In most Western countries with Christian orientation, the question itself is pretty obvious. ‘Belief in God’ for a typical American would usually be accompanied by some common Christian behaviors, and since many of these are optional, it could be translated into simple everyday habits. Nothing special that can be recognized by an outsider, unless they specifically ask.

Not so for an observant Jew. The amount of strict rules enforced by Orthodox Judaism is enormous, many of which are directly related to how one is dressed, how they talk, what they eat, you name it. Hence, asking a Jewish person ‘are you religious’ – seems unnecessary. If they are, you quickly see it without asking.

So far, the minority of Israeli citizens of Jewish origins would answer ‘yes’ and be classified that way. Yet, a recent survey revealed 80% of Israeli Jews ‘believe in God’… What is the meaning of this? How can one define him or herself as ’secular’ and believe in God at the same time?

I suppose the explanation has to do with both the way we are brought up and the way our mind has evolved, but whatever the reasons are, the road from ’secular but believe in God’ to ‘religious’ is pretty clear. It is that road that poses the real danger to the future of modern Israel.

Try to criticize religion, especially the Middle-Eastern ones. Soon you’ll find yourself as the target of various accusations, which may start with ‘hatred’ and end with ‘Anti-Semitism’ and ‘Islamofobia’. Religions are not very tolerant of criticism, and that is an understatement.

The issue has two different aspects. One of them pertains especially to Orthodox Judaism. While extreme Islam simply tells you to fight the heretics, there are several ancient Jewish rules that tell you to hate them. You are explicitly told to hate those of your own people who do not follow divine orders. You are supposed to hate those who do not ‘believe in God’, and so on. In fact, since the verb ‘to hate’ is so often mentioned, it gets a whole new interpretation, more associated with behavior than with feelings.

The other aspect even looks more important to me. I have many love ones with whom I sometimes argue. Show me one person who doesn’t. When we do argue, we often do so because of some occasional ‘hatred’, so to speak, to something someone just did or said. Some of my love ones also possess certain long-lasting qualities that I specifically hate. On the other hand, there are a few people I really hate, literally. For all that, I can put my finger on specific qualities associated with them that I actually like.

To sum it all up, there is a clear distinction between people and their specific behaviors. Between the actual persons and the contents. My criticism of religions is rarely of the people themselves, it is much more of the religious contents. I hereby declare I truly hate some of these contents. There are some I also love, I admit not too many.

But please do me a favor: Don’t blame me for things I don’t do!

Perhaps the most striking attribute of a legend is to assign human-like behaviors to other “things”. These can be animals, plants, and of course silent objects (where does Bugs Bunny fit in this classification?). Some call it ‘personification’, and others would use the term ‘anthropomorphism’ (look up Google for the difference).

The most interesting usage of personification stories involves fooling around with the personification issue itself. Take Pinocchio for example: He (it?) started his (its?) way as a wooden puppet being assembled by a skilled carpenter. In the end… well, we all know what happened. Want another example? How about The Sorcerer’s Apprentice? That is a fine example of splitting one conscious mind into several. Who Framed Roger Rabbit set the standard for a mixed human-cartoon plot. And the list grows on and on.

The ancient Greek mythology, and for that matter, many ancient mythologies, made use of their own Pinocchios, building, destroying, bringing to life, and shutting down each other. Some of these mythologies really made it to the top with Pinocchio making Geppetto, as in God making man in his workshop: First version from earth, second version from a rib.

Many legends have managed to remain under the ‘legend’ tag. Some have managed to escape.

The origins of this absurd rule are not necessarily the same as its current strict interpretation. It was probably aimed at some specific prayer (not that this meaning was somewhat more justified). Still, nowadays it has evolved to forbid any male Orthodox Jew to listen to a woman sings. It’s still ok to listen to a woman talks. Yay.

One wouldn’t really care that much about religious oddities, but it seems once you try to avoid them – they chase you wherever you are. The recent huge debate in the IDF (Israeli army) is not ‘how to tackle terror’ or ‘what to do with Iran’s nuclear effort’, but rather: Are male soldiers allowed to leave official ceremonies where and when women sing? The strongest and most modern army in the middle-east is developing high-tech anti-missile defense, but is afraid of songs. Perhaps this should be the new Hammas weapon at hand – it seems more effective in driving away soldiers, than the old fashioned ballistic pipes filled with explosives.

