The Red Pill: Take It: Part Three — by Hugh Mungus

THE BLUE PILL

"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society."

― Jiddu Krishnamurti *

• Jiddu Krishnamurti:

Humanity on Earth — being offspring of the cosmos — is deeply embroiled in its own soap opera, only this show's entitled All My Retarded Children.

It's not only acceptable to execute your own species, it's celebrated, as you're bestowed medals for doing so.

You revere people who collect more meaningless strips of fabric — known as cash — than others.

Mass murderers are your leaders.

You remodel your house, yet do everything you can to decimate the planet upon which it's built.

You've no way off Earth — should you be forced to escape — and you're doing nothing to fix that.

You watch egomaniacs pretend to be other people on an invention called a TV — whilst wishing you were them.

You believe you're the ultimate species, yet you've never left the planet, and couldn't do so if you needed to.

You forfeit your life by adhering to cults known as religions, that keep you segregated from your own kind, and compel you to denounce others.

Yet, you're fine with all this. In fact, you believe this is reality.

That's what you get when you take the blue pill.

In the words of Bill Hicks:

"Quit putting a goddamned dollar sign on every fuckin' thing on this planet!" **

** Bill Hicks:

Ostensibly, Sam Walton — the founder of Walmart — was doing his damnedest to accumulate more cash, from his hospital bed, mere days before he died… ***

*** Fishman, Charles. (2006). The Wal-Mart Effect: How the World's Most Powerful Company Really Works — and How It's Transforming the American Economy. The Penguin Press. ISBN: 1594200769

What a fuckin' loser!

Pay for 10,001 hookers, so you can best Wilt Chamberlain's record; overdose on psychotropic drugs; give your billions — including all the stores you own — to starving people the planet over! Anything worthwhile, but instead you spend your last moments in this corporeal form collecting worthless swatches of cloth?!

C'mon, people. When are ya' gonna scream, "Enough's enough," and drop this monetary system that's killing our species on Earth?

"Why do we work so hard? For what? For this? Paper?

Other people; they bomb, they steal, they get away with murder. They create currency out of thin air, and lone it out at interest. Interest!

Why aren't you like that? Why aren't we like that?

Because we're sleepwalking, brainwashed debt slaves, that's why. […]

To the elite we're inferior. […]

It's pretty simple. You work hard, watch TV, take pills and vote once a year. You operate strictly from your left brain. As for all this paper [money], it doesn't even exist. Just numbers on a screen." ****

**** Joy Camp:

Still, every day, billions of us curtail our lives over something that isn't even real. Stock markets rise, and stock markets fall, and yet — back in reality — nothing is happening. Nothing! Still, imbeciles leap to their deaths from high-rise windows, as a result. What a bunch of morons! How stupid — and pissed off — would they feel if they knew they killed themselves over nothing?

Good idea: using condoms.

Bad idea: re-using condoms.

Good idea: not believing in a monetary system.

Bad idea: killing yourself because of a thing that doesn't even exist.

And what of these anthropogenic laws we're told we have to adhere to? Talk about a joke less funny than buying a double leg amputee a pair of shoes!

In a region of Germany, it's illegal to include anything but hops, malt, water and yeast in beer you're making.

Can you imagine being arrested for putting strawberries in your ale?

"What are you in prison for, big fella'?"

"I killed, and ate, my whole family. I burnt an entire city to the ground, raping anything, or anyone, I could find still alive in the smoldering ashes. What are you in for, little man?"

"I put strawberries in my beer."

"You're mine now, bitch!"

In Virginia, it's a crime to practice oral sex — whether giving or receiving.

What the fuck—?!

Picture this scenario: You're in bed with your wife, and feeling affectionate. You crawl between her legs, and the next thing you know, Jack Lord and the cast of Hawaii Five-0 crash through your plate glass window — armed like a Seal team — ready to arrest you.

