A Roast of the Quran

Aphorism 7. The Quran: It reads like someone took the Book of Mormon and the Confucian Analects, and slapped them together with a B Movie rendition of some badly plagiarized Bible Stories.

Aphorism 8. If the Bible is the Blockbuster, the Quran is the corny B movie that came out decades after it, but somehow managed to get a cult following.

Aphorism 9. I was told by a friend to read the Quran, and I'd see that the Bible and it are perfectly similar. From what I've read of the Quran, the two books have the quality of being crafted by an expert literary genius gifted in storytelling, poetry and aphoristic wisdom, over that of the ramblings of a sub-genius, oriental philosopher.

Aphorism 10. What I read of the Quran doesn't make sense. The Bible, its tougher laws make sense in lieu of the whole book. But, the Quran, being written by only one man, isn't half as composed as the Bible, which was written over the course of three thousand years.

Aphorism 11. The Bible has its roots in the very first religions, which Dons will call the "Cult of Righteousness." The Quran, like the Book of Mormon, was a paranoid plagiarization meant to supplement one man's doubt.

Aphorism 12. Somehow, being written over three thousand years by some forty or fifty individuals, the Bible comes together and every detail can be coherently described by a wise man. The Quran, one man wrote the entire thing, and that is why there is nothing miraculous about it.

Aphorism 13. The Quran, as a literary achievement, is sub par. It is a cheesy reworking of more ancient materials, often completely invented by the ravings of one man bent on political power.

Aphorism 14. When I read the Quran, I can't enjoy it like the Analects. For, Confucius never said he had the word of God. It's also no where near as wise or insightful, and is cardboard as opposed to flesh and blood.

Aphorism 15. The Quran has the texture of being false. It doesn't sound wise to my ears, nor does it have the complexity of something genuine.

YouTube Comment that Got Shadow Banned. Seriously. This is Some Orwellian Stuff. Don’t Watch Biography on YouTube. It’s crap.

@Biography - Your biography sucks. Milton was a voracious reader.

In fact, if you would have just bothered to look at the Milton Hershey School Website, you'd see it say, "Reading was an integral part of Milton Hershey’s life." and that he spent thee days reading Victor Hugo's Le Miserables, only coming out of his room for twenty minutes each day to do chores.

"Milton Hershey’s Passion for Reading and Literacy". https://www.mhskids.org/blog/milton-hersheys-passion-for-reading-literacy/. 5/13/22. Web.

Seriously, you suck and I'm never watching another biography by you again. I'm also pretty sure Mennonites don't believe wealth is evidence of God's favor. They would know better, having been steeped in the Bible from infants, that misfortune happens to us all, and in no way can be a measure of God's favor for a person.

Dear, Hank and John

Hank and John

I owe a huge part of my education to you. John, I knew you were a Christian. I've followed you for a long time. Since the beginning of your career. I watched Mental Floss and Crash Course. I watched the Vlog Brothers. Hank, I love Sci-Show.

How dare they censor your work, John. For obscenity? Your work is beautiful. I don't yet have it on my bookshelf, but it will be on there someday. I promise. Paper Towns will be on my bookshelf. 

You represented something good about the internet. A prevailing curiosity and sharing of valuable information. I could learn everything and anything on the internet. I could unravel the mysteries of the poets. I could find any piece of information, ever, on Google Books. 

I represent freedom of speech. On that hill I die on. You are a fellow Christian in my book. Christ cussed, if you didn't know. He said, "Fox", which was like calling Herod an "Ass". They referred to a certain menstruos cloth in the Prophets, which would be more foul than saying "Shit." It literally says the phrase "Piss'th against the wall" several dozen times in the book of Kings, in English. John Bunyan said "slut." C. S. Lewis said "damn" and even blasphemed a couple times in his earlier works. G. K. Chesterton said a word which I will not repeat, unless I'm placing it in dialogue. It's the only word I ever censored in any of my work. You're in a long line of Christians who used potty language, including God Himself in the Bible.

It's not old. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles offended parent groups, and so they ruined the franchise. Bambi offended the NRA, thus, they tried and failed to sue Disney. Censorship is evil. I don't care if it's Antifa or Black Lives Matter or my very own Christians who do it. The world is being destroyed by censorship.

Can we both agree that full blown pornography---unsimulated sex---and full blown violence---real live killings and assaults---ought to be censored? I find that okay. But, a naughty word? A naughty idea? I see nothing wrong with bleeping out a cussword on live T.V.. Do you? It seems we had this licked in the 90s and 80s. People were free to make whatever they chose, there just was a rule about what you could broadcast with regards to foul words, sex or violence. It couldn't be real. That was the only stipulation. And, rightly, I think it's okay to censor that. I may differ there.

But, a book? Why not have the firemen come and burn people's houses? I hate Nietzsche. But, I've learned the most valuable proof of God's existence by reading him. Without it, I could have never proven God exists, or the reason why we need Him. As, that idea is valuable to me. I disagree with it, just like CRT---but, I ought to listen.

Frankly, I knew censorship was happening on the left---today I'm seeing it on the right. Both wings are crushing the middles and centers. 

Your books are precious to me. As are Nietzsche's and Freud's and Kant's and Byron's and Lichtenstein, and the countless poets who will come after me. So much was possible, and still is. I want to nurture a young black man, to go to Africa and write their epics. I want an African mythology like Ovid. I want an Asian mythology, too. And I want Ovid. The world is getting smaller, and we need to share each other's literatures. Not be offended by them.

G. K. Chesterton said it, and I will too. In the early days it wasn't the church that censored, as they were greedy to copy down everything they could from existing sources predating the fall of Rome. It was what Scholars did, was compile sources, and translate old works of literature. It's how we have Beowulf and Aristotle and Plato and Ovid and the Iliad and Odyssey. I think that's the job of a monk, to find God interwoven throughout all things. As my faith was never hindered by dissent, but I found God in the critiques they laid. In saying "Darius the Mede never existed" I found him. He is Darius I, as Daniel is written out of order. Why? That's an important concept. Because God is not a pedant. And I think we need to know that. And for that, I think we need not censor, nor inhibit genius. But, that is the American way as of late. To inhibit genius, and make it only for a privileged class. Instead of one hundred thousand cobblers whose genius it was to make shoes, there are five companies with a patented design which all shoes are based. A few outliers. But, as was said on a specific TV show, when women who made beautiful jeans wanted to get funding for their project, "That's a saturated market." They were good jeans. And, they worked. But, because there were no jeans able to be made---all of them were Levi and Wrangler---they couldn't make Jeans. Not successfully at least. Understand?

Close Enough

1. Dogwood and Matzah Bread

The Matzah's holes and chars are like our Christ's
Wounds and bruises. It breaks, like Christ's body.
The dogwood's flowers, like a ray of sun
Had told me today, are wilted on its
Four petals, for "Christ was crucified on
Dogwood." Though not true, in either case, twain,
They are beautiful little thoughts which prove
Christ in their own, strange; fascinating ways.
That the Hawkish prudishness which doubts this
And must take every metaphor for a
Holy Writ, getting offended at lore
Which is beautiful, expounds upon man's 
Linear thinking. Not even complex 
Equations solve so prudishly---why does
It have to be literal? Christ was hanged
On an olive tree, yet the dark wrinkles
Of the Dogwood's bloom can remind us of
Those four wounds Christ took in his hands and feet.

Same is the skeptic's who say Christ could not 
Have been crucified, for scripture did not
Mention ropes. That is another kind of 
Prudishness. Everyone knew how men were 
Crucified. Rather, both kinds of rigid
Thinking are epitomes of stupid.
Maybe things of literary merit
Need not be exact, but remind us that
It did, indeed, happen once in history? 

2. Old Atheists

There is nothing so handsome
As the look of confidence on an old Atheist's sneering face,

Just as there is nothing so serene
As the look of satisfaction on an old Christian's. 

Both men have uncovered many truths
Yet the first is bitter while the second breathes a second breath.

3. Modern Music

Modern music is tinged with sadness.
Every breath is big, epic... yet melancholy.

Yet the older music, at its saddest
Was still a celebratory feast.

4. The Perfume of the Wild Flowers

The perfume of the wildflowers
Carries with the scent of the woods.
My lover's musk is like that of this breeze.
The April mowings brim in the warmer
Zephyrs of the sun's bath and periwinkle flood
Of sky; 

My lover, you are more pleasant than these.

5. Major Third

The minute I am vulnerable
In a poem,
I just want to delete the son of a gun.
I feel a tight pull somewhere outside my chest.
It is my spirit breaking...

Don't make me have to do this
To earn my bread.
I am distant---
My prophecy erring
For the same reason Jonah's did.

I want to keep my reader away.
I don't want them attuned to my heart.
I don't want them knowing where I hurt.
I want to talk about lofty things.
I want to speculate on things far away.

I don't want to talk about feelings
If there is nothing good to feel.
I don't want to sing songs like this.

They're popular...
Everyone loves them.
Everyone loves to hear the heartache
Everyone wants to see the vulnerabilities.

Don't you understand I'd rather talk politics
And religion
And philosophy
And art
And science
And math
And sociology
And psychology
And history
And mythology
And nature

And not talk about my feelings?
I'd rather not talk about my feelings.
An autobiography of life
Is not something I want to write.

Everyone wants an autobiography.
My life's too painful to write it.
Save in fables.

6. I–V–vi–IV

I walk with you through the valley
Walk with me one step more.
I saved you once, my daddy,
Don't make living into a dark chore.

Believe in my songs and future
Believe in my fortune and gift.
Don't throw me away with the soothers
Don't hate me or cause a rift.

I want to see my future
I want the good things of this world.
I have always been a straight shooter
And you an ever shining pearl.

I don't want great fame
Or money or vice.
I don't want my name
To be flashing with lights.

But, God gave me a talent
That you said not to burry.
So, don't think I'm a rapscallion 
For not wanting to worry

About my work which I have made.
This work I am called to, see;
Come what will or what may.

7. Karma Doesn't Exist

Karma is just the social opinion
Others have of you.
It is unforgiving,
Unjust, biased
Without mercy toward completely innocent people---
It justifies a serial killer and makes him feel no shame.
It constantly breaks and destroys an innocent man.
Do untouchables do untouchable things?
Did Genghis Kahn suffer anything?
What about the other countless dictators
And Mass Murderers in Asia and Africa?
Did Stalin receive Karma?
Did Mao? People still love him to this day.
He starved, slaughtered and imprisoned almost five-hundred million people.
Yet, his Karma is so good,
For half the world sings his praise.

Karma is a cur.
Because it has no justice
And no mercy.
It's as much a backward fable as the Koran.

8. God is Going to Bless Me

God is going to bless me
This I know is true.
For when I stand for Jesus
All things I fear will cool;
The fires of hell surround me
But Christ my compass reigns.
In Him I am a man freed
From sin's bondage and its chains.


"Let me never turn again..." 
T. S. Eliot in "Ash Wednesday"


"Evil is ancient, just like good."
B. K. Neifert


9. The Daughter of Zion

I, Christ's bride, wish to know the LORD.
I, rejected by my wife of youth, wish to be married
To the Land of Zion. I wish to call Zion 
"Beulah." I, a son of Zion, wish to be married to her,
I wish to cling, and become a nation.
I, a meek man, wish to become a clan.
I wish to Kiss the Son, so He is not angry with me.
LORD, answer me.

LORD, peer into the lattice for me;
Let thy hands drip with myrrh.
A Thousand Talents are yours, Solomon,
Let leave the LORD and I to lean one upon another, 
While coming up from the wildernesses.

10. Falsely Called

Our modern age
Looks upon every truth
And claims it is a lie.
Then, with the truth cast aside,
It invents a falsehood, saying it is science.

11. So You Want to be a Christian?

Do not be a Christian, and sin.
Do not come to Jesus, if sin
Is the thing you love above all.
Get your short life, and fill it good;
Suffer eternity in hell.

For if you will say you are a Christian
And choose to keep on sinning, you shall heap
Up evil upon yourself, and also 
Those you love. For you shall say, "Come this way!"
But it is a slippery slope, which will
Break you. And it will kill those you do love.
For they shall be led by you, believing
They have good from heaven, yet in their sins
Remain they dead to heavenly abodes.

Rather, heap up for yourselves heavenly 
Treasure, by living righteously and true.
Even if you are an offence to your
Brother, at least you live with blessings true.
You show them the path, and, yes, it is hard.
You wrestle with God like Jacob, to wounds
Yet, you cling even though your hip is touched
And you are wounded, broken, bruised--- you cling.
And those who are undaunted by your life
Will follow in your footsteps, those behind Christ's.

12. Why We Need Jesus

Man had learned what sin is
When he ate from the Tree of Knowledge.
From that point onward, man was cursed
Because not only could he sin,
He knowingly could now justify his sin.
And with that, man would have no way
To save himself, for he would be corrupt
By way of having knowledge of sin.

So, God repented of making man;
He was sorry for having created us.
Therefore, He gave us a way out
Of our miserable state, that on acceptance
We should be empowered to live a life
Worthy of Him. Through choosing the sprout
Of David, we would have redemption through Christ.

For man, having no choice but to sin---
For sin is compulsory in this world---
Need have a way to be forgiven
And therefore not suffer for his knowingly committing it.
Not only for his knowing it, 
But for his justification of it.

For by biting the fruit,
We now could rationalize our sin
And make it right in our own eyes.
That is the knowledge of judgment.
And that is a sin worthy of eternal damnation
To say, "I have done no wrong,
"But rather, whomever I hurt, I am in the right."

13. Joshua's Altar

Kosher bones, ashes, it's a sacrificial altar.
It is built exactly as Joshua said it was.
It has a ramp, therefore, is not a pagan altar.
It has scarab Beetles, explaining the Egyptian
Tie. Ironically, those same beetles are found throughout
All of Israel. T'was dated 1200BC,
Predating Josiah or Persian restoration;
Actually built at the exact time Joshua lived.
It is built exactly where Joshua said it was.
A tablet was found, made of lead, for permanence,
With three letters of the Tetragrammaton written 
In the proto-Hebrew alphabet. True evidence.
The lead tablet has curses written on it, just like
The Bible says. Joshua said, "Choose this day whom you serve."
For, by passing the mount Hubaal, one chooses the LORD
And leaves sin behind them, at the altar, once for all.
There is also evidence of Jeremiah, and 
Hezekiah having lived in Israel, as well.

What does it prove? That Israel was a people. Long
Before Josiah, long before Cyrus the Great, and
It proves Israel has been a people, forgotten
Once, as Hosea said, but now remembered and found.

14. Falsely Called Science


While reading my commentary on Milton
The thought entered into my head---
Creation Science is the thing falsely called.
Which, men professing, have strayed from the faith.

Do we not believe in an omnipotent God?
It was said by one, "Wouldn't God be a liar
"If he created the Earth in six days, but made
"It look like six billion years?" To which, I had no answer.
I still believed in God---yet, I'm not foolish enough
To gamble my life against science. Science seems will win
That bout, unless the Earth is flat, and all science is magic.

God is real because Nietzsche is right;---
By being right, we can plainly observe he is wrong.
Good and Evil are inherent, and easily observed.
Therefore, I say, "God merely died---
"He's as much alive today as any of us living."


Yet, now that we have trusted science and not God
Had not science become something of a god?
Need men a deity as cruel and ruthless?
One which gives no justice, save man's faulty laws?
One which confuses man from wo, and causes sodomy
To be praised higher than conception?
Science which calls human life a sin?
Science which says of a baby, "It should die
"If it will suffer long in this life."

There is nothing worse than the dual edged sword.
At first, science claimed, "There is not a god,"
To which, science then ceased to be science.
It claimed, "A man is a woman if he so believes."
Why? If I believe I can fly, and throw myself off a cliff
Will I not fall like any other man? If I walk on water
Will I not sink? To answer this question,
One stops believing in science, and starts believing in magic.
One starts believing in faith. My remark to one who crosses
The bridge from natural to supernatural is,
"Will science then moot itself in the future
"And bring us back to a pitiful dark age?"

Therefore, let the damned fly and walk on water;---
Let the innocent walk on water and fly to prove their faith.
What difference does it make? If we make all things possible
By means of magic, science no longer means anything.
If I walked on water, and a sinner could walk on water,
Then Jesus' miracle is moot. Is it not?
And science with it. Therefore, let me live by what truly is science
So when a healing comes, I can attest that it was not I,
But Jesus living within me. And man can remain amazed
That the physics which he rightly knows to be Law
Was violated in the name of good. Not evil.

15. Something Christians Ought not Say

Do not say, "Satan is the god of this world."
If I had twenty dollars for every time a pastor said this
I'd be well compensated. For, do pastors know what they say?
Paul had said it first, and being who he is
He must have meant to bring shock to his readers.
The same way I will say things to subvert common wisdom.
But, Satan is not the god of this world.
If he is, then he has lordship over you.
Why make him your head? Unless it is to throw you into hell?
Rather, Christ is the God of this world.
Satan is but a prince who suzerains,
And is in rebellion against his dominion.
Do we call the prince a god?
In those states which do, they are worshipping Baalim.
Do you wish to worship a Baalim?
Also, when Paul said, "Satan was the God of this world,"
He also said, "As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me.."
Do we then say, "Paul is a Gnostic!"
Paul was not a gnostic, but subverted the expectation of his reader.
Just as I am not an atheist, but use common atheistic wisdom
To subvert my reader. 
Just as Paul says "Satan is the god of this world,"
He does not mean literally, but that Satan is the god the world worships
And not our Creator. 
Cease saying it, lest you make Satan your god, and incur wrath on yourself.


"For if you love your neighboring kingdom as your own, 
"you will have less occasion to do them injustice
"and thereby have less war." ---
--- Mo Tzu from the Mozi


"There is no absolute wisdom in this life;
"things that ought not be, often are,
"and things that ought be, often aren't.
"Rather, hold onto your faith and let go of all illusions." ---
--- B. K. Neifert


16. Poetry

An engineer is a poet of sorts,
Precisely ordering her concepts
Through strings of operations.

A poet is an engineer of words
Laying down an idea,
Using his deductive proof
Of conjunctions and copulas,
Of phrases and clauses,
To describe something true about human existence..

Wise men are the ones who like them---
Common folk don't do math in their free time
So also they don't read poetry.

However, for those who are engineers,
And doctors, and lawyers,
And priests, and poets, and professors,
And students of life...
We take enjoyment from the big concepts.
So, those in the STEM field
Don't say a poem is useless---

Look at it like a riddle which needs solved.
And that riddle will reveal deeper things
About the human cosmos swirling around us.
It fills a mind like a cup as sweet
As milk and honey. It fills a mind with meaning.

I pray to God that it is not a curse
To think deeply, and see wisely.
For, if it were, I would remain saddened
By the loss of my mind.
The only thing sweeter than poetry
Is love--- And Poetry teaches me how to love
For it forces me to listen carefully to what other people are saying
And it teaches me the joy of other people's ideas.

17. Stupid People

It was brought to my attention
That a stupid person was one
Who was misfortunate.
And being unfortunate,
They brought misfortune on others.
I thought long and hard on it---
Only a stupid person would
Create an x/y graph, and link
Fortune with intelligence.

Good Character ought to bring fortune
Whether someone were not intelligent
Or someone were. Yet, it is not always the case.
For some people, with exceptionally bad character,
Bring fortune to themselves and all around them.
There are some with exceptionally good character
Like Jesus, who being gifted with God's intelligence
Are extremely unfortunate.

Is it intelligence which brings fortune?
Not always... men with iqs of 200 are extremely
Unfortunate, and do nothing with their lives
Beside farm---though they are very wise
For what else is there? They are unfortunate
In the sense that they are not household names
They are not great innovators solving problems.
They are unfortunate.

Really, there is no causal link between
Good Character, Fortune and Intelligence.
Each is a positive attribute to have
As desirable as the next.
To have good fortune is highly prized.
Intelligence is highly prized.
Character is highly prized.

In free societies, good character ought to bring good fortune.
This is true. There ought to be that causal link
And where good character cannot bring fortune---
And rather brings misfortune---that society is called corrupt.
Where bad character brings fortune
And not misfortune that society is corrupt.

Really, fortune is as much a lot
As a die cast---and depending on what you do with it
Determines your own prowess.
Yet, even prowess is not the same as fortune.
And prowess is not the same as intelligence.

There are many things and diversities.
Fortune, though, is primarily linked
To willpower or luck, depending on whether
A society were benevolent or corrupt.
In that sense, it is linked---but only with good character
And never with intelligence.

18. Guangwu

Recorded in Chinese History,
On the Seventh Year of Guangwu
In the Fourth Month---which is exactly at Passover---
It is exactly 31AD. And the sun darkened
According to the historical text.
The text prophesied that one man
Would bear the sins of the entire world,
And pardoning on the whole world would be accomplished.
It is in the actual text.
"The sins of all the people are on one man
"And pardon is proclaimed to all who are under heaven."
"Man from heaven died."

The miraculous thing about this is that
The next Solar Eclipse would be in 33ad.
Therefore, Christ was crucified in 31ad
And Chinese Historians had chronicled
The darkening of the sun on that exact day.
A year which did not have a solar eclipse.
It is actual historical evidence of the darkening
Which happened during the crucifixion.

Found in the history of the latter Hans
Record number 18.

19. Reparations

There was a good man, who was poor.
He waited for work every day, for daily hire,
Yet for his appearance and poverty
None would seek his hire.

The LORD walked by him, seeing his poverty
And his good heart, and thought to lay a test,
"This man's people have been sorely treated
"And I shall give him the just recompense
"Of his ancestor's dearth. I shall fairly treat him."

Thus, the man received just compensation
For his ancestor's slavery, and the LORD was pleased.

Yet, he had no lack whatsoever,
He began to oppress his neighbors
He began to steal,---having his heart fattened
By the wealth his ancestors had lost
He began to become wicked, and his good heart
Was turned toward evil and malice.
Until, he had killed a man in cold blood.

The LORD looked upon the Earth, and said,
"Even if I give these people what they deserve,
"They shall destroy themselves with it.
"Therefore, I cannot give it to them,
"For they have hearts prone to doing evil
"And must first learn to stop oppressing their neighbors.
"For, there are ample opportunities for them to be rich
"But lo, their oppression of their brethren
"Causes them to have wayward hearts
"And causes them to shed blood, which I have not commanded them."


"Cram them full of noncombustible data, 
"chock them so damned full of 'facts' 
"they feel stuffed, but absolutely 
"brilliant' with information."
"Beatty to Guy Montag
--- In Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451


"Where I have to fear
"for an unpopular or incorrect opinion,
"or am spied on for having such,
"it is no longer a free society."
--- B. K. Neifert


20. A Final Thought

Written words are so bare---
Let some thoughts exist
Which will be unrecorded.
Speak them, in oral poetry
Which cannot be censored.
Learn to hone your life
In listening, and short phrases.
Learn to be interested in others.

Poetry is my voice, and I am tired of it.
Rather, I like to listen to a thousand voices
All speaking their minds---I miss it.
Other people's wisdom.
Let me be silent now,
And peer into my silent lips
With wisdom spoken by others.
Attune to the oral poetry
Of life, and stop writing every thought
Every detail---the robin was beautiful
Upon the deck, its fat belly filled with eggs.
Yet, speak a word of poetry or two
Which can be for only one or two ears.
Do not, always, be recording your thoughts.
Do not always be throwing your thoughts
To the wind. Who is it for?
Listen, why don't you?
Listen to the wind, the voices of the ones you love.
Listen, and you will feel the swelling within your ileum. 
If I be a poet, I must learn to listen.
For only by listening, have I anything worthwhile to say.
And say some things once, and don't write it.
Say things once, for one ear, for one time
Let it evaporate, and return later as a planted
Seed. Then, be silent, as the rain comes
With the lightning's fertilization
And it comes with a mellow silence;
A tattoo of pitter patter tapping against the roof.
Listen to it, and the voices of those around you.
Stay silent.
For speech destroys the pleasant reverie;
It disturbs our peace.

21. Fallen by the Way

I prayed for you to meet me...
In prophetic verse you did greet me.
Yet, tangled with Jezebel you did your dance.
My heart hurts, and looks on with soldier's eyes...

You were a friend, instantly, yet she
Sought to fire her devices upon my brow---
She did not seek my life, but the barbarians
Whom she kept company with would hate my soul.

And you, taken with dry loves had forsaken our friendship.
I wish to comfort you; I wish to give you the bread of peace.
But, danger lurks on every corner, and the gnarly trap
Lays deep within your flesh---I cannot save you.

With knowledge you sinned, and severed from us
Divine friendship. I would hasten to help you
To bring you into fields of freshly grown moss
And pleasant water brooks. Yet, you sinned.

It was not you but the choices you made
And the danger you placed me in.
I must have hidden my soul from destruction
For you did your dance with Jezebel, 
And would not entreat my company in the woods
Where we could have fled the troubles of this world.

Yet, you also dashed my hopes to pieces...
You knew my dreams, and my divine purpose
And took to taunting me before my face
With all. You took my kindness and entreated it lightly.
You mocked me before my face---for that I could forgive you.
Yet, the company you kept, it is dangerous
And ready to fail---wishing to end the cycle of reincarnation
That immoral politics; for death was her highest hope
And not life. And you chose her instead of me.

22. American Sonnet

I found Christ the day I believed, and loved Him fervently, my beloved.
I found His name as both Priest and King, in the book of Zechariah.
I saw him foretold, in Isaiah Fifty-Three, Who bore our gross sin.
I saw Him in Psalm Twenty-Two that soldiers would divide His Garments.
In Jeremiah, I saw was there a new covenant prophesied.
To be established in Abraham's seed, I saw that covenant nigh.
The serpent bit Christ's ankle, the Seed of Eve, I saw once in a poem.
Guangwu, a Chinese King saw darkness on Passover, and made Christ known.
Good and evil are both self-evident, yet Who but Jesus can judge?
Job cried out for a mediator between man and God, when sores rubbed.
Science and math's tautology need be established in God's wisdom.
Miracles exist in great numbers, which break man's laws and his theorems.
The stars are patterned to tell God's story, like a Child Christ had drawn.
In order for there to be real love, God must be believed and His Son.

23. Treasure Common Things

Treasure common things.
Cherish the dandelion flower
Over the hibiscus or rose.
Cherish the dogwood and Red Buds
Every spring, and cherish the mulberry's fruit;
Cherish the fruit in season
But have a taste for some fruits out of season,
Those commonly sold at market.
Splendor over the amethyst and not the diamond;
Dig your hand into the stone bucket
And cherish the variegated colors of those common rocks;
Don't seek after the Ruby or Sapphire or Peridot or Emerald.
Cherish the Zebra Coral, Unakite and Blue Quartz and Pink Howlite.

When the bluebells appear in the forest, cherish them.
When the helicopter leaves fall, cherish them.
Cherish the dandelion fuzz and the Queen Anne's Lace.
Find chestnuts, and walnuts, and hedge apples,
And wild violets and wild strawberries and Veronica flowers;
When they are in bunches, the common blue violets are a most beautiful sight.
In the fall, cherish the golden and blazen leaves.
In the winter cherish the snow.
In the summer cherish the summer storms.

Love chess boards, and old pictures of family and friends,
Love the curtains that hang in your home,
Love the common items you always see
Those which you have possessed all your years.
These I must say treasure, before you lose them.

Be exhilarated over  
Susan B. Anthonys and Golden Sacajaweas;
And Bicentennials which make change from the vending machines. 
Love the variegated state quarters
And the different nickels,

And the common pieces of art that hang in your home,
The ones that family had made.
Love those people around you,
Who you commonly associate with.
Love your coworkers and classmates
And bosses and neighbors,
And yes, even your job.

Be satisfied with your TV
And Computer with the key missing
And broken keyboard that doesn't type.

Love what is common and readily available to you
Over rare and priceless things.
For, if you seek out rare and priceless things
You shall always be impoverished by their lack.

24. The Men From York

Two men from York stand nigh a woman
Whom in great offense had slain free speech.
They, in their indignation, sought to bury
The bones of Elijah underneath the Broom Tree;
There, they sought their war, and exiled
The good and the bad and the ugly
From off the Earth. Jude and Thomas
Sat aghast, asking, "Why did the world
"Not accept you?" "LORD, they have seen like I!"
Yet, faith departed from the Earth as the two men from York
Sung their hymns, with Mary in great offense betwixt.
"Speak no more, and lie dead---For men are no longer
"Free to pursue truth, but must accept all words
"Canon to the world they have become yoked to."

Jude, Judas and Thomas slept
Sharing one another's dreams;
Jude, Judas and Thomas
All wrote their poetry;
Yet, Judas decried, "The stars are a lie!"
And he, in the dead of night
Walked the streets
And turned Thomas to try his tormented tyrannies.
He did it once to Jude, who in confusion
Bought the book most beloved of Benjamin
To see the stars were accorded to their clockwork
And the hands moved in their precious courses;
All was on time.

Thus, Jude and Thomas said,
"Let me never turn again.
"Let us never go back to our former sin---
"Let us not see Judas' treachery any longer!"

As it was, that thing we abhor is nailed to Christ.
Yet, Mary said, "I am offended at thee!"
Thus, the exile was fierce.

Jude and Thomas both believed
And like Daniel, were unharmed by the Lion.

Jude having once stepped on a serpent's brood
And though it bit, it was like naught.
Thomas, seeing the treachery of Judas Iscariot
Awoke, and like a dream, it was like naught.

The two men from York succored Mary
In great offense at Jude and Thomas---
Beleaguered, with Judas Iscariot
Their Captain.

Thomas said, "They see!"
And Jude said, "Why doth the world reject you?"  


"But if at first God is said to have made formless, 
"and through void He makes form, 
"He does not contradict Himself; 
"He is able to determine what precedes eternity, 
"whether in time, by His volition,--- 
"and where it originates in Eternity, God precedes it all..."
--- St. Augustine, from his Confessions

"God is omnipotent; trying to understand Genesis
"through our linear way of thinking
"is like trying to make unequal lines literally
"equal, in intersecting chords."
--- B. K. Neifert


25. Guangwu

They changed Guangwu before my very eyes.
I have documented proof, if only for myself.
Christ was crucified in 31AD, and the darkening was 
Not a solar eclipse. Someone is literally changing
The facts as we speak. Google literally said
According to yesterday's date, 5/4/22
"A solar eclipse on Passover Would have been impossible." 
End quote. Do we now change astronomy to sate the world's delusions?

26. Monseigneur

A Tale of Two Cities,
The dystopian nightmare...
Monseigneur kills while he drives
His carriage, and doesn't flinch.
Men in lower social class
Were considered expendable
By those in higher social class.
Lawless, unaccountable...
A little baby was his victim.

It took me a while to understand
The story. I didn't like Dickens at first.
Now, I see a tapestry of the time before times.
Poor flooding the street to drink a filthy flagon of wine,
Prisons where men sit in solitary confinement,
Marquises murdering maliciously like mountebanks.

There is no great past---
And there is no great future---
There is only now.
Let us not spoil it with our greed...

Poem dedicated to my best friend Jonathan

27. A Connecticut Yankee

Mark Twain was no fool---
He looked at the records of the past
The Dark Ages---
Even without the amenities
Of iPhones, computers and tvs.
It had indoor plumbing,
Was gaslit, a comfortable place.

There, in King Arthur's dystopian courts---
For the work is a dystopian
Science fiction about time travel---
Men were held in dungeons,
Queens killed with impunity,
Knights rode around aimlessly
And killed one another for profit.
The Church censored, and ruled
With an iron fist.

I read it, and am chilled by it.
I read two works of Feudalism;
Giving me an idea what it was really like.
The cruelty, inhumanity,
The callousness, the lawlessness,
The gross things people did to one another.
Believing in magic and mysticism
Which fully believed by the nobility
Strewn its luck throughout the kingdom
In disastrous chains of misfortune.

I've seen all I want to see of Feudalism.
Let kings be antiquated,
Capitalism flourish
And let the poor be fed by their own work.

As socialism in practice
Is just Feudalism disguised.

28. A True Poet

To be a true poet
You must command a meaning
With every word. Not
Word associations
Or random vocab lessons.

29. Blushed Facts

Weak faith had I, when every truth
Brought the blush of cherry tomatoes
To my peachskin face. I looked
And every good fact doubted.

I held to faith...
Would cut truth,
And in faithless backbiting
Tear down every bastion of knowledge.

A fire, burning the chaff
Of miracles, truth and beautiful exegesis.

30. Feud of the Avatars

The painful stroke of marginalized
Artists, making 50,000 florins,
Taking up the apprenticeship of sire;
Walking the path his father gave...

When the two great masters met
They hated one another, competing
To best an adversary. Bitter and spiteful,
Like Southey and Byron,
Wordsworth and Shelley,
Leonardo and Michelangelo...

I watch like Raphael,
Wondering at their chafe.
Their unbridled hate.

For all genius is welcome to me...
I will applaud it.

Yet, the modern sage says Michelangelo's unfinished
Pieta is better than the one set in St. Peter's Basilica;
Better than Moses and David
For that, there can be no Raphael now...
For the sophist says
That exegesis is deferred to the reader
And their capricious whims.

I told him, I'd "burn my entire library
"And everything I'd ever wrote
"If you are right."

Yet, his musings were divine...
It was not jealousy, just the disrespect
To communicated thought.

Were Leonardo and Michelangelo
Different? Were they not the same,
Dissecting corpses, and both experts?
Yet, Leonardo was jealous of the craft
Of Sculpture, and Michelangelo 
Defiant in his defense.

Why do I write?
I tenderly ask this question when I see the sophist
Has reign over the modern age.
While I do not wish a scientist to determine the language---
While I do not want an algorithm to determine my meaning---
He says, "Language is not an algorithm, it expands, contracts..."
I say to him, there is one thing I disagree with.
One thing. I said that words can be understood.
And for that, he ignored me.

For we are not engines, but human beings;
We can indeed understand.

Like Leonardo's disrespect for Michelangelo's
Sculpture, the terrific thing is that I am not
Simply caked with dust like a baker.
I form with words the sculpture of my architecture...
And I wish them to mean something.
Not just be a kaleidoscope of feeling. 

31. Otherness

My love, I had forgotten Smerdis was that Death, 
And Death my Doppelganger throughout my odes.

My poem decries the cycle of civilization. 
How there is always a vacuum left where power begins to fail.

In the Histories, Cambyses campaigned in Egypt, 
After his sire Cyrus had freed all his subjects;
Cambyses sought to reconquer them. 
Thus, Smerdis arose to usurp power from his brother Cambyses---
Yet Smerdis was killed by Darius,
So was justified because Smerdis was a changeling
As the story goes---drawing a comparison with Smerdis 
To the Androgynous mobs of Death.

Yet, I felt the presence of the poem,
That its meaning defied even me...
It was born from this author
But---as the Archer told me in his village---
It had a sense of strange otherness.
What I had made was beyond even my own interpretation.
How I could forget something so key,
There it was, beyond me, something I made and could now rediscover---
A poem I wrote had intrinsic meaning... 
Even its author need rediscover it.

It was, then, its own being,
Like I had given birth
And the child grew.
There the child was,
Born of my seed, 
But something else.


"Wrong does not cease to be wrong 
"because the majority share it."
--- Leo Tolstoy


"Look at a good poem like a proof,
"and the single sentence summating its thought
"the solution."
--- B. K. Neifert


32. My Audience

You are my poetry.
I listen... what do those thoughts inspire?
I know not anymore what they mean---
Only what you say about them.

Do not come to me, and ask,
"Does your poem mean, thus..."
I do not know.
I want to hear your words
And interpret them like I do Eliot or Wordsworth.

I want to listen.
Do you not understand?
I wrote so much to listen to you
Tell me what they mean.
I know what I meant by them...
What do you see by them?

I can listen, and understand you.
You listen, and understand me.
I wish to listen to you...
Just tell me your honest thoughts.

Know only one thing about me.
I believe in Christ.
But, tell me what you see in my poems
And reveal to me mysteries I had not even fathomed.
Reveal to me the hidden parcels of wisdom
I did not see, nor conceive.
Show me what they mean---
For do you not understand,
Words have meaning?
I say this over and over again---
Thoughts have meaning.
Precise meanings.
Do not shy away from telling me your thoughts.
I will think over them,
Mull over them...
For that is what I want.
I want you to think
And speak important words.
Not sit idly and talk about nonsense.
Talk about something deep,
And if poetry draws that out of you,
I wish to listen and see the chrysalis of your thoughts.

See, those reading my poems,
You are my poetry.
To have never had an audience
To listen to,
To never hear you tell me what they mean---
I am tired of my own thoughts...
Do not make me blue.

I wish to place wisdom
Onto your lips, and make it rain forth.

33. To Understand a Poet

The primary thing to understand
About poets, is that "Love is not All"
By Edna St. Vincent, I understand
That when she wrote, "I do not
"Think I would", it meant she wouldn't.
There is no might about it.

Also see it hopefully,
That though love is not everything,
It is still as necessary as all the rest.


Savage Thoughts

Aphorism 1. The Irish make the most beautiful music and poetry.

Aphorism 2. The Germans have invented all novel ideas, but were, usually, fatally wrong.

Aphorism 3. The English are unrivalled in their mastery of social sciences.

Aphorism 4. The Spaniard fights bulls because he is daring.

Aphorism 5. The Italian is practical, gregarious, yet has no illusions.

Aphorism 6. The Ethiopian is wise, yet mingles a little juice with the waters.

Aphorism 7. The Chinese and Greeks have uncovered all philosophical laws.

Aphorism 8. The American has always been stupid and always had a penchant for mischief. But, the greatest saints have rested here.

Aphorism 9. The Russian is a hearty friend, yet abuses authority.

Aphorism 10. The South African is strong in morale, as any white man.

Aphorism 11. The Black American enslaves themselves more than anyone else.

Aphorism 12. The Mexican can work hard and feel comforted by their family above all else.

Aphorism 13. The Brazilian is free.

Aphorism 14. Texas and California both have equal problems, just from opposite ends.

Aphorism 15. Pennsylvania is my favorite state because it is a true melting pot; throw a stone, and you'll find someone completely different. Nobody lives in a vacuum here.