One should also research the unclear boundaries defined by modern technologies: Is a woman’s voice still forbidden if distorted by audio-processing software? Is a man’s voice ok if made higher in pitch by the same software? What about artificial text-to-speech results? Rest assured, there will be a good religious verdict for each. God’s taste in voices cannot be left to coincidence.

Let’s take Belgium for instance: You can be a Belgian citizen, while from the ethnic point of view you may be Flemish or Walloon, or perhaps an African immigrant. From the religious point of view, you may be a Christian, or perhaps you are a Muslim. Of course you may be an atheist and enjoy a healthy set of values. All these words are different, each set reside on different axis.

The same goes for other lucky groups of people. If you’re an Arab, statistics show you are most likely to be a Muslim, but there are many Christian Arabs and those with other religions. Again there are also some lucky atheists.

However, things come to a total confusion when talking about Jews. Many people call themselves ‘Jews’ while declaring they are not religious at all. Some insist there’s no way of being Jewish unless you believe in the Jewish god, obeying his alleged commands. I’ve found out at least five very different definitions for the term:

1. The Orthodox Jewish definition is trying to be very clear: You are a Jew if your mother was a Jew, or if you so-called “converted” to Judaism in the Orthodox way. This of course is a recursive definition, because now we have to examine your mother’s Jewishness, which is essentially the same task. Not to mention some awkward situations that arise when the two parents hold different religions, which have different rules for this topic.

2. The linguistic definition determines you are “Jew” if you are a descendant of the old tribe of Judea. Hence, perhaps many of the “Cohen’s” and “Levi’s” are not Jews, as they’re known to be descendant of the old Hebrew tribe of Levi. Yet this is from their father’s side… How confusing…

3. The Nazis had another clear-but-recursive definition of what a ‘Jew’ is. It was more-or-less someone with Jewish ancestors 2 generation before. Thus someone could be a ‘Jew’ according to Hitler, but not according to the Rabbi.

4. And there is the common definition: The Jewish “people”, from the ethnic point of view. Not clearly defined, certainly has nothing to do with “religion”, but very practical. The problem? Someone can be a Jew according to this definition, while know nothing of Jewishness, have no Jewish friends whatsoever, and be a total stranger.

Personally I think the best definition is the cultural one. The Jewish culture is many things: It contains the various branches of the Jewish religion, the Hebrew language, the geographical linkage with Israel, the Jewish holidays and literature, etc. I would easily define someone as a ‘Jew’ even if he/she has Christian parents, he/she has never “converted” and not religious at all, but truly shares the same culture with me. I would not define a total stranger as a ‘Jew’ just for having a Jewish mother by some chance.

There are many words of wisdom in the Old and New Testament, as well as in the Koran and the Talmud. The Jewish Mishnaic tractate of ‘Eduyot’ says: “Your actions bring you closer, and your actions bring you further”, which simply and most wisely implies, “Judge things individually”. There are good things done by various religious people, and there are bad things performed by religious people. There are good things done by various secular people, and there are bad things carried out by secular people. If someone acts in a way that deserves criticism according to your opinion, then it’s okay to criticize that someone, whether he or she is a religious person or a secular one.

A somewhat related topic, but of a different ilk, has to do with associating the religious behavior of a group of people with having special protection from God. Religious Jews will generally tell you that it’s specifically their religious habits (especially following the Bible and keeping the Sabbath), which have kept the continuous existence of the Jewish people over the years. This follows the idea that it pays to be faithful, because it guards your community. Many Muslims will boast the fact that Islam has united them and their peoples, and will also claim divine safekeeping.

In a way, the above statements are right. A group’s tendency to live in relative isolation has always contributed to the survival of the group as a whole, with or without relation to any religion. Nevertheless, there are a few important points to note in this strange competition for celestial protection:

