

ALEXANDER MANN's

"The Angel Ultimatum"

"Dedicated to every caring person who

has ever, or will ever live."

COPYRIGHT 2014 by Alexander Mann

(Writers Guild Registry #1549244)

FILM IN DEVELOPMENT

SMASHWORDS EDITION
INTRODUCTION

Many would agree that the traditional explanation for creation is completely untenable. Angels are created, only to fight a war, humans are created, only to fall, religion is created, only to fail, so all is flawed, a cascade of one mistake after another. Yet, the Bible itself continues to have a profound influence on our society, even though that influence often results in chaos.

The creation of Angels, leads to a chaotic war. The mortal fall, results in a chaotic world. The creation of religion, results in a chaotic struggle between belief systems, resulting in a great deal of religious tension, that continuously opposes peace. So what explanation could possibly make sense out of such a mess?

Enter, "The Angel Ultimatum," which is to, "make sense of creation, or else." Here we exchange the untenable explanation of creation, for the tenable explanation of the creation of individuality. Once the individual is created, it is then hands-off, otherwise individuality is sacrificed, which would oppose the very point of the creation.

The resulting, "free will," must then produce extremes of both good and evil, which can only produce a chaotic society. If then, the Angels are individuals, the same chaos can be expected, and the result can be war. True faith is then expressed through love, through which the Divine connects with the creation, making religion irrelevant.

This is an explanation of everything that has occurred, from the creation of Angels onward. It is a glimpse into the plan that runs seamlessly and quietly, behind the chaos, which appears to make no sense. It takes us to the precipice of creation, where we stand beside a Creator, who must decide to either create individuality, from chaos, knowing everything that must follow, or face eternity alone.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Chapter One: What's with the Influence?

Chapter Two: The Origin of Faith

Chapter Three: A Multitude of Puzzles

Chapter Four: The Legislation of Love

Chapter Five: The Ides of Individuality

Chapter Six: The Law of Love

Chapter Seven: The Two Salvations

Chapter Eight: Outside of Time

Chapter Nine: The Souls of Angels

Chapter Ten: The Mortal Angels

Chapter Eleven: The Genesis of Angels

Chapter Twelve: The Angel Ultimatum

Chapter Thirteen: The Dualities of Creation

Chapter Fourteen: The Very Nature of the Plan

Chapter Fifteen: Universal Selection

Bibliography

About the Author

CHAPTER ONE: WHAT'S WITH THE INFLUENCE?

When considering the Bible, any sane, reasonable, objective individual, should ask the question, why has this collection of books had such a profound influence on our society? In the Bible, we have an alleged God of creation, who creates the heavens and the earth in six days, which makes no sense. This God allegedly then creates beings, called Angels, which leads to a war in heaven, after which people are created, leading to the fall of the human race.

This, "God of love," then requires animal sacrifices for something called, "sin," and this same, "God of love," allegedly orders the people of Israel to commit genocide when they enter the Promised Land. Yet, in spite of this insanity, according to many people, this collection of books is the absolutely perfect, "word of God."

Now, none of these books were written until after 600 BC, yet they cover subject matter that goes back thousands of years. So, we need to ask, are we looking at an alleged historical record, passed on verbally, or are we simply looking at collection of fiction? We have three options here. One, being that the history of the nation of Israel was passed on accurately. Two, that it was simply invented, in which case it is all fiction and none of it actually occurred, as described. Or three, it is a combination of both, in which case there is accurate information, mixed with fiction.

It is important to keep in mind that from the point in history, beginning after the reign of King Solomon, the recorded history of Israel can be verified from independent Egyptian, and Assyrian accounts. So we know that this portion of the historical record, contained in the Bible is more, or less, accurate. However, from the beginning of the book of Genesis, until the end of Solomon's reign, virtually nothing can be verified.

The existence of every early biblical character is therefore questionable, because there is no evidence to prove that they existed. Also, the efforts of archaeologists have apparently failed to find any evidence that the nation of Israel ever travelled through the wilderness, and into the promised-land. Nor is there apparently anything in Egyptian history to verify the claim that the Nation of Israel ever was enslaved, certainly not in the way that the Bible claims. This means that the very existence of Adam and Eve, Noah, Moses, Abraham, David, Solomon and virtually every other early biblical character, may be nothing more than fiction, as there is no proof that they did exist.

So, at this point, we need to ask the question, can we find a source for the biblical stories that we see in the early history, described in the Bible? And, what is actually contained in the historical records of Egypt, for that time period, and will those records provide us some plausible explanations of what might have actually occurred?

Now, if we examine the early history of Egypt, we see a society that consistently worships many different Gods, with only one very notable exception. And, it is extremely important that we understand the significance of this one exception, because it gives us the very first documented evidence, in the history of the world, of a monotheism religion. That is the belief in one single God.

Now, this occurred in the reign of the Pharaoh called Akhenaten. He was known as the heretic Pharaoh, who worshiped the one God. He built the city of Amarna, the city of the one God, Aten. And he forbade the worship of all the other Gods of Egypt, calling them false Gods. He essentially elevated the Egyptian God Aten, to become the one supreme God, the one Supreme Being, and if his actions were influenced, the question would be, by whom?

Now, Sigmund Freud (Moses and Monotheism, 1939) argued that Moses was actually an Atenist Priest, and it is completely plausible that the Hebrew people were on the scene at this time, but under a different name. They could have been known as the Hyksos or Habiru or Apiru, and could have had an influence simply by believing in the one God. The Egyptians could have been curious, thought it was a good idea, elevating the God Aten.

Then, after the death of Akhenaten, the Egyptian people completely rebelled against his belief in the one God, and they put everything back the way it was, prior to his reign. The backlash was so strong that the people of Egypt erased every trace of Akhenaten from history, and he remained completely lost to history, until the remains of the City of Amarna was discovered in the 19th century.

Now, with the backlash of the Egyptian people being so severe, against this belief in the one God, it is also very likely that anyone associated with that belief, may have had to flee Egypt. And, this could have been the cause of an actual exodus from Egypt. Also, around the same time period, we have the eruption of Thera, one of the most powerful eruptions in history, which is credited by some as having caused the plagues of Egypt (The Exodus Decoded, 2006).

And, that same eruption could also be the source for the description of the Hebrew people being led, by a cloud by day, and a pillar of fire by night. And, the Pharaoh who came into power, just thirty three years after the death of Akhenaten, was the Pharaoh Ramses, who is most associated with the biblical stories.

Now the Hebrew people initially began writing down their history during the period of what is called, "The Babylonian Captivity," approximately 800 years after these events took place. And, there is now evidence (Dr. Irving Finkel, The Real Noah's Ark: Secret History) that while in Babylon, they would have been exposed to the story of the flood of Gilgamesh. And, that the story of Moses as a baby, and the lineage of Adam, also have Babylonian sources.

So, the flood of Gilgamesh becomes the flood of Noah. The influence on the Pharaoh Akhenaten becomes the story of the influence of Joseph. The Thera eruption becomes both the plagues of Egypt, and the cloud by day, and pillar of fire by night. And, the story of the exodus, that may have occurred at some point after the death of Akhenaten, becomes the story of Moses, and the Exodus.

Also, if any Egyptian military units had been lost in a tsunami caused by, either the Thera eruption, or a subsequent earthquake, this could have then been a source for the story of the parting of the Red Sea. What we would then have is a source for almost every early biblical story. So, when the Hebrew people finally did decide to write down their history, they could simply have used these sources to tell the story in their own way.

Now, there is some debate as to who may have influenced whom. Did Akhenaten influence Judaism, or did the Hebrews influence the belief in the one God? Some say that because there are no similarities between the belief systems that there was no influence at all, either way. However, it should be noted that after the death of Akhenaten, the Egyptians erased his memory from history, leaving only the ruins of the City of Amarna. This demonstrates just how alien the belief system was to Egypt, perhaps suggesting an outside influence.

Now, there could have been very little contact between the Egyptians and the Hebrews. The Egyptians, at the time, could have simply heard of a belief in the one God, thought it was a good idea, and decided to worship Aten. And/or the Hebrews could have simply decided to take credit, as the originators of the belief in the one God, when they wrote down their history. It really doesn't matter either way, what does matter is that we have sources for the early Biblical stories.

One other very important point here is that, if the early biblical stories were in fact partially fictionalized, from other sources, then order of events becomes irrelevant. For instance, the Thera eruption would not have caused the plagues of Egypt, but would simply have been a source for the fictionalized story. In which case, the chronology of events would not be an issue, as we would be dealing with at least partial fiction.

The eruption of Thera would have caused dramatic effects in Egypt (The Ten Plagues of the Bible, 2010), which could have included, changing the colour of the Nile to look like blood. Swarms of frogs, lice and flies would have resulted, as would have disease in livestock, as well as boils, swarms of locust, and the volcano cloud, would have brought lightening and darkness.

We know that the eruption of Thera and its effects did happen, some kind of interaction in Egypt very likely did take place, and that there was exposure to sources in Babylon. So when the Hebrews did finally write down their history, they could have easily taken these sources, and partially fictionalized events to their liking. And the order of events would have been completely changed to suit the story.

Now, if the early biblical history was partially fictionalized, based on real events and sources from Babylon, it might tempt one to ask the question, where did the Hebrews get the God? Or, what is the source for the God? If Noah didn't happen, and both the lineage of Adam and the story of the baby Moses come from Babylon, then what is the source for the God?

What we find is that the earliest reference to the deity, "Yahweh," is actually found in Egyptian texts, in the 13th Century BC (Devers, William G., "Who Were the Early Israelites and Where did They Come From," 2003). Also called, "El," this deity became the God of the Hebrews and was eventually elevated to being the one true God. That means there was over 700 years for Yahweh to become the God of the Hebrews, prior to them ever writing down their history, which was the beginning of the modern Bible.

So, by the time they started writing in Babylon, where they found additional source material, the God Yahweh had been fully elevated to being the one divine being. They then had plenty of source material, from their own history, and from Babylon, to write out their partially fictionalized history, in which they were the children of Yahweh.

Also, keep in mind, that when they started writing the Bible, it was in Babylon, right after they had been conquered and taken away as slaves. So, why had this happened? Perhaps, to them, it happened because they hadn't been faithful to their God, or had sinned. So in response to this we see the concepts of sin, and the response of an angry, vengeful God, who had punished that sin. This makes sense given what they had just been through as a people.

Now, if the early biblical history is partially fictionalized, what are the implications? Should the Bible then lose all credibility, because it isn't accurate, or is there something else there worth our time and attention? Many people would rightfully point out that in the Bible we see descriptions of a God, who does not appear to be a God of love. Yet, if the vengeful God of the Bible was written as a response to what had just happened to the Hebrew people, can we then dismiss those claims as having been fictionalized?

If so, we can then resume the search for the God of love, and approach the Bible as containing a literary puzzle, that can still be solved? And, can we do this free of the ridiculous claims that a God of love could behave in a manner that makes absolutely no sense? And, if we search the Bible for evidence of something being hidden, behind all this fictionalization, what do we find? Is there any evidence of something being concealed that we may yet discover? The answer to these questions may well be, Yes!

For instance, in Proverbs 25:2, we find the statement, "It is the glory of God to conceal a matter." The Hebrew word for "conceal", in the verse quoted above is the word "cathar" (saw-thar'). It is a Hebrew root word that literally means "to hide." It also figuratively means "be absent, keep close, conceal, hide, and keep secret."

And, in Romans 8:19-20, we find the statement, "For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it." So, something is concealed, and the creation is subjected to frustration, by the Creator. And, it is stated in Ecclesiastes 3:10-12 that, "No one can fathom what God has done from beginning to end." So, no one can understand it, because it has been concealed, and there has been a deliberate effort to frustrate.

So something has perhaps been kept hidden, such as an alternate, rational explanation for creation, and this was done in order to produce frustration. In which case, that which does not make sense, is not supposed to make sense, by design, and this is all part of a deliberate attempt to produce frustration.

Now, if this were true, the question would be, why? And, the answer would then have everything to do with understanding the complexities involved in creating a society which is fundamentally based upon true individuality. And, that if one is going to create such a society, one must also understand, and anticipate, the absolutely dire consequences of that creation.

Now, regardless of what actually did occur in that early history of the world, we do know that the nation of Israel was eventually established, as was Judaism. Then, we see the establishment of Christianity, leading to the modern relationship between the God of the Bible, and the modern Christian Religion.

So, the Bible, and God, are now both associated with religion, an association which is now taken for granted, or assumed. If asked, "What are the main subjects of the Bible?" Many would say, God and religion. And, it is traditionally believed that God is represented by religion, but by which one? Even within Christianity there are many different religions, with significant differences in beliefs. They all claim to know, understand, and represent God, but who is right, and who is wrong?

And, we have examples throughout history, of Bible believing people, who's actions have nothing to do with a God of love. Some examples include the, "Spanish inquisitions," the three, "great crusades of Europe," and the, "witch hunts," of early America. During these events many people were murdered in the name of a God of love. Today, in many cases, religion is a business, with leaders who are very adept at asking people to send them money.

To many, this all represents a complete failure of people to represent the divine. And, the alleged, and perhaps fictionalized, biblical actions of the divine itself, does not improve the situation. This all leads many people to conclude that this representation, and concept, of the divine has failed, and there is nothing further to consider. If true, we need to continue our search for an alternate explanation, behind that which has been fictionalized, or all we are left with is an untenable explanation that simply does not work.

In which case, we are then actually trying to determine if we are dealing with a, "God of love and perfection," that is really neither, and may not even exist. Or, are we dealing with a God of creation, who has put a plan of creation in play, that is in some way hidden, or concealed, is completely intact, and has absolutely nothing to do with our traditional untenable understanding.

Now, looking at the term religion itself, in the Bible, the word religion appears nowhere in the Old Testament Hebrew, and only five times in the New Testament Greek. The five New Testament references are from two Greek words. One is "ioudaismos" (ee-oo-dah-is-mos) which means "Judaism", which is the Jewish Faith. The other is "threskeia" (thrace-ki-ah), which means "ceremonial observance, or the act of worshipping."

So, we could then define religion as simply being the act of worshipping God. The Bible states that "God is love," so a Bible-based religion would then be defined as the act of worshipping a God of love. Yet this definition does not work, given the crusades, the inquisitions, the witch hunts, or much of what we see in religion today, so we must find another.

Now, all Bible-based religions began with a very simple belief, or faith, in the God of the Bible. Those people then studied the Bible, and developed what is called a theology, which is defined by Webster's as a, "systematic study of God." In many cases this study of God is exclusively limited to the Bible, so the theology becomes the religion's attempt to understand both the Bible, and God.

Now, the Bible is extremely subject to interpretation, which makes sense, if we approach it as being a very complex literary puzzle. Then, the number of different interpretations, is equal to the number of different ways in which the puzzle can be assembled. Each theology develops its own version of the puzzle, and the differences between these versions, represents the differences between the many Bible-based religions, and their denominations.

They each develop their own, "system of beliefs," based upon their own version of the puzzle, each with its own, "set of instructions," on how to get into heaven. With some, the instructions for getting into heaven are exclusive, so one must join the religion to be saved. They may then look upon people of other religions as being evil, and people without religion as being lost, and even evil, as one can only get into heaven by following their specific instructions.

This rational then nullifies, or invalidates, belief in a God of love. People may start off with a sincere faith in a "God of love", but then the "belief system" causes them to reject people with different beliefs. In extreme cases this becomes justification for the crusades, the inquisitions, the witch hunts, or any other persecution perpetrated by a religion. The catalyst of these events is the dedication of people to their belief systems.

So, we might then conclude that a Bible-based religion is a specific, "system of beliefs," developed from a theology, which is a Bible-based study of God. It is then the devotion of people to such a, "belief system," that makes them religious, and the degree of their devotion then determines the extent to which they are religious.

This then gives us a definition for religion that fits both what we see throughout history, and what we see today. It has all resulted from the attempts of people to solve a very complex literary puzzle. This has caused the formation of a multitude of different belief systems, and as people tend to argue and fight over beliefs, it has caused a great deal of division within our societies. This is why it is the nature of religion to divide, because people are easily divided by beliefs.

Now, the goal here is to solve the puzzle in a way which gives us an explanation for the creation of individuality, from the point of view of the Divine, and we are unconcerned with belief systems. Instead, we are looking for an alternate explanation for everything that has occurred, within creation, right from before the creation of Angels, onward. This process begins by understanding the difference between religion, and a quality possessed by every human being, called faith.

CHAPTER TWO: THE ORIGIN OF FAITH

If one were to assume that anyone who believes in God is religious, the definition of the word would not support the conclusion. Webster's identifies the term religious as being an adjective of the word religion, and it is defined as being, "concerned with, or devoted to religion." So a religion must be involved, or a person is not religious.