Aphorism 16. The Indian has all the benefits of ethical teaching, and so have they a profound mastery over maths.

Aphorism 17. The Persian is wise, and has a good heart.

Aphorism 18. The Arab is a friend, and is noble.

Aphorism 19. The Egyptian is not radical.

Aphorism 20. The Jew is a superior man to all others; for they have overcome and thrived through all adversity.

Aphorism 21. Beauty isn't universal, though it ought to be.

Aphorism 22. There is good and bad; it's usually best discovered in dress.

Aphorism 23. The oldest civilizations in the world are Black, and also the happiest.

Aphorism 24. There are happy civilizations which do not believe in God.

Aphorism 25. The best civilization in the world had Christ; it abolished every slave, it freed a third of the world; it gave no prejudice to religion, race or gender.

Aphorism 26. It's funny how the more we muddy gender, the more sexist we become.

Aphorism 27. The price to pay for freedom is blood.

Aphorism 28. The ideals of an activist is always contrary to their practice.

Aphorism 29. Marx was a millionaire, and his followers are just like him: possessing all the fortune in the world, yet never satisfied.

Aphorism 30. The communist is just like I was; making thirty thousand a year, and unable to see that they were already free. In effect, they enslave themselves.

Aphorism 31. If it weren't for the Federal Reserve, or Central Banking, we'd be buying and selling everything online. I like to go shopping. Don't you?

Aphorism 32. I am not the perfect philosopher. I just listen and tell you what's already been said.

Aphorism 33. I do not Plagiarize. I just know that my writing will outlast everyone else's. So, I try to make the most sense, so the future doesn't forget the truth.

Aphorism 34. I will be published. And I will eat from my work. As the proverb goes, "Gather all that's needed, before starting to build the house."

Aphorism 35. Conspiracy Theories and Communism are trifles for the youth. The mature ought to understand mankind is incapable of accomplishing either.

Aphorism 36. Alex Jones ought not have been sued; it is his right to be wrong.

Aphorism 37. In an age where publicity happens spontaneously, I think the fourth amendment need protect us from our fellow citizen; not just the government.

Aphorism 38. I see no conspiracy of the government trying to hinder my livelihood. Rather, the conspiracy is the populace moving wherever they collectively will.

Aphorism 39. Satan is real. I don't believe man is intelligent enough to make conspiracies, but he surely can, often through subconscious hate and greed.

Aphorism 40. One thing common among Americans is their penchant to hate America. I don't hate America; I hate Americans. Only the most uneducated population could have elected such stupid officials.

Aphorism 41. Germans are educated, yet spiritually blind. One thing Providence does for America, is it protects us from our own ignorance.

Aphorism 42. Joe Biden being elected was providence. I believe there was no better option. We aren't at war, are we?

Aphorism 43. Ukraine is winning.

Aphorism 44. California is an example of leftist policies, and Texas an example of right wing policies. Pennsylvania is an example of when both exist equally.

Aphorism 45. Pennsylvanians said "Screw you," and we're freer and happier here than in Florida.

Aphorism 46. State's rights are good. It's the best thing about our Democracy.

Aphorism 47. Gas is affordable here precisely because we are not radical.

Aphorism 48. In Pennsylvania, Christ is everywhere. Seven Christian radio stations, two of them devoted to sermons; billboards up and down the highways, churches on every street corner. That's why we're sheltered. Let us never give up that faith.

Aphorism 49. The socialite hates Pennsylvania. She thinks we haven't a good culture. I disagree.

Aphorism 50. The only fault of Pennsylvania is our lack of a reliable Public Transportation system.

Aphorism 51. Purple mountains and golden prairies, only a fool would despise them.

Aphorism 52. Peppers add to life's variety.

Aphorism 53. An onion, garlic and salt are the three secret spices of any proficient chef.

Aphorism 54. Ginger and cinnamon go good with just about everything.

Aphorism 55. Creams, fats, acids, salts, sweets and spices. Master these, and you'll be a proficient chef.

Aphorism 56. To form the base of any dish, look at its tradition. Millennia oftentimes vet the ingredients to form perfect flavors.

Aphorism 57. A secret ingredient is the one or two things you do differently than the tradition.

Aphorism 58. Religion continues because it works. Its universal ethics apply, and create stable societies.

Aphorism 59. Good religions are ancient ones because they comprise universal moral values.

Aphorism 60. Mystery religions or dead religions die because they haven't vetted truths.

Aphorism 61. Philosophy is religion absent of deity.

Aphorism 62. Ethics are universal. We need God, ultimately, to judge.

Aphorism 63. Without God's judgment, the world would fall into total anarchy. Sin works, but it ultimately causes many to fall into calamity.

Aphorism 64. Power works through spiritual authorities. That is why one man can rule a nation.

Aphorism 65. Often the man ruling a nation is the portrait of its spirit. If that spirit dies, so does the leader.

Aphorism 66. Martin Luther King has become a martyr of the left's racism.

Aphorism 67. There are many paths to wealth, but the safest path is to stick to one path, and not multiple.

Aphorism 68. Failure breeds misanthropy in those around you. Forgive them when you're successful.

Aphorism 69. The masses are stupid. Yet, also perpetually wise.

Aphorism 70. One thing I learned during the Pandemic was that you couldn't fool a Pennsylvanian.

Aphorism 71. Covid wasn't a conspiracy, except that people overreacted to it.

Aphorism 72. Let them wear masks. Just don't force me to.

Aphorism 73. I'd rather die of bubonic plague, than deal with another year of Covid lockdowns.

Aphorism 74. I wasn't afraid of the virus, but of the stupidity of those around me.

Aphorism 75. People believe what they want to hear, and they also distrust official sources.

Aphorism 76. I doubt that I will be jailed for my writing. I also doubt that I will remain poor for much longer.

Aphorism 77. People are naturally appalled by sin. I discovered this delightful truth during everything that has gone on in the last three years.

Aphorism 78. A dictator, like a bad idea, runs its course with a sharp offensive, but ultimately gets diluted the further out it reaches.

Aphorism 79. Russia and China are proof that you cannot hold onto a bad government for too long. Even now, China is bored of its own conniving.

Aphorism 80. War runs its course. Let nation deal with nation. Don't let them ban together, and destroy the world.

Aphorism 81. It is the LORD Who establishes the nations' boundaries. Not man.

Aphorism 82. Canada is probably lost. It was LGBTQ+ that lost it.

Aphorism 83. Where the people are righteous, unrighteous laws shall not harm them.

Aphorism 84. The oppression of the last three years, was like an androgynous woman telling you where and when to use the bathroom.

Aphorism 85. Democrats are incompetent. I trust them in executive power over Republicans who actually get things done.

Aphorism 86. Bush and Trump were by far the Nation's worst presidents. Let's counteract the stupidity created by them.

Aphorism 87. It's not the Democrat's evil that I'm afraid of; it's the Republican's failure to do good.

Aphorism 88. Christ was not a socialist. He was in favor of Gold Standards.

Aphorism 89. Property is guaranteed by the law, "Thou Shalt not Steal." 

Aphorism 90. If you ever actually read Marx, you'd see a real issue but not a real solution.

Aphorism 91. Nietzsche and Marx did not invent their crises. They saw it, and therefore warned of it. Though, each was on the wrong end of the solution.

Aphorism 92. Morality is self evident. Thereby God exists. Why? Because morality being self evident, Who ultimately must judge if the world decides to be immoral?

Aphorism 93. I think the end times will be when people know the truth, but flagrantly decide to disregard it.

Aphorism 94. It's a common musing of mine that evil people know Satan exists, yet pretend like they don't.

Aphorism 95. It's also a musing of mine that people know truth inherently, but disregard it because it's easier.

Aphorism 96. Love is difficult to nurture, therefore, evil people are those who just get lazy.

Aphorism 97. The right of the people is God given. There is no boundary which can move, save God decree it.

Aphorism 98. I love the United States of America.

Aphorism 99. March grass is green; April trees bloom.

Aphorism 100. The Robins mate in April.

Aphorism 101. David is on the far Western Horizon in spring.

Aphorism 102. The stars do not lie.

Aphorism 103. The deer mate in October.

Aphorism 104. The planets and moon, constellations and sun are like hands on a clock.

Aphorism 105. Know nature, and you will never be deceived.

Aphorism 106. David appears in December, and Goliath soon after.

Aphorism 107. The Triune appears in the summer, and doesn't set until winter.

Aphorism 108. The leaves unfold in May.

Aphorism 109. The summer leaf begins as a flower.

Aphorism 110. May springs, bring June things.

Aphorism 111. An October chill brings a November furnace.

Aphorism 112. Snow in winter time is precious.

Aphorism 113. The trees lose their leaves in December.

Aphorism 114. The winterberries are a sure sign. When they fall, it is probably February.

Aphorism 115. Blue Birds and Robins appear at spring time, but when you see them before, it is not good.

Aphorism 116. The mowing begins at Spring, and ends at Winter.

Aphorism 117. Love keeps warm by the winter fire.

Aphorism 118. The willow is the first tree in spring to receive her green.

Aphorism 119. The Robin would rather run than fly to escape.

Aphorism 120. A Robin before Springtime so with a fly in Winter: it's natural, yet untimely.

Aphorism 121. The forest's fragrance bears the subtle musk of a lover.

Aphorism 122. Holidays are good; the immature dislike them.

Aphorism 123. April fools this year was a gay one.

Aphorism 124. St. Patrick's Day is a gay little holiday.

Aphorism 125. Valentine's day is a day to make love with your spouse, or risk disapproval for a future romance.

Aphorism 126. Birthdays are good. Go have a bite to eat with the ones you love.

Aphorism 127. Christmas is a time to feast, and give to the poor and needy. For, the winter requires fat.

Aphorism 128. Thanksgiving is a feast to put fat on the bones for winter's hoary air.

Aphorism 129. New Year's Day is a feast; eat your traditional meals.

Aphorism 130. Easter's feast leads to strength for harvest.

Aphorism 131. If you celebrate different feasts, consider: they all will occur to give strength in season.

Aphorism 132. The Fourth of July, Juneteenth, Memorial Day and Labor Day, enjoy the frivolities of Summer.

Aphorism 133. Daylight Savings is probably the cause of Spring Suicide. Let the sun awaken you, and not the hour.

Aphorism 134. The sun is a clock, more precious than the hour hand.

Aphorism 135. When first entering the home, you can smell the good things best.

Aphorism 136. When the Bible says "Uncleanliness" is a sin, it means literal uncleanliness.

Aphorism 137. A good home smells natural. Not overbearing with the stench of perfumes, nor odiferous with the stench of animals, nor unpleasant. If the odor offends, then the residents likely will, too.

Aphorism 138. Nothing is better than a home cooked meal's fragrance wafting through the domicile.

Aphorism 139. The stuffing in the oven makes the whole house smell like thyme.

Aphorism 140. The most precious thing in the world is a good woman.

Aphorism 141. A good woman makes love, makes beds, makes soup and folds laundry.

Aphorism 142. A good woman buys fields, knits blankets, keeps clean and has spice.

Aphorism 143. A good woman has beautiful heart, loves her children, loves her husband and fills a house with love.

Aphorism 144. A good man is kind, is courteous, is chivalric and praises his wife.

Aphorism 145. A good man holds his wife, teaches his children, attends his business and works close to home.

Aphorism 146. A good man tells the truth, waits until marriage, is kind to his flocks and looks into the eyes of his wife with lively passion.

Aphorism 147. A good lover does not tire of their love, is disciplined to bear the hard times, listens and speaks kind words.

Aphorism 148. A good son is boyish, likes a little mischief but not too much, plays hard and does what his parents tell him.

Aphorism 149. A good daughter is girly, listens and commiserates, plays nice and does what her parents tell her.

Aphorism 150. A good person knows their distant relatives, stays within a day's journey of their family, works close to home and does not change much.

1. The Poetry of History

Dostoevsky and Tolstoy---
I had been elucidated too---
Never met.

Before I knew this,
I thought their meeting fated,
Yet after I knew it,
It became clear
It was the poetry of history.

Two witnesses, of equal skill,
Speak... never having met
To cross their antlers
And thereby destroy their works.

Providence moves with such a hand
Through history, to cause such 
Fascinating little miracles.
For unimpeded by the other
Each made their witness of Mother Russia
In her soon collapse.

Yet, also, each man had died
Like the merciful men in scripture
Before God's wrath ever came nigh them.

2. Self Love

The most beautiful commandment;
The one which caused me to worship
That bless'ed Risen King, Jesus:
Though, the self-harming love of gross
Desires causes the human
Heart to believe that they have no
Self Love---so, their own "Self-hatred",
It seems, causes hate for others.
What yoke was ever loosed by love
Of Self? Does it not strengthen bonds?
To love oneself adds eternal angst
And misery to the soul. Make
It gay with an outpouring of
Love toward those lost souls around you.
For, seeking inwardly for truth
Does nothing but reveal one's heart.
This, we ought to know, is evil.
For, by seeking inwardly, we trap
Ourselves within the prison of
Our heart's each whim and desire.

3. A Squircle

A rounded square
Which to determine its dimensions
Is so laborious a calculation,
Yet, nonetheless, simply exists
In many utilitarian ways.

There are many innocuous things
We take for granted in life.
Even in some simple shapes,
There are such eccentricities
That it would take a Doctor of Math
Just to figure them out.
Of which, I am not one.
But, I pleasantly muse
Over their formulas
Knowing that greater minds than mine
Are hard at work.

4. Karl Marx

Surprisingly, he had a good family.
He had daughters which he loved.
He had a beautiful wife who stuck by him.
He had good friends. He had servants.
He has to be the most foul hypocrite to ever live.

5. Arthur Schiller

It is the man who wants freedom the most
Who is the same man who cannot live free.
Desiring freedom, he is under the steward of tyrant
After tyrant. Nowhere could he go, where he was free.
He was continually a slave to one nobleman or another.
The precious angst it created.
Precious is the angst, however,
For the man speaks a true desire of the human heart.
Though, unable to live free, he teaches all how precious freedom is.

Yet, I've found the purest freedom is to live nobly
And to keep pushing forward with the talent Providence has gifted you.
Then, at some point, one will break free;
For, to desire what is in your means and modest blessing
Is the true mark of someone who is free.
And to believe in God, for without God,
Even the freest man is never truly free.
He is always a slave to his earthly circumstance.

6. Sins I witnessed this Month

The dog snarled;
The owners gossiped.
The counselor taught
Mischief, to reward
Evil for evil, stripe for stripe,
Pain for pain.
The son would not
Go to see his mother.
The man accepted
The person of a 
Woman who wore
What is unseemly.
Lovers from youth
Would not forgive.
Men and wives strove
So the women's
Adulteries were made acceptable
In his sight.
The joyful man
Was rebuked.
The righteous man
Is prickly.
An elderly woman
Was abused.
Fathers despised 
Their sons.
Old friends said "Depart" to
One another.

7. The Story Teller

It is said that the one who tells the stories
Rules the worlds.

This is not true.

The one who tells the stories
Merely aligns their stories with the Author of Creation's.

For, if the story had not truth,
None would take pleasure in it.

8. The German and the Zulu

Like the Valkyrie and the Harpy
One with spotted wing,
And the other with speckled;
Both with arcane religion deifying savagery;
Thor's hammer is like the Shaman's skull;
The totem and the fetish both rule there.
Metallurgy is not foreign to Africa;
Nor is the fetish foreign to Germany.
The baptized sword or the shrunken head.
The bone jewel or the tattoo.
Greece and Songhai stand nigh you
Barbarians. Yet, you do battle
Speaking your magical incantations
One toward one another.

Let Imitatio Christi bring you forth to a better world.

Both elicit a certain drunkenness.
Germans a false precision, and salubriousness.
Zulus a wild and unrestrained pride.

Yet, the Germans observed the Slave Morality---
And the Zulus enslaved their kindred.

A society wearing robes
Is always more kind
Than the one which is naked;
Yet, it is the nude which wrestle one another in the pits.
Though this is not literally true,
Let the metaphors I write speak.

9. Racist?

The ignorance of a prudish pastor
Who says every pleasure is a grave sin.
The flagrant falsehood of a man who stands
Upon his lector and defiles love
With his homilies, saying, "Loves are aught!"
The Philosopher who must slice every
Word to tiny pieces, not listening
Always defining, diverting to a thousand hills.
The freed slave who wishes all else
To be a slave, ever, to he;
For he is angry about long 
Forgotten woes. Those annoy me.

10. Joy is not Shallow

There was a famous man, whom with his tears
Cried over the shallowness of joyful
Music. I stopped to think: there is nothing
Deeper than joy; for it even sustains 
Love through the darkest of times, and restores
Hope. Joy, rather, is not shallow but the
Deep well, where all the good things are drawn up.

11. Louie Louis

The imagination
Sees its own evil;
It makes flagrant an
Innocent offense.
Thus, what was simply a word
Becomes ten thousand evil thoughts.
What was a minor infraction
Becomes amplified to the basest evils
In the minds of the recurring gossipers,
All of which they have conjured.

12. Upon the Paths at Pinchot

My Love, my Lass, in bonny flowers I run through
As I see your face, more beauteous than the dew
Upon the steepled Blue-Bells, weeping that I find
You far away;--- upon two paths when shall they pass?
For your purest mien does show you are truly kind.

13. Husband of Youth

My love, I wait for you on shores
Of opal crests, where once I saw
You, in godly grace, innocent
And in your dress; you were so pure.
In my dreams, was Amarisa
Your name, that odious vision
Where I saw your heart was like mine,
Your loves telling you things unkind.

For, you had been left in your youth
By a husband betrothed, who looked
At you, was it ever in couth?
Yet, did he die or did fooresook
The Violet Flower with her
Precious, little, smiling face, poor?

14. Jerusalem's Streams

My love, this poem I write to you:
I am not a perfected man
Nor are you perfect, though despite
Your beauty, which is as the Land
Of Jerusalem in its time
Of fertility; I shan't find
A more beautiful doe in Nine
Thousand, and one more for your kind
Personality. Radiates
The spirit of God from your gate
Which, if I enter will be my
Precious treasure during the time
I'm given to Earthly toils,
You, my balm and Earthly oil.

I am saddened by the willow
Where I weep my loneliest tears.
For a river by the mountain
Sends forth its spry springs; do the years
Saunter by where the mountain flows
Into the streams: When will I drink?

15. Triangle

One would think the triangle
Be a simple shape to plot
In linear algebra.
Nope... its simplest requires calculus.
Its most elegant requires three lines of equation.
One can, indeed, make any shape
From linear equations;
I'm confident of this.

A good poem is formed like an equation---
Instead of numbers, one pieces together
Psychology and Sociology;
Nature and History;
Philosophy and Religion;
Wisdom and Action.

And like a triangle, simple
Things we take for granted,
Such as the existence of God
Or the why of good and evil,
Can be very difficult to figure out on our own.

16. Moral Truth

Simple shapes, even,
Have such eccentricities
That it would take an Engineer
To understand why they work.
I don't see why moral truth is any different.

Asking someone to reinvent moral philosophy,---
Which ancients had only barely grasped,
Men more brilliant than Einstein,---
Is like telling a grade school student
Whose highest math is long division
To discover the circumference of an ellipse.
And not only so, to reinvent it
Without any prior knowledge or schooling
In the subject. To essentially rediscover Calculus.
And especially, to blatantly
Disregard the ancients' discoveries.
Not only would the modern man disregard Euclid,
He would outright deny that Euclid ever found truth.

17. Selfishness

Selfishness is evil.
Love is evil, if purely for one's own gratification;
Then, it is not love, but is selfishness.
Selfishness taints all that it touches.
It darkens the mind with desire.
It satiates at others' expense.
It feeds on others' wellbeing.
It harms the soul of all around you.
It seeks its gratification always
Above all else.

Another word for it is "Self-love".

Draw strength from Christ,
Love outwardly, not inwardly,
Seek the welfare of others first.
Bear hardship and grief with outpourings of grace.
Build the soul of those around you.
Fill their cups until you are empty.
Perish before giving evil a foothold in your heart.

18. Mencius

A lecturer, in his naivety
Gracefully defended the decadence
Of America.
Contrasted against Mencius,
Our system did not hold up.

I come from a more ancient boundary.
America was free, but was bridled by
Religion's yoke, which kept her safe.
Without it, America has become dangerous.

Seeing the man speak in naïve words
Making America great because of its greed
It's disregard for parental authority,
Its disregard for all things good.
This is not the tradition handed down
By my fathers, but yet was broken
By my fathers, when the beginning
Of generational curses set in.
And four generations later
We have the generation which
Oppresses the poor and does violence.

Mencius was right---
As that was the Judges of Israel
Who having the Law of Jah
Followed it, and God ruled.
In China, the hierarchy
Of parental bonds and honor
Ruled. Righteousness, Propriety, Benevolence and Wisdom.

The Chinese did not listen to either Mencius
Or Confucius, until many moons later
When the countries were prosperous.
There are poor even in the United States---
We can see them on the street corners.
It is a universal problem of all mankind,
However, you can judge the civilization
By the affluence and number of their middle classes.
And China, under rule of Confucius,
Had a sizable middle class compared
To other ancient worlds.

What I see is good, 
Is the filial respect 
And the honoring of the commandment,
"Honor thy father and mother."
And also to honor the ruler.
Americans love to rebel against presidents.
We love to cast them at low approval ratings
While our affluence is greater than 
Even the best ancient kingdom.

Yet, it was not our libertine attitude
Which garnered the wealth,
But the work of a generation
Who honored their family traditions
Back to the nation's founding.
And like all nations,
There is a generation which rebels,
And then brings forth its downfall. 

19. In the West

In the West, we protect our citizens.
In the East, they do not.

As horrible the government in America is
It does not reach one thousandth of the violence
The Chinese and Russian Governments commit.

We can be impressed by their philosophers;
We can be impressed by their affluence;
We can be impressed by the appearance of freedom.
We can be impressed by the abundance of food.
We can be impressed by the happiness of their citizens.

Underneath that, however, is a machine
Which kills for pleasure, and enslaves many.

The citizens are unruly and wicked in the West.
They deserve to be punished, but by whom?
Will China or Russia be that whip?
When, their citizens are righteous and salt of the Earth?

Personally, I'd rather live unmolested by my government
And tolerate the abusive inhabitants while patiently learning virtue,
Than live a righteous life and be in perpetual fear.

The principles of Chinese Philosophy are true,
Yet the government are sophists.
The government rules benevolently,
Yet it deliberately kills people it deems unworthy.
What compassion or benevolence is that?
None whatsoever. A poor beggar can still live happily
If he have love in his heart.
And often they have love in abundance
While the rest of the affluent masses do not.

Would I rather live underneath a hypocritical government
Where the people are good and kind and right?
Or, would I rather live underneath a just government,
Where my neighbor will oppress me, yet also be struck down by Law?
The latter, of course. I can tolerate the evil of my neighbors
If I am still fed by the fat of the land.

China is a golden city of philosophy
And at one point in time in its history it actually
Lived by the standards it preached.
But, I'd rather serve under a well ordered government
Where corruption can even be rooted out,
Than a hypocritical one that bears no shame.

20. Charity

Many think that by giving the homeless
Aught they need, they will ultimately be successful.
This is not true. The homeless, the abjectly poor,
If given all their desires will do what all men do.
They will spend it on their belly, then their members,
And then growing affluent, they will seek to destroy.
For, men who have gained a fortune without work
Will become bored, and must seek to muse themselves
Like any other man.

Rather, every poor man you see, give him his immediate
Need. Proportionate to that. Do not give him excess,
Do not give him below the means he needs.
Give to him his immediate needs only.
Do not pass him by and say, "I wish to teach this man
"How to take care of himself." Some men cannot.
If you must, bring them into your houses,
And be their servant, but vet the ones you help
And make sure they are not swine.

Give proportionally, to each his immediate need
And no further. For, excess will create waste.
A poor man is uneducated. Therefore, he does not know
How to conduct business. It is not his fault that he does not know this
But, you will not do anything for him that he cannot do for himself.
If the poor man gets wisdom, he will invest his money and time
On an occupation, and will accrue fortune on his own.
If the poor man cannot, he will remain poor
And such a one needs their portions like any other man.
Passing him by on the street, and saying,
"I ought to teach him how to make his fortune,"
Will not feed him, will it?
Yet, giving him everything, so he has no lack,
Will only create waste.

These are the harsh realities of charity.
If you have a day's bread in your pocket
Give the poor man that.
If you have a day's shelter in your pocket,
Give the poor man that.
That is what he needs, and no more.
Any more, and he will in five years time
Find himself in prison, for his lack comes from idleness.
Yet, some men cannot do anything but be idle.
These men, their work is to beg.
Give them their portion, what they need,
And no more. And also, no less.
You will help them by doing this
More than by giving a fortune away
Or by needlessly pondering on how you can teach them to knead dough.

Yet, always feed him with kind words
Proportional to your kind gift.

21. Goethe

Having the 200iq he did,
He made a good life for himself.
His unpopularity comes from
This fact, so said a man in a lecture I once heard.

The man in the lecture
Was the American
Fully embracing everything
Popular about Americanism.
I heard him speak on Mencius,
And it's like these men were
Aliens to his own understanding of the world.

What I draw from Goethe is a supreme
Sympathy... Given his highest IQ
He could see both sides of every argument
And be fully convinced of it, simultaneously.
Yet, his personality did not fracture;
He held both viewpoints within one being.

Though, there is something cute about the way
The lecturer understood their subject
Intellectually, but did not fully grasp
Or agree with it. I like him because he is an American
Unapologetically. Naivety reams from his lectures;
A blind acceptance to a miserable code.
Yet, he like Goethe is happy---
He sees in Goethe the pursuit of life's joys.
There, I see it, too. I am not an intellect infatuated
With the world's suffering.
I am infatuated with joy and peace.

Yet, I look to the conditions of what makes man happiest.
Not very many men have iqs above 200
And thereby, can inherit fortunes
And forge for themselves happiness.
I know I can, through my writing,
Like he with his own.

However, a daemon once said of Goethe
"I wish he had died miserable."
And the lecturer thought, 
"Genius must suffer."
I chuckled. True geniuses do not suffer;
What makes them truly genius
Is their ability to forge happiness
In this world.

22. My Politics

		1. Freedom

A. Speech

       Every man, woman and child ought to be given the right to speak. If racist, homophobic, transphobic, sexist, sacrilegious, or otherwise deemed offensive, a man, woman or child ought to have the right to speak it. It does not mean they cannot be censured. However, every citizen needs the right to express themselves freely, without threat of being denied a livelihood. No one, therefore, should be allowed to deny someone the opportunity to earn bread because of something they had said. 
	Freedom of speech is so important for democracy, that in protecting what we dislike, we also protect ourselves. I cannot stand sacrilegious jokes, but I have no right to deny another man his portion for speaking what I disagreed with. The same thing applies in reverse. Everyone ought to have the right to speak uncensored, and unhindered. This does not mean that certain improprieties cannot get one fired. This does not mean one ought to be allowed to say curse words and not be fired from a position of employment, if such word caused a guest to be offended. But, should the citizen express a view on a social media platform or in public, that ought not be taken into consideration, whether a nude photo, a homophobic or racist remark, or a sacrilegious comment, or anything otherwise deemed as offensive. Humans err, and change, and sometimes they don’t want to admit it. Giving grace to what is said is the best measure for retaining a freer society. Not allowing the mob to censor.

B. Religion

	Everyone ought to have the right to worship the god they choose. So long as worship of that god does not cause another harm. So long as worship of that god doesn’t cause an animal harm. And by harm, I mean by recourse of the common law, not some fabricated offense of impropriety, or some mischievous harm caused by a petty disagreement. I mean real, physical harm which causes physical pain. As, religion’s job is to not only discipline its adherent, but also teach them a set of moral values. And in doing so, the citizen can be better suited for society.
	Therefore, religion is best free. To worship any god, whether personal or on a grand scale. To believe in whatever spirits one wishes. To bow to whatever fetish. So long as there is no harm being committed in the religion. 
	In the manner of cults, so long as they do not put their adherents in physical danger, they ought be free. A proper education ought to be employed to steer unwitting folk away from cults, but they pose no true danger to a society, save they engender an atmosphere of true physical harm.
	In manners of emotional abuse, no such thing can be considered harmful. Religion’s job is to teach temperance, therefore, one ought to learn to control themselves, as is the effort of any great sage, and any great disciple of any religious system. It ought not be legislated.

C. Press

	The printing press ought to remain completely unregulated. However, mass media needs regulated. The tools of propaganda are so adept right now, that it can destroy civilization from within. Simply put, graphic images, terrorist organizations bent on doing actual harm to citizens or the state, explicit sexual images, nudity, violent images, child exploitation, solicitations for sex and banned words should have no place on public platforms. They ought to be regulated, and not allowed to be exposed to the public.
	As for conspiracy theories, urban legends, strange religious ideas, counter cultural viewpoints, these ought to remain freely disseminated. As, the point of regulation of the press is to censor explicit materials, and not simply to ban viewpoints we do not agree with. Pornography, explicit language, nudity, violence, these things ought to remain out of the public’s view.

D. Petition

	I do not know an instance where a petition actually changed a law. But, in the instance where the democracy is in peril, petitioning is the freedom most useful. It can unwool the cloak which the corrupt democracy and media likes to pull. It can speak the truth, where the lies of publicity do not. If such a right were taken away, it would damage democracy significantly. As, the point of the petition is to show the true workings of democracy, should any corruption be had nigh the ballot. It might seem fanciful, but it can work.

E. Assembly

	Anyone should be able to assemble. Whether at the Congress Lawn, whether on a New York Street Corner, whether on a back street or pub, or home… no one should be forbid the right to assemble. This is one of our most violated rights. And it’s one of the most important. People ought not block public events or traffic, nor cause disruptions. But, they can peacefully assemble where they will, and I’d say even without permits.

F. Bear Arms

	The bearing of arms is to protect the nation. Both against invaders, and against internal threats. It is the right of a people, I think, to keep and bear arms. To protect themselves from a corrupt government, if need be. And such a time, there will be government officials who purposely ally with the cause of those armed. Whereby, if a civil war is needed to restore order in the country, there will be those in government who fracture off of the rest, and take with them government resources to be used in the fighting. As is the necessary means of any coup; from which, a successful ordering of law needs to be in place, and a distinct governing body precedented on the established order of law and governance. Such a case, the arms would be needed, and every citizen ought to have a right to bear them for this instance. As this is a freedom granted to us in the Declaration of Independence. And is, in fact, the first law our government instituted.

G. Privacy

	The citizens ought to be protected against the government’s spying, as well as their fellow citizen. In our age, it is less the government’s intrusion on our lives---save medical records and other records which the public keeps, which ought to be forbade to be retained---but the private citizen who corrupts and violates their fellow citizen’s right. To avoid this, it ought to be a part of common law to prosecute those who violate the privacy of their fellow citizen, even those who are famous. One should not be able to keep databases, or records of private citizens' affaires.

H. Jurisprudence

	Citizens ought to have the right to fair trials. And trials by jury.

I. Protection from Other Citizens

	Laws are created to protect a civilization from internal threats. Such as murder, rape, theft, bribery, extortion---yet, also, a citizen should be unhindered from their fellow citizen and have none of their freedoms dampened. Thereby, if a citizen owns a country store, they ought not have the right to shun employment from someone based on their opinion. If someone writes a book, it ought not be banned as a matter of fact, because the public wishes it so. The writer is free to attempt to write their own works. If they fail, and were unhindered, then it is their freedom to fail. Yet, if someone hindered them, the one who is hindering has not that freedom.

J. The Constitution and the Civil Rights Charter

	I believe in the Constitution and Civil Rights Charter. Those are my political platform, to the letter. This is a condensed version of it, but my ideals are found in both of those beautiful documents. The UN’s statement is perhaps one of the most beautiful ever created, next to the United States’ Constitution. And I stand by them with all my heart.

		2. Economics

A. Cash Money

	It ought to be the right of citizens to have a cash monetary system. Not having so would be an ethical violation of enormous proportions. It would force the citizen to have technology in order to buy and sell, and such a thing could only be the forbade mark prophesied by John at Patmos.

B. Free Market

	A citizen ought to be able to buy, sell, and publish whatever they wish. Save in the instance of public utilities or mass media, citizens ought to be free to go about their business and day to day lives unhindered.

C. Stipends

	There ought to be public programs, such as welfare, public health insurance policies, housing plans,---yet, those citizens receiving such stipends ought to be required to show some work. No one ought to receive stipends without proving they are making contributions. If none will purchase their contributions, or their products are not marketable, such a person still ought to find work. As, work is necessary for a life purpose, and without it, people riot, burn and destroy, and ultimately will kill themselves. This issue is a hairy one, and needs some looking into. As, I believe there ought not be a product which has no market---if the product is good. If someone can indeed create a product to sell, there ought to exist a market for it. Which will lead into the next segment.

D. Big Corporations

	There ought to be no corporation so large, that it eats up even a fiftieth of the market. A business ought to be capped on growth at one billion dollars, and trusts strictly disallowed, thereby, to allow those who do not have means to also find a place in the economy. Thereby, Copyrights ought to be shortened, Trademarks and Patents ought to be shortened, and unable to be renewed. As, the issue with the current standard is that those unable to work simply cannot find fulfilling work. It’s not a matter of being unable to work, but being unable to fully express their genius, because a larger corporation like Nike has a corner on all the shoes. Therefore, making it so corporations cannot grow beyond a certain measure ought to curb this, and allow the economy to be more localized.

		3. Criminal Justice
A. Criminal Records

       There ought to be no records of criminality beyond the person’s served sentence. Such a thing only hinders the offender from ever getting past their sentence. And, it also creates situations where individuals are given lengthy and unlawful sentences where they suffer for long periods of time for minor infractions. Therefore, there ought to be no Criminal Records or Sex Offender Registries. It might seem counter intuitive, but people all need an equal chance at regaining their footing in life. Without it, we see the rioting and burning in the cities. The Black Lives Matter movement is caused by criminal records, as blacks are incarcerated at high rates, and can never then be integrated back into society without a stigma attached to them for life. Criminal Records need to be compulsorily expunged on the date of the sentence’s end.

23. Alien

There is no such thing.
It is just a demon;
A mass hallucination;
A photorealistic Pixilation;
A madness.

24. The Arrogance of Truth

Goethe argues on the shade,
And hails experience determines color.
Newton claims the color is inherent
Within the object, by reflected wavelength.

Scientists argue about it for centuries.
Did it ever occur to any of them
That both could be simultaneously true?
Like all systems of knowledge
Invented, the inventor thinks it is exclusive.

Obviously, light is experienced subjectively
For no two objects are nigh a source of light the same.
Yet, obviously, within any object is its inherent color.
Yet, it is... The color exists and can indeed be described.
Though the light reflects off the table a white
And though the shadow creates multitudes of shade;
It can be described accurately. It is as scientific
As Newton's inherent color.

This is too wise for those who wish
To calculate and say that truth is subjective---
For, it is not. Color in both cases can be accurately described.
One on the chemical level, and the other on the photogenic level.
What we learn is that light interacts with color
Differently, depending on where the source is.

I'm sure I'm not the only one to have discovered this.
I look at Goethe, so impressed by phenomenology.
To express our differences---yet we are all inherently the same;
We can indeed know the experiences of others;
Just the same that Goethe can write about his.
Fools are enamored by slight differences.
Wise men are enamored by the consistency of life;
Yet, the opposite is true for the fool
When it suits their aims at committing mischief.
For, truly, there are only righteous men and wicked.
Each will find their wisdom in either truth or folly.
To me, it is folly to believe that either system must
Be the only law or the only axiom. Truth is multifaceted,
And based in objectivity. It is not, however, based in personal opinion.
What is my truth, is also your truth;
It just so happens that I may not suffer for the same reasons you do.

25. The Cycle of Nations

The nation enters into its colonial age;
It is founded by strong men.
It grows through its various wars,
And if it survives them,
It grows into its golden age.
America, she had two golden ages
And lucky were her inhabitants.
Then, the golden age disintegrates
Into pleasure-seeking.
The beautiful highways, architecture
Ethics and culture which built the nation
Begin to come under scrutiny.
The inhabitants then begin to focus
Their arts on effeminate objects
Or grotesque objects.
It starts in the intelligentsia 
And then bleeds down into the masses.
When this happens, the masses
Are as opulent as kings;
Then, there comes a first crisis.
If the crisis is averted,
Some three and a half generations later
There comes a second.
I do not know of any thirds.

26. Captivity

Nations are burdened by periods of long-suffering
Equal to the opulence of their citizens.
It is not a sin to be wealthy; for comfort
Breeds an environment where suffering
Cannot choke out compassion.
Yet, the decadence of generations
Who inherit their predecessors' wealth
And become idle in their work;
Refusing to do work, or take up no activity,
And leech off the fat of the previous generations,
This leads to a corruption so deep and bitter.
The citizens become worse than any tyrant.
Then, by their own designs, does corruption
Seep into governments, and like a whip
The government cracks against the back of its citizens.
Where once they were free, they are now bonded
By their own greed and lust, and desire for idleness.
Then, they suffer for, sometimes, six generations.
The people who are natured to be violent die
And the ones who are hearty and compassionate survive.
The government continues to be wretched
Until the people rise up, and challenge it;
For they have been chastened, and must no longer
Bear the grief. Or, if they still be wicked,
The government holds them for another generation.

As a good man living in one of these times;
The very few of us there happens to be,
Remember Daniel, Meshach, Shadrach and Abednego.
They were protected in the lion's dens;
They were not singed by the furnace.
Or Mordecai and Esther, righteous were they.
Or Ezekiel, righteous was he.
The fact is, one ought to remain silent under the oppression
And bear it with grace. For, six good men cannot
Save a nation. They can only save themselves.

27. mein Freund

To be of the
World but
Not in it

Is the same
As being in the world
But not of it.

This wisdom
Brought me
A good friend.

Forgetting it,
We separated.

