← Back to overview
The Inevitable Dossier · Chapter Five

Is God the Light?

Every religion, and every scientist, may be reaching for the same thing under different names.

Enlightenment is generally related with words as insight, understanding and knowledge which refers to light, but in what sense? Some will argue about the difference between spiritual and none spiritual enlightenment, but what is the difference? OK, first, there is no difference, but there are some other ingrediences involved when arguing about spiritual enlightenment – such as rational and irrational behavior and reasoning. Confused? Well, that’s normal, so lets try to sort these things out, beginning with none spiritual light.

Knowledge, Experience & Understanding

Understanding cannot be achieved by just reading a book. For example; my understanding, which of course is the fundament to what’s in this dossier, can of course not be transferred to you just because you read this dossier. Therefore beside the knowledge retrieved by reading, we also have to understand the nature of understanding.

“Understanding is what’s left after you have forgotten what you learnt.”

Books Are Knowledge

Lots of ancient texts have been preserved thru history, but we can not be 100% sure about the level of understanding the writers had - as we interpret the texts using our present understanding. If you take a moment and try to analyze what I just said, then you will understand that it’s not the texts that are important – it’s the level of understanding which is important. A sentence: - “Tiger shoots a birdie”. Well, that didn’t say much. Most of us have basic understanding regarding animal’s abilities to handle weapon and will thereby reject this sentence as rubbish. However, if you are a golfer, then you most likely have specific understanding that will make you interpret this sentence differently. If you haven’t got a clue about the meaning of the sentence, ask a golfer. The type of understanding that he or she possess to be able to interpret this sentence correct is per definition called “metadata”, which could be translated to “Information describing information”. So the golfer is smarter than other’s? Of course not! Understanding has nothing to do with intelligence.

Understanding is related to situations. If you are on a tiger safari and hear the sentence, it isn’t likely that it actually is describing a golf event. This was a bad example, but I guess you get the picture. So now you understand that books are knowledge and that the gap between your own level of understanding and the writer’s level of understanding set the degree of difficulty to transfer understanding to you as a reader.

Experience

To be able to turn over knowledge to understanding, one has to learn to trust the knowledge. There are two ways achieve this. Either one get real life experiences that proves the knowledge or one learns to trust it by conviction. Both are common in ordinary life and are related to the things I wrote about in the enlightenment chapter. This also serves as the main difference between rational and irrational understanding. Science is rational as, instead of stating a definitive answer, it states a thesis about the most reliable answer, which is based upon series of dialectic tests. The rational understanding is always willing to evolve as it has learnt how complex the world is and that it is constantly changing. Even static thing changes from an understanding point of view. Irrational understanding, however, would state the answer, without having a rational argumentation about it and by constantly avoid rational tests, conviction regarding the answers correctness will increase. Now, as most fundamental questions regarding faith can’t be tested, a constant window of opportunity is open to take control over irrational minds.

So, what does this tell us? Well, you can read a book and get into a situation were the knowledge retrieved from the book matches. Then, if you act as learnt from the book and the reaction is not what you expected, it’s up to you to decide if you trust the book or the situation. The alternative you choose in this scenario, irrational or not, serve as the footprint of understanding retrieved from the book. Thereby you now also understand that experience is knowledge turned over into understanding based on your own choice, which ultimately is the product of what I wrote about in the Enlightenment chapter.

Writing the Book Is Understanding

Up to now we have learnt a lot about the nature of understanding. It’s a unique, precious and powerful thing to possess. Most individuals who feel they are more enlightened than others also feel a natural force of wanting to share it with allies and to use it against opponents. Therefore books, scrolls, texts, carvings, meaningful symbols etc has always been looked upon with fear and respect. It’s easy to understand that, if we burn all books of a kind as well as suppress all discussions of their subjects, the understanding contained in them will be erased from the earth within hundred years, as all humans on earth then have been replaced. Understanding that ends, can you imagine that? Its true, understanding dies out, decreases, changes, evolves, mutates and expands all the time – it’s a part of the nature of mankind. As it does, we align with it in the same way as it does to us – hand in hand, knowledge and understanding, into the inevitable. Therefore, books are important. They preserve understanding into knowledge and tell a lot about our history as well as guide us into our future.

Decent Behavior

In our modern world decent behavior that generates experiences which ultimately is turned over into valuable understanding is a complex task. Chaos, order and control are words that often come into mind when discussing world complexity. There seems to be ethic and moral cop’s everywhere claiming the correct ways to think and behave. Why is that? Has it always been like this? Of course not, if we take a look in the rear-view history mirror we will see members of tribes that were dependant on each others to survive. This of course made life less complex. To survive you had no options other that to contribute. Contribute with what? Well, someone had to lead the tribe and ultimately it was that leader who decided what resources that the tribe needed, which answered the question. Of course the skills and status of the leader was important as the number of tribe members grew.

So when does things get complex according to history? Well, we have to find a single big event in our present history loop (remember repeating history) when focus changes from leaders to the masses, because it’s when we, the masses, get dependant on ourselves the complex world begins. As life in history became more peaceful the leaders (the elite) needed some tool that made them special and needed. Values and honor was created. Sworn men and women’s could go in death to protect values and their honor. Have you ever wondered about the tournaments or duels of the middle Ages? Man against man in a battle about honor with life at stake. This was the peak of decent behavior according to me. The heavily armored Knights, the Nobles and the elite stood on the frontier protecting their people. You should know that the battles of the early middle Ages were rather simple. It was politics between societies that had turned into arms, led by the society leaders. The primitive battles ended when one side gave up, which was a simple calculation about how much the values was worth in comparison with the honor. Afterward the battle it was standard behavior to pay the winner to get captured knights back.

The big change comes in battle of Crecy, France in year 1346, when the unbeatable army of about 40.000 French heavily armored knights met the English army of 12.000 men, led by King Edvard III. He used longbows for the first time in a large scale battle, which made him the winner, even if his army was so much smaller than the French. This was the first time in history when an ordinary trained farmer got a weapon that could beat a professional and heavy armored Knight. This successful battle marked the decline of the honorable Knights on the battlefield.

