Chapter One: The Confessions of a Priest Cardinal Law is rumored to suggest that there are three, and perhaps four, dimensions to the argument—these predicated upon a burden of proof, which, though not static, rests upon a more sophisticated appraisal of morality. Given the potential for iniquity in the name of the Father, Hammurabi did not go overboard, for even he could not out-distance truth. But, in so far as Law codifies morality, Holy Mary’s prayer in the hour of our death ought to be facilitated by finer distinctions, rigorous though they may be, attainable from the intuition of a child’s petition to the forces of justice. Two approaches to state law rely upon discrete judgments of the matter at hand. Empirical sojourns, fuelled by the expansion of particular ideas, have sought to determine the truth in as much as such the concept may be validated by the presence of mass. Logically, a negated clause, sanctioned only by the conjunction of forty-two literals, signified the derivation of quantum mass. This liturgy was non-trivial, and since state law relied upon proof, the outcome was decidable. Alas, Coptic crucifixions, influenced by popular trials, have justified empiricism in defense of a thesis. Admirable though the Academy, the Republic requires stricter regulation. Democracy, the wisdom goes, is threatened by an esoteric elite, and yet it is the language of this ruling class. Paradoxically, as space requires truth as a medium, democracy must be propagated by dictation of its own liturgy by those wise enough to understand why freedom must be asserted by force of will. Liberty, the fact exceeds, requires the suppression of the lack of freedom. Consequently, PhD, the badge of distinction, gives life to a civilization. An empty symbol it is not, and without jostling for position, is sought by a state on account of its value. The instinct of a state is to maintain power. What then shall we say of Greece, that marvelous, quaint village by the sea-side which had no PhDs, save for the few who studied under a certain chancellor in times past? Certainly, it must have been surprising to many, the manner in which these enterprising villagers were able to grasp, with considerable sophistication, the truth of the matter. The distribution of PhDs in all the states follows certain laws codified for posterity. The question, then, concerns that which facilitates this distribution at any observational instant. History has shown that potential charges have economic ramifications and must, thus, be in line with the will of a state as emphasized by its military wealth. Even Sun Tzu knew to suggest that a war is better won without a single photon fired. Alas, inertia frames situations and history is made when PhDs are exposed to external cultures. Stability, then, suggests that all cultures, though externally rooted, ought to be understood internally. It is the guiding principle of the states. But controversy has trailed the decriminalization of certain vegetables, baffling modern scientists and theosophists alike since the discovery of the library in Eden. Even more baffling, more often than not, Hebrew texts have concerned us with jealousy amongst kin. Why vegetables should conjure such colorless fascination with the cosmic constant that accounts for the expansion of particular ideas, one cannot say. Indeed culture has never been isolated. This much we must agree on. Yet in the heart of Bakongo did Prometheus tell his story. Of our most native pursuit. The communion of natives has never been devoid of predatory insistences. Even in the sacred heart of darkness, the promiscuity of inhibition has produced a liturgy consistent with Mobutu’s reign. Since the day it was reported in the news that a German man wished fervently to be eaten, Roman soldiers have celebrated the justification of their desires. Yet, while Sapiens’ desire, suggestive of much more than a morbid fascination with wild grapes, may be condoned on the grounds that such is only a testament to the war between inhibition and morality, Homo Erectus has outlived any purposeful extance. Evolution is in order. Zero tolerance, while feasible, must understand discrete and continuous truth. That the flawed are capable of reform is debatable so long as the flawed are the backbone of a class system which propagates an insoluble misadventure reflective of social policy gone astray. If the underclass must suffer, then the foibles of Rome are not to be condemned to the slate of “family affairs”, left to be sorted out by those more moral than others. But if the underclass is given the chance to be relevant in society, then so must those whose lust for a perfect union with their God be treated with herbs and medication. Vegetables. A life of sacrifice is often attributed to Ur. Since the demise of Baal, these polices have come under review. While admirable, under agreeable circumstances, is sacrifice really necessary? Such acts of love are controversial, even in an era where the queer perspective of Latin and Greek texts is fashionably more transliterable than King James’. The separation of church and state is consistent with the vision of state law as the most democratic moral code. The responsibility, thus, ought to lie with the individual whose freedoms a state is bound to protect. Commandments, made popular by mighty men in days gone by, condense the matter by proffering to the state the singular power to control the destiny of the individual. If a state is unable to stay united by force of reason, ought it be a state? The medium of contention is in the definition of freedom, emphasized by Harmony Theory in natural existence. This is the necessity of PhD distribution in the states. Alas, Greece, our model village, did not learn this lesson. And thus, other villages which spawned from Athena’s womb, not out of Africa, have continued this tradition. Harmony Theory bears little weight in the consideration of the state from such perspectives. Is it any wonder, then, that contemporary affirmations of state law have produced individuals more concerned with the God without than the God within? In relative terms, individual responsibility has become a mere shadow of what such a symbol as the PhD conveyed when dinosaurs walked the earth, days when the power over life and death was the symbol of the scholar The lexicon of truth—a manifestation of gradations in discriminatory power—is often viewed upon as the arbiter of civilization. What then shall we consider the arbiter of morality? Which is better, a civilized, immoral people, or a primitive moral bunch? The heterodoxal proclamations of the mayor of a town called Rome were not indicative of originality or creativity. They were, instead, testament to the truth that the cloak of wisdom may only be worn by the wise. Congenial, if, his descendant may be, one must always be quick to note that, in times of war, the greatest enemy on the battlefield is the adulation of a friend. This mayor punctured his heart with shame when it was discovered that he was not worthy