 
Before the book

First, a little theology:

Preachers say that the mind of a human is in his soul or spirit, specifically, that conscience is in spirit. That is a false teaching. Bible says that branding the head with hot iron can damage proper conscience: (1Tim. 4:2) " **through the hypocrisy of men who speak lies, branded in their own conscience as with a hot iron** " and thus a man is ruled by the brain accordingly Bible. A human is his brain, well accordingly science. But what is the soul then? In my opinion, the soul is a heavenly backup of a human brain, just like a computer backup. Then it all goes logical: People's mind, including feelings and the consience, decisions for good and bad, etc. are just functions of his brain; but people have an eternal soul that continues even after death.

Not that because of "For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels" (Mk. 8:38). "For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed, when he comes in his glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels" (Lk. 9:26) I was saying about myself that I am a sectarian and religious fanatic, to be hated by everybody. So only a very spiritual lawyer like me would behave.

So, in childhood for following the Gospel as I understood it, I was repeatedly beaten by the head. I went mad for some period of time. It is no joke to go mad. You won't be a "good madman" if you are hit by the head, it is evil. So, I had to conclude that following the Gospel makes me worse. Moreover, I was greatly confused, because Baptists taught me that the mind is in the soul (variant: in the spirit). Does hit by the head damage the soul? If I do a sin after being so beaten, will I be punished by God for this sin?

To make the moral problem more complex, I was dying of hunger for following the Gospel. On the streets while eating grass, I (being a first-year student of a university) discovered a new formula. Should I kill myself by following the Gospel and deprive mankind of the formula? Or should I denounce the Gospel to survive and help people?

Years later keeping to think about this I concluded: the Gospel is a letter and a law and the Gospel itself tells not to follow the letter and the law. Therefore the Gospel terminates itself as a contract.

I told God that I terminate the New Testament with Him. I found many reasons why it should and can be terminated in the New Testament itself.

I remind that I was a spiritual "lawyer" and such people are under the anger of God: (Gal. 3:10) "For as many as are of the works of the law are under the curse: for it is written, Cursed is every one that continues not in all things which are written in the book of the law to do them." I came out of this curse: I was no more in the danger of death from hunger. But I didn't enter into a blessing: I remained alone without any help. Trying to get away from the Gospel, I started, for example, to gaze at women. I became unspiritual.

I concluded that I am first among the brothers (will take the best place in heaven). I reasoned that I passed the entire "distance" of the Gospel and came to the end. I even suspected that all the rest people will go to hell for not believing me.

Continuing my theological "development" further, I decided to stop the Eucharist: (Mt. 26:39) "And he having going forward, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as you will." But I Corinthians 11:25 explains "This cup is the new testament in my blood." I decided that I will do the will of the Father instead of the will of Christ. Therefore the will of the Father came and the cup of Eucharist shall pass away from Christ (we shall stop taking the eucharist).

I also concluded that we can lie: Christ is the truth and serving Christ we must always tell the truth, but I serve to the Father God, that is love, I should instead follow love, not truth.

But trying to do so, I was greatly confused (for example, should I do good for mankind or for Christ by eliminating the mankind that they to stop taking eucharist). Should I, for example, be for or against global warming?

I remind that I became unspiritual, gazed at women, etc.

Recently, I have understood that I don't really follow the will of the Father. Therefore my argument that the cup of eucharist is away is void. This cup is the New Testament in His blood, therefore the New Testament yet continues. I decided to return to the church. (Now is the epidemic of the corona-virus and I cannot right now, but I decided to return to the church when I can.)

In fact, the will of the Father will be done after 1000 years of the Millennium kingdom, when Christ will deliver his authority to the Father: (1Cor. 15:24) "Then comes the end, when he shall have delivered up the kingdom to God, even the Father; when he shall have put down all rule and all authority and power."

But, lo, I learned something during this spiritual journey: I am no more a lawyer. I no more say "I am a sectarian and a religious fanatic." instead of "Hi". If I meet fascists, I can lie to them that I am not a Jew. (Who follows the law is under God's curse.)

But why the Gospel says not to deny Christ before men? Read in the context:

(Mt. 10) "31 Fear you not therefore, you are of more value than many sparrows. 32 Whoever therefore shall confess me before men, him will I confess also before my Father which is in heaven. 33 But whoever shall deny me before men, him will I also deny before my Father which is in heaven."

We should not deny Christ because we should be not afraid, not for some other reason (not by the law that we should not do so). I was afraid mother who beat me by the head that I go mad. But finally it led to a good: I stopped to be a "lawyer".

(Luk. 12) "3 Therefore whatever you have spoken in darkness shall be heard in the light; and that which you have spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed on the housetops. 4 And I say to you my friends, Be not afraid of them that kill the body, and after that have no more that they can do. 5 But I will forewarn you whom you shall fear: Fear him, which after he has killed has power to cast into hell; yes, I say to you, Fear him. 6 Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of them is forgotten before God? 7 But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered. Fear not therefore: you are of more value than many sparrows. 8 Also I say to you, Whoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of man also confess before the angels of God: 9 But he that denies me before men shall be denied before the angels of God."

This means that they can damage our brains, but they cannot damage the backup at the heaven (soul). We should not fear people, that is assume that they can do worse for us. As I said above, beating and starving me finally made me better (I ceased to be a "lawyer"). It was very fearful but with a positive result. We should not take the decision to deny Christ by our soul. That's more important.

Well, how then about my formula (see above) which was in danger to be lost? Shouldn't I deny Christ for the benefit of other people?

(Is. 43:4) "Since you were precious in my sight, you have been honorable, and I have loved you: therefore will I give men for you, and nations for your life." God killed nations (!) for the purpose of making me humble. It is not that I worth it, but that He found an especially proud and "legalistic" man and decided to show to the angels how He can make me humble and based on grace.

By the way, how he has killed nations for every Christian? There is not enough nations for every one of us! I think, he simply eliminated not yet born nations.

My math formula costs less. Therefore, I should not have denied Christ for the benefit of human mathematics.

The book

(First read "Before the book" above.)

In this book, I affirm that the New Testament denies itself in the same way as it denies the Old Testament. The outcome of gospel is the end of gospel.

The meaning of gospel is sometimes the direct opposite of what we thought it means.

http://endofgospel.org

What I Do Not Say

I do not say that the gospel is wrong. It was and always will be right.

I do not say that I would cease to believe. I believe just as before.

I do not say that the gospel ceased to have importance for us. It always was and will be important.

Hard Questions

In this chapter, I raised several questions about Christian religion which are hard to answer.

Who Is Better?

"Make my joy full...in humility, each counting others better than himself" (Phil. 2:1–3).

So we should count others better than ourselves.

But how can we count above us those who don't know the gospel? Are they better than us who know the gospel and live accordingly to it?

One Hundred Thousand Dollars  
for Sex

Once I met with a rich woman. She asked me to have sex with her. I said, "Pay me one hundred thousand dollars if you want to have sex with me."

A day later, she came with one hundred thousand dollars in a suitcase. Then I told her that I'm a Christian and would not have sex for money.

Why I refused? Because in 1 Corinthians 6:9–10, it says, "the unrighteous will not inherit the kingdom of God. Don't be deceived...nor male prostitutes...nor thieves...will inherit the kingdom of God." A male prostitute is a man who indulges sex for money. So I decided to not be a prostitute because it contradicts to the New Testament.

But despite my refusal, I wondered why God forbids this. This way, I could escape from living in poverty and from many trials and temptations in life.

I also wondered why God strictly forbids thieving. Isn't it that money is more useful in the hands of believers? Wouldn't it be better if we would seize or thieve money in order to use it for the kingdom of God?

Broken Head

It is scientifically proven that people think and are ruled with brain. The proof is simple: If a man's brain is damaged, then his thoughts and behavior change.

I was not believing this scientific fact, being sure (according to a widespread Christian doctrine) that the mind of a man belongs to the soul or spirit and not to the brain.

But there were a few occasions when my own head was broken. Particularly, my head was sometimes hit by a frying pan as a punishment for following the gospel. That was causing my misbehavior, proving that our thoughts and behavior indeed are dependent on the brain.

How can we get away with this contradiction of Christian doctrine and proven science?

The Outcome of the Contradictions

As such, I was living with contradictions:

I'm better than other people; I should count myself worse than other people.

I need money for good; I must not steal or do prostitution.

The conscience is located in soul; damaged brain damages proper conscience.

Thus I lived with contradictions in my mind. It was an unbreakable obstacle on my way. I was suffering an obstacle in every kind of situation, even when there were no real obstacles, because contradictions in my mind were obstacles.

So, I've formulated several questions hard for a Christian to answer. I indeed will answer these questions below.

On Losing Something

Jesus has said, "But I tell you, don't resist him who is evil; but whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Mt. 5:39). I wondered, isn't proper functioning of our mouth important for our ability to preach the gospel? Shouldn't we protect ourselves in order to be able to preach? "But having food and clothing, we will be content with that" (1 Tim. 6:8). But how could we contend if we had no Internet access in order to preach the gospel? "But I tell you who hear: love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" (Lk. 6:27). Okay, we should love our enemies. But should we love enemies of the gospel?

The Main Idea of This Book

The main ideas of this book are postulated as the following:

The gospel should be applied to itself.

The New Testament terminates itself in the same way as it terminates the Old Testament.

The meaning of the gospel is about the "end of gospel" (a situation where the gospel does not apply anymore).

Gospel comes to its end like the Old Testament has come to end.

I will give examples below of that novel interpretation of the New Testament.

The Real Purpose of Jesus

What is the real purpose of Jesus? Why did He sent us like sheep among wolves?

(Mt. 26:39) "And he having going forward, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass away from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as you will."

But I Corinthians 11:25 explains "This cup is the new testament in my blood."

So read it: "And he having doing further progress, and fell on his face, and prayed, saying, O my Father, if it be possible, let New Testament in my blood pass away from me: nevertheless not as I will, but as you will."

So Christ wants that New Testament passes away!

It can be also translated: "let this cup pass away from me as much as possible but not as I will, but as you will." It means that Jesus wanted us to take the Eucharist ("this cup") as less as possible (provided that the Father's will will be done).

This explains why Christians were tortured so much, it was a solution of the problem to minimize occurrences of Eucharist: If a Christian is in a prison, he can't take the Eucharist, so Jesus wanted us to sit in prisons and likewise. He told this plainly "I am sending you as sheep among wolves." This means that He gave us such directions of the way of life that people would hate us and behave like wolves to us.

Jesus wanted the period of grace to last as little as possible, leading to the New Testament (contract) termination as soon as possible. Apparently He didn't want us to eat his flesh.

Some Misses with Gospel

Misses with the Coming of Christ

**Christ has come to us and was sacrificed for us by mistake**

The statement is not my invention, it is written in the Bible, "For him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf; so that in him we might become the righteousness of God" (2 Cor. 5:21). Christ has never made any mistakes. But his coming was by mistake. The entire life of Jesus Christ was a big mistake.

The word sin means "a mistake," or literally translated "to miss the mark," or "to hit missing away the target."

In simple words, Christ has come to a wrong planet (roughly saying). It was not his mistake as he never mistakes, but his driver—an angel—has mistaken and driven him to a wrong planet. The driver has missed the target of the travel. For us saved by Christ was good, but this was not good in general. The gospel plainly tells that we are saved by grace—that is, saved incidentally as a result of a mistake, which was a good for us. Christ had more important deals than to save us, but his driver has mistaken. We were reading in the New Testament that we are saved by grace that is incidentally not by us being worthy of salvation, but were not understanding this before.

However, not only the earthy life of Jesus Christ was a mistake. It is written, "Christ...him who knew no sin he made to be sin on our behalf" (2 Cor. 5:20–21). That is, Christ was made sin. This means that the entire life of Christ in this world (not only on the Earth) was a mistake—that is, all what has happened to him in the world was a mistake. We had just an incidental success (grace), but anybody else also had only the same incidental success. For anybody taken separately, salvation is just an incident (good for him) but missing for others.

Jesus Christ was speaking  
not from himself

"The words that I tell you, I speak not from myself; but the Father who lives in me does his works...The word which you hear isn't mine, but the Father's who sent me" (Jn. 14:10, 24).

Jesus Christ was saying that he speaks not from himself. We were not realizing what this means despite that it is very simple, He was just saying not what he wanted to say. He was probably also bound by certain legal obligations and was not able to say what he wanted to say. All what he has said was a truth, but not that truth which it should be.

Here, it is also said that Christ is sent—that is, accomplishes a particular formal mission. He is not at a free walk where one would speak anything he wants to say.

A reader could respond, "Yes, he was speaking not from himself, but it is plainly told here that he was speaking from the Father, so his words were indeed the words of God to us."

He indeed has said not in vain that he spoke not from himself. It meant something. He has emphasized that he speaks not from himself. And what does it mean? It means that he was speaking not free according to the situation, but by a prepared (by the Father) pattern. You would meet with a great teacher or a great speaker, but if he would just read a study book, he would be no different in anything when compared with a lesser teacher. It is exactly what I say that Christ teaches not from himself but by a study book, by a pattern. It was not an individual lesson specifically prepared for us, as we are not worthy of this, but just a standard lesson.

We have not yet really spoken with Christ! We have spoken with him as an official, not as a person. Essentially, we have spoken with a common official of the kingdom of Heaven, not reached the highest level. Just any official would say the same words, so this does not matter that it was Jesus Christ himself; it was just like a common official.

So we have overweighed the importance of the visit of Christ. A great teacher has come, but what all he did was that he just read us from a study book, just like as any other (lower rank) teacher would do. Nothing special has happened. We were simply overimpressed by the words that Christ has come.

Doing Away with the Letter of Gospel

Letter kills

Gospel says: "Who also made us sufficient as servants of a new covenant; not of the letter, but of the Spirit. For the letter kills, but the Spirit gives life" (2 Cor. 3:6).

But have you ever think that this produces a paradox: New Testament book itself is letter. So it should kill.

In other words, New Testament itself claims that we should not follow its letter, because it "kills", but spirit. After all, we know that Bible is true, we cannot ignore its letter.

In the end of gospel theology, this verse should be understood as the letter of the gospel kills. Moreover, it should be understand as the letter of the gospel kills the gospel itself—that is, the New Testament terminates itself.

To say "we should not follow the letter of Gospel" is the same as to say "New Testament is terminated", because we must follow the letter of a covenant we entered in, unless it is terminated. Termination means that we are no more following the letter. It does not mean that we stop to believe or stop to live accordingly the spirit of Gospel.

When we tried to follow the letter of Bible we were like Pharisees as in (Mat. 23:24) "You blind guides, who strain out a gnat, and swallow a camel!" That is when we followed some particular commandments, we just violated more important commandments.

Before, we did not know the exact way the gospel is terminated. In this book, I explained where exactly the gospel fails and why it needs to be terminated.

We are not under the gospel now

The story that was told by the gospel was that the ancient Jews were, in their time, under the law of God and the Old Covenant (Old Testament). But once the time of the law has passed—when Jesus Christ the Messiah has come and then the believers started to justify themselves independently of the law by faith, "We maintain therefore that a man is justified by faith apart from the works of the law" (Rom. 3:28). So, accordingly in the gospel, the law has become not needed and has become a history, just a teaching example for us now, not a law according to which we live. "For sin will not have dominion over you. For you are not under law, but under grace" (Rom. 6:14).

It is clear that this should somehow apply to any law and even to the gospel itself. (Well, the gospel is not a law, but our understanding of the gospel has made a law for us.) But before, it was not understood how it should be applied to the gospel. For example, personally, I before supposed that regarding the gospel itself, it means just raising from the gospel to a new level of the gospel itself. But now, I know how we should deal away with the gospel. Now this is clear.

What I say is, we are not under the gospel anymore, and what the gospel says is now not said to us—that is, God speaks in the gospel to others but not to us. "Now we know that whatever things the law says, it speaks to those who are under the law" (Rom. 3:19).

This is just like as that after the end of the Old  
Testament; what God speaks in the book to the Jewish nation continues to be important, knowledgeable, insightful, etc., but it is not spoken to us; it was spoken to the old covenant Jews.

Death for gospel

By "death for Gospel" I mean that we stop following the commandments like a law. I do not mean neither that we stop believing nor that we deny the spirit of Gospel.

"Death for Gospel" sounds... wild, but it is just like to Paul preaching death for Torah. At some stage this should happen.

"For I, through the law, died to the law, that I might live to God. I have been crucified with Christ, and it is no longer I that live, but Christ living in me. That life which I now live in the flesh, I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me. I don't make void the grace of God. For if righteousness is through the law, then Christ died for nothing!" (Gal. 2:19–21). For the past stage, "the law" has been meaning the gospel. That is, for us, it means that through the gospel, we died to the gospel. In the time when we lived accordingly in the gospel, we lived for ourselves not for God. We followed selfish desires to be unpunished. (However some followed it from the reasoning that God wants this.) Now being free of the gospel, we can live for God. Before, we counted that we live an eternal life according to the gospel. Now I do not count so anymore. "Christ is the end of the law," (Rom. 10:4). We reach contact with Christ when we cease to live by a law. Now it means for us to cease to live by the gospel. Then we will reach revelation of Christ. "For if I build again the things which I destroyed, I make myself a transgressor. For I through the law am dead to the law, that I may live to God" (Gal. 2:18–19). Pertaining to our topic, it means that we should never again build our life accordingly following commandments of the gospel as a law. No return to the gospel as a law. Gospel itself locks the way back.

Resurrection for Gospel

After death for a commandment of New Testament we should experience resurrection for it. This means that we begin to live by spirit and fulfill a commandment naturally by our inner nature without trying to conform to a particular commandment.

For resurrection to happen, first death should happen. This means that first we should understand that we should not follow a particular commandment or doctrine as a law.

It is essential to know the doctrine of death for Gospel, because otherwise we cannot stop to live accordingly to a law.

I tried to live accordingly to spirit not accordingly commandments, but in the past this failed for me: Because our understanding of spirit of Gospel was constructed from individual commandments, I returned to follow commandments like a law. My attempt to live by spirit of Gospel failed with my understanding of spirit of Gospel crashing and breaking into individual commandments again. We need to understand that the entire Gospel dies and every commandment is canceled for us, in order to be able to live by spirit.

Now I do not live accordingly commandments and ordinances anymore, because I understand that every commandment is canceled for us, for us to live accordingly spirit.

Prosperity Gospel as an example

Some Christian denominations, primarily Charismatics and Pentecostals, believe in the Prosperity doctrine or Prosperity Gospel. Other denominations, both evangelical and liberal, such as Methodists or Baptists, reject this teaching and even say that it is a heresy.

For those who may be unaware of what this teaching is; the _Prosperity Gospel_ is the belief that faith, when combined with following certain commandments, primarily those involving giving money to God's work or those who need it, results in making the giver prosperous, not only in heaven but also in this world. This prosperity takes the form or earthly wealth and influence.