• Religion contributes to its own survival. There’s no wonder it works – this is what religion is built to do. A large part of religious content is tailored especially to protect the religious belief against external influences, regardless of them being true or false, good or bad.
• The survival and protection of the group is not the same as the survival and protection of the people. Many ancient nations have not survived, but their descendants live happily among us today as Muslims, Jews, Americans, French, Germans or whatever, time and again being very proud of their current people’s history.
• Furthermore, even groups and nations that have survived are generally different from their ancestors. During the years, habits and customs have changed. Some have changed slightly and others have been drastically altered. In most cases even the genes (i.e., the race) have been mixed with those of other peoples and groups.
• An old culture may wonder about its own survival and seek reasons for it. However, by definition, there will always be only those who survived – that is what survival is all about. Those who didn’t make it, for whatever reasons, are not here with us to philosophize on the matter, regardless of their original belief being more right or wrong. In other words: Where there is a finite set of nations, there must be a most ancient one. There is no reason to wonder that something that must happen has happened.
• For a group of people, being more ancient than another group does not entitle them to anything more or better. There are no points collected and no game to win. Just a little bit of pride (which is not bad in itself). Generally speaking, it should be more important to look ahead and plan for the future than to advocate the past.
• If keeping religious commands is associated with things happening to the group, then why only connect it to the survival of the group? It can be associated just the same with the suffering of the members of the group over the years, which has been unfortunately true in the Jewish case as well as (recently) in the Muslim case.
• And finally, with our modern world becoming amazingly and rapidly smaller, it seems that given enough time – perhaps hundreds even thousands of years from now – the ethnic issue will simply die of natural causes. That is, if mankind does not succeed in exterminating itself sooner.

Some researchers view monotheism (the belief in a single god) in the Western religions, as a root of arrogance, which leads to racism: Your gods are not legitimate, only ours is, hence we are superior to you.

A famous joke explains how cheap it is to call God on the phone from a certain location, because it’s a local call. The exact location depends greatly on the person telling the joke. It could be Ireland. It could be Jerusalem. It could be Alberta, Canada. It could be other places.

Are we special? Sure! We’re all special! We are human beings!! This is what makes us special. We should not forget and should not violate this uniqueness, by strange and foolish attitudes towards other human beings.

<< Prev Contents Next >>

“Us, and them. And after all we’re only ordinary men.” – ‘Us and Them’, Pink Floyd, Roger Waters

Using passive voice is a great thing, a must for skillful politicians and salesmen. “Promised Land” and “Chosen People” are both amazing expressions without needing to explain who promised and who chose.

So, who are God’s chosen people? In what way are they chosen? The answer depends of-course on whom you ask. Many faithful Christians will say that the Jews used to be the chosen ones, until they abandoned the real faith, thus “the truth abandoned them and took refuge in the Church” (St. Ambrose). Many religious Jews simply know they’ve never ceased to be the “chosen ones”. Some of them may even explain about the myth of the Jewish genius. The faithful Muslims, not very surprisingly, seem to know a whole different story of choice.

Certain Melanists believe that the black pigment called melanin, in our skin, contributes to our intellect and spirituality. Guess who promotes this theory? You guessed right – this theory is promoted mainly by some black people. The Ku Klux Klan (KKK), on the other hand, believes that white people are inherently superior to any other race, and that they are following the Bible in doing God’s work. In fact, they’ve often used the religious symbol of the cross for various activities… The Nazis believed that the Aryan race was superior, and acted to exterminate supposedly inferior races such as the Jews.

Rest assured, each of the above has brought a wealth of evidence to support the appropriate claims. Yet, there are a few interesting questions to be asked in this context.

Does God check your genes? Or is it your behavior that determines your being chosen? According to St. Ambrose mentioned above, it’s clearly the behavior of the Jewish people that disqualified them from being “chosen”. According to the Orthodox Jews, there is a clear option to join the chosen group by going through the process of proper conversion to Judaism. What’s a proper conversion? Ahhh… weeks of Israeli parliamentary activity has been spent on this issue.

According to Jewish Orthodoxy, the definition of a Jew is someone whose mother is a Jew, or someone who has been converted to Judaism the Orthodox way. Every experienced software programmer will tell you the problems concerned with the recursive nature of this definition. In simple words: Verifying the Jewish-ness of the mother is in essence the same task all over again.

It gets more complicated, since, for instance, an Orthodox Jew will not consider the conversion process done by a Reform rabbi as proper (but not necessarily the other way around). Conversely, for Muslims, the chosen genes are generally attached to the father. This may of-course raise various flavors of strange situations when one parent is officially Jewish, and the other is Muslim.

However, if Judaism is generally inherited, it makes one wonder how come Jews from African countries are darker? And why is there a large percentage of Jews with blonde hair in Russia? Evolution doesn’t work that fast. Apparently, whilst the Israeli parliament and its religious parties were not watching, there have been some, well, you know…

Racism is bad – most people will tell you this. Yet this confusion between genes and way of life has been known to produce false accusations of racism. For example: Is it okay to criticize certain religious beliefs and customs, or is it racism? Does Islam, just as an example, represent a race of people (or several specific races), and it is therefore wrong to speak against? Do the ultra-Orthodox Jews constitute a race, or is it valid to claim they’re wrong and criticize their habits? And what about the Amish? The Zulu? Others?