In just a few years, battles changes completely. The French Nobles feared the longbows so much that Captures bowmen got their fingers cut off before they were given back to the enemy. The “V” sign commonly referred to as a sign for victory and is believed to come from captured bowmen who have gotten all but two fingers cut off – who proudly showed their two fingers as a “V” for their victorious part in battles. The finally stroke against the noble battlefields happened in the battle of Azincourt, year 1415, when King Henrik V of England challenged the French Prince Karl in a noble duel about the French throne. When Karl does not respond the battle became a fact. This battle became the bloodiest ever. Towards the end of the battle, when the French troops fled – but return in a surprise attack, which wasn’t normal behavior, angered King Henrik who replied by ordering all captured Knights to be executed. As knights only killed in honor, this also created internal problems. The Knights were executed, which once and for all placed honor outside the battlefield. The honorable knights moved into politics instead and left the battlefields to become a bloody place thru history up to the end of World War II and the Geneva Convention, which finally restored honor to the battlefields. The Noble Knights were back in a modern form.

Is There Modern Nobility?

Is there modern Nobility? If so, who possess it? I say it is and it’s still based on the same old values. The old families still exists, trying to figure out how to use their heritage. Life is different in our modern world and their part isn’t that obvious. But I predict a bright future were Nobility will come into light again. But, to be able to get there, the Nobles of today have to accept new paths into their “locked” world.

Let’s take a look at the peak of battlefields of today, which in my opinion has moved into economics. Primitive warfare still exists, but is of subordinate importance compared to world economy. I myself have had the privilege of being both a board director and a CEO during the IT-boom era. During that time I’ve experienced what I would define as our modern knights of honor. The often large amounts of money involved in mergers, acquisitions, bonus wages etc brings the old values into light and it also picture one of the most discussed subjects in media today.

For the wide masses, these high figures are so unreachable that they per definition become related to bad behavior. Who can possible be worthy of such amount of money? Seeing this from the inside, without reaching the money myself, did give me valuable perspectives of both fronts in “the war”. As money brings freedom in many ways of course there are those who are driven with greed for money or/and freedom as their core force. In these cases I align with everyone else who do not se them as worthy of such amounts of money. But on the other hand, there are those who help others to realize ideas, visions and plans and are driven by the joy of their work. For them, the amount of money or freedom is irrelevant and is just seen as a needful resource on the path. Companies which these ones are involved in are most often aligned with detailed core values that put nature, humanity and mutual respect before money earnings. These are the ones if any that I would define was the modern nobles of honor. Believe me; these ones are worthy every penny in the same manner as the old nobles were during the time when society needed such values, honor and order to survive. Examples of such, from my own country (Sweden), are families such as the Kamprad’s, Rausing’s and the Wallenberg’s.

While the first two families are active at the innovation market, the Wallenberg’s focus their business onto economics, which serves as the peak of the modern battleground according to me. Companies on the economic market face harder intellectual competition as they do not possess “patents” as weapons. The weapons on this market instead are made up of personal networks which according to me are the main reason why we in general see a lot higher bonus wages there. The high bonus wages in these personal networks are used to extend the personal network by attracting new intellectuals, build new companies and ultimately to gain market shares.

Filtering

In our modern society, we are all responsible for ourselves. Our minds response to this is to put up a guard and begin to explain the society as the problem, as it does not supply information regarding what’s expected from us. This is our society of today. You are on your own. It’s up to you to seek answers to your own questions and problems. Help exists, but if you do not know what to look for, life itself may become a problem and when if it does, you may fell into being one of those who, without knowing it, works for a restart of the “repeating history”. It’s important that you learn to filter the world, so that you do not need to process everything. Stick to the things you like and that you see a future in. Align yourself with others that share your values and try to complement each others instead of being experts on the same matters. No one is expert on everything, but one can be expert in attracting experts, which gets as close to being the expert on everything as you can get. If you still think of the world as to complex and hostile, I you suggest that you also should try to filter the world using rational methods, which I think you, do not if this is the case. I will now move over to the more irrational part of the dossier. If you are religious, I must remind you about the terms in the beginning…

Intelligent Design / Creationism

When irrational minds try to be rational regarding irrational matters, things get complicated. The discussions about Intelligent Design and Creationism are good examples. I can only make up two reasons why this has grown big lately. Either someone really is trying to merge irrational with rational reasoning which could be compared with my own parts about “the Light” later in this dossier or it may be a well planned attack against the Church using the old strategy of “divide and conquer”. The latter could be either of greed as there are a lot of money involved in Church activities or just a plain and simple war attack against the Church.

First let’s sort out what “Creationism” is. Creationism is actually just another of all of these –ism’s, were those who have a new view of something need to categorize themselves to be noticed. If I say that I believe the universe was created by rubbing coconuts against each others, I would be a Creationist per definition. So if you get the picture, Creationists are those who have a certain idea about how everything was created. And of course there are many different ideas about the creation. Some are good and some bad. Generally the good ones are those who are based of some sort of scientific research.

What unites them all is that none is true. Well, at least we can not be 100% sure. Therefore, we have to judge good from bad ourselves. Generally scientists do not call them selves Creationists even if they would have an alternative idea about how the world was created. Why not? Well, they do not have to. Going back to basic rules of definition; only those who need to be heard, need to be defined. Scientist’s ideas have its fundaments in tests and Creationists have their fundaments in beliefs. Beliefs need continuous marketing to survive. Even if you say that 80-90% of the world’s population is religious, it does not prove there is a God. It may seem likely, but if no proofs can be presented, you should take a look at the subject from the opposite angle: If 80-90% of the world can’t prove that there is a God then God most likely do not exist.

So what about the talk about “Intelligent Design”? Well, intelligent design is one of the ideas regarding the creation of everything. Those who believe in intelligent design believe there must have been an intelligent source of some kind involved in the moment of creation. If they would win this battle and get “Intelligent Design” accepted as an alternative to Darwin’s ideas, then I guess history just will have to repeat itself another time to get it right next time. Back to the essence of the Intelligent design creationism. Well, first - there was no intelligence involved in the moment of creation, because intelligence is based on abstract thinking and choice. In the moment of creation there was nothing to be abstract about and there was no choice to be made. Creating something from nothing was not and could not have been a choice.

It’s fundamental!