For, we must 
Not love the world.
That is what it is truly

28. The Parent's Song

My sweet child, make your bed
So when you sleep, you rest your head
Upon the soft and orderly, divine.

My sweet child, clean your room
So when you work, you can be true
And not be burdened by what's vile.

My sweet child, do your chores
So when you're old, you will be sure
That you can be well to do your daily hire.

My sweet child, learn the gift of no
So you can be joyful in rain or snow
And not live life burdened by desire.

My sweet child, eat your peas
And carrots, sprouts and vegies please,
So you can grow to have great strength and mind.

My sweet child, eat a little sweet
So you can live so happily,
And be blessed even in life's sour brine.

My sweet child, do these things
And you will live to see the spring
Of winters many and good times.

29. Gossip

The central theme of all conversation
Is centered around the social clique.
If you really wish to interest someone
Talk about someone you both mutually know.

I? I have no interest in doing this.
That is why I am so unpopular.
I would rather talk about man collectively
Than any one individual person.
As I find that rude.

30. Young Adult Group

The Young adult leader puts together a good program.
They get a beautiful flock.
Then, after getting his taste of power,
Wishes to go off and found his new church.
That beautiful flock scatters
And looks at me spitefully
For being right all along about the vanity of its pastors.

Is it just I? Or did I tell you all along what would happen?
They wanted a cooler group, and thereby destroyed
Your church, to obtain the popular and trendy crowd.
Yet you all looked at me like a lunatic
And treated me the same?
Where is my brother's church family?
Where did they go? Your pastor saved him
Or was it I all along who planted the seed?
Did you listen to his slander, and get a foul taste in your mouth about me?
Well, I cultivated the seed in both of them;
Where's the shepherd who will watch over it?

31. Dissonance from the World

I. Philosophy

It is vain.
What does it teach
Save that "God is dead?"
It teaches truth cannot be found.
It teaches love is for the self.
It teaches pleasure is all there is.
It teaches there is no good.
It teaches to suffer blindly.
It confuses what is obvious.
It creates an idol.
It causes its practitioner to doubt.

It is vain.

II. Philosophy

But, when it grasps truth
It strengthens faith.
For, it is "Love of Wisdom."
And its truths point to Christ.
They toil over arcane mysteries
Yet, Christ being our Rabbi
Can let us unravel it for them
All the good thinker knows
Is Christ.

III. Desire

Also, I have become acquainted with the world's love.
Para mores are common.
Which is better?
Loveless marriages with paramours
Or husbandless women
Raising fatherless children?
For order's sake, the former
A cuckold at least loves
What he mistakenly thinks
Are his spawn.
They grow non the wiser.
The woman pledges 
Her undying love
Yet eats from another table...
Another vine.

It is a sad world
We live in, where no one
Truly ever could find love.
A sacred gift:
It always was perverted.

Let the damed play
That game, and never
Know true joy.

IV. Love

Marc and Erin could not even 
Conceive of the word
"Paramour". Their love was so strong.

Anyone who has truly loved
Would be offended
AT the mere thought of
Whatever the world has
Done to love
To make it not
Universally understood.

The love I know
Is so sweet, and real.
It trusts, never fails.
It is a friend; I read that
Somewhere in some great
Thinker's words.

The romantic seeks either
The nobler passions
Or she seeks the instinctual passions.

Man, by instinct, is a wicked creature
This,  look to my noble
Passions; what pleasures I felt
And needn't remorse.

1. The Anima And Animus

I've encountered this in Jung's philosophy. First, I thought they were foolish, but then I recognized the confusion of the younger generations on Gender Fluidity, and how this is being taught in the schools.

The feminine is the feeling. The masculine is the rational. The feminine is the nurturing. The masculine is the protective instinct. The feminine is the individual. The masculine is the collective. The feminine is the familial; the masculine is the societal.

I thought to myself, "The confusion of the current generation on gender..." That, having the fluidity---described by Jung as the androgynous aspect of the soul---it seems our expressions of Gender Fluidity are actually a reaction to the universal androgyny of the self. That both men and women have rational and emotional capabilities, both men and women have nurturing and protective capabilities. Both men and women have individual and collective instincts. Both men and women have familial and societal instincts. And in this, the confusion of the inner self is expressing itself, now, in the androgyny of sex and sexual identity.

I think it's important that people---all of us---understand there is androgyny in the soul. That we all share aspects of feminine and masculine gender identity within our souls. Rather, the detrimental side of Gender Fluidity is the expression of that androgyny in the persona. Which is not where it belongs. It's taking things deeper than the shadow---more primal and instinctual---and drives them to the consciousness and into the persona. 

The danger of this is simple. One does not want their shadow integrated into the persona. We call this "Toxic Masculinity", yet it's more fundamentally the latent aggression of the psyche becoming conscious in the persona, which is dangerous because it doesn't allow the person to integrate and thereby flow with healthy civilizations. Same thing with the deeper elements, of the Anima and Animus. If we drive those into the persona---into the superficial face we wish to show to the world---we are driving confusing aspects of our nature into the persona. We are, in effect, confusing what is our deepest psychical nature with something we show to the external world.

I think this is dangerous, for obvious reasons. The confusion it creates, telling children that something normal---something observed throughout history, in the form of Atalanta or King David---of the Anima and Animus being expressed in individuals... We understood this, yet we didn't reject that---these characters of the androgyny of the soul,---but rather, we didn't let them be driven into our persona, by manipulating people's perceptions of us to truly accept our darker nature. Rather, our dark nature ought to be hidden, and expressed in things like humor, stories and only be something which influences us from the dark places they reside, which is the deepest layer of the psyche.

It seems like the current mentality is to draw out our deepest latent psychical things, the Shadow and Anima and Animus, into the persona, and to drive our subconscious into the conscious. Now, forgive me if I must say, our subconscious is the same thing that dreams, and dreams seem to me most unconstructive. If anyone were honest, they would tell of dreaming of murder, suicide, promiscuity, and many other deeply evil things. And that's the danger, is driving that dream world into the conscious, into the persona. As, now are we not subduing the aggression, the androgyny---we are expressing it in our very superego. And frankly, being there people will be able to commit just about any crime, if our subconscious is unfiltered by the self and denied access to the ego and persona. As, then the more rational functions of mankind prevail, if one accepts the fact that sex is biological, and gender ought to remain correlated with sex. As, we all have androgyny latent in our subconscious. And that androgyny does not belong in the ego nor persona in healthy civilizations. Rather, reversing the Persona to reveal our darkest nature leads to that darkest of nature spilling out into the areas of life where it doesn't belong. It's bringing the Dream World into the Real World;---and I think that's unconstructive, if not very dangerous.

Because one thing I notice in Homosexuals, and Non-binary genders is the driving of their subconscious into the conscious, thereby trying to create a persona developed around the psychologically dangerous parts of our mind. Which, exist possibly for the purpose of giving men and women ways to relate to one another, and also to help us share in one another's burdens. But, driven into the conscious, we are no longer sharing one another's burdens, but becoming one another's burdens by tyrannizing one another with our aggression and androgyny.

2. Sir Gawain and Ovid Comparison and Contrast

Ovid and the Gawain Poet. I'm reading these two heavy-weights together. Both are, Hugo de Masci. Both are “Bright minded, and expert servants of the craft.â€ I don't believe Hugo de Masci is a name of the Gawain author. Rather, I think it is, if communicated, a feat of the author being humble, and showing the skill he wields with the pen. As with Ovid, there is mastery of the Greek Mythos. Both crafting stories which are sublime, coherent and easily understood.

There are some artefacts which I draw from Ovid. His obsession with unhealthy romance, illicit sex... and then The Gawain Poet playing with the boundaries of fidelity. It's like both poets are straining against one another. Both are communing with one another. In a cycle of time, where neither ethos was likely to meet the other---it's possible The Gawain Poet read Ovid. But, rather, the response of Chivalry to the romanticism of Ovid's adultery. 

It's important to know that Ovid had been exiled, likely for his stance on adultery. It is also further likely that The Gawain Poet was pushing the boundaries of adultery. Seeing where the line was crossed. Or really, striving for the line. Seeing what boundary would be crossed that would prove fatal.

Ovid's obsession with flirtation and sex is found in his romanticized version of the gods in Roman Religion. It's unclear whether the Romans believed in the gods, but it seems like Ovid is clearly showing the blatant affairs of the gods to poke fun at Augustus's mandate that adultery be illegal. If the gods committed adultery, what reason ought Ovid not?

Then, of course, there is the Chivalry code in Gawain. It plays with adultery---as some of the best poets do---pushing to where the crime is fatal. Is it a kiss? Two kisses? Three kisses? Dishonoring the lord of the house by taking the sash his wife had given, and then not presenting it to him in order to avoid death? Is it in the close and instant chemistry between the lord's wife,---who's more beautiful than Guinevere,---with Gawain? Their conversations, their obvious fatal attraction, the desire they have to be close to the king while in company? What's even more revelatory is that the King is not jealous of this instant attraction between Gawain and his wife. There is a sort of revelation that the whole thing might be contrived by the king---yet, we can rightly say that there is a bond between Gawain and the King's Wife that is chemical, visceral... And Gawain steals six kisses. But, he tells of the kisses to his lord. Obviously the kiss is more important than the sash of immortality.

Ovid, of course, the opposite holds true. gods make frivolous love to maidens, sisters become unhealthily obsessed with their brothers, nymphs almost get raped. It becomes clear that the attitude toward sex reflects that of the Grecian religion. Which is flailing in front of Augustus. Showing him, no proving him that it is counter the will of the idols of Rome. Yet, somehow it prevails that adultery is wrong while Ovid has forgotten this. And there is a conscious reading of Metamorphoses, the almost dreamlike waking up when the crime is about to be committed. Then the dream narration of the poem moves toward the magical Deus Ex Machina of the Nymph being turned into a knoll. Or, in the other case, of the universal law being yielded to, and a brother utterly rejects his sister's love. Ovid is not aware of this---rather, I think he'd almost prefer it if the passions were acted out. Pan chasing Sirynx has that feel of a child chasing his girlhood friend on the playground. The thrill of the chase, and the naughty deed that never happens. 

It's unclear to me what these two opposed systems portray. It's obvious that adultery is celebrated in today's society---I understand it now. It's obvious that the code of Chivalry is dead. Yet, which system would produce the better customs? More inversely, which world was more disdainful of adultery? It seemed like The Gawain Poet pushed the boundaries of the norm---though not readily accepted at his time. And then Ovid was banished. Do the poets always entertain naughty themes? Murder, sex, rape, theft... And why do they? They obviously do for the reason that those naughty things are in us, and we need them purged from us through art.

And what's even more important, is today's society getting offended by stories. Even in Ovid's time, the king tolerated tales of adultery committed by the gods. Ovid wrote of rape. The Gawain Poet wrote on a boundary which would offend many's customs. Yet, today it prevails that adultery is celebrated. Even noble. Why? It doesn't produce happiness. As we've seen. And the story is not tolerated, while the act of adultery is accepted. Pushed into the subconscious, the story is meant to act upon the desire, without really doing so. Yet, when the story is wrong, and the act is right, what can be said? If the story offends the audience because it portrays something taboo, then will not the taboo become active rather than passive? As, the story is a dream. First it brings one to the naughty deed, then it pacifies the naughty dream like it had never happened. Waking up the reader from the dream and the desire. Both satisfying it, and cutting the guilty conscience to allow them to realize “It was only a story.â€ 

Rightly, that's what the story is meant to do. It's meant to cut us. Even Bible Stories play this role, as I can see no other meaning for the story of the Levite who cuts his concubine into pieces, after she is raped. Though this is a true story, there is something built in us that feeds on the macabre. There is something in us that wants to see entire civilizations destroyed to the last child, and then to wake up from it so we can better appreciate peace. There is a fascination with war and not peace in the human mind. We are readily aware of peace. But, we do not know war. We do not know crime. So, the artist---possibly having committed certain crimes or gone to war---puts on a moral display for us, to wake us up from the moment of the deed. And thereby, appeasing our curiosity while at the same time telling a moral tale on why not to do it.

Stories are integral for that reason. When they're done right. As, stories can often be the most damaging thing on the psyche if they delve into concepts of bathos. Bathos being graphic sex, gratuitous murder or the elevation of the passions. Or kitsch, which is the indulgence of lustful or aggravating themes. Such things as Pan and Sirynx, if Sirynx did not turn into a knoll. Or Narcissus and Echo, where Echo becomes the true villain. Such things are contrary to the Logos and Nature. 

So I have just revealed the mystery of a story.

3. Shakespearean Sonnet 1-126

One day I intend to do a line by line analysis of the poem. Since everyone ought to study one epic poem in their life---study it intensely, knowing each nuance, each line, each rhythm---The Shakespearean sonnets will be my subject.

However, upon reading them, I was fully immersed in the notion that Shakespeare was singing about a gay lover. I had begun reading the first 126 lines with that in mind. However, I don't think that's an appropriate reading, and I'd like to explain some of my reasons why.

For one thing, the beginning of the poem seems to insinuate that the subject being carried up was something like a son to Shakespeare, and that this individual had died, or was wounded, while courting a woman. With this in view, it makes a lot of the passages more clear, rather than more opaque. And further, if we account the latter portion of the Sonnets to the subject's mother---the Black Lady---we begin to bring a tapestry of what the poems are about. Hamnet. Whom, probably, was Shakespeare's son to a Concubine, and being encouraged to find a wife and bear a son, he had gotten himself into trouble like Romeo. There's one sonnet in particular where Hamnet is described as Shakespeare's muse in all of his work. And if it's a gay lover, I don't think one can find Romeo and Juliet from that, but rather the plot structure of the first few Sonnets seem to tell a Romeo type story of failed courtship which was fatal.

Further on, there's some references to Shakespeare being a "Slave" to the subject of the poem. Some requite this as gay love, but I find it more probable that Shakespeare is using a device of irony to say that he was his Concubine's Son's slave. Which is more in line, that the adoration---and reference to Hamnet's fair skin and Cheeks---seem to be references to his availability for courtship and the wrong committed against him.

There are some twenty passages I've found that directly relate to death, that the subject has died, and then the poem begins to fracture into two distinct characters. Love and then the Character of Hamnet who becomes a symbol of love. The character, Love, is possibly a reference to the fame of his poem. If Love should die, then nobody would read the Epitaph of Hamnet's. If Love keeps men reading the poems, then love lives even after Shakespeare's death. Then Hamnet, in turn, lives on through Shakespeare's poem. As there are two distinct individuals being talked about in the poem. Separated. There is Hamnet who died. And then the figure of Love, whom Hamnet becomes a symbol for. And the reading of the poem is what preserves the love.

There's several hints that Shakespeare believes the poem will be skewed by the "Sluttishness of Time"; that is, somehow he could foresee the Logos being skewed, and then maybe this faulty interpretation becoming canon. I believe Shakespeare had some inclination that the poem was going to be interpreted as erotic, when he never intended it to be erotic. As the poem's subject is Love. The character in the poem whose cheeks are often referred to is dead or near death, while Love lives on and is continued to be enjoyed for as long as his poem is read, and the epitaph is read. As, the poem several times calls itself an epitaph for the individual in the poem. It is a love poem of a Father's devotion to his Son who died unfairly, when courting a woman. There can be no other interpretation, for the poem is cognizant of its being skewed toward eroticism---several times the poem is self aware that it could be misrepresented or misunderstood. And it might even seem inappropriate for a father to write such a thing about his deceased son. And Shakespeare is cognizant that Love itself could be misrepresented by the poem. It seems embarrassing, as a writer at that time was not prone to using such emotionality. 

However, let us look at the possibility of Shakespeare singing a homoerotic song. Then why refer to the subject having died so often? In the sonnets are some thirty references to death having already happened. Anywhere there is a slight hint of the poem becoming erotic, the next sonnet will bring one to bear with the truth that the poem is actually about Hamnet. Perhaps the "Slutishness of time" was precisely the erotic reading of the poem, that Shakespeare was subtly aware of being a possible rendering. It might have been indecent for a father to sing about his son that way, or the boy might have been commonly known to be of African descent. In either case, the poem is speaking of a Father's love, and his epitaph to his son who became the embodiment of love, having pursued a woman whom he was unequal with for the time's standard.

It is my imagination that Shakespeare was a good man, who loved his son, and when his son wanted to court the woman whom he chose, Shakespeare encouraged it, and this led to the unfortunate circumstance of a wound. Perhaps the sonnets were being written at the time of Hamnet's deathbed, which could be a heart-wrenching song of a father not knowing if his son will survive.

I've written copious amounts of work over the course of a day or two. It's not unlikely that Shakespeare had composed this entire piece in less than four or five days. So, it could have been written while Hamnet was on his deathbed, recovering from a wound he acquired from a failed romance. As the subject is the muse of all of Shakespeare's writing. I leave this off, as it is the interpretation that seems most in line with the subject. A father in the bargaining phase of grief, writing what is the world's best piece of literature.

4. Analysis of the Mithgarth Worm

I attempt to describe universal symbolism with my poetry. I tend to draw out a universal vision---though unique to my letters. For instance, the verse in Micah, which talks of our sin being cast into the sea, I make my sin a literal Doppelganger. I drew that from the archetype without being first aware of it. The same that I think there is a universal symbolism. For instance, across three continents, there are depictions of a seven headed dragon. And, in Revelation, there is a seven headed dragon. And in Norse Mythology, there is a Mithgarth Worm. How cultures relate to this aesthetic defines them. Some celebrate the aesthetic while others do not. However, in Chinese culture they celebrate the dragon, while Westerners fight it. Some Western Myths have their heroes defeated by the dragon, place it in different places of their cosmology. What's important to understand is that the dragon exists. It manifests itself in different places throughout the world, being universally symbolic of an aesthetic. The Christians would call it evil while the Eastern religions would call it good.

It's important to know that I do not worship the Dragon's aesthetic. The aesthetic I worship is Christ---pure beauty, pure light, pure truth. I find it indicative of what a true God would be. It is my belief that God had revealed Himself in stages throughout tangible history. First to Abraham, who influenced the making of the Hammurabi's Code. Second to Moses, whose signs and wonders convinced the Pharaoh to create the cult of Aten. And lastly in Christ Jesus, the Man Who Was God Incarnate. I feel this needed to happen, as we derive from the symbolism across culture manifestations of evil, too. Distortions to the truth.

I believe good has been revealed in stages, and I believe evil has been present on this earth, creating its manifestations. While, Christ is the ultimate good. For, He promises something important, which is the purging of our evil; the erasure of our sins from ever having existed. It's paramount for men to have clean slates if they ever intend on being good. Not to say that remembrance of the past will send one to hell, it won't. But, to say that if our past defined us, or if we were limited by it and never forgiven... if it were never forgotten, the danger is that past embittering us and turning us toward an aesthetic like that of the Dragon.

As, that is the aesthetic war. Christ against the Dragon. The Christ is natural, beauty, light, life, heterosexual love; the Dragon is artificial, ugliness, darkness, death and homoeroticism. For by heterosexual love, life continues and flourishes. Through homoeroticism, life is seen foul, self indulgent and hedonistic. This fact that the modern world's aesthetic is turning toward the Dragon, obviously the aesthetic is turning toward the elevation of what is evil. What is self indulgent. What cannot create flourishing, nor brings the power of life but death.

Symbolically, the image of a Man is beautiful; it is pure, but the image of a seven headed dragon much like a Dilophosaurus, with a rattlesnake like sound. Or, as Satan is commonly seen as a red satyr; that is, a color which is invisible without light, distorted into a shape half that of a man and half that of a beast. And the Satyr in mythology is unbridled lust, while the Dragon is unbridled hate. And it's seen in this that these common symbols become apparent across all culture... Perhaps because the vision, or the Logos, reveals them to cultures based upon their diversion. Either toward Good, and thereby the form of Man or Christ, or evil, therefore, toward the form of Dragons or Satyrs.

The mentalities bring with them equal relief or despair. The Christ Child brings with him a wholesome carol of Christmas, of a Baby pure and innocent and the beauty of this is in the form of God becoming an infant, and dwelling among men to one day step upon the Dragon and Satyr's weapons. To make it so they cannot drag men to hell. Whereby, if one gravitates toward the Satyr and Dragon's aesthetic, they will naturally create the despair these figures bring within the culture. Not, anymore, of a child arriving in the dead of winter, but of utter despair and unnatural sorcery. Aberrations of man's form, and the corruption of strange sciences. Ones which erase definition, skew what is sin, and creates confusion about even the most basic truths. It, rather, denies there is truth. Whereby, Christ embodied truth, He was the full dwelling of the Logos in human flesh, the full dwelling of truth and sense, the Dragon is as airy as a metaphor, not embodied, but when embodied is utterly horrifying. And I have no doubt it will claim to be what created the human race, when it comes. Like the common myth is that Earth was created by alien species, this Dragon's face looks like the Grey, black eyed alien species. It claims to have created our Earth, and the hordes in follie follow him because they don't know better, but rather worship the aesthetic of the Dragon. They know not the joys and peace of the Christ Child; they never knew him, for they are embodied by a gene of selfishness and homoeroticism. One which Christ will remove, if we let Him; for that is the power of grace, is to remove our flesh, and thereby circumcise our heart.

Yet, it is my life's work to show these competing aesthetics, and how they war, and what their civilizations are. What each embodied idea creates, either despair or joy. And of course the conflict of both struggling; for the Thirteen Kings are merely inventions of mine, the Dragon, Beast and False Prophet are not. In fact, they are described in all cultures, unconnected from one another. And because of this, we are beginning to believe this supernatural phenomena is from outer space, when indeed, it is something much simpler. It is the very aesthetic of Evil coming in the guise of false hope. And, only the Form of the Christ Child can defeat it; the form of the Christmas Good, the Merriment and serenity of the season. The blessing of Charity, and following the example of St. Nicholas by giving gifts to the poor, and cheering up the broken hearted. For, that aesthetic is good while our TV personalities praise impatience, and praise sin because "It works." Surely it does when injustice abounds, but it will all be destroyed by that Child Christ, and the true aesthetic of good and what is natural.

5. Mythology is a Soap Opera

As I was reading Agamemnon's fate, in Edith Hamilton's Mythology, I realized Mythology is a soap opera. I've read the Norse and the Greek, and I see it now. Someone is raping someone, someone is killing someone, someone is committing patricide or filicide to accomplish arcane magic. Nor do I believe that Agamemnon actually died this way. I tend to think of him as Nebuchadnezzar, and the Sack of Troy was the Sack of Tyre. Maybe some Bibliomancy was done to create it. As there is a verse in the Bible, "Behold, I will put a spirit in him, so that he shall hear a rumor and return to his own land, and I will make him fall by the sword in his own land.'" Perhaps that's just an overreaching theme in old literature, is the king returning from battle, and being slain. Perhaps because it is true. Maybe the peoples hate the war, and that is why there is regicide after coming home from a war.

The mythologies of the world were soap operas. They followed the ill reputed gods, who boasted omniscience and omnibenevolence, as they destroyed, and left wakes of ruin behind them. Setting an example to their people to follow. To rape those of lower status, to murder beloved children for magic---only, to expect recompense from the dharma of fate. For, every evil act must return an evil act. Which, is why I believe Agamemnon was Nebuchadnezzar is because that form of belief seems more consistent with the Babylonians.

That's the whole story. The gods in their dramatic wars with mortals and with one another, frolic without consequences, bringing upon the wrath of mortal and god alike. Sometimes there is a mortal who hates a god. Sometimes there is a god who hates a mortal. Whether because of rape, or because of infidelity, they seek retribution, destroying temples, bodies, while committing sodomy at times to accomplish the deed.

I see all of this, and now know what makes it interesting. I cannot write it. I know of humanity's bad nature, but I only know it from the outside. I know it from watching it, and feeling it oppress me. I know it on a crude, Global scale. I know it not intimately, anymore. When I read Ovid, I am reminded of my youth, chasing the girls around on the playground in boyish lust, like Pan and Syrinx, but that's over. That person died a long time ago. He died when I found Christ, and when I fell in love with Jorgia. An idea of love captivates me. Love actually saved me. Though it was love with a phantom, the idea of peace. What I write, I wish to capture peace. For, I tried writing my mythology, and I found it lacking the soap operatic feel and texture of a true mythology. I do not wish to make characters, populate my worlds---that author is dead, too. The imagination I had as a boy is cultured into a prosaic mind, wishing to merely find meaning. 

The King of Assyria heard a voice telling him of a rumor, I can only hope the same happens to Putin. And this war ends. Yet, I wish not to write the soap opera of kings and queens, of Putin and Elizabeth. I wish not to write the soap opera of history. My ability is waning---if I push, I might bring about another delusion. For somewhere does the material come, and I hope to comfort you with my arcane stories, and poems. I wish to give you peace with them. The waking up from a dream. But, my creative spring is tapped.

6. Uncle Tom's Cabin Analysis

What does 2Pac and a Racist White Southern Scholar have in common? A lot, actually. They both believe the Civil War was not fought because of slavery, and they both probably use the slur Uncle Tom.

Let's just go down the line.

First, the Civil War was fought over Slavery. There can be no other reason for the war to be fought. Mark Twain, having joined the Rebel Army, left the army the very same day. Why? Because he was told it was about protecting the South's right to own slaves. Abraham Lincoln couldn't avoid civil war because the die had been cast. Slavery would be abolished soon. The South, forecasting those devices, preemptively started the bloodiest war in American History.

Uncle Tom, as it were, was a widely disseminated tract in support of abolishing slavery. Uncle Tom was a Christ Like Figure who died in service to his fellow blacks, dying so they could run free. Then, the war garnered such support for the abolition of slavery, that people actually joined the Union army in droves because they had read Uncle Tom's Cabin, and felt sympathy, as the work humanized black people in the eyes of white Northerners.

Also, the Battle Hymn of the Republic was written for the express intent of freeing blacks. The Northerners had the song, sung the song---as did the South, but they just appropriated the song---and the North sung in the lyrics, "He died to make men holy, LET US LIVE TO MAKE MEN FREE, His truth is marching on."

Also, the reason Uncle Tom is a pejorative, is because racist Southerners created journals which stigmatized Uncle Tom, and they began making satirical plays called "Tom Plays" Throughout the South which made Uncle Tom into a racist figure. It was, for express intentions, the White Southerners who created these Tom Plays, as they were salty for having lost the war due to the enormous recruitment by the sentiment Uncle Tom's Cabin created.

Then, if that weren't bad enough, those same journals created the stigma against sentimentalism in art. Bleeding into our current situation where gaudy and grotesque and bathos and scatological art is patronized. Because beauty, and all sentiments of feelings which are pure and awesome and right have been deemed as "Kitsch" by a group of racist White Southerners looking to do as much damage as they can.

Now, the Black Lives Matter movement is a propagate of these same Racist Southerner's ideas, by calling productive Blacks "Uncle Tom", by scathing beautiful art, by hating intrinsically well formed material. 2Pac couldn't be more wrong about the Civil War. Every drop of blood spilled was in the aim of ending Chattel Slavery. The Fourteenth Amendment was drafted as a direct result of the war. The Emancipation Proclamation was created because of the war.

What's truly racist, is Black Lives Matter because it is the invention of the White Southern Racism, to create a straw man, enemy image to burn down as an effigy of rage in the face of White Nationalism. Do not be fooled.

7. Meditation on the Word Tattoo in Seamus Heaney's Name Lore Poem Broagh

It's easy to read this poem, and get a completely different viewpoint. It's almost entirely inescapable for me, living by the Susquehanna, to see something entirely wrong in the poem. Though, a neat little interpolation I drew from it... it wasn't correct.

The fact remains, that I put question marks by the word "Tattoo". I didn't like it in the poem, and thought Heaney was just pandering to a sort of strange ethos. It seemed strangely placed, and it should have been my first clue to slow down, and look at the poem more carefully. As, the "Tattoo" was taking another denotation, that of a "drumming" and it was describing the rain.

Many things I got correct. Such as the description of the Tillage, the time of year---because I'm from a rural area too, these sorts of questions come to my mind. Yet, many things I got wrong, such as "rig" which didn't mean boat, but meant the tillage. And also "Tattoo", which dubiously I thought was placed in the poem, and I had begun to think I was reading an amateur. I followed through with my investigation, not knowing that "docken" wasn't "dock" as that's Scottish, but was "docken" as in dandelion, thistle, stinkweed, milkweed and the such. I had interpreted half the poem, yet why didn't I use my literary pretension, to assume that "Tattoo" in this instance wasn't being used to represent what I commonly think, and then the rest of the poem as well. It's a trap, of course, Seamus placed in the poem. Probably one to pleasantly drive a reader like myself to this other interpolation. Not dubiously, would a skilled reader place question marks next to "Tattoo", yet a more skilled reader might try to find sense three or four of the word in Webster.

Which, this brings one to a question, of the reader's aptitude. Had I gone with my better instincts, in being skeptical of the word "Tattoo" and not been tainted by instagram poetry where such things would unapologetically be thrown around... I may have gotten the right answer on a first draw through.

The poem is using idiomatic expression from the locale of Broagh; its dialect. So, pad, rig, docken and tattoo are not portmanteau or expressions of boats. It should be obvious to anyone, knowing the river is too small, the Moyola river is too small to have boats or docks in it. Yet, none are clued into that, unless they take great offense at the word "tattoo" and are thereby questioning the very deceptive nature of the wording of the poem. Seamus is aware of this, too, as there is a pleasant little side trek one can go on without first knowing the true meaning of the word. Yet, it would assume that Seamus would use the word "Tattoo" and refer it to a footprint. Such a thing is of an inferior quality for a poet of such high caliber, and ought to be condescended to the local dialect, over one's own prejudices and word associations. (Unless, of course, Seamus was superbly skilled enough to dual wield a metaphor, and thereby allow negative capability so a lay reader can also enjoy the poem. To which, if the poem has negative capability, Seamus' mastery is all to forward to make the use of Second Person Figure, to say that this significant character's footprint is now tattooed into the soil of Broagh. But, one would have to interpret the rhubarb is what ends like the "gh" and not the rain; to which, I received a pleasant meditation on man's impact on the environment with farming, getting a sort of sense of how we, through this, are a part of the land and nature, too.)

The poem was beautiful, and the tradition is called Dinnseanchas, or more appropriately simplified to, "Place-lore." It's creating a mythology for the place---the very specific locale. And all of that is fine, yet how do we get to the true interpretation of the poem? Obviously Seamus gets us there by placing a gaudy word like "tattoo" into the poem, to help us be skeptical of some of the word choice. To make us tread more carefully through the poem's use of seemingly obvious words. Because, after using the internet to search the river, it should be clear the river is not wide like the Susquehanna, but is rather what we would call around my parts a creek. There can't be docks and  boats on it. Which, is why "tattoo", the specious word choice, becomes the most critical word in the poem, to help the reader doubt their first impressions on the poem's meaning. 

As the poem is not about the narrator's childhood, where he would place shoeprints in the tillage. As there's another carefully chosen word, an innocuous one, "You". The poem uses Second Person Figure. Therefore, the narrator is talking to someone other than himself. Which, the word "tattoo" ought to bring one to this subtle doubt of their own first impressions. The rabbit hole is quite pleasant, but it's not the true interpretation of the poem, which can only be rendered in such a way that "tattoo" is the word which brings us to doubt our first impressions. And if one places question marks next to the word, to question why Seamus would use such a base word, it is meant to bring one to that question, and to be answered by a rarer, and more beautiful and poetic denotation.

8. An Analysis of Coleridge's Poem “To a Friend Who Expressed His Desire to Write No More Poetry.”

I have written epics on American history. In perfect form. I have written epics on English Mythology, doing what Tolkien wished to do---his question was my inspiration. I have written Byronic Heroes who fought the demons of my own soul. I have written a thousand or so short poems of various degrees of quality---some might even say, true poesy. I have written cogently on both subjects of Math and Humanity. I have mastered two philosophies, Platonic Forms and Existentialism. I am mastering a third, Epicureanism. I have found kernels which prove God's existence.

I come to this poem, and humbly I say I haven't written anything so beautiful. At first, I figure a friend would encourage another friend to write poetry---Charles Lamb was a lamb of a man. But, as I read it, unable to penetrate the verse, I start to find poison, Achilles, Hight Castalie---that is to be cast on a lying path. I find a true friend. And I read Charles Lamb's poetry. I see the sort of thing I see in the modern poet. That if I were their friend, I would tell them to stop writing it.

Yet, I follow his advice, too. Not because I haven't written anything good, but because there is nowhere left to write. And mystically, he predicts me with his allusion to Auld Lang Syne. The mystery of the Prophets. 

I believe I, too, have written so much over the years. I have mastered poetry. I have mastered my thoughts. Now, rather, I wish to tell what others have spoken. What others have written. For I have a knack for telling the hidden secrets of another's verse. Even the things they do not know or see. And in that is the ministry I have. To draw forth the precious out of the worthless, as God said to Jeremiah. For what is all of this poetry even I write?

Where do I improve? Tell me. I have written in perfect verse the critical moment of American History. I have written in beautiful poesy the Mythology of England. I have touched every subject under the sun---I know no other to be explored. What is within me, is completely exhausted. Yet, I have it in me to write. What can I improve upon with my poetry? Written every Tall Tale again, written even a Pseudepigraphal Gospel. Short of writing a verse of scripture, I have no other mountain to climb. And no scripture, I am afraid, shall ever pour forth from my pen if I am to remain an honest man.

There is nowhere left in poetry. Nor is there anywhere left in fiction. I have written worlds deep, rich---Trilogies the caliber of War and Peace, Novellas of literature like Austen or Melville. I've written my first taste of poetry like Eliot---I was told. I was told, "Your production is Godly." Godly, as in praising God... Yet, it is not godlike. It is the fruit of an imagination which was given to me as a child. My whole life, up to about fifteen, was invented worlds. As a grown up, it shifts to poetry. And finally, as a Sage, it ought to end in essay.

What is the sage? Simply, the man who finds God's Word on his own. And with one more leap, I shall be a disciple.

And more importantly, why ought I write anything more? If it is not to discover what others have found?

9. The Hubris of the Modern Poet Asking “What is Poetry?”

I see many struggle with this question. And many answer it, by asking the question, and then telling the answer lies within themselves. Simply, who they are.

Truthfully, unless you're interesting, don't write poetry about yourself. Not even for yourself. As, poetry, unless it's coupled with wisdom, is a narcissistic task. Of selfishly delving deep into one's own things. Selfishly drawing out a portrait---getting more and more shallow--of you the artist.

If you cannot, by any means, relate to the world around you, don't write a single verse. Poetry, if about oneself, must be tainted with self-denial. It must be tainted by doubt, self reflection. It must peer into the failings---not the greatness. And if you do write a story of greatness, make sure you build a hero. Maybe a Byronic Hero, but a hero nonetheless to avoid the pathology of narcissism that poetry entails for the average writer.

Singing of love is a lute's charm, yet if it is not truly love? Why sing of it? If it is the same tired failure, of relationships failing because of one's own desire... then why write of it? Write rather of your failing toward your lover. That is a poem I haven't heard many do.

The Poem is an observation of the world around you. It is the decisive exploration of a thought. A poem is not a rambling of how great you are. Or how misunderstood. Rather, poetry ought to be---if it's well done---about something entirely new and alien, something wholly not of yourself. If it's to be done right, the poem should divert to conversations happening in the real world. As they relate to you, maybe. But, not simply your relation to yourself. You self-esteem.

The true poet is the one who draws forth wisdom, and relates it. A poem has the energy of an equation being solved, and wise men are the ones who get pleasure from it. For, to the average manchild and womanchild this involves work. Very unpopular, they'd rather the receding mess that is modern poetry, and obey the rule of self indulgence. "I, too, can be successful. I, too, if my words are pretty enough, can make it in this world." The ends are certain. It is the end of success, fame, affluence. It is not the ends of truth or learning or joy.

For this, the poet of modern day needs to put down the pen, as Coleridge said to Charles Lamb. For it is an asp's bite, driving oneself into the bitter revilings of narcissism. And so is true for any act of written word. Every word you write ought to be to succumbed to the world around you... not the world as it exists within your mind. That is true art.

So, I shall, in one fell swoop, interpret almost every amateur poet.

They are special, and they are offensive. They have great things to say, and go on and on about themselves and how special they are. True narcissists. They talk about their heroism, their failed love---on and on about how misunderstood they are. They get hundreds of followers who want to be special, too.

They have a hubris, which like many professional athletes is reinforced by their success. Maybe they are special? For, their story of how heroic they are---void of imagination, or theme, or crux, or content---tells all the simplistic story of how greatly misunderstood, how greatly wise they are. Nobody likes them... of course. They have great mysteries to tell us of themselves. They tell us the mystery of themselves, and its end is themselves.

There are a few poets whom this is not the case. And I typically will honor them by interpreting their work. They have heroic deeds. They have things to speak. They have observations, nuanced views, making the strange mundane, or making the mundane strange. They can rightly talk about themselves, for they have learned the subtle art of self-denial. The subtle art of self scathing. No true artist can be a poet unless they have that little man in them telling them and the world their failings.

The poets of modern day sing of themes... like a kaleidoscope being twirled around and around. Telling of failed love---making us horny. Is it truly skill? Is it anything worth writing? They garner their followers---for it seems the pack follows what mostly resembles their own craft. "Should that be successful, then so shall I."  Thus, the Instagram Poetry gets popular, sold for millions of dollars.

I don't mean to sneer, but if the whole interpretation of the poem is just a matter of getting some vague notion of you, I don't think that's a poem. Unless you have made an observation about the real world, or some real conundrum or mystery. Those who are true poets will understand this. The frustration of seeing the flocks tell of how special and offensive they are. No... what I write is offensive. Because I have the audacity to speak.

10. Analysis of the Redbreast Chasing the Butterfly by William Wordsworth

One of the most interesting things was observed by me, while doing an analysis of this poem last night. The fact that Wordsworth transposed his Shadow onto the Robin. Making the Robin equal to a "False Prophet." The text is clear... And I'd believe he's talking about Robert Southey, and possibly insinuating a superficial relationship between the two of them; at the end, he clearly says to either commit to the friendship or "Leave him alone." It's almost, however, like Wordsworth is transposing his shadow upon the Robin---as who the figure is is only speculative---there's some non compos mentis moments in the poem, where there's an allusion to misbehavior happening with children in the leaves. Where he gets this, is likely material from dealing with his shadow... as I struggle with imagery of the same. Just in different ways.