Proponents of this doctrine point to Bible verses, such as the well-known "blessing of Abraham" (who was a rich man by the standards of his day). Likewise, opponents quote other Bible verses to support their case.

Provided our faith is correct, I do not doubt that with God's help we can obtain everything we request. "Or do you think that I couldn't ask my Father, and he would even now send me more than twelve legions of angels?" (Mt. 26:53); "... how much more will your Father who is in heaven give good things to those who ask him" (Mt. 7:11); "All things, whatever you ask in prayer, believing, you will receive." (Mt. 21:22); "Therefore I tell you, all things whatever you pray and ask for, believe that you receive them, and you shall have them." (Mrk. 11:24); "Whatever you will ask in my name, that will I do, that the Father may be glorified in the Son. If you will ask anything in my name, I will do it." (Jn. 14:13); "If you remain in me, and my words remain in you, you will ask whatever you desire, and it will be done for you." (Jn. 15:7); "... that whatever you will ask of the Father in my name, he may give it to you." (Jn. 15:16); "... Most assuredly I tell you, whatever you may ask of the Father in my name, he will give it to you." (John 16:23)

During the first few years after my conversion to Christ I lived in extreme poverty. Things were so bad I was afraid I would die of hunger. Even later when I believed the Prosperity doctrine and was asking God to give me money, I wasn't receiving the promised blessings. I was in conflict with everybody, because I was constantly quarreling about the Bible with anyone who would listen. The verses are plain in their promises, so if they were not evident in my life the problem is not the bible, rather my faith was wrong. (Or do you think having the right faith leads to a meaningless death by starvation?) I could be not a preacher, because if I preached in a church, all of my sermons would be "how to behave in such a way as to conflict with everyone and die of hunger." I was living a life of following a self-contradictory doctrine. It was all about me: "For let that man not think that he will receive anything from the Lord. He is a double-minded man, unstable in all his ways." (James 1:7-8)

Now I have no doubt that if a person's faith is correct and they pray for money then God will answer.

The question is should we ask God to give us large sums of money? Should we practice the commandments of prosperity for the sake of prosperity?

It looks like that Gospel indicates that the answer is a resounding no! "But having food and clothing, we will be content with that. But those who are determined to be rich fall into a temptation and a snare and many foolish and harmful lusts, such as drown men in ruin and destruction." (1Tim. 6:8-9)

This verse is the _death_ of the Prosperity doctrine.

But remember, in the Gospel death is followed by a resurrection! "Count it all joy, my brothers, when you fall into various temptations, knowing that the testing of your faith produces endurance. Let endurance have its perfect work, that you may be perfect and complete, lacking in nothing." (Jam. 1:2-4) In this passage, "various" includes the temptation of richness. So when God gives us richness we should accept it with great joy. We should lack in nothing (be rich) according to the above Bible quote. Also, "Blessed is the man who endures temptation, for when he has been approved, he will receive the crown of life, which the Lord promised to those who love him." (Jam. 1:12)

"But let the brother in humble circumstances glory in his high position; and the rich, in that he is made humble, because like the flower in the grass, he will pass away" (Jam. 1:9-10). This is the reverse of what we thought.

Those who have riches should understand that they are tempted more than those who have little or nothing. "Come now, you rich, weep and howl for your miseries that are coming on you." (Jam. 5:1)

Wisdom of Gospel

Let no one deceive himself. If anyone thinks that he is wise among you in this world, let him become a fool, that he may become wise. For the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God. For it is written, "He has taken the wise in their craftiness." And again, "The Lord knows the reasoning of the wise, that it is worthless." (1 Cor. 3:18–20)

According to my theological postulates, world should be interpreted as "followers of the gospel." That is, wisdom of followers of the gospel is foolishness.

The more we were studying the gospel, the more we were tempted and confused.

When he [the spirit of truth] has come, he will convict the world about sin, about righteousness, and about judgment; about sin, because they don't believe in me; about righteousness, because I am going to my Father, and you won't see me any more; about judgment, because the prince of this world has been judged. I have yet many things to tell you, but you can't bear them now. (Jn. 16:8–12)

That the prince of this world is condemned means that who will be condemned is our past life in ignorance when we attempted to live according to the gospel as a law. "About sin that do not believe me" means that we were ignoring the real personality of Christ completely, substituting it with the official representative described in the gospel. "About righteousness that I go to my Father" means that Christ has come to the earth by mistake, while he was traveling to another direction, to his Father what is the right direction and his remaining here would be wrong.

The essence of what I say is that—notwithstanding that there are no contradictions in the gospel—the gospel has come very near to contradiction.

Failures of Life in Accordance to the Gospel

Here is an example of a problem that appeared during life accordingly gospel. Being (in my own understanding) a great mathematician, I counted that people should kind of stay on their knees before me, serve me. So everybody whom I was met was made severely blamed for his actions, even a little bad to me or not doing good to me. But the gospel is the ministry of justification (not the "ministry of good" as was the Old Testament). So my life was contrary to the gospel as I was making everybody I met blamed, not justified. What I have reached is kind of absurd—the more good I do, the worse it is. Every time, when a bad man meets a good man, it is bad, because the bad man should serve the good man, but he does not. So we have concluded that to be a good man is bad because it causes others to be guilty.

That we have advocates is good. We cannot live without advocates. But when a good advocate saves a bad person from prison, it is not the best.

Why we Christians were tortured so much? Isn't it for the good purpose to cause us to somehow deviate from the set way of faith and to guess that thing (which I guessed) and write here? What else can be done to teach somebody to which it is impossible to speak except to somehow torture him in the hope that incidentally he will deviate from his normal way and guess? "The god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving" (2 Cor. 4:4). "God of this world" means God limited to the means and rules of this world. Now we see exactly this that despite the gospel is true and right, we were blinded by that spirit (God of this world) which has set our minds that we should be limited by the gospel.

Now I deem that being justified, we indeed should behave as not justified, remembering however that we are justified to not fall into complete self-condemnation.

Probably St. Paul also knew the mystery. "For seeing that in the wisdom of God, the world through its wisdom didn't know God, it was God's good pleasure through the foolishness of the preaching to save those who believe" (1 Cor. 1:21). Here Paul says that our preaching was foolish. It was a foolish deal to preach. "For the word of the cross is foolishness to those who are dying, but to us who are saved it is the power of God" (1 Cor. 1:18). Oh, who died on the cross? It was Christ. For him, what was considered by us as the power of God (the word of cross) was simply a stupidity. It was looking like wise only from our side.

Failure of Angels

The word gospel in Greek (evangelion) has a common root with the word angel. Based on this, gospel can be also translated like "being angel well," "correct life of angels," "correct rules of behavior for angels" or something like this. So the end of gospel means that the behavior of angels ceased to be well, that the angels started to misbehave.

Not only Christian people, but also angels attempted to live according to the gospel. As I have shown above, the attempt to be ministers of the gospel was silly. As a result, not only people but also angels lived in a silly way. As during that time, the church developed and become more advanced; actions of Christians became more silly. Obviously. angels advanced greater and more successfully than people, so the actions of angels became sillier faster than the actions of people. As a result in our time, angels have reached about the same degree of silliness as people. Now angels are essentially as silly as people.

(Before, I was unable to think this way—to accommodate this into my mental model—as I was considering people as inherently unequal with higher levels of angels.)

For me, it was a self-obvious thing that an angel surpasses a man so much that a man would have no hope to reach a level compared to that. But as angels have also become silly, now it has happened indeed that people are on a level of development which is near to the level of angels—that is, angels have now reached such a degree of silliness that take the decision to actually count themselves equal with people.

In the future world, angels will be below people. "For he didn't subject the world to come, whereof we speak, to angels. But one has somewhere testified, saying, 'What is man, that you think of him? Or the son of man, that you care for him?'" (Heb. 2:5–6).

Inherent Problems with Gospel

Here are also some examples of how attempting to minister the gospel leads to nonsense:

Bible teaches to be humble to be raised by God, but also that those who raise themselves are brought down by God. It has lead me to the nonsense that I am to be humble to be raised, but this would be raising myself and humility has lost its sense for me. (The resolution is not that the Bible would be not right, but that this should be eliminated by counting all being equal before a higher level. Being equal, it is impossible nor to be raised nor to fall, and this loses any sense.)

Jesus Christ has commanded to not judge, but in 1 Corinthians chapter 2 verse 15, it states, "But he who is spiritual discerns all things, and he himself is judged by no one." (Now we do not count ourselves as spiritual but as fleshly.)

Gospel can be called a teaching about humility, and humility is an important thing. Because this is an important thing, we were proud that we are ministers of the gospel, instead of to be humble.

I continue to believe that all what was said in the Bible are historic facts. But now, for me, these have become namely historic facts. Great history with heavenly powers coming to the earth but just a history, the past.

Here I will demonstrate some silly, meaningless situations where I have fallen, attempting to live according to the gospel.

Silly Situations

When I was a teenager, the elders severely punished me for my faith of Christ and for my godly life (sexual abstinence, for example). The punishments included hitting my head and other kinds of tortures which were making me mad. Then, driven mad, would I not go to have sex with a dog? Wouldn't it better to have sex with the girl with which they commanded me to have sex? Wouldn't it better to deny Christ by words than being driven mad lose memory and really forget him or even to change to pray to the devil?

This is what was leading to my life according to the gospel. Now it is evident that it is useless and even harmful to attempt to live according to the gospel as a law.

The gospel as a law was inappropriate from the very beginning. Yet St. Paul was beaten and driven mad. But either, St. Paul did not understood that gospel has the end, according to the gospel itself, or rather he has kept this in secret (so it seems from the verse "mystery of the gospel" [Eph. 6:19]). But anyway, until now we were holding the gospel despite it was having no sense for us to attempt to hold it.

Now I have realized that the driver of Christ has missed the target, came to a wrong planet, and all this was a big mistake, after being for a long time greatly confused, attempting to find a sense in some of acts of Christ (who as I know never makes mistakes and his every act has a sense) which as I now understand were meaningless.

I was repeatedly put in silly situations like this. I was at the lowest rank in a church organization. They would not only allow me to preach, but they did not even speak to me. The pastor was despising me. So I found no chance of how I could call them (both the pastor and others) to the true faith and repentance and save them. And all what could be enough to change all this—to be respected by the pastor, allowed to preach, and take a high position—would be to have sex with the wife of the pastor (which has offered it to me). I was completely messed in mind, thinking about situations like this, supposing I would do this (I have not). But if I would, what would it be? A kind of prostitution. Then who would I be after this? I would be an apostle prostitute. (I was called to be a missionary in Africa as I will describe below, so I call myself an apostle.) Yes, there was a reason in not doing this. It is that I was simply not able to analyze this situation. I have been somehow able to analyze apostles and prostitutes, but I would not be able to analyze anything about anyone both apostle and prostitute. An airplane may crash because of a damage or fuel going out. But it may also crash by the other reason, lost orientation (where I am); this would be lost orientation and so also a crash.

Or another example on the same topic: I was dying of hunger. I was bringing to coffin my math discovery worth trillions of dollars. Isn't there a simple solution: marry a "wrong" girl with money? I was popular among women, it would be possible to do. After all what is more important: not to sleep with a girl I don't like or give the world a few trillions dollars (what could maybe enhance all areas of living including dating sites and the possibilities for men to sleep with women they like)? I was stopped to do this by a contradiction in my mind: not understanding what the Gospel means by "marriage", "prostitution", "generosity", "greediness". The same about to become a thief to earn a trillion for the world. No way to understand what is to be a thief and prostitute Gospel follower.

Now I understand that I was put in these situations by God in order for me to understand that I cannot hold the gospel, and it makes no sense to attempt to continue to hold it.

Failure of the Ministry as the Way  
to the Next Stage

Now I thank God for all what has happened. I was following my understanding of God's will optimized for evangelical ministry. I did not understand why God allowed them to torture and break me; otherwise, if I were not being tortured, I would further develop my knowledge and raise to upper levels of ministry. But we have been missing the most important thing in all evangelical ministry, that it was a wrong way according to the gospel itself. Gospel is right but ministering the gospel is wrong. Only after a complete failure I was dared to think that something may be wrong in evangelical ministry. And I then have thought something which nobody in my circle was thinking, that the gospel indicates its own end.

That is, I would otherwise, following my understanding of the will of God for me, become one more Billy Graham, or Oral Roberts and Kenneth Copeland, may be preaching and curing more and greater due surpassing gifts which God has given me (but I have largely lost as a result of tortures and silly life). I was wondering why all these bad things happened to me. But the essence here is that to be like Billy Graham or Oral Roberts or Kenneth Copeland or whoever is not a good thing. Everyone of us spoke, not understanding what we say: we are saved by God's mercy. Now I understand that what was with me is also what was worth for Billy Graham, Oral Roberts or Kenneth Copeland, doing a wrong deal—a misconception—but God just had mercy on them. On me, however, God had greater mercy as he had led me to realize that it was a misconception.

Church of Last Days:  
The Confusion about Gospel

It is also interesting to note the practical aspects of the church of the last days. The gospel was repeatedly substituted with different conflicting with the gospel and with each other systems of principles, either explicitly formulated or unconscious. Everybody of us said, "There is a problem" but no one of us was able to formulate what is the problem. We fought the so-called spiritual war for peace and did a bunch of other silly things. "In that he says, 'A new covenant,' he has made the first old. But that which is becoming old and grows aged is near to vanishing away" (Heb. 8:13). We simply saw that the New Testament for us becomes old and grows aged, but were refusing to believe the New Testament itself is vanishing away.

Following the gospel, we were seeking a problem inside ourselves, and it was our failed attempt to follow the gospel.

I Attempted to Be an Angel

In my earlier Christian life, I decided to do away with my emotions as belonging to the flesh. Well, I realized that emotions are also given by God, but I decided just to use emotions to do my rational acts—that is, for me, emotions became just an instrument.

This way, I've become somehow similar to an angel by my relation to emotions. This was a natural consequence of my attempt to follow the gospel. This is no wonder as the word gospel may be translated "being an angel well."

And what has this led to? I just reinvented bad human emotions:

Fear sprung out of carefulness

Anger sprung from the desire to be just

Greed and envy sprung from my desire to have means for a ministry

Hatred to people sprung from hatred to their sins

Offense sprung from my relation to evil and desire to choose better targets for my good

Purely rational creatures are bad in some competitions, because of too little flexibility of mind for such creatures. Particularly, these are bad in competitions where weaker form groups to overcome stronger ones, and in this case stronger ones may lose.

This way, I haven't just remained a sinner, but became a big sinner like St. Paul was. "Here is a trustworthy saying that deserves full acceptance: Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners—of whom I am the worst" (1 Tim. 1:15). For example, instead of being in conflict with some people, I was in conflict with the entire country of my habitation (that time, it was Russia) and even in conflict with the entire mankind.

God does not need more angels. He instead wants saved people with corrected human emotions.

Gospel Induces Harm  
onto Its Readers

In the gospel, there are serious provocations, following which you could impose serious threats for your life, wealth, and health.

The main of these provocations is to confess Christ before sinners.

Whether to Confess Christ  
before Bad People?

Bible requires us to be honest always. For example, if somebody will ask you, "Do you believe in Christ?" We must not answer no, even if the answer yes may cause our death or tortures.

But what if you sit among a group of people and then a bandit with a pistol enters and says, "I will kill every Christian! Are there any Christians among you?" Then should we say, "I believe in Christ" in this case or better to keep silence?

At first, it seems that we must say this because of the following verses of the Bible: "For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels" (Mk. 8:38). "For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed, when he comes in his glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels" (Lk. 9:26).

The bandit is a typical sinner from the generation of sinners. We shall not be ashamed before him; following the word of the Lord would be the first opinion.

But now, after careful thinking, I concluded that we may remain silent in this case and not to tell about Christ when it is not appropriate. Now I think that we do not need to confess Christ before this bandit.

That we should not always confess Christ is clear from nearby verses. "He said to them, 'But who do you say that I am?' Peter answered, 'You are the Christ.' He charged them that they should tell no one about him" (Mk. 8:29–30). So we have felt into a contradiction. From one verse, we have concluded that we should confess Christ not in any situation but sometimes keep silent; from the other that we must openly confess Christ in any situation. Something was wrong with our conclusion, but what? How we can obey Mark chapter 8 verse 38, but not confess Christ before gangsters like this?

It is also written, "Don't give that which is holy to the dogs, neither throw your pearls before the pigs, lest perhaps they trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces" (Matt. 7:6). How these two looking contradictory commandments can be combined? When we meet sinner (dog or swine) from this adulterous generation, how not to be ashamed of Jesus Christ before this generation, but at the same time to not throw the pearls of Christian teaching before him?

About these two verses

Now go to detailed analysis of Mark 8:38 and Luke 9:26 to explain why it is not a contradiction, and these verses do not require us to confess Christ in such situations as before that gangster.

It is important to realize that these are two different verses of the Bible. One of these says, "Ashamed of me and of my words in this adulterous and sinful generation" (Mk. 8:38) and the other says simply, "Ashamed of me and of my words" (Lk. 9:26). So these verses differ from each other.

The differences between these two verses can be summarized in the table below.

Mark 8:38:

Shame before who?

people of this adulterous and sinful generation, especially adulterers and other sinners

Which kind of shame?

**human shame:** the kind of shame of this adulterous and sinful generation; this kind of shame is activity of certain brain zones, the same zones which are responsible for adultery, it often may be visible as red color of the face

100 percent of the measure of the shame

_even if ashamed only before sinful and adulterous people_

Luke 9:26:

Shame before who?

anybody including yourself

Which kind of shame?

**any kind of shame:** not necessarily human shame; may be unrelated with any particular brain zone and human feelings, may be not shown by red face (consider, for example, a politician who refuses to speak about certain things not because of feeling of shame but because of reasonable political motives to hide certain things)

100 percent of the measure of the shame

_when ashamed before all_

I think that we should not confess Christ before that bandit because, in my opinion, not Mark's nor Luke's, obliges us to do so, but for two different reasons; consider these two verses separately.

Analysis of the situation with the gangster in each verse accordingly

Gospel of Mark 8:38

For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my  
words in this adulterous and sinful generation, the Son of Man also will be ashamed of him, when he comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels. (Mk. 8:38)

Keeping in silence before that bandit, would I feel shame of the same kind, as a typical sinner and adulterer who does not want to speak about Christ? Would I feel myself so to say to be united with sinners and adulterers, sitting in the same room by common feeling shame? Certainly, no. It is not the same kind of shame. What I would feel is quite different. This is not shame of this adulterous and sinful generation.

So, Mark 8:38 (which speaks specifically about shame of this adulterous and sinful generation) is not applicable to us keeping in silence before such a gangster. Should we indeed feel shame in such a case? Yes, we should. But we would be ashamed not the words of Christ, but we would be ashamed of the presence of that bandit. This is not a violation of Mark 8:38.

Conclusion: Mark 8:38 does not require us to confess Christ before the gangster.