However, all Creationists who believe in intelligent design do not need to drop all of their ideas. They easily could hook onto my edited Genesis (later in the dossier) and class it as their intelligent design. They can focus on the “Light” as the source of everything and a moment of creation that was initiated from nothing. No intelligence, no moral, no ethics, no feelings, etc – only nothing. If you understand that changes has been the constant ever since the creation and that it is the light who has brought us to be who we are today - then you can define light as God if you want. If you think of it as a part of everything, you hopefully will understand that both you and I share the same beliefs with the only difference; you are religious. Thinking further, you will again hopefully understand that God, religion and the books are only words and texts. It’s fundamental: we’re all equal, no matter what we believe!

Is God “Light” Personalized?

During my studies of human faith and religion in general I found one key component that create a fundamental boarder between irrational faith, such as religious faith and rational faith, such as faith in science. This component serves as the dividing border of humanity, as I see it, and even if individuals with mentality on one side of this boarder fully respect individuals on the other side, it’s the border itself which never will fully respect either side. I’m talking about “God”, “Heaven” and what he, she or it really is. As long as this question can’t be answered in a rational way, we can’t make any real progress in over bridging the border. What if I told you that there may be a solution to this problem. Well, first you have to identify it as a problem, which mean that you have to be on the peak of inner understanding on both sides to identify it as maybe the greatest problem of mankind. Otherwise, you will probably just reject this possibility.

Let’s Imagine that those profound individuals who created the Bible by merging old texts and hearsay, failed to interpret one fundamental part of Genesis which led to this boarder of faith. If they did, how should it possibly have been written? Well, that is as hard and mind-bending as it should be. But let’s make a try. We have nothing to loose and a mankind united faith to win if we are lucky. Below is my own alternative version of Genesis 1:1 – 1:5.

Alternative Genesis 1:1–1:5 in the Bible

(1:1) In the beginning there was nothing but darkness and God. (1:2) God said: - “In this endless existence of darkness, let changes be the constant and in the purpose of my values, let me be the light”. (1:3) Gods will made darkness overwhelmed by light and the changing contrasts formed matter. (1:4) God studied the changes with great enthusiasm as darkness changed into a universe of matter. (1:5) God looked upon a formed mass of matter, “Earth”, and as he did, the morning of the first day was born.

Understanding Is the Key

OK, what have we solved with this little change. Well, for a start, If God is the light which initiated everything; even scientists will be able to have faith in “God”. The same scientists can today create matter using high levels of energy. Well, even in this case, if God is the energy itself (source of light) and “understanding” is a part of the light, then one could say that it really is God who creates matter.

Understanding a part of the Light? Well, take a deep think about how we use and refer to the word “Light”. Individuals with great knowledge and understanding are often referred to as enlightened on both sides of the border. Education itself very often refers to itself as enlightening. The enlightenment period in history was about increasing understanding. Many individuals, who have been on the edge of death, refer to the moment as a journey towards the Light (back to the source?). Science agrees on the fact that it is the light that brings life to our planet. We use Light to guide us (Lighthouses) and we need light to be able to study and educate. Light, Light, Light... Everywhere there are references to the Light. My little change of Genesis 1:1 – 1:5 would break the boarder mentioned above and we all could agree on the existence of God as light itself. And if God is the light, then we all is a part of God. This will of course re-angle some religious stands. However, it does not have to mean that the “Kingdom of heaven” would not exist. In fact, it would be easier to refer to someone as being the closes individual to God (The Pope?). This individual most likely would be the most enlightened individual in all areas of understanding. The people who serves and follows him would be the most interested in understanding of life, mankind, nature and the light itself.

One normally says: - “Understanding is the basic source of forgiveness”. Even this would mean that it actually is God who forgives when; people forgive each others. OK, one actually can go on for hours, days, years and probably a lifetime thinking of what the Light actually is. Even if scientists can explain how light works, they have no idea about why light exists. This is the most fundamental part of humanity itself, which again unite both sides of the boarder.

The Constant

In my version of Genesis, God mentioned the constant “Change”. It can be hard to understand why a constant must exist, but if you take time and think about things that possibly could serve as constants, you will find out that Changes is the most suitable. And by applying “Change” as constant, we can assure that everything is changed by time, which also is one of the great concerns of mankind. Time itself is a part of Change, as otherwise changes can’t appear, but I’m not convinced that time uses the same pattern everywhere in Universe. As God made changes inevitable, understanding has to evolve with it, or else the both values and purposes of mankind will emerge into the type of conflicts that we can identify in our world today.

Purpose of Values

What is the purpose of life? Well, the answer to that question also changes. Before life existed, the purpose of life was composed by just one thing: - “Life itself”. And in the beginning of life, the answer to the purpose of life almost only consisted in just staying alive. However as life changed purpose also changed. Today it’s impossible to answer this so called “Eternal question” with a simple answer, without walking over the feet’s of all philosophers thru history. Well, at this point you have understandings about so much, that you most likely also would understand that I won’t leave this question open either. My own research regarding this came up with the exact same answer as Douglas Adams did in his book “The Hitchhikers guide to the Universe”, which was: “42”. Could be hard to understand how this is possible, but by reading his book or talking to those who have, you will get a better understanding about the Eternal question and its relation to life itself.

Back to my edit of the Bible; My Genesis chapter relate Gods values to the purpose. Which of course mean that each living species purpose of life is composed by its own values of life? Blarrph! Now we’re up at the very top of understanding itself. So if purpose is made up of values, what form the values?

OK, let’s take it slow: - “Values ... are ... created ... by ... understanding”. And as we already have learned; - “Understanding is composed and evolved by the species themselves interacting with the environment around them”. The light again... One thereby can summarize everything by saying: - “The purpose of life is made up by no one else but God”. Understanding everything up to this point, one can also draw an inevitable conclusion by adding: - “…and God was created by the Light” – meaning that at some point in history mankind’s evolved understanding (Light) realized that a untouchable force was needed, possible to stabilize and unite society with surviving as the core fundamental purpose. By time this force, this creation, this mastermind tool, grew as its only measurable threat was other creations like it. Following the inevitable pattern of evolution, the stronger creation survived. Today the world’s greatest religions (Islam, Judaism and Christianity) share the same God. Even if they have different views of things regarding faith, they stand virtually united against the opposing rational faith – which I would summarize as being the church and state separated nation-state movement who have, in secrecy, evolved beside the great religions ever since this mastermind tool was first used. Is it possible to merge both sides of the boarder of mankind’s faith? Well, don’t ask me. But if you do, I would answer yes. I definitely would like to go to Church with my own faith, but only if the Church respected me and my values. From my point of view, we all have faith in the same source; “understanding”.