Webster's defines faith as, "a belief in the truth of revealed religion, or any system of religious beliefs." In which case, faith is simply another word for religion, as it is referring to a belief system, so the Christian Faith would be the Christian Religion, in which case the words faith and religion are interchangeable.

However, Webster's also defines faith as, "trust, or confidence, or that which is believed." Now, in this case, faith is best described as, "belief in," anything, without necessarily being related to, "belief in," God. So, we can have faith in a friendship, faith in the universe, faith in life, love, and happiness. So, we have faith in anything in which we believe, and it has nothing to do with any God, yet it is the most basic element of our existence. Therefore, as our lives are filled with the things, in which we believe, our lives are also filled with faith.

Now, Webster's also defines faith as being, "confidence and trust in God," which can be simple faith, or, "belief in," without any religion. This faith must exist first, before anyone creates or adopts a religion. A person first has belief in God, then they create, or seek out a belief system, but in every case the faith comes first.

Now, "blind faith," is faith without reason. There is no proof God exists, so belief is blind. The Bible is fiction, so belief is blind. And, this applies to every deity, because they are all fiction. So, it is then reasonable to ask, what is the basis for faith in God? Is it simply that we need something to believe in, in order to make it through the day, or is there a larger equation?

This brings us to a discussion about what could be called a, "common knowledge," that is allegedly possessed by every human being. This common knowledge includes the voice of creation, "speaking," about the existence of God, the concept of eternity set within the hearts of people, and the knowledge of good & evil.

Psalm 19:1-4, "The heavens declare the glory of God," and, "There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard." Then, Ecclesiastes 3:11, "He has set eternity in the hearts of people; yet they cannot fathom what God has done from beginning to end." And, Genesis 3:22, where Adam & Eve ate the forbidden fruit, and gain the knowledge of good & evil, which has presumably been passed on to the entire human race.

So, we have a universe, that appeared out of nowhere, being attributed to a God, who appeared out of nowhere, and a biblical claim that creation points to God. Now, many people do attribute creation to God, whereas scientists like Steven Hawking spend a great deal of time trying to conceive of a universe which does not require a creator. Either way, a degree of faith is required.

Then we have the statement that the concept of, "eternity," has been set within the hearts of people. Most of us do believe in life after death. As a society we are completely fascinated with the afterlife, as it permeates our culture, and clearly has been the subject of countless conversations, debates, books and movies. Then again, we are sentient beings, we understand death, so wondering what comes after death is quite natural.

The knowledge of good & evil is clearly present in our world, although it is not always clear what is right and what is wrong. So did Adam and Eve introduce this knowledge, or were they meant to introduce the concept of this knowledge? Either way, we all have a conscience, which Webster's defines as, "one's moral sense of right & wrong," or good & evil.

Now, we may all have a conscience, but people clearly have different concepts of right and wrong, or good & evil. This is in part due to our environment, and upbringing, but it is also due to our individuality, as we each have our own individual nature, which is unique. Webster's defines nature as the, "essential character of a person," and character is defined as the, "qualities that distinguish one person from another." So, we all have a conscience, but we are all individuals, so we have somewhat different concepts of good & evil.

So, we then have all these billions of individuals, all with their own individual concepts of good & evil, most of whom will spend time considering the concepts of creation and eternity. All of whom will constantly be faced with issues regarding what is right and what is wrong. And, as we know, a significant percentage of these people are going to end up believing in some form of God. Then, as God is generally believed to be good, a God of love is often chosen.

Now, one would then think that all this belief in a God of Love, would then inspire love, and there is no doubt that it has inspired love, both throughout history, and today. However, it has also inspired the creation of many religions, which has led to tremendous conflict between belief systems and tremendous conflict with those who do not share those belief systems. And, of course, love often times becomes completely lost within this conflict.

Now, we have all heard it said that the people of good will, are the true people of God. Or it could be said that they are the people who, "care," as caring may be the simplest way to describe, and define, love. To care about people, or to be caring, or compassionate, is the opposite of being indifferent, or selfish, or hateful.

So, we allegedly have this, "common knowledge," which is the combination of the concepts of creation, eternity, and good & evil, which may inspire belief in God. Then, completely aside from religion, we have another statement in Romans 10:14-18, where concerning faith, it is asked, "how can a person hear without a preacher?"

Now many religious people believe this refers to a human preacher, thus religion, but the answer is given a few verses later. It states, "But I ask: Did they not hear? Of course they did: 'Their voice has gone out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world'." This again is the quote from Psalm 19:1-4, which states, "The heavens declare the glory of God." So, creation is the preacher, and this is a reference to the common knowledge.

So this means that, in theory, any person can hear the voice of creation, consider the concepts of eternity, and good & evil, and there we find the origin of faith in God. The concepts of creation, eternity and good & evil, permeate our society, they are everywhere, and they are common to every human being. Then, when combined, the resulting leap of faith isn't exactly blind, but it is still a leap of faith, which is also often required in science.

The problem is that faith then inspires the creation of religion, which results in conflict, and the alleged bizarre behaviour of the deity described in the Bible doesn't help. This then all results in a tremendous amount of confusion and frustration on the part of those trying to make sense out of life. Yet we have already seen that allegedly, the creation was intentionally subjected to frustration, so what are we missing?

Is there a puzzle to be solved here, one that has absolutely nothing to do with religion? A puzzle that, when solved, will provide us with an understanding of the creation of individuality? And, an understanding of how the Divine relates to, and connects with, that individuality, which for some reason has been subjected to frustration?

Now, as with any puzzle, one must use all of the pieces to properly assemble the puzzle. In the Bible there are two fundamental laws, one is a law of judgement, the second is a law of love. References are made throughout the Bible to both of these laws, yet one of them is not recognized or understood. This means that people are attempting to assemble the puzzle without having one of the most important pieces.

This means that the references made to the two laws appear as contradictions because the context provided by the second law is missing. Yet, when that second, "law of love," is given its rightful place in the puzzle, the contradictions begin to sort themselves out, and a second picture of creation begins to emerge.

CHAPTER THREE: A MULTITUDE OF PUZZLES

Solving the puzzle is entirely dependent upon the technique used. The two essential elements being, use the original Hebrew and Greek, in which the Bible was written, and second, do not allow the Bible to nullify, or invalidate itself. The puzzle can only be solved by using all of the original pieces.

If pieces are altered, or changed, the original puzzle becomes altered, or changed, to the same extent. We know the Bible is subject to interpretation, so if any interpretation would cause us to alter, or change the puzzle, we know the interpretation is wrong. We can then use this as a guide.

Every failed attempt to solve the puzzle has been the result of the original puzzle being altered or nullified. An example of this is found in Matthew 15:3-9, and in Mark 7:9-13, where religious leaders are accused of nullifying pieces of the puzzle. They had established a law that allowed people to abandon their parents by giving money to the synagogue.

The command was to, "honour your father and your mother," yet they nullified this with their law, which was nothing more than a cash grab. Christ responds by saying, "You have a fine way of setting aside the commands of God in order to observe your own traditions." And, "Thus you nullify the word of God by your tradition that you have handed down, and you do many things like that." So, they altered the puzzle, and did so often.

As such a change is handed down from generation to generation, the altered puzzle becomes accepted, and as more changes are made, it gets further and further from the original. It morphs into a belief system, which can take on a life of its own, yet most people, within the religion, will still believe that it's firmly based upon the original puzzle.

Another example of altering the puzzle is the belief that Angels do not have souls. This belief is maintained by many Bible-based religions, yet it is not stated, or even inferred, anywhere in the Bible, that Angels do not have souls. Again, as this belief gets handed down, people believe that it has a basis, which is not the case.

As these theologies are developed, and passed down, from one generation to another, they are assumed to be entirely based upon the original puzzle, and people are usually not allowed to disagree. In the case of the Catholic Church, only in the last several decades have members been allowed to read the Bible for themselves. Previous to this, no one had access to the Bible, so no one could question the belief system.

To further illustrate, the fundamental Christian belief is that all have 'sinned", are therefore lost, and must be saved to enter heaven. This can only be achieved through belief in Christ, the only begotten son of God, who died on the cross, for the sins of the world. Then, salvation is entirely dependent on whether, or not, he is the, "personal Lord and saviour," of any individual.

According to this common Christian, "belief system," the eternal destiny of any human being is entirely based upon whether, or not, a person believes. So it is the position of these religions that God will one day judge the world, and the outcome of this judgement will be entirely dependent on the beliefs of each individual. This makes, "salvation," an issue of religion, because religion is beliefs.

Problem is, how was anyone saved before Christ, as thousands of years of human history occurred prior to this event? The answer to this question has always been unclear. Furthermore, biblically speaking, we can find statements clearly indicating that beliefs are not a factor in the judgement of the world.

In Matthew 25:31-46, we find what is called, "The sheep and the goats," which is Christ's own description of the judgement of the world. He states, "When the son of man comes in his glory, and all the Angels with him, he will sit on his throne in heavenly glory. All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats."

In the statement, "all the nations," the Greek word for all is the word, "pas," meaning, "all, any, every, and the whole," implying, any, and every nation, and the whole of the nations, meaning the entire world. Christ continues, "Then the king will say to those on his right (the sheep), 'come, you who are blessed by my father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world."

"For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me'." To which the righteous ask the king, "When did we feed you, or give you something to drink, or invite you in, or clothe you, or visit you?"

The king reply's, "When you did it for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did it for me." The king then turns to the goats on his left, stating they had not done what the sheep had done. After which, the goats are then sent to eternal punishment, the sheep to eternal life.

So, in Christ's own biblical description of the judgement of the world, religious beliefs are not even mentioned. Instead, judgement is entirely based upon acts of love, and compassion, not beliefs, completely contradicting the beliefs of most Bible-based Christian religions. This is further supported by biblical statements illustrating the impartiality of God, which is described in three different ways.

First, Deuteronomy 10:17 & 2 Chronicles 19:7, both state that God does not show partiality. Second, Psalm 98:9, states that God "will judge the world in righteousness and the peoples with equity." And third, there are a number of references, including Psalm 62:12, which state that God, "will reward each person according to what they have done."

According to these statements, God would look at every person in exactly the same way. The word, "equity," from above is from the Hebrew root word "yashar" (yaw-shar'), meaning "straightness or evenness." The statement that, "God will judge the peoples with equity," means with evenness, or all the same way. This is exactly what is seen in the sheep and the goats, everyone judged according to what they each did, the same standard applied to each one.

The same impartiality is also applicable to churches. In Revelation 3:16, Christ tells a church, "I am about to spit you out of my mouth." In Revelation 2:4-5, he tells another, they are about to lose the presence of God. In Revelation 3:4, he tells another that few of them are worthy, all indicating that churches do not have an exclusive on God, nor do they receive preferential treatment.

Then, in Revelation 22:12, he states that he will give to everyone according to what they have done. A statement which is consistent with impartiality, consistent with his description of judgement, nothing to do with beliefs. So, biblically speaking, impartiality is maintained from cover to cover, right from Deuteronomy to Revelation.

And so, here comes the huge contradiction, as the Bible also does state that one must believe in Christ to be saved. This belief is then the focus of most Bible-based Christian religions, and it is the nucleus of a multitude of puzzles, all partially based on the original puzzle. However, they all focus on beliefs, to the exclusion of everything else, and the original puzzle is then significantly altered. This leaves us with a puzzle that is yet to be solved, a world full of Bible-based religions, that have failed, and the question, "why?"

The book of Job is entirely about asking the question, "why?" Job is described as being "the greatest man among all the people of the east." He had children, land, hundreds of animals, all representing great wealth at that particular point in history. He is devoted to God, then Satan tells God, the devotion is only due to his success. God then allows Satan to take away everything, to see if the devotion remains.

So everything is taken from Job, his children and servants are killed, his livestock taken by raiders, and he is covered with painful sores. The majority of the book is about Job trying to figure out "why?" And, he finds himself wishing he could speak directly to God, to get an answer.

This is a search for answers that many people experience at some point in their lives. Something happens, we attempt to make sense out of life, we want an explanation from God, or someone. In Job's case, God answers, only to say, "who are you to question me." Then, in Job 42:2, Job responds to God saying, "I know that you can do all things; no plan of yours can be thwarted."

This then brings us to the concept of a plan that cannot be thwarted, and the question, could such a plan exist? And, if the Bible is a puzzle, would solving the puzzle provide us with the details of that plan? This means we would then understand the creation, and fall of the Angels, followed by the creation, and fall of the human race. All of it planned out in advance, all by design, for a very specific purpose.

Now, this all begins by solving the contradiction between a judgment, in which religious beliefs aren't even mentioned, and a statement that people must believe. To solve this contradiction, we must first understand that with any puzzle, if two pieces cannot be joined directly together, it likely means that a piece, or pieces, must go in between.

This brings us to the question, "is there a key piece of the puzzle that can solve this contradiction?" And, is the exclusion of that piece, from the theologies of all Bible-based religions, the reason they have failed to solve the puzzle? And, if the puzzle is assembled using that piece, does it give us a completely different explanation for creation, that being, the creation of individuality, from chaos? The answer to all of these questions is, "yes!"

CHAPTER FOUR: THE LEGISLATION OF LOVE

The Bible contains two distinctly different laws, one is the foundation of Judaism, the second is completely ignored, but understanding both is essential to solving the puzzle. Now, in Genesis, we see the rise of a society so violent, it allegedly has to be destroyed by a flood. Noah builds the ark, they survive, they start over, but something goes wrong, because violent societies again begin to emerge.

In Genesis 14, we see warfare between kings, two of them being from the violent cities of Sodom and Gomorrah. God sends two Angels, to check them out, and after being threatened with rape, the Angels blind the men of the city, and then destroy Sodom and Gomorrah. At which point, in order to stem the violence, God chooses one man named Abraham to father the nation of Israel.

Abraham was chosen because he had faith in God. He has a son named Isaac, who has a son named Jacob, both of whom had faith in God. Jacob has twelve sons, the most favoured is Joseph, his jealous brothers sell him into slavery, after which he is taken to Egypt, where he becomes the right hand man of the Pharaoh. And the source for this story may come from the actual events surrounding the Pharaoh Akhenaten.

In the biblical story, during a famine, Joseph's brothers come to Egypt to buy food, they are reconciled, after which Joseph brings the people of Israel to Egypt, to live. Then, after the death of Joseph, the people of Israel become so numerous that the Egyptians fear them, so they enslave them. They remain slaves for four hundred years, and then God sends them Moses.

Under Moses, the people of Israel are freed, they travel through the wilderness, and enter the "promised land." According to the Bible, Moses does not enter this land, he dies in the wilderness, but before his death he gives the people God's law, which is eventually called the "Law of Moses." This law contains the, "Ten Commandments," and a multitude of other laws, and sacrifices. It can be looked upon as God's response to the hatred, violence, and injustice that kept dominating the world, which are the basis for the biblical concepts of evil, and sin.

Now, religiously speaking, there are some who believe that everything is evil, or everything is sin, because everyone is lost, and no one is good, until they get saved. So, we must then believe, which is religion. However, if we use the judgement of love for context, we can then get a much better understanding of the concepts of evil and sin, which are very much misunderstood.

To begin with, we need to understand that the concepts of evil, and sin, as they are found in the Bible, were only required because of the hatred, violence and injustice that kept developing on earth. And, this becomes clear when the Hebrew, and Greeks words for evil, and sin, are analysed.

For instance, the Hebrew root word for sin is "chata" (khaw-taw'), which means "to miss." It also means "the harm that has been done." So, if the goal is love, compassion, or caring, then harming others would definitely be the opposite of this goal, therefore it would "miss" this goal.

The Greek word for sin is "hamartano" (ham-ar-tan'-o), which means "to miss the mark." If the mark is to care, be compassionate, or love, then harming others would certainly be missing this mark. The Hebrew root word for evil is "raa" (raw-ah'), which means "to be bad, evil, injurious, wicked, and to do injury, or hurt." Again we see the definition of, "doing injury to," or harming others, which is definitely the opposite of caring, or love. The Greek word for evil is "poneros" (pon-ay-ros'), which means "hurtful."

So, we first need to understand that the biblical definitions for evil, and sin, are essentially the same. In the biblical record we see one violent society after another, with the concepts of evil and sin being aimed right at that violence. Throughout history, we see the same pattern, with one conquering society after another. The Mongols, Alexander the Great, the Greeks, the Romans, were all societies that thrived upon violence.

