Sticks and stones!

PREFACE.

Listen to Return To Innocence by Enigma (1993). This is the theme song of this essay. Notice in the video how everything goes back in time. Clearly, I am not the first to understand innocence?

And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.”

Matthew 18:3-4.

Albert Einstein. The quickest mind in the West.

I will state now that time and relativity do lighten sins. It is just a matter of finding out how? And how is what I am trying to find out. I will state now that adding temporal adjectives prior to the following nouns: innocence, crime, criminal, offence, slavery, cannibalism etc does sound good, and somehow it does ameliorate or absolve those nouns or crimes and sins etc. For example, relative innocence, relative crime, relative criminal, relative offence, recent slavery, ancient slavery, modern cannibalism and ancient cannibalism all sound better and seem to ameliorate or absolve sins and crimes. For example, relative innocence sounds like a very good thing for a criminal to attain. Relative criminal sounds a much better description than simply calling someone a criminal or an ex-criminal. So how does it work? How can we get these adjectives and nouns to work? It is something to do with time and relativity. So how do we inject or apply time and relativity to criminals, crimes and sins? How can we use time? How can we play with time? As you will see in this blog, there is a double converse between early primitive innocence (EPI) and late advanced guilt (LAG), in that there are two EPIs and two LAGs. For the moment all you have to know is that there are two ways two be early primitive innocence (EPI). You can be early, as in early years, as in babies, or you can be early, as early men, as cavemen. For the moment all you have to know is that Jeffrey Dahmer is LAG. Therefore, how can we give Jeffrey Dahmer holiness or early primitive innocence (EPI)? The only way I can imagine or think of, is some form of time travel or spiritual time travel (STT) for Jeffrey Dahmer to such as the Lower Palaeolithic period where and when cannibalism was usual or was not a problem. However, unfortunately the second law of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics determine that physical time travel to the past is impossible. So what do we do? How come the combination of those adjectives and nouns sound so good? What if there were two types of time travel, physical and spiritual? Therefore, what about spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife? That is the only possible way that I can see how to get those adjectives and nouns to work and to give Jeffrey Dahmer holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI). However, there is one saving grace concerning spiritual time travel (STT) in the afterlife. That is, ironically, although this essay is practically 100% secular and although it is 100% down to and because of Albert Einstein, and although it practically challenges the Catholic Church about moral absolutism, it is ironically the Catholic Church that is 100% holy, and believes 100% in the afterlife. For some reason, scientists and philosophers are too scared to seriously talk about the afterlife because they believe it is unprofessional or Mickey Mouse. I have no problems in talking about the afterlife in terms of the Catholic Church. Therefore, although it is almost 100% secular, ironically, this blog could be used and taken up by the Catholic Church, in order to forgive us our sins. To reiterate, I created this essay 100% secularly as a philosopher or pseudo-scientist, but I use it as the Catholic Church. To demonstrate the ironic secularism of this work here is an example of its philosophy. Why is it that time is as attractive to human beings as spirituality and the soul? Time is like light, it is like electricity or a machine. Time is like fundamental or mathematical divinity. Time is like a magnet to us poor suffering flesh-bound hominins. The only difference between time and spirituality (to humans) is that time is not vain like spirituality, and time is modest unlike spirituality. Time is a modest soul. Therefore, does this modesty of time reflect on the person of Albert Einstein? Therefore, with time and relativity this work is about light punishment, light judgement or the lightest punishment or judgement for serious or present criminals as can possibly be. Light punishment is about lighthearted humour or comedy for serious or present criminals. I believe this blog can even lighten things up for even such as Ian Huntley. Nobody wants there to not be light punishment for such as Ian Huntley. Without light punishment, there is only horror. And nobody wants this. I truly believe that light is not just massless photons in the afterlife, but in a real kabbalistic sense, I believe that when we truly make light out of something, such as a sin or darkness, that we truly create light. I believe that as well as being massless photons and the fastest moving thing in the universe, that light is also lighter than a feather, lighthearted and comedy etc? We sometimes say that comedians and funny people are very quick, really fast or fast witted etc, therefore, what if light was the same? What if light was the fastest comedy or comedian in the universe? My other experimental blog (https://squareoftime.com) is about time or T² and I gave it the tag line ‘be ahead’ because the mathematics and formulas are very quick and they are always one step ‘ahead’ of you, therefore, you have to think one step ‘ahead’ in order to workout the questions. Perhaps light is similar to time in that it is very quick or quick witted? I am a firm believer in Albert Einstein and I know that the speed of light means that Albert Einstein was unbelievably quick minded. He was the quickest mind in the West. I hope he had a light sense of humour as well?

Faith.

As I will prove to you without Albert Einstein you need faith. This is because without time and relativity we do not rationally understand how, why and when forgiveness of serious or present crimes is possible. To reiterate, this 84k word essay is only possible with Einsteinism, or time and relativity, and without it you would only have Jesus Christ’s teachings, and you would therefore, have to have faith as to why we should forgive serious or present criminals.

https://lightpunishment.com

https://lightjudgement.com

https://modesttime.com

https://modestytime.com

https://modestyoftime.com

DEFINITION OF CRIME TRAVEL.

Crime travel works in the following way. Present criminals must become past criminals or relative criminals, and this is achieved through:

  • Spiritual time travel (STT) to the past to such as the Lower Palaeolithic period, when life was more primitive and innocent and where (or when) present crimes such as murder and cannibalism were or seemed less of a problem.
  • Equivalent forgiveness, which means a present criminal must become or equate to an animal, prehistoric hominin or person from the past such as the medieval or Victorian periods in order to lighten their sins and forgive them.

And the most important forewarning of this blog, is that you definitely do not want to become a future criminal. Apart from the obvious, the reason you definitely do not want to become a future criminal is because the future is more advanced and therefore, less innocent, more culpable and guilty than the blissful, primitive and innocent past, which could relatively get away with more sins such as recent slavery and statutory rape etc than the present or future. This means that because you are more advanced in the future, you are much more responsible, less innocent and more culpable and guilty etc, therefore, you would definitely get into a lot more trouble than the past for an equivalent sin.

DEFINITIONS.

Present criminal.

present criminal is a recent serious criminal who is not forgiven. A present criminal is a recent serious criminal who is dead or alive, incarcerated or at large who needs to serve time or to spiritually time travel (STT) to the past in order to seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence. As you will see the only problem with a present crime is time, in that it is present, therefore, if a present criminal can spiritually time travel (STT) to the past and become a past criminal, therefore, that relative criminal can be forgiven.

https://presentcriminal.com

https://presentsinner.com

Past criminal or relative criminal.

past criminal or relative criminal is a forgiven (ex-present) criminal who has either died, has served time in prison or is currently serving time in prison, or who has spiritually time travelled (STT) to the past and has therefore, already attained holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence.

https://pastcriminal.com

https://pastsinner.com

Relative innocence.

I believe relative innocence is something that can only be attained with spiritual time travel (HTT). I believe that once convicted, present criminals can never have innocence (on its own) like normal, non-criminal people, in that present criminals are guilty. However, with spiritual time travel (HTT) I believe present criminals can have relative innocence.

https://relativeinnocence.com

Future criminal.

future criminal is someone who is planning to commit a crime in the future. A future criminal is something or someone you definitely do not want to be. This is because the future is more advanced and therefore, less innocent and more culpable and guilty than the blissful, primitive and innocent past.

THE 5WS AND 1H OF FORGIVENESS.

For example, as I will show you, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) tell us the 5Ws and 1H of forgiveness:

1. What? Humans.

2. Who? All.

3. Why? Heaven.

4. How? Time.

5. Where? Afterlife.

6. When? Past.

I will briefly adumbrate each question.

What?

What needs forgiveness is the only difficult question to answer, however, if you were to ask YHWH, He might say that an animal is a what and a human is a who. Therefore, He might also say that only life needs forgiveness and thank heavens animals luckily need no forgiveness, hence, it is humans and humans only who require forgiveness because they are more advanced and therefore, more responsible, culpable and guilty etc.

Who?

As you will see this essay is about absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness, which means it is about the forgiveness of all things and all people throughout all of space and time, everything, no ifs and not buts. Therefore, as long as present sinners can spiritually time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife to attain forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence, therefore, we have to forgive absolutely all or everybody no matter what they have done. Not just tax collectors and prostitutes, but everyone, no ifs, no buts!

Why?

“If you forgive men their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you.” 

Matthew 6:14

Trying to prove that it is right.

When the above verse says if you forgive men their transgressions, it is not talking about forgiving men who have transgressed against you personally, but about men who have transgressed against other people that you do not know. Therefore, that is why I am trying to prove that it is right to forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile.

“In the way you judge, you will be judged, and by your standard of measure it will be measured to you” 

Matthew 7:2

Against?

I am hoping that by developing light judgement that I have judged the world’s most serious sinners in the lightest possible way and I am hoping that my own standard of measure is very comical and light. Therefore, in the afterlife I am hoping that I will be judged similarly in the lightest possible way and I am hoping that my standard of measure will be measured to me similarly in a very comical and light way. Therefore, why are YOU against the forgiveness of Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile? Why do you judge and condemn them? Even if you have relatively mild sins, it will be measured out to you as you measure. It’s in your interest to be for the forgiveness of such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, not against.

Other reasons why?

And Jesus answered him, “Simon, I have something to say to you.” And he replied, “Say it, Teacher.” “A moneylender had two debtors: one owed five hundred denarii, and the other fifty. When they were unable to repay, he graciously forgave them both. So which of them will love him more?” Simon answered and said, “I suppose the one whom he forgave more.” And He said to him, “You have judged correctly.” Turning toward the woman, He said to Simon, “Do you see this woman? I entered your house; you gave Me no water for My feet, but she has wet My feet with her tears and wiped them with her hair. You gave Me no kiss; but she, since the time I came in, has not ceased to kiss My feet. You did not anoint My head with oil, but she anointed My feet with perfume. For this reason I say to you, her sins, which are many, have been forgiven, for she loved much; but he who is forgiven little, loves little.” Then He said to her, “Your sins have been forgiven.” Those who were reclining at the table with Him began to say to themselves, “Who is this man who even forgives sins?” And He said to the woman, “Your faith has saved you; go in peace.”

Luke 7:40-50.

So why should we forgive? Quite simply, the rewards of forgiveness are far too great. I know that the rewards are worth more than the entire universe itself. For example, taking Jesus Christ’s parable of the two debtors above, the man who owed 500 denarii is relatively and infinitely far more happy with and grateful to the lender than the debtor who owned 50 denarii. I know that from my own experience that this is especially important for people who are still alive, I mean that for people who have seriously sinned in life, that is, it can mean his or her life is over, and that he or she might as well be dead. Sin is pure hell. I have personally met a young strapping man in his 20s who had unfortunately killed someone in a fight. This handsome young man had served his time, yet you could tell he was still severely mentally and spiritually distraught. He said, like me, that he thinks he can hear the voices of the man whom he had killed come back to haunt him. Now if this blog was able to genuinely forgive this young man, that is, not only to get everyone down here on Earth to forgive him, but also to get him to forgive himself, yet most importantly, to get God or the voices that he hears to genuinely and permanently forgive him in this life as well, he would then be eternally grateful beyond words. To reiterate, if this essay could attain this young man’s forgiveness, then he would be eternally happy with and infinitely grateful to us beyond measure and beyond words. Never mind gratitude from your children at Christmas. It would be as though you had literally saved this young man’s life! Imagine if a mother was screaming and crying next to a river because her 5 year old daughter was drowning in the river. Imagine if you courageously dived into the river and rescued the young girl and restored her to her mother safe and sound. How courageous and heroic would you feel? And how eternally grateful would the mother be to you for saving her daughter’s life? That is how grateful this young man would be to you for saving his life and for simply forgiving him. In fact, I believe this eternal gratitude of life-saving forgiveness is what makes Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ. This eternal gratitude for the forgiveness of our sins is what makes Jesus Christ our Lord and Saviour and our Messiah. Therefore, I believe the only way to see the Holy face of our Lord and Saviour, is by having or feeling this eternal gratitude inside one’s self for the forgiveness of our sins and the Holocaust etc. For example, imagine if Jesus Christ genuinely forgave Adolf Hitler and all Europeans for the Holocaust. How eternally grateful would we Europeans be towards Jesus Christ? Like this young man mentioned above, to genuinely forgive a murderer is to attain the utmost gratitude for forgiveness. The forgiveness of murder is life for life. This is because it is like saving this young man’s life, or giving him a second chance in life. It means that he does not have to die before he finds forgiveness. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are actuated by both selfless and selfish desires. I also believe, if we can absolve a present criminal of his present crime then there is hope for us all. There is hope for us all in forgiving present criminals, such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. To reiterate, there is only hope (especially) for indigenous Europeans if there is hope for Hitler. Even prisoners serving life sentences want hope. By forgiving all sins real or imaginable I am never trying to be Jesus Christ, that is why this blog is almost 100% secular. Also, even though it is never as good as forgiving the young man mentioned above, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) have other perfectly selfish reasons. I am an indigenous European and I believe if we can genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler then indigenous Europeans would have hope and be much better off. If we can genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler this would be beneficial to Europeans, especially Germans. Indigenous Europeans need to eradicate their white guilt and to do this they may need to regain their early primitive innocence (EPI)? Also, there is the benefit in that if you have committed a minor sin, such as hitting your wife or burglary then relatively who cares if we can forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile? Therefore, importantly forgiveness has something to do with Jesus Christ, therefore, there clearly must be many rewards in it? It may have something to do with the kingdom of heaven, and if that is the case then I don’t know about you, but then such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile are forgiven and no sweat to me, just like prehistoric man! However, you cannot just say I forgive, you have to truly mean it. With spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) there is genuine forgiveness. I also have my own sins to worry about and basically spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF), early primitive innocence (EPI), crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement, whatever you want to call them make me feel better. Therefore, I have perfectly selfish reasons.

How?

With three things (STT, EF and EPI). That is through spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife when life was more primitive and innocent and therefore, where (and when) present sins seemed less of a problem and can therefore, be ameliorated with time and relativity. And also through equivalent forgiveness, that is, by making present criminals the equivalent of animals and prehistoric hominins of the past in order to lighten their sins and forgive them.

Where?

The second law of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics determine that physical time travel to the past (in life) is impossible, therefore, the only place we could spiritually time travel (STT) to the past is the afterlife. However, if we can know, see or believe that spiritual time travel (STT) to the past is possible in the afterlife, perhaps we can then therefore, use that knowledge to imagine or visualise the forgiveness of present sinners down here in life or on Earth also?

When?

Early primitive innocence (EPI) and evolution determine that life gets more primitive and innocent the further you go back in time, also the main idea of this blog is that moral law or just the law changes over space and time. This all determines that people of the past could get away with more of what we would call sin today, such as recent slavery and statutory rape etc. Therefore, in theory our sins can be absolved or ameliorated in the past with spiritual time travel (STT) to it.

As you can see the theory or idea of spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) can be summed up in a paragraph or two, hence the rest of this blog will demonstrate many examples and proofs to defend the theory or idea.

Bipedalism is the first step!

Human evolution with an (anthropological) apology.

There exists pure hatred in this world and it is located in between Nazis and Antifa, racists and anti-racists, the far-right and far-left. I can remove it! If you would like to know how, read this blog!

Spiritual time travel (STT) is time for forgiveness on two levels, first of all, it is quite literally time for forgiveness, as in time for the purpose of forgiveness, and second of all, it is definitely about time for forgiveness as in today please. This double-pun is similar to the statement that bipedalism is the first step. Bipedalism is the first step on the road to advancement and quite literally the first physical step.

Pliocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, first step on the road to advancement.

Think about it, are you going to eternally and I mean eternally condemn Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer? No! Which means it is just a matter of time. Therefore, why wait? Do we have a specific length of time for them to wait for forgiveness? No! Therefore, why not spiritually send them back in time now and forgive them right now? It is time for forgiveness and about time for forgiveness! I will make it absolutely clear now that the goal of this blog is not to make light of the Holocaust, but to make light of Adolf Hitler. One of the main goals of this blog is that through light judgement, light humour and comedy I would like the Jews and Adolf Hitler to be genuine good friends. This blog is about absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness, I mean for example, if you call President Trump a “monster” then what chance has Adolf Hitler got relatively? Gheeze! Come on!? I make no bones about it, this blog is about the forgiveness of present criminals, therefore, if you want forgiveness for absolutely anything at all, and I mean anything, then I am confident that you will find this blog most auxiliary. When I say present criminals I mean serious criminals, however, crime travel always uses time or the tenses in order express time travel and therefore, to lighten sins as much as possible. The idea is that to be a present criminal means you are unforgiven, therefore, the object is that through spiritual time travel (STT) a present criminal is to become a past criminal or relative criminal. This blog is entirely about how, why, who and when we should forgive, therefore, if you are against the forgiveness of present criminals, therefore, imagine if someone wrote a blog on how and why we shouldn’t forgive present criminals? Or how and why there is a limit to forgiveness? Surely even you can see that writing a blog about why we shouldn’t forgive is absolutely wrong. Jesus Christ would probably have a few bones with you for a start? I believe Jesus Christ’s examples of associating with relatively minor sinners such prostitutes and tax collectors only, may be why there appears to be an imaginary limit to forgiveness? However, as I will prove to the imaginary limit is a mirage, and Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness will prove to you there are no limits with time and relativity. Also, if there are no limits to forgiveness, then what else are there no limits to? Therefore, if you read this blog I will prove to you that with time, forgiveness is inevitable. Despite how it may or may not look to you, there is no racism in this blog, however, as you will see this blog is entirely about anthropology, the past and our ancestors such as prehistoric man, ancient, medieval and Victorian people etc, therefore, the distinction between me and most people, is that I really care about our ancestors, whereas most people either do not care about our ancestors and the past or are cynical or blasé about the afterlife and our ancestors. There is nothing in the future as it does not exist. People, most especially the far-right care far too much about life, what it is down here on Earth, that is they care too much about race and the continent of Europe etc. I know that life and the universe seem like everything down here, but they are not in fact. We will have our European empires and superpowers in the eternal afterlife. Because of the Holocaust, there is nothing we can do to save our race and countries. Therefore, after long fruitless efforts in this direction myself, I would therefore, like to advise you to give up and just look forward to the afterlife. Because of the Holocaust, we can never be racist in this life or on Earth, it is impossible and futile. Therefore, that is what this blog attempts to do, that is ameliorate your anger and frustration and to get you to chill out and look forward to the afterlife. As you will see, the field or genre of this blog could be anthropology, however, I have allocated the subject to forgiveness, therefore, the qualification of this blog could be a PhD of Forgiveness? However, take it with a pinch of salt. Why and by what authority have I awarded myself a PhD of Forgiveness?

There are several reasons:

  1. Firstly, the essay has become so big, in that it is currently 84k words and it shows no signs of finishing. There is likely much more to discover.
  2. Secondly, I have read 140 books in my life (121 since the 1st of August 2016) and therefore, there has to be a point, goal or culmination to all of this reading.
  3. Giving the work a PhD qualification makes it make much more sense and comprehensible to you than simply calling it or using such domains as https://illegaltime.com.
  4. A PhD is supposed to be entirely independent anyway, I have simply taken that reality to the extreme, in that I am contributing to knowledge even without the support or encouragement of a university or educational establishment.
  5. A PhD of Forgiveness is ironic or a catch-22 because one would simply not be allowed to research and submit such a work in or to a university. This is because it is a little taboo and a little politically incorrect. If universities did this kind of thing, I would not have to and they would save me the trouble.
  6. Giving the work a PhD qualification makes it a bit more serious, professional, interesting and encouraging, it also makes one keener to undertake the endeavour.
  7. It gives the forgiveness of the work more authority or officialness.
  8. It makes forgiveness secular, and proves I am never trying to be Jesus Christ.
  9. I am mentally handicapped or disabled and cannot attend a university.