Gospel of Luke 9:26

For whoever will be ashamed of me and of my words, of him will the Son of Man be ashamed, when he comes in his glory, and the glory of the Father, and of the holy angels. (Lk. 9:26)

I will show that Luke 9:26 also does not require us to confess Christ before this gangster. However, the above explained reasons concerning Mark 8:38 do not apply to Luke 9:26. The reason why we are not required **by Luke 9:26** to say to the gangster that we are Christians is much more subtle than in Mark 8:38.

We will consider two reasons why the requirements of Luke 9:26 are not as strict as it may look like:

Reason 1: Freedom of choice

Of who is ashamed a possible violator (not we, believers) of Mark 8:38 in the situation with the sinful and adulterous gangster? He would be ashamed of Christ not of the gangster because shaming of sinful and adulterous people is not a shame of this sinful and adulterous generation (they are not ashamed of themselves). However, we have already considered Mark 8:38.

It is not applicable to Luke 9:26. So of who is ashamed a possible violator of Luke 9:26, of Christ or of the gangster? He is ashamed either of Christ or of the gangster; this Bible verse does not give us an evidence to decide of who of them he is ashamed, because Luke 9:26 does not specify which kind of shame it is about. It does not require us to think that he would be ashamed of the gangster, but it also does not require us to think that he would be ashamed of Christ, not speaking the gangster that we believe in Christ.

So we have a choice, the gospel gives believers the right of choice by confessing either thing. We have the right to confess like this: If measured according to Luke 9:26, I should be considered as ashamed of the gangster not of Christ in this situation, by the right of choice in the name of Jesus which is on us. So I am not ashamed of Christ.

Reason 2: Measure of the shame

If the above indeed is not enough for you, and you want to reassure that you will not be punished by God for shaming of Christ in this case (with the gangster), there is one more reason.

To explain Luke 9:26, we need to consider the measure of the shame. That is we need to analyze the degrees of violations of Luke 9:26. So we need to find what is the maximum (100 percent) violation of Luke 9:26.

In Mark 8:38, it was already 100 percent violation if one would be ashamed of Christ, even only before sinful and adulterous people such as our gangster. But in Luke 9:26, it is different. When somebody is ashamed only before sinful and adulterous people, it is not 100 percent violation of Mark 8:38. A 100 percent violation of Mark 8:38 would be when one is ashamed of Christ before all and before himself.

So if we do not say to this gangster that we believe in Christ, we may be considered as falling under the effect of Mark 8:38, however, not 100 percent but only partially. On the example of the situation with the gangster, we consider the case when we may be ashamed of speaking about Christ only in the case if confessing Christ would threat us a danger or a harm (for our bodies).

So, because we have done our part (kept silent) of Mark 8:38, what will be Christ's recompense to us? It will be that Christ may be also ashamed of us but not always, only in situations when not being ashamed of us would threat danger or harm to the body of Christ that is to the church (see Eph. 1:22–23).

So we now see that, in this case, Christ may be considered somehow ashamed of us but it is not bad, it is even good if your purpose is to serve the Church. Christ's recompense will be that he will take care (guard) of your church in these situations when speaking about you, and your deals would harm your church, by not telling about you when not telling about it is for the interest of the Church. Isn't it good?

My conclusion is that by these two reasons, we are not obliged to confess Christ before that gangster (following Luke 9:26).

We have been using to mix these two different verses (Mk. 8:38 and Lk. 9:26) as if these would be the same verse. But I have shown that we need to separate them and analyze separately. If we would intermix them, then we would get the result that we must confess Christ before that gangster because we would consider to be ashamed before that gangster a 100 percent measure of all shame with no freedom of choice of another variant. This is an example of a mistake to which intermixing different Bible verses may lead.

My advisers were indeed right

Some people told me that I should not speak about Christ when not appropriate (for example, in reply to a question of an antireligious employee, a bandit with a weapon, etc.).

So finally, in this sophisticated way, I have come to the same conclusion which they told me. "You have hidden these things from the wise and understanding, and revealed them to little children. Yes, Father, for so it was well pleasing in your sight" (Lk. 10:21). However, I have come to it in a different way than my advisers. Whether they did not know or just unable to explain to me why my reasoning was wrong, they have not explained to me why these words of Jesus do not require us to behave in such a way. And so what they advised me to do (for me) meant just to ignore these words of Jesus completely. And this was unacceptable for me. But now when I understand why, following the words of Jesus, I am indeed not obliged to behave in such a way. I do not ignore the words of Jesus despite that I may now behave as they have advised me. I have lost many years in conflicts with all the world before I understood it.

I would be a traitor and a coward if would ignore words of Jesus

If I ceased to speak about Jesus when not appropriate, without understanding the above theology, I would just be a coward and a traitor who would confess Christ only in politically beneficial situations. I have been basing my not being a traitor and a coward (especially in the issue of openly telling my opinion) on this commandment of Jesus; if I would ignore this commandment, I would be a traitor and a coward. So it has been indeed important for me to follow this commandment.

Years of life lost in troubles

Before I have understood this, my life was spent in religious discrimination. I was only in dangers and in loses, because I confessed Christ in inappropriate situations, e.g., before gangsters, before evil (potential) employees, and before stupids who do not understand what I say. (I do not say that this is the only reason of religious discrimination against me, but this is a big part of it.) I was sent away from several churches because of my radical sayings, which were not needed, but which I spoke just because I wanted to say all what I think the Bible tells on this subject. Moreover, I was worthless (harmful) preacher who was telling not only what is good for the hearers but all what I know from the Bible on this subject—often things inappropriate, which would only harm or deceive the unprepared hearers.

Until I recently understood this, most of my life was useless. The more I was achieving, the more problems I had because I had more possibilities to witness about Christ before all kinds of swines and dogs and to go into trouble. And that I was completely messed up in what to do in my life.

Exam obstacle for Christian politics

So I have shown that in these two verses concluded a sophisticated politics. After a study of this biblical teaching, you are set free and are allowed not to confess Christ in situations threatening a danger for you (or your friends). Before studying this, we were however not allowed to do so and had to come to the death in such situations, what is better than to be a traitor or a coward.

I conclude that these who do not know the above are simply not allowed to live. Who has not studied this should heroically self-liquidate in meeting with bad people who kill those who confess Christ by confessing Christ before them. It is because he who has not studied this cannot solve such problems politically and politely, and he has to solve these problems in the rude way.

Certain knowledge level is required for proper Christian politics. Christ does not allow Christians not knowing certain things to do any politics. This preaching is one of the things which are needed to know for any Christian politics.

But why Jesus Christ has said this?

Well, why then Christ has said these things to us in a so subtle way by which we were confused and are made radical fanatics by our misunderstanding of the words of Christ? The answer is given by the preceding verses. "What does it profit a man to gain the whole world, and forfeit his soul?" (Mk. 8:36). Everybody of us would conquer the world by cunning politics if we were not limited by being hated fanatics and radicals which cannot do any successful politics at all. Yes, it is so, any believer can conquer the world as it is written. "For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. This is the victory that has overcome the world: your faith. Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?" (1 Jn. 5:4–5).

But Christ has been not wanting that we would do this (actually overcome in this world before the proper time) because in doing this without proper preparation (studying of Christ's way of doing politics), we would go out of our proper moral limits in pride and would harm our own souls. He has made us unable to build our own state, as we were made worthless politicians by Christ, so that we would not become world politicians like the Roman Catholics. It is written that "He called the multitude to himself with his disciples, and said to them, 'Whoever wants to come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross, and follow me'" (Mk. 8:34). To follow this commandment of not shaming Christ and his words, even before sinful and adulterous generation, were our taking of the cross (going to the death in hardships of religious discrimination). We were not allowed to abstain from this cross that is just to violate this commandment. However, now we have become theologically strong enough to bear this cross easily.

Now after studying this, we, students of Christ, can move to the next course—that is, to enter into politics and start to do Christian politics, what we (former radical fanatics, but not now) were never doing.

Finally, I strictly recommend to preach this in all churches, so that I would become the last unrestricted fanatical preacher who has felt into an unreasonable conflict with the world in his superfluous zeal. The period of when we evangelical Christians were (not for nothing) considered by others as a radical sect cult may come to end in this time. It is not an endless conflict.

Now the answer on the above posed a question whether we should love the enemies of the gospel. "But I tell you who hear: love your enemies, do good to those who hate you" (Lk. 6:27) should be understood as "Love enemies of gospel."

What Are Christ and Soul?

Because as it is shown above, we cannot rely directly on the gospel, we need to develop a theological theory based on the gospel as an intermediary between the gospel and a reader.

The theory should be supported not only by the gospel, but also by internal beautify of the theory.

In this chapter, I develop the theories of some important subjects of the gospel—about Christ and about the human soul.

What Is Christ?

So, somebody from outside came to the earth two thousand years ago under the name Jesus. And we need to answer the question what the word Christ means?

Well, there are many texts around here, in the Internet, which try to answer the question, who is Christ. But have you noticed that I've aroused some subtly different question, "What the word Christ means?" Not many ask this way, but we need to answer.

We will start with the question, what has happened that time, two thousand years ago?

Firstly, I will enumerate some of the widespread opinions:

a normal historic event of people's history;

a contact with aliens;

come of a wise man.

What happened was not like other historic events, and this was not just a contact with aliens, this was something exceedingly much greater, it was a **contact with God**.

Contact with God

Now we have the first of several senses of the word Christ. The word Christ means contact, however, not just a contact but contact with God.

When they (apostles) speak in the gospel that "Christ came," you can translate to the modern language "contact (with God) came." Christ is contact with God. The main message of Gospel was the contact (with God) has come!

So two thousand years ago, we got a contact!

If just an alien came, this would be a common contact. (Really, many such contacts have happened, read in the Old Testament about Baals and Asheras, or not read it, that was not the main topic in the Old Testament.) Who has come then two thousand years ago? The gospel says the contact has came. Again, who has come, from which constellation he was? He was not from a constellation. He has said, "I am not of the world" (Jn. 17:16). One who came was not from the universe, that is he was not from a constellation, galaxy, an or the nth dimension, etc.

Who has said that, an alien? No, we spoke not with an alien but with contact itself—the global contact which connects everyone in the universe.

Sometimes, we get a phone speaker and hear a voice, but that is not the voice of a man at that side, but the voice of the phone communicator itself! One who spoke with us is the communicator of the entire universe himself.

The Bible says that Christ brings all creation together; that he brings these who were far away near making peace.

But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off are made near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who made both one, and broke down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in the flesh the hostility, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man of the two, making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, having killed the hostility thereby. He came and preached peace to you who were far off and to those who were near. For through him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God. (Eph. 2:13–19)

But now, stop. One more important point: Christ is even not just the contact of the universe, he is the contact of the universe with God! (God is not in the universe.) I again repeat, the contact **with God** has come!

Christ has said that he is the light of the universe. "Jesus spoke to them, saying, "I am the light of the world" (Jn. 8:12) and "While I am in the world, I am the light of the world" (Jn. 9:5), and he has said that he has come into the universe, and he is not from the universe. "I am not of the world" (Jn. 17:16). Even the physicists will confirm that the light has come into the universe like from the outside! He was one through whom everything have begun to exist, and nothing have begun to exist not through him say about the light of the universe both gospel and modern physics. "All things were made through him. Without him was not anything made that has been made" (Jn. 1:3). Our radio connection is not limited by so to say the border of the universe, the signal of contact we accept has come into the universe as from the outside.

Yep, the reader, you may not know Christ before, but now I have told you about him. He is the contact of the universe with God, which connects all the universe. You can think about him as about the communicator through which we may call God, or as the communicator which communicates everyone, or as about the contact, the global contact of all Universe, the contact of all contacts just like a central phone communicator which connects all communicators in a country...

Contact with whom? Hey, the writer, you spoke about the contact so much, but with whom was the contact? Not with somebody concrete, not with somebody who may be pointed. But with whom? With the one with whom is the contact. For example, if you speak with Catty, your contact is with Catty; when you speak with Mike, your contact is with Mike. But when you do not speak with Catty, or not speak with Mike, your contact is not with Catty, nor with Mike. But we are in contact with the one who is not Catty, not Mike, not an alien from Little Bear, not from the Andromeda. Our contact is not with anyone in the universe, but indeed we are in contact. We are in contact with somebody. Do you believe?

Now the author went mad, you may think, we have asked him who was the contact and he answered, "With one with whom is the contact." What an answer! Indeed, it is the answer. Our contact is with God, and God is the one with who we are in contact.

Now I will tell you also what the word God means. **The God is the one with whom we are in that contact, which is not a contact with somebody in the universe.**

Well, then, God is a hard topic, let's return to studying Christ! Now we can just conclude together, there was a contact but not with anyone we can point in any other way than to say he is the one with whom was the contact. "No one comes to the Father, except through me" (Jn. 14:6). That is, it is impossible to point to God the Father by any other way except through his relation to Christ. Enough for now, let think about the contact itself, even if we cannot comprehend with whom was the contact. Anyway, studying Christ we will gain the knowledge about God.

The light of the universe

"Jesus spoke to them, saying, 'I am the light of the world'" (Jn. 8:12) and "While I am in the world, I am the light of the world" (Jn. 9:5).

I've already have said that Jesus Christ has said that he is the light of the universe. That means Christ is a living person which consists of light. He consists of all light (electromagnetic waves) of the universe. He is the light of the universe. Teaching his disciples so to say electromagnetism (not electromagnetism, but really a higher order theory), he has said, "I'm the light of the universe, I have come into the world." And the apostle John adds, "Anything what have begun to exist was has begun to exists through Him, and not anything what have begun to exist has begun to exists without Him" (Jn. 1:3).

Huh, reader? That is, the one who came to the earth to speak with the people two thousand years ago! Noted that he is more powerful than anything in the universe.

So then, returning to the topic of the contact. As the gospel proclaims, the true radio wave has come! ("The true light that enlightens everyone was coming into the world" [Jn. 1:9] and "The darkness is passing away, and the true light already shines" [1 Jn. 2:8]). That is good news, we have received a true message. This is the word of God. The gospel says that Christ is the word of God. Now it is simple to understand as we can imagine Christ like a radio wave, and he is the message of God.

Again, **Christ is the message of God**. Imagine all the sounds you've produced during your life, it is your word; and Christ is God's word, all what God says. Christ is the living word of God—a living wave of radio and light.

Oh, now one more reason to stop and think, as Christ is all the light of the entire Universe, so every radio translation is some word of God, isn't it? The good answer here isn't simple. But the simple answer is yes, but we need to know how to decode the signal to understand and not misunderstand what God means. If we don't know how to understand, we will misunderstand. Read about this below. Anyway, what is some word you hear, a word of a man, or of God depends on how you hear or rather how you understand; if you don't understand (or misunderstand) God, for you it is just a word of man, but if you would understand any saying completely, to the end, then for you it would be a word of God. Anyway, astronomers hearing stars, hear nothing except of some noise, and a signal which we can't understand is like a noise for us.

Well, now enough about radio waves of the universe which people anyway cannot understand with their own knowledge. Let's now explain who is Christ in simple words which are easy to understand, the message we have received from heaven.

Our peace

But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far off are made near in the blood of Christ. For he is our peace, who made both one, and broke down the middle wall of partition, having abolished in the flesh the hostility, the law of commandments contained in ordinances, that he might create in himself one new man of the two, making peace; and might reconcile them both in one body to God through the cross, having killed the hostility thereby. He came and preached peace to you who were far off and to those who were near. For through him we both have our access in one Spirit to the Father. So then you are no longer strangers and foreigners, but you are fellow citizens with the saints, and of the household of God. (Eph. 2:13–19)

The gospel says, he is our peace (Eph. 2:14). For people is not very hard to imagine this: a global intergalactic peace union—the peace union of the entire universe. Indeed, it is amazing. Stop and weep here! Our feelings tend to come to weep when we come to the understanding of that highest authority.

**Christ is the peace union  
of the entire universe**

Moreover, he is the peace with God.

The above does not imply that Christ was established by somebody in the universe, nor that he would be controlled by anybody in the universe. Just reversely, he existed from the beginning and through him all have begun to be and is controlled.

What is peace? It is just missing war. If we somehow meet God and do not make war with him, it is peace with God. Just a meeting with God without a war is Christ. May seems strange, just missing something is so great! People use to think that only something present may be great, but something missing would not be great. Indeed, Christ is just missing war, but it is very great when war is missing. He is great!

Oh, again, how just missing war may be so great? Isn't being at a big distance, a wall in between, or even the desire not to contact with each other also peace? But it is just being missing and not something great, it is not Christ! That things are not the real true peace, but the desire not to speak is a hidden hate, after meeting with aliens from a big distance, people would have a war, every wall will some day fall and between the sides would arise a conflict.

The issue here is of stable peace which lives without a separating wall between (Eph. 2:14). The gospel says about Christ he broke the wall between, making peace.

**Christ is our real, true (guaranteed) eternal unbreakable peace**

So now you may understand that the real true peace is always great. The war cannot be missing by simple mundane means! TV news say about wars and this they call great news, but really great news would be missing conflict! Now you see, missing war is very great! By the way, if somebody would say to me "I'm not in Christ," what does it mean for me? By the sense of the word itself, it means for me formally the same as he would say to me, I'm at a war with you! Oh, what a man may say to me when he meets me! And people often wonder why they are not in contact with aliens. At every meeting, they say, we are at war with you! Imagine, you'd would come to an African tribe and would try to explain to them about peace and war in international relations, and that they understanding not would begin to say, "We want just to be in relations with you, but we at a war with you and we will continue the war and never stop!" You'd say to them no, but they'd replied, "No, we insist to not agree with the rules of peace!" Could you able to be in contact with that tribe? It is exactly what we hear from people who often say, "We will not accept Christ, but we want to have good relations with you, be your friends." God, let you keep me free from any friends who make war against me, even if that is a hidden war masked for peace!

So again, Christ is the peace uniting all of us. What is he then? Firstly, **he is the highest authority** **.** He is my Lord.

Then, he is our purpose, we strive to reach to raise in him. (See also below.)

In to say USSR, there was the highest government, the man in charge of the entire empire. But in Christ, there is no highest level. He is infinite. Christ is the only one solution of the dilemma. A state needs the highest authority to not fall into the anarchy (for anarchists, I speak not only about state authorities but also about authority of high reason, esteem, deals), but the highest authority itself always falls into a sin as has no authority over it. But Christ is the authority over every authority, not having a dead end at the highest!

So, Christ is like a state, like a peace organization, but without any deficiency. He is like a tree and has branches, every of us, Christians, is his branch. We are a part of the whole system.

Oh, may ask a reader, you've said that Christ is light, how can he simultaneously be peace? Well, then, what is peace? Peace is a peace contract! What is a contract? A contract is a word, a message. Christ is light, the word of God, God's message. The light of the universe which connects all of us together is our peace.

Meeting of two Christians means, oh, we have a contract of peace with each other! There are no walls between us. Well, if these are real Christians.