The question is not purely theoretical – it may have practical implications: If I run a factory that needs seven-day shift workers, is it legitimate to reject the candidacy of an Orthodox Jew who refuses to work on the Sabbath? How come it’s considered okay, for the wine industry in Israel, to employ solely Orthodox Jewish men in the wine manufacturing process (in this case, for the employees not to work on the Sabbath is one of the requirements, in order to get the kosher stamp for the wine)?

<< Prev Contents Next >>

This method is most popular among Jewish players of the game, some of whom have turned it into a real art. Rabbi Zamir Cohen, for instance, has produced a booklet named Bible and Science, where he masters this game and allegedly exposes certain mysterious knowledge found in the Bible and in the Jewish Talmud.

In general, these so-called findings are nothing more than simple manipulations of old contents, combined with lack of knowledge and aimed at the young and the bewildered. Want an example? Sure you do!

The tractate of ‘Rosh Hashanah’ (in the Talmud) tells us of Rabban Gamliel, who is explaining to the other sages about the synodic month – the time between two consecutive conjunctions of the Moon and the Sun. In other words: The exact length of the Jewish (and also the Muslim) traditional month. Apparently Rabban Gamliel is quoted as specifying this period of time with precision that is equivalent to five decimal digits after the decimal point (i.e., 29.53059 days). Does it mean we should all start eating kosher and keeping the Sabbath?

An old Russian joke tells about a peasant named Ivan from the region of Smolensk. According to the news he won a prize for producing the largest amount of wheat during the last year. A commission of inquiry was established and found out that his real name was not Ivan, but rather it was Vladimir. He did not live in Smolensk, but in Moscow. It wasn’t wheat what he was growing, but rather it was corn, and the prize was for actually producing the smallest amount of it.

In our case, the story is similar. Research of the text and other related passages in ancient Jewish literature, demonstrates that some of Rabban Gamliel’s words were put there at a later time, and were probably associated with his name retroactively. Rabban Gamliel is himself quoted as saying some contradicting things later. Moreover, this amount of precision is nothing to be proud of, since it is the result of a simple calculation, which was known to the ancient Greeks as well as to the Babylonians. Similar results were found, in fact, in archaeological excavations such as those associated with the ancient astronomer Nabu-Rimanni, and dated more than half a millennium before Rabban Gamliel’s time.

Part of “The sages knew it all” game indeed tends to retroactively associate later masterpieces with earlier alleged authors. For example, we are used to link The Zohar book (that deals with the Jewish Kabbalah) with the name of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, from the Roman times, while in practice it was published in the 13th century in Spain, by a Jewish author named Moses De Leon.

(iv) Prophecy – a good example is the ‘She’ar Yashuv’ case mentioned above. There have been many similar attempts by followers of various religions to find clues in the Biblical text for their being on the right side. Muslim preachers, for example, may quote various uses of words similar to ‘Muhammad’, ignoring the fact that they simply mean “precious things” in Hebrew. Of-course, enthusiastic Christians find traces of Jesus there. Certain fragments of text from the book of Psalms were associated with names of Zionist leaders from the middle of the 20th century. The list of ridiculous manipulations does not seem to end.

Give yourself a task: Try and search for some current event of your choice in the text of the Bible. Given enough time and resources, you’ll be sure to find something. Some ancient clues (in the right state of mind) can easily be interpreted to predict your chosen event. Cute game!

A few additional remarks are worth mentioning:

First (and not very surprisingly), none of this funny hocus-pocus stuff has ever been used to actually predict the future. It has always been used to explain past events. As the famous saying of Niels Bohr (also quoted in the above mentioned Michael Shermer’s article): “Prediction is very difficult, especially about the future.”

Second, the only real prophet we know about is the scientific approach. It can predict vast amount of things: Future weather, volcanic eruptions, the sex of an unborn child, the next lunar eclipse, and the odds of a sick person healing. None of our past mystical prophets ever came close to such ability.

Finally, even if we prove with high probability (which we didn’t) that some person in the 2nd century came to possess certain specific knowledge of our universe – why should we start praying to God or Jesus? Does this imply there’s a god who constantly keeps an eye on the deeds of our specific species on our specific planet?