You may think as a layman, it is nearly insurmountable, staggering or even impossible to contemplate taking on a PhD thesis or to contribute to knowledge? All that I would say to you is that the earlier you come or the earlier you start the easier it is, by this I mean that I believe that being early or earliness is the absolute law of life, in that the earlier you come the better. By this I mean that if you want to be early like Pythagoras, Leonardo Da Vinci or Albert Einstein, you have to study hard as a child. That is, you have to be early. Even if you want to be a car mechanic, you have to be early and take on your apprenticeship at 16 years old etc. Also, the earlier you are born the wiser you are because relatively the easier it is to discover something amazing or to contribute to knowledge. However, most importantly, I would say to you that it is really not that hard to write or produce a 84k word PhD thesis. There is a huge difference between being dedicated to and loving or living and breathing what you do. To be dedicated implies it is hard work. By this I mean that school children and graduates are dedicated, but Albert Einstein was much more than dedicated to his theory of relativity, in that, he lived and breathed what he did, it was his whole life. This is the difference between school or graduate study and postgraduate study. By this I mean one is dedicated in the former two, whereas to take on a PhD thesis one has to be a lot more than dedicated, in that your work has to be your whole life and your baby. Therefore, doing a PhD thesis is not really work or that hard if you live and breathe or love what you are doing. The only prerequisite of taking on a PhD thesis is reading and a lot of it. However, that can be as little as reading one hour a day, like me, whereas the actual writing is an absolute pleasure. Therefore, to reiterate, if you live and breathe or love what you do, therefore, a PhD thesis is not work or taxing in the least. Therefore, never be dedicated. On another note, we might as well get one thing out of the way right now, this blog is about spiritual time travel (STT). You may say what type of monkey do you take me for? I would say I don’t know it entirely depends on the severity of your sins and how far back in time you have to go? However, if you read this blog I will prove to you some people do actually make a monkey of themselves. The main point of this blog is that if it is funny and hence if it forgives present crimes then what does it matter if spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in life is scientifically impossible? As you will see spiritual time travel (STT) is not the main or primary goal, forgiveness is! Spiritual time travel (STT) is only a secondary goal. Therefore, what does it matter? Hence, spiritual time travel (STT) is not fact today, it is a hypothesis, a proposal or a proposition. The one and only uncertainty in this blog that I have to ask you to believe in or have faith in is spiritual time travel (STT) or crime travel, specifically time travel to the past, and never the future. The whole blog hangs on this crux of spiritual time travel (STT) to the past and therefore, it is the blog’s only exposed part or Achilles heel. I know that the second law of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics determine that physical time travel to the past (in life) is impossible, however, what about the afterlife? Would it truly be heaven if we could not see or study extinct creatures of the past such as dinosaurs or Australopithecus afarensis in the afterlife? Therefore, this blog gives us the noble and necessary reason, desire or purpose for spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife. It simply asks the question(s) what if? What if we could use time to lighten sins?

Mesolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, with gear and bow.

What if sin or crime were relative? What if spiritual time travel (STT) to the past were possible in the afterlife? What if we could absolve all crimes or sins with spiritual time travel (STT) or crime travel to the past in the afterlife? It is a win-win situation because if none of these questions are true, then at least this blog still works as a lighthearted joke! Therefore, if you like, take it with a pinch of salt and as a lighthearted and innocent joke. All that I am saying is that if we can lighten up these three eternal examples (Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile), then really, and in theory, there can be no problems anywhere in the world or even the universe! All that I am saying is that if in the remotest possibility spiritual time travel (STT) were possible either in the afterlife or future, then at least we can therefore imagine the forgiveness of such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile? However, to reiterate, spiritual time travel (STT) is not fact and will likely not be proven down here on Earth or in life for the foreseeable future. However, if any of these questions are in any way in the remotest possibility true, then this blog definitely needs doing as the potential rewards far outweigh the trivial matter of the impossibility of time travel. It is the difference between heaven and hell for people. I will state that I have 90% confidence that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are right. All that I am saying is that these three eternal examples are for arguments sake the absolute worst cases, therefore, if we can forgive them, then who cares about our relatively minor sins? I know many people who need forgiveness, people who have done things to me and I have also done things to others myself. If you cannot forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, who is to say that YOUR relatively minor sins will be forgiven? Is there a limit? For example, is drug use the limit of forgiveness? Would that enable us to forgive all of our relatively minor sins? I doubt it? However, if we can forgive these three eternal examples, then we are guaranteed. Whether you are a sinner or a saint, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) can help you and should be pleasing and adjuvant for you. By this I mean that my primary goal is the total 100% absolution of present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, however, a secondary or ricochet effect is that normal people, light sinners, mild sinners and perfectly law abiding and perfectly good model citizens such as priests and vicars should also be highly benefited by this blog. This is because if we can genuinely forgive present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively who cares about your minor sins? Therefore, although this is work primarily about the forgiveness of present criminals and should make them feel great, it should also make normal people feel really great as well. I will state now that in terms of forgiveness, spiritual time travel (STT) works. It just a matter of if it is possible? But it works anyway. I mean that it works in the mind, in that if criminals can travel back in time, you do forgive them! For example, as you will see, if Adolf Hitler travelled back in time 419 million years to the Devonian epoch, when most of life was in the sea, you would forgive him. This is because this is about the only place and time where killing 6 million life forms would not matter. For example, would you care if Adolf Hitler killed 6 million fish? No. Therefore, you would forgive him if he traveled back in time to the Devonian period and/or equated himself to a fish for forgiveness. Therefore, equivalent forgiveness works in the mind, it is just a matter of if spiritual time travel (STT) is possible in the afterlife? I will also state categorically that this blog worked for me. Unfortunately, I am a certified schizophrenic, however, that does not mean you have to be scared of me or shun me, it just means I am a clown and I cannot work. I had a severe mental breakdown in 2006/2007 from which I will never fully recover. I used to see things good and bad and I still hear voices all the time. The voices used to be terrible, they had me in paranoid hell for 12 years. If you are a schizophrenic and hear voices you will know what I mean about how terrible the voices can be? Hence, like the main theme or title of this blog, if you have a mental illness and hear voices like me, just read this blog and say to the voice “sticks and stones!” Sticks and stones also has a double meaning in the context of this blog. First of all, prehistoric man used sticks and stones as tools and weapons for roughly 2.6 million years and second of all we have all heard the old saying sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me! Therefore, if a present criminal such as Adolf Hitler can spiritually time travel (STT) to the Neolithic, Mesolithic or Palaeolithic periods he then earns the right to say sticks and stones. Returning to the voices I and other people hear. Since the 7th of May 2020 the ‘voice’ said to me (and I trust him) I am totally forgiven and I have heard very little of a derogatory nature since. In fact, the voice constantly reminds me that I am forgiven, and I feel better. Why does the voice say that I am now forgiven? Because I wrote this blog. Therefore, trust me when I say this blog works and that if you need forgiveness for absolutely anything at all it can help you. If you do not agree with this blog on anal scientific grounds, I do not care regardless because I am now forgiven, it is simply a case of that there are many other people who need forgiveness.

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo habilis) Adolf Hitler, flint knapping. (ZERO COMMANDMENTS).

For example, if you have a past like me, then this blog can definitely help you, because as you can see from the art on this blog, the secret to forgiveness is that the key lies in the past, in that spiritual time travel (STT) or crime travel to the past for such as Jeffrey Dahmer, to such as the Lower Palaeolithic period (when cannibalism was not a problem) would be beneficial to Jeffrey Dahmer. A major question of this essay, is can Jeffrey Dahmer ever be holy? I believe he can as long as he travelled far back in time to such as the Lower Palaeolithic period and became or made himself the equivalent of such as Homo antecessor. Also, as you will see schizophrenics do have a use or a purpose, because as I will prove to you ONLY a schizophrenic or a clown can deal with and extirpate pure hatred! This blog is an independent project, that is, nothing to do with universities, therefore, this blog is an ongoing endeavour with no deadlines. At Cambridge university a Masters dissertation has a limit of 60k words and a PhD thesis has limit of 80k words. Although I have read 121 books in 4 years, however, this blog or the writing was only started in April 2019. The blog currently consists of a 100% original 84k word essay including 94 original works of digital art. Just a word about the art, it is not very scientifically accurate at this point, that is, on epochs or time periods and species names. I am kind of just getting as much art uploaded as possible. For example, I may label a picture of Adolf Hitler as a chimpanzee, gorilla or brown headed spider monkey, as from the ‘Miocene’ epoch, obviously this is not very accurate, but I don’t claim to be a scientist, I am just an artist, so therefore, please just take the art with a pinch of salt. It is just art. You get the picture? Also, you may point out that by time travelling to the past, for example, to the Miocene or Devonian periods would not actually turn you into a primate or a fish respectively, that is, you would still be a Homo sapiens just located in the Miocene or Devonian periods? However, spiritual time travel (STT) is also about equivalent forgiveness (EF) which means that in conjunction with spiritual time travel (STT), present sinners also have to be the equivalent of animals, prehistoric hominins and people of the past etc in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. Therefore, my art is the art of equivalence, in that it depicts past sinners in the past and equivalent to animals and prehistoric hominins etc, it is equivalent art. You get the picture? I am not sure if I have a PhD thesis here, as I am not sure I am that academic or articulate and hence, the text or literature may not be of that quality? Also, obviously as the essay is unfinished, there are no proper house rules formatting, Ibids or referencing etc yet. However, I do have what I would say is the hardest part of some kind of PhD thesis, that is the content or the bulk 84k words. Formatting and referencing should be the easiest part? However, because I already have a Bachelor of Arts degree, therefore, I am more confident to say that an essay of this scale and scope has the essay quality or the bones or skeleton of some kind of (independent) PhD thesis? As mentioned I believe the field of this work could be anthropology, however, I am inclined to say the subject is forgiveness and therefore, the qualification could be a PhD of Forgiveness? However, remember, take it with a pinch of salt. Considering my actual degree dissertation had a trivial limit of 10k words, it is hoped that 140 books and 84k plus words would reach a PhD academic level or qualification of some subject or field? However, regardless for now this essay is just a blog. This blog is directly connected to and developed in tandem with the digital art website https://lightpunishment.com. It is also semi-connected to a non-serious experimental mathematical blog called time or T², which is mathematical time and very simple relativity. You can visit this site at https://squareoftime.com. It is semi-connected to this blog in that they are both about time, and therefore, they mutually and experimentally support and strengthen each other. What I mean by experimental is that I am comparing two forms of time, mathematical time and spiritual time. I actually came across time or T² first, in an independent mathematical study I did in 2009. I then left T² for a decade and came back at it 2019. Then I started this blog. Although non-serious and experimental, time or T² may have given me the confidence to take up and incorporate time into this blog? Hence, this blog is on the forgiveness of all sins real or imaginable with time and relativity or specifically with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), however, the blog can also be poetically called crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. To take Charles Darwin as an example, descent with modification through natural selection (or evolution) is a theory which can be summed up in a few sentences or a paragraph. While On the Origin of Species is just a book with many examples and proofs of Charles Darwin’s theory. Although, the theory is contained in On the Origin of Species, the book itself is not the actual theory. The theory is something much more, it is everywhere and in our minds. Similarly, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement are an idea that can be practiced with any crime or criminal, while this blog is just packed with many examples and proofs to defend the idea. I read everyday and write maybe once a week or fortnight, that is, when I am feeling inspired by what I have learned from my reading. I have read 140 books in my life, 121 since August 2016, most of which are in some way connected to this blog (see Bibliography in menu). Although I try to read books that are directly or specifically related to this blog, that is not always possible. Therefore, I do not quote directly very much, it is more of a case that I write from my overall understanding and learning from what I have read over 4 years. In fact, I have noticed that some good insights and breakthroughs come from reading random history books as opposed to reading something directly related to the theory such as relativity or anthropology. For example, I attained the fact that the term primitive innocence requires adjectives before it, as in superstitious primitive innocence (SPI) and early primitive innocence (EPI) from reading 6 volumes of the Rise of South Africa, by Sir George Cory. It was a very esoteric historical occurrence indeed, in South Africa in 1856 and 1857, when the Kaffir tribes committed a national suicide or cattle killing delusion, due to a false prophet who instructed them to kill all their cattle and to destroy all their stores of corn, because he said there was going to be a resurrection of heroes and cattle. Obviously the resurrection did not occur at the appointed time and there was subsequently and severe famine and tens of thousands perished. It was this story that led me to believe that older and/or more primitive people are more superstitious than more modern and/or more advanced people. Hence, I realised that the term primitive innocence always requires an adjective before it such as superstitious primitive innocence (SPI), which along with early primitive innocence (EPI) was one of the greatest discoveries of this blog. Therefore, I believe spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are theoretical because you can apply them to reading any random book as opposed to something technical or directly related such as relativity. The blog takes about 8-9 hours to read. To reiterate, if you think you need forgiveness for anything at all I believe the blog would be very adjuvant to you. If you want to quickly see all 94 works of art click on Posts in the menu.

“No matter how filthy something gets, you can always clean it right up.”

(Morgan Freeman, Bruce Almighty film 2003).

Victorian (pre-Offences Against the Person Act of 1875) Jimmy Savile, with hat and cane.

Admass.

This blog is entirely original and novel in that I believe no one has ever written the like, tried it or said it before, however, in order to be original the content is controversial. I will state now, that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement are just common sense and they are very simple. The only reasons they have not been said or tried before is because firstly, no one has ever dared to stick their neck out and go there with present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, I mean no one has ever dared to stick their neck out and forgive them. And secondly, no one has ever dared to stick their neck out and risk their professional reputations by proposing that spiritual time travel (STT) to the past might be possible in the afterlife. However, most importantly, one thing that I am stressing about this blog, is that, I am a layman who has read 140 books on a wide variety of topics, therefore, I am not that authoritative on any single subject, and it is true that there are many people, professors, experts, philosophers and scientists etc that are infinitely more qualified and 100s of times more capable than I am to write this essay. However, the problem is that they are all too scared! They are all too scared of being called a Nazi or a racist. They are all too scared of losing their jobs, positions or reputations to even consider discussing or writing about the forgiveness of Adolf Hitler etc. Even the Catholic Church, who should know a lot about forgiveness is too scared to discuss forgiving Nazism for fear of castigation and fear of been seen as sympathising with Nazism. Forgiveness is never sympathy. Forgiveness is never racism. They all have too much to lose, whereas I am a lower class and unemployed schizophrenic who has nothing to lose. This determines that the higher you are in society or the more famous you are the more you have to lose. This means that I would never want to be famous or high in society in this life or down here on Earth.

Whoever seeks to preserve his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life will keep it. Luke 17:33

Therefore, this proves that only a poor, lower class or schizophrenic person could write this blog. Therefore, I would like to recommend to you admonitorily, to not hold back from taboos, do not be constrained by institutional political correctness and try not to be just a part of the admass (or that part of society that is easily influenced by the mass media and advertising) etc. I mean are you seriously telling me that you guys are so advanced that you can put a man on the moon and return him safely to the Earth, but you cannot forgive? You may say it is too hard or even impossible to forgive such as Adolf Hitler, however, I will prove that it is not that hard. The only reason it has not been done before is because nobody has seriously tried. People do either one of two things, they either support him and try to justify him or they eternally condemn him. No one has ever tried to forgive Adolf Hitler, and there is nothing wrong with forgiveness.

Ask and it will be given to you; seek and you will find; knock and the door will be opened to you.

Matthew 7:7

As mentioned, this blog is an entirely independent project, that is, nothing to do with universities, however, the irony is that a PhD of Forgiveness such as this is a catch-22, in that one would simply not be allowed to write and hand in such a work at a modern day university. To me this is a real and genuine tragedy, in that it seems to me that institutional political correctness and fear of so called taboos could really hold back or stifle philosophical and academic debate and progress? On another note, please try not to be easily offended. I believe the overall or main or crucial concept of the blog is sound. If you do have an adversative opinion, I welcome constructive criticism and debate, as in ‘I don’t like this sentence’, ‘I don’t like this paragraph’ or even ‘I don’t like this section’, however, I have read 140 books in my life, 121 of them in some way in regard to this blog, therefore, I am not going to be dumbfounded by a tweet from off the top of someone’s head. Unless you have proof that would confound or disprove the essential or crucial concept of the blog, otherwise, please just point out little inconsequential mistakes. I don’t think this blog is brilliant or amazing or anything like that, I just think it is alright. However, considering the serious content or subject of the blog I think this could be a good thing? Also it is a work in progress and I improve it constantly. I read the blog as often as I can, which may be once or twice a week, at other times I add to it and leave it for a few days before reading it again. Therefore, if as you read it, some parts seems a little off, it is probably because I have added to it and have just left it for a few days. Hence, you get what you are given. As mentioned, I am not an expert, although I have a 2:1 Bachelor of Arts degree in Computer Animation and have therefore, successfully completed a trivial 10k word dissertation before, hence I know the textual or literary quality of the work and its art is at least of that standard?

Human evolution with Adolf Hitler the apogee.

About the author.

I am British and was born in 1981, and from 1985 onwards I grew up between three locations, Easington Colliery in County Durham, Obuasi, a gold mining town in the Ashanti Region of Ghana, West Africa and a private boarding school also in County Durham called Barnard Castle School. My family has a mining heritage, my ancestors worked the collieries in the North East of England, with only my father raising the game to gold mining in 1985, when he started work for an old British imperial company called Ashanti Goldfields Corporation Ltd in Ghana. My background is art and IT. As you can see by the art on this blog, I have a 2:1 Bachelor of Arts Computer Animation degree and a BTEC National Diploma in IT. Unfortunately, I am a certified schizophrenic, however, that does not mean you have to be scared of me or shun me, it just means I am a clown and I cannot work. I was sectioned in 2012 for 2 months. Prior to my section, I had a severe mental breakdown in 2006 and 2007 from which I will never fully recover (the section helped though). I am mentally disabled, I see things and I hear voices, however, I am not stupid. Due to visual and auditory hallucinations and severe anxiety I cannot work, however, please do not judge me or my work because I do not work. I am alright. I do not waste my time. I have read just about every day since the 1st of August 2016 (mostly history), therefore I am kind of a self-taught QBE philosopher, in that I have independently read well over 100 books and I have written this 84k word blog about spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. The first three terms are technical terms, however, the latter four are beautiful or poetic titles. I have also conducted an experimental mathematical study of time or what I have called T². You can visit it at https://squareoftime.com. However, please note I am never trying to prove anything with T² or time, other than the fact that it proves that I work with and understand a little time and relativity? T² is just an interest. T² is just fun! One thing that I am doing is comparing spiritual time travel (STT), which is spiritual time, with time or T², which is mathematical time. The first thing to note is that they are completely different forms of time. The first is spiritual, literary and imprecise, while the latter is mathematical, scientific and precise. What is time? Is it light? Is it energy? Is it fundamental divinity? What is the divine? All I know is that the divine is abstruse, recondite, esoteric or even acataleptic and therefore, requires faith or belief, whereas time and Albert Einstein do not!

Miocene Adolf Hitler, Squirrel monkey.

CONTENTS.

I have divided this blog into 4 parts, and I will adumbrate each part.

1. Introduction.

This part starts off firstly by explaining the goals, themes and structure of the work, which are as follows:

  • Goals:
    • One main goal of this blog is the genuine forgiveness ((without justification), for the good spiritual and mental well being of both Jews and Europeans)), of Adolf Hitler with time and relativity.
    • Another main goal is that through light judgement, light humour and comedy I would like the Jews and Adolf Hitler to be good friends.
    • Another main goal is through light judgement, light humour and comedy I would like to achieve the liberation or emancipation of Europeans from the guilt and consequences of the Holocaust.
    • The main goal of this blog is that through the forgiveness of such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, that we can attain the absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness of all people for all sins real or imaginable throughout all of space and time.

Just before you go calling me a racist or Nazi because I am on Adolf Hitler’s side because I am trying to forgive him with light punishment, light humour and comedy etc, I will tell you now that more importantly I am on Ian Huntley’s and Jeffrey Dahmer’s side. By this I mean I am on anybody’s side who is in trouble.

  • Themes:
    • Spiritual time travel (STT).
    • Early primitive innocence (EPI).
    • Equivalent forgiveness (EF).
    • Anthropology.
    • Evolution (biological and technological).
    • The past.
    • Our ancestors.
    • Prehistoric man.
    • The afterlife.
  • Structure:
    • The depth, tiers or levels of the text.