The poem struck me, as in my own poetry, there's this figure who's like the shadow. I make him into a doppelganger, and I understand him through Biblical Turn of Phrase such as Micah 7 where it says that "Our sin will be cast into the sea" or in Isaiah 53, where the poem literally says that Christ burdens our "Contagion" which I believe means something like "Daemon." The Shadow element of the soul, which the great poets touch upon. Even Bob Dylan has touched upon this shadow; the universal figure of the "False Prophet"; so has Byron, whom Child Harold's Pilgrimage is about his very shadow. There is a strain of great poets to be talking about this enigmatic figure. In Hosea it says "Death is more prosperous than his brethren."

This figure is ubiquitous throughout all poetry. It may just be the Daemon which Christ subdues for us. The burden which Christ carries within Him, according to Isaiah 53. Because Wordsworth is struggling with this deep imbedded evil. The truth is, Wordsworth struggled with Schizophrenia, and judging by my own dealings with it it normally is when our shadow comes into conscious thought, and the "Daemon" is consciously touched. Which causes the sickness of the soul, and thereby, creates the paranoia. Yet, the "Daemon" is burdened by Christ; the sin nature in all of us, which is capable of having "Covered with leaves the little children,/ So painfully in the wood?" and there's a question mark. It touches upon my conscience latent reminiscing of the Daemon... either projected outward or inward. In Wordsworth's case it is projected outward, into a persecution delusion. In my case, it's projected inward, into a Doppelganger delusion. In either case, we split the Shadow into an individual separate from ourselves. A lot of great poets do this, split the shadow self and lay accusations upon him. The closer that shadow is to our own person, the more we understand ourselves to be in need of Christ. Yet, it is the figure of "Death" which Wordsworth is talking about. Death is Who Jung called the Shadow Self; Our Sin Nature; or as Isaiah 53 puts it, our "Contagion" or "Daemon".

11. White Doe of Rylestone 

12. Paradise Lost


Christ Borne

Aphorism 1. We can know a man's idolatry through the sins he imparts on Jesus.

Aphorism 2. If your image of Christ isn't wholly unblemished, then neither can you be.

Aphorism 3. I once saw a fool boast, "Jesus loves me". Their sin caused a great fall, but then they continued to say, "Jesus would never cause me to fall."

Aphorism 4. I saw a shrine to a wicked man destroyed by a thunder bolt.

Aphorism 5. If one understood Einstein, it wouldn't be impressive that light is both a wave and particle---measured, it will be a particle, yet moves at the fastest speed allowable; therefore, those particles will be waves when not slowed down in a lab.

Aphorism 6. I'm skeptical that merely observing something changes its quantum reaction---I think like light, it makes more sense that it will just behave different when isolated. I'm skeptical of New Age mysticism because I do, Mr. Dawkins, understand science.

Aphorism 7. Choosing a mate ought to be as comfortable a decision as settling into a drawn bath. If love doesn't come that easy, then don't make the mistake of sleeping with them.

Aphorism 8. If love comes naturally, make the mistake of marrying before making the mistake of getting into bed.

Aphorism 9. I've seen so many with good intentions fail to do good. That is why faith is a prerequisite for good works.

Aphorism 10. The planets, sun, moon and stars move exactly how they will. It can be calculated out to infinity. Every body in the universe interacts with time according to its own gravity. Yet, from wherever you stand, all other bodies move relative to your world, keeping all within the same breadth.

Aphorism 11. The sin we are most outraged about in others, is a sin we ourselves have tasted and feared.

Aphorism 12. Prison is the most unforgiving environment. That's how I know guilt is the root cause of all moral outrage.

Aphorism 13. A fool once said, "If you don't sin, Jesus died for nothing." I know she has sin. It's just society is more forgiving toward hers.

Aphorism 14. If a society accepted rape, no one would be ashamed of it. I'm glad I live in a society that understands its gravity. However, all other sins of a carnal nature are just as serious.

Aphorism 15. Adultery, Divorce, Sodomy, Transsexuality, Premarital Sex, Polyamory, Serial Monogamy, Bitterness, Judgment, Hatred, Self-Conceit, Self-Righteousness, Self Centeredness, Ingratitude, and Dishonoring the Sabbath are all carnal sins which our culture deems are noble.

Aphorism 16. To know why our culture is so unhappy, just look at all the sin it calls good.

Aphorism 17. Not all modern inventions are bad. Just like not all old customs are good.

Aphorism 18. Some people desire there to be no meaning.

Aphorism 19. Life is a struggle between Meaning and Nonentity; Good and Evil; Right and Wrong; Kindness and Cruelty; Love and Self-Love... Truth and Aught.

Aphorism 20. The biggest decision in life, is to believe in something or nothing at all.

Aphorism 21. A Rational Moralist has more in common with me than a Christian Fundamentalist.

Aphorism 22. Do not mistake my skepticism. I am fully convinced of the Bodily Resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Aphorism 23. The Bible is true, but not literally. 

Aphorism 24. I'm 100% certain God exists, and He is the God of the Bible; but, I have a different way of understanding Him than most people.

Aphorism 25. Saul died in two different ways. Yet, I'm more skeptical of the Bible's skeptics, than I am of Childlike faith.

Aphorism 26. Jesus, bear our contagion.

Aphorism 27. It is because I sinned---and know you have too---that I believe in the redemptive grace of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

Aphorism 28. I believe all of Genesis literally happened, just not in the literal sense Creationists do.

Aphorism 29. In my mind, prophecy refers to Catholics as Judah, Protestants as Israel, and Orthodox as Ephraim. That is how I understand it, and I've made many true predictions that way.

Aphorism 30. Prophecy is the best medicine. It is continually applicable, based on our actions, thoughts and deeds.

Aphorism 31. Every story in the Bible is true. Very miniscule errors appear to remind us not to worship it, over what we already knew was right.

Aphorism 32. It's not true that history disproves the Bible. Rather, some very curious details corroborate scripture, rather than obscure it.

Aphorism 33. Materialism is its own proof of why belief is valid. In all its wisdom, its greatest attribution to moral philosophy is a work called the "Selfish Gene."

Aphorism 34. Moral Rationalism makes sense, only if morals are attained a posteriori and not a priori. 

Aphorism 35. I think, if one looked throughout all of history, they'd find the most stable and prosperous times were those which best reflected the morals of Jehovah.

Aphorism 36. I saw a man with wisdom contest a man without. The controversy was on good conduct.

Aphorism 37. The wise atheist sees the pitfalls of religion, that it clearly undermines the most basic truths. However, the same atheist cannot know when to yield to exceptions.

Aphorism 38. Canaanites were pedophiles, murderers, child rapists, sacrificed babies, ate those babies, and did all sorts of other horrific things. Yet, prominent intellectuals defend them as if they were innocent.

Aphorism 39. I believe science can find moral truth. Yet, will we accept its findings?

Aphorism 40. Say a perfect moral Law is codified through science---Mankind could only tyrannize with such a stupid force.

Aphorism 41. God exists, necessarily, to judge.

Aphorism 42. The stupidest man I've known, is also one with a high IQ.

Aphorism 43. The clear and present danger of hell is a good deterrent for mischief.

Aphorism 44. The fault in modern Christianity, is that they've forgotten to, also, do good. 

Aphorism 45. When I hear a preacher babble, I turn off his sermon.

Aphorism 46. A ten minute sermon is good enough in most cases. Let the service be devoted to prayer and music, and give the congregation their part to play.

Aphorism 47. Modern Christians are in disorder, or they falsely believe there are no more miracles.

Aphorism 48. If you see a child rolling on the floor during church, rebuke him.

Aphorism 49. Church ought to be melancholy, and filled with rest. Not rowdy and like a rock concert.

Aphorism 50. My sweetest moments of Worship were at Bethel; yet, they were sweet because I sat still before the LORD.

Aphorism 51. The Bible is quite cogent, actually.

Aphorism 52. A preacher ought to spend the entire week shepherding his congregation; rather, most think event calendars and standing for an hour at the pulpit each Sunday is their work.

Aphorism 53. A preacher is not a therapist. He is the one who tells you what the shrink isn't allowed to.

Aphorism 54. If a man has a dark cloud over him, don't automatically assume it's there because he sinned. Likely he did, but your job is to dissipate it.

Aphorism 55. Ministering the truth resolves the soul's conflict.

Aphorism 56. When Jesus said, "This kind comes out only by prayer and fasting," He meant talking to God about the person's ill, and repenting and abstaining from wrongdoing.

Aphorism 57. Starving yourself has no spiritual benefits. According to Isaiah.

Aphorism 58. Children, screaming "Jesus" in the streets isn't as effective as talking one on one.

Aphorism 59. Jay Vernon McGee has deflated me on numerous occasions. And I love him for it.

Aphorism 60. I've encountered Paul Washer's train. That famous sermon of his was one I truly understood.

Aphorism 61. The world hates Mark Driscoll, yet I don't.

Aphorism 62. Ray Comfort would be skeptical of me, yet I'm not Christ; so he ought to be.

Aphorism 63. Bobby Hill, from Maryland, is my favorite preacher. 

Aphorism 64. Matthew Henry Laurens is my favorite commentary. I guess I have more in common with an old Baptist pastor than I thought.

Aphorism 65. C. S. Lewis, G. K. Chesterton, John Bunyan and St. Augustine fed me. As I hope to feed others, despite all our faults and follies.

Aphorism 66. Bishop Robert Barron is a man of God,---yet I exhort him not to forget the exclusivity of the Gospel.

Aphorism 67. Any living man can fall by sin---I ascribe to the Athanasian Creed that we must hold onto the Faith for life.

Aphorism 68. John Bunyan's Calvinism is true, for he received it in a vision. We must not die upon the way.

Aphorism 69. If you love God, you'll keep His commandments.

Aphorism 70. If you do not love God, you're better not believing in Him.

Aphorism 71. God will spit out the Luke Warm Christian---that is the Christian who will not renounce their sins.

Aphorism 72. C. S. Lewis spoke swearwords in Narnia and The Space Trilogy. I hope one day my work is just like his; edifying and my offense overlooked.

Aphorism 73. A creative man must use his creativity to serve God.

Aphorism 74. A man given a mind to fantasize must exert all of it for the Kingdom.

Aphorism 75. This is my work.

Aphorism 76. I have produced a lot of it.

Aphorism 77. One day I hope to Shepherd a congregation, yet I am not above reproach. So, I can't. Therefore, I hope my wisdom is used to build and edify a new church age, one stronger and more convinced of Christ than any other.

Aphorism 78. Epicureanism and Christianity work together well in Western Culture. Epicureanism is the Heart and Christianity the Soul.

Aphorism 79. Everything results from cause and effect. The cause of making bad choices, results in the effect of poor quality life.

Aphorism 80. I'm not sure if a man can be forgiven in this life. That's why it's so important for a man to believe in the other.

Aphorism 81. God doesn't want perfect people.

Aphorism 82. The most foolish turd says with a straight face, "I haven't sinned."

Aphorism 83. Charles Bukowski was wise, in that he realized there isn't much to the American life.

Aphorism 84. Byron was wise, in that he realized Christendom would some day be replaced.

Aphorism 85. Nietzsche was wise, in that he realized if God didn't exist, then neither ought morality.

Aphorism 86. Yeats was wise, in that he saw peace was superior to liberty.

Aphorism 87. Adonis is wise, in that he understands American Decadence, and that democracy is not ubiquitous.

Aphorism 88. Sometimes a little foolishness is needed.

Aphorism 89. Amaris Erin Jorgia O'Conner is the name of the lover I have dreamt up.

Aphorism 90. Like Chateaubriand or Dante---if you consider them poets---I have conjured an ideal woman. She has helped me through many dark times.

Aphorism 91. If we are married to Zion, and God created humanity from Earth's soil... I say that's the thing I'm most excited about.

Aphorism 92. The cool man, is the foolish man.

Aphorism 93. I thought of walking into a room with saints, like I made a grand entrance and was important, but I realized it would probably look ridiculous.

Aphorism 94. Good people aren't genetically disposed toward good---they're actually the ones who know just how genetically screwed they are.

Aphorism 95. I'm sure the purest individuals---as termed by genetics---have done some really awful things.

Aphorism 96. The problem with a good natured man, is that he doesn't realize he is capable of great evil.

Aphorism 97. Positivity is a sickness leading to a negative outcome.

Aphorism 98. Wise men mourn over the masses' stupidity.

Aphorism 99. Wise men also mourn over their own stupidity.

Aphorism 100. I am honest;---that's all I can say.

Aphorism 101. People come so close to finding truth, and then start adding to it their own ideas.

Aphorism 102. The age old problem with mankind, is they find a truth, and think they've found it all.

Aphorism 103. Pythagoreans and African Sages have a lot in common---finding a rational foundation for truth, they begin to make it into a religion.

Aphorism 104. The problem with scientists, is that they assume because they understand it, they can understand humanity.

Aphorism 105. Humans change with the seasons and times---no one point in history is like any other, therefore, what social science we discover is valid only for today.

Aphorism 106. There are overreaching truths across all time and history---one of them, is to never underestimate the intellect of predecessors.

Aphorism 107. Black and white people are equally brilliant.

Aphorism 108. Black and white people get stuck in the same pitfalls.

Aphorism 109. Asians and North Africans are better developed than the Western World because they retained filial respect.

Aphorism 110. Black Africa and North Africa are two very different worlds.

Aphorism 111. There is more in common between the White race and the Black race, than the White race and the Asian races.

Aphorism 112. Women are smarter than men, but lack the judgment men do.

Aphorism 113. What distinguishes between a Lawyer and a Judge is that the Lawyer knows the Law while the Judge knows when to ignore it.

Aphorism 114. A woman is an intelligent creature, yet a man sees what is right.

Aphorism 115. The Law, if it is unjust, ought to be overruled in judgment.

Aphorism 116. Men are born knowing right from wrong.

Aphorism 117. Women are born knowing right from wrong, yet deceive themselves quite easier.

Aphorism 118. A woman who is wise, is often one who wants a family and recognizes her shortfallings.

Aphorism 119. I've met several dozen wise women, and each of them wanted a husband more than they wanted a career. Yet, what was equally true was each of them had careers thrust upon them for their wisdom.

Aphorism 120. Gay means happy.

Aphorism 121. Sick people ought not be in authority.

Aphorism 122. A eunuch with silicon breasts is nigh the highest levels of government.

Aphorism 123. I counsel for peace; sometimes war is necessary for there to be peace.

Aphorism 124. Ukraine, fight bloody and win. The whole world is depending on you.

Aphorism 125. I do not hate Vladimir Putin; nor do I believe he is evil. Rather, I think the times are evil, and a war was inevitable.

Aphorism 126. Life was good in China and Russia until the world went bats.

Aphorism 127. Tyranny is everywhere---there is no good guy right now.

Aphorism 128. John Bunyan said "Slut."

Aphorism 129. I believe in prophecy and revelation happening right now.

Aphorism 130. Satan was at war in Christ's day. He is already on the Earth. We ought not despise him nor revile him. He is instrumental in the destruction of God's enemies.

Aphorism 131. Christians, do not fear Satan or the Mark of the Beast. Fear, instead, Christ and His divine judgment.

Aphorism 132. I hate no one.

Aphorism 133. There is a rational foundation for truth which is established in Christ Jesus.

Aphorism 134. Solomon says not to be overly wise---so, I continue to write books.

Aphorism 135. I hope I store my wisdom for my own benefit, and not merely to enrich another.

Aphorism 136. One of the worst conditions of life, is to have found knowledge, and passed it on to someone else so they would then become wealthy.

Aphorism 137. In my dream I felt Christ's calloused hand pleasantly marking me out for salvation.

Aphorism 138. The most dangerous part of being human, is to have never truly been in love.

Aphorism 139. Christian mysticism is a cloud without water; it is a confession without a miracle.

Aphorism 140. I believe one can find God through a healthy romance---knowing it is good, one can never then say there is no such thing.

Aphorism 141. Homosexuality is wrong because it is selfish.

Aphorism 142. I've never met a homosexual with my notion of love---to them, it's just a chemical reaction. And for that, they will be damned.

Aphorism 143. Love is man's highest ideal.

Aphorism 144. A man or woman who loves does not let themselves feel aggravation.

Aphorism 145. Picking on your lover, or teasing them, is a sign that you ought not have chosen them.

Aphorism 146. A loveless marriage is a curse---it is still wrong, in this instance, to get a divorce.

Aphorism 147. In marriage, your fidelity is important. It sustains the healthy love of all around you, even if you do not have infatuation.

Aphorism 148. The best kind of marriage is one where love is created, not one governed by capricious whims.

Aphorism 149. Love is melancholy.

Aphorism 150. There is nothing better in this world than a happy marriage.

1. Muse; A True Tanka

A muse---for those who
Chase the Beautiful Naiads---
Is a thought from Christ;
Or, it is a thought from hell,
Whichever the poet serves.

2. The Conqueror

The two greatest men in history died at thirty-three.
One, like Satan himself, conquered the unconquerable.
He laid the stones of Tyre into causeways, and his armies
Passed upon them into the isle,---it fulfilled prophecy
As a wise, good hearted preacher once said.
Years before, Nebuchadnezzar laid siege to it by the Trojan Horse.
Yet this, this conqueror scraped the town to the foundations
And built causeways out to the inner island.
It's been said before.

The other, Christ, none truly believe will bear a sword.
They say of Him, "He is gentle, soft, like a blanket
"Which a toddler carries upon his arm, and suckles his fingers
"And cries to." I say, yes, a toddler does this, yet a mature
Christian ought to feed upon more than milk and honey.
The mature Christian ought to look upon the nations
And see war, that this is what Christ will bring at the end.
A sword, which many tens of thousands, a greater
Army than Alexander's, shall purge the seas
And lay the valleys with blood to the coasts.
He will, in one day, accomplish justice, while the saints
Are huddled like Noah in their mystical arks---
They shall never see it, nor taste of it.
They shall huddle together with love
When Daniel's vision shall be accomplished.
We shall look up, and see our bless'ed conqueror---
And we shalt then be carried up, before
The great and mighty battle; where those rotting corpses
Shall remain in the marshes of hell for eternity. Those who remain,
The small remnant we are, shall inherit the Earth,
Never having tasted wrath; but like Jeremiah,
Shall bear our burdens, when we warn
Men not to ask, "What is the Burden of the LORD?"
We will say to you, "It is thou, o foolish man!"

3. Elvis Sings to Me

Elvis sings a song 
I wrote... Yet he sings the words
Better than my words. 
It is like angels singing.
I published in a journal---

The journal was called
Something, but on the barcode
The name was misspelled.
A dubious journal that
I had to pay to publish.

The Elvis song was 
Like my Hail Britannica 
Recording. Some words
Were sung for their lyrical
Flow, differently than the page.

It left some questions 
In my mind, whether my work's
Quality were true.
Yet, dreams of music mean I
Feel peace and accomplishment.

It seems Elvis' 
Song,---the true meaning had come,---
Is God's word. And my
Paltry poetry is a 
Close likeness, but not scripture.

4. Self Reflection

I sit. I think about Micah 7. But, I cannot sit for long. In the Black Screen of the TV, turned off, I see my reflection. I get nervous--- Anxious--- I even hate it. I see an arrogance. I understand what my family is seeing in me.

Inwardly, I feel peace. Like I'm accomplishing my goals, little by little. That I'm winning my battles. That my silence, my inaction, is not contrary to what I'm supposed to be doing right now. Like Micah 7. I sit in darkness. I do not know what else I can do. I say to myself, "I have sinned." 

Seeing myself from the outside, I can see how it drives my family crazy. To see the me perceived by others, it is hateful, arrogant, slovenly, lazy, prideful... That is how I appear when reflected in the TV. I see myself like I am seen by others.

Inwardly, I am not a ravenous wolf. Inwardly, I am calm, reticent, without fear, forming more understanding on the nature of being kindhearted, forgiving and able to trust. I see in my reflection someone else. Like I saw in my mother a sort of nonchalance reflected which wasn't her true feelings. Appearances can be deceiving. It seems like I am not at rest. It seems like I am unwise, lazy, prideful, vain, arrogant... inwardly, I know all of that is the opposite. I am trying my best to see the world through other's eyes, to draw from wisdom a cup of salvation. To understand.

I see what I look like to the outside world. I even am close to hating myself. But, that is not me. Like my mother's mien, I misread it for nonchalance when it was simply her playfulness. We put on an outward display which is not reflecting what is inward. I see myself from the perspective of others. It looks vain... Inwardly, I am contemplating the truths which are foundational to the world. I can see why people hate me. But, I can tell you, what you see in appearance is not who I am underneath. Outwardly, I am a ravenous wolf, but inwardly I am a lamb with a lion's courage and a serpent's wisdom. I look vain, stupid, insecure, lazy, prideful, arrogant,---like I am continually not at ease. But, I know from my reflection that what I seem is not what I am. Inwardly, I am at peace, readying myself to flee and lay aside this world's cares.

5. Writer not a Gamer

You were always better than me at games.
I'd fight my way to Great Tiger
And you'd fight your arch nemesis Mr. Sandman.
I remember at Stratego, you placed
Your troops in illogical order.
No bombs surrounded your flag.
I'd send my rows in columns,
My massive armies,
And you'd take one little guy
And decimate an entire force.
Haphazardly, the guy would walk
An eight getting blown up with a bomb.
My generals would defend, but the damage was already done.
Star Wars, Donkey Kong, and Punch Out
Mario, That game we borrowed from Meredith,
You were always better than me.
I play my cards... but lose.
I can see the strategy to win the game at Risk,
But I refuse to conquer the world.

You were a hero to me,
Able to get to Mr. Sand Man
And beat Soda Popinski.
Your epic foe, Mr. Sandman.
Once, I think I saw you get to the guy
Right before Mike Tyson.
We were never a gaming family...
My scrabble skills are par excellence.
I am able to score above three hundred and seventy
In a two player match regularly.
But, that just gets to my real talent.
Words---I love them.
Meaning. My childhood obsessions 
With gemstones, coins, rocks, plants, birds,
Animals, Alcohols---I wanted to know every kind.
I wanted to know all the different things.
I was very curious... always compiling facts
Data, in encyclopedic form.
Stories I loved, art... I still gorge myself on art.
The more fantastic, the more I loved it.

A part of me would like to be good at games.
But, I am not good at them.
I never was. I'd get to Great Tiger
At about the age of seven.
I showed no prodigiousness at games.
I can understand the rules...
I'm good at memorizing specific details
And remembering after a long time how games ought to be played.
But, even chess, I didn't know about En Passant 
Until I was about twenty-four.
When John played a trick on me, and I thought he lost his mind.
I thought I could get one past him
By jumping my pawn past his.
And that's when I learned it.

Our family, loving games, were not top quality gamers.
You could just barely beat Soda Popinksi. He was a rival of ours
And I'd watch you, with starry eyes,
Sometimes get to the Sandman...
And he, he was our arch nemesis.
And once you beat him. Only once.
And you got knocked out in one punch
By Macho Man.

I guess I'm saying I ought to be a writer.
As, the only other thing I could be is a gamer.
And I'm not very good at games.
Love you, Mom.

6. Uncle Don

A cherry Chevy in the Apartment's garage
Sits with a lock and a yellow sign with a handgun on it,
Warning not to enter. A laborer of Caterpillar
A father to two, a good husband...
His PA Dutch accent was thick.
He was simply spoken, a hard worker
Wore suspenders... He was Blue Collar Pennsylvania.
I already miss him.

He dated a black woman.
This came as a surprise to us.
He was soft spoken, and once told me
That on an occasion where corporal punishment
Was being used, he took the belt from Pap-pap
And told him, "That's enough of that."
He owned my Great Grandmother's apartment
Which housed her nicely through her life---
That apartment was in our family for generations.
Later he would rent it out and tell us about the tenants.
Some were good, some were bad.

He was salt of the Earth.

There was a twinkle in his eye
When I would tell him about my jobs as a Tree Trimmer.
I never made it at that job,---
A friend always "accidentally" sabotaged my work;
But, I don't remember Don making me feel inadequate.
Rather, I think he was just proud that I put in a day's real work.
He'd always tell me, "You staying out of trouble?"
I'd say, "Always."
We'd talk, while he would smoke his cigarette.
Cigarettes into his seventies---
He and his son would talk mechanic talk
Smoke cigarettes,
And I felt welcomed into the conversation.
He never judged me.
Probably because he and I thought a lot alike.
Mostly alike. That generation I have a lot more in common with
Than my own.

My Big Black Lab was---for a time---
Not a nice dog. Uncle Don walked through our front door
And kneed him in the chest and literally scarred the shit out of him.
He was not a guy you wanted to be on the bad side of.
He was strong, muscular even into his old age.
My Mom said of an old picture of him, that he was a "Hottie".
He was strong, forgiving, righteous,
And I remember him driving me home from my Aunt's
We had a long talk. We both agreed that our cousins 
From out of town were... well... a little bit too liberal.
I don't know if I talked about Jesus with him in that car ride,
But I lived and talked about Jesus a lot.
I only hope somewhere, through osmosis,
He gained a confession.

Yesterday, there was a light in the sky.
My dad and I thought it was a planet.
I went in, and brought out my farmer's Almanac
Which I had just bought, seeing if it were Venus.
It wasn't. Rather, it was a light in the sky,
And I'd like to think that it was his soul passing onto heaven
Checking up on us one last time.
I know he found Jesus.

7. The Robins in February

Two robins fly on a branch in February...
The naturalists lie through their ignorance.
"It's not uncommon to see the bird
"In winter time." Yet, I never have until today.
Never once, in thirty-two years
Have I seen a robin in February.
The Blackbirds had I seen,
And in one week, the Robin?
A sure sign of spring,
Should the Robin tarry in winter
It means eternal spring.
It means, unfortunately, the climate
Is changing. There is no way
A half-millennia's worth of wisdom is wrong.

8. Charcuterie

Three cheeses,
Smoked Gouda, Drunken Goat Cheese,
And a third orange one with some fruitiness.
Strawberries, and succulent grapes---
It's a good season for grapes.
Conversation swings to metaphor.
Everyone is trying to understand what is a metaphor.
Ask the poet in the room...
But Aunt M________ was right
Yet was scolded.

I offer to the semi-curious onlookers
"Dead Metaphor."
None ever heard of that.
There is also complex metaphor.
There is negative capability---
When a poem has doubtful interpretations
Or perhaps two or three.
Some also call that Wit,
When you can draw out two or three meanings for a poem.

A simile uses "Like" or "As".
I didn't dare get into Ekphrasis or something more complex.
Though, I did get to a dead metaphor,
And this pleased A____.
He'd never heard of it before.
A way to explain it,
Is a metaphor so commonly applied to an object
That it became a part of the lexicon.
A "Tailgate" is a dead metaphor.
Emphasis on the "Tail"
That it applies to the "Tail"
Of the truck. Others are "Causeway"
Or "Parkway" which are different a little
As those entail also oxymoronic statements.

I learned that these concepts are difficult
For even an intelligent person to understand;
My family is not stupid.
As a lawyer struggled to understand them.
Apparently an entire argument erupted at his office
Over their specific meanings.
You just got to kind of feel them out...
Like with all literature.

Some can be applied two or three different ways.
Idiom was understood.
We agreed that "A watched pot never boils"
Was proverbial. I do agree it is difficult to pin down 
What exactly this device is.
Is it Cliché? Is it Idiom? Is it Proverbial? Is it Metaphor?
Maybe all four.
How it is metaphor, is that it is not literally true
That a watched pot never boils.
But it is counter intuitive, because one sees the common
Activity of watching a pot, so the familiarity hides the deceptive untruth.
 As, certainly, me in my absurd focus during cooking,
I have watched a pot
And seen the moment it has begun to boil.
It kind of has a bubble or two at first, then a few bubbles,
Then bubbles collect on all the sides of the pot,
To which it begins to raise to the top.
And finally, after a slow increase in turbulence,
It begins to rapidly percolate.

Not paying attention to the water boiling,
Which is what the metaphor means,
Shortens the attention, and one doesn't notice
These steps. Rather, at one moment it seems
To be steady---probably steaming a little---
And the next the water rolls in that beautiful way.

I didn't really want to argue. I just listened.
I spoke what I understand is a metaphor.
More of a complex idea that is full and filled with meaning.
It's something like the Logos
Of an old Twilight Zone Episode
Where you know what the episode is really saying.
Which, is likely an idea attached to the real world
Gained through something which is pure fantasy.
Though, nonfiction can have metaphor, too.
The way I understand it.
As, the entire piece builds up to a meaning,
A full idea or revelation about something deeper than the actual
Events being described.
So, true stories can have metaphors in them, too.
A parable is a form of metaphor.
Allegory and Analogy work through metaphor.
As, in literature, metaphor is a parent class
Of a range of literary devices
Which simile is included.

Alyse showed everyone how to eat the smoked salmon.
I preferred it with the Drunken Goat cheese,
And the strawberries elevated the flavor of the grapes.
The strawberries were weak, but even my cousin
Noted, that they made everything around them taste better.
Like a good wine ought to do.

9. A Hard Day's Work

I put in a satisfying day of hard work.
Drank my cokes on break.
Felt achy in every joint.
Tired was the word, pooped,
Treading on hot sidewalks.

I came home, and I lay on my bed.
The hours passed by, slowly.
I realized, that dread from childhood
Of the passage of time slowly
Was built for a purpose.
When one works all day,
Eight hours, and comes home physically exhausted,
Time ought to move more slowly
So you can hopefully be better prepared for the next day's work.

10. My Tired body

I worked my shift.
I could do the shift.
My doctor says I'm in remission.
It wasn't mental this time.
Rather, my body just broke down physically.
I twisted my thumb sideways...
I wanted to stay, but thought better of it.
Why risk a torn ligament?
I went home.
At least it wasn't mental...
Well, unless you count the shock of seeing your thumb bent backward.
Thank God for risperdone.

11. Biblically Accurate Angels

The Cherubim, like
A griffon, haunches with
Its four faces of the
Man, Lion, Eagle and Calf.
It, covered with eyes, has wings.

Then, the Twenty-Four
Elders, look like human men
With hoary, crowned heads
Robed in brightly, shining Cloth.
These are the second.

Then there are the Thrones
Seated nigh Jehovah's Courts
Who are in the form
Of men and women. These sing
Their hymns of Battles and Heart.

Then, Archangels are
Two, Michael and Gabriel,---
Those now tasked as the
Messengers of God,---carry
God's utmost important news.

Then Seraphim, like
A loong, with feathered wings, it
Flies, though it didn't
Cover its face or legs toward
Me when I saw them singing.

Then, are numerous
Angels we do not know of.
Many myriads.
First of, are the raised in Christ,
Then many awesome creatures.

Then the Cherethims
Who are demons, rogue Seraphs
Two rogue Cherubs, whom
Are the Dragon and Beast,---the 
False Prophet is of Satyrs.

Antichrist, I think,
Was an Archangel. He whom
Is Lawless upon
Our forsaken Earth. Satan's
Coup is ordered without Christ.

12. The March Moon

I see the March moon;---
There, it hovers long
Like a contrail in the sky,
But, moves imperceptibly,
Like a large clock's hour hand.

13. Self Assessment

IQ... 157

Myers Briggs... INFP Though I want to be an INFJ, I am not conscientious enough.

Multiple Intelligences

Verbal... 100%
Mathematical... 57%
Musical... 77%
Kinesthetic... 23%
Spatial Visual... 73%
Interpersonal... 90%
Intrapersonal... 100%
Naturalistic... 90%
Existential... 100%

Big 5 Personality

45% on Extroversion
67% on Emotional Stability
80% on Agreeableness
12% on Conscientiousness
96% on Intellect and Imagination

14. Rorschach Poem 1

City of dreams;
The little African with the clay pot
What does this mean?
Dreams, dreams,
What do you mean?
Nothing, except to warn me.
For, I love the form of woman
And see what she seems:
Don’t make me what I’m not, please.
For, my little African woman
With the clay jar at the waters,
There I see you, with your breasts
And your jar to take back to the fathers.
Why say I’m not what I’m calling
When my mind is different than the mass of human falling?
There she is, with her jar by the lake;
Taking her jar to her husband’s plate.
There she is, with her ugly face
Looking like some African women
Who I’ve known one day.
There you are, little African woman
Taking your pot to the waters.
There’s your piercing upon your knee
Decoration, bone jewelry, not a penis you see.
Why, because I see the woman doing
What women have done
For centuries.
Leaning over the watering hole
And getting water for their villagees.
Why, why, does the Rorschach speak such falsehood?
I don’t know, for I see it as I know.
A woman going to a watering hole.
Do you see it too?

15. Rorschach Poem 2

Dreams, dreams
Here, walking toward the mountain
From the desert is a beaver
He searches for the fountains
With his tale extended hither.
There be his head,
And there be his ears
He is white and red
There you go little beaver.
Searching for your home
Beneath the massif’s loom
There you go,
From the desert, like Israel.
Searching for the homes
A mountain of treeheal.
There you go, little beaver
On your little way.
Rorschach, of this what do you say?

16. Rorschach Poem 3

Dreams, Dreams,
Lucille Ball, there you are,
Staring in a mirror.
There you are, Lucille Ball
With your bunny eared fame
Staring into mirrors ready for the play.
There you’ll bumble out onto the stage
And there Ricky and you will do some hilarious thing.
Below your famous bosom
Be the wooden desk
On which you stare into the glassy pane.
There you are, readying for the show;
Putting on make-up, puckering up
To see if it is caked or evenly rose;
Lucille Ball, my friend, ready for a hilarious cancan
Where you’ll bumble to and fro.
Rorschach and Freud, what do you say?
That my mother is Lucille Ball today?
Nay, nay, ridiculous thing;
For look at the woman’s face
And you’ll see!
Alas, in our generation of playboy bunnies
I say she’s comedy gold, readying for a cancan that’s funny.
For, the trick to the Rorschach is to be honest you see:
And to not let your shrink trick you into seeing what you do not see.
For how can anyone who knows Hugh Hefner
Not see a playboy bunny?
So, idiots of mind, make pure from what is most unkind.
The subconscious is a lie, a dastard lie
So, just know all it is is your immediate notions applied!
This is what I see, Lucille Ball
With bunny ears ready for a cancan’s fall;
There she’ll go onto the stage
Where before she put on makeup for fame.
See what is pure in these Rorschachs you see,
And God will heal your mind from any infirmity.

17. Rorschach Poem 4

City of dreams,
Dream away,
Two elephants touching noses today.
There be Dumbo, the flying elephant;
There be his friend as well.
Look at his legs,
And look at his trunk
The Elephant Dumbo displays.
What do the elephants do?
What way do they see in the lake?
They are just walking by the pond
And the one on the right sees himself in the sun
And sees his reflection some say.
Thus is what I see,
An Elephant looking into a lake
After drinking a huge drink;
This elephant, water allayed.

18. Rorschach Poem 5

Dream, Dream, thou City of Dreams
Here sits two men,
Two Russian dancers doing the Mazurka
Upon their red, leather boots.
There they stand, doing their country’s dance
A wardance, from ancient customs old;
Bringing to mind the joys of peace,
And the overcoming of past battles.
The two dance together,
Joining hands in victory.
The old folk dances of the peasants
Of Moscow, celebrating Czar Alexander;
Natasha Rostov doing her Mazurka
In the frock, after the hunt
In victory; victory, Mazurka,
Victory; Victory’s herald
Of the dance of war, for the celebration of peace:
Conqueror Czar Alexander! Defender of Europe.

19. Rorschach Poem 6

Dream, dream, city of dreams:
A moth, a moth, drawn to the flame
A moth, a moth, warmed by the flame
Upon the other side, a butterfly’s wing.
It’s frilled silk
Comes out on the fringe.
A moth, a moth,
Why do these tests make such lies?
For, all I see is a moth and a butterfly.
Men look to the moth,
And say, “Don’t see the alligators upon its wing,”
And now I see them, don’t you?
What a horrid thing!
Yet a bat I do not see,
For it is rightly a moth.
Whoever sees a bat is insane,
Not I, does this make you wroth?
The Rorschach test
Is not real psychology:
But it can help us see our immediate pathology.
Look into the picture,
And draw what you will.
They have exact answers,
According to what’s shown there still.
For this is objectively a moth,
The two dancing figures a Mazurka
The two women, Lucille Ball looking into a mirror
And the Elephants and Water Pots, of this I’m sure of.
Why do we use them?
Because people are sick:
What I say is right,
As it is logically what’s depict.
Insane I may be,
But test me in this:
If after looking at the objects
Are my poems amiss?

20. Rorschach Poem 7

Dream, Dream,
A palm tree over a desert island I see.
Or an angel, there above the New Mexico crests
Spread arms out to give a hug,
And flying through the New Mexican gorge.
There, staring above the gorge
Is the angel,
Her butterfly wings behind her,
Seraphim; there, ruler of the valleys
The New Mexican plateaus.
There she is, or perhaps a palm tree
There in the ravine.
What is so crazy about seeing this?
Turn the picture, and see what, exactly?
I see the palm or seraphim
In the New Mexican Desert;
Why? Because New Mexico is beautiful
Fantastically exotic, yet American nonetheless.
Beautiful, there I imagine flying through the gorge
And seeing the canyons and ravines,
The pillars of rocky sandstone,
A beautiful, sunny landscape
That amazes the eyes.

21. Rorschach Poem 8

Dreams, Dreams
Two blue crabs
Doing a dance to the Eiffel Tower
Beneath a sandy beach.
Some seaweed grows there
With some Lobsters
And some fish.
The big red things are a Coral reef
You see, or maybe a shark or a dauphin?
Don’t know which one.
But today I’m agitated…
So I might see a shark.
Do you see what these are used for?
For immediate impressions, friends
For my mind is agitated
And I know it.