Governor Rick Perry incriminated on abuse of power charges? What is that?! Sounds like something as egregious as sprinkling when tinkling. Why not prosecute him, and all politicians, for what they're truly guilty of? Preserving a system that's annihilating us all; i.e. mass murder.

At one point it's not okay to eat meat on a certain day; the next it is?! If you're stupid enough to believe any man-made law is valid, you're exactly what the powers currently controlling us want.

The only laws that exist in reality are known as natural laws — Universal, non-anthropogenic conditions ruling the consequences of behavior. Natural laws are constant — on Earth anyway — cosmic mandates acting as the governing dynamics of consciousness. *****

***** Mark Passio: Natural Law:

We could go into detail here, but our blogs are about concision and ease of understanding. Hence, a man-made law would be a decree not binding anywhere but within the myopic minds of those mandating it, and those wishing to adhere to it. Let's say something like not being able to turn left at a particular street sign. Hit the intersection in question, and hang a south paw late at night. Your car won't be broadsided, and — although you may incur a ticket — you'll still be able to perform the maneuver in question.

An example of a natural law would be walking off a 500 foot cliff over a bed of jagged rocks. Invariably, you'll die. This is conclusive and immovable. The law of gravity cares not if you're an innocent child taking that step off the precipice, or a mass murderer the likes of Barack Obama. You'll meet your demise, either way.

When it comes to natural laws, there's no sympathy, and no malice. There's only what is.

Natural laws exist in the paradigm of those who take the blue pill, but individuals in this domain choose to believe otherwise. Rather, they drown themselves in what's known as cognitive dissonance — something a considerable portion of the human population engages in when shown the truth.

You're presented with reality, but because it doesn't gibe with how you wish to exist, you force yourself to believe a lie. ******

****** Cognitive dissonance:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

Glaring examples of this are the more than 1,000 nukes the U.S. government detonated on its own populace. Since it's too scary to believe the American bureaucracy could have committed such vicious atrocities out of malice, people choose to believe the insane justification these genocidal acts were executed for a demented, non-existent tenet known as "national security." Once again, how do you drown a population in radioactive fallout for its own benefit?! Adding insult to injury, you send your children to propaganda factories — termed school — to be indoctrinated into believing this obvious bullshit.

Engaging in cognitive dissonance is lying to oneself, and doing so is a blatant indication of insanity. In contemporary terms, cognitive dissonance is known as denial.

That said, venture forth into a public arena, and literally prove to the populace 9/11 was an inside job. The facts supporting such are overwhelming! No amount of evidence matters. Observe the reactions of individuals to your exposure of the truth. You'll incur everything from rage, to profuse weeping, to being ignored as if you weren't there, speaking. Every technique will be employed so people can continue to immerse themselves in cognitive dissonance — residing in their fantasy realm, as opposed to living in reality.

Again, welcome to what you get — this paradigm in which you currently reside — when you take the blue pill.

Sources:

Books:

Fishman, Charles. (2006). The Wal-Mart Effect: How the World's Most Powerful Company Really Works — and How It's Transforming the American Economy. The Penguin Press. ISBN: 1594200769

Online Movies:

Mark Passio: Natural Law:

THE NEW TESTAMENT

"That's it for me, religion's fuckin' finished. […] It's fuckin' over! You've had a couple a thousand years. Ya' fucked it. […] It's fuckin' over!

Take your Reformation, your Vatican, your fuckin' Mecca and fuck off!"

― Billy Connolly

"The more you begin to investigate what we think we understand, where we came from, what we think we're doing, the more you begin to see we've been lied to. We've been lied to by every institution. What makes you think for one minute that the religious institution is the only one that's never been touched?

The religious institutions of this world are at the bottom of the dirt. The religious institutions in this world are put there by the same people who gave you your government, your corrupt education, who set up your international banking cartels…

Because our masters don't give a damn about you or your family. All they care about is what they have always cared about, and that's controlling the whole damn world.