Basic Value: Equal Respect

Treat each others with “equal respect” have been mentioned by many profound individuals throughout history, but did they really understand the purpose of the words? In most cases its religious leaders who create the border of faith, which in fact can and probably must be seen as the greatest action of no equal respect. Many holy texts contain stuff that is in direct conflict with the ideals of equal respect which on the other hand in many cases serves as the basic ideal of the text itself. Holy texts are not really my area of knowledge, but if they along with everything else aren’t evolved along with the inevitable constant, they most likely will serve their readers with reversed understanding. Instead of being enlightened, they instead will learn to live in the shadows of understanding, not mentally prepared for life itself. Life will become a constant battle against the evolved humanity and the inevitable constant instead of a life along with all others species in the world. A good example regarding respect is the argumentation against for example homosexuality, which seems to be popular at the moment. Well, if one uses the Bible as argument against homosexuality, I wonder why we haven’t heard similar arguments regarding these parts in the bible:

The above lines from the bible are just a few of countless numbers of old ideals. Let’s face it - You can’t use some parts of the bible just because it suit ones agenda. Therefore it’s the agenda itself witch is interesting. Why being hostile against homosexuality for example? Could it be as simple as trying to keep a certain level of moral and ethics in society by using the bible as a tool? Well, if one would try to accept that, one can possibly say that we all, religious or not, are doing the same using different tools with different success. It would be interesting to do a test about which side of the border that produces highest levels of moral and ethics in society. My guess is that religions of today in many cases do not really produce high moral or ethics. They think they do but they may just create contrast shields around their members which limit personal abilities in life and instead forms a frontier in a holy war of moral and ethics. An example of this is the way that women are covering their bodies and face in the Muslim world. The main reason as far as I understand is to make men less tempted to interact with them. Who can possibly related this to an act of equal respect? I say that it’s more likely that such a shield just stops the mental evolution of men’s relation to women. Wouldn’t it be better if men learnt how to handle their own feelings concerning women’s, so that both could live life on equal basis?

Religious and Non-Religious Commons

Regarding the above, it must have become obvious that there are a number of commons between religious and none religious views of life. Even if both sides will argue about so many differences, could it be possible that the arguments are just based different interpretations of our common history. If both sides would agree on the fundamental truth that “God” is the “Light”, then religious leaders can begin to re-evaluate their holy texts and the scientists can rethink their own faith as they already have come up to the conclusion that energy (light) is the source of everything. This would make even an atheist a believer. Not likely in a personalized “God” with values written in a holy book, but in the source itself. There shouldn’t be any obvious conflict if religious leaders kept personalizing “God” with values and purposes. However, they must adapt to the understanding that everyone, even the greatest sinner is a creation of God. I’m fully convinced that we, mankind, need moral and ethic guidance, but if religious leaders are interested in shoulder this task, they also must shoulder the burden to unite mankind even under the most difficult circumstances.

One of these difficult scenarios is to understand that religious leaders cannot judge mankind based on holy texts written based on values that do not exist anymore. We must understand that God gave Moses the Ten Commandments to make him realize the importance of rights and responsibilities. In the same way Moses needed his ten commandments, ruler Hammurabi of Egypt needed his 282 laws around 1750 BC, which brought order to the people. One can compare this with founding constitutions, laws and regulations. All the profound, educated and understanding individuals involved when creating such, are made up by generations of inherited understanding (Light/God). To use religion against for example homosexuality may have been accepted in history. However, in our modern world were law and order has evolved with mankind’s understanding this can’t be accepted. As one understands that it is an enormous task to over bridge the gaps of mankind’s values, one also would understand that who else but the religious leaders would serve as the perfect part for this task. I can foresee that religions as we see them today will die out. Who can build faith in religious leaders that can’t interact with mankind without creating conflicts? I don’t mean that the old holy books should be burned. I mean that they should be used more wisely and new books need to be written.

…Or Is “Heaven” the Light?

Prophet Muhammad of Islam

Let’s begin with Islam? Well, we now that Islam share the view of The One God (Allah) with both Christianity and Judaism. But instead of claiming a throne of its own, Islam bases its faith upon enlightenment and especially on the one individual which is seen as the last of the great prophets, Muhammad. The thing that does Islam extra interesting is that prophet Muhammad is seen as an ordinary, but highly enlightened, human. So, following the ideas of Muhammad and his Islam mean more focus on how to be a good human of high moral and ethics than having faith in the supernatural, which in Judaism is of higher importance and in Christianity vital.

With this understanding in mind it would be rather simple to understand why Muslims did react as they did when the Danish Newspaper, Jyllands-posten, published the cartoons of Muhammad in September, 2005. For Muslims, this was a hit against their life, not their faith. A counterstrike of the same magnitude would be to point out that in western democracies, money rules – not people, free speech or freedom itself. But, it’s not possible to parse such a message to the western masses, as too few are interested in hearing it. Why? Well, understanding the human mind will give the simple answer: for the time being, they are happy with the situation concerning the matter, which make other things more prioritized. If having the tools of so called “False flag” activities in mind, one also could wonder if the events regarding the pictures of Muhammad as well as the pictures of tortured terrorists are of such type. In divide and conquer tactics, events that increase irrational behavior on the opposing side is normal.

Back to Muhammad - In the 6th century after years of successful trading, faith in the Arabic world was fragmented into polytheism, which means faith in many different gods. To be able to stand against the growing western threat of Christianity and Judaism who both claimed there was only one God, something had to be done. The Koran was written based on Muhammad’s 20 year interpretations of the bible which, according to the legend, was a commandment by the angle Gabriel. Muhammad called on people to renounce all other faiths and to submit to the will of Allah in the year 622, when he had moved to Mecca and founded the first Muslim congregation. He named his faith Islam, which means ‘submission to Allah’. Those who practice Islam became known as Muslims and the faith spread quickly through the Middle East and across North Africa were faithful people also became known as Moors.