22. Rorschach Poem 9

Dream, Dream
I see fire.
It's a warm, toasty fire.
I can see why you're not supposed to see
Anything so vibrant or green.
A crazy thought crossed through my mind:
Maybe there's some credence to these things.

23. Rorschach Poem 10

The last and final.
What I see is an old man ready for battle
With his blessed armament
And a dragon that just got body slammed.
The thing down at the bottom looks like a toothed beast
And He looks like a warrior in a helmet
Donning a chariot
Ready to take down the Whore of Babylon.
Thus, what I most feared,
To be afraid of authority,
I fear not; for this authority shall bring down my enemies for me.


I'm not a homosexual, at all.
I really can't be homosexual;
In my dreams I make love to women
And am repulsed by men.

However, this primitive response
Is likely inspired by my watching the Jungle Book.
It imprinted on me from a young kid
And I had associated the activity of gathering
Water in a clay pot from the Jungle Book
As a feminine activity.
Displaying a preference for defined gender roles in society.
It is offensive for me to think that the appendage is a penis.
I can't bring myself to think that,
But rather, with the African theme, it is bone jewelry.


The general motif here is of the average individual.


I see Lucile Ball looking into a mirror.
A mirror response indicates narcissism---
While I'm unhappy about that, it is a trait of mine
To be selfish, which I'm working on.
It is also---if I'm interpreting the data correctly---
Indicative of a thoughtful and reflective personality.
However, I'm skeptical of that interpretation
And believe it to be on there to ease the egocentricity
Of people with severe Antisocial personality disorder---
I will interpret the card as having a strained relationship with my mother.
Not narcissism, though I have severe selfish streaks in me which I recognize.

The comical nature of Lucile Ball indicates I find my mother humorous,
Which I do. The Playboy Bunny reflects my pure attitude toward sex.
As, the only sexual image on any of the cards is reflected in the Playboy Bunny
Ears, which remind me of Lucile Ball about ready to do a Cancan---
As I probably also saw that imagery in one of the episodes of I Love Lucy at a young age.


I see two elephants looking into a pool at the bottom of the card.
Not one elephant looking into a reflection, therefore it cannot be a mirror response.
They remind me of Dumbo, which is imprinted on me from my childhood
As a misfit who has always been singled out as being "Special";
Which is probably also where some of the narcissistic tendencies come from.
I see two distinct elephants.


I see two Russian Dancers doing a Mazurka
Which is a form of Russian Peasant dance.
I've seen it many times in the movies
And have read about it in War and Peace---
Therefore my association with it comes from the Russian Novelist's
Description. Which is a celebratory dance;
And in that particular book it was a symbol
Of the Russian vigor winning freedom from the French.


I have the average response for this.


I see a unique item here, a New Mexican Gorge.
Particularly, I see a canyon of hoodoos.
And an "Angel" or "Palm Tree."
The Angel indicates a feeling of being falsely accused
Or being overly punished.
Why in New Mexico is probably from seeing imagery
Of its canyons and ridges in so many TV shows
It has imprinted on me.


I see a lot of the common imagery in this one, too.


I see the common imagery in this.


I see an old man in a helmet  
Who is sitting over a Dragon pelt.
It is very common imagery.
The beast at the bottom looks like a dragon
And I interpret the Dragon as being defeated
By the man in the helmet.
Probably indicating the strong Paternal
Bond I share with my dad.


As a whole, I have four common answers.
I have nine whole answers. Which indicates extremely high levels of creativity.
I have a few movement answers. Which indicates maturity of thinking.
I have a few color answers. Which the colors are usually calm or idyllic.
I have one mirror answer---which is an indication of narcissism, and I'm working on that. It also might express the strained relationship with my mother.
I have a few detail responses, which indicate a moderate level of alertness.
I have one sexual response, which the indication of the nature of it was a pure attitude toward sex, relating it to Playboy.

35. My Creed

First, I attest to the three oldest creeds of the faith.
The Athanasian Creed, the Apostle's Creed and the Nicene Creed.
Second, I believe in John Bunyan's understanding of Calvanism.
I believe we are sealed by God, through the predestination of His election,
And that we must hold onto our Seal, lest we succumb to death by rejecting Christ.
I believe every man, woman and child are called and written into the book of life
Until they have sinned, and were thereby separated. 
Yet, by accepting the LORD Jesus, our names are rewritten back into the book of life.
If we lose our profession of faith, our names will be blotted out of the book of life.
I believe in the Millennial Kingdom, as prophesied in Isaiah, Ezekiel and Revelation;
That it is its own distinct time and dispensation
Meant to give sustenance to those who've suffered in this life; that they shall then gain the things of this world during Christ's reign, and it will be so that the Meek inherit the Earth.
I believe in dispensations, that first men had a vapor of knowledge that God exists
And later, God would reveal Himself to Abraham, and Moses, the Prophets and finally reveal Himself unto Death as Christ Jesus, and furthermore through the Apostles.
I believe works of charity are integral for salvation. If one has sustenance, they must give to the poor, and have a deep desire to do so.
I believe that the Old Covenant is what Jesus referred to as "Finished", 
And that when Paul says "Works" he means "Works" pertaining to the Mosaic Covenant.
I believe in the direct revelation of Prophets and Faith Healings and Tongues---
That all these gifts are still active today.
I do not believe the Bible is literally inerrant, because I believe it must be that men do not worship it above God.
I believe God's law is inherent, and can be observed by those outside of the church, and even discovered and witnessed.
I believe in the Miracles of Genesis, and that God's Omnipotence is above my own understanding.
I believe the morals set down by Christ and His Apostles are the law we must follow, and that the Mosaic Law in the Old Testament we must abstain from following.
I believe every man, woman and child deserves a sentence of death, as described in the Mosaic law, and this is why Christ accomplished grace at the cross, for even disobeying the Sabbath---who is Christ---is a penalty worthy of death.
I believe in the Old Liturgy and Hymns over newly created ones, save that the hymns have rich theology based in the Holy Prophecies of Christ.
I believe the Rapture is at the 6th seal, as is prophesied by Christ and John.
I believe that if I hold onto these beliefs, and never reject them, and all others taught by God through the Holy Scripture and Prophets and Saints, that I shall never see nor taste of death, and I shall never need suffer through the seven years of tribulation.
I believe in laying no barriers to Baptism, save a confession that Jesus is the LORD, that He raised, and a confession of the Trinity.
I believe true salvation is evidenced by a deep desire to Fear God's name, and walk in His commandments.
I believe in the Fruit of the Spirit, Love, Joy, Peace, Patience, Kindness, Gentleness, Self Control, Goodness and Faithfulness are gifts from God, and come from no other source but through God, and are the evidence of the faith.
I believe that I am a sinner, guilty of capital punishment and therefore guilty of hellfire, and so need God's grace to return unto Him, and walk a perfect walk with an unstained conscience.

36. Nursing Home

I can smell the vomit on her breath.
She's so anxious her stomach won't settle.
I sit with her for an hour
And the nurses are finishing their
"Charts." They tell me,
I didn't ask... "We'll set Mel down for her nap
"After we're done with Charts..."
Or whatever the word they used was.
They stood in front of a wall sized tablet computer
And picked at it for about twenty minutes.
I see they are done,
So I politely ask, "Since you're done with charts
"Can you please lay my grandmother down?"
Then they gaslight me, "Charts?"
Like they hadn't just told me they would.
I get a little sense of what it's like in there.
Finally, after two more times asking,
And my grandmother pleading with me to stay
Until they put her to bed,
They take her, and don't even put the 
Safety feet on her wheelchair.
Apparently, that's only if residents
Can't hold up their feet.
I knew otherwise, but didn't say anything.
I tell them three times they are doing good,
And was about to give them commendations.
Then, they put her on her bed,
And frustrated they have to do a little extra work
They shove her socks on, yank up her pants,
And yank her so hard that my Mimi hits her head on the bed board.
She cries out the whole time---I've seen it once before
But not this violent---
And I walk out of the room.
My grandmother pleads for me,
I walk in and tell them, "These are human beings."
My face contorts, I can feel it furrowing into a frown.
They look at me like I had spoken a foreign language.
It never occurs to them that they are doing something wrong.
Because they've been inconvenienced when asked to do their job
They take it out on an eighty-seven year old woman.
I hold in my anger as best I can.
I tell them in the politest tone possible to leave.
They try to turn it back on me, but I won't let them.
They leave, one by one.
I report it. Got a phone call.

My dad had a similar experience with just how cruel people are getting.
The life and soul of people has been sucked out of them,
And all their love and good nature is gone, it seems.
Like Micah said, "Woe is me, for I desired the first ripe fruit off the vine."
I learned recently that the statement was Micah looking for kindness in Israel.

37. A Philosopher

I score so high
On everything
But the most important.

I foresee my folds
Will remain sloppy.
My lack of kinesthetic 
Intelligence precludes me
From all labor positions.

My half-wise math skills
Make me useless
As an engineer or accountant.

My high iq and lack
Of conscientiousness
Makes me useless
As a grunt.

My criminal record
Makes me useless
As a Social Worker
Or Nursing Home

My limitation
As a musician
Makes me proficient
Yet, nowhere near professional.

I have an INFP
Like Tolstoy
       Tolkien &
A dreamer.

Some say Jesus
Was an INFP.

Yet, Jesus was high
On all attributes
Of intelligence.
I realize, with peace,
I cannot be,
Nor ever was,

38. Faith Trumps Magic

Magic---I'm telling preachers---
Is delusion. Sangria, Voodoo,
Canaanite Magic, it works through hatred
And bitterness. The way a crowd
Turns on a righteous man---
Vindictive Indignation is a powerful agent.

The preachers believe, right now,
That Satan performs wonders.
Lying wonders---uncorroborated
By any witnesses.
And what wonders Satan employs,
Drives the witness mad
Though hypnotism or sleight of hand.

Faith, however, is like the wind---
Its substance is unseen,
Yet can topple mountains.
Faith, is to see the Stars
And know that our fortunes lie not within their mystery,
But rather, the stars are a timepiece
Calculating each day so minutely,
That no other in history will ever be like so.
Faith is to see the bounds of human love
To see the bounds of human kindness
And, also, to see the bounds of human pride and folly;
Lust, lasciviousness and deceit,
To discern between them which is good,
And to forsake which is evil.

Faith understands reality rests on God's Will alone,
While Magic assumes The Self is the authority, 
From self-will and self-deceit.
That, when in the presence of Demoniacs,
Rather, it is Power emitting from God
Which casts them out,---
Spiritual impartations 
Aneled upon His people through divine love.

Therefore, what distinguishes between the two,
Is that Faith is real, and Magic is not.

39. Correlation

There is such a thing as Kinesthetic Intelligence.
It was the thing I was teased about in school.
My clumsiness, my doppy failure to cut straight lines
Or make neat letters.
From there, not being able to do the basic
Things the other kids could,
I failed to produce any quality work.
My sloppy handwriting was unreadable,
Or I wrote too slow to keep up in class.
Today, I try to work---
Whether as a Tree Trimmer, or a Laundry Worker
Or a Painter---it isn't waking up early
That I can't do. I actually like waking up early.
It's something deeper. It's the actual work
I fail to do right. I have no sense of body movement;
No sense of where my body is
Or where it was before.
I shoot the paper wad into the trashcan
Six or seven times before it ever goes in.
I feel like such an idiot.
I see my work, and I know it's not going to get better.
Sooner or later, the closets are going to be in disarray,
My sloppy folds will be wrinkled, and it will just get worse.
In painting, my body doesn't know which place I went before.
I have no sense of where I've been, or where I'm going.
In tree trimming---chainsaws and falling logs---
Are not a good place for me to be.
I look at my intelligence, 
And it seems the best job for me is right here.
My intelligence is in the top percentiles
For Verbal, Intrapersonal and Existential intelligence.
For Interpersonal and Natural intelligence
I'm in the nineties.
Writing is my gift---
If America is the land of opportunity,
Then I ought to be able to feed myself from this.
My mind isn't high in Mathematical Intelligence.
This is what I need.

40. I Am a Calvinist

I am a Calvinist.
"But, you believe in choice."

Calvinism isn't the doctrine
Of Free Will versus Determinism.
That is a philosophical presumption
Which doesn't belong in theological discussions.

Calvinism is the doctrine of Predestined Grace
And the Sealing of God's Saints through the Holy Spirit.
That God, and God alone, empowers a man to make choices.
It also assumes that God already knows beforehand
Who will choose God, and thereby receive Grace.
However, how can one be blotted out of the book of life
If there is no choice to follow God's commandments?
Simply, it leaves a lot to ask,
As I can't be Arminian because
If I held onto my Seal of God's Approval myself,
By only my own power,
And it wasn't bound to me through God's seal of grace,
I would be certainly one who would make the wrong choice.

Rather, it is God's love, yet also our love.
True love never fails---and if one is capable of true love
God's Love abides upon that person forever.
If a man is adulterous, he shall be written a bill of divorcement.

41. Melodies

The true condition of a man's soul
Is reflected in the music he desires.

If a man is truly joyful,
He will listen to jubilant tunes.
If a man is truly sad, and doleful,
He will listen to somber melodies.
If violently passionate,
His music will have violent passions.
If he is angry, bitter or hateful,
His music will be angry, bitter and resentful.
If a man is in love, his songs
Will be tinged with the melancholy sting of love.
If a man is anxious, he will listen to
Music which resounds with his anxiety.
If a man is rebellious,
His music will be rebellious.

To know the inward heart of man
Listen to their music.
Listen to the melody---
The lyrics betray very little.
Rather, to sing a sad song with joyful lyrics,
The soul is still sad.
To sing of an anxious heart and its bitter loves,
If the song is at peace, so is the heart at rest.

I have listened to many melodies
And they have always imparted 
The true meaning of my soul.

42. The Statutes of Omri

"O, my child, given for a gay
"Life here upon the earth.
"For, I hate my child more than I;"
Cells it is, Cells which one day grow
Into a manchild or womanchild.
"Foresee into the future, this one
"Is hateful, and will cause misery in life.
"For a gay life, I give unto Moloch and Baphomet
"The little infant, whose face will be torn
"And his little hands ripped out of the womb."

"O, my daughter and son, for a gay
"Life here upon the earth,
"I will castrate myself, and rip off my breasts;
"I will place the soil into my chest,
"And I will take my fingers and fashion a loin.
"I will eat up the LORD's people, and throw 
"Them into prisons. I will make them unable to gain
"And unable to work, for I shall devour them
"For my gay little life here upon the Earth."

O, thou Wiseman, have you seen
The city's name? Do you see the LORD's
Name in the book? Whose Firstborn
Was given for our sins? Whose City
Is given to us in our heavenly abode?
Who is the Daughter of Zion
And why is she under siege?
"Because none do uprightly.
"The rich are corrupt, and oppress
"The poor in their wages. 
"The men exchange their manhood
"To make themselves slaves to sin.
"The women tear their breasts in their mourning.
"The children's bodies are given to ointments
"And the righteous and wise are denied
"The bounty of their craft.
"Rather, the people say, 
"'Be a slave like we, who must follow
"The laws of Omri to survive!'"

43. The Beauty of Chess

The Beauty of Chess
Is that it cannot be a
True, infinite game.
Therefore, one cannot summate
Perfect chess through calculus.

44. Philosophical Treatise

I come to the subject of philosophy today
And in thirteen meter verse shall I hereby allay
For the mystic number Thirteen,---superstition I
Do not believe, nor Kabbalah, nor silly, rogue eyes
Upon the dollar bill are conspiracy; rather
Thirteen is the mystic number of naught, but further
Understand, Thirteen Colonies belayed our good land
To bring Freedom to the Western World and 'twas grand
This Epicurean nightmare which became of us
Where pleasure drove us to the pits of many grievous
Philosophies. And, abandoning Christ we denied
Science; for Epicurean we were 'till this nigh
Point in time, when science improved the lives of many.

My philosophy is quite simple. That tangible 
Chords of History---what we know is found there, devils
Have played at the end of every society. Then
Came war, famine, disease, tyranny, or change would spread
From the land quite organically. From history
I believe we find self evident truths, governed free
From human folly or subjective thoughts. As true as
God's Law, we see proven as a social form of math.
For the Epicurean wisdom of pleasure here 
On Earth, one need follow the Laws of Christ, and so fear
The locomotion of cause and effect, which brings fates
Of ill's misfortune upon men who are profligate.
For, the disobedience to God's law causes such
Invisible strings of faith to break and fracture, thus,
Failure to love and be kind shadows those present times.
For, men not being wise enough to foresee it, find
Mischief for themselves and all around them, and thereby
Create unnatural perditions for all which doth lie
Within their terrible reach---oppressing each other
Through unnatural laws, and the ordinances of Sin.
Thus, the only ones who have joy are those then given 
To what is a most eternal unrest. Then failure
To thrive inhibits all citizens, save those most cruel;
In such world, it is given to the cruel to rule.

45. False Teacher

If I am called "Rabbi"
I am a charlatan.
If I am called "Father"
I am a fraud.
If I will rob you by tithes and offerings
I am a greedy man.
If I tell you you have nothing to fear
I am false.
If I tell you there is not Hell
I shall be thrown there.
If I tell you Christ alone isn't the path to salvation
I am on the broadstreet.
If I tell you I am the only way, and only I can feed you
I will starve you.
If I see you have itching ears, and tell you what you want
Then I am a false teacher.
If I tell you to pay for my prophecies and oracles,
I am a false prophet.
If I shepherd for a wage
I am a false pastor.
If I sell my teachings, and nowhere can you find it freely,
Then I am a greedy man.
If I feed upon you, and don't feed you
I am a wolf.
If I wear silk suits, or two hundred dollar sneakers
Then I have sheared your wool, and worn it as a garment.
If my ministry is to give myself bread, but to not give you bread
Then know I speak of literal mouths, and I am a glutton.
If I kick the homeless off my stoop, or have my spies torment them,
I am a damnable pastor of a damnable church.
If I see the hungry, or the naked, or the prisoner, or the sick,
And do not feed, clothe, and visit them
I am a goat.
If I speak my words with mystic meanings and tell you to only use my words
They are my own words, and I am deluded.
If I tell you to speak a name you have not heard, one with invented tongues
I am a false shepherd.
If I tell you the Bible is false, or that it is corrupted by man
It is only of my own corruption I speak.
If I say, "Catholics are anathema" or "Protestants are anathema"
Then I am anathema.
If I say, "Hindus are saved," "Buddhists are Saved" 
"Muslims are saved" "Atheists and Agnostics are saved"
Then I am not saved.
If I speak of Ecumenicalism, but mean all paths are equal
Then I am unequal.
If I speak not of Ecumenicalism, and say only my denomination is true
Then I am untrue.
If I claim to be a prophet, then test me in everything I say...
Did what I speak six years ago manifest?
Did what I warn about come true?
Was my prophecy erring?
Did I have a heart to bring the sinner to repentance?
Or, did I prophesy only to have my belly filled?
Did I tell you what you wanted to hear?
Or, did I obstruct God's clear ordinance?
Did I falsely spy out my brethren, and secretly wish to destroy him?
Did I visit him in prison, and burden him with a yoke of despair?
Did I visit him with daggers?
Did I speak words falsely into his life, in order to cause him doubt?
Did I minister to him unrest?
Did I ask of you for anything in return for my counsel?
Did I speak words over you, to loll you into a false sense of security?
Did I add to your sickness and disease?
Did I shackle you in captive bonds, while you were yet a captive?
Did I plead for you when you were in chains?
Did I tell the truth about you, when everyone else had lied and formed a plot?
Did I strengthen you in honesty, goodness and humility?
Or, did I speak my own words, in order to cause you to fall?

46. Artificial

The most disturbing
Thing about today, is our
Gravity towards fake
Things. Mario 64
Is a good game, yet isn't real.

Even our knowledge
Of it is falsehood; for we
Explore it through hacks.

47. Onesimus

It was a Christian who discovered Vaccines.
It was a Black Man who discovered Vaccines.
It was Africa which first discovered Vaccines.
It was Black Africa which first discovered Vaccines.

These are the facts.

48. Homer's Theorem

I learn from this,
"The square roots of the two shorter sides' sum 
"Of a Right Triangle
"Is equal to the square root of the longer,"
In purely logical form...
The equality breaks down
And Algebra ceases to function.

Take the Pythagorean Theorem.
If one square roots the C variable, and square roots it again,
The same must be done to the opposite side.
Creating Homer's Theorem.
Frighteningly, I see the problem with modern mathematics,
In that when we are taught pure deduction,
We are never taught the practical applications.
Thus, Algebra breaks down where there is nothing 
Extant to base it on... or at least it can, as proven by Homer's Theorem.

Coincidentally, the Pythagorean Theorem also 
Breaks algebra in itself, that it wouldn't exist
If one could merely square root both sides of an equation.
Then, necessarily, A+B=C is the same as A^2+B^2=C^2
If this axiom holds true.
Which, if it did, well, then there'd be no discovery.

Of course, I'm probably not the first to have trifled with this.
So, I'm confident there is an explanation.

49. Laws of Wisdom --- An Essay

Part 1: Word

	 	1. Form

	In Plato’s philosophy, Form is the idea that all things have within them an ideal form. That every object has within it a shape which governs how it’s defined. And broadening that out, Plato believed that every idea would have an ideal shape---or form. Something which makes it so.
		2. Archetype

	Similarly, an archetype exists like a form. It is a psychological fact, rather than an essential fact. What makes it different, is that an archetype is personal. It exists within the individual, and their own perspective. For instance, if one’s experience with a chair is a stone, as is the case in India, then the ideal object to sit upon is a stone and not a chair. Yet, we fall back to the form of a chair, to identify that both the four legged and back braced object we know is a chair, and so is the stone which the Indian man keeps in his house.
	Archetypes also have objective effects on psychology. For instance, light, dark, love, good, evil---they all affect the psyche similarly. Sun worship draws from the human psyche similar problems in almost every culture it appears. So with the concept of Love is universal, and can be described by Sages and Simpletons alike. That is, unless the archetype is out of alignment, and no longer can the individual define these things. It is, for instance, taking the stone and chair and mistaking it for something completely different. The stone in the Indian’s house is a chair, yet the bird feeder out in the back yard is not a seat; yet a deviant child might climb upon it, and sit atop it if the structure is sound enough. Thereby, the object is being used outside of its parameters, and such use could potentially cause damage to the object. Or, if repeatedly acted upon, it can lead to carelessness later on in life.
	A good example of this, I saw a thirty year old male throwing rocks onto the ice in Lake Pinchot. These were heavy rocks, which could have damaged the structure of the pond, and there were people ice fishing out in the center of the ice. Potentially, damaging the structural integrity of the lake could potentially weaken the ice crust, and cause those on top of the ice to fall through. Yet, the thirty year old man had never developed familiarity with the Form of an iced over lake. And rather, he had identified with his childhood the act of throwing stones into the pond---which is its own taboo, as it scares fish. The act was childish, but an example of one's psychological patterns not lining up with the Form of etiquette, developed for safety.
	I, however, could recognize such an act was not good. Never having been in the situation, I’ve learned that disturbing the natural order of such a thing could weaken the structural integrity of the lake, and cause a potential hazard to those on top of the ice, especially if a crack developed through the crust. Which, throwing rocks onto an icy lake could potentially create cracks and weaknesses.
	The archetype is primarily psychological, and properly aligning one’s archetype to the form creates in men healthy states of being. One could, even, in my previous example, draw forth from the form of love, that if one were loving, they wouldn’t incidentally put another person’s life at risk. As, carelessly experimenting with physics as a child is something which ought to be scolded, and if it’s not, the child doesn’t learn that in their behavior as an adult. Thereby, the child doesn’t learn to care about those around them, but rather selfishly dives into the experimentation with physical objects, which potentially creates a hazard for those around them. Thereby, they are not taught the form of love, which is to have concern for those around you.

		3. Logos

	With this being said, Logos, or Word, is the concept of patterns underneath communication which establish meaning. It is objective, therefore, that certain patterns are established and are created by objective strings of evidence which create thought processes.
	For instance, a deviant child might associate their immediate gratification with a certain pleasure. Thereby, they associate the pleasure as good. Therefore, they create a pattern of being based around maximizing their pleasure. Thereby, they develop a construct of Words around their system of belief, to justify their maximization of pleasure.
	What’s more evident, and more precise, is describing it through mathematics. A formula, such as “Πd”, represents a fact about a circle. It is that if the diameter of a circle is one, the circumference will be Pi. This is important to understand about a circle, that the formula we use is a language. The number system, the letter system, even the algebra. Yet, underneath it is the Logos. The established fact which the language is determining to describe. 
	Therefore, in the example of the child maximizing their pleasure, it seems good to do what is wrong, and thereby receive what is right. If doing wrong causes harm, normally a Law will proscribe against it. However, if the activity does not seem to cause immediate harm, then the individual might determine something is okay. However, given the circumstance of the man throwing rocks onto the ice, he didn’t break the ice. Thereby, it seems right at the moment, for there wasn’t any harm. However, continued behavior of the sorts will objectively lead to a careless situation, in which harm will become more probable. And thereby, Laws are also preventative to shield people from possible dangers. Such as a speed limit.
	Therefore, Laws are created to maximize human pleasure, and the Logos of what objectively is underneath our languages, is what Laws ought to align themselves to. Or, the objective standard of good, which maximizes social harmony. 
	Some men are not smart enough to understand this; in fact, no man is smart enough to understand the whole of it. Which is why sometimes our modern predilection for new things can be very dangerous, that what is old, and established custom for hundreds of years is established to protect the society from unforeseen dangers. Such as oppression from neighbors, or simple apportionment.

Part 2. Existentialism

		1. Choice

	One has a choice in life---really only one---of believing in something, or believing in nothing. Each behavior brings its own consequences. The first, believing in something, brings the consequence of accountability. Of faith. The second, brings the consequence of pleasure seeking, and gratifying all urges regardless of whom it might impede. 	
	Most ethical problems and conflicts are found in this question. Whether to believe in something, and thereby have faith in a Good and Orderly system. Or thereby to ignore it, and fall into the category of a mischief maker. Most people are half between, believing in good to the benefit of themselves, and believing in evil to the detriment of their needs. However, this falls into the outline of believing in nothing. To believe good and evil are based on how things affect you, and your own state of wellbeing, is to essentially believe in nothing. It is to believe there is not an objective standard outside of you, which governs human behavior and action. Rather, it is a belief that all things are beholden to one’s own immediate gratification.
	Therefore, it becomes easy to understand why one will believe in disorder and moral nihilism. Because the choice is easier, and thereby, maximizes the immediate gratification of urges and pleasure. What ultimately happens, is that as these individuals grow more numerous, there is objectively less pleasure for those who are not beholden to such views. Thereby, the choice becomes whether one believes in an objective standard for good, or one does not. Each individual creates consequential trains of ripples within their environment, which effectively impedes on other’s well being, or it adds to other’s well being. 

		2. God or Not
	This leads to the question, “Do morals exist because God exists, or do they exist on their own?” The Bible answers this question in one of my favorite verses, “I will worship toward Thy holy temple, and praise Thy name for Thy lovingkindness and for Thy truth, for Thou hast magnified Thy word above all Thy name. “ There is another verse in the Old Testament that pertains to this:

“1But in the last days it shall come to pass, that the mountain of the house of the LORD shall be established in the top of the mountains, and it shall be exalted above the hills; and people shall flow unto it.
2And many nations shall come, and say, Come, and let us go up to the mountain of the LORD, and to the house of the God of Jacob; and he will teach us of his ways, and we will walk in his paths: for the law shall go forth of Zion, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem.
3And he shall judge among many people, and rebuke strong nations afar off; and they shall beat their swords into plowshares, and their spears into pruninghooks: nation shall not lift up a sword against nation, neither shall they learn war any more.
4But they shall sit every man under his vine and under his fig tree; and none shall make them afraid: for the mouth of the LORD of hosts hath spoken it.
5For all people will walk every one in the name of his god, and we will walk in the name of the LORD our God for ever and ever.”

	These verses determine that God’s law is self evident. That moral truth can be found, and that good is established because it is good. Therefore, answering the Euthyphro dilemma Biblically. It means that even Atheists and Muslims can find this objective moral standard, and it says that Jehovah will at the end of days sit in His temple, and men will inquire of Him what is right and wrong.
	Here is the most important thing to grasp from these verses. That good is not good because God makes it so. Good is good, and self evidently so. Thereby, the previous question is mooted. Some might say, “Well, that’s an argument from authority.” Then, have I not proven it already? If morality is about maximizing pleasure, then the morality which best maximizes pleasure ought to be the morality which men adopt. I believe---because I’ve verified it many times---that morality is found in the New Testament, and Jesus spoke it. Which, there is not a more self evident morality than the one laid down by Christ, except that the individual is clouded by self deceit, and thereby, esteems their immediate gratification over the well being of others. Which, if men do, I have proven this leads to general suffering.

		3. Modus Ponen and Tollens	

	Finally, there is one last statement. Men like Nietzsche have definitively proven that if God doesn’t exist, than neither ought good. So, therefore, if we use this modus tollens argument, that “If there is good, there is a God. There is not a God. Therefore, there is no Good.” This has been the philosophical presumption of the greatest men of letters for a thousand years. Men wiser than myself have come to this conclusion, therefore, Bob, your assumption that good exists on its own self merit is false. It cannot be that good exists on its own self merit. The reason why, is that good would then be subjective. As I’ve already appointed there are those who define good solely on the basis of their own self interest. Such people do exist, and finding a universal moral ought while accounting for such people, there remains such people in the world regardless of whether we determine there is an ought. Even if we do so scientifically. Because there are selfish people in the world, and Bob, you’re one of them. By being who you are, you negate any sound possibility of there being good existing on its own merit.
	Thereby, we have to appeal to the evidence. If we do, in fact, observe something objectively good, it must follow that God exists. Why? Because if good is predicated on human judgment, it will be determined in a thousand different ways. We, as human beings, are not smart enough to determine a universal ethic on our own, and should we ever come close, the result would be perpetual misery. For, the standard would be enforced by flawed people, who would necessarily pervert any sort of judgment. That’s just how it is. Greed and self interest are built into human nature, thereby, precluding any objective standard of good. Save, that God give ultimate judgment of what is good. Save that a higher intelligence determine for we humans what is, truly, good. Thereby, if we observe even one good thing in this world, it proves God exists. For the modus tollens argument is proven purely through Bob’s insolence and arrogance.

Part 3. Epicureanism

		1. Physics

	The most important aspect of Epicureanism is the appeal to natural law. That things are natured in an objective order, that the universe has order---and the Epicureans came closer to finding it than any other, until Newton---is fundamental for understanding the nature of reality. Concrete facts about causality in nature, whether laws of physics or laws of psychology, determine in a lot of ways the course of civilizations. There are objective measures for good in the world, which if followed, determine a healthier and happier state of being for mankind. 
	Rooted in the laws of physics is an appeal to an objective, immutable world. Thereby, nullifying the delusional beliefs of magic. If something is real, it will have a physical or causal being which can be observed. Whether by actual physical chains of events, of matter and force moving into more matter and force---or a psychological affect of creating well being or harm.

		2. Pleasure or Pain	
	This leads to very real causal chains which determine a society’s felicity. Good societies maximize their citizen’s pleasure by giving them freedom to move, freedom to build families, freedom to work, freedom to think and create, but above all freedom to be unimpeded by their neighbor. However, certain seemingly benign behaviors, that don’t seem to create an immediate impact on their environment, when stacked on top of one another, creates problems with apportionment, or problems with psychological inuring to other people’s pain, or it weakens the resolve and constitution of a populous. Thereby, certain behaviors are wrong, Malum in Se, though the general population cannot see them. Until, the behaviors become normative, and thereby, cause mass suffering and psychosis. And a lack of judgment.
	Therefore, it is true that morality can be found through understanding the pleasure pain principle, however, certain behaviors in of themselves might seem harmless at first, but compound upon themselves to create far reaching, and rippling problems throughout the culture which become systemic. Thereby, not everyone will understand this. In fact, very few will. Thereby, freedom to think is necessary, but freedom to act necessarily, in all cases, cannot be granted. For some actions are deceptively innocuous, until they compound into a larger social problem where everyone is hindered.

Part 4. Christianity

		1. God’s Law is Built for Maximizing Pleasure

	This leads to the fact that God’s law is built for maximizing pleasure. And reducing pain to the most degree. We do not understand it fully, but its notions work, even on the more difficult aspects like Homosexuality and War. We cannot understand it. But, the principles work, and are given for our benefit. Objectively, they form a basis for a concrete moral system, which like the Laws of Algebra, are applied a priori so they produce a posteriori effects on the cultures at large, to prevent widespread suffering and panic and pandemonium.

		2. Faith and Logos

	Which gets to Faith. Faith is rooted in the Logos. Faith is seeing behind the constructs of words, and seeing what is invisible and drawing it forth. Faith is necessary, as not all truths are able to be scratched at in a lab. Rather, what ultimately succumbs, is a fact that some people wish to rather hide themselves from. The causal chains of social science are governed by the Laws of God, which are found in the Holy Scripture.
	The same way that algebra was perfected over so many years to produce concrete, and testable explanations for things regarding physical objects, so is God’s Law perfected to create testable and concrete pathways for solidarity and peace on Earth.
	The problem is, in this world, men are not beholden to those truths. Therefore, we are sheep---so the Bible says---who chew on the cud of faith and wisdome. We follow the paths Christ set down, not being given to judgment. To let the world fail, and thereby, hasten the day of Christ’s return. Our job is not to judge, but merely to remind the world what God had said. And if some are thereby saved, then that, too, is our mission. Yet, we, filled with the Holy Spirit, condemn the world through our knowledge of faith. And we are given to prison, death and cruel treatments because of it. Because God’s word is objective, and proves itself in history, we can be assured that God is in fact the God of the Bible, and He did come to Earth in the flesh of Jesus Christ. And we can also be certain that God raised Jesus from the Grave.

50. 200iq

One common trait of
People with IQs above 
200 is their
Penchant for finding low stress
Careers while caring little 

About success.

51. Euclid's 35th Law

Intersecting Chords Theorem---
Again I have encountered something
I cannot understand.
It's as plain as day that this works.
I had it proven to me
By Presh Talwalkar,
Yet, my mind is incapable of knowing why
It works as a first principle.

How can anyone say God doesn't exist?
If God is infinitely wiser than any man---
I don't know why this simple axiom works...
I, like you,
Have to rest on faith that it does...

I do now understand Intersecting Chords Theorem.
It is not the lines which are being measured as equal
But the segments of the circle as a whole.
However, some minds cannot attain to this knowledge
Therefore the previous is still a cogent argument.
And there are many things my mind cannot attain to, as well.

52. Salvatar Mundi

Isabella d’Este,
You were like a little Christ
To Leonardo---
Allowing this Genius
To save the world.

53. Theorems

The fact we must now
Understand about these Laws
Is that algebra
Must be applied to something
In order for it to work.

As pure, and baseless
Deductions make invalid
Geometric Laws.
Save the deductions apply
To a measurable thing.

53. I Understand You

I understand you.
Sheltered, never having had responsibilities.
Work seems so difficult.
To even edit or speak something for an hour
On any given day
Must be hard.

The amount of work I do
My Anchor Account,
My Books--
I look at what you've produced in three years,
And I've done more in three months.
I understand it must be exhausting
To have something wise to say---
That's the first step.
Find something to say.

It took me fifteen years of hard work---

I don't tease you.
I worked a few jobs---
While your labor is supposed to be intellectual
My labor is supposed to be physical.
I cannot do physical labor.
But, I can do intellectual labor.
And intellectual labor I do...

It's funny how work is subjective.
Your family expects you to do work like I do.
While my family expects me to do work like my brother.
What comforts me is Leonardo da Vinci
Came from a Notary's family.
That rank would be like a middle class clerk.
It is my labor---of my class-which I do;
If I'm endowed with Genius, then so be it.
But, I understand you.
I'm being told to do something I can't.

54. Jussie Smollett

The reason Smollett is guilty---
I foolishly believed him
And even said it was a biker gang---
Is because the Osundairo brothers were seen in film
As persons of interest on the night of the false report.
Jussie said he was smoking "Weed"
To increase the validity of his alibi
As to why he was personally with the Osundairo brothers earlier that day;---
Which discredits his claim, as he's confessing to a DUI willfully
To give his perjury credibility, which is a common lying tactic--- 
While driving, he, note HE, said he passed
The staircase where the attack happened four times
Earlier that day with the Osundairo brothers.
Not to mention there is the 3,500 dollar check
Given to the Osundairo brothers.
But the real stinker, is the connection of the people
Of interest that night to the Osundairo brothers
Whom Jussie obviously knew personally.

Jussie is guilty as sin.

55. Go and See

Some eight years after Christ had died,
Paul visited James and Peter.
He was then given this first creed;

"He is God
"Who died
"And was Raised."

56. A True Crusade

With the ancient notions of tyranny,
The Crusades were fought for territory;
The Reconquista was fought for the same.
Yet, a war, where Christianity enflamed,
Sent thirty million to their deaths, with most
Cruel and unusual religious laws, so
Base and sadistic, it made the sexes
Unable to mingle with each other;
The Taiping Heavenly Kingdom of Peace
Was its name; Theocracy in China
Led the British into the frenetic
War, which raged for fourteen years, and total
Desolation havocked China's Eastern
Countryside, where the Christian Cult entrenched.

57. Spots of Evolution

Frogs turn into Toads---
For what differs them
Is the stage of a tadpole.

Platypi evolve from birds
Which evolve from dinosaurs.
Which, Platypi are a mammal
Which lay eggs---
Probably, the Platypi became a Marsupial
And then came of a live birth.
Therefore, man has an ancestral link
With the dinosaurs.

In an Amphibian's cycle
The entire process of evolution occurs.
First, the egg, then the fish, then the salamander.
The salamander then becomes the lizard.
Or the salamander then becomes the snake.