It then states that although this essay is more less completely secular, that it also takes for granted the existence of an afterlife and a God. As already mentioned above, the introduction describes in detail the structure of the blog, which constitutes 5 levels or tiers, including:

  1. Domains, which are the various website addresses I have for this blog.
  2. The field of the work, which could be anthropology.
  3. The subject of the work, which is forgiveness or a PhD of Forgiveness.
  4. Beautiful or poetic titles, such as crime travel and time for forgiveness.
  5. The technical terms, including spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF), primitive innocence and its essential adjectives which come before the term such as early primitive innocence (EPI) or superstitious primitive innocence (SPI) etc. Also there are present criminal, past criminal and relative criminal etc.

I then explain why we should never compare ourselves to Jesus Christ’s moral standards because it magnifies our own sins, and that therefore, we should associate with and compare ourselves to prehistoric man and present criminals so that we can relatively shrink our own minor sins. I then explain the political correctness of this blog. Next I digress on the digital art of this blog, how I make it and what it means. I then caution you about the controversial nature of the blog and how it is really not that bad. I then discuss at length the simplicity of everyday relativity and relative equivalence with many examples of easy to understand life relativity. Using these examples, I then state that if ignorance is bliss and happiness is relative then relativity determines it makes no difference when you were born. For example medieval people were just as relatively happy as us today without anaesthetics and penicillin. You cannot know the technological or medical advances of the future therefore, ignorance is bliss. I then discuss and explain equivalent forgiveness, which is a very important concept of this blog. By this I mean I explain the possibility of extending Albert Einstein’s theory of equivalence to spiritual time. Equivalent forgiveness may therefore determine that sinners such as Jeffrey Dahmer may fundamentally have to be the equivalent of an animal or a prehistoric hominin such as a raccoon or Homo antecessor in order for us to understand them and lighten their sins? We humans naturally and instinctively perform equivalent forgiveness all the time. For example, if someone seriously sins such as Adolf Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer, we often exclaim HE IS AN ANIMAL! We do this because being an animal is the only place and time we can understand such as Adolf Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer with any lightness. What use do animals have other than equivalent forgiveness? I then explain how this blog is a Jewish invention, due to Albert Einstein and Jesus Christ and also how it is largely secular. I then discuss how normal Christians deal with forgiveness and how it is lame. To demonstrate this, I quote an example of how normal Christians talk about the unlimitedness of God’s forgiveness but in terms of quantity of sins over severity. In a similar vein, I then caution you about the type of thing other people say regarding forgiveness and how it is incorrect. I then quote a story of the Buddha about forgiveness and how I believe it is connected to this blog. I then discuss holiness and extremely light sins such as sex for pleasure and wet dreams which the early medieval church was concerned about. However, I must stress that the church is holy and importantly so, therefore, one of my goals is to try to lessen the gap between holy people such as Mother Teresa or the Pope and present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. I then explain how I compare extremely light sins to an analogy of a vicar feeling guilty for taking the largest slice of pie. This is about as light a sin as I could think of, therefore, analogously I explain what types of sins we are interested in and what types of sins (or slices of pie) we are not interested in. However, remember, the church and ecclesiastical authorities are holy. I then explain how I always incorporate time into sins by saying things such as modern cannibalism or recent slavery etc, as I believe time lightens sins. I then discuss forgiving fascism, why it is hard, why nobody has ever done it before and therefore, why most people choose either one of two extremes, that is, far-left or far-right and also how forgiveness is the compromising middle ground. I then give a brief eulogy to Albert Einstein comparing him to Jesus Christ and the Buddha. I then discuss how with time and relativity we may not even need the divine. Also this part establishes why and how this blog is semi-connected to a non-serious experimental blog on mathematical time and simple relativity. These two blogs in question are both concerned with time, therefore, the introduction reveals an experimental comparison of the two different forms of time, that being time or T² which is mathematical time and spiritual time travel (STT) which is spiritual time. I then respectfully ask the question shouldn’t Europeans admit a few home truths, which is that are we not faltering? I then ask is there anything we can do about it and that wouldn’t it be better for all concerned if we genuinely forgave the Holocaust etc? I then give an example of early primitive innocence (EPI) with art, concerning how generally speaking the older the art the more valuable it is. I then ask who is more refined, classical and holy, ancient or modern people? And I then philosophically ask, as a Briton, would you rather have been born earlier with an empire or today with an iPad? I then state that generally speaking I do not believe in optimum periods of time to come or be alive, and that I therefore, believe that the earlier you come or the older you are the holier you are. I then deeply digress on how the law is not absolute but is relative, with many examples and proofs. I then discuss moral relativism, how I agree with it, how I reject moral absolutism and I then backup my views with examples and proofs. I then explain how this blog is racism free, because I advocate relative equality between all races and all species. The introduction also establishes or explains the main hypothesis of this blog which is that through spiritual time travel (STT), present criminals must become past criminals or relative criminals and you definitely do not want to become a future criminal. Hence, in order to forgive contemporary or modern present criminals, they should therefore, be equivalent to animals, primates, prehistoric hominins or ancient people of the past etc. Therefore, if or as along as a present criminal or sinner can spiritually travel back in time in the afterlife and/or make him or herself equal or equivalent to an animal, ape, primitive hominin, ancient, medieval or Victorian human etc, then in theory all crimes or sins real or imaginable can be forgiven. Therefore, this blog is about spiritual time travel (STT) for present criminals in order to seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence. As mentioned, most importantly the introduction establishes why the law is not absolute. This is because it depends on your frame of reference or where and when you commit your crime as to how guilty or innocent you are. Therefore the law changes over space and time, the law is relative and flexible etc. Why and how is primitivism linked to innocence? Early primitive innocence (EPI) is biological and technological evolution because the further you go back in time the more primitive life was and animals (such as humans) were, therefore, relatively the more holy and innocent they were. For example, in the 1980s we had no internet or mobile phones and we did not understand smart things like FaceTime and Spotify, therefore we were much more primitive and innocent in the 1980s than the 2020s. Because the further you go back in time, the harsher and more primitive and innocent life was, the desire for spiritual time travel (STT) in the afterlife, (specifically time travel to the distant past such as the Palaeolithic period) is explained with the excuse of attaining holiness, relative innocence and forgiveness? I then briefly discuss how we were less smart in the past because of our lack of smart technology, and that this is never a problem because it is EPI. I then state how I believe the New Testament is paramount and how this work is the combination of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity and Jesus Christ’s teachings on forgiveness and how it is very powerful. I then state that I believe that since the Holocaust it has become unfashionable for Europeans to be holy, in fact, I believe it is fashionable to be unholy. By this I mean that I think the reason we indigenous Europeans cringe about our own religion, attending Church, singing hymns and saying grace before meals etc today, is because we have lost our holiness and our early primitive innocence (EPI). It is fashionable today to be cool not holy. For example, I think that because superstar DJs are so unbelievably and wickedly cool, rocking the house and spinning the wheels of steel in clubs etc, that it makes it very hard to be holy, and it makes us actually say daaaang to God! Even though I am a hypocrite, I believe we should try to be holy, rather than saying daaaang to God! I then explain how my DJ name (DJ Innocence) is related or connected to this work. I then explain spiritual time travel (STT) and how obviously I am never trying prove how physical time travel is possible in life or on Earth, however, I believe spiritual time travel (STT) will be possible in the afterlife. I then discuss the beautiful terms superstitious primitive innocence (SPI), naive primitive innocence (NPI) and gullible primitive innocence (GPI). I then digress on more early primitive innocence (EPI) concerning the technological evolutions I have witnessed in my own lifetime since the 1980s. I then state that kids today metaphorically get away with murder, and how this trend is bleak for the future. This part also considers the temptation of technology, which states that advanced technology tempts us to live in the present or future, instead of living in the blissful, primitive and innocent past. On a related note, I believe the older something or someone becomes the more holy and classical it or they become, however, it is difficult to see this holiness or ‘classicalness’ in the very recent past, and this is why we ridicule it or them. For example, we would never ridicule Plato or Socrates because they are holy and classical, but we would ridicule Kenny Everett or Russ Abbot etc (for now). Why do things date? I believe that dating is not the problem, however, that it is our own misguided and childish perspective of the recent past. I believe that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) remedy this malaise of ridiculing the recent past. Therefore, this part also attempts to figure out why we ridicule the recent past and say things like ‘Daaaang! That is soooo last week!’ By this I mean how we often ridicule the music, fashion and haircuts of past etc, especially the recent past such as the 1960s and 1980s etc. However, what is the point in saying ‘Daaaang! That is soooo last week!’ to Lower Palaeolithic man, Tiktaalik roseae or single-celled forms? To attempt to investigate it and the meaning of the saying ‘Daaaang! That is soooo last week!’ the blog discusses how there are two ways to consider the past, in that in a way we can say the past was better because it had more early primitive innocence (EPI) or secondly we can ridicule it and say ‘Daaaaang! the past is so dated and primitive, look at the haircuts!’ It then challenges us to try and stop this ridicule. I then discuss pop stars with time and how with early primitive innocence (EPI) they can age like fine wine and become eternal and classical etc. Towards the end of this part, I explain how this blog is the work of doubles or double puns, and this is because the work is entirely about time and anthropology. For example, archaeologists jokingly say my career is in ruins. Get it? I then briefly adumbrate each of the 8 double puns so far stumbled across. Fittingly and immediately after the double puns, the most important theory you will learn in this blog is explained, which is the PRIMITIVE AND ADVANCED DOUBLE CONVERSE. This double converse basically determines that there are those who are younger than us, yet more primitive and innocent than us, as in early years, as in infants. Also that there are those older than us, yet more primitive and innocent than us, as in early men, as in cavemen. Therefore, the double converse table, which consists of four converse states of being primitive and advanced, shows that if you are old enough and mature enough to read this blog then YOU are less innocent, more culpable and guilty etc. I then at length digress on early primitive innocence (EPI), how it works and how it can benefit us concerning relative qualifications. For example, would you rather be 100 years old with all that EPI or a 23 year old with a PhD? I then emphatically state that we should look up to, honour, respect and revere all of our elders. I then describe how we would never swap our EPI for all the riches in the world if that life was even one day younger than our own life. I then state that the only life we would live again is our own or someone’s older, but never someone’s younger. I then discuss the difference between ancient and recent slavery and how we should not judge the past from the 21st century frame of reference because it was more primitive and innocent than today. I then reiterate why crime and sin are relative, I do this by using Jeffrey Dahmer and Homo antecessor as temporal examples. Finally, I discuss how we can practice spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI).

16th century Jimmy Savile, with large ruff.

2. Modern primitive innocence (MPI).

Cultural anthropology. This blog could in a small way be relevant to cultural anthropology in that it deals with what I have called modern primitive innocence (MPI), by this I mean living people and cultures around the world today who are still in a state of primitivism, such as bushmen, native Papuans and indigenous Amazonians etc. I believe that perhaps ethnography (etic or emic) or the study and observation of people and cultures who still have modern primitive innocence (MPI) or superstitious primitive innocence (SPI) around the world today could possibly help this work with contemporary examples of primitivism etc? Therefore, this is a very interesting part that shows us how contemporary developing or third world countries can demonstrate modern primitive innocence (MPI). For example, travelling to Africa is a bit like travelling back in time. For example, in Africa drink driving is much less taboo (especially in the bush) than it is in the UK. In the UK drink driving is absolute and a very serious offence. Why is drink driving acceptable in Africa but not in the UK? Because Africa is more primitive and the UK is more advanced. Which would you prefer? Again I think this proves the idea of this blog which is that the law is not absolute, for example, getting drunk and driving in the middle of the Sahara desert where there is nobody around for 100s of miles, or the bush of tropical Africa is not the same as getting drunk and driving in the densely populated and highly developed civilisation of the United Kingdom. It entirely depends on where and when you drink and drive. Which would you prefer? This difference, could prove that the law is not absolute, in that if you have highly developed or advanced infrastructure such as roads, motorways, bridges, flyovers and streetlights etc, then you cannot drink and drive. However, if you have less developed and primitive infrastructure such as mud roads with giant potholes and no streetlights etc, then you can drink and drive. Which would you prefer? Then after a digression of some of my own experiences of growing up in Africa, in the middle of this part, there is a parable about first contact indigenous Amazonians. In the parable two English explorers and cultural anthropologists discover a virgin and un-contacted tribe of indigenous Amazonians in the 1960s. Things seem to go well, then all of a sudden the Amazonians kill and cannibalise the two English anthropologists. We then philosophically interrogate this parable and ask the ethical question is it hypothetically correct for us to catch the un-contacted Amazonians and prosecute and incarcerate them for murder? Relatively, have they done anything wrong? Using this parable we prove that the law is not absolute, in that primitive people such as un-contacted native Amazonians can literally and metaphorically get away with murder and cannibalism etc, and that we should bare this mind when condemning people who have committed homicide in the developed world? It is simply a case of relativity. I then discuss education and literacy and how it makes us Europeans more advanced, less innocent, more culpable and guilty than native Papuans and indigenous Amazonians etc, and that this is why the latter is out of our jurisdiction and therefore, can literally get away with murder etc. This part then discusses more modern primitive innocence (MPI), this time with the bushmen of South Africa, in that because they live in mud huts and hunt game for meat with bows and arrows, bushmen are technically still primitive today, and therefore, they are probably out of our jurisdiction and can therefore, probably get away with more sin today than us relatively advanced indigenous Europeans. Connected to this topic of hunting game for meat, I discuss how we Europeans are advanced because we do our shopping at supermarkets and this makes us less innocent, more culpable and guilty than indigenous Amazonians, native Papuans, bushmen and prehistoric man etc. I then discuss the difference between Africa and Europe concerning their care (or lack of care) of their own disabled and crippled citizens, how this proves the validity and use of compassionate omnipotence and how it means that despite Africa’s lack of care for it’s disabled citizens, that Africa will win in the end anyway because of the Holocaust. By this I mean that it does not matter how compassionate, advanced, kind and ethical Europeans become in their care of their disabled citizens such as me, Africa will win anyway because it is still primitive. I then discuss our relative barbarism, such as fox hunting, duelling, gladiatorial combat and prehistoric cannibalism etc. I ask the question are or should we be ashamed of our relative barbarism of the past? I then state that it is EPI and that we are all very proud of our relative barbarism of the past. I then discuss how being advanced today is irrelevant because of the Nazis and how the developing third world are the real winners. This is because of the Holocaust, which means that despite having advanced weapons and technology, indigenous Europeans are paralysed due to anti-racism and human rights etc. I then recount some of the primitive things my mother (who was born in 1953) and grandfather (who was born in 1926) can remember which has filtered down to me. I then tell you how these days were happy and innocent. The last section in this part considers freedom and time or primitive freedom, in that, was there more or less freedom in the past?

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo erectus) Adolf Hitler, gathering with stick and stone.

3. Ancestral worship (sticks and stones).

Although lacking somewhat at this point, this part is intended to focus on the anthropological, evolutionary and prehistoric aspect of the blog. It starts off on a discussion of recorded history, how it is related to eternity and consequently how unlike the ancient Egyptians, prehistoric man did not attain eternity down here in life or on Earth. I then discuss compassion at length and how people of the past such as prehistoric man could have very little compassion (compared to us today), towards animals and each other, primarily because they were not yet omnipotent masters of, over and above the animal kingdom and natural world as we are today. I humorously explain that it is like explaining to wolf that we have nuclear warheads now, therefore, ironically, it means we are very compassionate towards animals. This is something wolves will never understand. Concerning compassion this part states that one reason that the Buddha and Jesus Christ might not have come earlier could be because prehistoric men only had primitive weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc, therefore, they had not yet tamed the wild and were not yet masters over the animal kingdom. This means they still had to compete with animals for life and resources, therefore, they could have no compassion toward life and animals. To reiterate, it is ironic that once you have attained nuclear warheads that you are by definition magnanimous and compassionate toward animals. Also without recorded history, Jesus Christ and the Buddha would never have been famous or remembered. Next up is a section called The Older The Better, which starts off by discussing that there are potentially people in heaven who are hundreds of thousands or even millions of years old and therefore, how time and EPI would be the most important commodities in this life and the next, also this section states that people of the past are extremely proud of being old, and that the older you are the holier, wiser and prouder you are. I then briefly explain how art is related to time or how art is timeless, in that art is always better understood with its date of creation. I then discuss how prehistoric art is priceless and how in the afterlife just about everything prehistoric man makes probably has value. I then importantly adumbrate why Creationism is obsolete because spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement determine that we need to be able to travel much further back in time than 3761 BC (which is the beginning of the world according to Creationists). On a related topic I then discuss how our prehistoric ancestors had Zero Commandments or forewarning of sin, and that we hominins are entirely on our own and independent etc, and that we have work out things out for ourselves. I then discuss how primitive anatomy such as fur makes sins lighter. I then briefly mention how there are thresholds in evolution. I then perform a little ancestral worship in that I give a eulogy to the relentless bravery and courage of prehistoric man. I achieve this panegyrising by comparing prehistoric man (as professional survivalists) to such as Bear Grylls or the Special Forces today. I then ask some philosophical questions from the perspective of prehistoric man, as if he or she is asking them. This is achieved through several works of art. The philosophical questions include:

  • Who am I?
  • What am I?
  • Why are we here?
  • How do you know? (By this I mean prehistoric man may ask how can we modern Homo sapiens predict so many things about prehistoric man?)
  • What is the meaning of life?
  • Where did we come from?
  • Where are we going?

The above questions are interspaced with text discussing various topics such as the unofficialness of prehistoric man, in that they had no writing, birth or death certificates etc. Therefore, by what authority did they exist? There is then a humorous modern day analogy of how large carnivores such as bears probably muscled in on prehistoric man’s kills all the time, and this demonstrates how prehistoric man could have little or no compassion towards animals in prehistory. This part then also establishes that after 3.5 billion years of life on Earth with non-stop violence and carnage without a single drop of regret, or from YHWH’s frame of reference or in the scheme of things, how much do you think YHWH will appreciate mankind? And how small and insignificant does Adolf Hitler’s genocide or Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism seem? Therefore, how small and insignificant do your minor sins seem? It is relative. This part finally states that the concepts of sin and guilt are intrinsically good because the knowledge, consciousness or awareness of sin and the feeling of guilt are by definition non-animal and hence this part is also related to innocence and forgiveness and therefore, sets the tone for part 4. Therefore, as you will see, although spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) take time and relativity from physics and moral relativism from philosophy, they also take or use hominid evolution from anthropology. Therefore, I believe this blog is probably made up of 50% physics and 50% anthropology. I will now explain how the blog uses or incorporates anthropology.

Physical anthropology. It is about or connected to physical anthropology in perhaps two ways. Firstly, I believe the only solution to all present or serious crimes always means that the perpetrator has to either spiritually travel back in time to a certain period in the afterlife and/or become or make themselves equal or equivalent to an animal, ape, archaic hominin or human of the past such as a medieval or Victorian person. This is in order for them to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) and therefore, for us to lighten their sins and forgive them. Other than the lighter crimes, which only require that a present criminal should spiritually go back in time to such as medieval or Victorian periods, generally speaking, this form of light punishment of spiritual time travel (STT) to the past for present criminals is in a reverse way evolutionary and hence is definitely about physical anthropology. For example, because Adolf Hitler cared so much about racism and “subhumans” this scientifically determines he is by definition equivalent to an ape or archaic hominid such as Australopithecus afarensis (for obvious reasons). Also note the punishment or consequence of racial genocide is miscegenation. And because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, this determines the only thing he can be or equate to is a prehistoric hominin such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic). And because Jimmy Savile committed statutory rape in the 20th century therefore, he must be the equivalent of a Victorian or medieval man, because the first age of consent was set in England in 1275 AD at age 12. These three eternal examples may demonstrate that all crimes or sins are always an animal, ape or anthropological, in that if you sin or commit a crime you literally make or equate to an animal, primate, primitive hominin or ancient human etc, that is you make a monkey of yourself. To reiterate, if you sin like such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile the only solution to your crime is spiritual time travel (STT) and equivalence to an animal or an ape etc. The second way this blog is connected to physical anthropology is possibly through early primitive innocence (EPI). The term early primitive innocence (EPI) so precisely describes what this blog is about or how it works, which is that the further you go back in time the more primitive and innocent animals such as Homo sapiens and life become. Early primitive innocence (EPI) could be biological and technological evolution, in that it helps us travel in time to the past in our thoughts and memories to identify primitive and obsolete technologies and anatomy and therefore, make the people or animals of the past that used or had them more innocent than the people or animals of the present or future. For example, in the 1980s we had no internet or mobile phones and we did not understand smart things such as Spotify and FaceTime, therefore, we were much more primitive and innocent in the 1980s than the 2020s. By this relatively recent example, we can see that this innocence becomes stronger or purer the further you go back in time. Therefore, imagine how primitive and innocent prehistoric hominins were? I believe prehistoric hominins were so primitive and innocent that they could literally get away with rape, killing and cannibalism etc. Therefore, I believe if we could spiritually travel back in time to prehistory in the afterlife, we could attain holiness, forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence?