Prophet Christ of Christianity

As all great societies, also the successful Roman Empire had one great weakness – internal stability. This weakness may, have been the answer to why Christianity was founded and became successful. The Jewish problems with Roman authorities were answered with three wars between the years 66 – 135, which included destruction of the second temple in Jerusalem and deportation of the Jews. These events opened the door for the minor religion of Christianity to gain market. Prophet Jesus (Christ) or possibly even someone else came up with the brilliant idea of proclaiming that he (Jesus) was the biblical Messiah and the son of God, living on earth.

“Jesus answered, ‘I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.’” — John 14:6

With the New Testament - which is made up of four ancient biographies of Jesus (called Gospels), a history of the early Christians (the book of Acts), early letters (epistles) written by Christian leaders, and Christian prophecies (the Apocalypse, also called the book of Revelation) – the Christians claimed control of the only path to God. Thereby they also did put themselves onto the religious throne, which of course was in direct conflict with the Jews. By stealing the Jewish monopolistic control access to Heaven and The One God, Christianity became popular among the faith seekers. As Christianity grew, history tells about growing conflicts with the Roman authorities. Towards the end of the Roman Empire one could define Christianity as the winner, if there was an internal fight about leadership. However, leading a great society isn’t easy and as the Roman strength weakened, the outside threats grew stronger and eventually conquered the Roman Empire. After previous Emperors had failed to wipe out the Christians, Emperor Constantine instead decided to merge Christianity with the Roman Sun worshipping. He did that thru introducing the Trinity into Christianity, which symbol still today is the cross with a ring or sun behind. And as you already know, the Roman Emperor Constantine the Great, tired of Christianity, packed his elite and moved to Turkey and founded Constantinople.

Could Christianity have been founded to gain control using access to Heaven as tool? Well, the “gospel of Judas” uncovered in Egypt that recently has been translated contains the following interesting words: “The secret account of the revelation that Jesus spoke in conversation with Judas Iscariot: In a key passage Jesus tells Judas, ‘You will exceed all of them, for you will sacrifice the man that clothes me. Step away from the others and I shall tell you the mysteries of the kingdom”. If these gospels are true, then this would mean that Jesus planned his own martyrdom, which itself is interesting. If not, what if Jesus just was a prophet among others and got into trouble with both Romans and the Jews and later the stories about him have been dictated just like this one – to become a tool in the hands of others.

God of Judaism

As a Hebrew exile in Babylon prophet Daniel is believed to have brought Heaven into Judaism influenced by Cyrus the Great, King of Persia. Daniels words by time evolved into the scrolls of Torah (Jewish Bible) and as the Hebrews (The Jews) did put one God (The One God) as the God of Heaven, they dared to challenge most existing faiths. This proved to be the winning solution as the Bible by time became The Bible, so to speak. So, thereby we understand that the Jews, who claimed The One God and bundled it with ancient ideas of Heaven, of course, as long as The One God is accepted, have put themselves onto a religious throne – which of course caused conflicts.

Heaven of Zoroastrianism

The great worshipper of Zoroastrianism Cyrus the Great, mentioned above, is still being cited in modern times. In year 2003 the Nobel Peace Prize winner Shirin Ebadi said:

“I am an Iranian. A descendant of Cyrus the Great. The very emperor who proclaimed at the pinnacle of power 2500 years ago that ‘…he would not reign over the people if they did not wish it.’ And [he] promised not to force any person to change his religion and faith and guaranteed freedom for all. The Charter of Cyrus the Great is one of the most important documents that should be studied in the history of human rights.” — Shirin Ebadi, 2003

So the Great Cyrus worshipped ‘Zoroastrianism’, what’s that? Well, in ancient history faith in many different Gods was common, but sometime between 18th and 11th century BC, an ‘Aryan’ Iranian prophet named Zoroaster or more correctly, Zarathustra is believed to have founded the basics of what today is commonly known as “Heaven”. Zoroastrianism has its roots in a social, political, and religious schism of the Bactrian Iranians from the primitive Aryans. This idea of Heaven as a place were human souls were connected with the supernatural, of course became of great value in a world were people worshipped many different Gods. By defining Heaven he gained control over a place in mind transparent to all Gods and thereby he reserved his place in history as one of to the most important religious prophets.

Interesting knowledge:

There are few if any real proofs from this ancient times, so trying to figure out the reality behind texts and artifacts must be a fascinating job, especially when great individuals like Zoroaster has influenced afterlife as far as up to our present modern times and still is by many seen as the source of structured religious beliefs.

Prophet Gautama of Buddhism

In Buddhism, the “Noble Eightfold Path” is called the “Arya Astangika Marga” and the “Four Noble Truths” are called the “Arya-Satya”. These are the two most fundamental parts of Buddhism and are clearly related to the ancient Aryan kings mentioned earlier.

The Noble Eightfold Path:

The Four Noble Truths:

So what is Buddhism? Well, building on the concepts of Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, like Islam, is more focused on living than on the worshipping. The key component in Buddhism is Enlightenment. But, Enlightenment from a Buddhist point of view isn’t the same understanding that I have been talking about in the Dossier. Buddhist Enlightenment is more about limiting the mind and the life to a sort of null status, to be able to listen to soul’s inner voice. Some say Buddhism isn’t a religion as its more about inner peace and stability, but I disagree. Buddhism clearly is put together to act as an organized religion. The basics of Buddhism was put together mid to late 6th century BC by the Aryan King Suddhodana’s son Siddhartha Gautama. More known as the Buddha (“Awakened One” or “Enlightened One”, from the root: √budh, "to awaken"), he experienced the Great Enlightenment while meditating under a Bodhi tree for seven weeks in Bihar, India. His experiences then were passed by oral tradition and about four hundred years later the ‘holy works’ of Buddhism, Tripitaka, was written down. The title ‘Buddha’ is used in Buddhism for anyone who has discovered enlightenment (Bodhi) and Siddhartha Gautama is not considered to be the first or the last Buddha. As son of a king, Siddhartha Gautama, the Buddha, did not claim any divine status for himself, nor did he assert that he was inspired by any god. He claimed to be a teacher to guide those who chose to listen. This of course made great impression of people and Buddhism grew quickly.