The walking fish is another mystery...
Yet, how can mammals evolve from two separate

The Dinosaur is a lizard
Which evolved from an amphibian,
Which evolved from a fish,
Which evolved from a mollusk
Which evolved from something else.
A man is an ape, which evolved
From a marsupial, which evolved from
An ornithorhynchidae
Which evolved from a bird
Which evolved from a dinosaur
Which evolved from a lizard.

Christians, let's not be hasty
To throw away God just because of this fact.
For, God's omnipotence is beyond our own understanding.
Remember, two unequal lines can be equal, if they belong to a circle.
Very counter intuitive, yet mathematic and scientific nonetheless.

59. Poet or Dreamer

Am I a dreamer?
Or am I the good poet?
Do I write for sect
Or creed or to change worlds?
Or, do I write lovely truths?

Am I a man who
Wishes to conquer, or am
I a man who needs
To understand Eternal 
Breaths and dark utterances?

Do I want peace, or
Do I wish to vex mankind
With a paradise?

60. Excuses

As a child---
None want to remember this---
I had excuses for why
I didn't do my homework.

To know the real reason---
For look at me,
Don't I love to learn?---
Was because I was miserable
In my school environment
And didn't want to spend 
My hours of relief doing it.

Now, I have another excuse.
I do not want to be unhappy.
For, is that not the sad state of everyone
Working a career?
Sweating every day, 
In major loads of debt just to survive,
Working for someone who can fire them at
A given moment
Without loyalty,
Without just compensation,
Without fixed hours or rest?

It's not that I'm lazy---
I love to work.
It's just, I want my chance to forge
My own work for myself.
But everyone wishes me to never obtain it.

Why can't I be a writer?

61. Song of a Saint

In the morning's dew, I'll say a prayer to You
And look upon the celestial moon
Which, like a silver cloud hanging in the sky
Says to me the stars are, this perfect day, aligned.

I'll do my day's task, wipe the sweat off my brow,
And do it this day to make my Papa proud.
Yet, I know one day all labor shall cease
And I shall sit by my LORD at His supper feast

And I shall have my mansion's stones
Of Agate, Sapphire, Beryl and gold
With Mount Zion's tremendous peak
And golden crest with silvercapped streaks.

I shall walk down the country roads,
To where Zion's spires and towers rose
Twelve Thousand Furlongs in awesome height,
To the distance of that moonlit sight.

That silver cloud, it hangs, I'm told
A Crescent moon one day old
To tell me the year and season
So I am not lost by Satan's Treason.

For by this I know the stars don't lie
And I am in God's season and time.
Oh, on Zion I preciously wait
To see that pearly, opalescent gate.

62. Byron

I listen closely to your advice---
And nare say you were no poet.
Heckling my peers in this current time
Will not win me the victory.
Naught will my work be sold for gold.
For what is gold, but empty?
Yet, for a fair wage will I be satisfied,
For even Leonardo was fed by patrons.

Endless torments and perpetual motion---
Conspiracies of Congress---
I know not.
Rather, of a subtle form of wisdome
Do I chew upon, like the ox or lamb---
Does Congress plot?
Do perpetual motions exist?
I know of the moon perpetually
Swinging around the Earth
Makes currents in the oceans.
I know Atoms forever spin their electrons.
Does Congress Plot?
I do not know---

You, with your mistakes, have
Done many ill reputed crimes---
I too.

A Satanic school of poetry
Cannot be attested to a prophetic voice---
Though, like Balaam, the prophets can err, too,
In heart and deed, but not in word.

Southey's verse is dull, 
Like a dry, tasteless wine---
I am generations removed
From him, and his work is rare.

Yet, Southey won Poet Laureate
Because his verse was what is enduring.
It reflected the novelists'
Who would later win your ancient hearts.

I, I am an Anachronism.
Bringing to the modern age
Wisdom it ought never forget.
Truths of Religion, truths of Science
Truths of Brotherhood.

To leave my work to posterity
Would be foolish---
For Southey was wise.
Was he not?
He saw the full fame and success
Of his poems, no sooner, and no later---
A man with an Elephant's memory
Who engineered verse laden with facts
Like a Courtroom's dry conversation.
Yet, he was beloved and read by many.
For that, I call him wise.

For you, living until you were thirty
Could not have lived more luxuriously
And for your politics was destroyed.
Democracy came to England---
And it left because of men like you.
Not men like me.

63. My dad Said Poet

I pressed my dad on
Whether I was a dreamer 
Or a poet. I
Know I sin in calling him
That, but Jesus meant

Not to make him or
Anyone a god. So I
Do not. 

                He said I
Was a poet. 

                     I look for
Auspicious tidings from God.

My dad's exact words
Were that, "I didn't write fluff,
But reality."

I have obtained my
Blessing. A poet is meant
To write poetry.
Though my dad would rather me

64. David's Last Words

5 Although my house be not so with God; 
yet he hath made with me an everlasting covenant, 
ordered in all things, and sure: for this is all my salvation, 
and all my desire, although he make it not to grow.

The verse refers to David not being allowed to
Build the temple.
This is the correct sense.

Charles Spurgeon was wrong
In that he thought David was lamenting
His household not being ordered.

Modern Translators are wrong
By making David's words rejoice.

Spurgeon's sermon was beautiful, 
Though. All of God's servants had an "Although."
Solomon, although he transgressed through many wives.
Samuel, although he transgressed through appearing to the witch at Endor.
Paul, although he transgressed by murder.
Although, James and Peter transgressed by doubt.
Although Samson transgressed by Delilah.
Although Hezekiah went to battle.
Although Manasseh repented.
Although Uzziah tried to be priest and king.
Although David was a man who shed blood.
Although Spurgeon was enormously proud and conceited.
Although I committed sins in youth.

And David sings a melancholy verse
Of how his house was not in order.
He didn't get to establish the temple.
Yet, God established him.
In my life...

65. My Words to Russians and Americans

It is better to die in gulags
Than live a slave.

66. I Am Done Writing Poetry

I want to be done---
But there's so much work to do.
My brother says I am "idle"
Because I can't fold laundry;
I can't saw wood;
I can't paint a room.
I tell him about Onesimus.
"So you looked it up."
Not exactly---
I had read Philemon
And typed in Onesimus.
I then went down a rabbit hole.
I thought maybe my reader would
Like to go down it with me.

Writing books is endless---
I do not wish to write and write,
And never earn a living.
That is what they wish for me.
I love my family,
But they are possessed with a demon
Which deems my credible work as useless.
I---says my brother---do not contribute anything to society.
No... I just discover the laws of Morality and Nature---
I communicate them to you.
You, my readers---
Who will soon be many---
Will see. I have discovered secrets.

The secret I am most interested in,
Right now, is the principle of Algebra.
There are yet mysteries I am unknown of.
How, I will bet, the reason there are two answers
To a square root, lies in the axioms of Pythagorean Theorem.
Or, really, of empirical data. As, that's how Maths are invented.

I say "Invented" but can maths truly be "Invented"?
In the narrow sense, I guess they can---
In so far as our knowledge will never be complete.
But, any invented math is not a math I am a friend to.
Unless the math is rooted in the truth---
Rooted in Logos---
I wish to have nothing of it.

I wish to have a friend in Richard Dawkins and Jay Vernon McGee.
I wish to tether Christians to reality,
And dissuade them from magical thinking.
As, the Farmer's Almanac clearly proves the Earth is a Sphere.
There can be no doubt about it.
Thus, Christians, the Earth is Old, and Evolution is true.
This doesn't say God can't exist.
It also doesn't say Jesus cannot be that God.
This silly debate rages---
And I've seen less converts
And more refugees
Made from it.
I don't think Dawkins or Tyson are mad about Christianity,
But rather the fact that Christians deny clearly established science.
Ought we?
I've seen God when I died---
He does exist.
I miraculously was reconstructed when I arose out of the waves.
I saw Satan in his black hood on the beach---
I've seen a woman heal a deaf girl
I've seen rivers run as blood
I've seen children's eyes go black as pitch.
Just, I'm leery of falling into the trap of simplistic faith
That Genesis is somehow to be interpreted as literal history.
Some of it, yes.
The tower of Babel I like to think is a crude Space Elevator.
The Flood has historical significance---and I don't think it was a tsunami.
As, then why would both Japan and Mesopotamia have it? 
Two tsunamis? Three? Multiple tsunamis?
Less than likely. I think there actually was a global flood.

The world is shrouded in mystery.
Philip K. Dick---as smart as he was---
Was delusional.
And when I start believing in science fiction concepts
So do I become delusional.
I believe, therefore, it's not true.
As, why would something true cause delusions?
That's where I would disagree with scientists.

Simply put, I don't know everything.
But, I try to be as thorough as I can.


Jordan Peterson’s Dream

Jordan Peterson sees a dream
Of kings raising from the dead.
They war among one another
But then submit themselves to Christ.

He goes on to talk about this prophecy
Like it were of psychological significance.

Jordan, you dreamt of the Resurrection
And the Kings of Old being raised,
And you dreamt that every knee will bow before Jesus.

Just today, a distant relative came to my Uncle's funeral.
Called to do so, she came and kept me company.
Up she rose, remembering my family.
Belonging to a distant, Great, Great Aunt.
Aunt Erma. On my Great Grandfather's side.
And cautious am I to call it a miracle.
Yes. I know not this. But, Jordan, as sure as I am
That what you saw was a vision of the resurrection.
Of that, there can be no doubt.

But I do believe that is the flaw of your ministry, 
Jordan. You doubt the miraculous, and the very existence of God.

My Last Poem

Coleridge, some three hundred years ago
Wrote a poem to his beloved friend Charles Lamb.
A modern soul thinks friendship is knit with flattery,
But it is not so. By comparing Lamb to his beloved Burns
Who wrote the hymn of Auld Lang Syne,
It was like he was speaking to me.

I have drunk deep from the Aolian Mount
In my grandmastery of the craft,---
Any further and I shall be grasping for the bough
Of a bare tree half way between inspiration;
And at the end I shall drink the many poisons of bitterness.
This is my last poem. For Coleridge wisely said
To Dr. Lamb to be bounden to ministry...
For my destiny is rooted in my heavenly muse.
I properly look for my patronage for this art...
Yet, Maecenas is dead. For I will
Renounce the world's cares and its lying vanity.
I shall not drink the bane.

Purchase Here

A List of Some Messianic References in the Old Testament

It seems like Isaiah saying “Line upon line, precept upon precept” is a prediction of the Talmudic law. It seems like the word “Sprout” there in Zechariah refers to the “Stem of Jesse”. It seems like it’s literally naming Yeshua as both King and Priest. It seems like Isaiah is saying “Virgin” in Isaiah 7, as that’s what a young woman ought to be. And saying otherwise is to imply that God’s redemption came by way of a whorish woman. It seems like Isaiah 53 is saying for us to make an offering of the Messiah’s soul. It seems like Jeremiah 31 is talking about a New Covenant. It seems like Genesis 22:18 is speaking of a Seed from Abraham that will bless all generations—it seems like that’s predicting the future. It seems like Psalm 2 is saying to “Kiss the Son” the “One Begotten by God” “Lest He be angry with you.” It seems like Psalm 22 describes crucifixion. It seems like Job 9 is saying there need be a mediator between God and Man. It seems like Song of Solomon is saying we need to forsake worldly riches for the sake of the Shepherd. It seems like Hosea is prophesying that the Gentiles would enter into God’s inheritance. It seems like Leviticus 27:29 is saying Christ must be put to death. It seems like Genesis predicts the Serpent would bite Christ’s heel is a reference to the nail being driven into His ankle, and the crushing of the Serpent’s head is Christ’s victory over death. It seems like Ezekiel 37 is talking about the resurrection. It seems like Psalm 68 says that God, Yahweh, would literally die. It seems like Isaiah 43 and 48 say that there will be a newly created thing, and that the old shall pass away, and that Christ is the LORD God. It seems like Abraham being provided a sacrifice in place of Isaac is God saying He Himself will provide the sacrifice. There’s more. Lots more.

What Jesus Wrote in the Sand

Jeremiah 17:13

O Lord, the hope of Israel, all who forsake you shall be put to shame; those who turn away from you shall be written in the earth, for they have forsaken the Lord, the fountain of living waters.

John 8:6

This they said, tempting him, that they might have to accuse him. But Jesus stooped down, and with his finger wrote on the ground, as though he heard them not.



"Brittos, armed in warcloth 
"And a shaft with bronze tip 
"A wooden oaken shield 
"With Noe’s boat on the lip.

"The shaft, carved for twelvemonths 
"With the scrimshaw of wins 
"Gingerly shaved with knives; 
"A beater of knaves tens.

"The shield with Behemoth 
"That tusk ’ed elephant 
"Oak to ebony etch’d 
"In tusks, the pliant rim (Neifert, 144)."

Neifert, B. K.. Excerpt from "The Ode of Brittos" from Fairyland. Kindle Direct Publishing, 2020.


Abide the Snow

How I love Thee, oh Stately King
The worlds seen from Thy peak.
Beneath Thee, Thy black Princes' tor
Gather by the valleys for war.

It, the breath of Heather Blossoms
Stain the rocks with liquid crimson;
The Princes reign above the lot
Of men, who upon earth, the gods

They have all stopped believing in.
Thus, Mount where the Nard Flower's sin
Had grown, and the harlot's love washed
Thy foot, Thy fragrant soils soft,---

Thy Statehood beams upon the breadth
Of all worlds and cloudy hex.
Thy peak is worshiped for its height;
Princes beneath Thee ready fight;

And the steeples of thy Welkin
Ring, for Thou art the very vault in
View of those who see Thy splendor;
And raiment of the Prisms wore

Thou upon kneck and ivory knape---
The sash of Thy Kinghood---irate
That the very dogs Thou wished good
Sought to steal from we poor our food.

Neifert, B. K.. My Collected Writings. Kindle Direct, (C)2021. pp. 198.

The Blue Bird

We artists are the Blue Bird;
Red chest; we wear the sky as a raiment.
Sell Outs, Marketers, Editors...
They are the Blue Jay
Which dig in their beaks
Wetting our feathers with blood.
They come, knowing only how to consume.
We Blue Birds come, only knowing how
To sing and be beautiful.
Unfettered Nature favors the Blue Jay;
Yet from where I come from
The Blue Jay is a pest
While the Blue Bird is a lovely gift of God's creation.
Build us our little homes
Which the Jays and Crows cannot fit.
For, soon enough we will no longer
Be an endangered species.

Purchase Here


There was once a man who accused his father
Of a sum of offenses, which would shame his father
For the rest of his life.

Such it was, that all had sympathy for the son
Who shamed his father, until a righteous messenger
Overheard what he was saying.

The messenger, grumpy and possibly sounding arrogant
Said, "You remember something which never occurred."
The man insisted his father had told him this secret.

To which, the messenger said, "Then keep your father's secret
"For you tell his secret to everyone, he will be ashamed."
Yet another man, concerned with the truth

Came and intervened. "Why do you harass this man?
"Do you not see that his father had committed a terrible wrong?"
The messenger spoke wisely to the man concerned with truth,

"We all have sinned like thus. His father may or may not have
"Acted shamefully, yet it was a secret which should have been kept.
"Now I know about the secret, and so does all who listened.

"It is only a matter of time before this man's father
"Be implicated in the crime, and whether it were true
"Or not, only the LORD knows. Yet, it is not our business to be this man's judge.

"Rather, we are to deliver one as such, as the son had claimed to have forgiven
"His father, yet you encourage him in this evil matter of spreading slander
"Throughout the community? Who is right? Let God be the judge

"Yet when you read this many years from now,
"Do not slander my character, for I strongly prefer to stay on the man's
"Behalf who was not present to defend his character, and it is yet you who have sinned against him.

"Will you sin against me, in spreading hatred for my rebuke
"Or will you allow the incident to be forgotten
"Like the son ought to have forgotten his father's secret?"

Poetic Stress Committed to Memory

Iamb = .|
Of man---

Trochee = |.
Truth is

Spondee = ||

Anapest = ..|
The man sought;

Dactyl = |..
Strange is he

Bacchiac = .|| 
To write free.

Cretic = |.|
He the weak...

Ionic a Minore = ..||
Is it Strong truth 

Ionic a Maiore = ||..
To write or not?

Fourth Paeon = ...|
Is it on form?

Amphibrach .|.
Soon found the

Antipast .||.
empty tomb; the

Choriamb |..|
Grave, was there rolled---

First Epitrite
a Superman .|||

Tribrch ...

risen from

Mollossus |||
Death's cruel touch.


A List of New Literary Devices

1. Ekphrastic Motabilem – Detailing the process of creating a work of art, or describing the process of skilled work. More specifically, utilizing Ekphrasis through describing the art form or skilled work in its process. Otherwise called “Ekphrasis”, but more technically called Ekphrastic Motabilem.

  1. Example: “Go, Ploughman, Plough” By Joseph Campbell
  2. Example: Jeremiah 18:4 “And the vessel that he made of clay was marred in the hand of the potter: so he made it again another vessel, as seemed good to the potter to make it.”

2. Hyperloxy or pl. Hyperloxa – An oxymoron expressed through hyperbole, to especially emphasize the last statement and make it stronger than the previous statement, which otherwise should be stronger.

  1. Example: “He is not very wise, but has an infinite wit.”
  2. Example: “Jude, he is not so strong, yet unrivaled in might.” Neifert, B. K.. Fairyland, “The Children’s Crusade”. Kindle Direct, 2020.

3. A Vulgar – When taking something that usually isn’t vulgar, or even taking a Euphemism, and making it vulgar through tone.

  1.  1. Example: From Wordsworth’s “Transubstantiation”: “And, while the Host is raised, its elevation/ An awe and supernatural horror breeds,”

4. Cantor – When a work breaks into a text with a voice dissimilar to the one established throughout the work, intentionally or unintentionally. Especially where it can be readily noticed. Derived from the word “Cantor” a responsive hymn, where the solo is the break in voice, and the choir is the established voice.

  1. Example:  The Gospel of John as opposed to the Synoptic Gospels.
  2. Example: The Egyptian Maid or White Doe of Rylstone by Wordsworth, as opposed to the rest of his body of Work, reflects stories in the forms of Southey or Coleridge.
  3. Example: The Last few segments of The Riddle in the Sea, by B. K. Neifert, where the form breaks to create an added effect of suspense.
  4. Example: The use of “Mirkwood” in Tolkien’s The Fall of Arthrur.

5. The Objective Other – An objective characterization where an artist portrays what appears to be a specific individual, yet the individual portrayed in the piece is meant to apply generally. Not to be confused with a Character; however, some characters are examples of The Objective Other.

  1. Example: Anna Karenina in Tolstoy’s titular piece.
  2. Example: George Wickham in Jane Austen’s Pride and Prejudice.
  3. Example: Christian in John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress.

6. Nominal Symbolism – A kind of symbolism where the name of a prominent historical figure, town or god is used to represent an archetypal story. Sometimes where the symbol relates to a specific individual.

  1. Example: “Bel boweth down, Nebo stoopeth, their idols were upon the beasts, and upon the cattle: your carriages were heavy loaden; they are a burden to the weary beast.” King James Bible Isaiah 46:1
  2. Example: “Tell me, Lydia, by all the gods I beg you, why you are in such a hurry to destroy Sybaris with your love.” Horace. The Complete Odes and Epodes. Translated by David West. Oxford University Press, 2008. (pp. 32.)
  3. Example: Xenophanes, you poetically and surgically/Weave your origins of doubt.

7.The Significant Other A specialized Characterization used to represent more unique or idiosyncratic character traits. The Character has traits which are not intended to be a universal paragon, or type of universal personality. Usually the traits are unique and are not meant to be examplar. Not to be confused with character, though some characters can be examples of the significant other.

  1. Example: Pilar in Earnest Hemingway’s For Whom the Bell Tolls
  2. Example: Eliza and Mr. Darcy in Pride and Prejudice (Despite what the novel’s title assumes, the work wasn’t originally titled “Pride and Prejudice” but was aptly named by the publisher.)
  3. Example: Pierre and Andre in War and Peace

Author’s Note: I’ve come to recognize that my two species of characters are hard to derive specific examples for. However, the Significant Other and the Objective Other can both simultaneously be present in a Character. The question remains whether the character is expressly unique, or if the character is expressly a paragon. I’ve been poring over good literature, and have found most of the best authors combine both attributes into their characters, while the less skilled authors lack both of these qualities. The range is less like a spectrum, and more like a a graph. There are characters which display both behaviors positively—and these are among the best literature has to offer—and then there are the characters who display none of the qualities. And of course there are characters that display more of one quality than another, or less of one than another. So on so forth.

8. Second Person Figure: A character who is only referred to as “You” within a poem or other work of literature.

  1. Example: Shakespearean Sonnet 54: Die to themselves. Sweet roses do not so;/ Of their sweet deaths are sweetest odors made./ And so of you, beauteous and lovely youth,/ When that shall vade, by verse distils your truth.
  2. Example: Psalm 55:13: But it was thou, a man mine equal, my guide, and mine acquaintance.


The Importance of Literary Theory

B. K. Neifert

(C) 2019

All Rights Reserved


For about ten years now, there has been a pervasive conspiracy theory that the Sumerians had created the Bible, and that everything we know about the Jews is a lie. The Epic of Gilgamesh is the text cited as being evidence of this erroneous supposition. There are a few glaring examples of why this belief is erroneous. For one, the Bible is conscious of its tradition, being written first by Moses, around 1300BC. So the assumption that the Bible was first oral traditions would be correct, and even corroborated by the Bible itself. Does it therefore discredit the Bible’s claim, when it corroborates itself that Moses was the first to write down the tradition? Then, it was carried forth by several dozen other prophets, to further record the prophetic heritage of Israel and her people.

No, rather, the conspiracy theory is so grand as to erase Israel from existence. No longer did the Twelve Tribes of Canaan exist. No longer do the Jews exist in Exile in Babylon, despite historical records of their conquest by Babylon. No longer does Persia exist, to send the Jews back to their land. No longer, in fact, because the Bible was written by the Sumerians. Which, literary criticism of the Bible would show that this is impossible. On several dozen fronts, but if we were to erase the Jews from history, we would essentially erase all of Western History with them. If the Sumerians wrote the Bible, and there were no Jews, then there have been absurd claims that Babylon never existed, and Cyrus never conquered it. Therefore, no Persia, therefore no Greece, therefore no Thermopylae, therefore, what exactly? If we acquiesce to the bad literary theory being used to discredit the Bible—and literary theory is the subject you embark on when interpreting it—then we can assume that if the Sumerians wrote the whole of the Bible, then there would be no Western Civilization to speak of. Which is actually one of the more radical and absurd claims being postulated in the hallowed halls of academia.

Of course, the argument breaks down, does it not? We have historical evidence of the Babylonians, evidence of the Jew’s exile in Babylon and the sack of Jerusalem. We have evidence of Persia, and yes, even the Sumerians. Which means, that if the Bible is being challenged on its literary truth, it corroborates what we already presume to know about the entirety of Western Civilization. Without the Bible’s claim, which is also corroborated by Herodotus and archeological evidence, we’d be in severe lack of an explanation for all of History. There’d be no Grecian defeat of Persia, no Persian defeat of Babylon, no Babylonian defeat of Assyria, no Median Empire, possibly even, if you got radical enough, no Roman empire. If we viewed history in the imaginary lens that the Sumerians wrote the Bible, then we’d have no history to speak of.

But, the Bible fills in the gaps of all history. It tells us of all these empires, corroborated by archeology, like the Babylonian game of Ur found in cuneiform text. Which proves there was indeed a Babylon, along with actual pictures of Babylon; Herodotus also noted that Cyrus had conquered it.

If we try to denounce the written records of historians, mythologists, prophets like Socrates, Confucius, Moses or Christ, we tend to do something destructive to the overall understanding of the continuum we call history. We skew it for our political aims, rather than view it objectively from witnesses at the time periods. For, the Bible could not simply be a text written by the Sumerians, passed down and propagated by them. More than likely, the Hammurabi’s code would predate or run contemporary of it, and show us that the Laws in Exodus and Leviticus were in their infancy, being hemmed out by those early civilizations. Hence where the myths get their traction. But, some Prophet had the foresight to place Abraham at the time period, through the Genealogical records of the Bible. Given this weird coincidence, that happens again with Moses and the Cult of Aten, and then again at the Fall of Babylon and the weird monotheistic invention of Zoroastrianism, it would seem that the Bible is very good at predicting when and where its prophets will be at times when Monotheism became most prominent. If studying the genealogical records, it lines up exactly with the events described. Either some genius constructed the Bible for that purpose, or the Bible is itself an accurate description of a people’s heritage. We know it’s an accurate description of a people’s heritage, and we can safely assume that the Bible is an authentic piece of literature describing what is, indeed, the first monotheistic religion. Because the evidence corroborates the stories in the Bible, and the Bible even discusses times when its own adherents forgot their own religion. The Bible is a seamless text at describing the very real and frustrating nuances of history. It even predicts its Messiah will suffer on a cross. It predicts its people will go into exile while only at the time of Moses. It predicts itself time and time again, and those predictions come true. It seems to find the most arbitrary points in history for its prophets to line up with, to corroborate the Monotheism of itself in those eras. And the Bible does, indeed, say that it began with God talking to a Mesopotamian Lord, corroborates with El Worship in Mesopotamia, around the initiating of the Hammurabi’s Code, where they worshipped El and El’s Son. The Bible is a seamless piece of literature, being corroborated by history from the time of the Sumerians in Mesopotamia, where only one man, Abraham, had divine promise from God to establish a people, to now the whole world in Christ.

There is possibly a reason for this, as cultures became more adept at describing the moral patterns of civilization, it became necessary for God to reveal Himself to the civilizations when they were at their ready stages. For some other interesting things appear.

The Greeks have numerous times quoted Old Testament passages. It’s highly unlikely that the quotations were taken from Greece and adapted into the Bible. If Persia wrote the Bible, the Greeks were their mortal enemies, and therefore, would not want their protectorate to succumb to Greek Influence. However, there is much evidence of the Bible predating the establishment of Persia or Greece. One blatant example is the literary consistency of the Bronze Serpent in the days of Moses being destroyed by Hezekiah; which suggests the Bible were written over a period of time, rather than all at once, for such a detail would be nearly impossible to artificially invent by more than one author. More than likely, the Bible was a document written by a people whose ancestry came from the land of Canaan, and their document was widely popular and widely read, as is stated in the Bible when God Himself says He has great fame. Through literature we can understand this is likeliest of all cases. Because the scripture is either written with the most unique piquancy to somehow get itself entangled in all of history, East and West; or it is the written Casebook of God.

Certainly, however, we must backtrack to understand that Western History is reliant on the Jews; the fundamental nature of our historical background is cemented by their existence. Because without the Jews’ Bible being authoritative, we have no knowledge of how Europe came to exist. No real knowledge. For, what is archeological evidence seems to even corroborate that all of it existed, there is a unique conspiracy theory that the Jews were in fact invented by Persia, but the Persians included Greek quotations in their little satellite nation’s book of propaganda, whom the Persians were to be sworn enemies with at their collapse. Less than likely.

What is more likely the case, is that the Bible was established prior to the foundation of Persia or Babylon, or Assyria, or Greece, that the Jews forgot their religion like is said numerous times in the Old Testament, and that the Bible was a widely circulated document in the time periods, which some of its wisdom ended up in the Iliad and Odyssey among other places. It could even be where Confucius learned “Do unto your neighbor as you would have them do unto you.” The Bible could have been, and likely was, a widely disseminated book read by myriads of scholars who would catalog such obscure things in their libraries. Such is a less superficial and fantastical theory than the Jews being the prodigious satellite state of Persia, who just so happened to include Greek quotations in their book of statewide propaganda.

This is more in line with a correct theory, as it’s Occam’s Razor. Assume the most likely of all solutions. It’s almost impossible to think that the Bible was written by anyone beside the Jews. It is almost exclusively, through literary analysis, an entire history of a people.


This fact remains, of why it is most imperative that we investigate literature. The Epic of Gilgamesh, upon a cursory perusal, is not the account of Noah and the flood. The Epic is more like Beowulf or Nordic Eddas than it is any account similar to the Biblical text. So, the story of Noah is likely original to the Jews, and given this fact, it is almost imperative that we place history back into its open alignment, with what we know, and not get to be obscurantists with it, by muddying arcane archeological discoveries with what we know through witness testimonies. Because the Bible is, by and by, witness testimony. It’s corroborated through Herodotus. It’s corroborated through Archeology, despite Atheist and skeptics’ protests. The attempt to erase the Bible from our historical knowledge is itself anti-Semitic, and would indeed erase all of known history, leaving us with a Europe that has no actual cause, but rather a mythological cause, which is then replaced and pieced together by archeology to bring about a new, and “improved” version of the truth, that completely contradicts the contemporary, eyewitness accounts of those truths.

With this said, it’s why it’s imperative that we read and understand literature. It is not “Fictitious.” Nor is the Bible purely literature, as I believe it to be the God Breathed Word, and the perfect Casebook on how divine judgments work. Because the patterns described in the Bible display the prescience to describe real psychological phenomena, and sociological phenomena. Which, so do literary works in Science Fiction and Fantasy, and yes, even Realism. But the Bible even more so, that it is almost so hyper realistic in its portrayal of these truths that people will say word for word things the Bible itself says. I often encounter in debates things that Christ’s opponents said to His face, when speaking to them in my evangelistic encounters. Nearly verbatim.

The evidence even goes so strongly in the Bible’s favor, that questioning it at this point is something similar to antisemitism. Which, perhaps, I have found an anti-Semitic vein in the cultures at large to completely erase a people from existence, and therefore their culture, and therefore the invention of that culture, which is what Socrates described in his Symposium: right before he was abused, and a gay orgy exploded on the scene, disrupting a beautiful dialogue about the meaning of love, and what love is.

Simply put, there is a vein in the culture to disenfranchise the Jews, disenfranchise Christians, and it is a sinister road of disenfranchisement, tending only to the destruction of Western Civilization. Which, literature is a preservation of the Western Tradition, as Google can change facts about history, but we can still read about them in old books, and see that Google is, in fact, lying.

The whole road ahead is one paved with fanatical zeal to destroy the past, to erase it from existence, and to build a narrative about the Sumerians. The Sumerians wrote the Bible. A basic propagandistic statement, founded on little shreds of archeological evidence such as The Epic of Gilgamesh. Which, to turn the table around, things that are simple to believe are often not the things that make truth. Simple things are built on propagandistic, little catch phrases and pithy quotes to understand and navigate life. We know this to be utterly simple, because what is true is nuanced. And literature offers a nuanced view of history, which can be seen through the lens of someone who lived through it. Not our far off eyes, trying to peer through the opaqueness of science and archeology.

Much the same, our interpretations of science must then be wrong if this is what we’re beginning to assume through archeological evidence. Either that, or the science does not actually corroborate what is popularly being attributed it. Perhaps it is as Paul warns, “Things falsely called Science.”

It can be an affront to the entirety of the human race to subtract the innocent people of the Jews from history. To steal from them their heritage, and to rob them of their Kings and Princes. This is a crime of anti-Semitism. Heinous in its all sweeping wave through society, that the academies are actually trying to propagate the lie. But, history is too strong, and the existence of Europe too much of an obelisk to forget the past. That same past which shared the Jews and Christians.

The Bible is a strong, historical document. Strongly corroborated by historical evidence. And we need to understand literature at this critical hour, lest we lose our heritage, and not just the West’s. The Jew’s heritage is in all civilizations, all people’s. The Bible is quoted in the Iliad and Odyssey. The Bible created Zoroastrianism. Moses’ defiance of Pharaoh created the Cult of Aten. Abraham created the Hammurabi code. Because the evidence is too much corroborated by the biblical genealogies.


Perhaps God had revealed Himself to us through stages. First to one man, because only that one man, plus Melchizedek, could have a true relationship with Him. Then, God revealed Himself to a people. Because only that people could truly know Him. Then, God revealed Himself by coming in the Flesh as Jesus Christ. The ultimate revelation, so man would have no mistaking what God wanted from us. Perhaps, even so, it was the invention of Love that God wanted us to discover. Written in Socrates’ Symposium, as it built from romantic love to the divine love. That perhaps Socrates had known the Hebrew Bible, which is only conjecture. But he possibly could have, as I would imagine the idea of monotheism would be quite novel to someone at that time. And so with the Monotheistic God’s invention, which is of course love.

Perhaps certain groups and peoples were not ready for the discovery of love, but when they had “Evolved” in the most crudest terms, to a point where they were ready to understand and fully comprehend love, that was the point where God fully allowed Himself to be revealed to the whole world, through His Son Jesus Christ.

As, the Bible strangely follows the patterns of history, and strangely is corroborated by random springs of monotheism correlating at the exact time the lineages place our prophets. It’s not likely that anyone would have the access to the information to know it back then, but rather it’s either a one in an impossibly large number’s chance of happening, or it was divinely inspired.

That God would show Himself to the world is itself necessary for God, if He’s benevolent, to do. To leave no question about what we need, and what He wants. First, he codified it with Moses, and second He lived it with Christ. First with the Law, and then with His Life. First he wrote the instructions, and then He demonstrated them. As anyone with Character does when in a managerial position. First he gives the instructions, and when those instructions are not followed through correctly, he demonstrates it himself. God, however, added a third aspect to this. God did it through us, by His holy Spirit.

But this is getting into religion, not literary theory. However, I lay down the reason why I believe in my religion. And next I will lay down why I believe in literary theory.


Often there are questions as to the cause of this or that. There are great sundry questions of history and psychology that people debate. Which, if someone were to read literature they would no longer have these questions, as eyewitness accounts would peer into the dank depths of human imagination, to draw forth an eye witness. A single man’s testimony, whether good or bad.

Yeats is fond of wanting to view love ephemerally, as if love were best as a buck and doe meeting in the woods, the doe showing herself to the buck from the rear, and then the buck mounting the doe. It exists as a prophetic look at the sort of person, whom we can see is wrong because of our knowledge of what love actually is. The check to that idea is Freudian psychology, which claims that the nuclear family is integral in the character development of human beings. Further, literature like Dostoevsky’s shows in stark detail the psychological portraits of unstable families, and even renders it into the most heinous crime, murder, in his Brothers Karamazov. We must view literature in this lens, first, as actual eye witness testimony of the time periods, and we can get a good grasp on their decline or Golden Ages.

In Russia, it was Atheism that caused it to decline. It was divorce. It was the throwing down of the old order, The Judeo-Christian ideas of family, of love, of virtue. Anna Karenina divorces her husband on a whim, and at the end gets the poetic justice of suicide to fit her crime. She had made everyone unhappy, and her hatred for her husband protruded to a hatred for her paramour and child. Which, then left her without a solid place to seek foundation. For she hadn’t love, and that was why she divorced. Levin loses much in the course of the book, gets as depressed as Anna, maybe more because he actually possessed love, but he survives his episode of despair because he finds Christ.

Dostoevsky, otherwise, shows the leap into despair and desperation when Dimitri wants to kills his father, which the cause is over a dispute about money. Dimitri’s father is not a good man, and humiliates a priest in the opening scenes of the book, but it doesn’t change the conscience of the book, that the murder is wrong, and is caused by the father hunger.

Literature captures these portraits of society. It is a barometer of the social milieus at the times it was written. If anyone were to look upon our social barometers, we’d see the world is getting darker. The stories are beginning to reflect more and more the banal realities we all face. In fact, literature is not present at the moment. It is left aside for videos about practical jokes and video essays concerning a host of strange subjects.

The Bible says something strange in Hosea. It says the “Prophets speak in similitudes.” It often crosses my mind if these litterateurs we read are not often prophets. Science Fiction is often prophetic of dark and destructive futures, and can put on moral plays for their audiences, to help the audience understand global trends in diplomacy, armistices,—as one superman episode had superman disabling the nuclear warheads, and then the subsequent invasion of aliens—and applied ethics. While I highly doubt there are aliens, the stories are discussing real phenomena. And it has, for the interim, helped sustain some semblance of peace. But, the story is simply telling its audience that nuclear weapons are keeping the world from experiencing unending global wars, and that the same principles for ethics apply to alien species as they do also to mankind.

At the time period, it was a very good critique. Now, I’m not so sure it was listened to, as there were other, more fundamental science fiction motifs that didn’t get listened to. Such warnings in Bradbury’s novel, or Orwell’s, showing the destructive and intrusive reach of technology into the everyday man’s life. The fact that people became callow from technology, and started harming one another for fun is not far from the truth we see today.

It’s imperative that we recognize the fact that these stories are able to foresee the psychological trends created by technologies. They are not forging the trends, but rather are calculating its use by observing what we already knew about human behavior to begin with. That men are fascinated with devices. Such devices as the printing press have revolutionized the spread of good information, while the internet has polarized everyone into their superficial, ideological camps, ready to cast stones at one another. Fiction predicted this.

Fiction is also good at predicting people’s lives. It can, even with no moral shade to the text, show itself reflective of human error. D. H. Lawrence had created his version of Tolstoy’s Anna Karenina without the moral shame cast upon Anna. And, in describing it from an essay in the very defense of D. H. Lawrence’s work, I could see the very critique Tolstoy outlines in that very defense of D. H. Lawrence. The cruelty and debauched nature, which Tolstoy had poked a hole in, and D. H. Lawrence could not hide it. It is often insulting when we read good books. The fact that the tautology of Tolstoy’s work didn’t need Anna to commit suicide, it was already present that she had done a wrong against her husband. And more often is it the case.