The Law of Moses was established to both prevent violence, and to make people aware that this violence was wrong. Six of the Ten Commandments can be analysed from the context of not harming others. Honour your parents, do not murder, commit adultery, steal, give false testimony, or covet. All, at the very least containing the potential to cause harm, if broken. And, the command to love a, "God of love," which in theory, would inspire love.

Now, the Ten Commandments are only a fraction of the Law of Moses. In Leviticus 19:15-18, we find laws directing people, "Not to pervert justice, not to show partiality to the poor, or favouritism to the rich." They were instructed, "Not to spread slander, or do anything that would endanger their neighbour's life." They were instructed, "Not to seek revenge, or bear a grudge, but instead, they were to love their neighbours as themselves."

So, the entire structure of the Law of Moses was intended to prevent the hatred, violence, and injustice that kept developing on earth. The society under this law was intended to function with an attitude of love, and caring. Violent societies kept developing on earth, so here was a law that was intended to show people a better way to live.

It was a law designed to, "force," people to care, an attempt to legislate both love, and faith. People would be forced to protect the interests of each other, rather than just looking after themselves. The law was also designed to control crime in two different ways, the combination of which had the potential to be extremely effective.

Under the Law of Moses, the attitude of love, and caring, within the society was to be extended to the poor. In Deuteronomy 15:7-11, the people were instructed, not to be hard-hearted, or tight-fisted towards the poor. Instead, they were to be open-handed, and freely lend them whatever they needed. It was clearly stated that "there would always be poor", but the people were to always help. In this way the poor would not starve, nor would they live without hope. This had the potential to reduce crime, and inspire caring within the society.

And, under the law, the society had a unique system of justice that was plugged straight into God. The nation of Israel was comprised of twelve tribes, one was a priesthood with the priests living in towns throughout the land. If a dispute could not be resolved, the priests would act as judge, hear the witnesses, and if they needed help, God would provide them with the truth.

The poor were not to be shown partiality, nor were the rich to be shown favouritism. So the poor did not get special treatment, but then neither did the rich, and strangers were also given equal rights, as far as justice was concerned. Everyone was to be treated exactly the same, and if any witness in a trial was caught lying, the witness would receive the full sentence for the crime in the case. This meant no one could lie in court, because they knew God would expose them. Crime could therefore be controlled, because the poor were cared for, and because the justice system was essentially flawless.

The law, by design, was intended to introduce a change, halting the violent societies that kept emerging, by introducing an ordered, civilized society. And, according to the biblical record, at times, it worked very well. The greatest example of this may be seen in the kingdom that allegedly flourished under the leadership of a king named Solomon. He was the son of King David, who slew Goliath, and he became king at a very young age.

In 1 Kings 3:5-15, once Solomon became king, the Lord appears to him in a dream, and says, "Ask for whatever you want me to give you." Solomon allegedly becomes, what may have been the greatest king in the history of the world, simply because of his reply. Solomon answered, "You have shown great kindness to your servant, my father David, because he was faithful to you and righteous and upright in heart."

"You have continued this great kindness to him and have given him a son to sit on his throne this very day. Now, o Lord my God, you have made your servant king in place of my father David, but I am only a little child and do not know how to carry out my duties. Your servant is here among the people you have chosen, a great people, too numerous to count or number. So give your servant a discerning heart to govern your people and to distinguish between right and wrong, "For who is able to govern this great people of yours?"

The Lord was pleased that Solomon had asked for this. So God said to him, "Since you have asked for this and not for long life or wealth for yourself, nor have you asked for the death of your enemies but for discernment in administering justice. I will do what you have asked, I will give you a wise and discerning heart, so that there will never have been anyone like you, nor will there ever be. Moreover, I will give you what you have not asked for—both riches and honour—so that in your lifetime you will have no equal among kings."

The biblical record states in 1 Kings 4:29-30, that "God gave Solomon wisdom and very great insight and a breadth of understanding as measureless as the sands on the seashore. Solomon's wisdom was greater than the wisdom of all the men of the east, and greater than all the wisdom of Egypt." In 1 Kings 4:34, it is recorded that, "Men of all nations came to listen to Solomon's wisdom, sent by the kings of the world, who had heard of his wisdom."

In 1 Kings 10:23-24, it is also recorded that "King Solomon was greater in riches and wisdom than all the other kings of the earth. The whole world sought audiences with Solomon to hear the wisdom God had put in his heart." Solomon had a fleet of trading vessels, he had chariot cities, and the Bible records in 1 Kings 10:27, that in Jerusalem, he made silver as common as stones.

Now, Solomon is one of the early biblical characters that some argue did not exist, but here we see an ordered, civilized society, that according to the biblical record, influenced the entire world. Violent societies kept developing on earth, one ordered society is introduced, everyone notices, and they think, perhaps there's a better way. So, violence would still be present, and warfare, but there would also now be an attempt to establish ordered, civilized societies.

This result was allegedly achieved by combining a caring King with a law designed to produce an ordered, civilized society. Solomon's unselfish response in his dream, asking for wisdom, and discernment, was indicative of the way he conducted himself as King. And, what we see in the biblical record clearly shows that when the Kings and leaders of Israel cared, the law worked, but when they did not care, the law became worthless.

Turns out that the administration, of a potentially flawless system of government, was dependant on people, meaning it had one devastating flaw. That being, if the leadership became corrupt, the entire system became corrupt, and when this happened, the results were horrifying. The biblical record shows that when the leadership was good, the system under the Law of Moses worked. It also shows that when the leadership was bad, the system became corrupt, and the entire system was left in ruins.

Initially, the law was administered by the priesthood, then by judges, then by kings. Regardless of who was leading the nation, when corruption set in, it would spread from top, to bottom. This meant that when the leadership became corrupt, the priesthood, and the people, also became corrupt.

Jeremiah 23:11, "From the least to the greatest, all were greedy for gain; prophets and priests alike, all practised deceit." Ezekial 22:29, "The people of the land practice extortion and commit robbery; they oppress the poor and needy and mistreat the alien, denying them justice." Hosea 4:2, "There is only cursing, lying and murder, stealing and adultery; they break all bounds and bloodshed follows bloodshed."

The same result is seen every time the leadership became corrupt, and Isaiah 3:14-15 states that the elders, and leaders of the people, were responsible. The Law of Moses was designed to prevent hatred, violence, and injustice, and at times it worked, resulting in an ordered, civilized society. It allegedly did have some success, but because of corruption it ultimately failed, which was no surprise to God.

The final portions of the law are given to Moses in Deuteronomy 31:9-13. Three verses later, in the same chapter, God tells Moses that the law will fail, apparently knowing, right from the beginning, that faith, and love cannot be legislated. The Law of Moses was designed to stop corruption, violence, and injustice, but instead, it proved that people cannot be forced to care.

It was seemingly known, right from the beginning that any system dependant on people will fail, because when the people become corrupt, the entire system becomes corrupt. People throughout history have tried again, and again, to create systems of government, and justice, that would work, but corruption has always stood in the way.

Now, the Law of Moses is identified as being an unforgiving law. Galations 3:10, "All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the book of the law." And, this actually is the basis for the religious belief that everyone is lost, and therefore, everyone must be saved.

So, in theory, all are flawed and make mistakes, so at some point we all cause harm, regardless of intention, at which point we break the law, and are guilty under the law. So, we have the quote, "For all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God." And, Romans 3:20, "No one will be declared righteous in God's sight by observing the law." So, we are allegedly all guilty, and this is the basis for the religious argument that everyone must be saved.

So this first, unforgiving law draws a line in the sand saying, we are not to cause harm, and the moment we do, we are guilty. And, it can do nothing but make people guilty, because it is unforgiving. This then brings us to the second law, which is a forgiving law, upon which we can find the basis for the judgement of love.

Now, unlike the first law, the second law is a forgiving law. It is called the "Royal law" or the "law of Christ," and it specifically is the command to, "love one another." If this law is given its place in the puzzle, love becomes the focus, rather than beliefs, and religion become irrelevant. Also, the omission of this piece from the puzzle is a mistake that cannot be overcome, if one wishes to solve the puzzle.

If harm is the basis for the biblical concepts of evil, and sin, the question can be asked, "What harm will people cause, if they care?" The Law of Moses contains a multitude of laws to cover many different types of harm, but the law of Christ is a single law that covers them all. The challenge now is to place this piece into the puzzle and see if we can come up with an alternate explanation for creation, one that focuses on the creation of individuality, from chaos.

CHAPTER FIVE: THE IDES OF INDIVIDUALITY

So, a Creator allegedly created beings called Angels, only to fight a war in heaven, through which some Angels became Demons. So then, the Creator can be attributed with the creation of Demons? Then, the encore is the creation, and fall, of the mortals, resulting in one completely messed up world. People consider this mess, and think, no way an intelligent deity could be behind such a disaster.

Now, as much as this appears to be a conclusive argument, it is time to start considering an alternate explanation. This detour begins by answering the question, why would the Divine create a messed up world? What would be the purpose, what would be the payoff, what would be worth the time, effort and bother?

The answer comes from understanding that, by definition, every human being, who has ever lived, is an individual. And that, if a Creator wished to create individuality, there would be completely expected implications, and consequences, to such an exercise. And, that any Creator, would absolutely have to completely understand, and anticipate, what would result from such a creation.

Now, Webster's defines an individual, as something that is, "not divisible without loss of identity." Meaning that individuality is the, "lowest common denominator," common to the entire human race, which cannot be further divided, or the individual ceases to exist. Now, every human being is unique, we all have qualities that make us different from everyone else.

So, these qualities make us unique, and they define our individuality to the point where it can never, ever be completely duplicated. It is the most essential part of our existence, it is the essence of our very being, and we are all aware of this uniqueness, it is what makes us sentient beings.

Now, it is known, beyond a doubt, that we are all individuals, and that we are all unique. However, it is not particularly important, for the sake of this discussion, that we know exactly how our individuality is created within the human mind and spirit. Instead, it is enough that we know that our individuality does exist, and that it is not divisible, without being lost.

There is one last very important component to this equation. This is the fact that we all posses the knowledge of good & evil, or, at the very least, we all understand these concepts, meaning that we are all influenced by, and can choose between, good & evil. Now, completely aside from the issues of God, or religion, our world is filled with both good & evil, which can clearly be seen today, and throughout history. Regardless of the source, there is no debating the existence of good & evil, or their influence in our society.

Now, our ability to choose between good & evil, along with our ability to make all the other choices we make in life is what we call our 'free-will.' It, along with our conscience, is one of the most essential components of our individuality, and these qualities are not divisible without suffering a loss of identity.

So, take away our 'free-will', take away our own individual conscience, take away our ability to be ourselves, and the individual ceases to exist. This is the key component to this entire discussion, understanding that the individual is not divisible, without the individual being lost, and something else being left in its place.

Now, if there indeed was a creation, and its purpose was the creation of individuals, we must then understand the implications of proceeding with such an act, because they are profound. This is true because if a Creator decides to create individuals, and then gives those individuals the knowledge of good & evil, through whatever source, then those individuals must then be free to choose.

Once this process has begun, almost all control is lost, because if the freedom to choose is interfered with, the individual is lost. This is why it is a constant theme, in books and movies, that there can be no interference with free-will, as this would damage the individual, or damage the experiment, by producing a reaction which is not genuine.

Now, if a robot, even an organic one, was created, it could be turned off, or be programmed not to choose evil, or not to inflict harm, but it would then not be an individual. So, if a Creator creates beings that can only be good, or that cannot inflict harm, then something other than an individual is created, and it is not a human being. However, when an individual is created, and that individual understands the concepts of good & evil, that individual will then be free to choose.

So, this influence and choice, is then absolutely essential to the creation of each and every, individual, and if this choice does not occur, the process of creation remains incomplete. So, because this choice is essential, it means that the introduction of something called corruption cannot be avoided, and the consequences of this are seen throughout human history.

This would also mean that, if a Creator wanted to create a world of individuals, there would be absolutely no choice, other than to create a world exactly like the one in which we live. This would be true because, by definition, if an individual is created, they are going to be able to choose between good & evil, so any resulting society is going to be filled with both good & evil, and there is no other way.

Now, one of the definitions given by Webster's for the word corrupt is, "to lose purity." So, to some extent, every human being would then have suffered a "necessary" loss of purity, simply because of the influence of evil. Now, the influence of good would also be present, and the choice between the two would then indicate the nature of each individual. However, if the introduction of corruption into the human system does not occur, this choice can never be made.

This means that the introduction of corruption is essential to the individuality of every human being. This also means that, if this corruption is taken away, the individuality of every human being is also taken away. It then becomes impossible for any human being to be perfect, because they all must be influenced by evil.

So, if a Creator sets out to create individuality, it would be known that choice, or free-will would be required. Christ said that sin, "must," come (Mathew 18:7), which would be a reference to the necessary introduction of corruption, or the knowledge of good & evil. It is introduced, into the human system, by design, for a specific purpose, and must occur.

Romans 8:19-20, "The creation waits in eager expectation for the children of God to be revealed. For the creation was subjected to frustration, not by its own choice, but by the will of the one who subjected it." It then goes on to state that this was done to liberate the creation, and bring it into the freedom of the children of God.

So, in essence what we have, are conditions being put in place for the creation and development of individuals. The Creator knows that there must be free-will, or choice, and good & evil, meaning corruption, all resulting in chaos, a society filled with extremes of good & evil, and everything between.

The Creator knows it's going to be a mess, and intentionally adds to that mess by purposefully subjecting the creation to frustration, doing so to facilitate the development of individuals. The Bible is then perhaps intentionally difficult to understand, extremely subject to interpretation, causing it to become the basis for a large number of religions. And, in the midst of all this frustration and chaos, individuality actually thrives.

When life is frustrating, confusing and chaotic, that is when we look inside and decide who we are going to be as individuals. And, if that individuality is what the Divine is after, then the conditions for that development are going to be maintained. So there is no reason to try to fix everything, there is no reason to have it all make sense.

This is then where we find the plan that cannot be thwarted, because the plan is the development of individuality, and the plan works very well in the midst of chaos. And, all of this is known and foreseen right from the beginning, from before anything is created. The Divine looks at the empty playing field and knows, if individuality is created, this is going to be the result.

Now the, "Ides of Individuality," is the tipping point at which the creation becomes advanced enough to look at the mess that has been created, and says to itself, you have got to be kidding me. It is the point at which we begin to question what we're being spoon fed. Initially the explanations given in the Bible, were not questioned, but were taken as gospel. And, it is only in recent years that our society has begun to advance rapidly, and question everything.

So, if the Bible does contain the details to a plan that cannot be thwarted, it's going to have to make sense, and to get there we must first solve the puzzle. To do this we must recognise that the Bible does contain two distinctly different laws. One is a law that cannot be fulfilled, because it requires perfection, the second is a very forgiving law that is completely fulfilled when people care.

The first of these laws was established by Moses, and it is called the "Law of Moses." The second of these laws was established by Christ, and it is called the "law of Christ." Now, there is not a single theology of any Bible-based religion that properly understands, and recognises the significance of both of these laws. And this, in itself, is the reason the puzzle has never been solved.

Many religious theologies do not recognise the "law of Christ", as being an independent law. Other religious theologies believe that the "law of Christ", can only be fulfilled if a person believes in Christ. This then makes the fulfilment of this law an issue of beliefs, which therefore, makes it an issue of religion. Now, the Bible contains plenty of evidence to make it very clear that both of these positions are completely and utterly wrong.

According to the Bible, after Moses had led the people of Israel out of Egypt, and into the wilderness, he went up Mount Sinai where God gave him the law. It is recorded in Exodus 32:1-4, that Moses was on the mountain for so long that the people became restless, and they made themselves a golden calf to worship.

Then, when Moses came down the mountain he became angry at what was happening, and all the men from the tribe of Levi rallied around him. After this, God set aside the tribe of Levi to be a priesthood called the Levitical priesthood, of which Aaron, the brother of Moses, was appointed the first high priest.

Now, the Levitical priesthood is not the only priesthood found in the Bible. Over four hundred years before the Law of Moses was ever established the biblical record states in Genesis 14:18, that Abraham met a priest of God named Melchizedek. This priest was the king of a city named Salem, which is an early word for Jerusalem. Hebrews 7:2 states, that the name Melchizedek means "king of righteousness", and that "king of Salem" also means "king of peace."

Now, according to the Bible, this priest was not human, and in Hebrews 7:3 it is stated that Melchizedek was, "without father or mother, without genealogy, without beginning of days or end of life." The Bible also states that Christ became a priest in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron.

So, the Levitical priesthood failed because it was a human priesthood, and was therefore corruptible. When it became corrupt, it also corrupted the "Law of Moses", and according to the Bible, this made the law worthless. So, according to the Bible, this corruptible human priesthood was replaced by an incorruptible priesthood, in the order of Melchizedek.