No other peace except of Christ exists! Simple logic, if one is not in Christ, he is in a war. Two different kinds of peace cannot coexist. If they are different, they are in a war with each other; otherwise, they are not different but both are parts of the higher peace, where only Christ is the true peace. The world's peace unions like NATO, United Nations, etc., are kind of fake. "I create the fruit of the lips: Peace, peace, to him who is far off and to him who is near, says Yahweh; and I will heal him" (Is. 57:19).

Wisdom of God

Also, the Gospel says that "Christ is the wisdom of God" (1 Cor. 1:24). The word of God (Remember, Christ is the Word of God?) is also the wisdom of God.

This means just two simple things:

The word of God is wise.

God has said all his wisdom in his word—that is, Christ is all the wisdom of God, not a part of the full wisdom.

Once more, a complex thing from the Bible has become plain. Christ is the image of God, fullness of godhead. This means just that Christ mirrors all what concerns God, while the concern of God is wisdom! Nothing more, nothing less. Christ is the full wisdom of God, while all what God is, is being wise (In other words, God is being only wise and nothing other (unwise); that is, Christ is the full wisdom which is that being of God.

In every head of man, to say for an example, there are some pieces of wisdom. But is it a real wisdom? When a man exits from the things customary for him, his wisdom becomes foolishness. A wisdom of a man isn't a wisdom of God! However, we can accept wisdom of God believing in it, then wisdom of God enters into us, and a part of the wisdom of God—that is, a part of Christ is inside us!

Again, **a part of Christ is in us, believers**. Actually, it is not a part, as with Christ God gives us everything.

However, the wisdom of God is everywhere (Christ is everywhere), not just in people. So, when understood in Christ, all is wise and alive (In him, all are alive).

Now we can define God once more. **God is the one whose wisdom is Christ.** Christ is somebody's wisdom, and one whose wisdom is God.

And finally, how the wisdom relates with peace? Just simple, **wisdom is internal peace**. When neurons are in peace with each other, not at war, our brain would be more clever than any brain! The peace of God is above any mind. "The peace of God, which surpasses all understanding, will guard your hearts and your thoughts in Christ Jesus" (Phil. 4:7). Satan confused to complete stupidity brains of people into a war inside, but Christ came to save—that is, to bring peace. And reversely, peace is wisdom of the above level.

About death and resurrection

It is written that Christ "died once for all" (Heb. 7:27). That means everyone has once withdrawn from the peace with God. This doesn't mean that peace of God ceased to exist or ever became less powerful, but just that everybody else has ceased from life and lost his power, nor that mean that the truth became false but just that everybody did not believe the truth.

Satan started a rebellion against God, and the war has broken through the entire universe. Satan has made a virus (sin) which was enough only to see to become mad and also to begin to also produce viruses.

It was tremendously awful. War everywhere around, no communication, no knowledge of what happens, no hope. We read messages we received by one letter because after we read the next letter that time, it may mean death for us because the letter may make us mad. We read the letters and thought we may also become mad and begin a war with God, and from dreadfulness of this though, we were becoming mad and beginning the senseless war. Many ceased to read or hear anything at all.

You know that Christ has resurrected. Once we received the message that Christ returned and saves everybody who believes in him. Peace returned! Communication returned! Understanding of wisdom forgotten in madness returned! All crimes were forgiven for everybody who believes! His glory after the resurrection became greater than before the death.

Christ died willingly. His death was the only way to save everyone of us because, before Christ's death, everybody served God from selfish ambitions of reward, being ready to rebel against Him and being righteous in appearance really did a hidden criminal, waiting a chance to begin the rebellion, clearly deserving only the death punishment. "Christ, being raised from the dead, dies no more. Death no more has dominion over him!" (Rom. 6:9). After the resurrection, Christ does not die anymore. Those who now are with him don't want to leave him again.

Christ was on the earth in the appearance of a man. They killed him. After this, some of the killers realized that they have killed the peace on the earth, leaving mankind without hope. But on the third day, he raised from the tomb. He forgives the sins and accepts into his kingdom anyone who believes in him.

The word "Jesus"

Among all the people, God has chosen one man in the name Jesus, which is to represent Christ for people.

For the dialogue sides need a common language. How do you choose the language accordingly in which to interpret the radio waves from outer space when there are so many different languages? Languages are so many that one word may mean several different things in different languages. We need to come to one common understanding, or we will not be able to speak.

Many people have the ability to hear cosmic radio waves with their spirit, but without common standard it is just a nonsense.

The understanding of Jesus is chosen to become the common understanding of all. God has made that the words of this man were always true, so representing Christ as the truth.

That is, the teaching of Jesus is a certain order of the wisdom of Christ.

Jesus has become the standard which all other people are to follow. That is, Jesus is like an arrow pointing people to Christ.

When people spoke with Jesus, they spoke with the Christ. It is the way which God has chosen for people to speak with Christ, through Jesus. For example, in a branch of a company, only one chief is chosen who will represent the opinion of the company. It is set with the authority that his opinion is the opinion of the company. If one wants to speak with the company, he needs to speak either with the chief himself or with somebody who represents his opinion.

The name of Jesus means the choice of one the best variants common for all. That is the way of Christ, God's choice. And this word means calling of God, God's phone number so to say.

Jesus continues to live in those who believe God, who directs us to choose the right way continuing the deal of Jesus.

He took the form of a man

To save people, Jesus, in anything, has become like a man except of having no mistakes. "Who has been in all points tempted like we are, yet without sin" (Heb. 4:15). That is, there was no single difference between a man and Jesus (except of having no mistakes). He transformed himself to be in a form almost the same as the brothers, and the only difference which makes this almost instead of exact was no mistakes. Everyone of us is only almost a man. A man has two hands, while some of us lost one hand. We have mutations and other deficiencies which make us only almost people. But Christ became a perfect man—a man more than everybody else, having no deficiencies.

His suffering on the cross was real. You've read above that his death was real death. His suffering was real suffering of a man, as he was a man. It can be understood this way: They, attacking Christ, were so offensive that the offense was the same as pain—the real pain.

In other words, having enough power to resist any weapon, he allowed the killers to destroy him. If you'd play a computer game, the imaginary persons of that game can't really harm you. But if you'd show compassion to suffering robots so much that your heart would become ill, you'd have real suffering for them.

Son of God

Christ goes to his Father. But he does not move. He is like a river (a river moves and does not move at the same time) in the same way Christ goes to his Father, but Christ does not move. The following Bible fragment says that Christ does not change:

And, "You, Lord, in the beginning, laid the foundation of the earth. The heavens are the works of your hands. They will perish, but you continue. They all will grow old like a garment does. As a mantle you will roll them up, And they will be changed; But you are the same. Your years will not fail. (Heb. 1:10–12)

It is only an illusion that light moves. Really, light does not move, but we move and so for us it looks like as if light would move.

But after the eternity of eternities will pass, Christ will come to the Father and become the same as the Father. When a child grows to full age, he becomes the same as his father. Christ is the Son of God.

When we grow, we become greater, but Christ is already perfect. Every growth in life is a part of growth in Christ. Christ is life. ("Jesus said to her, 'I am the resurrection and the life'" [Jn. 11:25]. and "Jesus said to him, 'I am the way, the truth, and the life'" [Jn. 14:6].) Every life is a part of Christ. Being truly living is the same as to be a part of Christ, that is of eternal life. It is a characteristic of life to be eternal—that is, to grow infinitely. Infinite growth is the difference of living things from dead. That which does not grow eternally but stops at some stage is not life (however, it may be similar to life).

The only way to live is to have Christ inside yourself. And it is not I who live, but Christ lives in me. "No longer I that live, but Christ living in me" (Gal. 2:20). That is, I'm only a dead cover of the life inside me that is of Christ.

Our life is the life of Christ inside us. My own life (without Christ) does not matter just because I do not have life besides Christ.

Imagine that you are very old that you are almost dead. And then you'd receive an injection of embryonic cells (a life sacrificed for you). Then the embryonic cells would begin to live in you and this would become your life, so that you may continue to live. Accept the sacrifice of Christ for you and his life inside you the same way, his blood, being the only medicine able to save you from death.

This means that you are to deny your old life and replace it with the new life of Christ inside you.

So rejecting old forms of life and allowing Christ to replace it with the new life, we live and grow infinitely. We are children of God—that is, Christ is born and grows inside us reaching God.

Christ is also our purpose; that is our sense of life is to become more similar to him, throwing away our old covers that is our old self.

Christ is the Son of God. We are the children of God only in that sense that he lives in us, causing our infinite growth.

I entreat you: Now welcome Christ to live inside you, accepting his sacrifice for your sins. I've told you that he died instead of you for your sin.

The Son of Man

Christ is also called the son of man in the gospel.

This means that Jesus is the end product of the development of humankind.

In other words, Jesus is just a guest from infinitely far future when men reach the development level of God.

Oneness in knowledge of the Son of God

Until we all attain to the unity of the faith, and of the knowledge of the Son of God, to a full grown man, to the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ; that we may no longer be children, tossed back and forth (by waves) and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the trickery of men, in craftiness, after the wiles of error; but speaking truth in love, we may grow up in all things into him, who is the head, Christ. (Eph. 4:13–15)

The above passage suggests that at the full stature of Christ, there are no waves. Electromagnetic waves are only of the lower levels of Christ. At the upper levels, there is speaking truth in love what is the essence of the nature of Christ.

So, we are to attain the full knowledge of the Son of God where Christ as light and Christ as truth unite in one faith about the same Christ.

When we are starting to live in Christ, we are becoming radio-controlled robots as Christ is light (radio waves). But as we grow to maturity, we instead become controlled by truth and love.

What Is Soul?

Soul is believed to be eternal, immaterial part of man.

What does this mean?

I have an unexpected answer. Soul is the warranty (given by God) for body (including warranty of preservation of information in the brain).

God gives the warranty as the Creator of man.

So, it is natural that the soul is eternal (that is God gives the warranty of eternal life) and immaterial (soul is not some "thinner" matter like astral bodies in some religions).

This way, we come to the possibility of agreement of our religion with the science. The mind of a man is located in the brain, but is backed up by independent soul.

The resurrection of the dead is an inherent property of soul (given by God). God warranted that if a man will die, he will resurrect. This warranty is a part of soul.

Thus we have quite a natural theory, God created agricultural robots with eternal warranty and backup. "Yahweh God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it" (Gen. 2:15).

Note that I am speaking about soul mean the Greek word psyche, not Hebrew word nephesh.

Free Salvation Is a Provocation

I recall that free salvation is the main Protestant doctrine. What I recall in this doctrine is that nobody can pay anything for salvation (i.e., cannot pay with money, good deals, etc.)

Martin Luther has understood that salvation is free—that is, somebody cannot pay for him to be saved.

I add to this, nobody (except God) can pay for anybody (himself or another) to be saved. "For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord" (Rom. 6:23).

This is because the salvation is not only individual but also social. The social salvation is freeing relations from the wages of sin.

It may be strange that salvation is somehow related with money. But in 1 Timothy 6:10, it says, "the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil." makes it clear: wiping out love of money God wipes out the root all kinds of evil. So salvation is an economical category.

We Sought Money

We were also taught that free salvation is a very valuable thing.

By preaching to us the importance of free salvation, our minds were set to earn money for preaching free salvation, as we have used to use money for any deal we deem important. So God has given us the doctrine of free salvation as a provocation that we could attempt to earn money for this.

While attempting to live for the gospel, I was greedy because I wanted to have money for my mission.

Now I understand, the thing which I wanted to earn money for was free salvation. My relations with God were on a bad foundation—the attempt to earn money for free salvation. Now I realize that my faith was not better than of a prostitute. Quite naturally, without proper faith, my relations with God were broken, and I missed God's blessings which could be given only to those who live accordingly to the doctrine of free salvation.

Freeing from Pride

I had too much hard problems in my life, especially problems caused by poverty such as hunger.

I sometimes wondered why I am treated by God worse than a prostitute.

But I also knew that our relations with God depend not on our deals but on our belief in free salvation by Christ. If an atheistic prostitute has greater blessing than I, does this mean that I believe in free salvation less than she does?

The situation was not agreed with my understanding of the gospel. Accordingly, my understanding is that I could be blessed because I believe in free salvation (the main Protestant's doctrine).

Now I understand that this is because my belief in free salvation was partial.

It is how free salvation worked. The entire life of a man is broken by his attempts to earn for free salvation. After this, the man finds himself doing wrong the entire his life which causes him to be humble afterward.

Then free salvation is freeing from pride. I was provoked to be proud by my knowledge of the concept of free salvation, but when I really have understood that doctrine, I was humbled.

We, Protestants, were very proud for having this doctrine. But its proper understanding frees from pride.

What Is Prostitution?

Traditional definition of prostitution is "sex for money." The gospel saying about prostitution means a subtly different thing.

In the gospel, prostitution is any motive to have sex for money—that is, even if somebody does not have sex for money but has a motive for it, it is indeed prostitution.

Thus prostitution, as understood in the gospel, has an economical not sexual nature. (Adultery as opposed to prostitution has sexual nature.)

Prostitution is the opposite of free salvation. Free salvation is believing that the most important thing we receive not for money. Prostitution is the opinion that we need money for something as important as sex. Thus these are opposite.

We are doing prostitution if we try to earn money to use it for salvation.

Thus I was found worse than a prostitute who was not so stupid to earn money for somebody's salvation.

Now it is clear what it means. "Jesus said to them, 'Most assuredly I tell you that the tax collectors and the prostitutes are entering into the Kingdom of God before you.'" (Matt. 21:31). We were just believing in free salvation worse than prostitutes.

We Are the Last

The first of the questions I've raised in the chapter "Hard Questions" was how can we consider others better than us when we know the gospel? "Make my joy full...in humility, each counting others better than himself" (Phil. 2:1–3).

This verse as every verse of the gospel should be interpreted as applied to the gospel itself.

So here "each" should be interpreted as "each gospel believer." So it means "Gospel believers should count others (not gospel believers) better than themselves."

So unsaved people are more important than gospel believers.

I think the reason why unsaved people are more important than saved people because these people who cannot be repaired get more attention of God.

We must be humbled. As I've already said above, the gospel and especially free salvation is a provocation. We were no better believing in free salvation than atheists do. Prostitutes were better than us by this criterion (Matt. 21:31).

Reversals of Good and Bad

In this chapter, I will consider some things which were used in our understanding to be good, but after more thorough study, appear to be bad or reversal of good as we were imagining them instead. "But many will be last who are first; and first who are last" (Matt. 19:30). "So the last will be first, and the first last" (Matt. 20:16). "But many who are first will be last; and the last first" (Mk. 10:31). "Behold, there are some who are last who will be first, and there are some who are first who will be last" (Lk. 13:30).

Perverted Gospel and Anathema

All Bible readers know this fragment of the Bible:

Then the soldiers, when they had crucified Jesus, took his garments and made four parts, to every soldier a part; and also the coat. Now the coat was without seam, woven from the top throughout. Then they said to one another, "Let's not tear it, but cast lots for it to decide whose it will be," that the Scripture might be fulfilled, which says, "They parted my garments among them. For my cloak they cast lots." Therefore the soldiers did these things. But there were standing by the cross of Jesus his mother, and his mother's sister, Mary the wife of Clopas, and Mary Magdalene. (Jn. 19:23–25)

But it may, following the grammar rules of ancient Greek, be translated in another way (with Strong's word numbers in braces, expressing morphology):

(Jn. 19:23-25) ... soldiers (of celestial army) spread on couches {4757←4756←4766} who make it staying stable and insert staying near and continue safe and healthy and do not ashame staying ready in presence of others {4717←04716←2476}, they made their companions and reserved for themselves, took into their possession (somebody's person) giving her access to themselves, took with hands (a person to use her), not rejecting but taking what is offered, His, Jesus' garments for putting on... Also tunic (sacred clothes). But the tunic was whole from the above, North ¼ of the sky {509←507}, woven through all... And they were staying before others ready near the Jesus' cross: mother of Jesus and a sister of the mother Maria and Klop's wife and Maria Magdalene (raised bed) {3094←3093←heb. 4026}.

What this translation says? That Mary (mother of Jesus) and Mary Magdalene (spiritually called Jesus's garments) were ready to have sex while they were staying near the cross? It says this! More thorough study of this Bible fragment (and nearby verses) even confirms this for sure.

Doubtless for this should be anathema. But anathema toward who? Toward the translator (me)? No, I can't be blamed for this. I just have followed the Greek grammar.

I marvel that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel; and there isn't another gospel. Only there are some who trouble you, and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any gospel other than that which we preached to you, let him be cursed. As we have said before, so I now say again: if any man preaches to you any gospel other than that which you received, let him be cursed. (Gal. 1:6–9)

The only outcome is that the gospel inducts anathema on itself. The gospel anathemas the gospel!

Now we need to remember the original meaning of the Greek word anathema. This word means "to place something in a special position (e.g., hanged on a wall) for all to see." I do exactly this. Place this translation of the gospel to public view.

So I have anathematized the gospel. This is the only outcome from the gospel itself.

This means that the gospel has been unable to resist perversion. The gospel has failed (found weak) and then the gospel should go away. "In that he says, 'A new covenant,' he has made the first old. But that which is becoming old and grows aged is near to vanishing away" (Heb. 8:13).

I marvel that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ to a different gospel; and there isn't another gospel. Only there are some who trouble you, and want to pervert the gospel of Christ. But even though we, or an angel from heaven, should preach to you any gospel other than that which we preached to you, let him be cursed. As we have said before, so I now say again: if any man preaches to you any gospel other than that which you received, let him be cursed. (Gal. 1:6–9)

"Now again" in "As we have said before, so I now say again" in Galatians 1:9 ("before" here should be now understood as "before the end of the New Covenant") means that this continues after the end of the New Testament, that if anyone preaches "any gospel different than which we have received" then he will be under anathema.

So, according to the gospel itself, no other gospel should be preached. It means that after the end of gospel, a gospel (another gospel) should not be preached again, to be followed as a law. That is, following commandments of the gospel as a law should not be returned back, never preached again.

The word anathema may be literally translated as "put in the midst to publicly take note." In our context, it may mean "publish a note about something or somebody." The word gospel translated literally means "good news" or more exactly "correct news." Gospel is simply the official intergalactic space news media channel. Anathema is an ad, banner, special note outside of the main channel. Gospel means the standard news media; anathema means a violation of the standard. Just like as the official paper news media (the news) yield place to the Internet channels, now comes a period of time when the gospel should yield place to the anathema.

Another analogy: In a very barbarian society, when anyone becomes famous, he has a problem. For example, in many child societies when with anyone happens anything such that he becomes widely known, his clothes would be set on fire, his study books stolen, etc. Or when even a little beautiful woman becomes famous, she has a great chance to be raped. In a society of higher morality and development, to become famous may not be a problem. "To be in the news" is even reversely counted as a happy occurrence. I suppose that something likewise happened on a higher level where previously anathema (switching publication from the official channel to a special note) was a problem for a man, but now it may become a benefit.