We have been misled away from the true and divine presence in the Universe that men have called God. I don't know what God is, but I know what he isn't. And unless, and until you are prepared to look at the whole truth, and wherever it may go, whoever it may lead to — if you want to look the other way, or if you want to play favorites — then somewhere along the line you're gonna find out you're messing with divine justice.

The more you educate yourself, the more you understand where things come from, the more obvious things become, and you begin to see lies everywhere. You have to know the truth, and seek the truth, and the truth will set you free."

— Jordan Maxwell *

• Jordan Maxwell:

Here's the scenario: You're buying a used car on Craigslist. One day, you're speaking with the owner online. He informs you the vehicle in question has 125,000 miles on it, five previous owners and two prior accidents.

The following day, you hop on the Internet to discover the owner has become severely ill, and his brother has taken over negotiations for him. Miraculously, the same car has now been driven no more than 14,000 miles, seen one prior owner and never been in a fender-bender.

Do you still buy the vehicle?

Of course not. You're not an idiot.

That said, billions of people have purchased that car, when they decided to place belief in the Bible. Akin to the asserted owner of the vehicle — whom you don't know — you've no idea who the hell wrote the Bible. For all you're aware, it could be the irrational musings of an amalgamation of lunatics living in the woods, high on psychedelic fungi, well over a thousand years ago.

In addition, "the good book" — which is anything but — contradicts itself continuously, just like the ostensible owner of the Craigslist car, and his supposed brother.

Hence, if you're not gonna believe one, why believe the other? In order to go to heaven? The same authors who can't keep their stories consistent are the ones telling you there is a heaven.

Let's put it this way: If some obviously pregnant chick professed she became so without having sex, would you believe her?

Nope.

Moreover, if the crazy in question ran around town, proclaiming she was still a virgin, some "child protection agency" would probably seize her kid — once birthed — as the woman would be deemed an unfit mother.

Still, at least 2.2 billion people on Earth buy the fantasy of Mary's Immaculate Deceptio— Conception.

To quote Thomas Paine — who was categorized a Founding Father of the U.S.:

"Were any girl that is now with child to say, and even to swear it, that she has gotten with child by a ghost, and that an angel told her so, would she be believed? Certainly she would not."

Paine spent a terrifying portion of his life imprisoned in France — facing possible execution on a daily basis — writing a book now known as The Age of Reason. This publication uses nothing more than the Bible as its sole reference source, in order to thoroughly confirm "the good book" is no more than a horrendous work of fiction.

For this, Thomas Paine was renounced by his peers — the same Founding Fathers who exalted him for penning Common Sense; a pamphlet that galvanized colonists to break away from England.

In The Age of Reason, Paine not only reveals the tremendous inconsistencies of the Bible, but also the inordinate cruelty displayed by a supposed benevolent and loving God:

"It is from the Bible that man has learned cruelty, rapine, and murder; for the belief of a cruel God makes a cruel man. That bloodthirsty man, called the prophet Samuel, makes God to say, (1 Sam. xv. 3,) 'Now go and smite Amaleck, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not, but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.' "

Really? You're gonna massacre the livestock, as well? How is this the mandate of a loving deity? We shudder to see what this ass detesting clown would be like if he was a hateful god.

What if some fucker ambled onto somebody else's farm today, and slaughtered as many cows, horses and pigs as he could, asserting voices in his head told him to do so? Would you believe him?

Of course not. Moreover, the guy would either be shipped to a mental institution, or incarcerated in prison for decades.

Multitudinous passages within the Bible, displaying such overt evil, forced Thomas Paine to conclude:

"Whenever we read the obscene stories, the voluptuous debaucheries, the cruel and torturous executions, the unrelenting vindictiveness, with which more than half the Bible is filled, it would be more consistent that we called it the word of a demon, than the Word of God. It is a history of wickedness, that has served to corrupt and brutalize mankind; and, for my own part, I sincerely detest it, as I detest everything that is cruel."

