The Brotherhood of Abraham

The Ellie Song

If atheists and religious church members want to get along better, there needs to be at least one person who was once a strict atheist and then recognized God. There needs to be an atheist who has recognized that a supernatural being justifiably exists for many people and that it makes sense for these people to believe in this creator. Such a person would be the best qualified ambassador for the atheists. They would be the one who could best advocate atheism, enable peaceful coexistence, exchange and bring understanding between churches and atheists.

A “society” is an entirety of at least two, but sometimes, a larger group of various “larger” organizations; these, altogether,are “present” and/or give exposure within at least one (specific) domain. This domain or these domains are their area of “influence” or “penetration,” which may sometimes be more geographically limited. Nonetheless, in the modern era of the Internet and the telephone, a society can have different limits, independent of geography, in regard to its compliance and belonging reach. A “society” always has/contains (some) dominant information.

A "kindred" are collectively all natural “relatives” (in the broader sense) that are (potentially) of high importance for one’s kind. A kindred is a society and it is a complex of related lineages, hence, they are all related by similar names. All lineages of a kindred have the same highest constitutional truth. Usually the kindred has a name/denominator. The denominator/name of a kindred is usually derived from the name of its leading lineage. The leading lineage of a kindred is usually the one that is the most well founded, yielding a large amount of integrated information.

The Doctrine behind the Last Judgment, the highest judicial instance of humankind, is concerned with the eradication of a whole kindred (a network of male relatives). It is about procreation, it is about that no sons are born or come into existence any longer bearing their father's name. It means the erasure of a (sur)name and its variations. It is the worst penalty in a patriachically organized society/world.

Though, the last judgment day is supposed to never come as long as we (naturally) improve for the better, for the good, for the progress of all human kind(s).

Someone usually becomes a member of a non-dominant or dominant “larger” organization once the exposure to its information exceeds a “certain” limit. If someone is rather resistant to information from a larger organization, to lead them into “membership” may be more difficult to achieve. To some degree, membership can be facilitated through various compliance measures (e.g., (monetary) incentives, pressure, punishment, or possibly coercion).

A consent/consensus that “exists” has a direction and a significant boundary. Therefore, it has at least a minimum of importance or it matters, which means that it has/provokes (a) tension/conflict in time.

A consent/consensus is (theoretically) (potentially) always “thinkable” by a human if its informational standard can be attained.

In the optimal case, a consent/consensus can become (very) conscious and be the “ground” of a (personal) judgment.

In a consent/consensus, a group regularly arrives at a decision in such a way that the majority agrees with it and not a single member disagrees.

When a human being says their own name for the first time, at that moment they realize the consent/consensus of their existence.

The graphic shows the typical life cycle of larger organizations which are organizations with at least two members.

In the beginning, a new larger organization often does not “yield” yet a consent/consensus and furthermore, it doesn't lead to much integrated information. There is no dominant information yet.

Through systematic improvement, however, its (highest) conflict can be reduced, and the language “defining” it can be advanced allowing a more precise and easier understanding.

Then, a tradition is created with a role/leadership model (often a patriarch) which is well-defined and leads to a rather accessible highest truth, which is derived from a consent/consensus. At that time the organization has become a larger "dominant" organization and it is about to gain the greatest importance during its existence.

Due to advances in language within the context of the organization, after some time, the extent of “integrated information” again decreases, though hopefully the consent/consensus remains. During that time the organization loses its importance again.

Hence, at that point it is necessary to reform the organization to retain its importance. However, instead, some organizations turn to fundamentalism and tighten its compliance measures. These organizations become often "war makers" as their conflict with the surrounding societies gets worse and at the same time the organization claims the greatest importance for this conflict.

Naturally, a basic belonging group does not have “dominant” information. Within a basic belonging group, a variety of information can coexist which is equally respected and celebrated among its members.

Through group communication, which results in a (hopefully higher) understanding to change (oneself and consequently possibly the others), the diversity in a basic belonging group may “innovatively” increase. Otherwise, the basic belonging group is only a compound of what everyone represents/unveils of their (initial) self in regard to the group.

Once the diversity within a basic belonging group exceeds “certain” limits, the selection of dominant information – and with this, the establishment of a compliance structure favoring a certain more targeted thinking within the basic belonging group – is necessary to maintain the coherence among all its members. It is sometimes the beginning of a stable (innovative) larger dominant organization if it gives birth to a new tradition.

A basic belonging group always tries to include all its members justly (which brings forth a very dynamic compliance).

The graphic shows a regular basic belonging group of size 4.