In Hebrews 7:11 it is stated, "If perfection could have been attained through the Levitical priesthood (for on the basis of it the law was given to the people), why was there still need for another priest to come -- one in the order of Melchizedek, not in the order of Aaron?" So, in the biblical record, we first see this change in the priesthood, and then in Hebrews 7:12, we also see the change in the law, stated as, "When there is a change of the priesthood there must also be a change of the law."

In the King James it states, "For the priesthood being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the law". Now, this is where virtually every Bible –based theology drops the ball, because although they do recognize the change in the priesthood, they do not recognise or understand the change in the law. This is unfortunate, because if they had understood this change in the law, they may have then also solved the puzzle.

CHAPTER SIX: THE LAW OF LOVE

The sacrifice of Christ was an event that clearly changed our world, it is also the elephant in the room. Some would argue that it didn't actually occur, or that it did not occur in the way described in the Bible. Some argue that Christ was actually married, may have had children, a picture very different from the biblical account.

And, why would such a sacrifice be required by the Divine? What would be the purpose, how could it possibly make sense? Now, we have the traditional explanation, that Adam & Eve introduced sin into the equation, now everyone is a sinner, and either we get saved, or else. It's all been wrapped up in a bow and we call it religion.

Now, the alternate explanation would have everything to do with the creation of individuality, from chaos, which results in a society filled with extremes of both good and evil. This chaotic society is required, if individuals are going to be produced, and this was understood by the Divine, right from the beginning. So, corruption is introduced, in order to produce individuality, and it then becomes necessary to, "light the way back out," of that corruption. It becomes necessary to point the way back to the Divine.

Now, think about it. We start off with violent societies developing on earth, and we see plenty of evidence of this beyond anything recorded in the Bible. So we then have the Divine introducing an ordered, civilized society, through the Law of Moses. Now, it doesn't work perfectly, but it does, at times, give the world an idea of what such a society can look like, and achieve.

Of course, we don't know if the kingdom under Solomon was real, as described in the Bible, but the society did exist, to some extent, as did the influence. We know this because that influence is still with us today, and is still influencing our world today. The influence of the Bible on modern civilization is undeniable, regardless of the degree to which it is historically accurate.

Just look at the sacrifice of Christ, which has changed our world. There are many who connect this event with the downfall of the Roman Empire, because they became too civilized to survive, as they were no longer war-like enough. Much of our modern civilization is based upon the values of, "love one another," and, "Do unto others." It is, to a large extent, the basis for modern human rights.

So here we possibly have the Divine, creating individuality, out of chaos, because there is no other way, and also placing influences into that chaos. These influences designed to direct us to become civilized, with higher values, first as a society, and then as an individual, all with the development of the individual in mind. This influence has permeated our society, and it has survived, in a seemingly supernatural manner, which may be an indication of the source.

So, the Creator plunges the creation into corruption, a requirement for the development of individuals. The Creator then, "lights the way back," saying, look up, I did this. The Divine, reaches down, makes a connection, to further contrast the differences between good & evil, and to keep humanity aspiring to reach back up to the Divine.

Now, the message today has become one of religion, which has resulted from the attempts of people to reach back up to the Divine. The Bible does contain the statements, in Habakkuk 2:4, and Romans 1:17, that, "the righteous will live by faith." And, the statement in Romans 1:17, indicates that this faith is, "from first to last", meaning from beginning to end. And, to many people, the requirement of that faith is found within religion, but the real question is, where is the requirement of that faith found, according to the Divine? Is the requirement religion, or is it love?

Now, according to the biblical record, when Christ came on the scene, the history of Israel had been like a roller coaster ride. This nation had at times been on top of the world, and at other times, it had almost been eradicated from the face of the planet. The low point of this nation, in biblical times, came at about 500 BC, when God sent the king of Babylon against Israel to destroy it. The armies of Babylon first defeated Israel, after which they also defeated Judah, which had become a separate kingdom.

During this occupation, many of the people of Israel, and Judah, who were not killed, were taken back to Babylon, as slaves, and captives. This was later called the period of the, "Babylonian Captivity." Now, the people of Babylon were very interested in culture, and because of this the people of Israel were allowed to record their history in writing. This was the beginning of the Old Testament as we know it today. After this captivity ended, the Old Testament nation of Israel was never the same. It never regained the glory that it had known under kings like David, or Solomon.

After the, "Babylonian Captivity," ended, it was not a simple matter for the people of Israel, or Judah, to rebuild, because their kingdoms had virtually been destroyed. This meant that when they went back, they had to start over, because everything was essentially in ruins. There were also neighbouring countries that did not want the Hebrews to rebuild, and this again made things difficult. The people did however have the beginnings of the Old Testament in writing, and religious groups did form, basing their beliefs on these writings.

There was approximately a four hundred year gap between the writing of the last book of the Old Testament, and the birth of Christ. During this period of time, changes happened, or began to happen, in what was left of Israel. The New Testament records that at the time of Christ, two prominent religious groups existed in Israel. One of these religious groups was called the Pharisees, and the other was called the Sadducees. Neither one of these two groups is mentioned anywhere in the Old Testament, which means they both likely originated in the time period between the Old, and New Testaments.

At the time of Christ, the nation of Israel was under the control of the Roman Empire, which had established a king to rule over Israel. The Pharisees, who had become the most prominent religious group, had also established a ruling council called the Sanhedrin, which was a completely separate authority. The establishment of this council was permitted by Rome because it helped keep the Jews under control.

The Pharisees, and the Sadducees, did not share the same religious beliefs, but they did both pursue legalistic forms of religion. They believed that the righteousness, and/or, salvation of any individual, was based on the observance of the right set of religious laws. The Pharisees wrote many laws in addition to those contained in the "Law of Moses", whereas the Sadducees would only recognise the "Law of Moses." The origins of the modern rabbi can be traced back to the Pharisees, but the order of the Sadducees was eventually abolished by the Sanhedrin.

When the army of Babylon destroyed the Jewish nation, the Levitical priesthood of the Old Testament was also essentially lost. It was in a sense replaced by the establishment of the Pharisees, which was actually the beginning of modern, "Judaism." This was a very significant change because the Levitical priesthood, along with the "Law of Moses", was a, "system of government," whereas modern Judaism is a faith, or a religion.

This means that by the time Christ was born, a "system of government", was well on its way to becoming a, "system of beliefs." It was then simply a matter of which, "system of beliefs," would emerge. It was either going to be the religion of the Sadducees, or the religion of the Pharisees. What took place between these two groups was nothing more than a competition between religions, which the Sadducees eventually lost.

Now, right after he'd received the last parts of the law, Moses was told by God that the law would fail, as it was already know that one cannot legislate love. And the Bible does state that the law was cursed, or came with a curse, essentially to curse the violence that kept occurring on earth. So then, the Pharisees and Sadducees, took that same law, which had already failed, and came with a curse, and they applied the many laws, within that law, to the individual, in the form of a religion.

They didn't understand that the application of these many laws doesn't work as a religion, any more than they worked as a system of government. This is true because the, "system of religion," becomes susceptible to corruption in exactly the same way as occurred with the system of government. And for this very reason this is not the means by which the Divine is looking to connect with the creation.

Christ accused the leadership of these two groups of, abandoning the love of God, of being blind guides, of being snakes. He accused them of weighing people down with the many laws, without really helping anyone, when all they really did was look after themselves. And this type of religion still exists today, is everywhere, and is just variations on the same theme.

The reason for the observance of all these laws, within religion, is to try and make people acceptable to the Divine. It's to try and please the Divine, to try and reach up to the Divine, to say, look at me, I am now worthy. They observe the laws, observe the ceremony, and then hope that the Divine agrees, that they are worthy. Yet, the many laws have already failed, they do not connect people to the Divine, and so what is then needed, is a completely different type of law, such as a, "law of love."

Now, we could ask, why the need for any laws at all? It's a great question, and the answer may be nothing more than to provide a frame of reference, or to define the issues in a way we humans can understand. Our own societies are filled with laws, which are very useful, are generally designed to keep us safe, and allow our societies to function in an orderly manner.

In the case of the Law of Moses, the law was established to define violence and harm as being wrong, and it could be looked at as an attempt to guide a society. In the case of the law of love, the law is established to say that the choice is love, in an attempt to guide the individual. The Law of Moses was initially established a system of government, and it proved that love cannot be legislated. Whereas the Law of Love was established by the Divine, to make the connection between the Divine, and every individual who chooses love.

Romans 13:8-10, "Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another, for the person who loves their fellowman has fulfilled the law. The commandments, 'do not commit adultery,' 'do not murder,' 'do not steal,' 'do not covet,' and whatever other commandment there may be, are summed up in this one rule: 'love your neighbour as yourself.' Love does no harm to its neighbour. Therefore love is the fulfilment of the law."

So the entire law, or the sum of all the laws, is summed up in the one law, "love your neighbour as yourself." All of the many laws are designed to prevent harm, but love does no harm, so love fulfils every law. Galations 5:14, "The entire law is summed up in a single command: 'love your neighbour as yourself'."

And, it is a law that can be fulfilled, Galations 6:2, "Carry each other's burdens and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ." So we have a second law, that can be fulfilled, that connects the individual who chooses love, to the Divine. Yet, this second law is not found in today's theologies, where instead, it is beliefs that connect the individual to the Divine, which makes it religion.

There are references to these two laws, interwoven throughout the Bible. Any references such as, "no one is righteous, no not one," or, "all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God," are references to the first law. Whereas anytime there is a reference to the righteous, it is a reference to the second law. The references to these two laws appear as contradictions, but once the two laws are understood, many of these contradictions simply disappear.

When Christ said, "Be perfect," or, "If you think it you have done it," he was referring to the first law. When he said, "forgive and you will be forgiven," or, "do unto others," he was referring to the second law. James 1:25 refers to, "The perfect law that gives freedom," which can only be a reference to the law of love. As is Genesis 4:7, where God says to Cain, "If you do what is right, will you not be accepted?" These are all references to a law of love that connects the Divine to those who choose love.

The problem is that, "love one another," is not a religious law. Religion prefers the many laws that can be built into a belief system, and contrasted against other beliefs. Then, opposing religions can stand on street corners and say, pick me. When this occurs it has everything to do with individuals attempting to connect with the Divine, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the Divine connecting with the creation.

CHAPTER SEVEN: THE TWO SALVATIONS

If the puzzle is assembled without a complete understanding of the, "law of love," a series of mistakes occurs, which can only lead to religious conclusions. This results in people trying to make themselves acceptable to the Divine, essentially by being committed to their religion, with the focus on a belief system.

The God of creation then, creates Angels, who fall because of pride, the mortal creation falls because of rebellion, none of it being the fault of the Creator. Then the entire mortal creation is free falling into hell and only those who believe will be saved. However, if the law of love is given its place in the puzzle, a completely different set of conclusions are reached, and a completely different picture emerges.

Now, according to religion, one is not, "saved," unless Christ is, "personal Lord and saviour." And, as the, "Law of Moses," cannot be fulfilled, everyone is lost unless they believe. John 3:16, "For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son, that whosoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life." And, John 3:18, "Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because they have not believed in the name of God's one and only son."

So, there is the proof, plain and simple. We either call him Lord or we don't and that's the extent to which the Divine is connecting with the creation. Matthew 7:21-23, "Not everyone who says to me, 'Lord, Lord,' will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only those who do the will of my father who is in heaven. Many will say to me on that day, 'Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name and in your name drive out demons and perform miracles?' Then I will tell them plainly, 'I never knew you. Get away from me you evildoers'!"

So, according to the Bible, many will call him Lord, drive out demons and perform miracles, and he'll say, I don't know you. Yet, they called him Lord, meaning they believed, so what happened? The statement is, "do the will of my father," which is, "do no harm," or, "love one another," which is seen in the judgement of love. So the Divine is then connecting with those who choose love, not religion.

Just look at the crusades, the inquisitions, and the witch hunts, in which belief in the Divine was used as a justification for murder. People choose a belief system that leads them to see others as being evil, which then allows them to kill that evil, all in the service of the Divine. So the first law, which was intended to prevent hatred and violence, is turned into the many laws of religion, and is then used as justification for hatred and violence.

We have the statements, "Do to others as you would have them do to you," "Forgive and you will be forgiven," and, "Let the person without sin throw the first stone." They all have the same meaning, and then we have the command to, "love one another," which is the, "law of love," which fulfils the entire law, end of story. And yet somehow a religious belief system can take this, and turn it into justification for killing people, in the name of the Divine.

So, a person believes, they accept the religion, they call him Lord, and become a disciple. They engage in Bible study, they fast and pray, and then they try to, "save," others. This is done by showing them that because they are a sinner, they must call him Lord, and then join the church. It's all about a personal relationship, and once they accept Christ as, "personal Lord and saviour," they too are saved. And anyone who has not done so remains lost.

The problem with this theology is that there is no context in the Bible for, "personal Lord and savoir." In the Old, and New Testaments, the Lordship of Christ is presented in one context only, that being, "the Lord of the whole earth", or, "Lord of all." The Bible does not present the Lordship anywhere as, "personal Lord and saviour."

In the context found in the Bible, the Lordship of the Divine is applied to the whole creation, and there is no other context. Joshua 3:13, "And as soon as the priests who carry the ark of the Lord – the Lord of all the earth – set foot in the Jordan, its waters flowing downstream will be cut off, and stand up in a heap."

Psalm 97:5, "The Mountains melt like wax before the Lord, before the Lord of all the earth." Zechariah 4:14, "So he said, 'these are the two who are anointed to serve the Lord of all the earth'." The word "all" comes from the Hebrew word "kowl" (kole). It means, "the whole; all, any or every." The King James Version of the Bible translates two of these verses as "the Lord of the whole earth."

The same context is also found in the New Testament. Acts 10:36, "You know the message God sent to the people of Israel, telling the good news of peace through Jesus Christ, who is Lord of all." Romans 10:12, "For there is no difference between Jew and gentile – the same Lord is Lord of all." The Greek word for all is the word "pas." It includes "all forms of declension" and means "all, any, every, and the whole."

The Greek word "pas" seen above is the same word which is translated as "all" in "the sheep and the goats," which is the judgment of love, where it states, "All the nations will be gathered before him." The fact that the word "pas" includes "all forms of declension" essentially means that it applies to every case, or that it is without exception. It literally means "a decline" and "a system of cases and case endings", which in this context means, "from the top to the bottom", and "in every case."

So what we see here is a contrast in context between the Divine being connected to everyone who chooses love, as opposed to being connected to everyone who chooses a specific religion. And the same contextual mistake is found concerning the sacrifice of Christ, which is again personalized in order to make it an issue of religion.

In the New Testament, it is stated six times that the sacrifice of Christ was "once for all." The best example of these is found in Hebrews 7:27, where it states, "He sacrificed for their sins once for all when he offered himself." Similar statements can also be found in Romans 6:10, Hebrews 9:12, and 26, Hebrews 10:10, and 1 Peter 3:18. Then, it states in Hebrews 10:12 that, "when this priest had offered 'for all time' one sacrifice for sins, he sat down at the right hand of God." So, the sacrifice was both "once for all", and "for all time", meaning from beginning to end.

So, the Divine introduces corruption into the human system, necessary for the development of individuality. That corruption results in extremes of good & evil, so it produces tremendous hatred and violence throughout history. The Divine identifies that hatred and violence as being evil, or sin, and then, "lights the way back," saying, this is on me, I'm paying the price. And the Divine then connects, through the law of love, to every individual who chooses love.

1 John 2:2, "He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world." "Our sins," would mean Christians, or, "believers," at that time, and then extending to the, "whole," world. So, the Divine says, the world is a mess because of me, I had to do it to give you your individuality, but now I'm connected with everyone who chooses love.

Now, under the law of love there are, and always have been, righteous people. Matthew 9:10-13, "While Jesus was having dinner at Matthew's house, many tax collectors and sinners came and ate with him and his disciples. When the Pharisees saw this, they asked his disciples, 'why does your teacher eat with tax collectors and sinners?' On hearing this Jesus said, 'it is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. But go and learn what this means: "I desire mercy, not sacrifice" for I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners'."

Now according to religion, no one is righteous, everyone is a sinner, so the righteous referred to above must have already repented, which would likely be the argument. Luke 15:7, "I tell you that in the same way there will be more rejoicing in heaven over one sinner who repents than over ninety-nine righteous people who do not need to repent." So, how could someone not need to repent, unless they simply, by nature, choose love?

Romans 2:14, "When gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves." So when people, by nature, choose love, they are then connected to the Divine, through the, "law of love," and nothing further is required. Matthew 12:7, "If you had known what these words mean, 'I desire mercy, not sacrifice,' you would not have condemned the innocent."