In part, this flagrant malevolence demanded by the god of the Bible led Paine to declare:

"I do not believe in the creed professed by the Jewish church, by the Roman church, by the Greek church, by the Turkish church, by the Protestant church, not by any church that I know of. My own mind is my own church.

All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit."

Face it, the Bible is one lengthy, boring read most who profess to believe won't ever pore over. Hence, they've no idea the cruelty and immorality within. They're simply told by parents — who probably never read the Bible, either — it's a book of love, teaching ethics. Nothing could be further from the truth. For copious examples of barbarity displayed in the Old Testament, just visit evilbible.com. Passages pulled precisely from that first portion of the Bible, exposing the nefarious nature of the tome in question.

But it wasn't only the odious character of the Bible that led Thomas Paine to bring to light the book's uselessness. It was also the fact this publication contradicts itself constantly. How can a form of reference be valid, if it's perpetually negating itself?

You've just purchased a hand-held, circular saw. On page one of the instruction manual, you're informed if you don't engage a particular safety feature, you'll inadvertently amputate your fingers while using this product.

On page two, however, you're told if you do engage this same feature, you'll end up severing your digits. By page three, you're apprised you'll dismember yourself, if you simply turn the saw on.

Do you use the saw, being that its instruction manual is filled with discrepancies?

Unless you're one of those strange individuals who doesn't feel complete until amputating some of their own appendages, the answer is obviously, "No." Instead — like anyone displaying logic — you return the tool, and buy a different brand.

In the same token, how is one supposed to place credibility in what the Bible tells you, if it's constantly contradicting itself?

Since we've already done a competent and pithy job of dismissing the Old Testament in What's to Stop an Atheist From Lying on the Witness Stand?, let's allocate the rest of this chapter to the New Testament and the quandary of contradictions it is.

A significant portion of the New Testament consists of Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John.

As suggested by many, the New Testament may have been written hundreds of years after Christ allegedly walked the Earth. If such is the case, how could it be a firsthand account of anything Jesus allegedly did?

In addition, how can one accurately remember what happened centuries ago? Most individuals can't recall what occurred in their own lives, no less, last week. Hence, we may have a version of the telephone game here. One generation apprises the next what they perceive happened, while that second generation imparts a skewed rendition of the supposed events to a third; the third to a fourth, and so on. After the passing of hundreds of years, you've got a completely different story than that of the original.

Furthermore, Paine states:

"About three hundred and fifty years after the time that Christ is said to have lived, several writings of the kind I am speaking of were scattered in the hands of divers[e] individuals, and as the church had begun to form itself into an hierarchy, or church government, with temporal powers, it set itself about collecting them into a code, as we now see them, called The New Testament. They decided by vote, as I have before said in the former part of [T]he Age of Reason, which of those writings, out of the collection they had made, should be the word of God, and which should not. The Rabbins of the Jews had decided, by vote, upon the books of the Bible before.

As the object of the church, as is the case in all national establishments of churches, was power and revenue, and terror the means it used, it is consistent to suppose that the most miraculous and wonderful of the writings they had collected stood the best chance of being voted."

As Thomas Paine declared, if Matthew, Mark, Luke and John — who were allegedly living in close proximity to one another — couldn't agree on the same story, the New Testament was obviously not written by them, but by other individuals.

When it comes to the New Testament, we're left with the Beatles producing an album on which George, John, Paul and Ringo simultaneously croon contrasting lyrics to the same songs. The tome in question is jumbled chaos no one has been able to comprehend for well over 1,500 years.

Over the course of more than a millennium, most folks believed the New Testament was composed by those for whom the individual books were named. Today, such a theory is highly questioned, not solely by those who denounce the Bible, but many theologians who study it.

If Matthew, Mark, Luke and John didn't pen the books to which their names are attributed, who did? We're left with an anonymous publication.

Should someone you'd never met before engage you on the street, bequeathing you an unsigned book he swore contained answers to everything, would you live your life by it?