A Qur’an group is a special sort of basic belonging group, with various distributed basic connective information. This means that in a Qur’an group not all members equally share (all contributed) values with all others, but rather with more specific “neighbors.” This allows more diversity within the group, raising the amount of (possible) conflict that can be contained in it. Of course, however, a Qur’an group’s members have a (limited) set of values that are shared among all participants equally.

The central basic connective information, containing values shared among all group members, is usually begun with a sura, which is then to be developed further by the Qur’an group until it is suitable to establish an Imam or, more precisely, to (at best) found a society or school of thought.

The difference between a regular Qur’an group and a usual Christian Bible group is that the Christian Bible group has, after some time, “dominant” information in the center. Hence the group (as a whole) is to be transformed into a dominant organization. However, the central basic connective information of a Qur’an group doesn’t ever dominate the group. Though, the definition is to be worked out by each member of the group rather separately, the consciences that are conclusively developed may then be suitable to set up dominant larger organizations attached to the respective members of the Qur'an group. They may reach far beyond the Qur'an group itself.

The graphic shows a regular Qur'an group of size 4.

The graphic shows the truth about Muhammad. It shows there have been three types of Muslims since the birth of Islam. There are those who want to build prisons, then there are those who want to climb mountains, and finally, there are those who seek to build the New Jerusalem. Muhammad united all these kinds of Muslims in his person throughout his life and at the end of his life he finally found the Heavenly Jerusalem.

The diagram shows the “simplest” “complete” Islamic larger organization in the (intended) tradition of Mohammed and described in Hebrew. It is Mohammed’s constitutional truth in the center, connected to a (minimal) Qur’an group composed of three sufficiently divergent societies "defining" Mohammed's highest truth.

This is a much more complex Islamic larger organization in the (intended) original tradition of Mohammed. It is called the "Twelver Islam". Mohammed’s constitutional truth is in the center and is connected to a Qur’an group composed of twelve societies "defining" Mohammed's highest truth.

The Lord said, for where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20)

Every society has its origins in three persons, two groups.

The Lord may be present, in group dynamics, of at least two, who are united in his name, his glorious name, through the holy spirit.

The graph shows the core of an already quite sophisticated society, as you regularly find in Islamic countries.

The Lord said, for where two or three are gathered in my name, there am I in the midst of them. (Matthew 18:20)

Every society has its origins in three persons, two groups.

There is no church without society, and no church can be without a society.

The Lord may be present, in group dynamics, of at least two, who are united in his name, his glorious name, through the holy spirit.

The graphic shows the nucleus of a human society.

The maximum conflict a human being can naturally bear, ends where severe contradiction begins.

Natural information of consistent directions and boundaries has an overall characteristic judgment bias which emerged from similarities in the “fitness” of the creators and their shared values.

If two differentiated pieces of natural information are conflicting, their combined overall judgment bias is significant.

In domains with very strong compliance competition among larger organizations, there is a risk that the whole situation will deteriorate with time, leading to increasingly drastic compliance measures, not to lose their (valuable) dedicated members. In extreme cases, killings and torture can seem reasonable. This paradoxically happens when the leaders of a larger organization see their larger organization increasingly threatened because they do not see it appropriately in context, but rather turn to fundamentalism.

Thus, what is most necessary in such a situation is a new initiative for a just inclusion (of the leaders) on all sides, giving them the necessary balance between context and interiors for the sake of their organization and the society (societies) of which they are a part.

If all the parties/competing larger organizations cooperated in favor of just inclusion in this case, they would reach a better overall outcome for everyone.

Good governmental organizations have to support this systemically. Otherwise, it remains a situation of deadlock.

Being a member of several organizations with (ideally non-contradicting, well-defined, independent) dominant information allows multi-dimensional compliance which means that someone exposed to various different well-defined organizations is compliant to more than one of them to some extent at the same time (but possibly in different ways).

Related to this is multi-dimensional belonging which is if someone is a “member” of several larger (ideally well-defined, independent) organizations whose information is at best supportive in developing one’s individual kind and includes the affected (more or less) justly.

Only an optimal/even compliance yields a “just” inclusion. So, belonging often hangs by the thread of an even compliance.

Compliance measures in an organization are there to raise the belonging to this organization. Maximum belonging is reached if somebody is basically “absorbed” into an organization.

Compliance in organizations can have various intensities. A (significantly different) person can be more or less compliant depending on how much compliance is incentivized (for example, through a payment), how much someone is exposed to the dominant information, how much someone is pressured or punished, how much someone is coerced, and how resistant someone is against information (that is conflicting). If someone has sufficient resistance and they cannot be paid enough, stressed enough, punished enough, exposed enough nor coerced enough, they are consequently incompliant.