Archaeology. Archaeology is another sub-field of anthropology and it doesn’t directly connect to this blog other than it is about the past. This blog is not about archaeological artefacts, as in, stones tools, or fossils such as bones and coprolites etc, in fact, as you will see below it is more about proving the necessity of spiritual time travel (STT) in the afterlife to the past and therefore, it is about living and breathing hominins etc, and therefore, it is more about how in the afterlife we would not need archaeology?

Linguistic anthropology. There is only one way in which I can see that this blog would be helped by linguistic anthropology, which is the proof of why spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife must be possible? Consider the origins of language. Animals communicate to each other, for example, some monkeys have aerial-predator-warning screeches, as opposed to its ground-predator-warning screeches etc, however, not in tens of millions of years would these monkeys be able to respond to us, if we tried talking to them. Therefore, who was the first hominin that would be able to respond to us if we tried to talk to him or her? Or who given a reasonable amount of time to train and learn each other’s languages etc would be able to reasonably and sentiently respond, interact and hold conversations with us? By definition to me this would make this hominin a who as opposed to a what. Therefore, who was the first hominin to fully and fluidly communicate with other hominins? I wonder what the very first meaningful, metaphorical, sentient, and/or coherent words and sentences were? I mean I doubt the very first sublimely graceful, sacred, holy and sentient utterances of life on Earth, after 3.5 billion years of evolution were curses or swear words? Perhaps William Shakespeare would be better judge than I? I mean once they got fully fluid with language, did they go around naming things like animals and fruits etc? Anyway, I think the above example really proves that spiritual time travel (STT) to the past must be possible in the afterlife, because for example, how else would we be able to learn or hear the very first meaningful and sentient utterances of life? If we could not do this or learn this, or if all that we had was still just archaeological artefacts and fossils, such as stones, bones and coprolites etc in the afterlife, we would never be able to learn such things as the first words, and this would never be heaven. Archaeology tells us a lot, however, it can never in eternity tell us about thoughts or what the very first words were etc. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife must be possible?

Dunbar hasn’t convinced everyone in anthropology that he’s entirely right, and of course talking doesn’t leave much of an archaeological trace, so the hypothesis is hard to prove one way or the other.

(Anthropology For Dummies, Cameron M. Smith and Evan T. Davies, page 127).

Unfortunately for archaeologists, spoken myths don’t leave much of an archaeological trace, and no one can be sure when they first arose.

(Anthropology For Dummies, Cameron M. Smith and Evan T. Davies, page 130).

Anthropology is the study of humanity and human evolution and that is what this blog is about, that is, the forgiveness of present criminals through spiritual time travel (STT) to the distant past and through equivalence to animals, prehistoric hominins and ancient people of the past. However, let’s get one thing clear, I am in no way an anthropologist, a lot of the time I just use predictable common sense prehistory, that we all can know and understand. I have read one book anthropology, one on human evolution and one book on the history of life, therefore, currently, that is about as authoritative as I am on the subject. What I mean by predictable common sense prehistory is that although we will never know who they were, as in their individual personalities or characters etc, there are things that we can know to a certain degree of accuracy or confidence about prehistoric people. Using common sense we can predict many things they would have had to do. For example, how did prehistoric people cut their nails? Well I doubt they had the time to invent stone or flint nail clippers so I bet they just bit them or filed them down with an abrasive stone? As you will see that is more like how I deal with prehistoric people. However, the ultimate objective or goal I have with prehistoric man, is that I am convinced that there is total absolution and remission of all of our sins with them. There is calm of soul, relief and peace of mind with prehistoric man. Our consciences have peace, relaxation and bliss with them. This is because probably everything we consider nasty happened in prehistory, such as cannibalism, killing, incest and statutory rape etc. And yet all of it was somehow ethical or relatively fine. Phew! Therefore, the hypothesis of this blog is that using spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement, prehistoric man can save us from all of our sins, no matter what we have done. There were not many laws in prehistory. Prehistoric man was a law unto himself. Why? Because prehistoric man had much less advanced weapons, technology and infrastructure than us, and were therefore, much more primitive and innocent than us. It would have been fine if YHWH had built, roads, buildings and bridges for prehistoric man and given unto them machine guns and tanks, and then said unto them, this is the law, thou shalt not kill, cannibalise or rape etc. But He did not! Therefore, could YHWH punish prehistoric people for (what we would call) sin? In fact, I believe that which we call sin in modern times, was not sin in prehistoric times. To me this proves that the main idea of this blog is valid, which is that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law is not absolute. The law changes over space and time. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible. Therefore, relatively prehistoric man could literally get away with murder. Therefore, prehistoric man gives us absolute peace of mind, especially if we could somehow spiritually travel back in time to the past to meet them. If we could do this in the afterlife, I believe we could find the ultimate absolution for all of our sins, especially for such as those committed by Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile etc? Therefore, if we can forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively who cares about our minor sins? It’s relative! To reiterate, in prehistory more or less everything was alright, nothing is wrong with prehistoric humans. If we can equate present criminals to prehistoric hominins of the past, then there is no problem and their sins are lighter.

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo erectus) Jeffrey Dahmer, holding spear in hominin settlement.

4. Spiritual time travel (STT).

This part starts by recapping on the main important points on why and how we should try to forgive present criminals with time and relativity. Then by using three eternal examples or case studies (Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile) this part shows how it is possible to forgive all sins real or imaginable using spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. For example, because Adolf Hitler cared so much about racism and “subhumans” this scientifically determines he is by definition equivalent to an ape or archaic hominin (for obvious reasons). And because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, this determines the only thing he can be or equate to is a prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic). And because Jimmy Savile committed statutory rape in the 20th century therefore, he must be the equivalent of a Victorian or medieval man, because up until 1875 AD the age of consent was just 12 in England. These three eternal examples may demonstrate that all crimes or sins are always an animal, ape or anthropological, in that if you sin or commit a crime you literally make or equate to an animal, primate, primitive hominin or ancient human etc, that is you make a monkey of yourself. To reiterate, if you sin like such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile the only solution to your crime is spiritual time travel (STT) and equivalence to an animal or an ape. Therefore, relatively Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile existed in the wrong places and the wrong times, therefore, they were anachronistic and therefore were relatively evil. Therefore, if Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile spiritually went back in time millions, hundreds of thousands or hundreds of years respectively to a more primitive and innocent period they might find holiness, forgiveness and acceptance or relative innocence? Once we have dealt and finished with the case studies and spiritual time travel (STT) or crime travel, the essay takes a on different tone and we henceforth never refer to Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile as present criminals anymore, but instead we refer to them as relative criminals and their crimes as relative crimes for the rest of the blog. This is because I believe that if a present criminal can travel in time, I believe he or she earns the right to be called a relative criminal. I then ask you if you have a problem with the forgiveness of relative criminals, how would you accomplish it if your life depended on it? I am fairly confident that you would do it with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI). I then explain how being anti-forgiveness is not the same as being anti-racist, in that, it is all fine and dandy to be anti-forgiveness until you, your child or someone you know makes a mistake and then requires spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI). Therefore, it is wise to be pro-forgiveness just in case. I then explain that there is a fundamental physical limit to the severity of sins that can be committed, and that Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer have already committed them, therefore, why not go all out and fix all sins once and for all? I the. state that we should try to make no bones about talking about and dealing with relative crimes. I then explain by how using a combination of spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) with Jesus Christ’s extreme teachings on forgiveness, that it is possible to remove the pure hatred in the world today that exists between neo-Nazis and Antifa or the far-right and far-left. In the same vein, I tell you who I find difficult to forgive and how I have overcome this with Jesus Christ’s extreme teachings on forgiveness. I then make an apology to primitive peoples of the world on behalf of my people and my ancestors such as recent slavers and conquistadors for any abuses or suffering caused as a result of empires and colonialism. With spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement we certainly do not think we are superior than you in any way at all. I then explain and warn you about a paradox of this blog, which is that it doesn’t matter what I do I will be forgiven. I then explain why people are afraid to forgive because of vigilantes and Antifa etc and how they stop forgiveness. I then tell you how spiritual time travel (STT) was realised and how I made a monkey of myself. And ultimately there then is a brief conclusion.

1. INTRODUCTION.

The goals.

Miocene Adolf Hitler, chimpanzee.

One main goal of this blog is the genuine forgiveness ((without justification), for the good spiritual and mental well being of both Jews and Europeans)), of Adolf Hitler with time and relativity. Also, as mentioned, another of the main goals of this blog is that through light judgement, light humour and comedy I would like the Jews and Adolf Hitler to be genuine good friends. However, as mentioned the actual main goal of this blog, is that through the forgiveness of such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey and Jimmy Savile, we can achieve the absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness for all people of all sins real or imaginable throughout all of space and time. I believe I have accomplished this, by using three examples or case studies, that being the above mentioned, the forgiveness of which relatively leads to the absolute and universal forgiveness of all people for all of their sins throughout space and time. You may be initially sceptical about the lofty or far-fetched goals of this blog, however, I promise you that if you can forgive Adolf Hitler for the Holocaust you can forgive anything. You have absolute and universal relative forgiveness. Therefore, if you read this whole blog I am confident that you will agree with me. Please note, by forgiving all sins real or imaginable, I am never trying to be Jesus Christ, that is why this blog is more or less completely secular!! My main motivation is the forgiveness of Adolf Hitler, in order to help my own people, hence I have perfectly selfish patriotic reasons. To reiterate, as you will see, spiritual time travel (STT) is mostly Albert Einstein’s forgiveness and it is more or less completely secular. As you will see I have accomplished the above mentioned goals by using time and relativity to forgive, as opposed to the divine! Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT) is actuated by both perfectly selfless and perfectly selfish desires.

The afterlife.

As will be seen, although this blog is more or less completely secular, it takes for granted the existence of an afterlife and a God, henceforth referred to as YHWH. In fact, a major theme of this blog is to try and work out what the afterlife is like or how it works? However, it does this with time and relativity and never with the divine! Unfortunately, because of the Holocaust, I believe a lot of indigenous European people have no option but to look forward to the afterlife. However, as will be seen, ironically, in order to look forward to the afterlife, this blog actually looks 100% backwards to the past. To be honest, I believe there is no such thing as a hell in the afterlife. For example, I believe Adolf Hitler is in heaven and not hell. However, how on Earth is this possible? How on Earth does the afterlife forgive or make it alright for Adolf Hitler? As will be seen this blog tries to answer that question. However, to reiterate, at precisely the same time, this blog is more or less completely secular, and never divine! Remember time is modesty.

Tiers (structure).

I believe this blog has depth or five (or at least four) tiers or five levels, or more accurately I am trying to pin down what the five tiers are or exactly what this blog is. I believe the five tiers start at the top with the domain(s), then the field or genre, then the subject, then the title and finally the technical terms. Domains is probably the only dubious tier as in reality a thesis would not have domains. I will briefly adumbrate each tier.

The tiers or levels of this essay.

Tier 1 (domains). I have some good domain names for this website some are the titles of this blog, some are the field or genre, some are the subject and some are the technical terms.

https://relativeanthropology.com and https://anthropologytime.com I think are good and I believe they reflect the field of this blog.

https://modesttime.com, https://modestytime.com and https://modestyoftime.com reflect the likely spirituality or character of Albert Einstein and this blog.

https://490.live and https://70times7.blog communicate the most important message of this blog, if you do not get it I am not even entertaining you, but I’ll give you a hint, it is nothing to do with arithmetic!

https://phew.blog is funny and the most succinct, and it does reflect the effect this blog can have on us sinners.

https://illegaltime.com is self explanatory and reflects what this blog is about.

https://forgiven.blog sums up what this blog about.

https://crimetravel.co.uk also does reflect what this blog is about, it is one of the most succinct terms I have. This is because the way that crime travel operates or works is that through spiritual time travel (STT), present criminals must become past criminals or relative criminals and you definitely do not want to become a future criminal.

https://time4forgiveness.com and https://time2forgive.com are beautiful and poetic. As mentioned the former is a double pun.

https://PhDForgive.com and https://PhDForgiveness.com could be the qualification or subject this blog?

https://spiritualtimetravel.com, https://equivalentforgiveness.com and https://primitiveinnocence.com are the main technical terms of this blog. However, crime travel also requires a couple of other lesser important technical terms, which are https://presentcriminal.com and https://pastcriminal.com.

I sometimes place domains throughout the blog for effect, however, please note that they all just bring you to this page, therefore, you do not need to to press them. For a full list, see domains in the menu.

Middle Palaeolithic (Neanderthal) Adolf Hitler, in Neanderthal settlement.

Tier 2 (field). I am more confident to allocate the field of this work to anthropology? As will be seen as opposed to mathematical or scientific time I have simply called it spiritual time. Spiritual time travel (STT) uses several concepts from science, that being space, time, equivalence and relativity from physics and hominin evolution from anthropology. However, this blog also uses moral relativism, which is philosophy, however, it is about moral relativism with time and evolution, which therefore, may connect it to relativity and anthropology? Also, note anthropology does also use cultural relativism. I have read 140 books in my life and wrote at least 84k words for this blog, therefore, I believe it has earned the field of anthropology? As mentioned, I am studying two different forms of time. The other form or website is mathematical time and this form or website is spiritual time. To be honest, in reality, the field or genre of this blog may be the top tier? The way I currently look at genres is the following:

  1. Science such as mathematics or physics are amoral or non-moral, in that they are completely neutral.
  2. Philosophy is not science but it is secular morality, in that it is non-ecclesiastical ethics and morality.
  3. Religion is 100% morality in that it is spiritual or ecclesiastical morality.

However, to me science seems to deny religion and the perfectly rational knowledge that the afterlife exists, whereas like this thesis, religion takes it for granted. I would like to think that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) incorporate all three genres or at least the latter two. How are STT, EF and EPI related to science? Well firstly, they borrow several concepts or terms from physics, that being time, equivalence and relativity. Second of all, they borrow human biological evolution from physical anthropology. How are STT, EF AND EPI related to religion? Well, they are primarily about forgiveness and there are no greater teachings regarding forgiveness than Jesus Christ’s. Hence, although I use many or as many of Jesus Christ’s teachings as I can, the greatest teaching that I can see regarding forgiveness is the love for one’s enemies. How are STT, EF and EPI related to philosophy? STT, EF and EPI are more or less secular, yet they are not scientific as they are about morality, innocence and forgiveness. Also, like a physicist, as I have become a bit of a follower and believer in Albert Einstein, and hence, I profess my religious or spiritual beliefs in time or the modesty of time. Therefore, I believe STT, EF and EPI could be secular morality or philosophy also?

Tier 3 (subject). Quite simply the subject of this thesis is forgiveness and innocence, hence the qualification of this thesis could probably be a PhD of Forgiveness?

Tier 4 (title). Similar to domain names I have various and interchangeable beautiful or poetic titles and tag lines for this blog such as sticks and stones, it’s in the past, crime travel, crime time, time for forgiveness, time to forgive, secular forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. As you will see I mostly use the technical terms spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), as well as the beautiful or poetic titles crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. Please bear with me as I am still trying to figure out what exactly the field of this blog is, what is its subject, what constitutes a beautiful or poetic title and what exactly constitutes a technical term? The technical terms and beautiful or poetic titles all basically mean the same thing and are interchangeable. I am coming to the conclusion that the idea or theory of blog would be called spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), while the beautiful or poetic titles of this blog would be crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. As I am still working things out, I vary the titles and combinations a little throughout the blog.

Victorian (pre-1875) Jimmy Savile, with top hat and tail.

Tier 5 (technical terms). I am not sure if spiritual time travel (STT) is a title or a technical term? However, I will now explain the certain main technical terms of this blog. Firstly, equivalent forgiveness (EF) means for example that present criminals or sinners must have to equate to or be the equivalent of an animal, prehistoric hominin or person of the past etc in order to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) and for us to understand them, lighten their sins and forgive them. For example, Adolf Hitler must be the equivalent of a “subhuman” such as Homo erectus (for obvious reasons), and Jeffrey Dahmer must be the equivalent of an archaic hominin such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic) and Jimmy Savile must be the equivalent of a medieval or Victorian person (because up until 1875 AD the legal age of consent was 12) etc. Therefore, in conjunction with the time or the spiritual time travel (STT) to the past implied, their equivalent counterparts ameliorate, cool or calm down any thoughts or speech regarding such present criminals or sinners. Please note that equivalent forgiveness is temporal, relative or related to relativity by the word ‘equivalence’. The other technical term primitive innocence requires a lot more explanation. I got the term ‘primitive innocence’ a long time ago, and recently I discovered that it has or needs various adjectives before it, such as early, late, superstitious, naive and gullible etc. I will briefly describe each variation term:

  • Early primitive innocence (EPI) means two things, first of all, it means that adult, mature and especially elderly people who are alive on Earth are or have EPI. And second of all, it means those people who are in the afterlife and of the past such as Victorian, medieval, ancient and prehistoric people are or have EPI. Basically the older you are the more EPI you have, dead or alive.
  • Early primitive innocence (EPI) means babies, infants and children are or have EPI. (Note: you may be wondering why there are two EPIs? All you have to know for now is that EPI is double).
  • Modern primitive innocence (MPI) refers to present day or modern primitivism or primitive people such as Africans, indigenous Amazonians and native Papuans etc.
  • Superstitious primitive innocence (SPI) refers to primitive people of the past or present who believe in or practice superstitions such as seances, miracles, prophecies and witchcraft etc. This can include anyone from modern Britons believing such things as the Loch Ness monster to native Africans believing in prophecy and witchcraft etc.
  • Naive primitive innocence (NPI) is another way to express SPI.
  • Gullible primitive innocence (GPI) is another way to express SPI.

I really like the term early primitive innocence (EPI), because it so precisely describes what this blog is about or how it works, which is that the further you go back in time the more holy, primitive and innocent animals such as Homo sapiens and life become. Early primitive innocence (EPI) could be biological and technological evolution, in that it helps us travel in time to the past to identify primitive and obsolete technologies and anatomy and therefore, make the people or animals of the past that used or had them more innocent than the people or animals of the present or future. Just to point out the difference between anatomical or biological and technological evolution, is that we cannot see anatomical or biological evolution without archaeology and artistic recreations etc, that is, apart from average human height, the evolutionary difference between Homo sapiens today and medieval Homo sapiens is imperceptible. However, we can see technological evolution in a single lifetime, thanks to such as Apple Inc. even those in there twenties can see how technology has evolved since their childhood. However, note, evolution is biological, however, it also definitely needs time. In fact evolution is time. Therefore, using this early primitive innocence (EPI) with spiritual time travel (STT) to the past, in theory we should be able to forgive all sins real or imaginable. However, primitive innocence on its own is not temporal, relative or relevant and as has been shown requires adjectives in front of it such as superstitious, naive and gullible as well as early and late etc. Therefore, I believe early primitive innocence (EPI) is biological and technological evolution. I even mistakenly changed it to relative innocence at one point to try and inject a little time into it, but succeeded when I changed it to early primitive innocence (EPI). I believe early primitive innocence (EPI) is essential because it is biological and technological evolution, and I believe it can help us travel in time in our thoughts. For example, in the 1980s we had no internet or mobile phones and we did not understand smart things such as Spotify and FaceTime, therefore, we were much more primitive and innocent in the 1980s than the 2020s. By this relatively recent example, we can see that this holiness or innocence becomes stronger or purer the further you go back in time. Therefore, imagine how holy, primitive and innocent prehistoric people were? I believe prehistoric man was so holy, primitive and innocent that they could literally get away with rape, killing and cannibalism etc. Therefore, I believe if we could spiritually travel back in time to prehistory we could attain holiness, forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? This blog is most importantly about forgiveness, however, to that end innocence is also absolutely essential. The difference between forgiveness and innocence is subtle, however, to forgive is a verb and is self explanatory while to be innocent, in the context of this blog, is an adjective which describes the state of people in the past regarding their use of primitive technologies or their lack of advanced technologies, such as the internet and mobile phones etc, which therefore, makes them more holy and innocent than people of the present or future. This holiness or innocence of the past increases or becomes stronger or purer the further you go back in time, and therefore, in conjunction with spiritual time travel (STT), it leads to the genuine forgiveness of all crimes or sins real or imaginable. For example, cannibalism was ethical in prehistory because such as Homo antecessor had infinitely less advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure than us today, therefore, they were much more holy, primitive and innocent than us, therefore, they could get away with cannibalism. Therefore, if Jeffrey Dahmer could somehow spiritually travel back in time to the Lower Palaeolithic, he might attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? I believe that we can forgive any sin real or imaginable with time, relativity, equivalence and anthropology, the past and prehistory. Early primitive innocence (EPI) therefore has a lot to do with prehistory, evolution and anthropology, however, it is about these with time and relativity or spiritual time travel (STT). Early primitive innocence (EPI) only deals with life, that is the last 3.5 billion years of life on Earth, since abiogenesis or the very first single-celled life form or protocell, which as will be seen later is not only the holiest, oldest and most primitive and innocent thing in the universe, but is also 100% UNIVERSAL, in that the very last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth can be anything from an insect to a dinosaur, from a fish to a human and it can be anything and everything, the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth is God, therefore, the very first single-celled life form or the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth can teach anyone, including Adolf Hitler a thing or two about racism. In fact, early primitive innocence (EPI) is life itself. Early primitive innocence (EPI) does not care about 13.7 billion years to 3.5 billion years ago, when life did not exist on Earth. Evolution is biological, however, it also definitely needs time. In fact evolution is time. STT, EF and EPI combine physics with anthropology and philosophy, in that they just take time from physics, common sense evolution from biology and anthropology and relativism from philosophy. Finally, as mentioned, crime travel also requires a couple of other lesser important technical terms, which are present criminal and past criminal.