We as a people must realize this is what literature is for, to help be a barometer of the social climates of their days. It can diagnose what is wrong with a civilization. Greek and Roman artists portraying sodomy are a good indicator of where their social climate was, and surely enough, the portraits dated close to social upheavals. More than that, a society is best understood through its art. The Epic of Gilgamesh can teach us a lot about the Sumerians but literally nothing about the Jews. Noah would not be a drunkard, nor would he be a great heroic king. He would, rather, fit the character of a humble shepherd or farmer; the noble peasant—,following the will of God, patiently building his ark. Two distinct versions, which modern Hollywood wanted to conflate in their portrayal of Noah. It was the illegitimate child of the stories of Noah and Gilgamesh. An action movie, that made it seem like the people at the time period wished to fight to get onto the ark. It portrayed our modern family aesthetic, but did not understand that Noah and his family would probably be quivering with fear, and huddled together in love, awaiting the flood waters to dissipate; as such would be the character of a man of God. A very unlikely adaption, as it doesn’t fit the reality of how good people behave, but rather bad people. More than likely, those other people drowned without knowledge of the ark ever being constructed, who Noah would have desired greatly to see on his ark, and the few who knew about the ark would have thought Noah was as insane for building it, as he was getting into it before the flood waters rose. That God was a tyrant for allowing the flood is, in all actuality, the same as a murderer thinking his executor is a tyrant for giving him the lethal injection. The fact remains it is more humane to let the murderer die, than live in the suffering he has caused for himself. That is why the law speaks to such affect. And at the time of Noah, everyone was a murderer, or I can see no other reason for God compelling Noah to build the ark. Nor, as is the case today, would anyone believe it, as our current yellow-scholarship tries to erase the Jews from history; it would be the same kind of blindness the peoples had in the days of Noah. It’s not that they are doing it on purpose, but that they cannot know the truth, nor even perceive the logic that makes it true. But, the facts were bare and certain yet opaque because nobody had searched them out.


This gets into the importance of literary theory as a whole, that we can, if we’re careful, deduce important artifacts from history. Not only that, but understand cultural milieus, and understand things in a nuanced way. Of course, Babylon’s ruins exist, one can merely look at them, and see it. However, the current milieu is to erase the history of our religion, that is the Christian and Jewish religion. The religion of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Not the God of Abraham and Ishmael. Not the God of Haile Selassie. Not the God of Joseph Smith, nor the God of Charles Russel. For, if one were to simply look at the meanings of the Biblical text, it would be difficult to equivocate the beliefs of these people. One would recognize instantly that Ethiopians are not the Jews. One would recognize immediately that Jesus claimed to literally be God, and is prophesied as so in the Old Testament. On would understand that it was Isaac whom the covenant was given to, not Ishmael. Therefore, one could easily discredit the claims of all of the other Abrahamic religions. If literary theory were practiced correctly, it will derive a meaning from a text that is accurate.

I do not mean the run of the mill Hermeneutics, either. As certain texts explicitly defy being interpreted that way. Some poetry is meant to not convey clear meanings, but is rather sensory, and other poems are meant to draw from subconscious cues a personal interpretation rather than an objective interpretation. Rather, that an interpretation and intention can be derived from any piece of literature, that is sufficient in itself for literary theory.

With this said, one can easily begin to understand rather than interpolate, and begin to view communication as a fundamental part of what makes us human. No other species can philosophize, nor create religion. As Jonathan Haidt said in a lecture, “Humans are the only species that can form cohesive bonds, and build things without being blood related.” I paraphrase. However, he cites quite accurately that it is religion that allowed these feats to take place, or nationalism, or communalism. What he fails to understand is that though the greatest cooperation was built by enlightenment philosophers in the capability of man to reason, and reason, not blind obedience, is the vehicle for cooperation in a pluralistic society such as America; however, underlying that Enlightenment society is the father-vein of Christianity. The one our Mason brothers built, who though rejecting the corner stone, it became the chief corner stone on which all of Western Civilization hinged. Without Christ, there can be no Western Society, and if literary theory were implemented in just understanding what men like George Washington and John Adams were saying, it would be moot whether they believed. The fact remains that in every quote attributed to them on religion, they found the moral epicenter of Christ’s teachings on the Sermon on the Mount sufficient as a moral law for their civilization. And they found no better.

I do not say the founders were Christian. They were not. They did, however, lay a foundation of Christianity in the country, to check the otherwise wild tendencies of human nature with what they found as a sufficient religion. If we were to try and argue against this very nuanced but accurate point, we’d undermine the social fabric of American democracy. Which, is what the postmodernists are doing at this present moment, by undermining the meaning of works of literature through deconstruction.

It is why the scholars who butchered the interpretation of Milton’s Paradise Lost, rather than succumb to the obvious meaning of the text, invented an ulterior meaning, making Satan—the murderer by trade—the good guy. Never did he value the insight of how reason, if taken in its purest form, could undermine the moral fabric of a country. This is what Immanuel Kant observed in his treatise. But, more than that, he quite arbitrarily made a murderer the hero of Paradise Lost. The insanity of this is lent to bad literary theory, where rather than try to utilize and communicate, the point is to simply expound whatever beliefs one has. That power is the alternative to reason, and without a foundation for reason—without literary theory, and accomplishing the arduous task of correctly interpreting someone else’s work—we undermine the foundation of our democracy. It can go one step further and say that the predicate of Reason is founded in the Greek concept of “Word” which St. John had coined as the embodiment of Who Christ is. It might very well be why this alternative viewpoint is being espoused by the universities, in order to undermine the premise of the enlightenment, which was, indeed, founded on the principle that a piece of writing could be understood, and rational discourse would win in the end.

This can only work if we have correct literary theory. Novels and Poems are similitudes, that perhaps the prophets speak, and interpreting them gives a moral play in the existential structure, allowing the audience to judge the characters and determine whether their actions are moral. Or, as a matter of fact, judge the social climates, the intrinsic networks of sociological and psychological truths needed for understanding what literature is. It is foundational to literary theory that we not do away with the clear meaning of a text, as the predicate of reason requires that language be able to be comprehended, and literary devices at that. It is predicated on context. And if Paradise Lost were read in context of the work’s premise, it is that Satan is ultimately bad, and will use persuasion in order to suck the human beings into the trap of nihilism, and therefore, undercut and dissuade men from behaving benevolently. As Satan knows this about us, and knows reason is a slippery slope of syllogism, that once fundamental premises are nullified, then the social strata can begin to slide into more desperate moral decay. And lo and behold, we do this by nullifying reason, ergo, nullifying religion, ergo, nullifying the age of reason with it by supplanting literary theory, and turning it into a subjective science.

Deconstruction is the method by which philosophers have negated clear meaning, and have even bled that lie into the population, so that they are unable to think critically about a piece of writing, and therefore interpret it. It is because the premise of communication is predicated on successful transactions of ideas. And if an idea is merely a matter of subjective interpretation, then there can be no premise to succeed in getting to the predicate of reason.

Therefore, it is fundamentally necessary for reason to be imbued with the thought that sentences can be interpreted. That meanings can be derived. That ideological frameworks can change with the right sorts of information. Our entire civilization hinges on the notion that there is truth, both metaphysical and empirical. That strata of ideas can exist just as concretely as strata of scientific phenomena. Therefore, morals are predicated on this logic too, that they can be discovered. It’s why moral philosophers have discovered morals all throughout the millennia. But, only Christ had found them all. A carpenter’s son. If this isn’t the miracle of them all, a boy who had no access to learning, no access to books, could create the most cogent moral philosophy ever in existence, then one can only be obstinate in their views that Christ is not the Messiah. For, it is proof enough for me to believe, and always was.

That Christ died, and raised from the dead, it is a matter of literary theory, too. The theories of His resurrection being a hoax don’t pan out with the observations we make about human character. Men do not die for a lie. They will readily admit the lie before dying, which none of the apostles who were martyred seem to have done. There have been many miraculous events in history described by many historians, for instance the darkness that followed Hannibal’s invasion of Rome. I personally believe this story, and even that the shields sweat blood. But that is just me. For the scholar who does not believe such things, and believes that the resurrection was a hoax, men contemporary of the time period died for that “hoax.” It is not likely that they died for a hoax, but that they truly saw the risen Christ. Because that is human nature, to die for something concrete. Muslims bombing Christian men, the Muslims are dying for the comradery of their group. Their religion is a great stabilizing factor in all of their lives, and it creates happiness for them. They die for it. But, when early Christians died, they were not dying in battle nor for the comforts of their religion. They were dying by execution after excruciating persecution and little public support. And it wasn’t for an established religion that everyone in society believed in. Only a very few people believed it. No, they died because something real led them to believe. And literary theory proves it. Because human psychologies do not let men die for what they don’t truly believe. A man can die for Christianity in battle, but that same man would have a hard time sitting in an execution line, seeing the opportunity to strike back flee him as he allowed himself to be martyred. For Christian martyrs will die even with an escape. They will still die. They will still risk getting arrested and thrown in prison, when everyone in their society is convinced that they are lunatics.

What’s important to know is that literary theory helps explain this, as what was true for the men and women back in the days of Christ still holds true for our Christian brothers and sisters today. Every day, almost, I hear news of martyrs in Northern Africa. I hear of martyrs here in the United States. It’s yet to be that the government is involved in the persecution, and by the grace of God and work of people like me it might never happen. But, it could happen in this day. Because literature is abused, and literature is rejected. It predicts human responses, just as the Gospel predicted its martyrs’ responses up to this very day. Literature is a forecasting device to allow us to peer into the future. And misinterpreting it, or calling it useless is a dangerous assumption because it has often been more accurate at predicting human advancements in technology, and human advancements in moral philosophy for the better part of its existence. Losing this ground, losing this special invention by mooting it, is leading to the kinds of chaotic thinking we see today. That Jane Austen had nothing to say, and that the time period were not really being described but was her own subjective interpretation;—or that Orwell had nothing to say, and that his vision couldn’t happen, but lo, it is. And what of it? Men need to understand these things so they can prevent it from ever occurring, and literature is exactly the inoculation against bad ideas.

It must further be attested that reading literature helps one think clearly, and understand morality in its narrative function. One can see morals demonstrated through stories, and this is why stories are so important. Without this function, they cease to be stories, but are rather propagandistic statements trying to elevate one side of a power struggle.

However, humans balance out over several generations back into their natural mode. When a great revolution occurs, and a great civilization burgeons, it falls, and another civilization stands on its ashes. As Marc says in my work, The Fifth Angel’s Trumpet, “Well, the sun rises and it also sets.” Which, it is literature that teaches us this mortality, even social mortality, of a civilization’s fall. Literature teaches us why it occurs, and if a man were intelligent they’d realize this, and hem the levies before it ever burst. For if the people are themselves unwilling to do what’s good, they ultimately get what they deserve. But, it’s better they see it in a poem, rather than in practice. It is better to understand war from art or literature, than it is to understand it by actually having to fight. It is better to understand divorce from Anna than it is to understand it from…

And, if we deny that communication is valuable, and can transfer these experiences from one man to another, then we forget that literature is powerful, we forget that experiences can be communicated, and we will forget the nature of our struggle, which is a moral struggle against the flow of the world. Which, is probably why literature was attacked, and vehemently too.


Literature, if done right, gives us experience. It gives us emotions, it gives us truths to aspire for. When Tolstoy had written Anna Karenina, he literally made me feel like I was getting married, though I had never experienced it. No other author could, or perhaps many have. And that’s the power of literature, too, is that it can communicate experience from one person to another. It can communicate thought. If thought is not communicable, then the very premise of an Age of Reason fails. And that Age of Reason is hemmed in with the existence of a Jewish Carpenter who died on a cross two thousand years ago, approximately. Because if we undermine reason, we undermine Word, we undermine the very nature of the Enlightenment, which is that truth can be established. It is not a light subject we embark on. Postmodern philosophers have noted power as the only thing which roots reason. Whose power? Certainly they do not know, for if it is man’s power, is it the man Orwell created who governed 1984, or is it the man in the KGB who understood corrupting our psychology makes us weak and susceptible to internal collapse?

Somehow, our enemies understand this, but hold as a bone the idea of anarchy and freedom in front of us. They sashay the bone in front of us, saying, “Freedom and Anarchy, Prosperity for All and Perpetual Leisure!” and it is Locke’s very freedom that this Postmodern revolution is predicated on. For freedom in a postmodern world is, indeed, Locke’s freedom. It is Locke’s system. But, so is the ardent capitalist. However, both sides of the debate are locked in a heated war of whose poison will be there to fill the vacuum, when Locke’s philosophy reigns supreme. Will it be the socialist or the capitalist? Maybe neither. However, it is not whose power, but rather the cogent philosophy of Locke, that men want happiness, and the government should be best administered to the people’s happiness and that just free exercise thereof of our ability to figure things out for ourselves. There are differing opinions on whose brand will be chosen. However, what is duly unnoticed by most, is that both systems would be hell on earth without a foundation in God’s love. And reason freed from the feelings we share is dangerous. For, truth brings into us feelings, and our hearts can be pleasurable, either for good or bad. But, there are good and pure feelings that we can understand are not bad. There are good and sublime feelings that we can, indeed, understand are wicked. There is pleasure in cruelty. There is also pleasure in feeling an emotional bond with a woman you are making love to. Cruelty in war is the root of Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder because the killing was enjoyed, having enjoyed the slaughtering of your enemies. And artists describe it. That guilt, it is an artist’s job to describe.

Where else can you feel the guilt of having committed a murder, unless an artist portrays it to you? Perhaps the artist himself had an outburst of violence, and nearly killed someone, and had felt for a second what it was like to have killed. To translate that emotion to a reader, it is invaluable moral teaching. It can show us what it is to have murdered, and we will never have to know firsthand. We can understand that the conscience is indwelt within us, and is built in our very souls from the moment of conception. We can know many things both good and bad from literature. And if we throw away this valuable teaching tool, we in effect nullify the real experiences of the authors, and say man cannot ever know what it is like to truly experience something, until he does. Yet, anyone who has had a true awakening to art, can understand that the experience in art is nearly the same in similitude with the author’s who wrote it. And we can understand it from afar, seeing if we truly wish to embark on such a dangerous—or perhaps beneficial—task.

It is these experiences in art that lend to the most important aspects of art. That art is satisfactory in communicating, and that it can, indeed, communicate. It can communicate new experiences to us, ones we have never even experienced. The isolation of a Russian Gulag, the terror of a psychotic’s thinking, the evil deed of a good man who murdered a degenerate, the vengeance of a broken whaleship captain.

We must understand these things. We must not try to undermine them with our own notions, nor our own prejudices. We must not get lost in the dark alleys of believing communication cannot exist. For, it is a new invention to say that communication doesn’t exist. Communication does exist. It is very real. Very serious. Very strong. And it would be imperative that one understand that because we can tap into this reality, that the Bible itself details a people’s history, for it is too real not to. If not for the historical existence of the Twelve Tribes of Canaan which we know from the Tel Dan stele, or the photos of Babylon, or the Babylonian Game of Ur of the Chaldees, the literal transcripts of the sack of Jerusalem in Babylonian historical recorded in the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle, the birth records of Jesus Christ, the witness accounts of Herodotus, then the most cogent reason to believe in the Jews historicity is that they have a piece of literature woven from different times, corroborated by things like Hammurabi’s Code, and the Prophets aligning with every instance of Monotheism; there are just too many details, and precious ones at that, for the Bible to be fictitious. It is, indeed, the history of a people, written by that people over the course of thirteen hundred years by different people. Jeremiah, alone, describes the sack at Jerusalem. It is too invested in the subject to be anything but an eyewitness account. He is the same as me, trying to warn my country of danger, but its darkened ear and ravenous silence answers back.

Such is too much a similitude with my very existence. Such is why I’m inclined to believe the Bible, because the experiences it tells are not only true, but the only concrete and predictive truths in literature. People actually respond the way they do in the Bible. Quite miraculously, stupor comes over people, and they ludicrously take literal what was intended as metaphorical. They strive at strange conjectures, over the simple adherence of the subject revealed. That the Sadducees are the Mainline Denominations and the Pharisees the Evangelicals, and that the Gospel itself predicted this. Both the doctrines stay concrete, unchanging, and that literary truth is why it begins to show itself veritable. It shows itself more plausible than any other religion in history. Because the concepts still exist. The New Apostolic Reformation are the Niccolaitans. The Gnostics are the New Age Theologians and Prosperity Gospel Teachers. The Arians are the Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons. The same religions persist, but take embodied forms with details dissimilar, but the Word is all the same. And it is that concept of Word that proves the Bible’s verity. That the concepts persist, that they sustain, that they predict, that they even on occasion were so blatantly plain in a prediction, that the only thing someone could say to the contrary was that it was a later edit into the Bible. But the Dead Sea Scrolls proves that to be inaccurate. There is more evidence sustaining the truth of the Bible, and it can all be attained through literary studies. Not because the literary studies are postmodern, but because they can attain a concrete interpretation of an abstract text, and that communication does indeed exist despite all our protests that it does not.


One of the things that reassure me is how an artist is the best judge of another artist’s work. Humans tend to gravitate toward art that reflects their own soul, and their own conscience. Be it horrific, or sublime, the man who appraises art, appraises it based on his own soul, and sees himself reflected. It is one of the reasons people tend to devalue literature, is that they have never had the idea, nor was it original to them.

I say this is the problem with our interpretation of all literature. It tends to imitate what we already know about our world, and tends to give explanation to the moral phenomena which are often discomforting. What is most true, that literature becomes valued and appraised higher than what is most untrue. The similitude with reality reflects the appraisal of the art. The best Science Fiction, for example, reflects society better than the worst.

This is why literature is logic. It has true and false propositions. The best literature is a cogent strain of logical operators, creating in theory cause and effect, based on the causality observed outside of the container of the novel. They are meant to meet resistance by the reader, but a good novel persists because it overcomes the reader. It shapes them, rather than having them shape it.

Postmodernism, therefore, has become quite the philosophy in modern days, where interpretation of art and artists has been accomplished by the general populous, and the result is less that of art influencing the population, but rather the population influencing the kinds of art being consumed. This is counterproductive. Most of our important ideas come or start in novels, or they get stated in perfect clarity first in novels. Because there is action, and the moral philosopher finds the consequence of those actions. Dramatic, often bigger than the real world, but far more understandable, in that it can isolate one aspect of human existence and meditate on it for a few hundred pages.

Where art is never serving this purpose, but is simply serving a utilitarian purpose of entertainment, or enjoyment, it’s not a good day for the culture from which that information comes. Essays cannot, for instance, capture the truth like a poem can. And a novel is simply a poem written in paragraphs, and in existential structure—that is, action and time in narrative. So we can see in the narrative the events unfold, and bear moral weight on them. The details are there to help shape the reader’s understanding of the world they are observing; and if it’s a well-developed world, it will reflect reality because it was created from reality. It isn’t simply the author’s wishes in fancy. It is met with the harsh reality of truth. And that truth is what the novel must meditate on.

For example, in my Utopian novel, the truth is rooted in the romantic love shared between two partners. The almost ethereal and sublime love shared by them gets overshadowed by the constant barrage of scenes about war. Friends do die, old acquaintances with them; the characters who die are often random. Without purpose. Because it is war. And how many narratives are derived from the reality of war? Counterpoised with the reality of a home life? How many novels are written in the between moments? Most of the best novels, actually. Yet, my novels are sociologically rich with insights. The manner in which the society falls is the actual method employed by the KGB. The method is found by me without knowing this, but it happens to be the real method employed by the KGB. Something concrete is developed, something cogent. Something, in other words, real. Campy dialogue turns into real life, when the harsh realities of the outside world intrude upon Marc’s internal reality. And certainly I do not want someone who isn’t an artist themselves to critique it. Unless that non-artist understood the painstaking amounts of time I devoted to the effort, to create literature out of pulp fiction. Was it done? No… not satisfactorily, but the audiences will like it more than my pretentious writings because they will understand it. They themselves will be the artist, emotionally invested in the work, trying to preserve the societies I created, because somewhere they are allowed to create similar societies for themselves. Seeing it in stark detail, what they need.

Literature does this, too. It helps us understand our world. Somehow I traipse upon arcane Psychological Operations employed by our mortal enemies. And somehow they work, despite the protest of the more elite crust of audiences that the work I had made is “Unrealistic.” Pretentious is the thought that my work is unrealistic, when indeed it takes an artist of sorts to understand my work. That is, to say, a creative mind willing to bend to my reason, rather than superimpose their own. Which is what people need. They need to listen, not to speak. Let the artists speak, who have volumes more to say, rather than the propagandists and journalists who spout popular dogmas and opinion pieces. Rather than Rick and Morty, which is a stupid show, feigning depth, when it is indeed a certain kind of individual who watches it, feigning genius. It is indeed a show for those of exactly average intelligence. It is not literature. But, it is our modern literature, as the bulk of our voices are marginalized for what sells on Cartoon Network. And even Cartoon Network is losing its ratings because they don’t produce quality stories anymore, meaning that stories are a part of us. They are inherent in the way we understand the world.

More so, what is considered “A True Story” often has borrowed elements of fictitious literary devices because it captures what we want to know about the truth better than the truth itself. It captures the ideal. And that ideal is what men and women want to know about. Not the vulgar reality. Because the vulgar reality cannot attain moral betterment. It can only attain to an imitation of the vulgar banalities of life.

In that sense, literature is more real than reality. It transcends reality, getting into the layers upon layers of archetypes, and the reality beyond what we see. It gets to the moral perfection, the ideal, a form, and it gives us a vision to aspire to. It teaches us why certain pursuits are vain. If we lose it, which we are, we lose ourselves. Because humans without stories, humans without virtue, humans without the prophets’ similitudes, are humans without a moral standard. And these are more dangerous. These, as is often portrayed in the Russian Authors, are who stir the downfall of civilization.

Because stories are indeed important. Not for what they contain, but for what they aspire to be. Not for the real event, but if the event had transpired, what relevance does it have to our life? And of course it cannot be disagreed with. Disagreeing with a piece of literature is like disagreeing with a well formulated math equation. Because the moral conscience of man is employed by the consumer, to prick them where there is injustice, and to sway them to where there is good. Within the art displays the attitudes of a civilization, to unpack and understand. In those attitudes, we see—in America’s case—cultural decline. And the literature all points to it— without a belief in God, Americans are without the conscience to understand anything. They, rather, are all in an egocentric predicament, where everyone around them can see the mischief of their own doing, but they themselves cannot because to them, their heart is good and just. The moral play pricks at this conscience, when it has bad consequences. The prophet even pricked David’s conscience with his story when David raped Bathsheba. But, where the consequences are tolerable, they laude it. Such is why serial monogamy in art is heralded. Because the consequence is simply loneliness, and Americans are all already lonely.


For the penultimate part of this essay, I would like to distinguish what I believe about the Bible. It is precisely literary theory that I believe in the Bible. That I can indeed understand.

It’s hard to explain to someone the internal consistency of the scripture, and the doubtful theory that it was written all at once by a man named “Isaiah” who happened to live in Babylon.

First, the Torah sounds distinctly different than the rest of the Bible. It is simpler. It is like the difference between the Pauline letters and the Gospel. There is a certain wording in the Torah that distinguishes it from the rest of the Bible. Meaning, it had a distinct writer.

Secondly, regarding the historical texts, we know through Nehemiah and Ezra that the Bible was being written in succession through the generations. The writer of Judges and Kings sounds different than the writers of Nehemiah and Ezra. Not only do they sound different, but their mode of narrative is different, describing different elements and themes. Meaning, another writer had written them.

Then we come to the Prophets. The prophets each write in different themes, consisting of a consistent narrative throughout the Bible. There is a timeframe at which it is written, and too many differences—yes, actual differences—for it to be anything but a response to what was happening at a moment in history. I’ve read all of the minor prophets, and they have different subjects, different poetic references, different symbolism. It’s often easy to overlook that, but there are methods of interpreting the Bible, that each dispensation in the texts, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel, there is different symbolism. Not to mention that the Bible lines up with these historical prophets, with their corresponding kings. Had one man written the Bible, or a series of scribes, it would have been difficult to get the kind of internal consistency that I see in the book itself. The kings line up, and the prophets will tell when they were written, and the correlation abides with the kings. Several accounts of the kings are given, sometimes the same king is mentioned twice. Meaning, it is a record of a people’s history. Was the Bible put together directly after the reinstatement of Isreal? Highly dubious and unlikely, because there is a continuum of information that seems to have been written as it was happening. It seems to be written in succession, by different authors at various different times.

Not to mention, if the religion were simply made up on the spot, it would be nearly impossible for anyone to believe in it. That’s one of the strongest evidences of the Bible, that nobody would believe a religion that they knew was cooked up by a so called “Prophet Isaiah”, who dreamt of a fictitious people, and then with the help of a couple hundred scribes drafted a scripture. There would have to be some relevant link. And, looking at people like Mortdecai, who is lamenting in Babylon in front of the King’s Chamber, it would be obvious to the people living in that day if it were true or false. Nobody would adopt a religious volume knowing it was a forgery. Nobody would believe an account of modern figures if there wasn’t a correlating history to solidify their investment into the stories. Therefore, there almost certainly was a Jewish people. And we learn this through literary studies, as the studying of the literature would be hard to suggest otherwise. What we know about human psychology, is that it’s hard for one man to establish a religion without some kind of historicity. Joseph Smith, for instance, used it with the Native Americans. Had there been no Native Americans, or interest in his mythology, the religion would have failed immediately. But, because there was a people to attach the religion to, the religion succeeded in germinating. As Mormonism is a blatant example of what likely has to be the case. Islam, again, is much the same thing, borrowing from the Jewish stories of the Old Testament, only inciting Ishmael as the mythical founder. Because the tribes of his day had more in common, and the knowledge of these figures ran deep throughout the cultures. Even into other cultures. There’d have to be some—even if hypothetically specious—reason for the Jews to believe in the religion. Some foundation for the belief. And if the Jewish people did not exist, and these contemporary figures like Daniel and Mortdecai and Esther were not Jewish, then there’d be no reason for the people to adopt the religious text, as the subject of their salvation rested solely on their race and its history.

This alone proves that there must have been a culture of Jewish people prior to the captivity in Babylon. It is proven through literary theory. The cogent leaps from existential structure, the chronological telling of events from the time of Moses to the time of Nehemiah, is itself a sort of miracle, and not something that happens overnight. People tend not to believe things, unless there is a reason to invest in the belief. For Muhammad it was the Arab race. For the Israelites in Babylon, it would almost certainly have to be their own race. Otherwise, why would Persia grant them admittance out of the country, and take the painstaking efforts to produce a Bible? Or, why would the kings of Persia give credence to a madman like “Isaiah”, and establish an entire colony based on his ridiculous remarks? Of course, one might posit something like Christopher Columbus, but it is still ludicrously specious to assume that a great migration of people—documented in the very books, so their genealogies were recorded somewhere too—would take the time to go to some desert when Persia was a flourishing capital.

Too many questions are left, that have to be explained by blind zealotry, great persuasive methods, the ability of one orator to convince a mass of people to migrate out into a desert; the likelihood of this is less than likely, unless we have the presumption given to us that the Jews were a people prior Persian rule. It only makes sense, and it seems to make sense with what we know about psychology.

With that there are other reasons I believe in the text of the Bible. Psalm 2 explicitly says that there will be a Begotten of God, who is the Son of God, and that the government of Israel will rest on His shoulder, and we must “Kiss the Son, lest He be angry with us.” The likelihood of this ending up in the Bible is not likely at all.

Second is Psalm 22, the Psalm Jesus quoted on the Cross. It describes Crucifixion.

Third is Isaiah 43. Where it says “No other saves, except me.” This regarding the divinity of Christ, for those who doubt Christ’s divinity.

Fourth is Isaiah 53, where it plainly says a man’s soul will be offered for our sin.

Fifth is Jeremiah 31, where it describes a New and Unbreakable covenant with God. The New Covenant being established after Israel leaves captivity.

Sixth is the captivity itself, which severed Israel from the Old Covenant.

Seventh is Abraham being told to offer Isaac, which was a type of what was needed for our salvation.

Eighth is Job 9 where Job pleads for a mediator between he and God.

Ninth is Leviticus 27 where it says, “No one who may have been set apart among men shall be ransomed, he shall surely die” speaking of Christ, for only one man ever was set apart.

Tenth, and I can continue like this through every chapter in the Bible, is Isaiah 48 where it describes the new thing which was created now, that we hadn’t known before. That very new thing is Christ Jesus.


I will conclude this essay by saying that literature is a store of some of our most important knowledge. Beowulf, in fact, is an artefact of great importance. It showed us the heritage of Early Saxon culture. It also, in meaning, taught us that struggling against society’s ills was more noble than struggling against our fellow man.

The Bible, no less, tells us the moral law founded by God to His creation, the failure of His creation to fulfill that moral law, therefore, the creation of a new law, established on a previous covenant older than the original, to bring salvation to the whole world.

Arthurian legends tell us much about medieval Europe and Chivalry. They also teach us about comradery.

Don Quixote teaches us about the fall of Chivalry, it also teaches us about friendship.

Hemingway’s novels teach us about injustice, and they also teach us about harsh realities.

Modern scholarship teaches us about our modern age, and it teaches us about our modern bent toward distorting the past by not taking into account the witnesses of history.

Literature is anything we may read, as it is all created by time period it was written in. It is by no means true that we cannot render history accurately. But simply, what we write today is tainted by our own vices of modernity. There is no other way to explain it, as when Happy Days and Brady Bunch were shows, the earth really was that happy. Because it had something to say about the era it was written in. Andy Griffith said a lot about its time period. So with Twilight Zone. So with my History of Civilizations by Fernand Braudel; it taught me much about history, from the lens of the 1970s. So my history textbook tells me a lot about today. Our books teach us about the present, but we can, indeed interpret the past. Montaigne describes a lot of heartache, but in no way does he reveal the kinds of things we accept and tolerate today. Byron was about as bad as he could be, given his knowledge.

Literature is a moral compass. Whether we can be objective about the past, I’m sure we in some sense can, and were better at it at a time. But, unfortunately, the modern age has much to say about the modern age. And not much else. Because we find a sentence is incomprehensible, and this might be why the Jews are being taught in schools right now, as having never existed. When, clearly, the overwhelming amounts of literary evidence suggests they do. Doubly, the stories aren’t understood, and both of these facts are causing major problems in academia right now.

People truly believe that the Jews didn’t exist. It is an anti-Semitic lie perpetrated by academia itself. It makes no difference if a Jew was the one who formulated the theory or not. To minimalize the Bible, is to minimalize history. To minimalize literature, is also to minimalize history. It minimalizes our ability to communicate, and use reason. As, the texts themselves corroborate history. Why? Because they are written at different time periods, predicting futures, being corroborated by archeology, and have internal consistency with what we know about psychology. Reason is the premise that truth can be understood if it’s told to someone. Unfortunately, the problem with our modern age is that truth is subjective, that interpretations of literature don’t matter, and that art itself is outmoded. What will come in its place is systematic simplicity, where context no longer exists, and reason cannot exist. This, in itself, will undermine everything we’ve built, and it is why I am a writer, to help bridge this gap we’ve created. A gap between science and the truth, which needs to be bridged with literature.


The Nethanim and the Old Knight

A man with a shield and sword
Upon his home's wall
Reclined, wondering at the battles
He had once fought.

He was an old knight
Who never fought a magical thing.
No, he fought men
And in valiant battles
He would smite down
His enemy, one after another.
He was one of a handful 
Who lived old, so he had food in abundance.
He had his maiden,
He had his children.
Yet, upon that wall
He stared, reminiscing on his battles.

There came to him a Nethanim 
In armor, who had fought Helldames 
Vampires, Orcs, Elves
Wizards, Witches,
And once fought a Giant to a draw.

The knight saw his fellow traveler
And welcomed him into his abode.
The Nethanim surrendered his sword
At the door,
Of Damascene forge,
And sat down to sup.

The Nethanim had seen
All in the man's house;---
The knight's pretty daughters
The knight's Lady of the house,  
The knight's well stocked horses.
He saw the knight's furnished table
And the knight's mid sized house.

He did not see the shield or sword
Upon the wall.

The knight asked, 
"Whose court are you?"
The Nethanim replied,
"I am of the court of St. Jude
"And I come riding this way 
"To slay a dragon."

The knight, never having seen a dragon himself
Was skeptical.
"Tell me, how many dragons did you slay?"
"Never in my life had I slain a dragon.
"They are among the hardest creatures to slay.
"I had gone toe to toe with a giant, once,
"And fought him to a draw."
The knight then said,
"Certainly, you are deluded.
"Who do you really fight for?"
The Nethanim stopped feasting
And considered.
"If thou must know,
"I fight for God almighty.
"There is a contingent of knights
"Of Twelve Orders 
"Who battle the things of the dark.
"A man cannot slay these beasts
"But only God's power.
"So, there are knights whom
"Having the faith to wield feats of strength
"Against such foes, and with no magical aid,
"Fight these beasts."
"Surely, do you have a token?" asked the knight,
Whom the Nethanim took out a finger.
"See, this was from an Orc I fought several months ago.
"Beastly creatures they are."
The knight thought it was a peculiar looking man's finger.
He said, "I wish to have more proof."
So, the Nethanim took the canine tooth of a Vampire.
"This I took from a vampire. I broke his teeth with my fist
"In combat, and then slashed his head off.
"He burst into flames, of course,
"But I kept his incisor as a trophy."
The man looked at it.
"Certainly it was not a vampire
"But it was a mighty beast he won this from.
"I will respect him,
"For he certainly beat some beast
"Be it a wolf, or a small lion,
"Or even a leopard."

The Knight was satisfied that his company was
Indeed a valiant knight.
But, there snuck into his mind
The glory of his previous wars.
"What I wouldn't give to be in combat
"Again," said the old knight.
The Nethanim looked grave.
"You would wish to fight
"Rather than enjoy these pleasures?
"Beautiful daughters
"A succulent feast
"Maid and Man servants
"Sons and a Lady of the household?"
The knight daydreamt.
"Had you remembered the fear
"Of being in combat?" asked the Nethanim.
The knight thought back.
"No." he said,
Suddenly flashing back to his battles.
"It all was fear,
"Wasn't it?" asked the knight.
"Such is the way of the sword;
"It calls you, however.
"There's an old proverb 
"That once a sword tastes blood
"The knight is cursed to wield it
"For his entire life." said the Nethanim.
The knight nodded his head.
"And you, you have fought many things.
"I wish to have just one last battle."

The Nethanim ate his chop of mutton
And shook his head no.
"Valiant knight, 
"What you fail to understand
"Is that during your combat
"You had fret and fear.
"You are reminiscing on the past
"But forget the pains of the past.
"Why not enjoy what you have here?
"Rather than go on another adventure
"Why not enjoy this beautiful life?"
The knight became irate.
"You would insult me in my own home!
"Your indolence!"
The knight stood up, and 
Drew his sword from the wall.
The Nethanim stood up,
"Sire, I do not wish to fight with you."
But it was too late.
The knight swung his sword
In a fit of anger
Not before the Nethanim broke the knight's
Sword with a might clap of his hands.
The old man fell scorned.
The Nethanim sat back down at the table.

"Old knight, you are a fool.
"You wish to relive your struggles
"And cast yourself back into the uncertainty of battle?
"Why not enjoy your sup here?
"You cannot because you are too greedy.
"Like most men.
"If you would simply satisfy yourself
"With the things you have earned
"There is no need to throw yourself
"Back into battle's heat yet again
"For the sake of vainglory."

The knight, in hefty fear
Saw his favorite blade broken
On the table.
"You broke my sword with your hand?"
Said the knight.
"Yes. I did break your sword with my hand.
"Because you drew it upon me
"And would not heed my warning.
"A man who wishes to relieve his past
"Is a fool, especially one who has obtained wealth
"Honor, and the company of wife and sire.
"You be glad I do not slay men
"For if I were an orc, you'd already be dead.
"However, with your bloodlust,
"It might one day soon turn that you become an orc
"Cursed with immoratlity,
"And an insufferable hatred
"And an envy for naught."


The Validity of Belief

If there is Good, then there is a God.
There is good.
Therefore, there is a God.

Every skeptic I had ever talked to
Diligently claimed there wasn't any good.
At least no universal good.
To them, Good was
Like cologne or deodorant.
You got to choose it,
And then spray it on.

For anyone who had walked through the forest
And smelled a hint of a woman's body---
For the leaves when they decompose, sometimes,
Release a fragrance that smells like a woman's body---
Is it not wholly good?
Or that beautiful mien a woman gets when she is with children,
That accents her beauty.
There is also the beauty of a retired man going fishing
Content with his green, safari hat, casting into the water with peace.
There is also good when a whole family gets together
The kind that sees one another only once a year
And the Matriarch knows each one of them,
Some distant cousins,
Others the very kin who grew up with you.
There is a child feeding, and it gives its grunts.
There is a dog, happy to always see you at the door.
There are flowers, and the little bumble bees loafing 
To pollinate them.
There are two girls, best friends,
Who giggle and squeal when they see each other.
There are two boys, getting into harmless mischief.
There is discipline, a parent restraining their child
From going into the street---yes, this too is good
And is the beginning of even deeper wisdom.
Christmas carols, that exalted feeling one gets.
The poor. There is something inherently good in the poor.
Sex between a man and a woman who have committed their entire lives
To one another, and the chance that they will soon become one.

It follows that if there is Good,
Things universally good, that God exists.
For that is how logic works.
If the premise is true,
Then the conclusion is also true.
And that is how I know God exists.
Because there is good.
For you might ask, 
"Well, can there not be good,
"And also no God?"
No... not from my many engagements with skeptics.
The skeptics all say that good is preferential
Making it likely that good can also be masochistic.
That good can be cruel.
That good can be selfish.

And this cuts the line between good and evil.
That those who have lost their understanding of what good is
Are also the proof that there is indeed a link between Good and God.


Government of the Moneyed

Black is the day that the shadow
Fell over our land.
All want the cannon gibberish while
Freedom drinks hemlock like Socrates;
Powerful men control speech.
The strongest, through their money,
Create their government
Of portals and addresses.

Strong they are,
And great among the nations.
They silence the voices of the dissident.
They crush opposition with silence.
Silence, they say, is the enemy.
Yet, when skilled voices are
Stopped, the strong are made weak
Through silence...

How can my voice break through?