Kabbalah of Modern Judaism

The so called "soul" of the Torah (Jewish Bible), the Kabbalah, is a religious mystical system that claims insight into divine nature. As a creation of the medieval 13th century, this so called “understanding” has emerged as a revelation to elect saints from a remote past and is preserved only by a privileged few according to the Jewish tradition. It’s even more complicated as the followers of Kabbalah seem divided into two fractions. One who refers to it as a type of inner spiritual voice who helps them to decipher the world and a second who claim it’s an almost “scientific” explanation of how the world works.

I think the Kabbalah is quite interesting, but also scary. It picks up were other religions get lost between irrational and rational meaning. A sort of modern bible created for those who have come to a level of enlightenment were they doubt irrational faith and search for rational meaning to the existential questions of mankind. The reason why I find it scary is because it may be used as a camouflage for those who feel it’s easier to tell they are kabbalahists instead of spiritual atheists, because the latter often offend people in our present world and isn’t as fancy. I also think it’s easy that this type of advanced guidance will put oneself onto a throne based more on knowledge than understanding. Meaning: It’s as easy to draw complex map of nothing as it is to read it. Complexity then talks to the intellect and instead of being turned over to understanding, it manufacture truths. I my opinion it could be defined as a self justified belief system were the complexity itself fuzzy rational logic.

The Great Architect of Freemasonry

“Because truth lies beyond the reach of the intellect, we can't use words for it.” — From Mahábhârata, a holy Indian script

These thoughtful Indian words say a lot more about mankind than truths, faiths or beliefs. In the same way all religions have been initiated since the dawn of mankind, also Freemasonry should be counted as one of them. My own conclusion is that Freemasonry is a merger of those who have come to the conclusion that the church and the state needs to be separated as well as the state needs to be transparently integrated with the whole society, including religious parts. I would date the merging origin of modern Freemasonry to between 10th and 14th century as a direct response to the increased threat and control from the Roman Catholic Church.

Emperor, Kings, Nobles and Freemasonry

The word “Aryan” is English and derives from the ancient languages of Indian Vedic Sanskrit and Iranian Avestan. Aryan is also related to the word "aristocracy", and referred to Indo-Iranian holy Kings and holy warriors and thus "nobles". It could be interesting to know that the Roman historian Gaius Cornelius Tacitus work: “De origine et situ Germanorum” also called “Germania” dated year 98, tell about the Germanic tribes, who are sons of the ancient Aryan king named “Manno” or “Mannus”. You probably didn’t know it, but these are some of our modern words who derive from Manno: Man, Mankind, Management, Manual, Manuscript, Human, Humanity and Humanism. If that isn’t enough, I can add that “Manno” even is found in the Viking Age rune alphabet as the rune “Mannaz” which represent “Man” and is very similar to “M”. You see it tagged on the foundation of the statue of liberty on the frontpage of this dossier. Some scholars assert that this genealogy would make Manno the first civilized human being similar to the moral dilemmas of the biblical Adam. And did you know it? Even the Bible mentions runes. To add some extra spice to the subject of Aryan Manno, I will also tell you that most of the royal families of Europe and Russia consider themselves to be descendants of… Yes, you guessed right: The Aryan king “Manno”.

The merger of Germanic Tribe Nobility and Roman Empire Aristocracy, which began in 4th – 5th century, formed a new European Nobility. Status, wealth and fancy titles were extended with land and troop ownership in the medieval period. Roman Emperors gave blessing to local landlords/kings, who needed their nobles to run the kingdom as well as maintain prestige and power. Even if considered hereditary leaders, appointed by kings, wealth was the main factor when acquiring a Noble membership. As describes in the earlier chapter about Freemasonry, this period in time demanded secured living for wealthy individuals. This created a need for castles, fortresses and well designed houses. The upper class relation with builders and constructers was established and those who could afford made their relations with the traveling stonemasons, who by time become known as the Freemasons. Religion as a method of control grew and those who opposed wills and demands of the Emperor and allied kings faced conflicts from the neighbors. This situation evolved into the understanding that the ability to possess and preserve secrets was essential to survive – as agents of the Emperor and his allies were everywhere. An example of this is the so called “The Folkunga Revolt” in Sweden, 1229.

The early Freemasons had a solution for this and by time it evolved into modern Freemasonry. I thereby create a direct relation between Royalty, Nobility and Freemasonry, were the need of skillful, competent and popular Elite was obvious to preserve a strong and stable State or kingdom. The Noble Freemasonry shouldered the responsibility to ensure this by relate themselves with the fundaments of faith itself. The creation of the “The great architect” was a direct solution to this and a relation all the way back to the life of Zoroaster was established, using Nobility as a true source.

Quotes:

However, the religion of Freemasonry is not about worshipping the “the Great Architect”, it’s about being transparent to Gods and to have faith in the inevitable path to unification, the Society, which for them is based on identifying and promoting skillful and competent individuals – Freemason or not. Within Freemasonry this it’s more than a religion, it’s the Inevitable. Its way of living that takes hold on the essence in the truthful Indian words mentioned in this chapters beginning. This may answer the questions of why so many priests of all kinds of religions have chosen to be Freemasons and also why there is so much Freemasonic alike activity around universities all over the world and also why it has become so successful and secret.

“One may draw from the study of history the lesson that the age of princes is over… For two hundred years we have been watching the decomposition of this system. The princely houses have retained nothing but their pretensions. With these they traffic, and by these they live… If one day we had time to waste, it would be a curious study, that of these princely families, to see how they maintained themselves in power, despite their internal struggles. Their wars always had the most exalted motives. In reality, it was always a question of odd patches of land, whose possession was bitterly disputed. How much Europe has had to suffer, for eight hundred years, from these practices – and, especially and above all, Germany!” — Adolf Hitler

We know that the Hitler disliked both Royalties and Freemasons, but what do we know of the secret planning that eventually led to his fall? Among many interesting events, did you for example know that the “D-Day” invasion of Normandy, France was synchronized with a Red Army’s attack against Karelia, southern Finland?