Pliocene (Australopithecus africanus) Jeffrey Dahmer, with animal bones.

Comparing?

The media always paints unfortunate sinners in the worst possible light, I am simply saying that I can paint present criminals in the best possible light with time and relativity. Therefore, I am attempting to forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile in a predominantly non-Christian and secular way with time and relativity. We all put a lot of distance, bars or walls between ourselves and present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, in fact, down here on Earth we put them in prison to distance ourselves from them as much and for as long as possible. For example, if you burgle and get caught, people will distance themselves from you for a long time. However, as you will see instead of walls or distance, this blog puts time between us and present criminals. What happens to present criminals in the afterlife? Are they forgiven? Do we still distance ourselves from them? I think not. When you put time between yourself and an unfortunate sinner instead of distance or space, as you will see, although it is like prison, it is never hateful, vilifying or uses animosity etc. It is as light as possibly can be. And yes speed is always defined by two things, a distance covered and a time period. All that I am saying is that if you totally ignore, block out or distance yourself as much as you can from such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer or Jimmy Savile, then crime or sin is not relative, that is your minor sins will seem relatively big. However, if you acknowledge, talk about, deal with or even associate with such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer or Jimmy Savile, then crime or sin is relative, that is your sins seem relatively trivial. Most importantly what I am stressing by relative crime or sin, is that we should definitely stop comparing ourselves to Jesus Christ. If you constantly compare yourself to Jesus Christ’s standards then your (to me) relatively minor sins will seem huge! Whereas, if you compare yourself to Jeffrey Dahmer, prehistoric man or me, then your relatively minor sins will seem like nothing! For example, sin is relative because what one person finds sinful or unacceptable is not sinful or unacceptable to another person. For example, I smoked marijuana at school when I was not quite 17 and I shamefully got expelled from a very prestigious private school. Moral relativism states than sin is relative to each person, because to teachers in a highly responsible school environment, smoking marijuana is totally unacceptable, whereas to a some people doing drugs is never sinful? Again, for a surgeon to take drugs is unbelievably sinful, but to a bricklayer taking drugs is not even a sin? Why? Because a surgeon is advanced and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent, while a bricklayer is primitive, and therefore, less responsible and therefore more innocent. Therefore, the law is not absolute, because for example it depends where and when you smoke marijuana. If you smoke marijuana at a highly responsible and very prestigious private school this is totally unacceptable. However, if you smoke marijuana on a beach with Rastafarians in Africa, in this environment smoking marijuana is less of a problem? All that I am saying is that contemporary society judges everyone by the ethical or moral standards of a surgeon, where as, if the law was relative, then the authorities may go easier on the working class for what they would call sin, such as drug use?

17th century Jimmy Savile, King Charles I, 1628.

Political correctness.

As this blog has to forgive all sins real or imaginable, to that end it has to forgive the biggest sinner of all time. That is, Adolf Hitler. There are two ways in which you can write about, portray, use or display images of Adolf Hitler and Nazi symbology etc, that is wrong or right, politically incorrect or politically correct, far-right or far left, racist or anti-racist, supportive or hostile, sympathetic or with animosity etc. As you can see the art in this essay is completely benign and politically correct. This blog is neither sympathetic nor uses animosity. Forgiveness is never sympathy. Forgiveness is never racism. For example, the way Nazism is portrayed in the Indiana Jones films is absolutely fine (or politically correct) because they portray them as antagonists. However, obviously to write about Nazism or display Nazi symbology in any kind of supportive way is absolutely wrong and politically incorrect. Therefore, although I am trying to forgive Adolf Hitler and Nazism for the spiritual and mental well being of both Jews and European Christians, I am politically correct as forgiveness is never justification or support. To reiterate, I never support Nazism as a political theory, however, please forgive me if I forgive a lonely human being called Adolf Hitler. Therefore, as will be seen although I am right-leaning, I will prove to you by how I use a combination of the powers of two great Jews (Albert Einstein and Jesus Christ) to forgive all sins real or imaginable, that I am in no way a Nazi! I will state categorically that although I am right leaning, from experience I know that this work is hated by both Nazis and Antifa. It is too politically correct for Nazis and too politically incorrect for Antifa. It is neither far-right nor far-left. Like me, it is somewhere in the middle or right of centre. Therefore, this blog puts Adolf Hitler in a politically correct way, that is not supportive, panegyrizing, eulogyzing or worshiping etc, however, to reiterate, it does try to forgive Adolf Hitler (without justification) with time and relativity. Therefore, although this blog portrays Adolf Hitler in a politically correct way, you may notice I never use hate or animosity towards him. Time has no animosity. Therefore, as will you see, although this blog puts Adolf Hitler in a politically correct way, however, in order to forgive him it also puts him in the lightest and most humorous way possible.

Middle Palaeolithic (Neanderthal) Adolf Hitler, with spear and fur.

Art.

As you will see throughout this blog and especially on my art website there is quite a lot of art. The first thing to know is that my art is not really art, it is just digital image manipulation. I basically just take an original image from Pinterest or Shutterstock of an animal, prehistoric hominin, medieval or Victorian person etc and superimpose a pre-prepared head of a present criminal over the head of the character on the original image. I then just delete or erase the original head and digitally touch up the affected areas around the head to get a nice smooth and clean image. All this is done in Adobe Draw, Adobe Fresco and Adobe Photoshop. I then put the finished image through filters in Prisma or BeCasso for the final beautiful rendering. I learned my digital art skills from my Bachelor of Arts Computer Animation (2:1) degree, however, I am not that good a drawing artist, hence that is why I cheat and just use digital image manipulation. Therefore, please be warned that the purpose of the art or the lighthearted images on this blog and throughout my other digital art website is to counter or blot-out the negative or upsetting images that pop into our minds regarding the Holocaust, torture, cannibalism and necrophilia etc. The point that I am saying is that we should stay positive and not dwell on the mortifying examples and statistics of the Holocaust, torture, necrophilia and cannibalism etc, and the subsequent upsetting mental images that arise in our minds. Instead try to think of spiritual time travel (STT), crime travel and these lighthearted and witty images of these people. I like art with a purpose or point, art that is meaningful, such as conceptual art for archaeologists and anthropologists etc. Therefore, most importantly you must understand that my art is an idea. That is, it is art that portrays an idea technically called spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. When I say idea I do not mean something off the top of my head. I believe most artists just get quick or instant concepts or ideas from the top of their heads, whereas to attain the idea of the art on this website I have read 140 books and wrote this 84k word blog. Think of it more like a PhD archaeologist student who has spent years reading and writing his or her 80k word thesis, and then has an imperative need to visualise something from the distant past such as a primitive tetrapodomorph. That is more like the idea of this art. Crime travel transcends genres, in that you can use any genre of art, such as academic, impressionism, modern or pop art etc to depict the idea. Therefore, my writing and my art ask the question, what if we could forgive present criminals with time and relativity or spiritual time travel (STT)? I believe that in the afterlife that all sins real or imaginable are forgiven. I do not believe in hell. Hence, the idea or purpose of my art and writing is the forgiveness of all sins real or imaginable down here in life or on Earth as well. Note, I read over 100 books and wrote 84k plus words before I attained the idea and the art. For example, art is an under appreciated field until an archaeologist or palaeontologist has an urgent need to visualise something from the distant past etc. How else can you see prehistoric man without art? That is unless you have a time machine. Budush! On the other hand art can be pointless and meaningless, such as decorative art, art for aesthetics or art to make something look pretty etc. Hence, to understand my art you really need to read this blog. With my art the value lies in the subject, meaning or idea as opposed to art for art’s sake. The difference between scientific art and decorative art is that the former is imperative while the latter can be pointless. For example, a still life fruit bowl was fine for Jacopo de’Barbari in the 1504, because it broke new ground, however, I find modern depictions of such as a still life fruit bowl quite pointless and meaningless. Art is a funny field because it can sometimes just be about making something look pretty, such as just drawing for drawing’s sake, such as drawing something to the best of your abilities to get it to look as real as possible. I dislike this kind of art. However, at other times art is imperative such as conceptual art for archaeologists or visualising something from the past such as prehistoric people etc. This kind of art I love. Everything that can possibly be done in art has been done, even divisionism and cubism etc. Therefore, I am trying to break new ground with this kind of art. With my art it is never about the quality of the image, as in academic art or realistic like such as Leonardo Da Vinci’s or Sandro Botticelli‘s etc. Other people can do much better images or graphic design. But that is exactly my point, in that graphic design or art for art’s sake can sometimes be meaningless and pointless. All that I do is trace and add the face. I am not actually that good an artist. However, I believe the controversy, meaning and idea comes primarily through the faces of my infamous subjects. To reiterate, the most important purpose of my art is that you get the idea. That is all! You undoubtedly can do better. To briefly explain the idea behind my art, because Adolf Hitler cared so much about racism and (and I quote) “subhumans,” I have used time, relativity and art to make him equivalent to a primate or archaic hominin. And because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, the only thing he can be or equate to is an archaic hominin such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic). Therefore, with time and relativity, I have also made him as such. Also, because the age of consent in England was 12 until 1875, I have used spiritual time travel (STT) to make Jimmy Savile the equivalent of a medieval or Victorian man. This is in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. To reiterate, the above mentioned subjects were anachronistic, in that they all committed sins which are in the wrong space and time, hence I have used time and relativity or spiritual time travel (STT) to make them primates, archaic hominins or medieval or Victorian people etc in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. I believe we can use art, literature, time and relativity to paint the most serious criminals in a lighthearted way. You may say my art is too controversial? However, isn’t art supposed to be controversial? Isn’t art supposed to shock? Isn’t art supposed to break new ground? I believe it is. I have seen some shocking things in the Tate and Royal Academy myself, especially in the over-18 galleries. That’s what I like about my art, in that it is too controversial, even for artists like Damien Hirst or Andy Warhol etc. They would not risk their careers or reputations to draw Adolf Hitler in a lighthearted style for forgiveness etc. For example, impressionism was at first frowned upon by the established art community in the 19th century, and for example, Olympia by Édouard Manet in 1863 was extremely shocking for its time, because although there had always been nudity in art with nymphs, cherubs and Venuses etc no one had ever portrayed what basically amounted to pornographic nudity of a prostitute before. Also, The Origin of the World by Gustave Courbet in 1866 was extremely shocking and controversial for its time, and to be honest it is still probably controversial today. Therefore, my art is no different for its time. That is, you may condemn it today, but tomorrow it may be the norm, trivial or small potatoes? For example, Monty Python’s 1979 film, Life of Brian was considered extremely shocking and controversial for its time, and was banned in the UK during the late 1970s and 1980s. However, relatively, today this seems ridiculous to us. I would like you to consider this question? How else can you create politically correct art of Adolf Hitler without being negative, vilifying or using animosity towards him and definitely without eulogising, panegyrising, adoring or worshipping him? What is the best possible light that you can draw or sculpt Adolf Hitler in without either of the aforesaid connotations? There is no other way to do this than with art of forgiveness, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. For example, The Big Night Down the Drain (1962-63) by Georg Baselitz is a representation of Adolf Hitler masturbating. However, without art of forgiveness, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement, this is about as politically correct as an artist can be when depicting Adolf Hitler. The same logic applies to all present sinners such as Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, not just Adolf Hitler. I am learning Adobe Illustrator and Adobe Fresco as I go, hence you can see the improvement. You are welcome to have and use the images. I use Adobe Illustrator, Adobe Fresco, Adobe Photoshop and Prisma. All done on iPad Air 3 with Apple Pencil. Digital art is the only skill I take from my 2:1 Bachelor of Arts, Computer Animation degree. I also got an A* for GCSE Art. What do you think, pop art or post-impressionism?

Controversial.

A main goal of this blog is the liberation or emancipation of Europeans from the guilt of the Holocaust. By this I mean that I would like white people to be proud, happy with and to love themselves, and that is a purpose of this blog. To that end the main or primary goal of this blog is the genuine forgiveness (without justification (for the spiritual, mental and political wellbeing of both the Jews and Europeans)) of present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. Therefore, please note that what you will undoubtedly call the controversial nature of this blog is born out of my absolute love for my own people. I have read 121 books for this blog and wrote 84k plus words out of my concern and love for indigenous Europeans. Please read with an open mind. Like the statement I love white people, relative to most people this blog would probably be considered controversial. However, why is the statement I love white people controversial? There is nothing wrong with that statement, there is something wrong with the world! Therefore, I personally do not want to live in a world where such a beautiful statement is controversial. However, I believe that statement is only controversial because Adolf Hitler and the Nazis ruined the term white with their hate and aryanism. The term white has connotations of hate and supremacy and so I believe that we should never use the term white or try to limit its use as much as possible. Therefore, I have tried to use the much better and much broader term indigenous European(s) where possible. Returning to controversy, the main idea of this blog is that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law is not absolute. The law changes over space and time. The law is relative. The law is flexible. I believe offence is similar, in that what causes offence to one person does not cause offence to another person, especially if they are separated by time. Offence is relative. This is because, for example, given the extreme nature of far-right social media platforms such as Gab and Bitchute etc the statement I love white people is very small potatoes on those platforms. One can relax about such a mildly patriotic statement on such platforms. However, the statement I love white people is for some bizarre reason controversial on leftist or liberal social media platforms such as Soundclound or Facebook etc. In today’s climate or environment one cannot feel comfortable about using such a statement on such platforms. I also believe that all crimes are relative offences because such as Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism is extremely offensive to us modern people today, however, if we could spiritually travel back in time one million years or so to the Lower Palaeolithic period, I believe Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic) would not be as offended by Jeffrey Dahmer’s crimes? Therefore, please note the content of this blog is relatively controversial, however, despite how it may or may not look to you, there is no racism in this blog. The controversy lies in the severity of the sins that I am trying to forgive. I would like to state that the crimes of Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile cause me offence, however, this blog does not. I hope you will react the same?

Simple relativity.

You also may say isn’t relativity the most advanced scientific theory on Earth? Yes it is but relativity is also common sense because by definition it implies that everything is relative. Here is an example of common sense relativity:

  • Example 1: When a 6 year old learns arithmetic it is relative and that is why adults are enthusiastic with, take delight in and enjoy teaching 6 year olds arithmetic, reading and writing etc. However, for an adult to learn arithmetic, reading and writing we hardly get the same enjoyment or satisfaction out of it. This is because of time, in that because of their age teaching an adult is not relative, that is by learning something they know that they should have learned a long time ago. An adult is passed it, over the hill and irrelevant. It is relatively impressive for a 6 year old to learn arithmetic but it is relatively unimpressive for an adult to learn arithmetic.
Miocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, threatening with rock.

Here is another example of common sense relativity:

  • Example 2: If a working class person who lives in a small terraced house without a garden, has through some fortune the good luck to move into a medium sized detached Persimmons house with a quaint garden etc, then relative to this person, he or she is very happy indeed with this relatively big (compared to a terrace) detached house, because he or she has never known anything except a small terraced house. However, if an upper class person such as the Queen of England has through some misfortune the bad luck to have to evacuate Buckingham Palace and move into an identical medium sized detached Persimmons house with a quaint garden etc, relative to the Queen, the Queen would be very unhappy indeed with this relatively tiny (compared to a palace) detached house, this is because the Queen has never known anything except grand palaces and castles etc. It is relative!

What does relativity or the state of being relative mean? Perhaps the term relative means that nothing matters. For example, taking the above scenario of relative property, if ignorance is bliss and if happiness is relative, then what difference does it make? The working class person is relatively over the moon with the detached Persimmons house, while the Queen is in abject misery. Therefore, what difference does it make relatively?

What is miraculous, amazing and novel to one observer in one frame of reference or space and time is not miraculous, amazing and novel to another observer in another frame of reference or space and time.

Here is another example of common sense relativity:

  • Example 3: If the qualification for election to the Upper House of Parliament in South Africa in 1850 was the ownership of at least £1000, this does not mean that ownership of £1000 in 2020 carries the same relative qualification. Most people in 2020 do own £1000, however, due to inflation, £1000 in 1850 would be the relative equivalent of £1,000,000 today. It’s relative!

Here is another example of common sense relativity:

  • Example 4: It was just as relatively amazing, cutting-edge and advanced for prehistoric-hominin pioneers such as Homo erectus, in the Lower Palaeolithic, to invent and design primitive technologies such as the controlled use of fire, as it is for modern Homo sapiens today, such as Steve Jobs, in the 21st century, to invent and design advanced technologies such as iPads and iPhones etc. It’s relative!
Victorian (pre-Offences Against the Person Act of 1875) Jimmy Savile, with large top hat.

Ignorance is bliss.

Unless you know the future, I mean regarding such things as modern medicine then relatively living or existing in the distant past was absolutely fine. To know the future and live in the past could be insufferable? For example, before the invention of anaesthetics and penicillin people were relatively fine, they did not complain, even though they had to undergo amputations with nothing more than a bottle of whiskey and a piece of wood between their teeth etc. We cannot imagine the medical inventions of the future therefore, to us in the present or past, ignorance is bliss! As you will see, the negation of having advanced technologies such as anaesthetics and penicillin means people in the past were much more holy and innocent than us of today. Therefore, they could get away with more of what we would call sin today. For example, before the invention of anaesthetics people were probably more likely to get away with things that we could never do today such as war, slavery and what we would call statutory rape etc. The further you go back in time the purer the holiness and innocence become, therefore, applying the same logic of anaesthetics to prehistoric men, how holy, primitive and innocent do you think prehistoric men were? What could prehistoric men get away with that we cannot today? Because prehistoric men were so holy, primitive and innocent, they could literally get away with rape, killing and cannibalism etc, therefore, if such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile could spiritually travel back in time in the afterlife they could probably attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? Therefore, what does relative mean? If ignorance is bliss and if happiness is relative, then what difference does it make? A medieval person living without anaesthetics or penicillins was just as relatively happy without these medicines as we are today with them. You cannot know the medical advances of the future, therefore, ignorance must be bliss! Therefore, relativity implies it does not make a difference? Therefore, this may determine that we should be satisfied with our relatively primitive technologies and medicines etc? You may think that this determines that the more recently you were born or the more advanced and modern you are, the better? Absolutely not! It is early primitive innocence (EPI)! People of the 19th century and earlier who had to undergo fully awake and conscious amputations etc are very proud of that fact and therefore, can say they are holier and have a lot more early primitive innocence (EPI) than us! Therefore, although relativity is the most advanced scientific theory in history, by definition it is simple because it implies everything is relative, even everyday things. Therefore, relativity is also common sense. Therefore, I have turned relativity on it’s head and made this blog the opposite of advanced, that is, it is about primitivism. I believe that time and relativity are everything and that the entire universe as well as the afterlife, function and operate by time and relativity, even simple and everyday things, such as innocence and forgiveness etc. Reading is also time in that it takes a long time to read a book. I have read 140 books in my life and 121 of them since August 2016. I have read more or less every day for 4 years. If you have not got the time to read this blog which is only 84k words then you are missing out on time. Give it your advertence and a few hours of your time. No matter what you have done I promise will I forgive you, but most importantly I will get you to forgive yourself. I believe that is the purpose of Albert Einstein’s theory, that is, he would want us to apply time and relativity to everything even common sense things. The difference between relativity and relativism or the thing about spiritual time as opposed to plain philosophy, is that when you write about everyday things with time, the writing is always relative or relevant. Whereas plain philosophy such as relativism is not quite relative or relevant. This is why I believe moral relativism needs to incorporate time. On another note, you may say how is forgiveness and innocence relative? If you read this blog you will definitely find out. However, (although there is a lot more to it), for example if we can forgive present sinners such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively who cares about our minor sins?