You'd be more likely to shove your own foot up your ass. Yet, that's exactly what 2.2 billion people are doing, when they believe in the Bible.

"I don't know who the fuck wrote this thing, but goddamn we gotta place all our faith in it, people! Says here in chapter six we need to dunk our balls in battery acid, and knit our nipples to the rear of a Greyhound bus minutes before departure. Let's do this!"

Sounds stupid, after being reduced to its basics, doesn't it?

When exposing the falsehood of the New Testament, why not kickoff with Jesus Christ (J.C.) — leading cast member of the book? Christianity informs us J.C. was sent to Earth to spread God's message to all nations. Unfortunately, Christ only spoke Hebrew. Since hundreds of languages were in use on Earth at the time Jesus was allegedly here, and no printing presses present, how is disseminating this information possible?

As Paine discloses, solely humans — who, at that time, believed the world was flat, and walkable in its entirety — would assume such could be accomplished. An omniscient deity would know better.

"But how was Jesus Christ to make anything known to all nations? He could speak but one language, which was Hebrew; and there are in the world several hundred languages. Scarcely any two nations speak the same language, or understand each other; and as to translations, every man who knows anything of languages, knows that it is impossible to translate from one language into another, not only without losing a great part of the original, but frequently of mistaking the sense; and besides all this, the art of printing was wholly unknown at the time Christ lived."

Also, don't you think the son of God would be able to speak any, and all, languages he wanted? After all, the dude purportedly rose from the dead, didn't he?

In addition, if it had been Jesus' objective to create a new religion, why didn't he write the dogma upon which it was based himself, or have it written by others while he was living? The Bible is the playbook manual for Christianity. As such, why not compose it while the quarterback is still alive? Leaving it to chance that someone else may pick up the ball at a later date seems risky.

Let's begin with Matthew 2:16. In this verse, Herod — ruler of the Jews, and a real party guy — ordered the execution of all boys in and around Bethlehem "two years old and under." What's life without a hobby?

Only Matthew writes about this. John, Luke and Mark don't even mention it. You'd think such a drastic and heinous act would be reported by all four of these alleged authors.

If you're a news outlet only covering the consistency of Zac Efron's stool, when the U.N. demands all males under two must die, do you think you'll be viewed as a credible information source?

Mark testifies Christ was crucified at 9 AM, while John asserts it was noon.

Juan: sleepin' off a hangover.

How 'bout what was written over Christ when he was crucified? We're talkin' one sentence of inscription here.

As John states, it was: "Jesus of Nazareth, the king of the Jews."

Luke recalls it being: "This is the king of the Jews."

Mark: "The king of the Jews."

For Matthew, we're lookin' at: "This is Jesus, the king of the Jews."

Guys, this is a single sentence. Y'all couldn't even agree on that? We're referring to your main man; walkin' on water, bringin' people back from the dead, etc. Don't ya' think you would've remembered exactly what it said on the written notice above his cross?

Matthew purports Mary Magdalene and the other Mary arrived around dawn to check out Christ's grave. John alleges it was dark, and Mary came alone. Luke insists Mary Magdalene, Joanna, James' mom Mary and a mess of other women made the trek. We claim it wasn't anybody, since this is obviously some really boring, yet twisted, fairy tale.

Matthew rambles on about a massive earthquake prior to the angel of the Lord cruisin' down from heaven, rolling back the boulder covering Christ's crypt, and sitting on it. The other books don't mention said tremor, nor the angel hangin' out on the huge rock. Luke endorses the two angel theory, arguing both were standing up.

Oh, Luke. Why such a rebel? Why?!

Mark attests--

How come we're even having to write about this crap?! Aren't asteroids — we should be doing our best to stop — headed our way?

Anyway, Mark purports one angel spoke to Mary; Luke swears it was two; and John says Jesus was Chatty Cathy.

At this point, Paine brings up the fact that if these four stooges were in court, providing testimony, we'd be lookin' at perjury charges by now. This thing's more of a mockery than the O.J. trial.