And also personally, I was known as a member of a sect (in reality, I was first a Baptist, then a Charismatic or like this). And being known as a cultist, I was persecuted. How much I would desire to have a kind of anathema to cease from persecutions. And now I actually have something like this. Isn't it good?

"If somebody will preach to you other...we ourselves or an angel from the heaven, let be anathema." It again confirms that St. Paul knew the mystery as he was probably going to preach something other. Whose anathema then it should be?

I think that now (especially after Luther), it is good news when one receives such an anathema! He would have a chance to be shown in TV news, etc.

Icons

Now again the direct sense of the word anathema, "a thing hanged in a noticeable place in a temple to be seen, to be displayed." An icon (in the Roman Catholic and Russian/Greek Orthodox sense) is an anathema in this sense.

I also suppose (from purely historical, not religious positions) that probably the initial purpose of Christian icons was to display these who are under anathema so that all would know them. I am not sure whether icons really were initially spread with this purpose.

Previously, I have compared an anathema with an Internet banner. This is again a near analogy with an icon.

An icon is an anathema. Previously, we were sure that anathema is a bad thing. But now, I consider an anathema as a good thing. As a result, I am not sure what should be our relation to icons now, in the after gospel period. So what?

I do not know. I however suppose that we probably should display our photos in noticeable places for all to see that we are now under anathema. We probably should hang our photos near with ancient icons to display that the ancient saints should be under anathema just like we, signifying such things as that apostles were worse than prostitutes.

Humility for Converted to Christ

Gospel teaches to "each counting others better than himself" (Phil. 2:3). Now I will muse about the following topic: How do we, knowing the gospel, may consider others above us? Doesn't knowledge of the gospel makes us above other?

The correct answer is that converting to Christ makes us worse not better.

Do I imply that people should refuse to convert to Christ? No, and the reason is the following: God's desire is "who (God) desires all people to be saved" (1 Tim. 2:4) to save as many people as possible. But there is a limit on the number of saved people. "The fullness of the Gentiles has come in" (Rom. 11:25). It is clear that the reason for this limit is the impossibility to "pack" more people into heaven without a conflict. God solves the following mathematical problem: Save as many people as possible without falling into a conflict between them.

I mean a worse man is somebody who disturbs salvation of others. And by this criterion already saved are worse than unsaved.

Probably the best example of how a saved person may prevent salvation of others is my "spiritual war" (see a few chapters below) which I fought in the past. I was really the biggest of sinners. I could call my sin "magic." That is, misuse of spiritual powers.

Thus follows that evangelization should not be our main purpose. Instead, we need humility before each other and before unbelieving people which are actually better than us, as the mean to reach the full number of pagans. If we need to choose between evangelization and humility, we should choose humility because it influences the process behind the scene. Evangelization is just a screen before the actual essence of events as it is clear from this passage. "No one can come to me unless the Father who sent me draws him" (Jn. 6:44). I can say people are saved not by evangelization, but by the move of the Holy Spririt. Evangelization is just an external appearance of God's work.

Thus remember: From the moment you convert to Christ, you are already saved and thus you become less important person than unbelievers as long as it concerns future, but indeed only the future matters, not the past.

Yahweh vs. Baal

Much of the Old Testament is dedicated to consideration of people choosing to worship either to Yahweh (that is God) or to Baal. Those who serve Yahweh are blessed; those who serve Baal are cursed.

Yahweh is the creator of the universe. But who is Baal? Baal literally translated is just "owner."

Yahweh created people to be agricultural robots. "Yahweh God took the man, and put him into the garden of Eden to dress it and to keep it" (Gen. 2:15). (You may say that people are not robots because they have soul. I suppose that what is known as soul is just eternal warranty for the robots.)

Both Adam and Eve have fallen (became broken robots).

Now to our issue, who is Baal? The answer is: Baal is the entity for whom Yahweh created the robots to serve him.

After the fall, it became useless to attempt to serve Baal because the robots were broken. Yahweh in turn requires us to serve him in order for us to be repaired ("saved" in evangelical terminology). Moreover, Yahweh changed our purpose to serve him, becoming his children, not to Baal anymore.

The Old Testament insists that we must serve Yahweh and not serve Baal.

Now to the New Testament.

Or don't you know that your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which you have from God? You are not your own, for you were bought with a price. Therefore glorify God in your body and in your spirit, which are God's. (1 Cor. 6:19–20)

In the New Testament, we are slaves of Christ. He has bought us from the former Baal, to make children of God from us.

We, Trinitarians, believe that Christ is Yahweh (Son, the second person of God). Now also our Baal (the owner) is Christ.

The word Baal also can be translated as "husband" and Christ is called the husband of the Church in the New Testament. So it is again confirmed that Christ is the Baal in the New Testament.

In the New Testament, Christ is both Yahweh and Baal. So in the New Testament, we served both Yahweh and Baal and both blessing of those who serve Yahweh and cursing of those who serve Baal were on us.

How to deal away with serving Baal, not ceasing to serve Yahweh (Christ)?

The answer is: Serving Baal means "slavery." If we serve Christ as slaves, we serve Baal. If we serve Christ as his friends not slaves, we serve Yahweh. The word Baal should be understood as "slavery." Every time the word Baal is used in the Old Testament, it signifies a mention of slavery (not freedom).

The correct answer is that we should cease to be slaves of Christ and become his friends.

Well, Christ is truth ("I am...the truth" [Jn. 14:6]) and Christ is wisdom ("Christ is... the wisdom of God" [1 Cor. 1:24]). How can we be slaves of truth or slaves of wisdom? Being slaves of wisdom means to blindly follow wise principles, not understanding what they are for, likewise, being slaves of truth.

I call you to adapt the teaching of the end of gospel to become free, not slaves of Christ anymore but his friends, so serving Yahweh only and not to Baal. Know the truth which sets us free from slavery and makes us friends of God.

My War

I've made certain mathematical discoveries. I felt that my research is more important than Russia, the country where I lived (so ignoring the commandment to count myself lower than others).

Because at that time I lived in extreme poverty (one reason was religious discrimination) and afraid of death from hunger, I decided to make war with Russia using spiritual powers.

I decided to destabilize the world situation using spiritual powers and to make thermonuclear war.

I sought for a way to earn enough money for an air ticket to Moscow (from the city Perm where I lived).

My plan was approximately such: When I will be flying to Moscow, the thermonuclear war should start, and Moscow and several other cities would be destroyed. The pilots would change the course and need to land outside of Russia. So I would escape from the slavery.

As such, the situation was becoming worse because of the questions on how I treat people. I needed to answer that I'm in a war with them. So I was unable, for example, to be hired for a job. All people around were my enemies.

Later on, I studied a little of ancient Hebrew and read in Hebrew Bible what I counted a missionary call to Africa. (Thus I say that I was an apostle.) After this, my relations with people became even worse because my purpose of evangelical mission was contrary to the Russian people.

In the case of failing my plan with thermonuclear war, I planned even worse. Think of an asteroid falling to Earth and essentially moving Africa to the place where I live, so that I would not need to travel, killing 90 percent of the people.

Reading the Bible, I realized that I need to be humble not to make war and then God will help me. So I laid war aside. But this was only a temporary peace, the complete peace came only after I realized the end of gospel (and consequently end of my preaching mission).

Note that I frivolously thought that Earth will be able to protect itself, and the thermonuclear war will not cause nuclear winter.

Divided World

When I yet attempted to follow the gospel, there appeared the following conflict:

I was poor and had trouble to pay for Internet. Looking innocent? Could I just be hired to do a job and to have money to connect?

Indeed, this turned into a hard theological problem. "And he is the propitiation for our sins: and not for ours only, but also for of the whole world" (1 Jn. 2:2).

This says that the propitiation for our sins is for the whole world (not entire world as some translate).

So I had the following theological reasoning:

If all can connect to the Internet, but I can't then the world is unwhole. If the world is divided, then the propitiation for our sins doesn't work and all living people (except me) would go to hell.

At first, there is a simple solution. I should earn a little money and use them to save the world from disconnecting from me. But this way, I would spend money for salvation, but salvation is free and cannot be done for money. So this won't work.

If I would not be able to connect to the Internet because I would be, for example, blind, this would not impose the sin on the world because salvation is not dependent on material things.

But I'm not blind, there was a theological reason which has prevented me to connect to the Internet, a reason pertaining to faith. The salvation is dependent on faith ("We conclude that a man is justified by faith without the deeds of the law" [Rom. 3:28]). So only a theological (pertaining to faith) reason of disconnecting may harm to salvation. But the reason why I was near to be disconnected was namely theological. My conflict with the world is theological in nature. And as you know, a theological reason may impose lost of salvation.

This problem was solved only when I discharged to attempt to live according to the gospel. (No gospel, no problem.)

Note that I meant not that the world actually would be not saved because of me, but just that I had a theological misunderstanding.

Renewal of Spirit

The Old Testament has come to the end, what was so to say confirmed by the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in ac 70. In the New Testament, the temple is our bodies. "Your body is a temple of the Holy Spirit which is in you, which you have from God" (1 Cor. 6:19). And we should remember that our bodies are liable to destruction. So destruction of our bodies is the end of gospel. The gospel itself say that "Or don't you know, brothers (for I speak to men who know the law), that the law has dominion over a man for as long as he lives?" (Rom. 7:1).

As a result of broken head, the link of the body and the spirit may be lost.

And if there are no links, there is no sense to speak about the human spirit.

As such, we now must follow the Bible (which we were before refusing to follow, saying that we are spirits) that people are flesh and blood. There is spirit according to the Bible, but isn't the concept of "human spirit" our own invention?

And what is the biblical way to serve God? In newness of spirit, "But now we have been discharged from the law, having died to that in which we were held; so that we serve in newness of the spirit, and not in oldness of the letter" (Rom. 7:6). That is, being possessed every time by different spirits, not in "human spirit." We were attempting to apply the gospel to our human self-identity, but it should instead be applied to the wind of spirit which blows through us.

What is the materialistic concept of human mind? There are no human spirits—that is, no mind independent from the body. What is the idealistic concept of human mind? There are minds independent of the body (spirit).

These conceptions seem incompatible but indeed there is a new concept which in a sense unites both materialistic and idealistic concepts of the human mind. The composite concept is that the human spirit exists, but it may change (renewed or replaced) during the time of man's life.

Accordingly, the purely idealistic concept, when for example a man is hit by head, it could not cause any change in his inner character. So the idealistic concept was contradictory to the scientific data. In the new composite concept, it is explained so. When a human head is damaged, it may cause replacement (or if not strongly damaged, a partial replacement) of one spirit with another spirit.

An analogy for this is a radio receiver. Breaking a tuner can never damage the radio center. What the radio receiver broadcasts is controlled by an external radio center, but indeed damaging the receiver may damage what it speaks. For example, it may make it mad (possessed by demon) and, as a result of the damage, it mistakenly switches to a demonic radio channel.

With a man, it is more complex because the human body has its own mind and because the human brain simultaneously hears more than one radio channel. A brain damage may break a human character, yet without complete replacement of the human person with another person.

The so-called human spirit may be understood as the set of the channels which a man hears. Head damage may break tuning for some part of these channels so causing a partial change of the character. (Sometimes if the head is very much damaged, it may cause complete change of the person. For example, possession by a demon.)

A man despite being in much degree controlled externally indeed has his own character. Above, I have compared the man with a radio receiver, but a more exact comparison would be with a cell phone. When a speaker speaks by radio, what he says (the character of the program) depends only on the speaker, but when one speaks by cell phone what he says normally depends also on the receiver. When somebody speaks by cell phone with several different people, he normally makes a special individual so to say radio program for every individual hearer. Likewise, the spirit makes his own individual program for every man. Human spirit is just such a special individual radio program for a particular man. Every such program may have its own special character (or sometimes several men have a common spirit), it is called spiritual character.

This program may depend on the characteristics of the human brain (just like a cell phone speaker says would depend on the character of the hearer) but is not determined by it. Normally, the body's mind depends on the spirit not vice versa. Sin causes the reverse dependency when the human spirit depends on the body.

Human spirit itself resides in the atmosphere and/or near outer space. The spirit of a man is developed (or degrading) during time by spiritual laws (a higher rank analog of the brain physiology). This is one of the reasons why even if a man loses his memory, his character often remains the same as he may be indeed be controlled with the same spirit. Sometimes, the spirit may restore broken memory even if the body's memory is completely damaged by a serious trauma. Likewise, sometimes a spirit of one man (either alive or dead) is transferred to another man. In this case, the second man sometimes may remember what was with the first.

Or else a man may be compared with a publicly edited Website (i.e., Wiki). Despite such a site is edited externally by different writers, every site has its own character. Writers may change (some writers may die or cease to write and new writers may appear), but the character of the site is not much changed by this. The character of every aged Wiki site is established and normally does not change much. Just like it is with a man, who is edited by the spirit, by angels, and, by God through Christ.

Why then it rarely happens such things as transfer of spirit of one man to another man like as it commonly happen with Web servers between which sites are freely moved? A reasonable reader could ask. The reason of this is that man is severely broken by sin. A human brain is like a buggy Web server with broken connection. God has created men by a common standard, but now every man has his own individual set of deficiencies (deviations from the standard of righteousness), so it is hard to transfer software developed for one man to another man as it needs to deal with new problems. It is very hard to accomplish the transfer in such conditions. A spirit of one man may come (and remain a long time) onto another man only if the man in question has a very correct character. For example, the Bible says that the spirit of Elijah was transferred to Elisha when Elijah came to the heaven (both men had very strong and correct character compared to most other people) and remained on him all his life, or the spirit of Moses has come onto seventy other men but remained on them only for a short period of time. (Moses had the most stable character of all men (at least living in that time) but them not and they were not able to be Moses.)

This sin (that a man cannot keep other's spirit), however, has also a positive consequence that every man has its own individual character, and what makes people more valuable.

A man controlled by a spirit often perceives this spirit as his own (human) character. However, sometimes (in the case, when a man is controlled by several spirits which oppose to each other) a man feels it as an external influence which is against his will (practically against the will of the main spirit which controls him). It is just like a Wiki site (or rather the community of editors) opposes when some external force (e.g., a spammer) attempts to control their site.

Because I was reckoning myself high above other people, one of the primary purposes in my life was to preserve my spirit so that it would be not replaced with another spirit. That is, I wanted not to become like other people. It has in much degree failed—that is, my personal characteristics (so to say characteristics of an almost righteous genius, such as patience, self-control, strong desire to do good, good memory, ability to quickly take right decisions, etc.) have changed very much, so that if I past were meet myself present I past would despise this man. But now, renewal of spirit becomes the norm of the life, old preservation of human spirit anyway passes away.

Now I understand that my failure was necessary for success on the new level, namely for the end of gospel to happen. I have much failed in life according to the Gospel, but the unique success of bringing the gospel to the end is much greater.

When we change to be possessed by a new spirit, the promises which were given by an old spirit in us no longer are necessarily for us to fulfill. Well, that is only if our spirit really changes.

Conclusion:

Human spirit may change or even be replaced during time.

Both body and spirit have minds.

Head trauma may cause that the spirit of a man ceases to be functional for this man and this in turn may cause change, partial dysfunction and so to say turn off, or even complete replacement of the human spirit.

The new paradigm is not that a man should have special fixed human spirit, but that the spirit of a man should be constantly renewed.

We are allowed to not hold promises and oaths given under a different spirit.

Jesus on Sexual Relations  
and Divorce

As I've said above, we are not under the gospel now and are free not to follow its commandments (treating the commandments as mere advice or recommendation).

Indeed, here I will show an example of the hard way of developing theology based on the gospel how we can nullify what we were counting as a commandment of the gospel. "I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery" (Matt. 19:9).

At the first glance, it seems clear that these words of Jesus forbid divorce except of the case when the spouse committed adultery.

But it cannot be so because the gospel also says, "All things are lawful for me," (1 Cor. 6:12) but not all things are expedient. "All things are lawful for me, but I will not be brought under the power of anything." If all things are lawful, then divorce is also lawful. If "I will not be brought under the power of anything" then we cannot be under the power of the spouse to forbid divorce.

Below I will do a detailed analysis of the words of Jesus which shows that Jesus has not deprecated divorce.

Divorces Are Bad

Indeed, I will first say that generally speaking, divorces are bad and harmful.

There are many reasons not to commit adultery to the spouses. Most of people know some of these reasons: AIDS and venereal diseases, troubles of children of divorced parents, harm to family finances and other values, offended love feelings of the spouse, the need to readapt to the new spouses in case of marrying again, and harm for the structure of the society.

But most likely, these are not the main reasons.

The main reasons not to divorce

In my opinion, the main reason not to divorce is that divorces and adulteries break normal function of telepathic link between people (and consequently can deeply harm the psyche of people) and also synchronization of the biorhythms of the spouses (harmful for the health and marital relations).

Also adulteries (and divorces), in some way, harm the normal function of biosphere and our habitat as a whole (probably by the reason that sex between people influences bacteria and viruses, or by some reason unknown to the science); wonderfully, sex especially orgasm, in some way, causes change of the weather, and adulteries can literally corrupt the weather.

It seems that I've enumerated above all the main reasons not to divorce. I expect that about 90 percent of divorces would not happen if the spouses would take in account the abovementioned reasons. The abovementioned are very forcible arguments not to divorce and not to commit adultery. "So that they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, don't let man tear apart" (Matt. 19:6). "And the two will become one flesh, so that they are no longer two, but one flesh. What therefore God has joined together, let no man separate" (Mk. 10:8–9).

The opinion of Baptists

Many Protestants (e.g., Baptists) believed that it is absolutely not allowed to divorce. This is founded on the words of Jesus Christ, "Whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery" (Matt. 19:9).

So divorce for Baptists was completely forbidden (except of the case when the spouse has committed adultery). Likewise for Roman Catholics.

Edge cases of unfortunate marriage

Nevertheless, there are edge cases: For example, one of the spouses has gone mad. What then? Indeed, there are even more edge cases: One of the spouses has lost memory and does not confess his marriage; then there is just no continuation of the marriage. We naively counted that all what can be done in this case is to plead God for the demon to come out or the memory to return. But if you husband regularly beat you? Only to plead God to make him more kind or indeed to leave him until you yourself will have a hole in the head, big enough for a demon to enter through it? And what if the spouse is hopelessly infertile but you dream for a child? Only to pray? But if the spouse has AIDS because of blood transfusion? But if a woman was shipped into sexual slavery and she is already ten years at her slaveholder, and during this time they have get accustomed to each other and she has become to him almost as a wife, indeed not willingly, but the possibility to be set free appeared? At last, what if you are just shaken, viewing a certain cute girl, and the wife anymore does not attract you? Why then would you remain spouses? Or only to pray that God would return the love?

Whatever we may think, even Baptists made exceptions in extreme cases.

Indeed, we had a reason to so strictly deprecate divorce and be so afraid of it, that the breaking of spouses' telepathic link is very serious and may outweigh even so awful problems.