All this “overreaching” belief in a “god” happens if a person is not able to compare their religious organization to an equally great (independent) alternative, because, for example, there is none in their domain with sufficient importance. As long as there is a dominant (religious) organization in a domain in which it is (absolutely) the greatest for some people, having the maximum unrivaled importance, there will be a belief in an omnipotent “god.”

In order to nourish a belief in an omnipotent God among people, often the approach is to limit the use of God's names or at least to always call him simply "Jesus Christ", for example.

According to monotheism there is always of course only one “god.” Nonetheless, dependent on location and time, “god” may have different forms and characteristics.

A belief in a "god" often has someone who is exposed to a dominant larger (human) (religious) organization and who is convinced that this organization is of all others the absolute highest, the greatest. Thus, a "truthful" founder or someone behind the dominant information in power (a "person"), must have been related/close to a "god," though they (the believers) can "understand" the "nature" of the organization significantly. The dominant information of a "church" (organization) is a religion which, at best, is a well-structured system of truth. The present leaders of the organization are sometimes regarded in this case as being related to "god" if they are a good fit for the dominant information.

For Christians, the core of the dominant information is often derived from a bible or a textbook, and it is often a general consensus to denote the "god" behind simply as "Jesus Christ".

A virgin is a young woman. The human who takes her virginity will be for all time her "first." It is the human she (likely) will be concerned about for the rest of her life.

Ultimately, only a person who is more concerned about her than she is about her "first", will be able to "stand" above a "first."

E.g., especially in case of the virgin birth, the "first" could be a child of hers. It could even be the second-born.

Virginity relates very closely to a state of individual development of the "person" which may much depend on her kind and with this her most natural integration into the world and the society.

To repeat, being a virgin is a matter of mindset, even though it is usually very correlated with having sexual intercourse with a man for the first time.

Larger human organization would not be functioning (well) without religion.

When two members of different religious schools of thought meet, although God was natural to both of them at first, God must become supernatural to them in case of too much conflict between them, in order to enable peaceful exchange, coexistence, and understanding (among their parties).

A lineage is a tradition of ancestry and descendants related by a name similar to a unified thread whereby the tradition is to be advanced from generation to generation. Procreation is much about one's name and the values and beliefs associated with it. They are to be remembered for many generations to come.

Often the fertile man tries to achieve this by creating his own biological offspring through sex, and with children bearing his surname brought up in a certain way under his guidance.

For infertile men, a good option is to create something such as an important book, piece of art, or a new organization, which can convey his beliefs and values and name in a way which will last beyond his physical death. Reproduction is therefore not necessarily about multiplying one's genetic footprint.

It is important to note that in the Western tradition, it is considered a violation of one of the Ten Commandments for a son to give up his father's surname.

As Martin Luther advocated, it is necessary in any domain of being at least two equally greatest independent rivalling "Jesus Christ" larger organizations (capable of systemic kind dis-and reintegration), thus just inclusion is facilitated. The best possible integration of the individual into society requires cooperation and competition between independent religious larger organizations. A good citizen tradition is constructive to and supportive of this.

If there were only Christian religious organizations in place, this would not give optimal results, because they are all closely related and so have a similar "bias" arising from their dominant information from the Christian Bible. In particular, the doctrine on the duality of Jesus Christ and the emphasis on the "child Jesus", can be detrimental to just inclusion. It takes away the freedom of the individual, for example, lessening women to beings that must give birth as quickly as possible.

Another main focus of the "systemic kind dis-and reintegration" of the Christian Churches lies in "matchmaking" - the attempt in societies with many Christians that every person will only find a (good) partner if they prove their beliefs in, and alliance to, Christian traditions.

Simply said, "no (good) sex, no (good) relationship, no (good) marriage, no (good) child..." if you are not a friend of the Christians. In these efforts it may happen that they try to manipulate everyone related as much as they can through systemic larger social dynamics.

Psychology, and especially psychotherapy was developed to treat Christians and those affected by Christians. It is all about the child: having children, becoming parents, marriage, and sex. Since Christianity preaches/teaches that even God became a human child, was born as a baby through Jesus. Most Christians who have mental health issues can trace them back to this child complex. Either they have not found the right partner, they are infertile, too poor, too old, too sick, or the child is not as good as Jesus. The Jewish Sigmund Freud intended to heal at least half of humankind with the invention of Psychoanalysis: wanting to heal Christians and those affected by them. Modern Psychology was founded in the 17th/18th century during the Age of Enlightenment, and some of its earliest principles concerned finding a treatment for Christianity.