Perceptive catch here: Whomever wrote the Book of Matthew tells a tale that doesn't appear in any of the other books. According to Matt, guards at Christ's grave told a handful of priests about some strange shit happenin' in the cemetery.

As such, these "holy" guys paid off the sentries to lie that Jesus' Apostles had engaged in a little grave robbing. Sure sounds easier to digest than divulging that J.C. had risen from the dead, and might be preparing to kick ass.

In addition, Matt fucked up — once again — by exclaiming:

"So they took the money, and did as they were taught; and this saying is commonly reported among the Jews until this day."

That last term — "until this day" — could be further proof whomever wrote the Gospel of Matthew wasn't Matthew, himself, but someone else long after these events purportedly occurred. Until this day designates a lengthy passage of time.

The author of Matt's book has 11 of Christ's followers headed to Galilee to meet Jesus in a mountain. John, however, proclaims these adherents were somewhere else at that time. And, of course, Mark doesn't even mention the party caravan to G-town.

Thomas Paine brings up another great point: All four alleged authors of the these gospels finally agree on something: that Christ's resurrection was a private affair. Thus, very few witnesses. Hence, not many to interview with the possibility of finding flaws in the story.

In addition, only Paul — where the fuck did he come from? — asserts 500 folk saw Christ alive post-mortem. Did any of those half a thousand make the same claim?

Nope.

You've gotta admit, the whole suffering and dying for our sins thing, even though you're not only God's child, but God himself, is as convoluted and ridiculous as Obamacare. It makes no fucking sense. What point are you, being a supreme deity, attempting to prove? Furthermore, why go about it in such circuitous fashion that causes billions of people to agonize and die unnecessarily?

Then again, that's the point, isn't it? The Bible is that six inch thick sheaf of "legalese" you receive from the IRS that wouldn't make sense if you did take 14 years to read it. This piece of literary shit — by far the most purchased book in written history — is a sleight of hand, dumped in our laps so we'll ponder it, whilst failing to notice the overwhelming atrocities perpetrated on us every day.

As Thomas Paine writes:

"[T]he fall of man, the account of Jesus Christ being the Son of God, and of his dying to appease the wrath of God, and of salvation by that strange means, are all fabulous inventions, dishonorable to the wisdom and power of the Almighty."

In the end, Paine exclaimed:

"Of all the systems of religion that were ever invented, there is none more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself, than this thing called Christianity. Too absurd for belief, too impossible to convince, and too inconsistent for practice, it renders the heart torpid, or produces only atheists and fanatics. As an engine of power, it serves the purpose of despotism; and as a means of wealth, the avarice of priests; but so far as respects the good of man in general, it leads to nothing here or hereafter. […]

The Christian theory is little else than the idolatry of the ancient mythologists, accommodated to the purposes of power and revenue."

We began with Billy Connolly, so let's end with him:

"I find it [Catholicism] primitive, and frightening. I find the whole child molestation on an international scale a disgrace […]

I have a deep distrust and dislike of the Catholic church, and any other organization that brainwashes people. […]

There was Sarah Palin — wanted to be vice president of America, which would make her the second most powerful person in the world. And if McCain unfortunately died, she would be the most powerful person in the world. This is a person who thinks the world is 4,000 years old!" **

** Billy Connolly:

Sources:

Books:

Life Application Study Bible: "NIV" New International Version. (1984). Tyndale House Publishers and Zondervan, Inc. ISBN: 0310941466

Mungus, Hugh. (2011). What's to Stop an Atheist From Lying on the Witness Stand?. CreateSpace. ISBN: 146631348X

Paine, Thomas. (2006). The Age of Reason (Barnes & Noble Library of Essential Reading). Barnes & Noble. ISBN: 9780760778951

The preceding blog was written by Hugh Mungus. Feel free to contact the author directly here on Steemit, or via his personal E-mail address: [email protected]