Analysis: Jesus has not forbidden divorce

Words of Jesus: "Whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery" (Matt. 19:9).

First note that this verse of Bible uses two terms: sexual immorality (fornication that is prostitution in some other Bible translations) and adultery.

We perceived these words of Jesus as "whoever divorces his wife, except for her sexual immorality." But there is no word her here, it's written just "whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality." Whose sexual immorality? The wife or of the divorcing husband himself is not written. So if to approach formally, the discourse is about every sexual immorality, either the wife or the husband himself, or even about sexual immorality of some related third party (for example, if the spouses themselves do not commit sexual immorality but can live only in a brothel or what more realistic near a turned on TV, where before their eyes sexual immorality all time happens, so that they cannot endure this and concentrate their attention on each other).

Note that this can be translated from ancient Greek "because sexual immorality" and also "against sexual immorality" or "for sexual immorality" (with the purpose of sexual immorality). So it surely can be understood both as "because of husband's sexual immorality" and as "(in protest) against wife's sexual immorality."

So the formal meaning of Jesus's words is "whoever divorces his wife, except for any (his, wife's, or somebody's else) kind of sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery." That is roughly said, it is said, "Any divorce which is not sexual immorality is an adultery." So here, the relation of the terms "sexual immorality" and "adultery" is just given (specified the difference of these two concepts).

There is no prohibition here. This sentence is declarative not imperative.

At last, Jesus would not ever say, "It is forbidden for a husband to divorce, except for example the case if the husband decides to become a fornicator." Exactly, this nonsense would be one of the variants of translation, if the word "adultery" here would imply prohibition of divorce. In fact, this can be understood as "Divorce is an adultery, not counting these cases when the spouse has become a fornicator." Here, there is no single word saying whether adulteries are forbidden.

Other places in the Bible where there are inscribed words of Jesus about divorce, Mark 10:2, Luke 16:18, Matthew 5:32 also just state that divorce is a form of adultery and not deprecate divorce.

Why did it seem to us that Jesus had deprecated divorce?

So I state in this book that Jesus has not formally deprecated divorce. But why did it seem to us that he has forbidden it?

In my opinion, the reason here in the analogy with other sin, "sexual immorality" (fornication, prostitution). Our thinking closely associates these two different sins—adultery and sexual immorality (fornication). Many people even cannot differentiate between these two.

Fornication is inadmissible in the sense that it is known that no fornicator receives the kingdom of God. "Neither the sexually immoral...will inherit the Kingdom of God" (1 Cor. 6:9–10). By this reason, we consciously or unconsciously were afraid of this sin (sexual immorality) and all what is related with it.

Or don't you know that the unrighteous will not inherit the Kingdom of God? Don't be deceived. Neither the sexually immoral, nor idolaters, nor adulterers, nor male prostitutes, nor homosexuals, nor thieves, nor covetous, nor drunkards, nor slanderers, nor extortioners, will inherit the Kingdom of God. (1 Cor. 6:9–10)

The thought of categorical inadmissibility of divorce (as a form of adultery) was imposed by the analogy with the thought of categorical inadmissibility of fornication (prostitution). But prostitution is inadmissible by another reason (not directly linked with sex), see the section "What is prostitution?" in the chapter "Free Salvation Is a Provocation" about what is prostitution.

A careful reader of the Bible will notice that in  
1 Corinthians 6:9–10 is said also, "Nor adulterers...will inherit the Kingdom of God." But in this context, an adulterer by no means may denote everybody who regularly commits adultery to the wife (Note that even one who looks onto a woman with sexual desire: "Everyone who gazes at a woman to lust after her has committed adultery with her already in his heart" (Matt. 5:28) is counted as committing adultery), otherwise, to the paradise would come only a man perfect as a computer (or Adam before the fall). Almost every sexually mature may be tempted to sleep (not speaking to gaze with lust) with a third party, but this does not imply that he necessarily will go to hell. Even somebody who has a persistent mistress may not be counted as an "adulterer" because the mistress can be counted as the second wife that is, as a matter of fact, not forbidden in the Bible. (However, maybe one who has a persistent mistress and hides the presence of the mistress from the wife is an adulterer.)

The difference between an adulterer in a biblical sense and a man who sometimes is unfaithful to his wife is like the difference between an alcoholic and an occasional drinker. All alcoholics go to hell (1 Cor. 6:9–10), but not all who drinks.

The biblical sense of the word adultery is friendship with a mistress driven by desires of this world, and broader, any friendship with the world.

Because you ask with wrong motives, so that you may spend it for your pleasures... You adulterers and adulteresses, don't you know that friendship with the world is enmity with God? Whoever therefore wants to be a friend of the world makes himself an enemy of God. (James 4:2–4)

I remind from the above that adultery is very harmful.

Jesus specifies the concept of adultery

What really has Jesus said? He has said here nothing other than if somebody leaves the wife and comes to another woman, this is signified by the word adultery independently of whether this is made through divorce or in some other way.

In Matthew 19:9, Jesus notes that divorce is an adultery except of the case for fornication. That means somebody may leave his wife for financial reasons and this is called "fornication" (that is, denial of the most important thing, salvation, for free) and otherwise this is called "adultery" (friendship according to worldly desires).

All what Jesus did here is that he specified the definitions of adultery and sexual immorality (fornication). And he has not said here anything other. Jesus has not said, "Adultery is strictly prohibited in all cases without exceptions," or something similar.

If somebody has stopped to love his wife and married with another, he should not be counted for this as an adulterer in the sense of 1 Corinthians 6:9.

I dare to suppose that the twelve apostles were also not understanding the words of Jesus correctly. If they would understand that divorces are not completely forbidden, they would not say this, "His disciples said to him, 'If this is the case of the man with his wife, it is not expedient to marry.'" (Matt. 19:10).

Jesus confirms our special understanding of his words with the following verse: "But he said to them, "Not all men can receive this saying, but those to whom it is given" (Matt. 19:11). We are these to whom is given.

Plug all holes

Note the irony in the continuation of the abovementioned words of Jesus. "What is able to be inserted, let it be inserted" (Matt. 19:12, a modified translation). It can be also translated, "Who is able to accommodate (in a house), let him to accommodate" or "Let every separating space which can be eliminated be eliminated."

Lo, in fact, in accordance with the teaching of Jesus, it should be plain and natural. Every house that is suitable for living should be occupied. And likewise with sexual relations. It turns out to be the thing what Jesus taught.

As we understood the teaching of Jesus about sexual relations earlier, it looked for us to be completely antinatural. We did simply follow some rules (e.g., in sexual matters), not understanding why they should be.

I think the meaning of this utterance of Jesus is that he is drawing the analogy between the delicate problem of sexual relations and the material (tangible) and then more understandable issue of dwelling houses. He clearly hints that our sexual relations should be modeled on the base of principles of controlling dwelling houses. (Here, he does not say that our sexual relations should be based on some incomprehensible pure spiritual "love.") Sexual organs are material "properties," and we should not treat them as something holy (to make an idol of them). On the other hand, he requires to distribute our dwelling houses so free from economics as free (from economics) should be sexual relations; the rich often have sex with the poor, but allowing to dwell poor in their houses is sadly rarer. Jesus has taught that it should be not so, the rich should accept the poor into their houses.

In fact, Jesus preaches about charity here, but the word charity is not said because (from his positions) it is implied that charity should be a natural thing clear by itself, not only official. Allocating a needed dwelling place, according to the teaching of Jesus Christ, appears to be a function not only of the state and big business structures, but like sex a function of individual common people personally.

So the task is put forth to plug all holes, be these empty rooms in a house or missing husband or some other economical, social, political, or whatever "hole."

Somehow antinatural (artificially introduced) in our society relationship of marriage appears more natural in the teaching of Jesus where two material components of marriage—sex and living together freely (not paid)—are distributed.

We, Christians, long time rejected namely this (natural) approach to the problem of marriage because the phrase "to marry" was artificially introduced into our lexicon following the teaching of Roman Catholics, and was not naturally appearing from sexual and economical relations, because our relations were not following the principles of Jesus Christ. They were needed to be artificially corrected by the way of official marriage.

Conflict of Houses and Flesh

She is mad, he is mad

If I encountered some woman with a big house and she was not allowing me to live there, I was counting she mad, as in the house there is place, but she ignores this fact, not allowing me to enter and so she cannot adequately take in account all factors. She mutually may think that if living together, why not also have sex as we are individuals of the opposite sex, and he so categorically without an understandable reasoning rejects, so he is mad. Now I realize that I really was mad as much as her because I had no proper reasoning why not to have sex with her.

So I almost always fell out with women, counting each other as mad. In this, I was very proud for myself that I follow religious rules.

Exactly in the same way it has become default not to allow others to enter their houses, I was rejected without clarification of details and without reasoning.

Nevertheless not everybody to let in

Certainly, it often happens that cohabitation with somebody is impossible or harmful for objective reasons and that sex with somebody is impossible or harmful (physiologically or psychologically). For example, there is a reason not to allow one in if he is a thief. But often, we have no reason for rejection.

To let go in for all? You will probably not allow a thief to enter into your house. Also you would not allow an AIDS-infected man.

You will not allow one hundred people to live in your house and similarly you would not feel normal life having one hundred sex partners.

Not always everything is clear

Certainly, we may have some hidden reasons for rejection, which shouldn't be told about. For example, I was usually refusing women, considering them mad (seriously ill), because they did not allow me to live in a vacant room of their house for free, and I would not like to have sex with a seriously ill woman. But I would not tell them the reason because saying "seriously ill" (meaning "mad") may be a serious offense. I have said about not allowing a thief to go in. But to people a phobia of thieves appears. They would disallow a man to enter even if it's clear that he is not a thief. I'll tell that I, in the same way, would be refusing girls without AIDS and other problems as categorically as if they were with AIDS.

The problem about which I speak is that many of factors, because of which one really should not allow somebody to go in, have become fixed ideas or white spots in our thinking. We because of inertia of thinking, fanaticism, or fear started not to let in when there are no reason not to let to.

Breaking with the material base

So both sides have completely lost touch with the material base of our relations. For them, to allow dwelling together was torn off from the layout of the house and has become to be defined only by greediness. For us, marriage was torn off from the physiology of sexual relations and has become to be defined only by formal religious rules. Certainly, I don't state that whether to live together should be defined only by the layout of the house, and especially that choice of the spouse should be defined only by physiology. These things depend also on a multitude of other factors.

Our principles (be that principles of sexual relations or economical principles) have lost the link with the reality; we are mad.

In the other words, we were confused in the words be that economical terminology or the terminology about sex and marriage which was torn off the material reality.

So what was the problem? We based our morality and behavior on the concept "to marry" which was for us torn off the specifics—living together, sex, etc. We were not able to reduce our thinking to the level of material and spiritual basis.

Half of marriage

So it developed that there are two sides, each of which has a half of understanding of matrimonial relations; one, the understanding of the necessity of living together, and the other, understanding of fleshly matters.

I want to remind that in 1 John 2:2, Christ is "the atoning sacrifice" not for our sins only but for the whole world. But here we have a tearing off (unwholiness). Our material world has become divided: houses separately and flesh separately, torning of our understanding of marriage and its material basis, between physical compatibility and choice of the sexual partner. As a result, we have lost link with Christ.

Why? What Is the Complexity?

Why Jesus explained this so incomprehensibly that we have just mechanically deprecated divorce?

It seems that the reason is this, a preacher of Christianity would need to say by the very matter of things. "If you have a free place, allow to enter one who needs this place, for your place not to be wasted." But can a preacher say so? This could be also understood as a hint to allow sex to every comer. So here, there is a real complex problem on how to explain why (in particular cases) the place in your home should be used for dwelling there somebody except of your spouse but "another place" should be not used for somebody else. Here, there is a discrepancy which may obfuscate.

The problem in that is unclear where to draw the dividing line after which one must not pass if he is allowed to dwell in your house. It is clear that this line should be drawn somewhere but where exactly? This is a hard question.

The words of Jesus on this topic (namely how to use the free place) turned out to be hardly understandable because of the objective complexity of this problem. All this is around quite material problems, whom (for example) a woman should allow to enter into her house and into another place and whom should not allow. To say "to allow only to the husband" (what looked as the true answer) would be absolutely a meaningless recommendation because he at any time may divorce. To add "never divorce" would be wrong because the spouse may be gone mad or, for example, to be put into prison for life.

Naturality and Unnaturality

A skeptic may ask, why, Jesus himself did not do this. I think the answer is very simple: He was working twenty-three hours per day and had no free time.

At first glance, it may seem that "plug all holes" means to change sexual partners, but this is unfounded. For example, if you would be allowed to dwell in any house of a city at your choice, would this mean that you would constantly resettle from one house to another and occupy all rooms which you may occupy? No, if you are a reasonable person, you would choose for yourself one definite house not to transfer all your goods every day to a different house. In fact, this is just a test for understanding the question. A person who has understood sexual relations good enough will not want to change the partner without a necessity.

It is clear that not everything what is considered as natural is really natural. For many people having sex has just become an obsession. It is hard to call natural when a European suddenly travels to Africa to hunt elephants. This desire is developed under the influence of advertisements and other not quite natural factors. Similarly, the desire to have sex with maximal number of partners and leave as many children as possible, in my opinion, is formed under the influence of a propaganda. I can't prove it scientifically but according to my own self-consciousness, man has no native desire to have many sexual partners. But there is the instinctive desire to choose one woman from several. If you are my opponent, we have heard different propaganda.

I say this to mention also that it can be said, for me, sex has become a fixed idea also, but from the opposite direction: having rather incomprehensible rules about sex in my religion has made impossible to exclude this question, and questions about sex have begun to be raised before me even in situations in no way related with sex. (For example, in trade relations for me was appearing prostitution and so I was unable to operate on the trade, etc.)

So we need to have proper understanding of this.

Adultery Is Not a Reason for Divorce

"I tell you that whoever divorces his wife, except for sexual immorality, and marries another, commits adultery; and he who marries her when she is divorced commits adultery" (Matt. 19:9)

A divorce is adultery only in the case when it happens not because of sexual immorality (fornication). If a spouse committed adultery (which is not the same as fornication), it is not a reason to make the divorce to be not adultery.

So even if your wife committed adultery against you and you then divorce her, you indeed commit adultery also.

I repeat that this does not mean a categorical prohibition of divorce, as for example, "Yet if the unbeliever departs, let there be separation. The brother or the sister is not under bondage in such cases, but God has called us in peace" (1 Cor. 7:15). If the words of Jesus in Mark 10:11–12, "He said to them, 'Whoever divorces his wife, and marries another, commits adultery against her. If a woman herself divorces her husband, and marries another, she commits adultery," would be understood as a deprecation of divorce; it would be a contradiction with 1 Corinthians 7:15.

Some Particular Issues

In the New Testament, women were a little lower than men, as were disallowed to speak in the church and to teach "But I don't permit a woman to teach, nor to exercise authority over a man, but to be in quietness" (1 Tim. 2:12), and married women had to be obedient to husbands in all, "But as the assembly is subject to Christ, so let the wives also be to their own husbands in everything" (Eph. 5:24). "You husbands, in like manner, live with your wives according to knowledge, giving honor to the woman, as to the weaker vessel, as being also joint heirs of the grace of life; that your prayers may not be hindered" (1 Pt. 3:7). This is in the Lord, not in sin. But now when the time of grace comes to the end, it is spoken about women being equal heirs of the grace (1 Pe. 3:7); the word heirs implies covenant, so it pertains to the end of the New Covenant (gospel), as according to the gospel. "For where a last will and testament is, there must of necessity be the death of him who made it. For a will is in force where there has been death, for it is never in force while he who made it lives" (Heb. 9:16–17), and "death" here should be understood as the end of the covenant. Note that the rest rights were already symmetric in the New Testament. Well, anyway that is just a direct consequence of the New Testament as it commands to obey to each other.

As I have already said, we do not nullify the gospel, but we affirm the gospel. As before so also now wives should be obedient to husbands in all. But now it is emphasized that both should be obedient to each other "subjecting yourselves one to another in the fear of Christ" (Eph. 5:21). "Yes, all of you gird yourselves with humility, to subject yourselves to one another" (1 Pt. 5:5).

Miscellaneous

Consider if the king of a big country would request to make and send him a thing. Then imagine that a hundred manufacturers would make this thing. Every manufacturer manager would be mistaken, his gift was not needed as there were ninety-nine other, but regarding the entire system it would be right that they have made it, as if they did not make it, it would be missing. It is an often encountered case in mathematics when every element is superfluous and can be eliminated, but it is impossible to eliminate or decrease quantity of all elements as they are needed. By the way, a similar situation is now in the software industry, where many duplicate products are made. The entire system is relatively right (the best we can attain) but every competing producer is wrong.

Just likewise every our single act is sinful, but the entire system of acts of God is right.

Now we see in 2 Corinthians 4:3–4 that "Even if our gospel is veiled, it is veiled in those who perish; in whom the god of this world has blinded the minds of the unbelieving, that the light of the gospel of the glory of Christ, who is the image of God, should not dawn on them," means that the gospel is the veil with which "god of this world" (God limited to the means of the world—that is, things controlled by the gospel) "has blinded the minds of the unbelieving..." And this now means for us that we were limited by not knowing the termination of the New Covenant.

Christian Life After  
End of Gospel

"God having provided some better thing concerning us" (Heb. 11:40). This means that God has provided us something better than life according to the gospel.

What Remains from Gospel

"But now faith, hope, and love remain—these three. The greatest of these is love" (1 Cor. 13:13). That is, three things remain from the gospel, faith that it is true (not false), hope for good things spoken in the gospel (for example, we take in account possibility to have eternal life), and love which was developed under the gospel. It is the result of gospel, what it should produce and what should remain after it has accomplished its function. "I...appointed you, that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain" (Jn. 15:16). This means that the productive (fruitful) things which were in the stage of the gospel, as well as results of our deals, should be got into the next stage. Productive things from the gospel should remain and counterproductive things from the Gospel should be cast off. "Peace I leave with you. My peace I give to you; not as the world gives, give I to you. Don't let your heart be troubled, neither let it be fearful" (Jn. 14:27). This tells what Christ leaves to us after the New Testament period. It is peace. Our task now is to keep peace. Note that here the words "not as the world gives" means that these words of Jesus Christ extend after the termination of the New Testament, as "the world" here may be understood as the world of the New Testament.

Authority of Gospel

"Then the end comes, when he will deliver up the Kingdom to God, even the Father; when he will have abolished all rule and all authority and power" (1 Cor. 15:24).

This means that he will abolish every spiritual authority which belongs to adepts of the gospel (like the authority I used in my war described above).

Stages of Covenants with God

Stages of development of the covenants with God:

Old Testament

Angels searching for a way to save people from sin.

New Testament

God calls not existing as existing, unsaved people as saved. Good news (Gospel) is teaching of calling anything good, even bad things. "We know that all things work together for good for those who love God, to those who are called according to his purpose" (Rom. 8:28). Wonderfully, this is a solution. Called out salvation works in practice, e.g., sick become healthy, thieves start to work, etc.