As the war faded out, one can wonder if it isn’t possible that the Swedish crown prince Gustav Adolf, the father of today’s king of Sweden and the one who by many is referred to as a Nazi-friendly during world war II, actually was murdered at the mysterious plane crash in January 26 1947 – as a (freemason?) act to ensure that he would never become the future king that he was supposed to.

If you really thought the allied invasion of Germany with all it’s logistics was something that made world war II unique then, you should know this: In 1627 Gustav II Adolf, King of Sweden and called the "Lion of the North", had compared the revived Roman Catholic Church to the sea: "as one wave follows another in the sea, so the Papal deluge is approaching our shores.". Gustav organized the strongest allied army of the early seventeenth century, courageously led his forces from the front, and earned the title of the "Father of Modern Warfare" because of his innovative skills in the tactical integration of infantry, cavalry, artillery, and logistics. Gustav’s own motivation: “The house of Habsburgs has never ceased aims of world domination. The war between us and Emperor is inevitable, as he seek to exterminate all that is not of his religion. If we would sail over the sea and invade on their lands, we most likely would be joined by many Protestants in the war.”

The invasion and the merge of allies was a success and in the summer of 1632, Gustav Adolf released his plans for Germany, which included two Protestant leagues - the Corpus Bellicum (which would be responsible for military affairs) and the Corpus Evangelicorum (which would run the civil administration). The purpose was to establish a structure that would secure the future of Protestants in Germany. As he was more interested in Sweden, he left locals to decide about the head of the Protestant Empire.

Gustav did also acknowledge the “New World” (Modern USA) as a potential threat. The distant “New World” would leave an enemy alone to grow its potentials in secrecy, which he could not tolerate. On his orders two ships (“Gripen” and “Kalmar Nyckel”) was assigned to establish the first settlement “New Sweden” in Delaware, USA – March 1638 – to protect the Swedish interests in the New world.

The AFP News Agency published a press relrease 4th of April 2006 with this headline: “George W Bush has Swedish ancestry”. Guess what? Researchers have traced the Bush family ancestry through 10 generations to the 17th century arriving in the colony of New Sweden in Delaware 1639-1640. This, my friend, brings us back to the light, the inevitable understanding of mankind, and its anomalities. Generally known is that Dan Brown built his successful story, “The Da Vinci Code”, on a metaphor were the “Holy Grail” is supposed to be the so called “Bloodline” of Christ. This is a good beginning as it raises the public eyes over the horizon of control and opens the door to an otherwise locked history of truth.

“History is written by the Winners.”

I will go one step further and even ditch Christ completely from the “Holy Grail” metaphor. My conclusion is that, based on their interactions with all kinds of different cultures and religions, the Templar Knights and possible others come to understand that Christ is just an anomy of mankind and that it’s the understanding, the light, which is important. I suggest that the “Holy Grail” is a metaphor that was put in to its context just because it then would carry itself forward in history, protected by its opponents, without them being able to interpret it correctly. The Christian myths tell about Joseph of Arimathea who used the Grail to catch Christ's blood while interring him and then took the object to Britain, where he founded a line of guardians to keep it safe. From my own interpretation, the metaphor possibly created in Britain, still works if the blood is the metaphor of light, the understanding of Christ, and the grail is the metaphor of the line of guardians (the Christians). This may also combine the Christian lore with the Celtic myth of a cauldron endowed with special powers, which I mean may have been a line of Nobles/Knights who eventually were involved in building the Roslyn Chapel. The special powers were of course this understanding, the light, which gave them a powerful tool to unite people transparently to different kinds of faiths and also boosted the gust in battles. It’s a perfect cover for the “miraculous powers” that puzzles Christian mythology, which I would say contains the light of humanity. Proofs of such a cover-up, would say much about irrational faith. I think it’s possible that the secrets of the Roslyn Chapel display this or alike, but to interpret it correctly, one have to use some secret key that unlocks it. To be able to preserve a secret of such dignity, I would even believe that the highest grades of Freemasonry do not know what’s hidden. They may be able to build their own idea about it during their path upwards in grades. The highest Grand Masters may have an instruction which does not allow this key to be used before some signs in the general society has been identified, which would serve as an indicator that mankind was ready for the truth about our history.

Free Mind of Understanding

“The religion of the future will be a cosmic religion. It should transcend a personal God and avoid dogmas and theology. Covering both the natural and the spiritual, it should be based on a religious sense arising from the experience of all things, natural and spiritual as a meaningful unity. If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs, it would be Buddhism.” — Albert Einstein

Einstein sure had great problems to understand the irrational faiths of mankind. Albert’s quote above brings vital thoughts into light and in the same time it marks his mistake. He mentions a path, Buddhism, and by doing this he violate his own judgment in the statement regarding “avoid dogmas and theology”. Even Buddhism, which probably is the most transparent “religion” that exists today still, is bound to its own dogmas. My conclusion is that a future “cosmic religion” will be about NOT defining how to worship, spiritually practice or to think right. It will be about sharing joy, sympathy, affinity, love and all other things which make life worth living, but without defining a correct way. This “cosmic religion”, which would be nameless, will understand that equally shared control is a part of life and should not be misinterpreted as something related to autocratic faith, beliefs or spiritual guidance which could bring extra powers to the few. I can imagine a future society were Churches and Priests still will exists, but would act as the harmonics of society with a lot higher rank and respect than today. They would be the main uniting force of mankind, which makes us all feel as we are one big family. Imagine what such a great family would be able to accomplish...

Sin of Light

Hmmm, as I up to now have created an equal sign between Freemasonry and the protection of Light, I also have opened the door for the famous Biblical character, Lucifer. If I do not handle this situation, all my work just has given the Biblical faith more arguments against my own conclusions. This is of course, according to me, one of the fundaments of why religions tend to dislike Freemasonry, science and mankind’s ability to reason.

Who Was Lucifer?