The act of condemning the innocent then is calling everyone lost and evil, when everyone is not lost and evil. The word mercy, means compassion, or acts of love, seen in the judgment of love. So the Divine connects with the people of love, the people of good will, the people who care, through the, "law of love."

The best explanation of the law is found here. Luke 10:25-37, "On one occasion an expert in the law stood up to test Jesus. 'Teacher,' he asked, 'what must I do to inherit eternal life?' 'What is written in the law?' He replied, 'how do you read it'?" "He answered, 'love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'love your neighbour as yourself.'

You have answered correctly Jesus replied. 'Do this and you will live,' but he wanted to justify himself, so he asked Jesus, 'who is my neighbour?' In reply Jesus said: 'a man was going down from Jerusalem to Jericho, when he fell into the hands of robbers. They stripped him of his clothes, beat him and went away, leaving him half dead'."

"A priest happened to be going down the same road, and when he saw the man, he passed by on the other side, so too, a Levite, when he came to the place and saw him, passed by on the other side. But a Samaritan, as he travelled, came where the man was; and when he saw him, he took pity on him. He went to him and bandaged his wounds, pouring on oil and wine. Then he put the man on his own donkey, took him to an inn and took care of him."

"The next day he took out two silver coins, and gave them to the innkeeper, 'Look after him,' he said, 'and when I return, I will reimburse you for any extra expense you may have.' 'Which of these three do you think was a neighbour to the man who fell into the hands of robbers?' The expert in the law replied, 'the one who had mercy on him.' Jesus told him, 'go and do likewise'."

The parable answers the three questions, "who is my neighbour," "what is the proof of whether, or not, a person loves God," and, "how does one fulfil the law of love?" The neighbour is clearly the person in need, also seen in the judgment of love. The priest and Levite would have both been deeply religious, which would have been their proof that they loved God. They would have said, look how religious we are, we must love God.

The priest and Levite would both have looked down on the Samaritan, who would have been far below them on the social scale. Yet, it was the Samaritan who proved he loved God, when he cared for his fellow man. 1 John 4:20, "If anyone says, 'I love God,' yet hates their brother or sister, they are a liar."

"For anyone who does not love their brother or sister, whom they have seen, cannot love God, whom they have not seen." So, a commitment to religion does not connect one to the Divine, nor does it prove that one loves God. The proof is in mercy, compassion and love, which fulfil the, "law of love."

Now, the Law of Moses was cursed, because it curses hatred and violence.Galatians 3:10, "All who rely on observing the law are under a curse, for it is written: "Cursed is everyone who does not continue to do everything written in the Book of the Law." And, James 2:10, "For whoever keeps the whole law and yet stumbles at just one point is guilty of breaking all of it."

And here is the actual curse itself, Deuteronomy 27:15-26, "Cursed is the man who carves an image or casts an idol -- a thing detestable to the LORD, the work of the craftsman's hands -- and sets it up in secret." "Cursed is the man who dishonors his father or his mother." "Cursed is the man who moves his neighbor's boundary stone."

"Cursed is the man who leads the blind astray on the road." "Cursed is the man who withholds justice from the alien, the fatherless or the widow." "Cursed is the man who sleeps with his father's wife, for he dishonors his father's bed." "Cursed is the man who has sexual relations with any animal." "Cursed is the man who sleeps with his sister, the daughter of his father or the daughter of his mother."

"Cursed is the man who sleeps with his mother-in-law." "Cursed is the man who kills his neighbor secretly." "Cursed is the man who accepts a bribe to kill an innocent person." "Cursed is the man who does not uphold the words of this law by carrying them out." Notice that it is all directed at different acts of harm, and the last verse curses anyone who does not observe the entire law, making it unforgiving and impossible to fulfill.

Now, the two greatest commands of the Law of Moses are, "to love God," and to, "love you neighbor as yourself," with the second being proof of the first. So, if you don't love you neighbor, you don't love God. And, the command to, "love your neighbor as yourself," is the fulfillment of the law, because love does no harm. The problem is that both of these laws are a part of the law of Moses, meaning they cannot be fulfilled, so this meant the, "law of love," had to be reestablished as a forgiving law that people can fulfill.

John 13:34-35, "A new command I give you: love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all people will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." John 15:12, "My command is this: love each other as I have loved you." And, John 15:17, "This is my command: love each other." Only in the gospel of John is it identified as being a, "new command," and a separate command from the two greatest commands previously quoted.

So the Divine leaves the first law in place, to curse hatred and violence. The Divine pays the price for that hatred and violence, caused by corruption, "lighting the way back." And, the Divine established a second, very forgiving, "law of love," that connects the Divine to every individual who chooses love. And, love then becomes the fulfilment of the, "Divine law," or, "Royal law," without any need for religion.

James 2:12-13, "Speak and act as those who are going to be judged by the law that gives freedom, because judgement without mercy will be shown to anyone who has not been merciful. Mercy triumphs over judgement." This matches exactly what is seen in the judgment of love, with the very forgiving, "law of love," being the law that gives freedom. And this law applies from beginning to end, because both the, "law of love," and the Creator exist outside of time.

CHAPTER EIGHT: OUTSIDE OF TIME

Does heaven exist, and is the Divine contained within, or constrained by, time? If we examine the interaction between the Divine and the creation, according to the biblical evidence, what we see is an interaction that is not at all constrained by time. As mortals, we move through time, interacting only with the present. Our knowledge of history is limited to our own experience, in addition to whatever has been recorded, beyond this, we cannot see into the past.

If the universe was created, then heaven and the Divine would have existed prior to that creation, as opposed to being a product of the creation. In which case, they would not necessarily be subject to the laws of the creation, so they would not be constrained by those laws. Instead, one might expect that the Divine, and the original dwelling of the Divine, would be completely separate and independent of the creation.

Proverbs 30:4, "Who has gone up into heaven and come down? Who has gathered up the wind in the hallow of his hand? Who has wrapped up the waters in his cloak? Who has established all the ends of the earth? What is his name, and the name of his son? Tell me if you know!" Here we see an Old Testament reference to the Son of God, "the name of his son," hundreds of years before his alleged birth.

John 1:1-4 states, "In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made." Here we have reference to the Son prior to anything being created.

Luke 10:18, "I saw Satan fall like lightening from heaven." And, John 8:58, "'I tell you the truth,' Jesus answered, 'before Abraham was born, I am'!" Here we have evidence of the Son witnessing an event, the fall of Satan, prior to the mortal creation and predating the birth of Abraham. The Bible also contains a number of references to something called the, "book of life," which allegedly contains the names every person who will be admitted to heaven, and the first reference is found in Exodus.

Exodus 32:31-32. It states, "So Moses went back to the Lord and said, 'oh, what a great sin these people have committed! They have made themselves Gods of gold. But now, please forgive their sin – but if not, then blot me out of the book you have written'." And, Revelation 17:8, "The inhabitants of the earth whose names have not been written in the book of life from the creation of the world will be astonished when they see the beast."

Above we see that the names of those, not written in this book, have allegedly been known since the creation of the world. And, Revelation 13:8, "All inhabitants of the earth will worship the beast – all whose names have not been written in the book of life belonging to the lamb that was slain from the creation of the world." So here we have another reference to names, not written in the book of life, and a reference to the Son, being slain from the creation of the world. Implication being that the, "law of love," is applicable from the very beginning.

Here is a description of the crucifixion of Christ written hundreds of years before the event. Psalm 22:14-18, "I am poured out like water, and all my bones are out of joint. My heart has turned to wax; it has melted away within me. My strength is dried up like a potsherd, and my tongue sticks to the roof of my mouth; you lay me in the dust of death. Dogs have surrounded me; a band of evil men has encircled me, they have pierced my hands and my feet."

"I can count all my bones; people stare and gloat over me. They divide my garments among them and cast lots for my clothing." This description contains many striking similarities to the description of the crucifixion contained in the four gospels of the New Testament. In the biblical record, the hands and feet of Christ were pierced, and both Mark 15:24, and John 19:24, record that lots were cast for his clothing.

And 22nd Psalm begins with the words "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?" The gospels of Matthew, and Mark, both record these as being the last words of Christ. The Psalms were written over a long period of time by a number of authors, and there is controversy regarding who these authors were. It is known, however, that these books were written long before the event they describe.

Isaiah 46:10, "I make known the end from the beginning, from ancient times, what is still to come." So here we have a statement, attributed to the Creator, saying, I know the end from the beginning. Now, what all of this implies is a view of events from outside of time. It is commonly known that the Bible contains many prophecies, which are descriptions of future events, generally not understood until after the events have occurred. And, it is possible that these prophecies could actually be descriptions of events witnessed from outside of time.

Colossians 1:16, "All things were created: things in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible." And, 2 kings 6:15-17, "When the servant of the man of God got up and went out early the next morning, an army with horses and chariots had surrounded the city. 'oh, my Lord, what shall we do'? The servant asked."

"'Don't be afraid,' the prophet answered. 'those who are with us are more than those who are with them.' And Elisha prayed, 'o Lord, open his eyes so he may see.' Then the Lord opened the servant's eyes, and he looked and saw the hills full of horses and chariots of fire all around Elisha." So here we have a story of a city being defended by an invisible army.

The only point being, there may be more to creation than what we perceive, and in science there are many theories which include the existence of other dimensions. So, if the universe was created, did that creation include multiple dimensions, and if so are they all subject to the Divine? If so, then how do those dimensions come into play, where Angels are concerned, and in terms of possible interaction with our dimension?

Luke 20:38, "He is not the God of the dead, but of the living, for to him all are alive." Again, this could be another reference to existence outside of time, in which the Divine views the past, present and future, all at once. In which case the individual order of events, all co-exist together, and everyone is alive, somewhere on the grid. So, from that point of view, no one is dead, all are alive.

Now, what about the Angels? Why were they created, and what happened? Psalm 148:2-5 states, "Praise him, all his Angels, praise him, all his heavenly hosts. Praise him sun and moon praise him, all you shining stars. Praise him, you highest heavens and you waters above the skies. Let them praise the name of the LORD, for he commanded and they were created."

So, he gave the command and they came into existence, simple as that, at least, that's the explanation, and it's the only one given. He spoke and they existed, but then allegedly something happened, and that Angelic society fractured into all out war. How could that be part of a plan that cannot be thwarted, and would the Angels see such a plan?

If they are real, would the Angels have been created inside or outside of time? If the creation was intentionally subjected to frustration, does that include Angels, as well as mortals? Would it all be part of the same act of creation? Would the war in heaven, and this messed up world, make sense to the Angels, or would they still be looking for answers?

CHAPTER NINE: THE SOULS OF ANGELS

The great conflict, between good & evil, permeates our society and is the subject of countless books and films. For some, it's serious business, for others, it's great fun. Satan verses God, the most highly billed, heavy weight tilt of all time, with nothing else even coming close. And even where we do see, variations on the theme, the good versus evil concept is always present. God representing, the ultimate good, Satan representing, the ultimate evil, but how and why did it begin? Why would a part of the creation turn on the Creator?

There are few clues regarding what could have happened, but the theory of the coup against God, isn't really supported by the evidence. Isaiah 14:12-14, "How you have fallen from heaven, o morning star, Son of the dawn! You have been cast down to the earth, you who once laid low the nations! You said in your heart, 'I will ascend to heaven; I will raise my throne above the stars of God', and, 'I will make myself like the most high'."

Now, the above does seem to describe the fall of Satan, and it is the basis for the theory of the coup, but it is in fact a reference to the king of Babylon. When this was written the nation of Babylon had become extremely powerful, and the king thought he was a God, and sought to put himself above God. Isaiah 13:1, "An oracle concerning Babylon that Isaiah son of Amoz saw," identifies the country as being Babylon.

And, Isaiah 14:4, "You will take up this taunt against the king of Babylon." So the taunt, which includes the statements that many associate with Satan, is actually directed at one specific king. It is also interesting to note that these statements, which are mistakenly associated with Satan, are the reason many believe that pride was the reason for the fall, which is actually not the case. Instead, it is the pride of one specific king being discussed, not the pride of Satan.

Now, if we search the Bible for additional evidence of a coup against God, we do not find any, instead we find something very different. Jude 6, "and the Angels who did not keep their positions of authority but abandoned their own home – these he has kept in darkness, bound with everlasting chains for judgement on the great day."

So, what we have here is evidence that Satan and his Angels abandoned heaven, or they simply took off, and there is more. Revelation 12:7-9, "And there was war in heaven. Michael and his Angels fought against the dragon, and the dragon and his Angels fought back. But he was not strong enough and they lost their place in heaven."

So, what we have here is evidence that it was Michael and his Angels who attacked Satan and his Angels, who fought back and lost, which could indicate pursuit. So, Satan and his Angels abandon heaven, they take off, they are then pursued and attacked by Michael. No where do we find evidence that they attacked God, or they attacked heaven, or they attempted a coup.

Revelation 12:9, "The great dragon was hurled down—that ancient serpent called the devil or Satan, who leads the whole world astray. He was hurled to the earth and his Angels with him." And, we also have the account of Satan, falling like lightening from heaven. So, they abandon heaven, they are pursued and attacked, they lose the fight, and they lose their place in heaven.

Now, in order to understand what may have caused the fall, we must first examine some traditional beliefs about Angels, to determine their accuracy. This brings us back to the belief that Angels do not have souls, which cannot be substantiated by any statement found in the Bible. And, the same can be said about the belief that Angels were not created in the image of God.

Now, the Bible does not state anywhere that Angels were, or were not, created in the image of God, but it does contain some evidence to suggest they were, and some evidence to suggest they were not. And, an examination of this evidence will reveal that there is only one conclusion.

Now, the belief that Angels were not created in the image of God is to an extent substantiated by a number of verses. Hebrews 1:4, "So he became as much superior to the Angels as the name he has inherited is superior to theirs." This is a reference to Christ being superior to Angels. Then, 1 John 3:2, "we shall be like him," implying that people will be like Christ, so superior to Angels. 1 Corinthians 6:3, "Do you not know that we will judge Angels?" And, Hebrews 1:14, "Are not all Angels ministering spirits sent to serve those who will inherit salvation?"

So, based on the above, people will be superior to Angels, will judge Angels, and Angels are nothing more than ministering spirits or messengers. Now, this is actually supported when we examine the meaning of the word Angel. The Hebrew root word for angel is "malak" (mal-awk"). It essentially means "to dispatch as a deputy; or a messenger." The Greek word for angel is "aggelos" (ang"-el-os) and it means "a messenger." So, one could conclude that Angels are simply messengers, and were not created in the image of God.

Now, the above provides a fairly accurate description of the position that is taken by many traditional theologies, and has led to the belief that Angels do not have souls. And, all the evidence that has been examined to this point does seem to provide a very strong case in the favour of these traditional beliefs. However, there is additional evidence to be examined.

The Bible contains a number of vivid descriptions of God, and/or, Christ. One of these was recorded by the prophet Ezekial who was standing beside a river when he had a very powerful vision of God. Ezekial 1:25-28, "Then there came a voice from the expanse over their heads as they stood with lowered wings. Above the expanse over their heads was a figure like that of a man."

"I saw from what appeared to be his waist up he looked like glowing metal, as if full of fire, and that from there down he looked like fire; and brilliant light surrounded him. Like the appearance of a rainbow in the clouds on a rainy day, so was the radiance around him." "This was the appearance of the likeness of the glory of the Lord. When I saw it, I fell, face-down, and I heard the voice of one speaking." After the vision, Ezekial allegedly sat for seven days overwhelmed.

Then, Revelation 1:12-17, "I turned around to see the voice that was speaking to me. And when I turned I saw seven golden lamp-stands, and among the lamp-stands was someone 'like a son of man', dressed in a robe reaching down to his feet and with a golden sash around his chest."

"His head and hair were white like wool, as white as snow, and his eyes were like blazing fire. His feet were like bronze glowing in a furnace, and his voice was like the sound of rushing waters. In his right hand he held seven stars, and out of his mouth came a sharp double-edged sword. His face was like the sun shining in all its brilliance. When I saw him I fell at his feet as though dead."

The above is another vivid description of Christ, but additional similar descriptions are not limited to God, and/or, Christ, as very similar descriptions of Angels can also be found. Revelation 10:1-3, "Then I saw another mighty angel coming down from heaven. He was robed in a cloud, with a rainbow above his head; his face was like the sun, and his legs were like fiery pillars."

"He was holding a little scroll, which lay open in his hand. He planted his right foot on the sea and his left foot on the land, and he gave a loud shout like the roar of a lion. When he shouted, the voices of the seven thunders spoke."This description of a powerful angel is very similar to the previous descriptions of God, and/or, Christ.