A larger organization is an organization consisting of at least two members. Whether a larger organization has only two members or 2 million may make a difference, though, according to our point of view there are certain principles and characteristics that stay the same. On these, we base our analysis and we focus on in regards to the understanding of human organization in general.

Larger organizations are able to grow to immense size due to persistent dominant information which yields persistent truth.

In a world with larger dominant organizations, there is a need for at least two (independent) organizations in the same domain, with powerful dominant information which is sufficiently contrary to each other. It is "beyond good and evil" as the philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche said, it is necessary for a healthy equilibrium and essential to stability.

A major impulse for any larger organization to change (its course) at times is the importance of other larger (independent) organizations in its domain.

A nightmare for the Roman Catholic patriarchal church are Jewish, professional, bisexual, talented, single mothers with mental health problems whose sons are at heart citizens of the State of Israel, their spirits constituted by a civic tradition.

Only one of these groups, just one single mother with a child, they would already threaten the integrity of the entire church and its principles.

Anti-Semitism occurs when a person systematically tries to put an end to the existence of a person whose conscience is constituted by a highest Semitic truth comprising a well-defined conflict. Anti-Semitism restricts reason and (possible) awareness. It is about the eradication of an inherited cause. The one being anti-Semitic disintegrates with it their constitution of conscience (the conscious heart), even though, ultimately, it would lead to the end of their own existence. To repeat: Anti-Semitism reduces the conscience of the person.

Anti-Semitism dates back to Melito, and from there it forwards to Adam and Eve. It was grounded in the basics of family organization by Abraham.

The first event and the first action in history quite clearly related to anti-Semitism already was the murder of Abel, who was a son of Adam and Eve and who is said to had been favored by God.

Simply said, the drive/the force behind the anti-Semitic person is a desire for a return to paradise, and it is a violation of one of the Ten Commandments: "Honour thy father and thy mother".

The child abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, when "fathers" (sexually) "abused" so many (male) children in their care, was largely caused by a determination to prevent under all circumstances innovation in society.

What is the innovation in society?

They were first and foremost citizens of their nation, their spirit constituted in a civic tradition. Moreover, they followed firstly leading, emancipated women and mothers (considerably also lone wolves and single mothers). This undermined the dominance of the Roman Catholic Church. In fact, behind the miracle of the Eucharist there seems to be nothing other than a hunger for power (a traditional rulership of fathers/men over children and women).

A person is a feeling being, with a name, and at least a basic conscience. A person is a being that has at least a minimum of understanding of themselves in relation to the world. They are a being with a consciousness and hence a sufficient symbol set and a minimum of language.

Consequently, Adam and Eve were the first "persons" in human history.

If the religion of a church comprises so much (potential) conflict that a single church member, a single human being, cannot always bear it naturally anymore, in this case, the Gd associated with their religion must be "supernatural".

In the churches, there is a kinship concept implemented through the miracle of the Lord's Supper (the Eucharist). One is brought up with this from an early age, with a child considering the ecclesiastical father at least equal to the biological father. Priests/pastors can therefore have influence over their followers as if they were biological fathers. Of course, they don't look like alike, they have different names, ages, clothes and professions.... but it doesn't matter, and everything is strongly anchored in the subconscious. Priests don't even have to talk to their followers directly, detours and indirect signs are enough.

All of this is essential to the functioning of community and church in the Christian religion/tradition. However, there are denominational limits. For example, Roman Catholic priests cannot boss around Lutheran followers or vice-versa.

However, one must remember that it is a more complex organizational construct, with not only church fathers, but also church mothers, church brothers and church sisters. There are closer church relatives and there are more distant church relatives.

At least since the Age of Enlightenment, it should have been clear to many that this should be treated with caution. It needs mature, independently acting and thinking citizens and not only obedient church sheep!

"Religion" is a system of truths conceived and intended for a religious organization (like e.g. a church organization). The truths are structured part of well-connected sub-organizations. A religion contains dominant information to determine the directions and boundaries of the church organization. The truths are classifiable according to their degree of universality. The most universal truth of a religion can be expressed in a single symbol. The less universal a truth is, the more definite it becomes. If, on the other hand, it is more universal, it becomes much more relative. A religion also contains an often very broad concept of kinship, often grounded in the most basic form of organization among humans: family.

When a student exceeds his capacity, a good teacher will still find a way for him.