First let’s try think rational about the creation named Lucifer. Let go of all your negative thoughts about him, as he was according to the Bible, Ezekiel 28:15, was created with a free will and was perfect in all his ways. Lucifer was Gods anointed cherub, seraph and the highest rank archangel, who were given the divine purpose to protect the Light. Hang on, stop, wait, rewind. Let’s change “protect the light” to “guide of light”, as it’s obvious that light itself can’t be protected. Its nature comes with existence and thereby becomes nature itself. Here, I want to make a clear difference between protecting the ability to preserve and evolve the light and guiding the light. Were God is the light, understanding personified, Lucifer then would be his guide, reason personified. If one think rational about this, were Gods is the Light, one would most likely come to the conclusion that God made Lucifer his personal guide or advisor. The name Lucifer derives from lux (light; genitive lucis) and fero (Latin for to bear, to bring) meaning “bear or bring light”, which also prove the conclusion above. Lucifer can also be related to lu- (Light) and cipher (zero, none) which also can explain why western civilization feared the definition of nothing (zero) in history (mentioned earlier).

Why Did God Throw Lucifer Out of Heaven?

The Bible, Ezekiel 28:17, tells us that Lucifer perverted his power and wanted to exalt himself above God rather than "just" being an Angel of God. Iniquity was found in him, but was not put there by God. He corrupted the wisdom by reason of his brightness. We understand that “his brightness” is equal to his understanding and that it also is a creation of God, which he was, so everything works up to now. But what is “wisdom”? Well, “wisdom” is per definition the ability to make correct judgments and decisions based on the understanding of the present situation. Remember and relate this to communication and cognitive empathy, which I have mentioned earlier. So, what we are looking for is the answer to why Lucifer made the mistake and “Exalt himself above God”. What does this mean? If, God is light and understanding, then “exalt over” must mean that he, as Gods guide and advisor, saw himself as greater than God, the light and understanding – which of course also serve as the reason why his wisdom was corrupted. It’s obvious that understanding and reason have problems to co-operate and this is exactly what this whole dossier is about. Understanding needs control and reason needs its freedom to be able to gain understanding. The two must go hand-in-hand on equal terms, read wisdom, to work together.

But Why Did Lucifer Do Wrong?

Now we are up head against the 7 sins, which again are these:

According to my own understanding of behavior in general it most likely was an anomos act that led Lucifer into his Sin, Pride, judged by God. A rational mind would of course agree that the one who wrote these Biblical words possessed a large amount of understanding of human behavior. However, understanding this also would lead to understanding that the creation of Churches and holy texts may be a similar act as the one of Lucifer. Of course the holy texts were written to guide from a present time viewpoint and not to control, which again point out the difference between laws and faith and eventually the separation between state and church. So my conclusions regarding Lucifer, as the sinful archangel, are that God judged him correctly based on Biblical terms in the kingdom of heaven. However, if he would have been a human living in our society, then God must be considered even greater than the Bible, as he, God, the light, understanding personified, includes all mankind and therefore should be judged on such terms - which would be according to the state law. Therefore I would conclude that Freemasonry in its form of protecting the ability to preserve and evolve understanding, as I have learnt to understand it, and as long as it doesn’t violate state laws, it must be considered to be comparable to Lucifer before God did throw him out of heaven.

Chapter Conclusion

We have all heard it a trillion times; - “The pen is mightier than the sword” and I hope that this Chapter has put you deeper into its meaning. However, the pen is worthless without a context of words which is the product of understanding combined with the talent to write along with a purpose and the determination to deliver.

The Chaordic World of Mankind

The repeating history tells us about how chaos evolves into order and collapse. The slippery balance between Chaos and Order supply Humanity with needful experiences on the anomal path into eternity. Its how the experiences are used that judge if the history will need another turn to be able to balance the equation. I see only two paths to balance the equation of mankind. The first and the easy one is the “Divide and conquer” path. The second path is the “Compromise” path, which is the tricky one. Both paths if ultimately successful will lead to a unified mankind, but based on what terms: his, hers, yours, mine, ours or theirs? I suggest that, in this context; “his”, “hers”, “yours” and “mine” derives from the so called “Old World Order” and “Ours” and “theirs” from the “New World Order”. From now on, we all are together! Autocracies, dictatorships and uncontrolled democracies as well as today’s church communions will fade out and eventually be replaced by the free society of unions, constitutions and a new open and transparent church with “special powers” of happiness.

Special Powers of the Holy Grail

I suggest that the “special powers” were growing seeds maintaind by the Roman Church objecting Nobles and Knights who eventually merged with the “Commonwealth” Gothic Vikings as a result of the extraordinary events in southern Finland, mastered by “Mrs. King”, Queen Margaret I, in the end of the 14th century. The heredity, the Freemasons, made up of countless numbers of anomal events are today the main and the most successful protector of the free society who still acts as the link between the grassroots and the still active Knights, Nobles & constitutional Monarchs who are the honorable mentors of today’s “tyranny free” democracies.

The Three Crowns of Mental Dictatorship

“Triregnum” (three kingdoms) is the name of the Pope’s own tiara symbolizing the threefold authority of the Supreme Pontiff: Universal Pastor (top), Universal Ecclesiastical Jurisdiction (middle) and Temporal Power (bottom). When popes were crowned, the following Latin words were used:

“Accipe thiaram tribus coronis ornatam, et scias te esse Patrem Principum et Regum, Rectorem Orbis, in terra Vicarium Salvatoris Nostri Jesu Christi, cui est honor et gloria in sæcula sæculorum.”English translation: “Receive the tiara adorned with three crowns and know that thou art Father of Princes and Kings, Ruler of the World, Vicar of Our Savior Jesus Christ on earth, to him be the honor and glory forever and ever.”

Were one and two normally symbolizes singularity and dualism, three is the widely used symbol for “the rest” which normally is captured with words such as “three and above”. By having three crowns in one tiara symbolicly speak of clear aims which also are confirmed in the coronation text: “Ruler of the World”. Isn’t it obvious that the seal of Queen Margaret I is a direct protest against the Pope in his role as ruler of the world? The crowns have symbolicly been separated from each others, but still are located on the same crest – “the United Kingdoms”. I suggest that these three separated crowns is the Royal symbol of Protestantism and that Freemasonry in its basic form is the undercover workforce to ensure that religious leadership as entity does not get the opportunity to become a tyrant again - the ultimate separation between state and the Church, so to speak.

Even if the Pope’s Triregnum hasn’t officially been used since 1968, it still is used as a prominent symbol of the Vatican. Rumours speak of the last few popes, who were not crownd with the tiara, as being Freemasons.