And, Daniel 10:4-6, "On the twenty-fourth day of the first month, as I was standing on the bank of the great river, the Tigris, I looked up and there before me was a man dressed in linen, with a belt of the finest gold around his waist. His body was like Chrysolite, his face was like lightning, his eyes like flaming torches, his arms and legs like the gleam of burnished bronze, and his voice was like the sound of a multitude."

Now, in the 16th and 19th verses of the chapter, Daniel refers to this Angel as "my Lord," and this has caused some people to conclude that this angel is Christ, because they believe that only Christ would be addressed as Lord. However, other statements found in this chapter would quite strongly indicate that this is not the case.

For instance, in verses 12-13 the Angel states, "Do not be afraid, Daniel. Since the first day that you set your mind to gain understanding and to humble yourself before your God, your words were heard, and I have come in response to them. But the prince of the Persian kingdom resisted me twenty-one days. Then Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me, because I was detained there with the king of Persia."

The reference above to "the prince of the Persian kingdom" is likely a reference to one of Satan's Angels who blocked the way of the Angel sent to Daniel. If the Angel in Daniel's vision was actually Christ the above would suggest that one of Satan's Angels had been able to resist him for twenty-one days. It would also suggest that at the end of this struggle Christ would have required assistance from the angel Michael in order to break free.

In the Bible we see the Son described as being present, prior to creation, that nothing was created without him, and that he is above the Angels. This would mean that it would be very unlikely that any of Satan's Angels, or even Satan himself, would be able to resist the Son, at all, never mind for twenty-one days.

Now, some people see this Angel as being the Son simply because Daniel addresses him as "my Lord." The predominant Hebrew word for Lord which is used thousands of times throughout the Old Testament is the word "yehovah" (yeh-ho-vaw"). It means "Jehovah, the Lord" and it is a direct reference to God.

However, the word used in Daniel's address to the Angel is the Hebrew word "adown" (aw-done"), and it means "sovereign, controller: Lord, master, owner." This word is not necessarily a direct reference to God. It could be used as a reference to the master, or owner of a house. It can also be used to refer to human or divine beings. So, in the case of Daniel's address it is obviously being used in reference to a divine being, but not necessarily God, which means that the being could easily have been an Angel.

The Bible also contains a number of references to the "sons of God." Genesis 6:1-2, "When men began to increase in number on the earth, and daughters were born to them, the sons of God saw that the daughters of men were beautiful, and they married any of them they chose."

Now, the above reference to the "sons of God" could be a reference to Angels however traditionalists would likely not accept this interpretation, as they would not believe that an Angel could marry a human. This may, or may not be true, but other references to the "sons of God" are found in the Bible, and these are much clearer in their meaning.

Job 1:6, "One day the Angels came to present themselves before the Lord and Satan also came with them." Then, the same verse is practically repeated in Job 2:1, "On another day the Angels came to present themselves before the Lord, and Satan also came with them." Now, if a person were to look in the original Hebrew to find the meaning of the word Angels, used in both of the verses quoted above, the word would not be found.

Instead, in the original Hebrew, the word Angels does not appear in either of the verses quoted above. Rather, in both cases where the word Angels appears, the original Hebrew contains the phrase "the sons of God", and it is actually stated this way in the King James Version of the Bible. Then, concerning both people and Angels, Christ states in Luke 20:36, "And they can no longer die; for they are like the Angels. They are God's children."

So, in this reference we have Christ clearly identifying both people, and Angels, as being God's children, and there is no suggestion that Angels are soulless messengers. Then, in the King James Version of the Bible the verse quoted above is translated, "for they are equal unto the Angels." This now presents us with a rather serious contradiction.

In the verse quoted earlier from 1 John 3:2, we saw the statement, "we shall be like him," which implies that in heaven people will be like Christ. Then, above we see the statement, "they are like the Angels," or, "they are equal unto the Angels," which implies that in heaven people will be like Angels. We also know from Hebrews 1:4 that Christ is superior to the Angels. This leaves us asking the question, "In heaven are people going to be like Christ, or like Angels?" It would seem that only one, or the other, could possibly be true.

The answer to this contradiction is found by examining the original Greek. In the verse quoted above the words "like the Angels" or "equal unto the Angels" comes from the Greek word "isaggelos" (ee-sang"-el-los), which means "like an angel." The part of this word that means "like" comes from the Greek word "isos" (ee"-sos) which essentially means "similar to, and/or equal to," and the word by definition indicates a context of equality.

However, this is not the case in the statement, "we shall be like him," quoted earlier in the chapter. The statement used in theologies to conclude that people will be like Christ, and superior to Angels, as Christ is superior to Angels. In the statement the word "like" comes from the Greek word "homoios" (hom"-oy-os), which does not mean, "equal to", but instead means to be "similar to", or to "resemble."

So, an examination of the evidence shows that, in heaven, people would resemble Christ, having an angelic-like body, but would be equal to, not superior than Angels, as Angels already do resemble God, and/or Christ, according to the biblical record. This means that Angels could have been created in the image of God, could have a soul, and could have free-will, which then completely changes the game.

This then allows us to completely re-examine everything that could have occurred, within creation. And, leads us to a completely new and different set of conclusion, a plausible sequence of events, and an alternate explanation, for everything that could have occurred, right from the very beginning.

CHAPTER TEN: THE MORTAL ANGELS

As a whole, our society, including the experts, do not see Angels as being made in the image of God, and having a soul. To suggest that Angels could have a soul is completely, "of the map," according to traditional theologies and popular beliefs. And, Angels being jealous of mortals, because they have a soul, is a recurring theme that we often see within popular culture. Yet, the evidence is strong, if one is being objective, and if we go down this road, it changes everything.

If Angels have a soul, they also have free-will, and it begs the question, how does one rebel without free-will? How could Demons be evil, and Satan masquerade as an angel of light, without the knowledge of both good & evil? The premise that soulless messengers rebelled against a Creator, chose evil over good, and then attempted to lead the whole world astray, simply does not work. And the traditional answer that it all happened because of pride, has no meaning, it leads us absolutely nowhere.

However, the possibility of Angels having a soul, and free-will, brings us to a very important question. That being, would the creation of Angels, and mortals, be a product of two separate plans, or would both acts of creation be a part of the same plan? Now, if it's all one plan, then everything that has occurred would have been foreseen, before anything was created. In which case all of the chaos we see within the creation story is all entirely by design, and everything we see around us was supposed to occur.

In which case, we do not have the creation of Angels, followed by war in heaven, making it a failed creation. Then, the mortal creation falls, resulting in that creation free-falling into hell, requiring a salvage operation, which is ruined by religion. Instead, the one mistake, after another, explanation is replaced by something completely different. That being, the planned, intentional, creation of individuality, from chaos, but in this case, it only looks like a mess.

If a Creator were to stand on the precipice of creation, with the intention of creating individuality, there are certain realities that would be clearly understood. Such as, an individual is not divisible without loss of identity. Such as, it is impossible to create an individual as a being that can only choose good. Such as, a society comprised of individuality dictates a chaotic society, because there must be choice, there must be free-will, and this will result in extremes of both good and evil. So, if a Creator were going to proceed with such a creation, the consequences of that act would be entirely foreseen.

Now, how could it have begun? The Creator stands on the precipice of creation and decides to create, what comes next? Psalm 148:2-5, "Praise him, all his Angels, for he commanded and they were created". So, a thought or a command, and creation begins, we are given no details about any angelic-like society, such as, how long it lasted, or what happened to start the war, or when.

All we have is the command to create, the war in heaven, the fall of the mortals, followed by the war between good & evil. So, what happened? Where is the divine purpose in what appears to be one huge mess? Now, where time is a reference, if the creation of Angels, and the creation of mortals, were two completely separate events, then they could have occurred quite far apart. However, if these two, "phases," of creation were part of the same plan, then the following sequence of events could be possible.

In the beginning a Creator stands on the precipice of creation, with the intention of creating individuality. It is understood that this will require free-will, meaning the societies created will be chaotic, as they will be filled with extremes of both good and evil. And, it is understood that individuality cannot be created any other way.

The process of creation begins with a thought or a command, beginning with the Angels. They are created, in the image of the Creator, everyone an individual, beings of free-will, with the knowledge of good and evil, so that they can choose. The Creator then watches, anticipates, and awaits their individual decisions. And, either prior to, during, or just after, the Creator also creates something called time and space.

The biblical explanation of creation is ridiculous, but it was written when the world was still flat, and science was pretty much sorcery. At that point in time, no one would have been ready for a more detailed explanation, so it just didn't matter. Science has only recently been able to begin grappling with the physics of such an event, and the theories are often being adjusted, or changed, which is to be expected.

Regardless, approximately 14 billion years ago, there was the, "Big Bang," the universe then expanded, and we are here. It is a far cry from the six days of creation we see in the Bible, but that explanation did hold up for over two thousand years. If nothing else, this might tell us that we weren't ready for a better explanation.

Now, just to make the point, in the creation story, the sun and moon were not created until the fourth day, so the reference to six days is not necessarily a reference to a twenty four hour day. And from a perspective outside of time, a reference to a day could mean anything, or could have absolutely no meaning. Furthermore, if one wanted to explain, how a Creator would create a universe, the Big Bang theory is actually quite attractive.

The following is nothing more than an example of what could have happened, in order to give us something to visualize. First, from outside of time, creation begins with the Creator placing a point of light into a plain of existence, which then, on command, explodes into the Big Bang. Then, from outside of time, the Creator would witness the instantaneous formation of the universe, which would only have required approximately 14 billion years, if it was witnessed from inside of time.

From outside of time, the Creator would then be able to interact with a completely formed universe, simply by reaching into time, at a point where the universe was completely formed. There would be no delays in the process, everything would be instantaneous. And, if the building blocks of life were already present, which would have been the case, then life would already have formed, and the Creator would then be able to reach into time, at any point, and begin tweaking.

Now, it is possible that the universe could have been created either before or after the creation of Angels, as it could work either way. However, there is reason to believe that Angels cannot see events from outside of time, in which case the Angels would likely have been created within an already created universe.

Now, once the Angels had been created, it is also likely that the decision between good and evil could have been reached quite quickly. These would have been divine beings and the issues of good versus evil would have been quite clear. John 8:44, "He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there was no truth in him. When he lies, he speaks his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies."

The above description of Satan indicates that his nature was known from the beginning, and there was no point at which something changed. This is not a being who was created good and became evil, but rather this is an individual who's nature was clear right from the beginning. Again, it is not possible to create individuality by creating beings that can only choose good. If individuals are created, some will choose good, some evil, but it is the individual that must choose, otherwise there is no individuality.

What we have here is a discussion about the Gods, that is, about all of the Gods. Psalm 82:1, "God presides in the great assembly; he gives judgement among the 'Gods'." Here is the King James Version, "God stands in the congregation of the mighty; he judges among the Gods." The word "mighty" comes from the Hebrew word "el" (ale). It means "God, God-like, or mighty one." It can be used as a reference to "people, Angels, fallen Angels, or God."

The word for God or Gods in the Psalm, is the Hebrew word, "elohiym," (el-0-heem") which means "rulers, judges, divine ones, Angels, Gods." This word is used as the proper name for God over two thousand times in the Old Testament, but it can also be used as a reference to Angels, and/or, people.

Then, Psalm 82:6, "I said, 'you are Gods; you are all sons of the most high." And, the King James Version, "I have said you are Gods; and all of you are children of the most high." These are strikingly similar to the quote from Luke 20:36, "For they are like the Angels. They are God's children." So, regarding Angels and people, if we look at the context throughout the Bible, it's all the same, we are all children of the most high, and this is the context.

So, according to this analysis, Angels and people are made in the image of the Creator, everyone an individual, with a soul, and we must all choose for ourselves as individuals. Some of the Angels chose evil, they abandoned heaven, were overtaken by Michael, lost the battle, and lost their places in heaven. What comes next?

CHAPTER ELEVEN: THE GENESIS OF ANGELS

The Angels are created from a thought or a command, they are created from nothing, they simply come into existence. They open their eyes, look around, and become oriented. Their home is divine, their power tremendous. There is a Creator who claims to be their father, but there is little interaction. They have no idea what corruption is, they have no idea what a soul is, they are infants, and have no idea what is about to occur.

They are born, into existence, each one an individual, with a unique individual nature. Those, who by nature choose good over evil, accept their home, and are not corrupted by their power, but for those who choose evil, total power corrupts totally, which leads to rebellion and war. Those who are of a like mind find each other, they reject the angelic-society, they abandon heaven, are overtaken, and lose the battle, with the Creator anticipating every move.

If the creation was subjected to frustration, to aid the development of individuality, this process could well have begun in heaven with the Angels. Jude 6 states that, they were each given positions of authority, but it gives no details about those positions, or about the structure of heaven itself. Yet there was clearly something that Satan and his Angels rejected, which could have been nothing more than peace and order.

If Satan and his Angels had been corrupted by their power, they would not have been able to survive in a peaceful, ordered society for long. Instead, they would have wanted to go their own way, do their own thing, like a group of rebellious teens. They would have had this tremendous power surging through them, with a strong desire to use that power, but then they would have been expected to conform within a peaceful society.

Michael and his Angels would have been completely at peace, and content, not being corrupted by their power. It all festers, then blows up, with one corrupt Angel taking the lead. The Hebrew root word for Satan is "Satan" (saw-tan") and it means to "attack or accuse." The Greek word for Satan is "Satanas" (sat-an-as"), and it means "the accuser." The father of lies, a murderer from the beginning, the accuser steps into the spotlight.

Now, whether anything was said to the Creator or to Michael and his Angels is unknown, as Satan may have simply convinced his Angels to take off and abandon heaven. And, up until this point, the Creator may have simply sat back, and waited for the inevitable rebellion, engaging in little interaction, and providing few, if any, answers. In which case there would have been no reason to engage the Creator, and we have good reason to believe that no coup was ever attempted.

Instead, these powerful, corrupted beings simply looked at this amazing universe, decided to abandon heaven, and go their own way. They blast out of heaven, into the universe, are pursued and overtaken by Michael and his Angels, and a massive battle ensues between two incredibly powerful forces. In the end, Satan and his Angels are defeated, which proved only that Michael and his Angels were more powerful. It proved nothing else, so the conflict continued.

1 Peter 10-12, refers to prophets who tried to see into the future, using prophecies that had already been written about the coming Messiah. It then states at the end of verse twelve that, "even angels long to look into these things," implying that they don't know, implying that the future isn't known to them. Implying that they long to understand what is going to happen, that they long to understand, "the plan."

This also implies much more than basic curiosity, it implies a longing to make sense out of everything that has occurred, both to them and to us, and to understand how a Creator could remain perfect, in the midst of all this chaos. Meaning the Angels are watching the plan as it unfolds, meaning they cannot see into the future.

Luke 22:3-4, "Then Satan entered Judas, called Iscariot, one of the twelve. And Judas went to the chief priests, and the officers of the temple guard, and discussed with them how he might betray Jesus." The above shows a definite participation in the crucifixion, followed by the inability to go back in time and correct the mistake, providing additional evidence that Angels travel through time, moment by moment, the same as mortals.

At the time of Christ, the Jews expected that the Messiah would usher in the coming of the kingdom of heaven, so the crucifixion would have prevent this and foiled the plan. So, when it became a, "part of the plan," Satan was duped, but was unable to correct the mistake. In fact, his actions would then have aided plan, adding insult to injury.

So, we have the creation of Angels, the war in heaven, and the angelic-society lies in ruins, divided and confused. They don't see into the future, they don't understand what the Creator is doing, they don't understand the plan. Satan is cast down, and he stands there with his arms open, looking at every other Angel, including Michael's, and he says, what is this? How can this make any sense, and how can that Creator claim to be perfect?

Now, what had occurred was a result of corruption, but these Angels had just recently been born, and were inexperienced beings. They came into existence, they fought a war, and now nothing made any sense. If the Creator were to have told them they were individuals, and the war was a result of corruption, Satan would have responded by saying, what does any of that mean?

They had no history, they had no experience, and they had no depth of understanding regarding the effects of corruption. Satan would have been looking at the Creator, in the midst of all the Angels saying, who is this guy, look at this mess? How can he claim to know anything? Then, in the middle of this discourse, the Creator offers a way to study the effects of corruption, a way to give the Angels some history, some experience, and the proof that they require.

Then, in the presence of all the Angels, the second phase of creation begins, one that was foreseen prior to the creation of the Angels. And, with all the Angels watching, the words are spoken in reference to them all, in a way that was clearly inclusive of the Angels. Genesis 1:26, "let us make people in our image." Now, what follows could be completely figurative, as Adam and Eve could just be a story, but the application of the effects of corruption would still apply.

