mere philosophical contemplation and babble?  Please, I encourage you to read more of these church philosophers in chronological order and watch these Christian ideologies collect more and more addendums.

Another noteworthy element of Christian belief that is often deemed irrefutable, and divine fact, is the virgin birthing account of Mary, another individualized character, a virgin void of all sin.  The first thing that must be noted about this New Testament account is that the virgin birth myth in the gospel of Luke was not the first virgin myth.  We see similar virgin birth stories that predate Pauline Christianity in the accounts of Mut-em-ua, the virgin Queen of Egypt (approx. 1700 before Jesus) who gave birth to Amenkept III, and we see it with the Egyptian sun god Ra, we it with Attis, the Phrygian god, who was supposedly born of a virgin named Nana, and is claimed to have died three days before being brought back to life, we see it with Dionysos, and we see it with Mithra (Persian God).  We know today through technological advancements that artificial insemination and cloning is possible, but was it possible over 2000 years ago?  Most realistically, they probably did not possess that technology unless there was some technologically advanced alien race in the sky above.  Can this phenomenon of human birth without physical reproduction occur naturally?  Is not natural childbirth the most incredible miracle to ever be witnessed? The Earth and the life on it are indeed an incredible miracle with many extraordinary elements that, as human beings, we have not gained insight or technology to, yet the human mind, in all its greatness and fallacies, has historically sought to create more and more miracles by creating them throughout their flat, monster filled earth.

Continuing with the theme of inaccuracy based on philosophy, we encounter the man-made phenomenon of Christmas, now regarded after centuries as irrefutable in divinity by a majority of Christians (who lack self-education and research), and the winter solstice birth of Jesus, God in human form, or God’s son…who is considered part of one God, only in a different distinct portion (just trying to track all the philosophies), as argued by Boethius, Gregory of Nazianzus and the other philosophers.  Even Christian scholars, using the approximated dating of the historical records for the Herodian tax consensus mentioned in the synoptic Gospels and the argument that shepherds would not be flocking at that time of year, acknowledge that the date of December 25 is probably not accurate.  An interesting fact that I have uncovered in my research is that even in 200 CE, within the philosophers of the early church, there was debate concerning the birthdate of Jesus.  A notable written contemplation on the birthdate of Jesus was by Clement of Alexandria (150 CE-211 CE), whose philosophical writings are interesting as well as extensive.  Another philosopher, who actually argued in support of a December 25^th date, was Hippolytus (165 CE-235 CE).   In any case, it appears that the holiday of Christmas, and the widespread belief that Jesus was born at the Solstice, was correlated with the annual winter solstice festivals that actually predate Pauline Christianity and the holiday known today as Christmas was formalized as December 25th by the Catholic Church around the end of the 17^th century.  Even many of the modern traditions of the holiday, such as the yule log, tree and mistletoe customs were pagan in origins.  Yet, many American Christians walk around in December blindly thinking God was born on December 25^th in the year zero and many others, outside of storming Wal-Mart on Black Friday, give no thoughts to the historical development at all.

Finally, looking at ideologies, we come to the ethnical inferiority philosophy of Christianity, another individualistic aspect, aimed toward an individual ethnic group in this case, as Christians are taught early in childhood that God has chosen a special group of people, similar to how God chose a single son, that are God’s people above all other human beings even though God created all life.  Oddly, the mass majority of Christians are not ethnic members of this chosen ethnic group that they are ingrained to almost worship, while the main scriptural doctrines of the Christian religion were written by orthodox-raised members of the identified exalted and chosen ethnic groups, such as Saul/Paul of Tarsus and his affiliates who were children of the Sanhedrin (priesthood).  Just how did this philosophy of division among humanity develop?  Of course, the Old Testament chronology of original tribes of Jacob (Israel) and, later, the Hebrew flight from Egypt, with God’s covenant and promise through Moses, and the ideology was enhanced through literature of unknown authorship that emerged during the era of the Kingdom of Judah, where the Jewish identity was solidified, despite the conversion of many gentiles during the kingdom’s existence, under that name.  Since the original establishment of the gentile church was based on the Old Testament teachings, and built upon by the New Testament writings of Saul, who was raised under the orthodox Jewish priesthood, with changes to distinguish (or divide) original Jewish law from the new gentile laws of Pauline Christianity, we understand that the elevated distinction of the esteemed ethnic group was already in place at the beginning of the early Christian church network,  and began taking wider regional roots (away from Jerusalem) when the early church branched out to Antioch (present day Turkey), Alexandria and Rome.

On top of the deep rooted reverence of the Old Testament text in Christian ideology, I would have to consider two other smaller elements that occurred to assist with this inferiority worship of a small group of humans by a larger group of humans.  Those two events were the Jewish diaspora after the destruction of the temple in 70 CE, which spread the element of Judaic ethnicity throughout the gentile realms of the Roman Empire, which would soon after adopt Christianity as an official religion (but exempt Jews from the mandate), and the expansion of land occupation by the Christian Roman Empire.  We can see the importance of the Promised Land in the Old Testament text and the Christian empire certainly wanted to maintain control of that land throughout the centuries.  The Crusades was about religion, but it was more about the land.  Was the feverish, and often bloody, fixation with this land always based on Old Testament religious ideologies that Christians had strengthened over the centuries?  Or was it a combination of the two?  The area of Jerusalem, and modern day Israel and Palestine, certainly was a valuable tract of land.  Even before Jesus, the area was a major crossroad for trade with trade routes stemming out to Europe, South to Egypt and Africa, and Eastward.  As the world expanded, the Mediterranean was the center of trade and empire, and even during the bi-polar hegemony of the 20^th century World and Cold Wars, the area was a strategic asset for the Christian capitalist West.  Today, Christian Zionist preachers, such as Hagee, who claim that the establishment and defense of a Jewish state, Israel, plays into the biblical return of Jesus and the establishment of the kingdom of God on Earth, and even less conservative Christians regard the modern nation-state of Israel as essential to their core religious ideologies, but why?  From a rational, political perspective today, I ask what is so pertinent about providing that nation-state with over 3 billion dollars in U.S. economic and military aid at the cost of one’s own national economic, military and political well-being, and damaging the future of their Christian gentile children.  Has the original religious ideology of Christians toward the Jewish people and the Promised Land become so ingrained that it no longer requires political relevance, or protecting one’s own practical interests first before others, for rational decision making? 

In closing this letter, I acknowledge that there is still the issue of history concerning Christianity.  In two thousand years, many things have happened and I truly encourage you to devour the history books during your lifetime.  Hey, your father is a realist.  Five pages of reading and contemplation a day is better than no reading and contemplation at all.  The largest historical blemishes on Christianity that come to my mind, after working all day, are obviously the Crusades, which I consider a land conflict guised in religion (which are everywhere throughout history and still exist on the modern international stage), the Spanish Inquisition, Papal Bull Dum Diversas in 1452 from Pope Nicholas V to King Alfonso of Portugal which authorized the capturing and enslavement of non-Christians (beginning of the trans-Atlantic slave trade), and an interesting American account of the Salem Witch Trials in late 1600s (which EJ is currently doing a paper on). 

Why do I point these areas of Christianity out to you?  Because in the larger scope of our world, religious ideologies impact the way people reason, behave, act, segregate, vote, and react (among many other things).