It appears that once we really want to believe in something, nothing will stop us, including the truth.

<< Prev Contents Next >>

“Fools never die, they are merely replaced by others.” – Unknown

In February 1997, the Israeli Air Force suffered its worst disaster ever. Two transport helicopters carrying troops collided in mid-air over the village of She’ar Yashuv in northern Galilee, resulting in the death of 73 soldiers. The small country mourned, and a commission of inquiry was established to determine the cause of the disaster.

During the days that followed the disaster, several religious radio stations quoted Isaiah, chapter 7, verses 3-4:

“Then said the Lord unto Isaiah: ‘Go forth now to meet Ahaz, thou, and Shear-jashub thy son, at the end of the conduit of the upper pool, in the highway of the fullers’ field; and say unto him: Keep calm, and be quiet; fear not, neither let thy heart be faint, because of these two tails of smoking firebrands …”

The phrase ‘Shear-jashub’ (pronounced She’ar Yashuv) is mentioned several times in the book of Isaiah – sometimes as the name of Isaiah’s son. In fact, the northern Israeli village was named after this reference. Still, it was easy for some to make the association between the name ‘She’ar Yashuv’, the two burnt helicopters, the phrase ‘two tails of smoking firebrands’ and the fact that Isaiah is considered a prophet.

Six years later, in February 2003, the world watched in horror as the space shuttle Columbia broke into burning pieces high in the sky. During the week after, the righteous were busy again rummaging the Bible for clues. It eventually came out in the shape of some other claptrap called Bible code sometimes also referred to as letter skips. It appears that if you take the current Hebrew version of the Bible, start somewhere in the middle of the 7th verse of Genesis (that talks about the sky), and skip 1822 letters at a time, you reveal the phrase ‘Death to Columbia’. Of-course, the discovery is made with computers, courtesy of simple software that you can write at home over night.

In this game of hocus-pocus there are typically two sides – the instructor and the audience. They share the enthusiasm of finding mystical clues in allegedly God-given texts. They typically also share the lack of basic knowledge in statistics, or at least have the will to ignore it.

The game is most effective when the instructor possesses good presentation skills, and the student is a teenager at the age of “asking yourself questions” about important stuff, such as life in general and the world around us. The game is even more effective when there is a large and efficient organization or system backing up and supporting the instructor, perhaps even with some public funding. The background and environment of the students have strong relation to the expected outcome of the game. In a Jewish environment, the student may become an Orthodox Jewish believer. In a Christian atmosphere, he or she may eventually become a good Christian. In an Islamic environment, the game has been known to produce faithful Muslims.

The game itself has various flavors. They may be used separately or together. Let’s examine some of the most common approaches to this mind-blunting game:

(i) Bible Code (also known as Letter Skips or ‘Dilugim’ in Hebrew) – in this version of the game, we use a trick similar to the one explained above with the Columbia disaster. We scan the Biblical text and locate combinations of letters (that have a fixed distance from one another) which make some sense. Then (this is the tricky part) we tune our mind to believe that it cannot be a coincidence. It must be some secret message coded into the text by the Almighty – how else did it get there?

In practice, fooling around with the text enough time – with any sufficiently long text – will yield almost any desired result. You can probably locate your own name (if it’s not too long or complicated) as well as obvious hints to most famous disasters in human history. Just ask Michael Drosnin, the author of The Bible Code. If you proceed to read the Skeptic column of the Scientific American, June 2003 issue – you’ll find an outstanding article named Codified Claptrap by Michael Shermer. There you can discover in other masterpieces, such as Leo Tolstoy’s War and Peace, some interesting messages coded using this method. You can also read about the discovery of messages denying the method of the Bible Code, found in the book Bible Code II itself.

By the way, if you continue with the Columbia trick above and count two additional letters, you’ll get ‘No death to Columbia’. It’s also interesting to note that opposing religious trends have been known to find conflicting messages in the Bible. Jesus seems to be a major star of this scheme, for example, unless of-course you’re an Orthodox Jew. The other interesting thing to note is that the Biblical text itself – according to recent research – has changed quite a lot, especially (but not only) during the first millennium BC.

(ii) Numerology and Gimatria – these are other tricks to fool around with letters and numbers. Gimatria is a Hebrew version of numerology, where each letter is assigned a numeric value, based on the decimal method of counting.