So, we have the creation of Adam and Eve, and the mortal creation begins. Genesis 2:25, "The man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame," meaning in the beginning they were both completely innocent. They are told not to eat of the fruit of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, then along comes the serpent, who tells them they can eat the fruit, and we have the fall of the mortals.

Now, something happens here which is a part of the creation process. Genesis 3:1-7, "Now the serpent was more crafty than any of the wild animals the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, "Did God really say, 'you must not eat from any tree in the garden'?" The woman said to the serpent, "we may eat fruit from the trees in the garden, but God did say, 'you must not eat fruit from the tree that is in the middle of the garden, and you must not touch it, or you will die'."

"You will not surely die," the serpent said to the woman, "For God knows that when you eat of it, your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good & evil." They eat the fruit, realize they are naked, and cover themselves. Then, Genesis 3:22-23, "And the Lord God said, 'the man has now become like one of us, knowing good & evil. He must not be allowed to reach out his hand and take also from the tree of life and eat, and live forever.' So the Lord God banished him from the garden of Eden."

So, we have two statements, one by the serpent, "you will be like God, knowing good and evil," and the second by the Creator, "the man has now become like one of us, knowing good and evil." And, the reference to, "one of us," would be reference to them all, including the Angels. This means that the mortals had to acquire the knowledge of good and evil for the creation process to be complete. And, it wasn't until then that they became like the Creator and the Angels.

So, the Creator says to Satan, you want proof about corruption, get them to eat the apple and I'll give you your proof. Satan thinks, what have I got to loose, perhaps takes the form of the serpent himself, and does the deed. At that point the fallen ones would have likely looked at the mess that had been created thus far, and might not have been worried. They may have even been laughing to themselves.

Once the mortals had been made like the Creator and the Angels, which was witnessed by them all, the effects of corruption within the mortal system, would have been completely applicable. All of the Angels were likely thinking, where is this going, what is he doing? And with that, the Angels of God, and Satan, then watched, and waited, for the outcome.
CHAPTER TWELVE: THE ANGEL ULTIMATUM

As events unfolded, Satan and his Angels must have been shaking their heads, as they would not have seen any discernible logic behind what was happening. They had come into existence, fought and lost a war against Michael, costing them their place in heaven. The creation, at that point, would have already appeared to be one huge mess, with the Creator being far from perfect.

Even Michael's Angels would have been struggling to make any sense out of what had occurred. And, the fact that they had not been read into the plan means they would have been given little, if any, explanation. They would have been faced with a number of very obvious and potentially disturbing questions, regarding what had gone wrong with the creation.

How had Satan and his followers been so easily corrupted, and why had such beings been created? How could a divine, angelic society, become so quickly turned into a war zone? How could such a disaster be a part of a perfect creation, or be the work of a perfect Creator? If a master builder builds a house, which immediately falls apart, how then could they still claim to be a master builder, yet that was the claim.

Now, Michael's Angels had not been corrupted by their power, so they would have had no desire to rebel, but they must have shook their heads and wondered. Yet, from the point of view of the Creator, everything was proceeding according to plan, as the creation of individuality, from chaos, had begun.

The Angels had been created as individuals, they had been allowed to choose, some choosing good, some choosing evil, and the foreseen rebellion had occurred. And, the Angels had not been read into the plan, for the very specific reason, that they all had to play their roles in the production.

Satan and his Angels choose evil over good, because it was their nature, as individuals, to choose evil over good, not because of pride, or because they were tested but didn't understand. They were corrupted by their own sheer power, and were prepared to use that power to cause harm. So, total power, corrupted totally, and then Angels became Demons and forever lost their places in heaven.

Yet, from their point of view, they may not have been worried in the least. They had just witnessed a so called perfect Creator completely botch their own creation, resulting in war; followed by the fall of the mortals, resulting in a society that became filled with violence. They didn't buy the claim to perfection because everything they witnessed convinced them otherwise. They may have constantly looked at the Angels of heaven and said, you have got to be joking.

Everything they did would likely have seemed right to them. Everything about heaven would have gone against the grain for them. To have tremendous power, and a desire to use it, but live in a society of peace and order, would have seemed bizarre. Abandoning heaven would have been the right thing to do, as they could not survive there.

The war in heaven, followed by the fall of the mortals, resulting in the development of a violent society on earth, would have represented tremendous proof that the Creator was not perfect. And, that the Creator could be utterly rejected without any concern. In their minds, this proof would have been beyond convincing, it would have been absolute.

After the fall of the mortals, the biblical record indicates a substantial degree of interaction between the Creator, the Angels, and mortals. Genesis 3:8, "Then the man and his wife heard the sound of the Lord God, as he was walking in the garden in the cool of the day." This occurred right after Adam and Eve had eaten the forbidden fruit. The remainder of the chapter indicates that Creator was standing right there with Adam and Eve throughout everything that occurred.

In Genesis 4:2-5, Cain and Abel are described as being able to walk right up to the Creator with their offerings, and there is also evidence to suggest that Angels became intimate with mortals. Genesis 6:4, "The Nephilim were on the earth in those days—and also afterward—when the sons of God went to the daughters of men and had children by them. They were the heroes of old, men of renown."

The King James Version, "There were giants in the earth in those days; and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they boar children to them, the same became mighty men which were of old, men of renown." The reference to the "sons of God" is the same wording found in the references previously quoted from Job 1:6, and 2:1.

Now, the verses quoted from Job were clearly references to Angels, but in the verse quoted above the reference is likely to "fallen" Angels. The Hebrew word for "nephilim" or "giant" is the word "nephil" (nef-eel") which means "bully, tyrant or giant." And, the word "nephil" comes from the Hebrew root word "naphal" (naw-fal") which means "to fall, or be cast down." The very meaning of the word "naphal" does suggest a connection to fallen Angels.

Also, at the time this was written the Greek Gods were very much on the scene. And, we see similar interaction and intimacy between the Greek Gods and mortals, leading to the birth of demigods like Hercules. Notice the similarity between the fallen Angels and the mortals having the nephilim offspring, as opposed to the demigods, and could one have been the source for the other?

The children of the fallen ones and mortals are described as the, "heroes of old, men of renown," like Hercules or Achilles, so could it be a source? Could the legend of Hercules come from an ancient being who really was half mortal and half something else. Or, could the source of the Hebrew writing come from the Greek?

The Greek Gods were not exactly role models. They often had disagreements, conspired against one another, used mortals as pawns, and were often anything but divine. All this behaviour could be attributed to the fallen ones, if they had decided to play such a role. Somewhere in the past lies a source, based upon something real, or simply the product of someone's imagination.

The reference to the "Nephilim," is the last reference before the flood that suggests interaction between people, and Angels. After the flood however, additional references are found that again suggest interaction between God, Angels, and people. These include the record found in Genesis 14:18, of Abraham's encounter with Melchizedek "king of Salem", whom the Bible clearly identifies as not being human.

They also include Abraham's encounter with the Lord, and two Angels, recorded in the eighteenth chapter of Genesis. Then in the nineteenth chapter of Genesis the same two Angels go to Sodom, and Gomorrah, in physical form. Once there, they rescued Abraham's nephew Lot, before destroying the cities.

In other books of the Bible interaction is seen between God, Angels, and people, but this interaction is generally of a different type. In Exodus the angel of God appears as a cloud by day and a pillar of fire by night, and the source for this could actually be the eruption of Thera. In other books of the Bible both God, and Angels, appear in dreams, or in visions, but seldom do they appear in physical form and interact with people, the way that it is recorded in Genesis.

Now, according to the biblical record, as this first civilisation developed the effects of corruption became both apparent, and devastating. Genesis 6:11-12 states that the earth "was full of violence" and that "all the people on earth had corrupted their ways." This had occurred in spite of the fact that the people of this early civilisation had been given a very long life-span.

The Bible contains a record of the family tree of Adam. It records in Genesis chapter five that Adam lived to be 930 years old. Adam's son Seth lived to be 912 years old, and Seth's son Enosh lived to be 905 years old. The person of this time with the oldest recorded life-span was Methuselah who lived to be 969 years old.

Now, if these people had been given such a long life-span, to see if it would help them overcome the effects of corruption, it didn't work. As the world became filled with violence and apparently had to be destroyed. However, it is very unlikely that this ever actually occurred, as the story of the flood is likely taken from the story of Gilgamesh.

Yet, if such an event had actually occurred and an early civilization had been destroyed, it would have been witnessed by Satan and his Angels, as well as Michael and his Angels. So, if anything occurred which was out of line, there would have been a whole host of witnesses, and the Creator would have been thoroughly busted. It could have been game over right there, as Satan would have turned to Michael and said, need we go any further?

Genesis 6:3, "Then the Lord said, 'my spirit will not contend with man forever, for he is mortal (or corrupt); his days will be a hundred and twenty years'." This statement was made just before the flood, adjusting the lifespan closer to what it is today. Then, we have the story of Noah and the ark, saving a small group of humans and animals, which gives us a new beginning.

Yet, after the flood, we again see violent civilizations develop on earth, which goes right on through until the modern age. Completely aside from the biblical record we see a history filled with one violent society after another. The Mongols, the Egyptians, Alexander the Great, the Romans, and on throughout history, right up until today, where we still see warfare, and are constantly trying to hold the world together.

Now, from the point of view of Satan and his followers, it's all just one huge mess. Right from the war in heaven onward, it's one mistake after another, and all represents one enormous disaster. And, it all boils down to the one simple demand, to make sense out of creation, or else, which is, "The Angel Ultimatum."

Explain to us how this could be the work of a perfect Creator? Explain to us how you could create such a disaster and then presume to judge us? Explain to us how this act of complete and utter incompetence could represent a plan that cannot be thwarted? Do that before you judge anyone!

They would have had a front row seat to every war, to every slaughter, with everything being the responsibility of the Creator. They would have had front row seats for the crusades, the inquisitions, and the witch hunts, and all other harm caused by religion. And, they are far from alone, as many mortals reject the creation story as being too ridiculous to believe. If it were to be true, they too would look at the Creator and shake their heads.

The collective creation would look at the Creator and say, make sense of creation, or forget about coming off as being perfect. Make sense of creation, or judge no one. And, the argument is so strong, that it does appear to be a, "slam dunk," as in game, set and match. The evidence is just so conclusive that it's game over, and this is actually an entirely reasonable conclusion.

In fact, the logic works beautifully, right up until the point where we realize that there is an entirely different explanation for everything that has occurred within creation. Right up until the point that we realize there are two completely different explanations for creation, which coexist at all times. One explanation that represents one mistake after another, and is a complete and utter mess and a second explanation of the creation of individuality, from chaos. And, that when this second explanation enters the discussion, the game over, becomes game on.
CHAPTER THIRTEEN: THE DUALITIES OF CREATION

The creation of individuality, by definition, dictates a chaotic society, meaning it is going to be a mess. So, when Angels, or mortals, look at that creation, it is going to look like a mess. The individual must be allowed to choose, meaning the creation is going to be filled with extremes of both good and evil, and this applies to both Angels and mortals.

The individual is not divisible, without loss of identity, meaning that once the creation process has begun, aside from influence, it's hands off, as the individual must be allowed to be an individual. Now, this was known right from the beginning, the Creator knew it was going to be a mess, and that became a part of the plan. It became the basis for the creation being subjected to frustration, as it was known that frustration would occur, and would be present within the creation.

It then became a choice to either provide a clear explanation, to the creation, of everything that was occurring within the creation, or use the frustration to enhance the development of individuality. The frustration of life is useful, in that it forces us to look inside, and determine who we are going to be as individuals. Furthermore, the explanation of the six days to create the universe, stood up for approximately two thousand years, indicating that mortals weren't ready for more detailed explanations. And, the Angels had to play their role in the production.

Revelation 12:3-4, "Then another sign appeared in heaven: an enormous red dragon with seven heads and ten horns and seven crowns on its heads. Its tail swept a third of the stars out of the sky and flung them to the earth." The statement that the dragon, "swept a third of the stars out of the sky," is the basis for the belief that one third of the Angels fell with Satan.

So, the Angels are created as individuals, it's quite likely that they quickly chose between good and evil, then Satan and a third of the Angels abandoned heaven, they lost the war, and were cast down. At which point they would, in some ways, have still been infants, with little experience or history. Then, we have the mortal creation, followed by the fall, and thousands of years of alleged interaction between the divine and the mortals. And, within this interaction, the Angels help to maintain a balance of influence on the mortal creation, which in theory, has also aided the development of individuality.

And, within this interaction, the Angels themselves would have gained the experience and history they initially lacked, which would have completed their own development as individuals. Thus, we have two levels of creation, one divine, one mortal, each completely interdependent upon one another, each one serving and assisting the other.

And, throughout the millennia, the fallen ones will never once have regretted their choice to abandon heaven, nor will they have regretted their negative influence on the mortals. Instead, they will have believed, the whole time, that they were right, and that the Creator was far from perfect. In their minds, they would be a part of a seriously flawed creation, meaning all of the harm caused within that creation, including their own actions, are the responsibility of the Creator.

So we stand between a series of alternate explanations that could be called, "the dualities of creation." We have two explanations for creation, the first, representing mistake, after mistake, which could only prove the Creator to be far from perfect. The second, representing the creation of individuality, from chaos, in which everything is foreseen right from the beginning.

The resulting chaos is then used to subject both the divine and mortal levels of creation to frustration, aiding the development of individuality. And, the resulting chaos is also used as a type of, "misdirection play," to convince Satan that he's already won, securing his participation in his part of the production.

The fallen ones then do their part in maintaining a balanced influence of good and evil, on the mortal creation, thereby aiding the plan. They participate in the crucifixion, thereby aiding the plan. They participate in focusing on the first explanation of creation, being one mistake after another, thereby aiding the plan. They in fact do everything that was required of them, within the plan.

The second duality is two completely different explanations of the Angels. One, in which they are soulless messengers, who rebel because of pride, which makes no sense, their purpose being somewhat shrouded, for very good reason. The second in which the Angels are purposefully created in the image of God, as individuals, with a soul, and free will.

They are given a choice, which is inherent as individuals, some choose good, some choose evil, they fight their war, but are given no answers. They interact with the mortal creation, maintaining a balance of influence, and at the same time, their own process of creation is completed, as they gain the history and experience they initially lacked. And, the fallen ones never once look back, proving that their choice was no mistake.

The third duality is two laws, one unforgiving, meant to forever curse the harm caused by corruption. The second law, very forgiving, forever connecting the mortals who care, the people of good will, to the Divine. References to the two laws are intertwined throughout the Bible, but because the second law was not understood, they appeared as contradictions.

This made the Bible unclear, and very subject to interpretation, which led to the formation of many religions, contributing to the frustration of life, thereby aiding the plan. Whereas the second law, the law of love, was always present, always connecting the mortals who care to the Divine.

The fourth duality is the two explanations for the fall of the mortals. The first being that they rebelled, with the resulting sin plunging the entire mortal creation into hell, unless one finds salvation, which didn't arrive for thousands of years. And then, the message of that salvation was entrusted to religion, which is part of the overall mess that constitutes the first, one mistake after another, explanation of creation.

The second explanation is that the introduction of good and evil was simply required to complete the mortal creation. And, was the beginning of the creation of individuality, from chaos, within that specific creation, with the law of love connecting every caring mortal to the Divine, from day one.

All of this would have been seen by the Creator, from the precipice of creation, before anything was created, the creation of individuality, from chaos, on two different levels, one divine, one mortal. The Creator would have stood there, looking at nothing, and seen it all, before kicking things off with the Big Bang.

The chaos would have been intentionally used, by design, to produce frustration, aiding the development of individuality. The entire creation, both divine and mortal would have been focused on the first explanation of creation, and the first explanation of the fall of the Angels and mortals. And, everyone would have missed the significance of the law of love, meaning the second explanations remained shrouded, in the background, with it all coming off like a well orchestrated symphony.

Now, religious Christians would tell us that there are two issues left to be addressed, so here they are. Romans 1:17, 'For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: "The righteous will live by faith."' And, John 3:3, "No one can see the kingdom of God unless they are born again'." Also, John 3:7, "you must be born again." So, the righteous will live by faith, and one must be born again, with both currently being wrapped up within religion.

Here is the answer to the first, Galatians 5:6, "The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love." So, faith is expressed through love, not religion, which fits perfectly with the judgment of love and the good Samaritan. The priest and Levite, in the good Samaritan story, had faith expressed through religion, but because they didn't have love, the religion was worthless. The Samaritan would not have had the religion, but because he had, faith expressed through love, the religion was not required.