After New Testament

We need to realize that the New Testament itself has become a problem and we should somehow get rid some things of the New Testament. Calling anything good prevents us to speak about problems and many problems lie unsolved.

I deem that the motto of the next stage should be "Anything here is bad." It does not mean that it was bad. What has happened is good as God was acting in his glory. But it may be better. It is bad compared with how good it could be.

I deem that at this stage we should realize that we people are sick. But it is not a bad news. I tell you nothing new bad. Anybody of you already knows that we cannot raise much more than some hundred kilograms, cannot run 150 km/hour, calculate by brains like supercomputers, and do other things which healthy people can do. So when I tell you, "We are sick," I indeed tell you good news, not bad news, because it implies that it may be better. "Do we then nullify the law through faith? May it never be! No, we establish the law" (Rom. 3:31). Likewise, we do not nullify the gospel but we affirm the gospel. That is good news.

Now what I teach is a little above the gospel. I myself is not so high to reach even a little part of the gospel. But I stay on the gospel, so in this sense I am a little above. (Likewise, Isaac Newton said that he is so high because he stays on the shoulders of giants.)

Issue | Old Testament | Gospel | After Gospel

---|---|---|---

Appropriate motto | It is bad. | It is indeed good. | It could be better. Now it is bad.

What controls our behavior | Following rules without understanding what they are for. | Attempt to understand, knowledge. | Realization that our past rules and knowledge were wrong.

People are good or bad? | People are bad | Humility, God's saving glory, presence of God with people; people surpass angels accordingly Gospel | Humility turned out to be pride in madness. Glory is everywhere and we do not surpass in it.

Salvation | No technology of salvation yet. | Grace. God wants all people to be saved. "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; who desires all people to be saved and come to full knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:3–4). | "For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior; who desires all people to be saved and come to full knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:3–4). Many people received salvation by grace, but not many of them come to full knowledge of truth. Many stupids are a problem on the heaven. A good news was that heaven was able (easily enough) to accept all of them indeed and found for them a good place

Authority of men | Men are subordinate to angels | The future age is given not to angels but to men. (It is proved to be right by the humility wisdom.) | It is clear that if any man controls angels then he himself is controlled. He appears to be an intermediary without real authority.

Punishment of sinners | Sinners must be punished. | Grace makes believing Gospel sinners unpunished. | Condemned is our past life under the authority of god of this world (see below). It means that it ceases freeing place for new life (which these who accept it will have).

The essence of the testaments is: A scholar solves a problem. He cannot solve it (Old Testament). Somebody comes and helps him (New Testament). Now the solution is right. Yes, it was not that problem which should be solved.

Are People Computers?

Salvation Is Transforming  
into Computers

I believe that Adam before his fall was a computer. He was able to calculate in his mind with great speed, and he had perfect memory.

My belief is based on Genesis 1:31, "God saw everything that he had made, and, behold, it was very good." It would be bad if God's creation had bad memory or needed to calculate with paper and pencil. No man-made computer is so bad, and God's creation should be better than a man-made computer, not worse than it. "But of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you shall not eat of it: for in the day that you eat of it you will surely die" (Gen. 2:17). To die here means to hang (in the sense as computers sometimes hang)—that is, to cease to be a computer.

Before the fall, Adam and Eve were connected with telepathic link and, when they were together, there was the need to keep the eyes open only for one of them. Eve was seeing with the eyes of Adam, or Adam was seeing with the eyes of Eve, whoever was holding eyes open.

After they ate the forbidden fruit, "Both of their eyes were opened" (Gen. 3:7). That is, they lost network connection and each of them afterward was only able to see with his own eyes, not with eyes of the partner.

After the fall, people need salvation that is transforming back into computers.

Computers are characterized by simple law: Every computer can execute every program.

After the fall, people lost the ability to execute arbitrary computer programs.

Every man has his own set of defects. So a program working on one man usually cannot be transferred to another man.

There are exceptions: the Bible says that the spirit of Elijah was transferred to Elisha when Elijah came to heaven (both men had very strong and correct character compared to most other people) and remained on him all his life, or the spirit of Moses has come onto seventy other men but remained on them for only a short period of time. (Moses had the most stable character of all men (at least living in that time) but they had not and they were not able to be Moses.)

The complete salvation will be when all defects are closed—that is, every saved man will be able to execute every program which he wants to execute.

Until the complete salvation comes, all people are individuals because everyone has its own set of deficiencies and a program of one man usually cannot be transferred to another. But people will remain individual children of God after the salvation come, each one having an individual program. Thus after the complete salvation, people will be brought to a higher level than they were before fall. At the end, the fall will be a benefit for saved people.

Do We Need to Be Computers?

I once had lost the ability to remember all and count faster than a computer which I had in certain time (read below about this), and was in despair that I had become like other people, just like as a common man would be in despair if he would be transformed into a stupid and weak turtle (if turtle was able to understand how pitiful it is compared with a man). But now, after I have not only ceased to be a superman, but many times of being tortured was losing even common human mind, thinking about my tortures has caused me to turn to realize that I followed a misconception in anything. So it has turned that tortures had a purpose, to bring the gospel to its end.

Why is that the New Testament has failed in our time? People were living differently in the past than now. They had no need to count much. In the modern technological civilization, people need the ability to count quickly, like a computer and to have ideal memory. In other words now, we need to be transformed into computers. And as the next covenant will be built on better promises than the older (New Testament), the time when this will happen comes. Before the Fall to Sin, Adam and Eve were surely able to count, but they have lost this ability after eating the fruit. When Jesus Christ has come, he has returned people lost mind but this does not necessarily mean that people after this were able to count like computers. Jesus Christ has given people a new, different kind of mind than the computer mind. Only a few people and only for a little period of time were found to able to count in the past time. (For example, I was a supercomputer for a month or two and then have hanged. However, this month was something like thirty thousand years of study, but I have forgotten the knowledge.) Now we feel ourselves unsaved again because we miss something now important what Adam had but we now miss the ability to count. So now the New Testament has come to an end, and we need to be saved again (and we are saved in hope).

New Testament was: You are not broken. You can't do your old function, but you can do a different function (in heaven). God has taught us humility which includes that being unable to count we win in something other, better abstract thinking. This concept however has practically come to its actual end. We need to reckon. If we cannot, our attempt to consider ourselves clever is strained.

And certainly, the kingdom of God coming to the earth will transform us to reliable and fast computers.

I do not, like some others, say that the gospel has become too ancient. It has not become too ancient. But it was with an inherent deficiency from the very beginning by its own essence.

Real Superman

My Conversion to Christ  
and Following Events

Before fifteen years of age when I converted to Christ, I was possessed by a demon. I was much more clever than other children, but at the age of fifteen, the demon almost completely destroyed my mind, and my state was quickly becoming worse. It came so bad that in the short-time intervals of proper understanding, I realized that in one to two weeks, I will most probably forever become as stupid as a reptilian.

I felt horror when I realized first that I cannot count anymore and then I cannot read. (I saw a text but was not able to understand it.)

The demon has been preventing me to convert to Christ, making me forget that I want to convert, destroying my desire to convert, etc., and also with heresies. (I was not believing in the divinity of Christ.) But once I converted to Christ, a week later would be too late, I think I would have completely lost my mind.

After I converted, I thought that somebody has turned on a lamp or that the sun came out of the clouds. No, nobody turned on the lamp; my eyes changed. I felt somehow different, but as the devil has given me already many false conversions (while I was a heretic), I was yet unsure whether this time I really converted to Christ and became not mad anymore. Hours passed but I had no mad thoughts, no anger, no hallucinations, no memory loss. I have begun to realize that I really became a Christian.

I was at home that time. Three days after the conversion, I came out to the street and was very much wondered. I was seeing not one tree and not only the whole wood, but I was seeing every tree simultaneously! My attention was focused at every tree I was seeing at the same time, not one or two trees. It is like when somebody updates his computer to a more powerful hardware and then is able to play games in high graphics with higher resolution.

After yet three months of my new life, I got a math problem from a study book and instead of solving it during some time as it was before, I momentarily understood the answer, the entire solution was thought by me in one moment!

Well, afterward I was tempted, mistaught in a church, etc., and for a rather long time, lost the excellence of the mind and much of other spiritual gifts. However, once I understood that my church teachers mistake in many things and are just wrong and returned to the way of study directly from God with his word in the Bible and his Spirit, and of spiritual development.

This was a great return, but in many things I yet mistook, but I set the purpose studying the Bible to find the truth as it is. I began to come near to clean understanding and pure spirit.

For my faith, I was tortured and tempted by bad people, but God has given me the courage to overcome it (however, it was very hard).

That time, I decided to dedicate to God every second. I even counted seconds when I was lying to rest.

I Was Superman

And my possibilities developed exceedingly, much more than I was able to imagine before.

I found myself remembering anything, all events in the years of my life, everything.

A very hard gift was telepathy. It was torturous to hear many awkward curses and stupid thoughts in the minds of people. It also was a very hard temptation when I met a girl with clever thoughts.

First computer mind occurrence

Once, I was sitting in a school in front of a computer and programming. Unexpectedly, I found that I have calculated in mind what my program for the computer should compute. I calculated myself without the computer!

I was wondering if I have reached such degree of holiness that I can calculate as a computer. It was unexpected for me that I commit a few errors.

Superforce like Samson

I get the habit at all times to quickly move my hands back and forth. I was doing this to promote my zeal and dedication to God, because while I was moving so my attention was focused so that I was more zealous.

And lo! I found that I was moving my hands with the speed above the speed of sound.

I had arthritis before, but the heat of friction had healed my joints.

Also unexpectedly I received superforce. It also sometimes appeared, and sometimes I became weak again. Not every time the force was in full. But when it was in full, when I was not specifically limiting my movement, I was rumbling like a hard excavator when I was going because I moved my hands with speed above the speed of sound and they rumbled so much that I destroyed some glasses in some about eighth ground of a house while myself being at the bottom!

Also weariness disappeared completely. Of a much hard work, I was becoming hungry but never weary. I was able to work many days with awesome speed, without any pauses. I was sleeping no more than four hours twice per week. And when I was sleeping, I continued to think.

When superspeed was in beginning, it were painful for the joints (as I was a very ill child before all this happened). But I decided to continue to move with high speed as counted development of force of will more important than health of joints. After some time of superfast movements, my joints, being warmed by the warm of friction, became healthy, and I was able to move as fast as I wanted.

My body became harder than steel. When I was squeezing an iron thing in my hand, my fingerprint was left on it. The commandment of Jesus Christ to "whoever strikes you on your right cheek, turn to him the other also" (Matt. 5:39) gained a new sense for me, as anybody who beaten me was only damaging his hand, so if I wanted to save him, I would need to evade from him (or else specially make my body more soft, as its hardness was under my control).

The case of the most impressive action of the mechanical force of the Holy Spirit with me was probably this: I decided to show somebody the force and for this flapped the air with my hand to the thick door of a steel safe to close it with movement of the air, but I did it too powerfully and instead the air flapped by my hand has torn the door of the steel safe into pieces.

At the beginning, my actions sometimes were dangerous. For example, I caused a crash because the driver of the car was shocked to see as I jumped over the street (not desiring to wait when it would be free from cars). But afterward, I studied to be careful.

Yet once I was keeping a pole with one hand and a quickly moving car touched my other hand. I continued to stay immovable and the car crashed.

Yet once in a church (well, it was a heretical church), I was showing them "Samson power" and for this made a steel staff rotate with exceeding speed. To increase the effect, I accelerated the rotation for several minutes. But one of them came to look and (oh, a stupid man!) to touch the rotating staff. I cried him, stop, idiot, don't touch, don't come on, it is holy power you must not touch! (Because I also needed several minutes to stop it without breaking the building.) But he ignored the warning and touched the rotating staff. Only the blood sprinkled onto the walls.

Once, I attempted to check how strong I am. I got a steel thing (maybe that was a nut or a bolt) and squeezed it between two hands. Will I able to squeeze the steel? The outcome exceeded what I would expect. The energy of pressure of my hands caused steel to melt, and the melted iron flowed down by my hands, not causing me any harm. So I didn't know the limit of my force.

Other Superabilities

Once, I happened to be left in a wood in winter. I realized that even having superforce, I can't go out not freezing. Then I threw away the winter clothes, raised my hands, prayed that no wild animal or man would harm me while I cannot move and ceased to move, planning to stay immovable until the spring. My body was already frozen and hard when it happened and then a car came; as my brain and ears were not yet frozen, I noticed this and unfrozen myself, so that they took me into the car and driven out from the woods. I'm sure that if not for that car, I would have stayed stationary until the spring and then could go out from the wood. While being a super, I have spent several nights at the street, being frozen in winter. It was equally natural and convenient for me as to lie in a bed.

Also, I liked to lie on the bottom of a little river, not breathing during hours and to see how the water over me glances in the light. (Compare St. Paul which spent about twenty-four hours at the ocean bottom. "Three times I suffered a shipwreck. I have been a night and a day in the deep.")

I have been putting my body into many special physiological states. For example, sometimes I would temporarily enter into a dead body-like condition; my skin was covered with a fluid—even a little dissolved in this fluid—and it was flowing on my skin, and I would look no different than a dead body except that I continued to move. Some kinds of work were more convenient to do in this state. (St. Paul did the same. In 1 Corinthians 15:31, it says, "I affirm, by the boasting in you which I have in Christ Jesus our Lord, I die daily.")

When I was wounded, it took minutes or even seconds to cure.

Supercomputer brain

But what I am going to tell now more than exceedingly surpasses all what I've said above.

This superability was received the last, when I already had ideal memory, superforce, and many other superabilities. (However, some of this last super-ability was indeed sometimes glancing even before, as I said above on the case when I was sitting before a computer in school.)

Being very zealous all the time, I was either thinking or praying. While I did something, I was also thinking about something. I took the decision always when I think about something, to generalize my thoughts (that is, if I, for example, thought about a two-dimensional geometrical figure, also think about the three-dimensional, and even arbitrary n-dimensional objects). I followed this rule to generalize my thoughts as hard as possible, trying to reach the most general principles. I followed the math method called axiomatic method while thinking about anything, I tried to formulate a system of axioms and find the general principles. (Axiomatic method is an important math method invented in the beginning of the twentieth century and so also called the twentieth century math method, which splits math into parts (called axiomatic theories), every part having a fixed system of axioms.)

Sometimes, my thoughts were becoming very fast. There were moments of clean mind. But during these times, these moments were becoming more often and more intensive. So I found myself sometimes being able to calculate faster than a computer. As this superability developed, I found that I can, for example, read a computer program and execute it in my mind faster than the computer itself.

Then I studied not only executing a computer program in mind, but even just to think like a human with computer speed. And as this superability developed further, I thought with the above supercomputer speed that is not like a human but as a superhuman with clean, logical, super mind, surpassing the human mind not only in speed but also in other aspects.

I guess that the contacts in my brain have become metalized and passed the signals with (almost) lightspeed. Or maybe the neurons of my brain were linked with each other through radio waves rather than through contacts. It should be the next stage of the development of human brain as a child grows, but this typically does not happen with a sinner after Adam's fall.

This superability was very unstable, but, like the superforce, in some day has come to stability, I found that I think faster than a computer all the time, and the speed, stability, and perfection of mind continued to grow. I ceased to commit a mistake! I have come rather near to sinlessness and perfection as Adam was before his fall to sin. Having a superpowerful mind and thinking all the time, I gained probably much more scientific and other knowledge than the rest of mankind. (Afterward, I forgot it.)

I was in a telepathic link with heaven. I lived like an angel in heaven, only being on the earth. The Bible teaches that the atmosphere of the Earth is living (so-called spirit), and it is exceedingly a more powerful computer than any human brain. I lived in the spirit; brain is secondary.

Quite naturally, in one day of superlife, I studied as during the one thousand years of a common human life: "But don't forget this one thing, beloved, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years" (2 Pt. 3:8). (This is the only thing what I remember of my knowledge which I gained while being a super.)

After my fall from a super back to a common sinful man like you, I forgot anything of my super thoughts while being a super, I remember only that it was great, but no particular details. I have forgotten the superknowledge, the memory of a nonsuper cannot keep it. (However, I know that the knowledge is indeed in my memory, only I can't remember.)

Superman's dialogue

Having a conversation with several people at once, I managed to calculate and control over what they would say in such a way that the questions, which every one of them was asking, had the same answer. This way, by one phrase, I have the same answer on different questions by several people at once. Realizing that my answers "magically" answer each of their questions at once, the people jumped back (also simultaneously) from me in awe, being amazed by this thing.

My fall

In the way of becoming a super, as I have already told, I have fallen and risen again many times.

But then I nevertheless became a working "supercomputer hard robot" and my state was stable rather long time. In human terms, I was doing all with very much zeal, especially that I was calculating and solving mathematical problems zealously.

Nevertheless once I felt completely as a hanged computer.

My mother once has said me that I would destroy my health by "flaming" so much.

After a few hours, I remembered this her saying and feared for a tiny moment. But this little fear was enough to destroy all.

I felt fear for a moment and the fear caused my zeal to vanish.

As in that moment I lost the supercoordination of movements, I literally felt onto the ground. I attempted to make in my mind a system of equations, describing the mechanics of rising from the ground (I was solving a system of mathematical equations before every movement of my body), but realized the tremendous thing that I cannot count like a computer anymore. Little (compared with before) left mind was enough only to understand the "nightmare" of what had happened, I became almost a common man again. I raised from the ground with a difficulty because I forgot how common people (nonsupers) move. I spent months in despair. I'm stupid, I'm weak, I'm ill. Again, silly counting on fingers, and worse of all, I made mistakes and I can't completely control my actions doing what I don't want to do, I sin, and finally I'm in depression. More than a month without sins, and in one moment, I became a sinner again, as hopeless as other people to reach a sinless state. I think that Adam, after eating the fruit in which God deprecated him to eat, felt the same, as he ceased to be a super. God has not lied, saying to Adam, "You will die in the day when you will eat it." It is a death compared with what is life of a sinless man. (Do you know that dead bodies in coffins indeed move, only very slowly? The dead is the one who has become very much slower and sillier in his movements.). I'm dead.

After months of despair, I slowly began to try to continue the life of a common man (rather than a superhero as before). Well, some of my abilities (such as telepathy) was left, but degraded during the time. Sometimes, I even had little episodes of computer speed calculations in mind. I have not lost it completely, and I have not become as stupid as other people at all. I indeed studied some of math and have become a mathematician.

Can you imagine what would happen if I remained a computer for a long time? Wouldn't I, for example, prevent the economical crisis by calculating the state of economics? Wouldn't I build a thermonuclear reactor to eliminate dependency on the oil? I think I would do much. But I've failed.

On Apocalypse

In this chapter, I ask, "Can apocalypse be canceled?"