Middle Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, with club.

Equivalent forgiveness.

You may think gheeze, my god is this guy seriously talking about forgiving Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile with time, relativity and anthropology? Gheeze, that is disgusting. That is too extreme. Jesus Christ was extreme with forgiveness. Even his dying words on the cross were about forgiveness:

Jesus said, “Father, forgive them, for they do not know what they are doing.” And they divided up his clothes by casting lots.

Luke 23:34.

Therefore, I am also extreme with forgiveness. It may be extreme to talk about Jeffrey Dahmer with forgiveness, however, as you will see, this blog equates such as Jeffrey Dahmer with such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic), however, you would never judge Homo antecessor for ancient cannibalism. Why? Because there is time between you and Homo antecessor. Whereas there is no time between you and Jeffrey Dahmer, that is why he is a present criminal and why you judge and vilify Jeffrey Dahmer in the 20th/21st centuries. As you will see modern cannibalism is simply not right in the 20th/21st centuries in America. However, it was not always so. For example, in prehistoric times in Europe cannibalism was probably ok, and in the 16th century Caribbean it was okay for the Caribs etc. Therefore, the law is not absolute! Therefore, we should always equate such as Jeffrey Dahmer with a prehistoric hominin from the past such as Homo antecessor. Consider that all present criminals have a twin, parallel or equivalent in the past, for example Adolf Hitler equates to a “subhuman” such as Australopithecus Afarensis (for obvious reasons), Jeffrey Dahmer equates to a prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic) and Jimmy Savile equates to a medieval or Victorian man (as up until 1875 AD the age of consent was 12) etc. It is difficult and extreme to talk about such as Jeffrey Dahmer with forgiveness, but there is no problem in talking about Homo antecessor and their ancient cannibalism. Therefore, talk about Jeffrey Dahmer and Homo antecessor with equivalence, that is, in the same vein and interchangeably. Consider Jeffrey Dahmer and Homo antecessor as half and half, 1/2 and 1/2 or 50/50. They are equivalent and the same thing. Time ameliorates any sin, therefore, I believe the first half, Homo antecessor in the Lower Palaeolithic ameliorates slightly any speech regarding the second half, that is Jeffrey Dahmer in the 20th century. You may say I do not believe that Jeffrey Dahmer and Homo antecessor are equivalent and the same thing? Think about it, like calling a present sinner an animal such as a raccoon, doesn’t Jeffrey Dahmer kind of have to equate to such Homo antecessor? Isn’t that the only place and time that we can possibly understand or forgive Jeffrey Dahmer? Jeffrey Dahmer only gets into so much trouble in the 20th/21st centuries, because for example the Romans were so much older than Jeffrey Dahmer yet even they were not cannibalistic. Therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer was an extreme anachronism. He existed in the wrong space and time. Therefore, if Jeffrey Dahmer did not try to be advanced, special or superior to primates or primitive hominins and instead became, thought like, acted or accepted that he was primitive, prehistoric or even ape, would his sins be lighter? If Jeffrey Dahmer spiritually went back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to a more primitive period could he attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? As you will see, this is how spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement work. Honestly, this blog is not too bad, it is completely innocuous, humorous and lighthearted, and there is also no racism in it. So chill out! Calm down. And just read it. And remember the old saying don’t judge a book by its cover. Budush! If Jeffrey Dahmer and Homo antecessor are equivalent and the same thing, then there is no problem and everything is ok.

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo habilis) Jeffrey Dahmer, with posture and rock.

Secular forgiveness.

While they were eating, Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he broke it and gave it to his disciples, saying, “Take and eat; this is my body.”

Then he took a cup, and when he had given thanks, he gave it to them, saying, “Drink from it, all of you. This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins.

(Matthew 26:26-28).

The next day John saw Jesus coming toward him and said, “Look, the Lamb of God, who takes away the sin of the world!

John 1:29

Otherwise Christ would have had to suffer many times since the creation of the world. But he has appeared once for all at the culmination of the ages to do away with sin by the sacrifice of himself.

Hebrews 9:26

He is the atoning sacrifice for our sins, and not only for ours but also for the sins of the whole world.

1 John 2:2

How did Jesus Christ save us from our sins? I know we all take for granted the whole message or meaning of Christianity, which is that Jesus Christ is Our Saviour, He saved us from all of our sins and that He saved the world etc. But how!? How is this possible? Is it just something we will or can understand in the afterlife? Why? How exactly through Jesus Christ’s wounds are we healed? I believe that gratitude for the forgiveness of all sins is what makes Jesus Christ, Jesus Christ. For example, I think the genuine forgiveness of murder attains the utmost and immeasurable gratitude of that relative criminal, because murder is life for life. To an unforgiven murderer his or her life is more or less over, in that, he or she might as well be dead, therefore, if you can genuinely forgive a murderer, that is, to get God (or the voices he or she hears in his or her head) to genuinely forgive him or her, therefore, this relative criminal would be eternally and immeasurably grateful to that person or persons who accomplished such an absolution. The rewards are very great. However, how has Jesus Christ saved us? How has Jesus Christ saved the world? I know we all take the message or story for granted, however, I do not see much forgiveness in the world, in that I do not see any forgiveness for such as the Holocaust or serial killers etc. For example, Peter Sutcliffe the Yorkshire Ripper died on 13th of November 2020 of COVID-19, and I have personally seen statements on my own Facebook timeline such as “He should have been hung the day he was convicted to save the taxpayers money!” This is the malicious and evil kind of castigation and vigilantism that pervades the U.K. and the West in general. They do not forgive. Peter Sutcliffe has spent 40 years in prison (which is a life time) and he has also died in prison. Yet people are still unforgiving and malicious even though he has died. It is easy for evil judgemental and condemning people and vigilantes to use hatred and say such malicious things as “hang him and save the taxpayers money”, while it is difficult for Christians to talk about Peter Sutcliffe with forgiveness. This is because there is so much fear emanating from malicious people and vigilantism in society. This is a real problem because the former are so much louder the latter. Anyway, regarding forgiveness, all that I see is that indigenous Europeans are slowly being conquered and marginalised as a punishment or consequence of the Holocaust. Therefore, how has Jesus Christ forgiven or saved us Europeans down here in life or on Earth? How is it possible? This is a genuine question that I want to ask, in that I simply do not see how Jesus Christ accomplished that. I also believe that if we just sit around waiting for Jesus Christ to come save us it will never happen, therefore, that is why I have written this 84k word blog on relativity and forgiveness. That is order to catalyse or actuate Jesus Christ’s forgiveness for the Holocaust down here in life or on Earth as well. Therefore, although I definitely use Jesus Christ’s teachings on His forgiveness, I will tell you now that this blog is almost completely secular and it is 99% because and entirely due to Albert Einstein. I could not simply sit here and use or quote Jesus Christ’s teachings on forgiveness without this 84k blog on relativity and expect it to save the world. To reiterate, the forgiveness of this blog would simply not work without Albert Einstein’s theory. For simplicity’s sake I will call it Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness. Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and dying for the forgiveness of our sins is the most important message of Christianity. However, does it work? How does forgiveness work? Why should we forgive? Who should we forgive? Did Jesus Christ forgive absolutely everyone, including Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile or just prostitutes and tax collectors? I believe he saved everyone. However, are we supposed to wait until the afterlife before we can see this? Can Jesus Christ forgive real sinners such as genocidal megalomaniacs, cannibals and child abusers? If so how? I believe spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement can demonstrate how. How does forgiveness work in the afterlife? I take for granted that there is no hell and that all sins real or imaginable are forgiven in the afterlife. Therefore, why can’t we do the same in life? Why do we have to wait until the afterlife to see proof of how Jesus Christ has saved Adolf Hitler? If we could see how Adolf Hitler is forgiven in the afterlife, then perhaps we can forgive him down here as well? For example, concerning the genuine forgiveness of present criminals, most authorities and normal law abiding citizens simply leave that issue to or for the afterlife. I am simply telling you that with spiritual time travel (STT) we can bring the afterlife here, and we can therefore, technically forgive all sins real or imaginable in life or down here on Earth with time and relativity. Do we understand exactly how through Jesus Christ’s wounds our sins are healed? What about the Holocaust? I don’t see much forgiveness going on there. In fact, I do not see much forgiveness anywhere for present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. The church should know a lot about forgiveness, however, theirs is ecclesiastical forgiveness. Does it work? How does it work? Why should we forgive? Jesus Christ told us to forgive because your Father will also forgive you your sins, however, with purely ecclesiastical forgiveness, although we know how to forgive minor sins, we do not technically know how to forgive serious or present sins. For example, should we forgive everyone? Or just prostitutes and tax collectors? Is there a limit? How does the church forgive genocidal megalomaniacs, serial killers and child abusers? Shouldn’t the church know about or understand spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement? Although the Catholic Church is vehemently for moral absolutism and against moral relativism, I believe spiritual time travel (STT) is different. And just because it is more or less completely secular does not mean they could not consider it? Perhaps it would be admissible or adjuvant? Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are not adiaphoristic beliefs. Therefore without trying to sound heretical (I don’t want to be burned at the stake) as will be seen Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness is technical, rational, logical, it makes sense and is totally comprehensible. It is also secular. With time and relativity, we understand how, why, who and when to forgive. Regarding being burned at the stake, the major idea of this blog is that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not fundamental. The law is not universal. The law is relative. The law is flexible. So as an example (and a joke), I do not think I have to worry about being burned at the stake in Britain in the 21st century? Although I probably would have been in medieval England! Also note the same concept applies to Jesus Christ, in that 2000 years ago in Israel and under Roman law, crucifixion was perfectly legal, in fact it was the law or punishment for, well in our Lord and Saviour’s case, absolutely nothing. Whereas today such a harsh punitive act is unthinkable. Therefore, if you ‘crucify’ me for writing this blog, then know you will only make me a martyr. Regarding who to forgive, Jesus Christ’s examples alone, are fine for minor sinners such as prostitutes and tax collectors, but He did not obviously, blatantly or explicitly teach us how to forgive serious or present sinners, and therefore, this may be why there is a lack of forgiveness in the world? Or didn’t He? As a result, everybody understands how to forgive a drug user or a friend or a brother an annoyance, but no one understands how to forgive serious or present criminals. Whereas Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness does! Albert Einstein’s theory shows us how, why, who, and when to forgive with time and relativity. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement are a powerful combination of both Albert Einstein’s and Jesus Christ’s forgiveness. I get to quote Jesus Christ’s powerful teachings on forgiveness, but without the relativity in this blog that would be futile. Also even though it genuinely forgives Adolf Hitler, why wouldn’t Jewish people like Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness if it can catalyse and actuate Jesus Christ’s purely ecclesiastical forgiveness? Albert Einstein was Jewish while Adolf Hitler was a Christian, therefore why would Jewish people be interested in a purely Christian or ecclesiastical forgiveness? Because Adolf Hitler was unchristian, to forgive him in a purely Christian way would not work. Therefore, Jewish people might be satisfied and more comfortable with a largely Jewish invented, largely non-Christian and secular forgiveness? In fact, why wouldn’t all people of the Earth including Hindus, Muslims and atheists be more comfortable with a largely non-Christian and secular forgiveness?

Medieval Jimmy Savile, Blackadder.

Muslims will say: Christianity does not work.

There is no limit

There is no limit on how many times you may ask forgiveness from God, even for the same repeated sin.

This should not, of course, encourage us to keep on sinning. However it should encourage us to keep on repenting, struggling with our sin clothed with the full armour of God (Ephesians 6:10-18), and bringing our sin to the Saviour.

David prayed, when he asked forgiveness, “Have mercy upon me O God, according to your loving kindness, according to the multitude of your tender mercies. Blot out my transgressions. Wash me thoroughly from my iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin” (Psalms 51:1-13).

In the greatness of God’s compassion, there is a “multitude of tender mercies” and no upper limit on the number of times you can approach him for forgiveness.

https://www.simplybible.com/f410-forgv-unlimited-forgiveness.htm

As you can see normal Christians do not really or literally want to say that Jesus Christ forgives all sins even extreme sins such as the Holocaust, cannibalism and necrophilia etc. You can see this when Ron Graham (the author of the above quote) talks about the unlimitedness of forgiveness in terms of the quantity of sins but not the severity. I know personally myself that I would rather have forgiveness for one severe sin than a multitude of little sins. It is as if when it really comes to believing that Jesus Christ forgave everyone and everything, including Adolf Hitler’s genocide or Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism and necrophilia etc, that real Christians chicken out and procrastinate and say not really or not literally. So concerning the unquestionable faith in Jesus Christ’s universal salvation and forgiveness we say “not really” or “not literally”?

Miocene Adolf Hitler, (chimpanzee) with cross.

In fact, I believe that the reason that Europe or Christendom is being slowly conquered and marginalised by third world immigration and Islam etc is not because of the Holocaust directly itself but because we Europeans are so unforgiving, therefore Christianity is not working. Christianity is not working because the message of salvation does not apply to or excludes Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. By this I mean that we Europeans are not allowing Jesus Christ to save or forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. This is because when it comes to the most serious sins such as Adolf Hitler’s Holocaust or Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism and necrophilia etc, we so called European Christians actually say “not really” or “not literally”. Jesus Christ has not literally saved everyone including Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. We are saying that Jesus Christ did not save us from absolutely everything, including the Holocaust. Therefore, concerning Jesus Christ we have to say “not really” or “not literally”. Concerning Jesus Christ’s salvation it is all or nothing. If it is not all, then there is a limit of forgiveness? Therefore, Christianity does not save? Therefore, Christianity is not working? If you say not literally, then forgiveness has a limit? If Islam ever dominates the world, if Muslims ever conquer Europe or the West, they will say: Christianity does not work.

  1. Because it had a Holocaust.
  2. Because it could not save itself from said Holocaust.

And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

Matthew 16:18.

You may say Jesus Christ saved us in or for the afterlife? Rubbish! Not a single creature ever required Jesus Christ’s crucifixion and resurrection to gain entry into heaven upon death. From the very first single-celled life form (or the last universal ancestor of all life on Earth) to John the Baptist, no one ever required Jesus Christ to gain entry into heaven upon death. Jesus Christ was and is supposed to save us down here on Earth or in life. To wait until death for salvation is nonsense, we are guaranteed that with or without Jesus Christ. John the Baptist, Jesus Christ and the Apostles founded Christianity down here on Earth, it is the gospel (good news) for Europeans. And look well Christianity did, look how big Christianity became. However, it has failed because of the Holocaust, or even worse because it cannot save itself from the Holocaust. What is the proof that Christianity is not working? Well, do YOU go to church? Nobody goes to church these days, in fact, since the Holocaust church attendance has drastically decreased.

In 2012 about 6% of the population of the United Kingdom regularly attended church, with the average age of attendees being 51; in contrast, in 1980, 11% had regularly attended, with an average age of 37. It is predicted that by 2020 attendance will be around 4%, with an average age of 56. This decline in church attendance has forced many churches to close down across the United Kingdom, with the Church of England alone closing 1,500 churches between 1969 and 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_United_Kingdom#Attendance

Simultaneously to closing down 1500 churches, the U.K. has opened 1500 mosques.

The UK, home to about 2.8 million Muslims (3 per cent of the population) has around 1,500 mosques…

https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/art-design/2018/06/changing-shape-britain-s-mosques

It doesn’t matter how nice you are if you are secular, you are not helping Christianity or Europe. In the Tudor period church attendance was compulsory under pain of a fine.

The Act of Uniformity 1558 was an Act of the Parliament of England passed in 1559. It set the order of prayer to be used in the English Book of Common Prayer. All persons had to go to church once a week or be fined 12 pence (equivalent to just over £11 in 2007), a considerable sum for the poor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Act_of_Uniformity_1558

If our churches throughout England were as ram packed to the rafters as our nightclubs are, it would signify or symbolise to Islam and the rest of the world that we European Christians are winning again. Therefore, the formula is: if churches are full, Christianity is winning. So what shall we do about it? First of all, we Europeans Christians have to admit (whether we like it or not) that we have a problem. We have to admit (whether we like it or not) that we are being conquered by Islam. We have to admit (whether we like it or not) that the goal of Islam is to conquer Europe. We have to admit (whether we like it or not) that multiculturalism is the conquest of Europe. If we do not admit these things, if we cannot even admit we have a problem, then how can we contemplate forgiveness? It is never racist to admit that you are being conquered. It is never racist to admit that you have a problem. Admit you have a problem first, then think about forgiveness. As Christians we should not be afraid to say that Christianity is not working or even that Christianity does not work. And we definitely do not want to get to a point where we say Christianity did not work. I am not racist directly, I am not helping racists or the far-right directly. However, I am trying to help them indirectly through forgiveness. I believe that most racists channel or focus their energy and feelings directly into anger, hate and racism and because of the Holocaust, I believe this is wrong. I believe we first to need to indirectly seek for forgiveness for the Holocaust before we directly seek anything European or white.

Miocene (Chimpanzee) Jeffrey Dahmer, perched.

To give Ron Graham credit he did also say the following:

God Does Not Grade Our Sins

John tells us that “if we confess our sins God is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness” (1John 1:9).  The word “all” is very important in that verse and also in verse 7.

Whether our sins are small or great; whether few or many; whether done once or oft-repeated; the blood of Christ can cleanse them all —every single one.

https://www.simplybible.com/f410-forgv-unlimited-forgiveness.htm

The example above shows that Christians boldly claim that Jesus Christ forgave all of our sins no matter how extreme they were, yet simultaneously normal Christians chicken out, procrastinate and never really go there and try to forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. When a sinner really meant it like Adolf Hitler, Christians turn tail and run away with their tail between their legs. When a sinner is extreme, like Jeffrey Dahmer, Christians back off. Anyway, regardless as you will see Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness is genuinely, really and literally unlimited not only in quantity of sins but in severity also. I will say to you that Christianity does not work, however, this essay or Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness DOES work! Again, I will reiterate that normal Christians are too scared to forgive and that is the only reason they do not do so. As you will see I believe (unlike Jesus Christ), that normal Christians are too scared to forgive for fear of being metaphorically crucified by society and the media. Especially famous people are too scared to talk about forgiving such as Peter Sutcliffe and Jimmy Savile because of the fear of being crucified. Therefore, I would like to advise you to be brave like Jesus Christ and to not be afraid to forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile etc.

If the world hates you, keep in mind that it hated me first.

John 15:18

No one said it was going to easy, I mean pop stars such as The Beatles and people in high positions such as the Pope are probably for all intents and purposes sin free or without sin and wonder why do not they attain enlightenment like Buddha or Christ? Many good people probably do wonder why they are not enlightened like Christ? This is probably because it is not just a case of being sin free, but it also about forgiveness. Anyone can be sin free in the right institution, for example, I know I that was angelic until I got expelled from a very prestigious private school for smoking marijuana at 16. Therefore, to attain enlightenment like the Buddha or Christ is probably unbelievably difficult, like passing a camel through the eye of a needle, in that it is like openly and publicly saying that you forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile on TV.

Again I tell you, it is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for someone who is rich to enter the kingdom of God.”