Now in the, "born again," statement, the word for "born" does mean "to be born." However, the word "again" is from the Greek word "anothen" (an"-o-then). It means, "from above, from a higher place, of things which come from heaven or God, from the first, from the beginning, from the very first, or over again."

In the text itself, the disciples come back and say, how can one be born again? The answer given is, that which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Or, that which is born of God, is of God. And, 1 John 4:7, "Everyone who loves has been born of God and knows God." So, faith is expressed through love, and everyone who loves is born of God. Thus, the people of good will, or who care, are the people of God.

The statement, "born again," could have been translated as, "born from above," or, "born of God." It is translated as, "born again," because that's what the disciples heard, only because they didn't get it, because they didn't understand. And, the great commission then became to go out and make disciples of all nations, by having them be, born again.

It became the battle cry for the Christian religion. However, the command was to, "love one another," and by this people will know you are my disciples, so by the love, not by the religion. Yet, that message of love, and all the depth that goes with it, became lost within the religion. It was replaced by trying to save people with religion, rather than connecting them to the Divine, through the love.

We then have the fifth duality of creation, being two completely different understandings of salvation. One being, faith expressed through religion, which has been the focus of the past two thousand years, and the second being, faith express through love, which is how the Divine has always connected to the mortal creation. At which point, all the pieces to the puzzle fit together, and the puzzle is solved.

And, what we see in Bible-based religions is simply a failure to recognize, and understand the, "law of love," so they then personalize everything and it all becomes about beliefs, which is religion. Then, the "law of love" either does not exist, at all, or it can only be fulfilled by people who have accepted the religion. And then, to be, 'born again,' exclusively becomes a religious experience.

Once the significance of the 'law of love' is missed, or is not understood, all roads then lead to religion, but this would have been anticipated from day one. The chaos of the war in heaven, the chaos of the fall of the mortals, the chaos of this crazy world, and the chaos of religion, all served the plan. All placing the focus squarely on the first explanation of creation, being one mistake after another, none of it making any sense.

Yet, all the while, there is a case for a plan that cannot be thwarted, that ran silently in the background. A plan for the creation of individuality, from chaos, in which the, "law of love," always connected the mortal creation to the Divine. And, in the midst of the chaos, that plan may well have run seamlessly, without ever skipping a single beat.

CHAPTER FOURTEEN: THE VERY "NATURE" OF THE PLAN

Now, there is going to be a contention over people doing good deeds to get into heaven, as it is stated that it's, not by works. Ephesians 2:9, "not by works, so that no one can boast." In contrast with, Romans 2:14, "When gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves." And, there is a huge difference between people doing good deeds, to try and get into heaven, and individuals who, by nature, choose to care about others.

In a general sense, the good Samaritans would care, because it would be their nature to care. In, "the sheep and the goats," people are asking, "When did we feed you, or give you something to drink, or invite you in, or clothe you, or visit you?" The answer being, "when you did it to the least of one of these, you did it to me."

The point being that they wouldn't have known someone was watching, nor would they have cared, in order to win a prize. Instead, they would have simply been themselves, which is why it's better that the plan runs in the background, largely unnoticed, because then the results are genuine. In fact, if people knew, and were constantly doing good deeds in order to get into heaven, that might produce a type of chaos that would be harmful to the plan, as opposed to being helpful.

Now the, "law of love," can be found in many teachings and religions. In Buddhism it's, do not hurt others with anything that causes you pain. In Confucianism it's, do not do to others what you would not want done to yourself. In Hinduism it's, do nothing to others that would cause you pain. In Jainism it's, regard all creatures as we regard ourselves and refrain from causing injury.

In Sikhism it's, deem others as you deem yourself, and you will become a partner to heaven. And, in Taoism it's, regard the loss of your neighbour as your own loss. In Islam it's, love for your brother what you love for yourself. And, in Genesis 17:20, God tells Ishmael, that he will make his descendants into a great nation, and the law of love is also found within that great nation.

Just as it is found in many teachings, in many similar forms, and they all have the same message, and the same power, which is to inspire people to care. Also, imagine if all of these religions could recognize these laws of love as being equal. It might just provide a common denominator, a common ground, establishing a pathway to peace, which would greatly benefit society.

In this way, religion would still be relevant, inspiring people to care, yet as they agree on the laws of love, all of those collective caring people would no longer need to see their religious beliefs as a source of discourse. And, in the same way, any new age, metaphysical or spiritual teaching, that inspires people to care, would simply be a part of the plan. Otherwise, religion, philosophy, atheism, and sexual orientation would all be irrelevant, to the point that they would not even enter the equation.

Now, in the case of sexual orientation, it is only still an issue because people get hung up on the many laws, not understanding that they have been set aside, and are no longer relevant. Matthew 5:17, "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them." So here we have the reasoning that makes some believe the many laws are still relevant.

Then, Ephesians 2:15, "By abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace". So, one statement indicates the many laws are not abolished, then the next indicates they are, creating a contradiction, which can very quickly be cleared up.

In the statement, "do not think that I have come to abolish the law", the word, translated as, "destroy," in the King James, does mean to, "destroy or demolish," so the many laws are not destroyed. Whereas in the statement, "by abolishing the law in his flesh." The word abolishing, which is translated abolished in the king James, means to "render inactive or idle or inoperative, or to have no further efficiency, or to deprive of force, influence or power".

So, the many laws are, "set aside," or are rendered inactive or inoperative and are deprived of all power, force or influence, in favor of the law of love, which is the fulfillment of all laws. Hebrews 7:18-19, "The former regulation is set aside because it was weak and useless (for the law made nothing perfect), and a better hope is introduced, by which we draw near to God." And, Colossians, "Having cancelled the written code, with its regulations, that was against us and that stood opposed to us; he took it away, nailing it to the cross."

The many laws would then continue to curse hatred, violence and harm, but they would have no power to interfere with the, "law of love," which is the sum of the law, and the fulfilment of the law. We now know that variation is a constant in nature, and we know that there are genetic reasons for different orientations, and that this, in many cases, is innate.

None of the statements contained in the New Testament are referring to people who are born differently and are living a lifestyle that is natural for them. At that time, there was an abundance of slaves in Rome, who were bred, and ordered to have sex with whomever. In fact, Rome was like a State sponsored orgy, with these types of acts being common throughout the empire. And this is what was being addressed by New Testament writers who would have been completely unaware of innate orientations.

Instead, there is a, 'law of love,' that is the fulfillment of every other law and commandment, "whatever they may be," and when this law is fulfilled, there are no further considerations. Instead, the people who fulfill that law, would then step into heaven, and there would be nothing further to be said. In the judgment of love, once it is determined that the sheep have fulfilled the law of love, they are simply told, there is heaven, and that is where you belong.

Romans 4:8, "Blessed is the man whose sin the Lord will never count against him." And, Psalm 103:12, "as far as the east is from the west, so far has he removed our transgressions from us." Both apply to everyone who cares, fulfilling the law of love, which fulfills every law and command, nothing further is required, and religion is irrelevant.

The love is the proof of faith, everyone who loves is born of God, and all those who have chosen love, will immediately choose good over evil, as divine beings, and they will never again be corruptible. They fulfilled the law of love, they step into heaven, they join the Divine, they are given the keys to eternity, and the law of love becomes the one law of heaven.

CHAPTER FIFTEEN: UNIVERSAL SELECTION

We now have an alternate explanation for the war in heaven, and our messed up world, in which these are not proof of a failed creation. Instead, they are the product of the creation of individuality, from chaos, on two different levels, one divine, the other mortal. Yet, anything can still be argued.

Some believe that the remains of Christ have been found in a bone box in Jerusalem, and that he actually married Mary, and they had a child. In which case, there would have been no resurrection from the dead, and all representations concerning the divine nature of Christ would be inaccurate. Then the, "Gospel of Barnabas," asserts that he was not crucified, but ascended into heaven, while still alive.

It should not be surprising that there are different accounts of what may have taken place, as there was little written documentation, after the reported death of Christ. For instance, it is believed that the early church had only the Old Testament, plus perhaps some epistles. Then it's believed that the, "Pauline Epistles," were circulating collectively by the end of the 1st century, which is already approximately 70 years after the crucifixion.

Then the, "Memoirs of the Apostles," which later became the Gospels, by the early 2nd century. And, the first collection of books that resembles today's Bible, sometime after 350 AD. The point being, that time passed between the events detailed in the New Testament, and the actual formation of that testament. This means that those texts passed through several generations of individuals, who were very much into the religion of the New Testament, meaning changes could have been made.

And some of the texts we currently see in the New Testament were created along the way. For instance, the book of Revelations was not written by the apostle John, but by an unknown writer, and has not been accepted into every version of the Bible. It was likely accepted into most versions of the Bible, because the accounting of the wrath of God was in line with the religious theologies being developed, and preached, at the time. It has been a large part of, "fire and brimstone," preaching over a prolonged period of time, yet it's origins are questionable, to say the least.

The great commission, seen at the end of the Gospel of Mark, was added at some point, as it is not seen in early manuscripts. And, it is difficult to say what other subtle changes could have been made to fit in with a religious agenda. The problem being, once firsthand accounts are no longer available, where the documentation is not solid, which it was not, substantial changes can occur, especially over several generations.

In fact, the early Christians had very little in the way of documentation, after the reported death of Christ, and there wasn't substantial documentation for several hundred years. This means that it is perfectly reasonable for some to wonder what may have actually occurred, as opposed to the version of events that we now have.

It all leaves those, who wish to be objective, with a degree of uncertainty that cannot be resolved, which in itself might contribute to the balance of influences. I say this because, if there has been a balanced influence, of good and evil, upon the mortal creation, it has very likely been accompanied by a balance of reasons to believe, or have faith, versus reasons to doubt. And, if people cannot be certain of what actually occurred, it means there will always most certainly be reasons to doubt.

It seems to be an eternal tug of war, between the two sides, that never ends, as it is seen over and over again in literature and films. It is not just the good Angel, on one shoulder, versus the bad Angel, on the other. It is also finding reasons to believe, or to continue having faith, in spite of what life throws our way, or in spite of the reasons to doubt. And this struggle is a part of the development of individuality; it is a part of the equation. It is also quite possible that this balance cannot be undone, or is never intended to be undone, as it is a required condition of the mortal creation.

Imagine the hens, in the hen house, laying eggs, with Beethoven playing in the background, to increase production. Then, in the development of individuality, we have the balanced influences of good and evil, combined with reasons to have faith, or the reasons to believe, balanced against the reasons to doubt. These balanced influences would be the music playing in the background, as the development of individuals takes place.

Now, as the development of individuality progresses, we reach the point where the creation becomes advanced enough to begin questioning both itself and the Creator. "The Ides of Individuality," being that tipping point, at which the Creation takes a second look at the explanations that had, for so long, been accepted.

The six days of creation, no longer works, nor does much of what we see in what had been traditionally accepted as fact. And, as the creation becomes more advanced, we come to the final duality of creation, that being the significance of love, or caring, to both the individual, and the emerging civilization.

Now, some believe that our mortal creation is the only one, and that there are no more, in which case the Angels and mortals are part of a closed system of creation. However, in the universe, if other civilizations either have, or are emerging, does the Divine have a similar influence upon them all, seeing them all as children? And, if the Divine were to add every sentient being, who chooses love, to itself, then what about those civilizations?

The knowledge of good and evil, which is a requirement of individuality, creates a negative bias within every society, within every civilization. And, it is the source of the greed and the corruption that plagues every society. So a race of individuals may aspire to be something great, but they will always have to contend with that bias, of corruption, that is always present, and is seen daily in our world.

So, if fallen Angels were corrupted by their power, they then became slaves to that power, they serve that power, they are not the masters. Whereas, the Angels who did not fall where then not corrupted by their power, making them the masters of that power. So, we might say, power that cannot corrupt an individual, must then serve the individual. Then, we might also say, the one whom absolute power cannot corrupt absolutely, absolute power must serve, and perhaps they might then be called God, or might be called a God.

Then, for a mortal, the act of choosing love, or caring, would tell the Divine that the individual is worthy, will choose good over evil, as a divine being, so they can then be allowed to ascend and take their place among the divine. And then, on a different scale, the act of choosing love, or caring, as a society, or a civilization, may tell the universe, or the Divine, that a civilization is worthy of survival, and can then become something great.

And, does every advancing civilization then face this same tipping point, where they either succeed or fail, with the universe watching and waiting for the outcome? Does the civilization overcome the greed and corruption holding it back, at least to the point where the civilization can survive, or is it corrupted by power and overcome by pollution, overpopulation or war.

The act of caring, for oneself, for one another, and for our beautiful world, can be applied to both the individual and the society or civilization. For the individual, it determines if the individual deserves a place among the Divine, whereas with the civilization, it would determine if a place is deserved, as one of the great civilizations, within the universe.

When we look back at the Romans, we marvel at what they were able to accomplish, and build as a civilization, yet their society was deeply flawed. Roman citizens often lived in a state of poverty, while the rich had an abundance of slaves to do all the work. One day, an advanced race might find our remains and marvel at how much we accomplished and how far we came. Yet, they might also conclude that we just couldn't get past the greed and corruption that kept dragging us down.

So, if every advancing civilization does face this same tipping point, where they either succeed as a race, or fail, then this could be a type of, "universal selection." That selection being a safeguard that serves to protect the universal neighbourhood, only allowing those civilizations who are worthy to take their place in the universal community. And those who don't learn to care for each other, and their worlds, are then destined to fail, thereby protecting those who are truly deserving.

Now, caring is the one thing that can overcome greed and corruption. And, if one third of the Angels did fall with Satan, it would mean two thirds did not, and if the ratio is the same, it would mean that two thirds of the people on earth, at any given time, are caring. So, if they decided to become organized and care collectively, this might just be enough to make the difference. And the current development of social media would make this possible.

Now, we don't need everyone to be Mother Teresa, we just need people who care, to become somewhat organized, as this will influence governments, and corporations. No one needs to do it all themselves, if we all just do our part. And, the command is to be, "wise as serpents and harmless as doves," meaning don't be taken advantage of, but instead, be smart. A small change, in a substantial number of people, who are caring together, will produce an enormous change in our society, as it is the collective effort that would make the difference.

"The Angel Ultimatum," is to make sense of creation, or else! And, we can make sense, for the individual, out of the creation of individuality, from chaos, whereby the individual who cares, who chooses love, is worthy of taking their place among the Divine. Yet, to make sense out of creation, for a society, or a civilization, the creation will only make sense if the civilization succeeds.

Making sense of creation, as it applies to a civilization, is all about the success of that creation, as a whole. Either way, individuals within a civilization can succeed, and be worthy of the Divine, simply by choosing love. However, the civilization itself, becomes a success, when it becomes worthy of survival, and takes its place among the great civilizations of the universe.

Only then, does the universe nod its head, and applaud softly, thinking, we didn't blow it, we got it right. Only then, does the collective soul of humanity say, in the end, we were worthy, and we didn't screw it up. Only then do we collectively make sense of our creation, as the alternative most definitely is, or else!

###

Thank you for reading my book. If you enjoyed it, won't you please take a moment to leave a review at your favourite retailer? See you at the movies!

Thanks!

Alexander Mann

BIBLIOGRAPHY

1. Unless otherwise specified all biblical references

are from the "New International Version" (NIV) of the

Bible.

2. All Greek and Hebrew definitions are from Logos Bible Software.

3. Moses and Monotheism, Sigmund Freud, 1939.

4. The Exodus Decoded, History Channel, 2006.

5. Dr. Irving Finkel, "The Real Noah's Ark: Secret History,"

History Channel, 2014.

6. The Ten Plagues of the Bible, 2010, National Geographic Channel.

7. Devers, William G., "Who Were the Early Israelites and Where did

They Come From," 2003, p. 128

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

Alexander Mann is an author, producer, screenwriter, previously credited on the films, Angry Red Planet, Kowel's Voice, RockLand, and the film version of, "The Angel Ultimatum," all of which have now been moved back into an, "in development," status. He spent over two decades as a member of the Christian religion with, "The Angel Ultimatum," being the culmination of his journey back out of that religion; while still retaining a strong faith.

He suffered the death of his oldest brother Brad, who passed away in a motorcycle accident in 1975, at the age of 22, and has since lost both parents, his father in 1999, his mother in 2013. His greatest talent is his ability to conceptualize, which when combined with the loss he has suffered, results in a depth of writing, producing compelling stories.

He holds a technology diploma from BCIT, is a trained technician, and a health & safety professional; now emerging as a talented writer, with a goal to produce films that will touch both the hearts and minds of audiences. And to conceptualize a promising future, in which we choose, as a people, to succeed as a species.