The Eight Ronin Centurions; A Dream

Eight-hundred men were killed
 Eight-hundred were sent to the war.
 The emperor sent the eight-hundred Ronin
 To the battlefield
 So he could seize control of the citadels.
 Their death would send an outcry
 Throughout the kingdom.
 Their death would be heroic,
 A testimony of loyalty to their emperor.
 The eight-hundred were slaughtered
 Without much fight.
 Swords clashed, iron flashed
 Mounts hurdled over children.
 In the towns children were slain
 Elderly were thrown to the ground.
 The 800 Ronin defended the village
 From twenty-thousand mongols
 Who landed their ships upon
 The beaches of the Rising Sun.
 The eight-hundred fought hard,
 But in two hours were swept by the hordes of the Mongols.
 They killed, among them, seventeen-hundred.
 Each Ronin had killed two.
 Three Hundred and Thirty two Ronin had killed three.
 One Ronin had killed four.
 The report got back to the country
 As the Prince was in the citadel with his father
 Who expected to be lauded a great hero
 For the fame awarded by these Samurai's loyalty.
 Instead, the peoples held outside,
 Never knowing the misdeed that was done.
 They mourned the Ronin, but did not give honor to the king.
 They did not even know that the king's honor was why this act was done.
 Therefore, the peoples wept for the Ronin.
 But none knew it was the King who sent them into battle.
 For his honor...
 But none understood how it made the king honorable
 So it did not bring him any honor,
 Nor dishonor.

Amendment XXVIII; as a Note, This Is not Law, but You Would Want it To Be.

Article 1: No test shall be administered in due process or in an investigation that is based on subliminal interpretations. Citizens have a right to a fair investigation that does not interpret subliminal actions which are out of a Citizen’s control, due to the possibility of false representations of such actions by authorities or court officials.

Article 2: The rights of an offender are to have public records expunged—in a compulsory act of the courts, by the courts at no fee for the defendant—the moment their punishment is over; and no public record of such criminal offenses are allowed to be kept by private or public officials or individuals, except as a matter of court records, and only for Aye or Nay that such a proceeding had happened, without injury or bias toward the defendant of a criminal justice proceeding.

Article 3: No crime is to have statutory conditions; all crimes must be arbitrated by the courts, and all penalties and duties must be arbitrated by the courts prior to sentencing.

Article 4: Police, prosecutors and investigators, as a matter of jurisprudence, cannot have access or possess records of criminality, due to the inherent bias against individuals who would hold such records. Criminal records, also, are not admissible as evidence in a court of law.






Debating an Athetriangleist

Me: “A triangle has three sides.”

Atheist: “But I don’t believe in triangles. How do you know they have three sides?”

Me: “Because when you draw a shape with three sides, it is a triangle.”

A: “How can you know that it has three sides?”

Me: “Because it does.”

A: “Well, I want proof that a triangle has three sides.”

Me: “Well, there is this philosopher named Euclid, who discovered the principle of what’s possible in geometry. And the first principles were triangles, which have three sides.”

A: “Philosophy isn’t scientific.”

Me: “Yes. Yes it is.”

A: “Well, how can you prove that a triangle has three sides? What if it had four?”

Me: “Then it’d be a square.”

A: “You’re a square.”

Me: “Can we please keep to the topic? If it has three sides, it is a triangle.”

A: “Well, I’ve heard of a shape like that, but it cannot be determined how many sides a triangle has.”

Me: “Yes. A triangle has three sides.”

A: “You say that, but can you offer proof?”

Me: “No. I cannot offer proof that a triangle has three sides. You just have to know that.”

A: “Well, then a Triangle doesn’t exist.”

Me: “I’ll draw one for you.”

A: “Sure.”

I proceed to draw a triangle.

A: “That doesn’t prove that a triangle exists.”

Me: “If it doesn’t prove that a triangle exists, then I’m afraid it cannot be proven. It just has to be accepted on faith that it is a triangle.”

A: “See, I can only believe in what I see.”

Me: “Well, you can see this shape. It is called a triangle.”

A: “But that’s not proof enough. I need more proof that triangles have three sides.”

Me: “You can count them.”

A: “No… I want you to prove that a triangle has three sides.”


Substitute God with “A Triangle” and “Three Sides” with Morality.

Use your imagination to make the actual debate.

Because if you can’t, I don’t believe you.


This is how atheists sound when they argue about God’s existence.


The Fall of Arthur; An Analysis of Tolkien’s Work

  1. Tolkien’s The Fall of Arthur

Well… I’ve read Chaucer. I’ve read Arthur. Tolkien’s work is a combination of Caxton’s Translation of Malory, Beowulf and Chaucer. Chaucer’s feminine element is embodied in Guinevere, and Tolkien’s story is a very simple one. The title of the piece is “The Fall of Arthur.” Tolkien was writing with material sufficient for a Long poem, but intended the piece to be an epic. It proves one cannot go beyond the archetypal limitations of a story.

I have finished the poem with seven lines to give words to the metaphor, for my own pleasure. As the poem screamed Chaucer to me. It ended so beautifully at the Cliffs of Albion, and the metaphor wanted to be tied up there as a long poem, not an Epic. The metaphor being the loss of Albion giving up the Kingdom. The piece is a metaphor, of course. Arthur was out fighting his battles with, what I assume is, France (metaphorically), left Guinevere alone, and Mordred came and began to stir up strife. Therefore, Albion was lost because Arthur was overseas.

I saw Chaucer in the text. Therefore, a Canterbury tale. The piece is appropriate for a Canterbury tale; its subject is the same. Arthur left his lover vulnerable, Lancelot saved her, Arthur became jealous over Lancelot—therefore, for the warlust of conquering, he lost his friend because that friend had to save Guinevere, and his kingdom; so therefore, Arthur was also killed at Albion. The nature of the Jealousy is Chaucerian;—his son Chris says that the interpretation is new. It is for an Arthurian Legend, but Tolkien fused Chaucer’s element with Malory’s. The subject of Chaucer is showing up in the Arthurian poem, that being a certain feminine character in Guinevere.

The story is a metaphor about losing the Mythos of England to France. Perhaps because Tolkien had already given up the battle and embarked on writing Middle Earth, the poem could not be finished. It’s why I wrote Hail Britannica was this controversy right here, of Britain not having its own mythology. But, there’s some tension between Tolkien’s Middle Earth and The Fall of Arthur. What is called “Mirkwood”, there’s the beginning of a tension between Tolkien’s Universe of Discourse and the Arthurian Legend’s. Tolkien did, in fact, give a mythology to England. So also with the entire English Speaking civilization.

I have criticism from the New York Times, that doesn’t quite understand what they have here; which is typical of anything named after New York. We treat serious literature as if it were a product. But, it has a quintessential English Myth, about losing the Cliffs of Albion—what is referred to as “The Wall” several times in the poem—being the pivotal point in history where Arthur loses his reign. You’d almost have to be English to understand it—or have the first thing you learn about England be the impenetrable Cliffs of Albion.

Albion is the whole of Great Britain’s poetic name. And I believe the patriotic reference is appropriate. Tolkien, as a whole, was deeply ingrained in believing in the unity of good people’s against evil. So with it, I do believe the poem is right. Tolkien is English. He did fight in WWI, the worst war ever fought to date. It is a metaphor about the United Kingdom needing to stay whole.

I do, also, believe Tolkien had a Chaucer like tale here. I wish he could have tied up the metaphor, instead of go down rabbit holes trying to fuse his Middle Earth with the Arthurian Legends. He didn’t have the material for an Epic Poem, just a Chaucer like Long Poem which could be found in the Canterbury tales. The metaphor is perfect—but he had made a mistake by trying to carry on with the poem after its conclusion. The metaphor was in the title, and certainly, it would make Albion fall to Mordred, the events of the poem.

Why Tolkien could not finish a work of poetry is not really understood by me. But, the fact remains that the poem could be finished only by about line 70 or so of Canto V. Arthur was lost at Albion’s beach. As, that’s the poem’s end; it’s the metaphor being built up to. There can be no winning England after Albion falls. If the English lose Albion, there is no Gawain to win it back. I think that’s why Tolkien could not finish the poem. He had too far a breadth, but the archetypes wouldn’t allow him to go any further.

And frankly, my original draft of this essay had said “Dover.” Because of an obscure reference to Pevensey. But, I believe Tolkien is talking about Albion, not just the region of Dover. Where the battle is—which gives the myth more weight as no one knows where Camlann was fought—could be anywhere there are Salt Cliffs in Albion. The unified whole of the United Kingdom. The battle is most likely in Wales, though, as it seems the geographical center of the conflict, but it also blends with Dover. Probably a discreet warning to England about Wales’ geography. One might think that it is perfectly impenetrable being next to Ireland, but the threat is internal. Mordred is from Wales, and in the King’s absence, Mordred stirs up a rebellion. That is why the cliffs of Wales embody a United Kingdom, or better known as Albion.

Upon reading notes in my copy of the book, and my vivid imagination, I had imagined the possibility of writing more to the piece. Siegeworks being rowed in, the logistic train of ships. Though, this is a poor artistic choice. Tolkien would have known this, as many writers have fantastic notes, but employing them would be bathos, or in this case, ruin the Voltaire like ending. As, there is a striking Voltaire like punch in the last line.

My added lines would only be there to help the reader assess what the meaning of the poem is they had just read. Only for a modern audience, as I can easily account that the poem is talking about Camlann. The three futile battles, as Camlann was one of the three futile battles of English history, being the loss of Lancelot, the loss of Guinevere, and the landing of the galleons at Albion. The poem could not make more battles, as Hastings is one of those three futile battles, therefore, it must be three futilities, and landing at Albion is the third futility. To siege Albion would seem French.—To even assume it’s possible. Albion’s shores are futility, being the third futility. Guinevere’s love the second. Lancelot’s disownment the third.

Nothing more needs written to this poem. Except what I had written, only for a modern audience to help them understand what they had just read, and to help give some closure to the ambiguity of the poem if only for myself. Landing a fleet at Albion must be futile, as the battle Tolkien described was already stated a Punic victory several lines back. I suppose one could make it an Odyssey, but one would need fifteen Cantos, which would be theft. Let the reader simply imagine it with this line, as a series of failed siege attempts at Albion would be a strong story, but it would not then be Tolkien’s. His subject was taken up, it was completed, the three woes beautiful and simply were Guinevere’s futile love, Lancelot’s futile service, Arthur’s futile landing. To siege the cliff would be a fourth woe, therefore unnecessary.

  1. A Defense of the Completion of Tolkien’s Poem:

“… :: My heart Urgeth/ that best it were:: that battle waited.” To read the poem as it would naturally be read, with the context of the previous lines, it is Arthur claiming it would have been best to wait to give battle, rather than fight on the beach. The next lines are ambiguous, possibly to allow Tolkien the option to continue if he ever wanted to take up the subject again. But, since he never could, the last lines are best read as if they were stream of consciousness, to help complete the work. There is no way to communicate the sense, but to consider it in a grammatical tense of Arthur giving immediate thought to the events unfolding before he landed on the beach. That he is in that present mind. As, the author’s intents are known to the reader. But, subtracting the author from the text, using Autonomous Artwork in theory, the line should be reflected within the framework of the story as stream of consciousness. Therefore, a conclusion, and giving connotation of Pevensey, where the French sieged England and won at Hastings. The poem is masterful with this conclusion in view,—to go further would be deuterocanonical, and spoil the metaphor.

  1. Why I Offer a Different Scholarship than Chris Tolkien

For one thing, a man is acquainted with his father. He’s acquainted with Arthurian legend. He’s not so sure what he has. I’ll tell him what he has. He has one of England’s masterpieces, but, only if the poem does not continue.

So, it will come to no surprise that there should be no—rather there ought not be any—instance of the Silmarillion in this poem. Mirkwood sounds too much like one of Tolkien’s inventions, which was clumsy in the poem. Granted, Tolkien’s masterwork The Lord of the Rings is far superior to anything I had ever dreamt up, even to this date. It is without ties to any historical story. Arthur, however, is tied up with a lot of legends, where Tolkien’s foray into the Silmarillion or Middle Earth universe of discourse doesn’t fit the body of work poets have been creating in Britain, France, Dutchland and the United States. England has a vast mythology, starting with Beowulf, but including Paradise Lost, Pilgrim’s Progress, Arthur, Robin Hood, St. George. Middle Earth is like Rowling’s Masterwork. It is purely creative; it is even more creative, in that it is something brand new. It is a mythology for England. It is—as it can only be—purely British. There can be no American, Frenchman nor any German intruding on the purely British story of Middle Earth. It is the first of its kind, written in the bunkers of WWI, and only Dune rivals it in scope. If anyone were to ask me which body of work stands as the greatest masterpiece of fiction ever, The Lord of the Rings stands as the greatest.

However, Tolkien wrote an impressive work—to be viewed outside of his body. The Fall of Arthur is not unfinished. It is, I will argue, complete. Because the metaphor is complete. Tolkien had completed the poem on verse 63 of Canto V. I had written an interpretation starting at verse 64, and ending at 70. The reason why—and we’re in the realm of poetry—is that the metaphor is perfect in The Fall of Arthur.

One must understand Tolkien was writing a myth for England. Modern England. The England with Communism to the North of it. The England with Atomic Bombs. The England where further conquest would be futile.

In that is the third futility. Camlann was considered the third futile battle in English History. As recorded. Futile, Punic—Tolkien had written in Canto V a Punic victory. He had—as I read him closely—been conscious of the effect of the poem, and that it was soon coming to an end.

What’s more, is that there are wars with the “East”. Not south. The “East.” Rome was south of Britain. Russia is to the East. The metaphor must be preserved in the poem, as the poem is really about Wales being a vulnerability in the English isles. Not much is spoken of about Wales in our English literature. But, Mordred is a prince. A Prince of Wales, who foments a coup against his father, as his father is out fighting his glorious wars with the East. Remember, the point of the battle of Camlann is its futility. Anticlimax is the sum of futility, and is an artistic choice worthy of the subject.

Historically speaking—perhaps Tolkien realized this—the victory over Rome never occurred. C. S. Lewis was fanatical about this apparently—such is friendship that the fanaticism would carry over to Tolkien. It was, for some intellectual reason, disgusting, and these obscure and arcane opinions are held by scholars in agreement—for whatever reason, probably as a point of agreement that the sacred bonds will never be broken on that one solitary point. Arthur had left—the third futility when he came back and landed at Albion—and lost everything fighting his war with the “East.” Not Rome.

The first is Guinevere’s unrequited love. The second is Lancelot’s disownment as a friend. As the Chaucerian themes start to intrude onto the story. The story is English, but not wholly Arthurian. It is borrowed from Beowulf, it is borrowed from Chaucer.

The story seems to be a metaphor about Albion. The metaphor is the Salt Cliffs—often ambiguous, as the geography is all of England at once, but the conflict arises at Wales. The salt cliffs which kept England safe were the same ones, “The traitor keeper”, that solidified the reign of Mordred. The reign of whatever foreign threat there is. The metaphor is clear, the story must be about futility. It must have three futilities. A battle after winning a beach, the win must be the futility, not the future battle a futility. “:: doom of mortals/ ere the walls were won…” The walls were not won. Albion prevented Nazi invasion. It would never fall, even to Arthur. The metaphor must be Albion, either being in the possession of Arthur, where he can reign responsibly. Or in the possession of Mordred, the power hungry prince. The battle with the East will not be won, but will end in futility. The poem must mean that, or the metaphor it’s building carries no meaning.

It is arcane if studied in the context of Morte D’ Arthur. But Tolkien is not writing Morte D’ Arthur. He is writing The Fall of Arthur; a myth with no French words. The fall of Arthur, the spirit of England, is the disunity of the United Kingdoms. What follows suit, from the beginning of the poem, Albion is protecting not just England, but Christendom. Therefore, the metaphor is not only about Albion. It is about the Western Civilization.

The threat is war with the East. A futile war, that Tolkien is alluding to, which cannot really be won. It would be in name a glorious victory, fictitious in its accomplishment like Arthur’s victory against Rome. Truly, Arthur is in possession of Rome right now, therefore a possible concrete fulfillment of the prophecy of literature. But losing Albion, it is something futile. As futile as unrequited love. As futile as broken friendship.

  1. Tolkien’s Fall of Arthur An Analysis

The poem is not uncompleted. It is finished. With a comma in place of a period, it is finished. With seven lines of mine, maybe even extraneous, the poem is finished. Therefore, what does the poem mean?

The Battle of Camlann is considered the third futile battle in English history. Therefore, the poem is talking about the futility of the English striving with the East. It is a metaphor—Rome being the Western civilization. Therefore, completed, Arthur has conquered all Rome, with the United Kingdom being the principate in control of the entire Western Empire. Therefore, Arthur does control Rome, and the book is not looking back to Arthurian legends, but is looking to today, with wars haunting the West from the East.

With this being said, it is interpreted that while Arthur is out fighting his war, it leaves the door open to his son Mordred to rape away Guinevere, which is where the plot hinges. On that central focus, Mordred is now taking advantage of the king’s absence, by stirring up Wales against the United Kingdom. Wales, in particular, is the most stable of the three protectorates of England. But, in Arthur’s absence, Wales is stirred up against England, and therefore, Mordred launches a coup to usurp the kingdom from Arthur.

What follows is that Lancelot must save Guinevere, and her love for Lancelot is discovered. This leads to a furious jealousy in Arthur, who disowns Lancelot as a friend, and Arthur must now know that Guinevere is unfaithful. Therefore, two of the three futilities. The third, is the loss of Albion to Mordred. There can be—as the poem’s metaphor creates—no winning back the shores of Britain if Albion is seized by another king.

Arthur here is not a King, but is the spirit of England. And if the spirit of England is lost to the East, in futile battles bordering the edges of Mirkwood, the United Kingdom will be lost. The poem is a rallying cry to keep the kingdom United.

It fairs well as a short piece, almost like a Canterbury tale in length. Upon reading it the first time through, I was amazed, and kept hoping that the poem would end at Albion’s shores. It sure enough did, which is why the poem’s subject was finished. There was no sieging nor winning Albion, what was called The Wall. Because the cliffs are unassailable to foreign invader. Even keeping out the Nazis during World War II.

The poem is proof of a concept, and that is the archetypal structure of the collective knowledge. Albion cannot be lost to war, but must only be lost to subterfuge. If the Spirit of England fails, it is gone. The glorious revolution proves this all the more, that England must acquiesce to its rulers. It is the only way a ruler can get embedded within the shores, because once the Walls of Albion are abandoned, the power that is within the walls will be sustained. Thus, it is only lost to cowardice, or it is lost to campaigning, which is how Arthur lost it in the poem.

Readily, that is the metaphor of the poem, the three futilities are Guinevere’s Unrequited Love, Lancelot’s Disownment and Landing Ashore at Albion, as opposed to Pevensey, where it is possible to take Britain by military exploit, if she doesn’t have her navy.

  1. A Reflective Analysis of Mirkwood

Tolkien’s body of work includes references to “Mirkwood.” His masterpiece Universe of Discourse is starting to blend into the Arthurian legend. For what reason, we must know that the poem is Tolkien’s. Therefore, the poem must be a striving with Arthurian Legend and Middle Earth. Perhaps, Tolkien is only capable of achieving one universe of discourse, and is not able to enter into another.

With this said, there is a blending of Mirkwood—Middle Earth—with Arthur’s legend. Arthur is out fighting at Mirkwood, the East, somewhere, I would suppose with Middle Earth. Perhaps showing an unconscious tension between the two realms of creativity, that they could not be separated. Until, at the end, Middle Earth won out, and Tolkien abandoned the Mythos of England for the myth of Middle Earth.

Tolkien had said he wanted to embark on creating a “Universal myth of England,” a mythology that was “Uniquely English.” Thus, drawing from the English of past, fusing it together to work new languages; creating ex nihilo a body of work as rich as Middle Earth, England’s purely English mythology was made to be Middle Earth. Substantial in its own right, it does not interact with the real world. It is, on its own, something untouchable.

Tolkien, however, touched it with the Arthurian legends. He was probably unintentionally creating a link, temporal, with Middle Earth. Tolkien’s fairy worlds were an invention of Post World War I, and were probably an expression of his Post Traumatic Stress Disorder incurred by fighting in the trenches of World War I. Thus, the dark and dingy world of Tolkien’s is starting to burgeon into the more tangible metaphysic of Arthurian Legends.

This is what separates literature from fantasy, by the way. Literature is more real in its subject. As opposed to Fantasy, a world of pure creative thought, literature embarks on recreating what is real, even when it is using fantasy. It’s why Orwell’s 1984 is literature. Because it is real. Same with Brave New World. As opposed to Middle Earth which is High Fantasy. There is something overall fantastic about it. Yet, here, bordering Mirkwood, Tolkien is embarking on the fusing of the reality of Arthurian Legend—-something tied into the archetype of England—with his invention. It was, for lack of a better term, unwelcome by me when reading the poem. It is my only criticism of the poem, that Middle Earth began to rear up. It was better left at the War of the Rings.

Though, the poem does not suffer from it. As, its effect once understood begins to impress upon the reader the imaginative subject of Tolkien. Mirkwood is dark forest. Something ominous, nonetheless. Just, unfitting for the subject, we see what probably didn’t let the poem get finished. A man is only capable of perhaps one great world. Two great worlds, they must, therefore, be fused in some way. As is what happens in most of our art. I’m sure Disney will do it with Star Wars and Marvel, unadvisedly. Much the same, it had the same effect in this legend as Disney would fusing Marvel and Star Wars. And unwelcome fusing of two well established themes.

However, an author is keen on doing it. They get their little pet ideas, which then burgeon to a schema about how their worlds work. And, ultimately, it is unavoidable, which is why Tolkien should have probably written this work first. Unless, of course, the work was written first, and then Mirkwood created The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. To which case, Tolkien inventing Middle Earth by mere suggestion of a place is itself a wonderful little invention. But, he’s hereto created from Mirkwood what will, from now on, be associated with it, and that’s Middle Earth.

Therefore, Tolkien maybe created the archetype of Mirkwood. He not only created it, but encapsulated it with the War of the Rings and the Ents. To which I would say “Bravo”, but it still looks awkwardly placed in an Arthurian legend. Simply put, because Tolkien had invented, post hoc, the myth of Mirkwood. Which is interesting in its own right that this would take place, that even if Mirkwood were, itself, a real established literary place, Tolkien had been the one who created it for the modern audience. Therefore, it might be difficult to unravel Mirkwood as Tolkien created it with Mirkwood as it is established in a historical context.

In either regard, its placement, and not being deleted, is proof that Tolkien’s body of work was already fully immersed in The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit. It could not go any further, nor any creative work could be separated from it.

Conversely, even I with Fairyland must have it bleed into my other Universe of Discourse. Of course, there is the round and flat earths. The round the tangible; the flat earth the afterlife.

But, I digress there because it is inevitable that a worker of Universes of Discourse blend them into one Superordinate reality, which in Tolkien’s case is Middle Earth. In mine it is just Here and There.

  1. The Fall of Arthur a Legacy

Encroaching upon the cannon of history, a well written, paragraph response about this will not show up on Wikipedia’s entry of Camlann. Even if it’s true, or fundamental for England, Scotland, Ireland and Wales. We are falling on dark times, when research must be vetted for what is obvious. One paragraph, and a week has gone by, the paragraph disappears.

I find this is why my scholarship is hard to publish. I have intellectuals who want to break into the field, possibly break ground first. Possibly plant their flag. Or, possibly, they don’t care to know that The Fall of Arthur is about Camlann. Much of our interpretation of literature is specious at best; unmoving. Because of academic pride. It should not be about planting a flag, but about the truth.

The Fall of Arthur shows a truth. The futility of conquest. The futility of war. The futility of a king striving with other nations, abandoning their kingdom. It’s only an idea as old as civilization. It is proven time and time again. When the owner of a business is gone, the Manager is in his place. The store gets dirty. The employees slack off. Why The Fall of Arthur is not about this, I’m afraid it will be lost to the annuls of history unless I take it, and make it read. Much like all of literature, which holds these invaluable pieces of wisdom. Not because they literally occurred, but because they do literally occur. There was probably not a Battle of Camlann. If there was, Arthur probably did not fight there. If he did, the most likely cause of it is a Barbarian invasion of Rome, where a battle was won against it. And, the news carried up into the Barbarian tribes in England, and disseminated throughout the isle.

And a process of peer reviews needs to show it is possible. Often breaking away from the sublime truths of literature.

I offer this essay in response to Christopher Tolkien because the work is not his; the meaning, anyway. The rights to the words are his, and the property rights. But, the metaphor—the meaning—is not up to him to determine. It was up to his father, who had studied Camlann, and knew it was the third futile battle in English history. Who knew that Hastings was another of those battles. And a perfect metaphor which needs to be read, especially in these days when Scotland is talking about annexing from the United Kingdom. Literature is important. Not because it actually transpired, but because it can, quite refreshingly, help us understand by legend what is practical advice. Not because the United Kingdom ever did loose itself to Mordred, but because Scotland could as much be Wales as Ireland, and Tolkien, who fought in hell’s barracks, needs to be listened to. Men who fight in war, men who understand war, even if their stories are metaphors, their stories are true. Because Scotland needs to not annex from Britain. The fate of our earth depends on it. And if this truth is found in a simple literary poem, it is worthy enough for me to do six essays worth of analysis. And Christopher Tolkien does not get to dictate—nor would he, as I would hope he’d see his father is more serious than he had first understood.

We need stories because they preserve truths that go beyond the actual battles of history. They are intellectual and metaphorical battles, to be waged on paper so they do not get waged in real life.

That is why this little poem is important. Probably the most important.

Tolkien, J. R. R. Edited by Christopher Tolkien. The Fall of Arthur. Harper Collins, 2013. Text.


Why the FCC Will Regulate the Internet

As a business owner

If I express speech

That offends the

Heart, it is not

The right of Paul

To steal my voice.


HAM radio is

Licensed because

As a passeryonder told me

“It could interfere

“With Planes and



The Internet

Of course

Is a place of

Volatile speech

Which will


Therefore, because of

This, citizens interfere

With one another’s rights.


Theft, Identities stolen,

Illicit Crime,

Porn Bombs,

Frames for crime,

Dark Web.

The internet

Will have to

Be protected

To allow

Business like mine

To continue.


Not because

Of vain or

Offensive speech. No.

Because of



To go forward

We will probably

Have to purchase

Licenses to

Operate, like a

Car, since it

Is infrastructure

Necessary for

The modern day.


Freedom of

Speech is what we communicate

Through writing

And speech.

It is not,

Like HAM radio,

A right of the people.

Like medication is prescribed,

I think this is

A good analogy.

Because of the

Harm drug

Addiction has

On a society

Worse, is the

Man who can

Thwart public

Transit, hinder

Economic freedom,


And if not

Clear, we need

Paper, too…

It’s better

To pay bills

By mail

Than by Email.


The commerce

Needs to

Be protected

Personal property,


9th Amendment,

And most of all

Our interpersonal


Which is why

An issued handle

Will probably be necessary for

The internet.

If people

Are to have

Any wealth connected

To it, it needs done.


And, people should,

No, must be able to live

Life, if they chose,

Without it.

The Plot of the Entire Bible, From Beginning to End

A plot emerges from its pages.
An epic story, spanning every generation.
Do you wish to know the Bible's story?
I will tell it to you.

Man is created, and man falls.
So, immediately God sets forth a redemption plan.
Through the Woman's Seed, will be an heir
Which crushes the head of the Serpent.

So, God chooses a man from among His people
To give His promise to.
This man is Abraham.
And then Abraham has a Seed Isaac.
And Isaac has a seed Jacob.
And Jacob, all of his sons are promised
To be God's peculiar people.
Jacob's son Joseph then gets sold into slavery by his brothers
And later raises to the status of Satrap in Egypt.
He stays the famine, and all the world is saved.
And his family comes to Egypt.
Four hundred years later, Jacob's family
Are slaves, and the firstborn of Israel are commanded to be
Killed. Yet, from among them, comes Moses,
Who is from the son of Jacob named Levi.
And Moses leads his people out into the desert,
Gives the law and command of ordinances
By which God will judge the Earth,
Which if followed to the letter
Condemns every man, woman and child
And every nation to be destroyed.
For that is God's judgment and Wrath.
Moses dies, and a Warrior named Joshua raises up,
And Joshua leads God's people into Canaan,
After forty years of Israel's wandering
Because of disobedience and worshipping the Golden Calf.
Joshua conquers Canaan, for Canaan was abominable in its sin
And ruled by wickedness.
Then, Israel is established, and the land is ruled
Through God's law alone.
Yet, after several hundred years, 
The peoples cry out for a King to deliver them
And a king is given to them, by the ordinance of Samuel.
Then comes the lordship of the Kings.
First by Benjamin, the smallest tribe,
But Saul, the Benjamite,
Fails and becomes wicked. Then, redemption comes through Judah
And David becomes King,
A man after God's own heart.
And from David, it is promised that his Heir
Will be one who is seated upon the Throne of Israel forever.
David's Son Solomon then establishes the Temple
And his son Rehoboam divides the kingdom
For his cruelty. And Israel fractures into
Two kingdoms, Israel and Judah.
Judah remains faithful, mostly,
But, Israel rebels, and comes under siege
By Assyria, and is taken captive.
However, Judah survives the onslaught,
And is promised that the Messiah would suffer
For the sins of the people,
As it was promised to Abraham when he went to offer Isaac
That God would provide the Lamb for sacrifice,
And Abraham would not have to.
Finally, the King of Judah,
Jehoiakim, is besieged by Babylon,
For Hezekiah, the righteous king,
Sinned by showing Babylonian Kings the riches of Israel.
Babylon besieges Judah,
And the bloodiest siege in history ensues,
Where men eat one another,
And must eat human dung to survive.
The walls are broken,
And Judah goes into captivity.
The Law is broken, and severed,
And cannot be binding any longer.
So, after seventy years, Judah returns
To Israel by Cyrus the Great's decree
And there they rebuild the wall and temple.
And they are told to Eat the Fat and Drink the Sweet.
For they are commanded this, to show that they are awaiting
For a newly prophesied Covenant, rooted in Abraham's seed
Who will bless all nations.
Then, the Maccabees reign for a short while,
But are conquered by Rome.
And while under Roman Captivity
The branches are sheared for the ordinances of the Law had been added to.
Here a little, there a little.
And finally, the Promised Heir comes, the Seed of Abraham, the Seed of Eve
The King Who shall reign forever in David's stead,
And God's people reject Him, and Crucify Him,
And mock Him, and made Him poor and a vagabond.
Thus, God Himself was this man, and when He died
He descended into Hell to become our Burn offering;
The Lamb Whom Abraham was said God would Provide
In stead of Isaac.
Then, this man named Jesus raised from the dead,
Demonstrating His awesome power over death,
And He was God, Who raised, as the Early Creeds go.
And this man ascended in Bodily form to Heaven,
Where He remains to this day, awaiting to judge the living and the dead.
Then, upon His return, Zion shall give birth to the Christ Child,
The promised Heir, and He shall be swiftly carried up into Heaven
And there nurtured, until He returns with the Sons of Israel
Who had never sinned---those like He---
And He slays the hordes at the Battle of Megedo.
And this same man will rule upon the Earth for one thousand years
Giving those of His saints principalities and governorships,
And beautiful wives and children, and vineyards.
And none shall be made afraid, and every man shall eat from his own garden
Undaunted by any sin or malice.
Finally, Satan shall return, after having been imprisoned by God's Angel
And Satan shall gather his forces for the war
Of Gog and Magog. They shall be defeated utterly.
And a new heaven, and a new earth shall descend,
From which those men who have chosen God from the foundation of the world
Shall dwell, in a city more beautiful than any other,
And shall become nations and be pleased by the neverending
Bounty of Jehovah-Provider.

The Trinity Explained

God the Father,
God the Spirit;
God the Son.

For God to be all Omniscient,
And Omnipotent,
Philosophers have credited these attributes
To be contradictory and incompatible.
Except, that God exists in three Persons,
Then those divine attributes are reconciled.

The Father is like the Mind of God,
The Son is like the Word of God---His Voice---
The Spirit is the Life of God.

The Word of God became Flesh
And tabernacled among man.
It would be like our Vocal Vibrations
Taking a bodily form.
For Words are vibrations of air,
And the entire cosmos is energy---
Energy is vibrations
And must be vibrating because of the Son
Or Word of God.
That Word which became flesh
Died for us on the cross
And raised.

Distinctly, Genesis even says in the Hebrew,
"The faces of God"
When describing God.
The "Faces of Elohim."
Meaning, the Trinity is and was and always will be.

The Spirit is the breath---
In a man, spirit is our life,
Our breath.
It is our life force.
And in God, His Life Force is Holy
Because it can animate flesh
Bring the dead back to life
And speak and interpret tongues.

I believe when I go to heaven,
God will exist in three persons
Whom I can talk too.
The Father will sit at His Temple by Ezekiel's river
And the forests of the Trees of Life,
All the sacrifices made which will ever need made,
The Son will walk with us in the garden and city,
And dwell with us in our mansions,
And the Spirit will fill the whole Kingdom like a fire in a paraffin.

Blood Red

China, your skies are bloody red!
What do the astrologers and soothers say?

I say, it happened once before, the year of Boston's bloody massacre.
And from that massacre, America was freed from the yoke of tyranny.

Thunder, hail, storm,
You shall be pestle
And turned to the sea.
Your odor shall waft abroad.

Child, Touch Another World

The child's heart within all
Feels so much larger than it actually is.
It feels like all laws bend to its will,
That it is of a greater importance
Than the Great Pyramids,
Than the Mythic Stonehenge,
Than the Swirling Milky Way,
Than the Eifel Tower,
Than Democracy,
Than Free Speech,
Than Patriotism,
Than History.
The child within all feels like the creator of all worlds.

It feels so important,
Like a king,
Like it were great at every which thing.
A great skier,
A great chess player,
A great teacher,
A great writer,
A great builder,
A great artist,
A great singer,
A great champion and hero.

The child in all believes itself to be great...
It feels entitled to all good treatment.

It feels as if the world revolves around them.

I don't know how we ever grow up...
I look at people, in their self importance,
And I find each one a world swirls around their minds,
I can tap into it by listening to their words.
I can feel their feelings, know their thoughts
By the words they speak, and the mien they imbue.
I can know them, and so can you.
Yet, not many care to know them.
Not many care to look at the dramatic obelisk of Other
As a friend once wrote in a poem about a man named David.
That there are obstacles hindering us,
People, places and things.

I look at myself, and my wisest thoughts
Came from other minds much wiser than mine.
It came from listening, from tasting,
From touching, from smelling,
Through the descriptive tense
Of another's words.
Not my taste, not my touch,
Not my smell, but my ear.

The greatest pieces of wisdom
Came from the greatest adversaries.
For, I could poke holes right through them
When I became undaunted by their words.
When it became interesting.

In practical matters I still feel there are foolish men---
Yet, they find a more practical lifestyle than I do.
And I feel their swirling world as they speak---
It is offensive. It soon becomes my world
A swirling kaleidoscope of thoughts and inventions.
I've learned to embrace it, for such is their freedom
And such is mine.

Yet, my brother told me today,
"Do not seek to persuade me."
Can democracy flourish without persuasion?
My inner child likes to reach out and touch other worlds
But it often gets burnt. Thus, it still reaches,
It still touches, it pries into the deepest held beliefs.
Politely, I can have a conversation with a woman
On Dharma, and she enjoy it.
Yet, her husband---for he ought to be by now---
Scolds her, offends her, doesn't listen.

"Buddhism is more optimistic."
I agree, it's not the torments of Caste systems.
But, really, there must be something better after this life,
Than having to live it all over again.
What cruel deity swirls us in this cosmos for eternity?
Hell is a comfort to me, for there is no wisdom there.
No activity. No planning.
Meaning, no thought. For, with thought
There is wisdom. Hell seems less cruel
Than tormenting someone on Earth
Over and over again,
With a reincarnation of past lives
Rejuvenating and swirling like the Milky Way.
That is immoral.
And at last, it is simply to die?
I cannot  believe death is the sum of life's choices.
I believe there must be more.
I'd lose hope, if all I had to look for
Was another life like this.
Yet, her thoughts are interesting,
And he---very sure of himself---
Tells me I upset her.
Something tells me she was telling the truth
That it was not me.

Rather, I live to listen...
Do not be offended if I cannot agree,
But that is core to our freedom
Even to have heated arguments.
If I could not persuade,
If I could not gain access to the worlds which swirl around me,
I would be despaired, and lonely.
I would be, as the Woke Mob wishes me to be,
A solipsist, constantly reassuring himself with his own thoughts.
And there I would be, no one to challenge me
Suffering in the hell I created for myself
By telling someone I thought was wrong to, "Shut up."

Offense is necessary in a free society.
For, in a free society, we are free to share our worlds
With one another, and burdened though we be,
The child within us touches the scalding, red-hot
Iron of another's world---if we cannot sway them to ours
Or be swayed to theirs, then there is no freedom.

I know it burns. But, there is no better joy any other way.

My Audience

You are my poetry.
I listen... what do those thoughts inspire?
I know not anymore what they mean---
Only what you say about them.

Do not come to me, and ask,
"Does your poem mean, thus..."
I do not know.
I want to hear your words
And interpret them like I do Eliot or Wordsworth.

I want to listen.
Do you not understand?
I wrote so much to listen to you
Tell me what they mean.
I know what I meant by them...
What do you see by them?

I can listen, and understand you.
You listen, and understand me.
I wish to listen to you...
Just tell me your honest thoughts.

Know only one thing about me.
I believe in Christ.
But, tell me what you see in my poems
And reveal to me mysteries I had not even fathomed.
Reveal to me the hidden parcels of wisdom
I did not see, nor conceive.
Show me what they mean---
For do you not understand,
Words have meaning?
I say this over and over again---
Thoughts have meaning.
Precise meanings.
Do not shy away from telling me your thoughts.
I will think over them,
Mull over them...
For that is what I want.
I want you to think
And speak important words.
Not sit idly and talk about nonsense.
Talk about something deep,
And if poetry draws that out of you,
I wish to listen and see the chrysalis of your thoughts.

See, those reading my poems,
You are my poetry.
To have never had an audience
To listen to,
To never hear you tell me what they mean---
I am tired of my own thoughts...
Do not make me blue.

I wish to place wisdom
Onto your lips, and make it rain forth.