No one would ever dare stick their neck out and say such a thing as I believe it is time to forgive Adolf Hitler on TV, except perhaps a lowlife schizophrenic with nothing to lose such as me? If as a famous pop star or pontiff, you did come out and forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile on TV, you would then be metaphorically crucified, and have to watch your album sales plummet and lose your lofty position etc. What I am saying is that in order to forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile that we all need to shoulder and carry the cross.

The victims and survivors.

As a word of warning be wary of people who say things like this:

“Forgiveness has nothing to do with absolving a criminal of his crime. It has everything to do with relieving oneself of the burden of being a victim–letting go of the pain and transforming oneself from victim to survivor.” ― C.R. Strahan

https://www.tut.com/article/details/425-buddhist-prayer-of-forgiveness/?articleId=425

Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are just literature and use common sense anthropology with the terms time, equivalent, relative and relatively in order to absolve present criminals of their present crimes? When C.R. Strahan says ‘It has everything to do with relieving oneself of the burden of being a victim–letting go of the pain and transforming oneself from victim to survivor’ he is relatively only talking about or dealing with such as a cheating spouse. Although you may feel hurt if your spouse cheats on you and has a baby behind your back, think of the Holocaust victims and survivors. They are the only ‘victims’ and ‘survivors’ we care about. Although having an affair can be grounds for divorce and does get legal regarding finances, custody and property etc, it is not a crime. Therefore, beyond schadenfreude gossip no one cares about your cheating spouse. Suck it up! I have read 121 books since August 2016, I have put years into researching how to make it up for the Holocaust to the Jews and how to genuinely forgive (never justify) Adolf Hitler, therefore, believe me when I say I know how to forgive. Contrary to what C.R. Strahan says, it has everything to do with absolving a criminal of his crime, because there is only hope for us all in forgiving present criminals, such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. Even prisoners serving life sentences want hope. Also crime or sin is relative, in that, if you spend all your life only dealing with minor sin of course, minor sin or little things will seem bad and unforgivable to you. However, if you deal with present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile then relatively all those minor infractions such as a cheating spouse disintegrate and seem like nothing. You have to deal with real crime in order to be liberated. For example, if you have hit your father, or slapped your wife, or if you are serving time for a minor crime such as ABH or burglary, as will be seen, if we can genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively, who cares? I am not insulting anyone’s intelligence it’s just that nobody has ever dared to go there with such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, whereas I have!

Medieval Jimmy Savile, with hood.

It is in the past.

The following is a summarised short story about the Buddha and forgiveness.

The Buddha was sitting under a tree talking to his disciples when a man came and spat in his face. He wiped it off, and he asked the man, “What next? What do you want to say next?” The man was a little puzzled because he himself never expected that when you spit in someone’s face he should ask “What next?” He had no such experience in his past…

…The man looked at Buddha and said, “Forgive me for what I did yesterday.”

Buddha said, “Forgive? But I am not the same man to whom you did it. The Ganges goes on flowing, it is never the same Ganges again. Every man is a river. The man you spit upon is no longer here. I look just like him, but I am not the same, much has happened in these twenty-four hours! The river has flowed so much. So I cannot forgive you because I have no grudge against you.

“And you also are new. I can see you are not the same man who came yesterday because that man was angry and he spit, whereas you are bowing at my feet, touching my feet. How can you be the same man? You are not the same man, so let us forget about it. Those two people, the man who spit and the man on whom he spit, both are no more. Come closer. Let us talk of something else.”

https://theunboundedspirit.com/forgiveness/

I think the Buddha’s analogy in this story of how the river Ganges flows, is never the same Ganges and that every man is a river etc, indicates the main idea of this blog, which is that the secret of forgiveness lies in the past. The words forgiveness and forgive ask the question, can you forgive someone please? Forgiveness and forgive are in or anticipate the future tense, and because they ask the question, therefore, they never happen or are never fulfilled. Whereas the word forgiven is the key because it is in past tense, in that it has already happened, that is that he or she is already forgiven. The statement ‘it is in the past’ has a double meaning. This is because as you will read this blog and as you can see from the art on this blog, the secret of forgiveness for all sins for present criminals lies in the past, spiritual time travel (STT) or crime travel to the distant past such as Lower Palaeolithic, medieval or Victorian periods. Also we have all heard the saying that ‘it is in the past’, as in the clouds have blown over and that our sins are in the past.

His Holiness.

Why did Jesus Christ only associate with or forgive minor sinners such as prostitutes and tax collectors?

When the teachers of the law who were Pharisees saw him eating with the sinners and tax collectors, they asked his disciples: “Why does he eat with tax collectors and sinners?” On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

(Mark 2:16-17).

Although we get what Jesus Christ meant by associating with sinners and tax collectors, he still left us with a limit, because He did not openly forgive murderers, rapists and child abusers etc. Therefore, although we can forgive relatively minor sinners such as prostitutes and tax collectors we do not understand how to forgive serious or present sinners such murderers, cannibals, child abusers and rapists etc. However, Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness or spiritual time travel (STT) has no limits. When one thinks of forgiveness one usually thinks of religion, the church or Christianity. The following excerpts are from The Ecclesiastical History Of The English People, an 8th century work of literature by The Venerable Bede. I think these excerpts demonstrate how the church is holy and how the Pope, priests, vicars and nuns etc strive to be as holy as possible, and that this is a tremendous thing! However, this 8th century ecclesiastical literature is concerned with such things as sins of the flesh, uncleanliness, base imaginings and wet dreams etc, therefore, unfortunately I believe there is too much disparity in the world between such as His Holiness the Pope Francis and unfortunate present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. I believe ecclesiastical forgiveness leaves us with a gap, in that it cannot and does not deal with real sins of the flesh (that we give a damn about), such as Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism and necrophilia etc.

And so fleshly copulation is lawful when it is for the sake of producing offspring and not of desire; and the fleshly intercourse must be for the sake of producing children and not the satisfaction of vicious instincts. So if anyone approaches his wife, not carried away by lustful desire but only for the sake of getting children, such a man is by all means to be left to his own judgement both in the matter of entering the church and of receiving the mystery of the Lord’s Body and Blood; for one who is placed in the fire and yet cannot burn ought not to be hindered by us from receiving. But when it is not the love of getting children but desire which dominates in the act of coition, the couple have cause to lament.

Spiritual people will accept this law but will interpret it differently as we have already explained; for that man is deceived as it were by a dream who, after being tempted with impurity, is defiled in his waking thoughts by real images; and he must be washed with water in the sense that he should wash away the sins of thought with his tears: and unless the fire of temptation has first departed, let him reckon himself guilty until evening, so to speak.

(The Ecclesiastical History Of The English People, The Venerable Bede, page 50-51).

There are some whose mind, when it experiences such an illusion even when the body is asleep, is not contaminated by base imaginations.

(The Ecclesiastical History Of The English People, The Venerable Bede, page 52).

Middle Palaeolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, with spear and bow and arrows.

I believe the reason that the church is or was so concerned with such light sins, is because of holiness. They need to be holy. The virgin Mary had to be holy, similarly the church has to be holy. However, I believe there is too much disparity in the world, between such as His Holiness the Pope and present criminals such as Jeffrey Dahmer. I believe that sins such as sex for pleasure or wet dreams are not really sins anymore. However, they were evidently cause for concern in the early medieval period. Notice the subtlety of time or temporality in the above sentence. That is why I emboldened and underlined the word ‘anymore‘. This is because Albert Einstein’s theory may determine the idea that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period, the law changes over space and time, is not absolute, is not fundamental, is not universal, is relative and flexible etc. These light sins used to be what the church was concerned about. As will be seen, I believe sin is relative, in that if you only deal with minor sin such as sex for pleasure or wet dreams, then of course little things may seem big and unforgivable to you, whereas if we can genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively, who cares about such minor sins? Therefore, I think you might be at least glad that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement are there in the background, just in case such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile ever needed them? Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) give us peace of mind. Where purely ecclesiastical forgiveness fails or falls short secular forgiveness is there, because it has no limits and can deal with all sins real or imaginable.

Analogy.

I am not dealing with minor or petty sin such as a man of the cloth feeling guilty for taking the largest slice of pie. Nor am I concerned about such as ex-British Prime Minister Theresa May who in an interview with Julie Etchingham on ITV’s Tonight programme on 5 June 2017, said the naughtiest thing she had ever done was to ‘run through fields of wheat’ as a child. Jokes aside, there is a difference between sin and crime. I make no bones about it that I am dealing with real crimes such as genocide, homicide, child molestation and rape etc. Taking the man of the cloth example above, for argument’s sake let’s call all non-serious sins as pie. So non-serious, every day and non-criminal sins are pie and real, serious or present crimes such as genocide, homicide, child molestation and rape etc are not pie. Relative to Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile the vast majority of people have just taken the largest slice of pie. You do not have to worry if you think you are pie. You know if you think you deserve prison, and the vast majority of people do not. So chill out! Stop worrying about your and other people’s slices of pie. We are dealing with Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile no one cares if you have had an affair, had an illegitimate child behind your wife’s back, made a fraudulent insurance claim or snorted cocaine in front of your 6-year-old daughter. Relatively that’s all pie! PHEW! Therefore, I am not concerned with any sin unless it is a real crime such as genocide, homicide, child molestation and rape etc. The idea is that it does not get any worse than the above, and if you can fix such as the above then relatively nothing is really a problem and therefore, we all feel better. It is relative, if you spend all your life only dealing with minor sin or largest slices of pie then of course minor sin or little things will seem bad and unforgivable to you. However, if you deal with real criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile then relatively all those minor infractions or slices of pie disintegrate and seem like nothing. If you cannot forgive everybody then what is the point? For example, if you have hit your father, or slapped your wife, or if you are serving time for minor crimes such as ABH or burglary etc, as will be seen, if we can genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, then relatively, who cares?

Prehistoric medicine man Jeffrey Dahmer, with bear skull.

Modern and ancient cannibalism.

There are two types of sins, petty things and serious things. We all know how to forgive little or petty things such as a friendly dispute or brother who didn’t repay a debt etc, we know how to do it. We simply let go on the inside or in our hearts and minds. We resist, cool or calm our feelings of anger towards that particular person or persons and let go. So we know technically how to do it. However, how do we forgive serious or present crimes, such as those committed by Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile? We technically have no idea. We do not even know where to begin. We do not even know how to get the ball rolling with forgiving such as Adolf Hitler’s genocide or Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism or necrophilia etc? Notice how in reference to such as Jeffrey Dahmer’s sins I always say ‘modern’ cannibalism. This is because adding time lightens the sin. Even if just by a sliver, this could be enough? Also, the recentness of Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism is the only difference between his cannibalism and Homo antecessor’s ancient or prehistoric cannibalism, yet Homo antecessor’s cannibalism was relatively fine. You would never judge Homo antecessor? To reiterate, there is nothing wrong with ancient cannibalism! Why? Because of time and relativity. Therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer was anachronistic, in that he committed his sins in the wrong space and time. Also, please note, as you will see, I also refer to slavery (as in the transatlantic slave trade) as recent slavery, again adding time or the temporal element lightens the sins. This is because ancient slavery was relatively less of an issue in ancient and medieval times for such as the ancient Egyptians as compared to early modern British slavers such as Edward Colston because the ancient Egyptians were earlier and more ancient, therefore, they were more primitive, and therefore more innocent. The only difference between the ancient Egyptians and early modern British slavers such as Edward Colston is time, in that the latter was much more recent. Anyway, I think the reason we can forgive minor things and not relatively serious things may be because of other people. By this I mean that nobody cares if your brother didn’t repay a debt to you, or, beyond schadenfreude gossip, nobody cares if your spouse has had a baby with someone else behind your back etc. However, concerning serious things, for example, those sins committed by Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, other people do actually care, therefore, there is a fear factor of society and vigilantism. Just saying I forgive them or feeling that you forgive them in your heart has no effect whatsoever. What I am saying is that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement are that beginning. They tell us how to even in the remotest possibility how we can get the ball rolling with forgiving such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile etc. To reiterate, with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) we understand how, why and when to forgive.

Medieval Jimmy Savile, with hood.

Forgive fascism (time has no animosity).

Forgiveness is a different approach to both neo-Nazis and Antifa. The former get on Adolf Hitler’s side and try to justify him, while the latter judge all white people for Nazism and the Holocaust. The problem with the world today is the polarity of the political spectrum in that most indigenous Europeans choose either one of two extreme directions, that is far-left or far-right, anti-racist or racist. Neo-Nazis believe that Adolf Hitler and Nazism need no forgiveness, while Antifa believe that Adolf Hitler and Nazism will never have forgiveness.

If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ lend to ‘sinners,’ expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful.

(Luke 6:32-36).

I ❤️ Antifa!

Miocene (silverback) Adolf Hitler, DISPLAYING!!

Anyway both Nazis and Antifa are wrong, I do neither and forgiveness is the middle way. The first thing to know is that forgiveness is never sympathy or justification. Forgiveness is never sympathy. Forgiveness is never racism. There is a difference between proving someone right and forgiving them. If someone is right they do not need forgiveness. Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were unchristian, however, I believe there is only hope for us all if there is hope for Hitler, especially white people. Therefore, the only hope for indigenous Europeans is the forgiveness (never justification) of Adolf Hitler, and this is the problem, in that how do you genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler without justifying him? Adolf Hitler is like a black hole, in that the vast majority of indigenous Europeans try to avoid or distance themselves from him as much as possible, with a few oddballs getting sucked in. No one, not a single indigenous European or indeed any person has ever dared go there and try to forgive him. Therefore, the primary target of this blog is the forgiveness (never justification) of Adolf Hitler, as well as such criminals as Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. There is pure hatred and animosity in the world in the 21st century. This is because of the Holocaust and also probably because of the internet and social media such as Twitter. The 1980s and 1990s had no animosity. Therefore, to reiterate, this blog attempts to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler (without justification) with time and relativism, and by never using animosity towards him. I think this disparity is related to the question of how to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler without justifying him, in that nobody ever bothers trying and most people just distance themselves from him, while at the other extreme far-right people get on his side and try to justify him. Even to their own destruction, the vast majority of indigenous Europeans put a lot of distance between themselves and Adolf Hitler, as much as they can, which creates the opposite extreme such as Antifa. Therefore, they become anti-racist. I am simply saying that with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement, we can put time between ourselves and such as Adolf Hitler, not distance. On the other hand, because they do not know how to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler, a small minority of indigenous Europeans get on Adolf Hitler’s side and try to justify him or make his conspiracies theories right. To reiterate, this is because they do not know how to forgive him. Therefore, they become racist. There is no middle ground. As will be seen this blog answers that question, in that it demonstrates how we can forgive (never justify) Adolf Hitler in a largely non-Christian and secular way with time, equivalence and relativity. In order to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler, we have to be able to forgive all crimes or sins real or imaginable, and to that end, this blog also deals with the forgiveness of such as Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. The problem for far-right people is that they do not know even where to start. They have no idea how on Earth how to genuinely forgive fascism and Adolf Hitler without justifying them. Nazism and the Holocaust are so unbelievably big that they do not know what to do about it. For example, just saying “I forgive Adolf Hitler” does not work. It is a waste of breath. And obviously because he was unchristian and because of the religious nature of Adolf Hitler’s crimes, forgiving him in a purely Christian or ecclesiastical way would not work either. Therefore, far-right people just give up and get on his side. However, as will be seen spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement go way beyond breath, or just saying “I forgive Adolf Hitler”, in that they allow us to genuinely and technically forgive anyone for any crime real or imaginable with time, equivalence, relativity and anthropology. To reiterate, with Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness we understand rationally and technically why, how and when to forgive such as Adolf Hitler with time and relativity.

Pliocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, Madonna and child.

Albert Einstein’s theory.

This website is the main endeavour of four. The other works are art of forgiveness, time or T² and I also DJ or mix trance and techno music, my DJ name is DJ Innocence (see menu). However, spiritual time travel (STT) is definitely the main objective of all four. Time or T² is adscititious or accessory to spiritual time travel (STT). To reiterate, T² or time is just a non-serious experimental study of time and relativity. Time or T² is just a different form of time and relativity, by this I mean it is mathematical time and relativity. Therefore, its purpose is just to contrast and support spiritual time travel (STT) which I have labelled spiritual time. However, please note I am never trying to prove anything with T² or time, other than the fact that it proves that I work with and understand a little time and relativity. T² is just an interest. T² is simply fun! There is obviously nothing in time or T² that is not credited to Albert Einstein. However, there is also nothing in spiritual time travel (STT) which is not credited to Albert Einstein. This is because time travel is a phenomenon related to relativity and time is a fundamental property of relativity. Basically the time, relativity and equivalence of spiritual time travel (STT) would not work without Albert Einstein’s theory, as in time and the terms, equivalent, relative and relatively would be meaningless without it. For example, because Albert Einstein determined that a minute is not always a minute and a mile is not always mile and that spacetime is not absolute and is curved etc, as will be seen a consequence of Einstein’s theory could determine that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period, the law is not absolute, the law changes over space and time, the law is not universal, the law is not fundamental, the law is relative and flexible etc. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement belong to Albert Einstein. You may listen to Albert Einstein but you will never listen to me. Therefore, it is hoped that spiritual time travel (STT) is an effect or a consequence of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity. Another purpose of spiritual time travel (STT) is to get Albert Einstein on our side. By that I mean our European side. Because of the Holocaust and because Albert Einstein was Jewish, he could easily abandon Europe and side with non-Europeans. Albert Einstein is an immeasurable asset.

Middle Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, hunting bison.

Albert Einstein requires no faith!

The Buddha and Jesus Christ were ancient and primitive men, but what does that tell us? It tells us that you do not need to be modern and advanced to be eternally cool, hip, relative or relevant like perpetual teenagers or twenty-somethings that never date or go out of fashion. You can be primitive. No matter how high and advanced we get ultimately we all seem to be out done by two ancient and primitive men. How? Is it relative? Perhaps the reason the Buddha and Jesus never date, go out of fashion and are eternally cool, hip, the forefront and cutting edge is because they never sinned, therefore, they never needed to go back in time? I have removed most references to the divine in this blog as I want it to be acceptable to academics and everyone. However, although this blog and its concept is almost 100% secular, it presumes or takes for granted the existence of an afterlife as well as a God, henceforth referred to as YHWH. Also although I have become very secular and scientific I have not lost absolutely all faith in the spiritual. I would like to state that I believe in the Buddha and Jesus Christ, however, they require belief or faith as they are spiritual and therefore, abstruse, recondite, esoteric or even acataleptic. However, I understand Albert Einstein. To me the only difference between the Christ or the Buddha and Albert Einstein is that the latter requires no faith!

Jesus said to her, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?”

(John 11:25-26).

Ethics.

As you can see, the Buddha and Jesus Christ want you to believe in them. Whereas Albert Einstein does not want you to believe in him, he wants you to understand him! Why do we necessarily need the divine? For love? For compassion? For forgiveness? For morality? For ethics? No! Although I use a lot of Jesus Christ’s teachings in this thesis, the main ecclesiastical teaching I use regarding forgiveness is the love for one’s enemies. However, as will be seen compassion may be omnipotent, in that you may only attain compassion toward life and animals once you are invincible masters of the animal kingdom, that is only once you have attained advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc. It is like saying to wolf “I have a nuke now, therefore I am compassionate toward you!” This is something wolf will never understand, in that it it is ironic that once you have attained nuclear weapons you are by definition compassionate toward animals. As will be seen later this ironic purpose of lethal weapons may determine that animals (such as humans) only become compassionate once they become invincible and omnipotent in the natural world and over the animal kingdom. Also, we can say things like it was relatively ethical for Homo antecessor to cannibalise in Europe in the Lower Palaeolithic compared to Jeffrey Dahmer in America in the 20th century because Homo antecessor was so primitive and innocent in that they had no advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc and because they came from such a long time ago. Therefore, isn’t relativity and time enough? Because relativity and time can determine if you are innocent and deserve forgiveness isn’t relativity and time therefore morality and ethics? Therefore, why do we even need the divine?

Time is not spiritual or divine.

Prehistoric shaman Adolf Hitler, with feather headdress.