The trick here is to sum up the values of all the letters in a certain word, name or phrase. Then to sum up the values of some other word, name or phrase. If by some coincidence the result is the same, it means, of-course, that God meant it to be that way. So – there must be some relationship between the two.

Example: During the first Gulf War in 1991, some wise guy found that Saddam Hussein is equal to Amalek in Gimatria. ‘Amalek’ is the ancient enemy nation that was allegedly defeated by the ancient Israelites with some help from God (see Exodus, chapter 17). Apparently, this brilliant finding did not help at the time with the total defeat of Saddam Hussein. It also did not help to defeat the use of this funny method by Israeli spiritual leaders, such as Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, who discovered that Evil Haman (book of Esther) is equal to Yosef Sarid (a left-wing Israeli parliament member, hated by ultra-Orthodox Jews). Ovadia Yosef himself, by the way, is equal to Talks of Nonsense, using this same trick.

<< Prev Contents Next >>

“England and America are two countries separated by a common language.” – George Bernard Shaw

Religion deserves a dictionary of its own, and indeed there are already quite a few. However, they typically use a very serious approach. How about something lighter, but one that still carries the correct meaning of things?

So here it comes – The Ultimate Religious Dictionary:

Angel – An alien humanoid of male gender, with wings and knowledge of the Bible. Typically guards the righteous (see ‘Righteous’).

Ape – Charles Darwin’s grandfather.

Bless – Recite ancient text while looking as if you’re making an effort.

Christian – (if the speaker is a Christian:) A good man; (if the speaker is a religious Jew:) A pagan; (if the speaker is a Muslim:) A criminal and a conqueror.

Church – A place where God wants us to be without hats.

Democracy – A regime that conducts elections.

Dinosaur – A non-existing animal, part of some anti-religious scheme.

Evolution – A fantasy designed by some poor lunatics in order to demonstrate their hate of the truth (see ‘Hate’, ‘Truth’).

Freedom – Your option to choose what your priest or rabbi or sheikh tells you.

God – (There’s no definition to this word, but you’re supposed to understand it anyway.)

Hate – Possessing non-religious opinions; Opposing the religious way of life; Criticizing religious beliefs.

Heretic – One who dares to say things, which religious literature defines as heresy, regardless of their meaning and content.

Jew – (if the speaker is a religious Jew:) A good man, if religious; a potentially good man, if non-religious; (if the speaker is Muslim:) a conqueror with American friends; (if the speaker is Christian:) a chosen person who might or might not abandon the right way.

Kangaroo – An animal that swam all the way from Noah’s Ark to Australia, some 4000 years ago.

Kosher – Food (and sometimes other things) stamped by a well-paid person, who has learned kosher rules (see ‘Learn’).

Learn – Study the text of the Bible and other religious literature; Practice logic rules that appear in ancient religious texts (such as the Talmud) as long as the outcome is identical to the one that is found in the text.

Love – Converting one’s belief to religion (‘Love of Israel’ – converting one’s belief to Orthodox Judaism).

Messiah – An unclear title, for which there is a strong competition between Jesus of Nazareth, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson of Chabad-Lubavitch, and a futuristic stranger riding a white donkey.

Miracle – Something that perhaps happens and that makes you feel good if it happens.

Mosque – A place where God wants us to be with no shoes on.

Muslim – (if the speaker is a Muslim:) A good man; (if the speaker is a Christian:) A terrorist; (if the speaker is a religious Jew:) A somewhat primitive religious person.

Pluralism – Justification for missionary activity.

Protein – The evidence for evolutionists’ conspiracy.

Psalms – A Jewish medicine for everything. Since the Gulf War in 1991 it has been known to stop missiles.

Pure – Exercising not having sex for a long time; not being dead; not during menstruation.

Purpose – The plan designed for the future of a thing or a person in the blueprint of the universe drawn by God.

Righteous – A person, typically a male, who performs religious rituals in detail.

Save – A Christian flavor of ‘Love’ (See ‘Love’).

Sex – Something that God lets you get away with, under certain conditions.

Strengthen – Act in a way that encourages others not to think rationally.

Sun – A big source of light created after Earth, circling Earth ever since.

Synagogue – A place where God wants us to be with hats.

Tradition – A logical method of proving things beyond doubt.

Truth – Anything that correlates with the speaker’s belief.

Unity – A situation where everybody follows my religious rules.

Okay. Now you may put the book aside, have a short break, freshen up and come back soon invigorated.

<< Prev Contents Next >>