Something or someone is "natural" if they are well balanced in the "conflict" they contain within and which they exhibit to their surroundings. Regarding a single person or a "larger" organization what is to be considered "natural" (in various new ways) largely depends on the "present" "constitution" (of this organization). Something or someone is in general "natural" for someone/something as long as the natural still persists.

Share (natural) ideas and facilitate the access to (natural) ideas. Spread good feelings. If someone discovers/comes to know something potentially very important about somebody, it is best to tell them. If somebody doesn’t have the (natural) language to say it (respectfully), they should seek help.

The search for truth is as much an individual effort as a collective and universal concern.

To love is to keep a good (shared) balance of tolerance, suitable for favorable progress and innovation, and always related to a search for truth. Love is the means to develop feelings/emotions (someone’s heart). In fact, there is never an end to the search for truth.

Someone’s kind (the inner child) is "defined" by their resulting overall identity when they are as naturally integrated into the/a world as possible. A kind’s prerequisite is an "issue" proposed by a/the family.

Someone who is "self-aware" "knows" oneself; it implies (sufficient) "experience" with "oneself." This usually includes the ability to view (the development of) one’s self relatively/flexibly throughout time (with the support of a "world" language).

Self-confidence is a consciousness based on (natural) truth about oneself. Someone who is self-confident has confidence in ideas related to themselves. Any "person" can become self-confident, if they overcome the "doubt" in regard to themselves, revealing/resolving significantly one’s "matters."

"Honor/dignity" is the feeling in which the "existence" of the person is anchored. "Honor/dignity" is part of the constitution of the conscience, or so to say, it is part of the conscious "heart" of the person from very early age on. The "honor/dignity" usually relates directly to the absolutely highest constitutional truth of the "person."

The Spanish social dynamics for the realization of a confessional homogeneity in their dominions escalates very sharply in radicalism. The spread of disease if not death belongs for the Spaniards to early use. Differently minded (having different feelings) with a deviant denomination are opposed with aggression and hostility. Spaniards do not want discussion, they do not want a fair trial. They only want one thing: to prevail at all costs.

An organization is a dominant organization in case it has dominant information or so to say "clear" directions and boundaries. There has to be at least one member who subjects to the order of the organization and is dominated.

"Father" is a kindred (kinship network) and it is a lineage meant for a sufficiently developed (male) human in regards to various competences creating a certain leadership/role model (aligned to a family), which allows the person to lead (hopefully thoroughly with a sufficiently high judgment) a larger dominant (family) organization.

A truth is, at least, an idea of confidence (that is trustworthy). It is a conscious, "true," sure, "faithful," or, in Old Irish a "derb" idea.

An adult may reach high constitutional truth through means of pleasure, but, nonetheless, they will never be able to reach as high as the child with basic self-awareness.

It is natural that empires emerge and fall. Leaders are supposed to step down one day, and it is crucial that new ones come into existence. This all happens by reason of change so far, a more free kind does dare, for the better, for the good.

Justice is related to tolerance. Tolerance allows reason and at best a variety of (greatest/highest) truths. Reason which is not based on sufficient tolerance is biased reason which should not be part of one's decision making and higher judgment. If someone's reasoning includes insufficient tolerance, they should not lead larger dominant organizations.

An organization is a coordinated social entity. How coordinated it actually is depends on the information followed by its members.

A very "civilized" human is able to think broadly consciously in sufficiently differentiated ways, even under harsh (living) conditions, thus employing a rich heart, as much as the "I" can handle.

If you are able to think certainly, you exist. If you are capable of a developed, natural (world) language, you can (potentially) be aware of your existence.

The child abuse in the Roman Catholic Church, when "fathers" (sexually) "abused" so many (male) children in their care, was largely caused by a determination to prevent under all circumstances innovation in society. They violated the dignity of these children and they wanted to grasp (and manipulate) the word of "god," a highest "constitutional" truth (of the child).

The highest constitutional truth of a child is in large parts of Europe the "PAPA/BABA" (usually a sort of cross), though in Sweden, e.g., it is sometimes the "HEY" (figuratively often a human right hand).

Many church members are not sufficiently (authentically) aware of the truths behind church doctrine anymore. What they only have are "ideas" of the matters without sufficient context. Only few take the effort to re-explore these ideas deeply as they have had the church approval already. This can under various circumstances lead to certain impulsive behavior that is acknowledged by authorities.

These days, Latin is not the most dominant and only language. There are many competing (and sufficiently competitive), independent (national) church organizations in existence. This causes complications within the Roman Catholic Church.