to seat in the pantheon of pagan gods. Odd as they may seem to us, the ways of children are to be studied for what they might teach us about the nature of the unschooled. In this case, deterrence, the ultimate weapon against chaos, was established as the tradition which Rome would export to its colonies in Gaul, Bavaria and Munich. It was thus left to the scribes who reified doctrine to assign a weight to the measure of blood a pound of flesh would be required to procure. In these times, separation from church is the state of affairs. A woeful banishment, the sinner laments in the cold darkness of solitude, never again to paw at the innocence of charity and embody the disgrace of sainted men. Who then is Nimrod? Introspective phenomena are only phenomena to those overtaken by the extrinsic projections of cosmic reality upon illiterate souls. Moral sophistication is the assessable quality of the least among gods in a living pantheon. Even so, the ethos of villagers should not be condemned without equanimity—the understanding of how the illusion of cognitive reality may be influenced by the entropy of sensation in any universe. But a society hypnotized by sensationalism should be evaluated with the primitive habitation of malnourished spirits in mind. While we do not excuse illiteracy, we understand how it could come to be the status quo. The invention of powerful telescopes should give us hope, reminding us of a wise man from the village who one day thought to measure the leg of a flea. As their technologies progress, we imagine it possible that some manner of dialog may begin. But until such time, the emergent incoherence embodied in such reptilian valor as would prompt the heathen to imagine vain things ought to be tolerated as importunate perturbations magnified by the disposition of darkness to follow light. Nonetheless, must it be suggested that the illiterate have not the right to critique that which is beyond the latitude of their comprehension? Justified by intelligence, may the illiterate not critique wisdom? The evolution from mortal to bird to star, within the context of this universe of discourse, requires the ability to exist quicker than the effect of history as defined by orbit. Relatively speaking, the fabric of the souls of men will not contend with the proof of God without the conjunction of forty-two negated literals. This is the minimal level of intelligence required to hear the voice of Asaru. Nimrod’s rationale is furnished by inertia. His intensions, defended by a bevy of lemurs and bats, are believed to be good. But he is weak and thus dangerous. His belief in God is motivated by a desire to be moral, a poignant searching for solace in a civilization defined by man’s inhumanity to man. Far be it for any to imagine that such a good man would preside over evil as defined by man’s inhumanity to boy. But, and it must be understood clearly, the state of the church is a function of the state of intelligence and not the state of morality. For, in their view, all have sinned and have fallen short of the glory of their God. Then they certainly have fallen far short of the glory of Asaru, as entailed by their own dogma. The unease that prefaces the ability of man to transcend the constraints of dense matter is exemplified by Lucifer. That immoral men might be so gifted causes the wisest of men to look inwards and, as was the day of our early civilization, notarize intelligence by the wisdom of the state. The state must be wise. Its leaders must be wise. The knowledge of nuclear energy must not fall into the hands of rogue states. Rogue states are intelligent, but they are not wise. Moral relativity dies a quick death in the presence of a manifestation of Lucifer. But how then must we understand Mr. Pyke’s remarks? The matter is to be decided by ruminations on the study of the “enslavement” of Moses’ children for the sake of national security. At its best, the unified contention that Lucifer has provided is that knowledge is power. Moses has done well. His conceptions have depth, although his administrative skills leave much to be desired. But the worshipers of Baal seem, like Greece, to have cloned a system without an intrinsic understanding of why such refinement is necessary. These third-world clusters are not to be blamed on anyone but the stars, for they are merely evidence of the inability to validate the bridge between light and truth. This bridge exists, it is true. But it is unavailable for use, and because of what? Greed? Fear? Native instincts are the flaws of the gods, because in the final analysis, the ethosphere is constrained by the most minimal appreciation of the distance between the truth and itself. The commitment to preserving the value of wisdom colludes with the interests of a living state and forges the direction of a civilization into the known unknown. But the bridge between intelligence and wisdom is a reflection of the bridge between light and truth, and because we know the bridge is true, then we know that what is necessary is an overhaul of a defective educational system as drastic as the discrepancy between a PhD and its symbol. Interdisciplinary studies, so-designated because of the apparent unusualness of it within the context of pagans, ought to be adjudged more necessary than incidental. The argument for morality is in the Luciferian debate. But Lucifer has been the cause of the near-demise of a dynasty. This lesson we have learned. Certainly, then, morality must be argued for at the earliest opportunity that cognition permits, without defeasible appeals to the fear of dark matter. As for rogue states, it is the responsibility of the guardians of knowledge to maintain the balance of power. Alas, it is the way of our era. Baal worshipers, with the infrastructure necessary for evolution, represent an opportunity and not a blight. They are a reminder that education is the most potent weapon against illiteracy, illiteracy being the medium of least resistance for the existence of chaos. And so, Nimrod’s failings are, at some level, our responsibility. The investment in our educational system as sanctioned by the Truth has confirmed that the wealth of a nation is beyond the augmenting of enjoyments. It is in the defense of freedom. Aset has much to say about Nimrod and I would be the least of those to argue against her virtue. The medium of truth is where the truth is and procreation demands justice against those who would do harm to the continuum of beauty. A Hebrew rebel once said that it would be better that a stone be tied around Nimrod’s neck and he cast into the sea than for him to defend his dissertation. But in so far as the faculty has determined that education reform is in the interest of direction, much there is to say about the quality of Nimrod’s attitude, despite the circumstances that have confined inner city schools to so urgently argue for the relevance of affirmative action. And so, it is my opinion that this Pope be allowed to ascend to Heaven.
Posted on: Tue, 20 Jan 2015 03:49:39 +0000