To give an example of catastrophes of apocalypse, I will explain the eighth chapter of apocalypse, the seven trumpets.

Falling Comet

It appeared that the last Bible book, Revelation, is not only spiritual but also literal sense. Revelation chapter 8 describes the **catastrophe of the near future which is comparable only with the great diluvian** ; a big comet should fall onto Earth and kill most of the people.

Whether the comet will fall before or after the rapture of Church is outside of the scope of my message.

Every word of this biblical fragment describes in detail the catastrophe of the falling comet. Unbelieving would not be able to explain how the author of the Bible knows what happens when a comet falls onto Earth. So let's proceed:

When he opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven for about half an hour. I saw the seven angels who stand before God, and seven trumpets were given to them. Another angel came and stood over the altar, having a golden censor. Much incense was given to him, that he should add it to the prayers of all the saints on the golden altar which was before the throne. (Rev. 8:1–3)

As we will see further, this censor is without any doubt a comet. There will be much incense (i.e. smoke), when the comet will fall.

The censor (comet) is golden; much richness falls from heaven for greedy people to be sacrificed! I think pieces of gold and golden dust will be spread everywhere, glancing under the sun. The altar is also golden. There will be very rich churches in the day of God's punishment! Gold is a rather heavy metal. Greedy man will have a very heavy punishment. (The more heavy is the comet, the more destruction it causes.)

It is the big sacrifice to clean out Earth from any kind of evil. World lies in evil, and it will be cleaned out one more time as it was at the time of diluvian.

By the way, now it is not wonderful that in the New World (after the second coming of Christ), gold will be used for street covering instead of asphalt.

Well, the question arises, how and from where a golden comet may appear? Possible answer is that it is the result of crashing of a golden asteroid with a normal comet or with another asteroid. (Yes, astronomers have found an asteroid consisting wholly of gold, it is a fact! Quite probably that namely this asteroid will fall onto Earth.)"The smoke of the incense, with the prayers of the saints, went up before God out of the angel's hand" (Rev. 8:4).

The burst (caused by crashing on the giant speed) of the comet nucleus crashed on Earth will be so great that a part of the Earth's atmosphere will be thrown out to the outer space. There will remain less air on Earth; it will become harder to breathe.

Note that the comet is thrown by an angel with prayers of saints. It is not an accidental catastrophe, but an intended angels' attack to punish people for terrible sins. "The angel took the censor, and he filled it with the fire of the altar, and threw it on the earth. There followed thunders, sounds, lightnings, and an earthquake" (Rev. 8:5).

Falling comet is fiery as it becomes hot because of fast movement in the air. It will be a fiery mountain falling onto this planet. The earthquake, because of the comet impact, will destroy probably all the cities on Earth!

There will be an awful thunder (heard on the entire Earth), and so many people will become deaf. There will be lightnings, firstly giant lightnings between the comet and the Earth during the short time of falling of the comet; these primary lightnings will produce so much powerful radio waves that the waves will cause to sparkle anything metallic even at a big distance from the place of the fall. Many power lines and electronic devices will be destroyed by sparkling. Additionally, the atmosphere affected by the comet will produce many great thunderstorms. At the time when it will be falling, there will also be other sounds but heard not by ears, as the exceedingly powerful radio waves produced by the falling comet will be heard directly in people's brains, so people will hear of the falling comet immediately without waiting when the sound of thunders will pass the distance!

These were introductory passages. Now read the details:

"The seven angels who had the seven trumpets prepared themselves to sound. The first sounded, and there followed hail and fire, mixed with blood, and they were thrown to the earth. One third of the earth was burnt up, and one third of the trees were burnt up, and all green grass was burnt up." (Rev. 8:6–7)

There often exists a cloud of many stones of different sizes near a comet. (They may appear when a comet, moving by its orbit, passes near the sun or a planet and is partially destroyed by gravitation and the sun's heat. Also, it may be a result of crashing of the comet with some other body.) These stones will fall with giant speeds as fiery meteorites (so fast that they will burst as bombs crashing down onto the Earth like artillery batter), and they will be mixed with blood of people and animals. This batter will destroy and set fire on houses, cars, fields, anything. The cosmic dust flying with the comet will produce giant hailstones condensing in the atmosphere. These giant hailstones, the biggest in the history of mankind, will help meteorites, beating people and mixing with their blood. One third of the Earth's surface will be burnt!

Also, these burning meteorites will ionize the stratosphere and so destroy the ozone which protects the Earth's surface from ultraviolet rays. So, if somebody goes to street without special protective clothes and eyeglasses, he will get skin cancer and even blindness because of the ultraviolet rays of the sun.

Burning meteorites will set on fire agricultural fields, but a greater disaster is that the ultraviolet will destroy all the green grass (including agricultural plants). So the next distress is hunger. Many people will kill each other and eat people's flesh.

Because of the destruction of one third of the woods and of all the green grass, oxygen in air will begin to decrease (additionally to that, some part of the atmosphere was thrown out to the outer space). It will become even harder to breathe.

Satellites will be destroyed by the meteorite rain. So, Internet, TV, etc., will be broken. This will make the situation even more complicated because people will be hardly able to communicate at a distance.

"The second angel sounded, and something like a great burning mountain was thrown into the sea. One third of the sea became blood, and one third of the living creatures which were in the sea died. One third of the ships were destroyed" (Rev. 8:8–9).

From now on, for any reasonable Bible reader, it should be obvious that Revelation 8 describes a falling comet, so exactly it is described.

The event of Revelation 8:8 happens not after the Revelation 8:7, but in the middle of the meteorite rain of the verse. The burning mountain is the nucleus of the comet falling into one of the oceans. The phrase "big mountain" would mean that the nucleus of the comet will be comparable with Everest in size (eight kilometers). The more the comet weighs, the greater is the destruction. Previously, I noted the tremendous thing that the comet will be golden, but it is probably not so much heavy as an eight-kilometer piece of gold because it is most probably only partially golden.

The comet will breach a hole in the crust of the Earth, so a new giant volcano will rise on the ground of the ocean. In the region of the fall of the comet, the water will be very heated both because of the bang and because of the volcano.

In the region of the fall, a big quantity of poisonous hydrogen sulfide will be raised to the top of the ocean. (Hydrogen sulfide is contained in both lower levels of oceanic water and in oceanic bottom. Hydrogen sulfide is produced by certain kind of bacteria.) The poison as well as the bang and increased temperature will kill the life at the top levels of the ocean, and that life will be replaced with these bacteria which can live with hydrogen sulfide. These bacteria are of the red color and so the water will become red, like blood. As a result, one third of the living animals in the ocean will die. Additionally, water will be stained red by blood of dead bodies of sea animals and fishes. The concentration of microorganisms in the water will become comparable to the concentration of cells in blood. Water will become blood, the Bible says. Hydrogen sulfide is the very substance which stinks in dead bodies, so the ocean will very stink with the poison.

Super tsunami produced by the bang will destroy one third of the world's navy (besides ships destroyed by the meteorites). Also (in whatever reason, the Bible does not say about this), it will destroy many onshore cities (and kill people left in these cities).

I retell that the bang will produce a super earthquake on the whole Earth. Cities will be destroyed.

Airplanes are perfect targets to be destroyed by meteorites; one third of all the airplanes will be also destroyed. It will be impossible to fly to a safer place from the zone of the greatest destruction.

The third angel sounded, and a great star fell from the sky, burning like a torch, and it fell on one third of the rivers, and on the springs of the waters. The name of the star is called Wormwood. One third of the waters became wormwood. Many people died from the waters, because they were made bitter. (Rev. 8:10–11)

The meaning of these verses is less clear than of the former. So I give only a possible exegesis:

The name of the place in White Russia where a nuclear power station burst with great outburst of radiation in 1985 is Chernobyl when translated means "wormwood." Now the destroyed power station stays under a concrete building (called Chernobyl's sarcophagus) to protect the world from the radiation. Note that sarcophagus is not stable and nothing warrants that it will not be destroyed by burning and sometimes bursting radioactive substance inside.

I suppose that Revelation 8:10–11 means that a part of the comet will fall onto sarcophagus and destroy it. The second Chernobyl catastrophe will be much worse than the first. A great outburst of radioactive dust will just render radioactive practically all water in Europe. Many people in Europe will die because of radioactive water. Probably it will be also poisonous as inside the sarcophagus may not only be radioactive but also poisonous substances. (Bible seems to say that the water will have noticeable bitter taste.)

The fourth angel sounded, and one third of the sun was struck, and one third of the moon, and one third of the stars; so that one third of them would be darkened, and the day wouldn't shine for one third of it, and the night in the same way. (Rev. 8:12)

Because of the cosmic dust flying with the comet (together with smoke of burned cities and woods), transparency of the atmosphere will be decreased by one third. One third of the sun's rays will not reach the Earth's surface.

Because of this, it will begin a long extremely cold winter on the whole Earth. All will be frozen, most of life will die because of cold.

I saw, and I heard an eagle, flying in mid heaven, saying with a loud voice, Woe! Woe! Woe for those who dwell on the earth, because of the other voices of the trumpets of the three angels, who are yet to sound! (Rev. 8:13)

It says that the catastrophes which follow these are even much more tremendous. But the further text of apocalypse is much harder to understand and I now lay aside its exegesis.

May the Apocalypse Be Canceled?

In the New Testament, we were slaves—slaves of God. But as Christ has said, "No longer do I call you servants, for the servant doesn't know what his lord does. But I have called you friends, for everything that I heard from my Father, I have made known to you" (Jn. 15:15). Here, the phrase "I heard from my Father" refers to that Christ was simply repeating the standard words of his Father rather than speaking to himself. Now we know this (that everything what he made known to us was heard from the Father). Now God sets us free from any religious ministry (except of our free choice, certainly).

May apocalypse be canceled? It is addressed to the slaves of God. "This is the Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show to his servants the things which must happen soon, which he sent and made known by his angel to his servant, John" (Rev. 1:1). But we are now friends of God, not slaves. We were slaves in the age of the gospel.

The abovementioned comet may probably be found by astronomers and suppressed by a rocket with nuclear warhead.

I expect that probably people may be brought to complete salvation (transformed into computers), like it was with me during a month, with the only difference is it's not for a month but forever.

I hope that we may pass away the catastrophes of apocalypse.

But I don't know.

To Say a Lie if Necessary

Suppose you are a Jew and you meet fascists. Should you answer "yes" to the question "Are you a Jew?" and be killed?

This depends on who you serve. If you serve Christ, you will say "yes", because Christ is the truth (John 14:6). To serve truth means to say correct ("good") news all the time.

If you serve to the Father however not to Christ, you don't need to say "yes". God is love and you would choose to live and do good for God.

Under Gospel you would go to the Hell if you lied once: (Rev. 21:8) " **all** liars, shall have their part in the lake which burns with fire and brimstone: which is the second death."

The only way to accomplish Gospel is to reject it, because only one who rejects his own soul will have his soul saved. (Rom. 3:19) "Now we know that what things soever the law said, it said to them who are under the law". That you will go to the hell if you because of lying even once (and you did: Psalms 116:11) is not about you if you choose not to be under the Gospel anymore.

Who followed the Gospel sincerely will be revealed as these who reject it like rejecting my own soul.

DNA of Jesus

"Again, I leave the world, and go to the Father." (Jn. 16:28) "Most assuredly I tell you, he who believes in me, the works that I do, he will do also; and greater works than these will he do; because I am going to my Father" (Jn. 14:12).

Why a believer could do more than Jesus himself? Surely no one surpasses Jesus in his working skills. The reason is that Jesus was busy with a certain deal and has no free time to do other works.

What then is the deal with which Jesus was busy? John 14:12 answers this question: Jesus was going to his Father. This means that Jesus was preparing to become to a father. This means that his deal was to distribute his DNA.

Certainly, there is no woman in the world worthy to become his wife and to bear his children. So Jesus decided to go through another route. Some viruses are able to distribute fragments of DNA molecules from the infecting to the infected organism. Jesus used it in his healing ministry. The true purpose of his healing ministry was not healing itself, but distributing his DNA. Jesus was doing nothing other except the deals for him to become a father. Healing was only a means for distributing his DNA. Healing was not the end purpose.

Now it is clear why the church is called the fiancée of Jesus.

So while earthly kinds of species competed with each other, won an alien.

Nevertheless, I should note that the concepts of Father and Son introduced by Jesus are more general than heir of DNA molecules. Jesus was speaking about the more fundamental mathematical things.

Misc

Why Jesus Refuses to Kneel  
Before the Devil

Provocations by Jesus are from the very beginning of the gospel.

Again, the devil took him to an exceedingly high mountain, and showed him all the kingdoms of the world, and their glory. He said to him, "I will give you all of these things, if you will fall down and worship me." (Matt. 4:8–9)

Jesus refused to accept this offer of the devil.

Have you ever wondered why Jesus has refused to agree to the devil's offer? What has the devil required? He has required only to stay on the knees, That is, to change pose of the body in a certain way. Isn't this a purely formal thing? Why Jesus would not agree to stay on his knees before the devil, only formally doing what the devil required but not really worshipping the devil? What it could change, the pose of the body?

Or otherwise, we could consent that behavior of Jesus Christ, God in human body, was not effective and not the most effective (not optimal). No, we believe that acts of Christ are optimal, nothing what God does is not the most effective.

It is plain that Jesus would have many reasons to accomplish what Devil has required here. So Christ had an even stronger reason to refuse to stay on his knees before Devil. What is this reason?

I'd compare the relationship of Jesus Christ and the devil to a chess game. As in a chess game, this great sacrifice by a high professional chess master is hardly understandable. This reason of refusal can be inferred from the next move, the next thing which Jesus has said with the sense that Jesus is the leader and Satan can only be lead behind. "Then Jesus said to him, Satan, go behind me..." (Matt. 4:10, variant of translation). He has said to the devil to follow after him. What Jesus has done is that he took the time and attention of the devil which the devil could use to tempt others instead of useless attempts of the devil to tempt Jesus who cannot be tempted. If Jesus would agree to do what the devil required, the devil would count his operation with Jesus complete and could then come to tempt other people, instead of his attention focused on useless attempts to tempt Jesus.

An important thing to note here is that the devil attempts to tempt Jesus, but Jesus doesn't tempt the devil. That is, Jesus doesn't attempt to cause the devil to have wrong opinion on anything. Jesus only spends time with the devil. If your friend (or enemy) could come to your house and you would make something to cause him to remain in your house as long as possible, this could not be called a temptation.

So from the beginning, the gospel is a provocation (but not a temptation).

As the devil then follows all the way near Jesus, what Jesus speaks afterward is also under influence of presence of the devil. The devil is one of the listeners of the preachings of Jesus, and Jesus takes into account that there are enemy listeners, so that things said by Jesus are limited to things which may be said in the devil's presence and not cause harm. (You would probably be also limited to what you could say if you would speak in the presence of your enemy.)

Miscellaneous Notes

As the end of the law is Christ (Rom. 10:4), then the end of gospel is God the Father. This is clear from the words of Christ, "I am going to my Father." (Jn. 14:12). These words specify where Christ (in the form of a gospel) go and where is the end of the way of the gospel. So in the age of the gospel, we were receiving knowledge (primarily) about Christ, in the next age we are to know the Father primarily not as before only Christ.

It is said in Revelation 20:4, 6 and 1 Corinthians 15:24–25 that Christ will rule for one thousand years and then will give over the authority to the Father. This means that in one thousand years, the gospel will continue. During this period, we will know that we hear only good news and miss the rest of the information. In this, we will be similar to a population of a total country from which the information is hidden. But it will be different that we, unlike citizens of human total systems, will openly know that to us are said only good news and the rest of the information is hidden. Moreover, according to the words of Jesus, "Seek, and you will find...For everyone...who seeks finds" (Matt. 7:7–8) and Luke 11:9–10, we will be able to find the information.

So where is the gospel not applicable? The gospel is applicable to anything in the world. It is not applicable to itself. "By the law I died for the law" (Gal. 2:19). Simply, the gospel can deal with any problem except of these problems which arise out of the gospel itself (problems caused by the gospel). Above is an example for this. I have shown that the gospel cannot deal with the problems of an apostle. It is because apostles are pertaining to the gospel, but the gospel fails in dealing with problems pertaining to the gospel itself. "He who speaks against a brother and judges his brother, speaks against the law and judges the law. But if you judge the law, you are not a doer of the law, but a judge" (James 4:11). Here, the law spiritually means the gospel, so the gospel is found unable to deal with the conflicts of the brother (fellow priests who attempt to lead each other to pasture instead of the sheep).

Last Words

Some Bible quotes as the epilogue of this book: "Don't let your heart be troubled. Believe in God. Believe also in me" (Jn. 14:1).

Confession

Traditional Christianity offers you to become a Christ's slave. I offer something other, to become free, neither his slave nor anybody else's slave. "Jesus therefore said to those Jews who had believed him, 'If you remain in my word, then you are truly my disciples. You will know the truth, and the truth will make you free.'" (Jn. 8:31–32).

Believing in Christ makes us also believe in his commandments in the gospel; believing in the commandments makes us slaves as, according to our faith, we are directed to decide our actions accordingly to the commandments.

Conversion into traditional Christianity is not good because sins of a convert need to be managed by the master who is Christ. "Woe to you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! For you travel around by sea and land to make one proselyte; and when he becomes one, you make him twice as much of a son of Gehenna as yourselves" (Mt. 23). Thus a slave of Christ is not a good thing but a son of Gehenna.

Christ does not need slaves. He needs to pay for the sins of his slaves, and this is not his will.

Thus, I offer you to become free disciples of Christ, not slaves of sin and not slaves of Christ anymore.

The reasons for this are the following:

It's better for you to be free than to be slaves of somebody.

Christ will not need anymore to manage you with your sins as his slave.

The attempt to observe the commandments leads only to harm. Thus, the gospel cancels itself and an attempt to follow it is useless. Thus I am freed by this truth from the obligation to observe the commandments, and the commandments are only recommendations for me. I'm not a slave of Christ anymore but his friend.

Our attempt to follow the commandments produces only violation of more important commandments. For example, we are greedy for money needed for our vision of accomplishing Christ's commandments and this is not good.

We cannot fulfill the commandments of the gospel and may only cause harm if we attempt to follow the gospel and therefore should be set free from the commandments. Instead, I expect from Christ to change me and to make the observation of commandments my inner nature, not to follow them artificially.

Ready to become a friend of Christ? Just pronounce the following confession and this is done!

I want to become a friend of Christ, neither a slave of anybody nor anything, even not a slave of Christ himself. I admit that Christ has died for my sins in order to pay the price of his life for purchasing me with the following plan to make me free from any slavery.

I allow Christ to enter me and fix my soul, brain, and heart in order to set me free from sin, in order to live an eternal life as an adopted child of God, according to my faith, not my attempt to observe the commandments.

I'm now a free person, not a slave of anybody or anything.

Amen.

Our Community

We will build a community of believers in End of Gospel at this URL:

http://community.endofgospel.org