I am working on or developing four things spiritual time travel (STT), art of forgiveness, time or T² and DJ Innocence. All four works are related to time, however, the first is spiritual time, the second is art that portrays crime travel, the third is mathematical time and the fourth is my DJ name. As mentioned one goal is an experimental comparison of two different forms of time and relativity, spiritual time travel (STT) and time or T². What I mean by spiritual time is that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are just literature and simply use common sense evolution and anthropology with the terms time, equivalent, relative and relatively in order to absolve present criminals of their crimes? As T² obviously does not prove anything scientifically that is not already known, therefore, it is just a non-serious experimental study of time and relativity. I have learned that other than ‘being ahead’ there is not much in mathematical time whereas there is ethics, morality, innocence and forgiveness in spiritual time. When I first started studying T² I stated rational things like:

“Time is not spiritual or divine.”

“Do not seek spiritual enlightenment, seek time intellectually.”

”Never listen to electronic beats, all you need is a ticking clock.”

I kind of believe all except the last statement. I definitely do not now believe the last, as DJing and music are beautiful and hip in a way that science and academia can never be, which are dry and ugly in comparison. Concerning the other statements, what is spiritual enlightenment or energy anyway? Spiritual enlightenment and spiritual energy are abstruse, recondite, esoteric or acataleptic (not understandable), whereas Albert Einstein’s light and energy are real, technical, rational, comprehensible and scientific, hence the C² and E in E = MC². There is no other form of light or energy? Therefore, do not seek spiritual enlightenment, seek time intellectually. Also, Albert Einstein’s secular forgiveness is real, technical, rational, comprehensible and scientific.

Clearly?

There is no ethics or morality in science or physics such as scientific or mathematical time, however, there is ethics and morality in spiritual time. Physics has no morality, it is amoral, non-moral or neutral etc, therefore, we have no hope for forgiveness, particularly to do with the Holocaust with science or physics. However, spiritual time is morality and it can deal with the genuine forgiveness of the Holocaust. Not that I honestly care too much about what it is down here on Earth or in life, however, is it not time that indigenous Europeans admitted a few home truths? That is, individually as a physicist or surgeon, you might be doing personally well, but as a people, as Europeans or a countries are Europeans not faltering? For example, isn’t it time to admit that it is plainly obvious that European people are being slowly conquered or marginalised? Therefore, I mean, what is it that is making the third world right in the 21st century? And therefore, what is it that is making clumsy, stupid and pedantic Europeans wrong today? As will be seen, by such as how Africans do not really look after their own disabled or crippled citizens, because they are still primitive and therefore, cannot be as compassionate as Europeans are towards their own disabled and crippled citizens, the third world is still so innocently primitive. Therefore, because of the Holocaust, Europeans are advanced and guilty. Firstly, Europeans have to admit that they are wrong. And this is because of the Holocaust. However, is there nothing we can do about it? I understand that it is not 100% politically correct, but I mean are we even allowed to try? As you will see, that is what this blog tries to ask and answer? Could Europeans be forgiven for the Holocaust? For example, it could be holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) that the third world still has? And it could be holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) that Europeans have lost? I believe Europeans lost their holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) by or during two world wars. All that I am saying is that wouldn’t it be better for all concerned if there was genuine forgiveness for the Holocaust? All that I am saying is that wouldn’t it be better for all concerned if there was genuine forgiveness for modern cannibalism? All that I am saying is that wouldn’t it be better for all concerned if we removed the pure hatred in the world? Therefore, wouldn’t it be better for all concerned if there was such a thing as spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement for the Holocaust? All that I am saying is that such as Islam or the Qu’ran are morality and that you cannot overcome them, that is science cannot do anything to stop them. However, spiritual time travel (STT) may be able to forgive the Holocaust? I mean for example, Albert Einstein’s discovery of E = MC² and his theory of relativity CLEARLY had absolutely no effect, impact or influence philosophically or morally whatsoever on Germany, Europeans or the west in general, because obviously as soon as he discovered it, two of the world’s largest wars in history occurred. In fact, was it not because of the discovery of relativity that the two world wars happened? Are the two world wars connected to relativity? Perhaps, like this essay it would have been adjuvant if Albert Einstein had produced some kind of moral or philosophical relativity to influence governments, the church and world generally. That is, if he could have found the time? This proves that although physics gives us energy, it is amoral or non-moral, and therefore it cannot save us from sins.

Miocene (Dryopithecus) Adolf Hitler, quadrupedal.

Definition.

  1. a recurrent theory or belief, as in philosophy or art, that the qualities of primitive or chronologically early cultures are superior to those of contemporary civilization.

noun (Primitivism)

The Sistine Chapel of Prehistory.

I bet you are a sceptic and do not believe that the qualities of primitive or chronologically early cultures are superior to those of contemporary civilisation? However, as will be seen the further you go back in time the more holy, primitive and innocent life was and this could constitute in a way as a superior quality. The only advantage the present or future has is its advanced technology, but as will be seen this never means superior because it means you are less holy and innocent. As will be seen it is definitely not a case of being advanced is always better and that is the end of it! Art is definitely a good example of holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) in that for arguments sake, in general the further you go back in time the more timeless, primitive, priceless and classical art becomes. For example, contemporary art is less timeless and valuable than modern art such as the post-impressionism and cubism of the late 19th and early 20th centuries. And skipping things on a bit, modern art is less timeless and valuable than such as baroque art by such as Caravaggio of the early 17th century. And Caravaggio’s art is less timeless, classical and priceless than renaissance art of the 16th and 15th centuries by such as Leonardo Da Vinci and Sandro Botticelli etc. And the renaissance art of Da Vinci and Botticelli etc is less holy, timeless, classical and priceless than the cruder more primitive medieval religious art such as Byzantine art etc. And pushing things to their extreme, medieval art is less holy, sacred, timeless and priceless than primitive prehistoric art such as the Upper Palaeolithic cave paintings, such as the Chauvet and Lascaux cave paintings in France etc, which along with Venus figurines etc are the most holy, sacred, timeless and priceless works of art that we have on Earth. In fact, the only kind of thing in the world that would equal the value of the Lascaux or Chauvet cave paintings today would be such as The Sistine Chapel. But look at how ginormous and advanced The Sistine Chapel is. In fact the Catholic priest and archaeologist Abbé Henri Breuil, described Lascaux as ‘The Sistine Chapel of Prehistory’. Considering the relative primitivism of prehistoric cave paintings such as the Lascaux and Chauvet, compared to The Sistine Chapel, it was clearly a lot easier to attain great things the earlier you come in time. If a cave was discovered in your local area with lots of prehistoric cave paintings, it might as well be filled with gold bullion. In fact, even that would probably not match the value of prehistoric cave paintings? Relative difference of time means for example, today the art of an artist today in the 21st century is significantly less valuable than than art of the renaissance by such as Leonardo Da Vinci or Sandro Botticelli and this is because of time, in that new or young art is not as valuable as old or medieval art. Excepting state of the art or advanced technology such as iPhones or iPads, the older something becomes generally speaking the more valuable it becomes. Because of the overbearing attraction or temptation of such things as iPhones and iPads it is difficult too see this value of the old and ancient, except obviously in antiques. Returning to the 21st century artist, the only reason that his or her art is not valuable in the present, is because of relativity and because of time. However, if we were to wait 1000 years, then from that frame of reference, the 21st century artist would seem relatively closer to the renaissance period, Leonardo Da Vinci and Sandro Botticelli, than whatever cretins are doing art in the 31st century. And the gap between the renaissance and 21st century artist will become relatively smaller, in that, to those in 10,000 years time, the difference or gap between the renaissance and the 21st century artist would seem almost negligible. Therefore, then and only then might the art of the 21st century artist become relatively valuable? This determines that we should look forward to the past instead of the future and that we should look forward to ageing like fine wine and to becoming relatively old, ancient, classical and holy etc. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) work the same, in that in the afterlife, the older you are the holier and prouder you are. Who are more refined classical or modern people? Although at the time classical people were probably much less refined than we are today, however, several thousand years later, classical antiquity has aged like fine wine and become unbelievably refined and holy, for example, consider how refined great people like Moses, Socrates, Plato and Aristotle have become over time. Therefore, think of how refined, classical and holy Albert Einstein will become over time? Who is superior Mesolithic man of 5 to 15k years ago or the Jackass generation of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s? The present and future are valueless, while the past and prehistory are priceless. As will be seen you do not need to go back far in time to find early primitive innocence (EPI), in fact, the more recent examples demonstrate it better! For example, the Victorians have become relatively classical almost like the Romans. Therefore, who would you rather be a Victorian with an empire or a modern Elizabethan with an iPhone? This is the temptation of technology. Also, the Nazis labelled primitive people as inferior, but this is absolutely not the case, as will be seen there is nothing wrong with being primitive as it means you are more holy and innocent. The Buddha and Jesus Christ are primitive and ancient men, yet they are eternally relative or relevant like perpetual teenagers or twenty-somethings that will never date or go out of fashion, even more so than anyone alive today. Contemporary civilisations are much less primitive and innocent, which could be inferior? As a Briton would you rather have been born in 1920 with the largest empire in history or 2020 with an iPad? This is the central question of this blog.

No optimums.

I outright do not believe in optimum time periods in which to come or to be born. By this I mean I believe it is a law that the older you are the holier, more innocent and better you are, end of, period. For example, we could say that it was optimum for Jesus Christ to be born in 0 AD, because obviously he had the opportunity to become The First Coming or the Messiah, however, in this case I would say people who were born in BC times are prouder and that it is simply better to be older than Jesus Christ than younger. For example, would you rather have come an Upper Palaeolithic man or Jesus Christ? Also, we could say that it was a precisely optimum time period for Albert Einstein to be born in 1879, because due to the precise level of scientific knowledge at that time, or the lack of scientific knowledge at that time, such as the luminiferous aether, that therefore, Albert Einstein only had the opportunity to discover E = MC2 and relativity at this precise moment in time. Therefore, Albert Einstein would never have wanted to be born at any other period before and certainly not after 1879? Again I believe it is a rule that the older you are the holier and better you are, even if it means you are too early to discover something such as E = MC2 and relativity. This determines it is much better to be too early, than to be too late. For example, if you were born or were alive before 1905 and Albert Einstein’s miracle year, when the scientific world still believed in the luminiferous aether, this is better because you are holier and have a lot more early primitive innocence (EPI) than those born after. Or we could say it was optimum to be born in the 1960s because you had the opportunity to become a superstar DJ during The Second Summer of Love and the acid house movement in the late 1980s. Whereas those born before or after had less chance of becoming a superstar DJ. What I would say in this case is that it is certainly not as good to be born in the 1980s like me, as it was to be born in the 1960s, however, it was definitely a lot better to be born in the 1930s or 1940s because you had the opportunity to come either as Elvis Presley or The Beatles respectively, and they are a lot more or bigger than a superstar DJ born in the 1960s. Therefore, I do not believe in optimum time periods to be born in and I believe it is always a case of that the older you are the holier you are.

Absolute law.

…relativists don’t believe in universal moral laws…

(Absolute Relativism, The new dictatorship and what to do about it, Chris Stefanick, loc 208).

I will state now that obviously it is common knowledge that laws are different in different countries (or different spaces) and that laws were different in the past (or different times), however, do you really think about it in terms of space, time and relativity?

Upper Palaeolithic (Cro Magnon) Jeffrey Dahmer, hunter with pheasant and deer.

I think the authorities such as government, judges, lawyers and police etc believe that they or the law is absolute. However, if I were a criminal in the dock I would say to the judge, if I only could travel back in time, Your Honour, I would not be in as much trouble. Therefore, the way that crime travel operates or works is that through spiritual time travel (STT), present criminals must become past criminals or relative criminals and you definitely do not want to become a future criminal. Hence, the main hypothesis of crime travel is that in order to forgive contemporary or modern present criminals, they should therefore, be equivalent to animals, primates, prehistoric hominins or ancient people of the past etc. Therefore, if or as along as a present criminal or sinner can spiritually travel back in time in the afterlife and/or make him or herself equal or equivalent to an animal, ape, primitive hominin, ancient, medieval or Victorian human etc, then in theory all crimes or sins real or imaginable can be forgiven. Therefore, this blog is about spiritual time travel (STT) for present criminals in order to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or to seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence. Is moral law or just the law universal, absolute, eternal and the same throughout space and time? I mean is the law fundamental and the same throughout space and time like mathematics or physics?

In general, absolute truth is whatever is always valid, regardless of parameters or context. The absolute in the term connotes one or more of: a quality of truth that cannot be exceeded; complete truth; unvarying and permanent truth. It can be contrasted to relative truth or truth in a more ordinary sense in which a degree of relativity is implied.

https://whatis.techtarget.com/definition/absolute-truth

Absolute Truth – Inflexible Reality
“Absolute truth” is defined as inflexible reality: fixed, invariable, unalterable facts. For example, it is a fixed, invariable, unalterable fact that there are absolutely no square circles and there are absolutely no round squares.

https://www.allaboutphilosophy.org/absolute-truth.htm

Absolute truth is something that is true at all times and in all places. It is something that is always true no matter what the circumstances. It is a fact that cannot be changed. For example, there are no round squares. There are also no square circles. The angles of a triangle add up to 180 degrees. These are all true by definition. Absolute truths are discovered, not invented. They exist in all cultures.

https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolute_truth

So this obviously means the angles of a triangle have always added up to 180° even at the beginning of time, that is 13.7 billion years ago. Therefore, the angles of a triangle have always added up to 180° at any point in time, for example 100,000 years ago. Mathematics is an absolute, universal, fundamental and eternal truth or law. However, is moral law absolute and eternal? I mean were rape, killing and cannibalism always universally evil, as they are to us today? For example, were rape, killing and cannibalism as evil 100,000 years ago? No! Therefore, do the same laws that apply to us in the UK also apply to Americans, Muslims, Africans, bushmen, native Papuans or un-contacted native Amazonians? No! The law changes with space. For example, capital punishment is legal in Texas, such as drinking driving is much less taboo in Africa, marijuana is legal in Amsterdam, speed is unlimited on the German autobahns, execution and amputation are legal in Islamic countries and until relatively recently such as killing and cannibalism were less of a problem for un-contacted native Amazonians and native Papuans etc.

The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment in the United States Constitution (Constitution) is a current example of how accepted norms are called into question in a relativistic sense. The prohibition against cruel and unusual punishment stemmed from certain extreme punishments in England centuries ago, especially the practice of hanging, drawing, and quartering a condemned criminal. By its very nature the principle of outlawing cruel and unusual punishment is relativistic. What human beings today especially in Western countries consider cruel and unusual punishment was acceptable as just and normal centuries ago in Western countries. Also, various forms of punishment especially in Islamic countries such as flogging, cutting off the hand of a thief, and beheading are accepted in those cultures, but not in Western Europe and North America.

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 44).

Therefore, do the same laws that apply to us today also apply in the Victorian, medieval, ancient and prehistoric periods? No! The law changes over time. For example, slavery and what we today would call statutory rape were legal in Victorian and all earlier periods, and for example, rape, killing and cannibalism were not illegal in prehistoric times. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement, whatever you may call them are founded on the following idea:

The law in on frame of reference or point in time is not the law in another frame of reference or point in time.

The law changes over space and time.

The law is not absolute.

The law is not universal.

The law is not fundamental.

The law is relative.

The law is flexible.

I will state again that obviously it is common knowledge that laws are different in different countries (or different spaces) and that laws were different in the past (or different times), however, do you really think about it in terms of space, time and relativity?

You may think what is this idiot doing with relativity or relativism? Relativism is not relativity is it? Relativity is physics and relativism is philosophy, however, cultural anthropology uses cultural relativism and I also believe moral relativism needs to fully incorporate time. If relativism could fully incorporate time, I therefore believe it is connected to relativity? Currently, anthropologists and philosophers do not fully connect their respective fields to relativity. But with time or spiritual time travel (STT) it is potentially easy? All you have to do is state that laws/crimes were/seemed different in the past (or in different frames of reference), therefore, if present criminals could spiritually time travel (STT) to the past and/or make themselves equate to or the equivalent of animals, apes or prehistoric hominins etc they might be able to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? If you have a problem with fully incorporating time into anthropology and moral relativism, consider the following. Moral relativism is the belief that there are no absolute and universal moral laws and that each person or culture determines their own moral principles relative to each individual or culture, it is the belief of each to their own, or who am I to judge? However, moral relativism usually only ever deals with now, today or the present. All that I am saying is that it is absolutely true that moral law changes over time, in that laws were very different in the past or even non-existent. For example, cannibalism was relatively ethical in prehistoric times for such as Homo antecessor, and that which we would call statutory rape today was legal in Britain up until 1885. Therefore, it is absolutely true that the law changes over time. Therefore, the only issue left for anthropologists and philosophers is the trivial issue of spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife, for such as Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, in order to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? Therefore the only issue that remains for anthropologists and philosophers is are they brave enough to believe in or conjecture that spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife is possible?

Relativism is the idea that there is no universal, absolute truth but that truth differs from person to person and culture to culture. In other words, truth is relative to what each person or culture thinks.

(Absolute Relativism, The New Dictatorship, and what to do about it, Chris Stefanick, location 130).

Moral relativism is the idea that there is no universal or absolute set of moral principles. It’s a version of morality that advocates “to each her own,” and those who follow it say, “Who am I to judge?”

In addition to its staunch stands against contraception, abortion, and same-sex marriage, the Catholic Church opposes relativism—moral relativism. Views on moral relativism generally fall into three categories: Descriptive Moral Relativism, Meta-ethical Moral Relativism, and Normative Moral Relativism.

Descriptive Moral Relativism simply recognizes cultural differences on moral issues. Meta-ethical Moral Relativism goes beyond Descriptive Moral Relativism in that it recognizes that “right” and “wrong” are not dependent on one universal standard. Instead, “right” and “wrong” are culturally determined and vary over time and circumstances. Normative Moral Relativism recognizes the Meta-ethical position, but goes further. For example, various behaviors should be tolerated even though they conflict with what a culture considers its moral norm. However, intolerance of certain behaviors also may be warranted under Normative Moral Relativism, precisely because all issues of morality are to be decided in cultural contexts under various circumstances over time.

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 2).

Moral relativism can be understood in several ways.

Descriptive moral relativism, also known as cultural relativism, says that moral standards are culturally defined, which is generally true. Indeed, there may be a few values that seem nearly universal, such as honesty and respect, but many differences appear across cultures when people evaluate moral standards around the world.

Meta-ethical moral relativism states that there are no objective grounds for preferring the moral values of one culture over another. Societies make their moral choices based on their unique beliefs, customs, and practices. And, in fact, people tend to believe that the “right” moral values are the values that exist in their own culture.

Victorian (pre-Offences Against the Person Act of 1875) Jimmy Savile, in purple suit.

Absolutism is supremacy?

Note, all that I am saying is that I agree with moral relativism, because primarily and most importantly, I unwaveringly and categorically believe that crime and sin are relative. I believe this because ancient cannibalism was fine for Homo antecessor, but modern cannibalism was not fine for Jeffrey Dahmer. How else could we forgive Jeffrey Dahmer if crime was not relative? How else could we forgive Jeffrey Dahmer without spiritual time travel (STT)? I believe (for the sake of forgiveness) that such as human sacrifice and ritual cannibalism were morally acceptable for the cultures of the Caribs and the Aztecs in as late as the 15th and 16th centuries in the New World. The societies of the Caribs and Aztecs made their own moral choices, regarding human sacrifice and cannibalism, based on their own unique beliefs, customs and practices. Were European explorers and conquistadors such as Christopher Columbus and Hernan Cortes absolute in their moral righteousness over and condemnation of the human sacrifice and cannibalism of the Caribs and Aztecs? Perhaps? However, the Catholic Church advocates moral absolutism, in that it believes it has the one, universal, absolute and eternal truth from God for mankind.

From the Catholic Church’s perspective, moral relativism is an inherent evil, because it denies universal truth that comes from God.

The Catholic Church also attacks the moral relativist claim that there are no absolute moral truths based on logic.

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 24).

The Catholic Church’s claim to divine absolute truth and the moral relativists claim that there is no universal absolute truth with or without God are examples of reaching for the stars so drastically that one undoubtedly will fall down.

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 104).

When that reality is juxtaposed with the position of the Catholic Church that there are absolute moral truths that come from God, such a position contradicts the sociological evidence of how moral principles evolved within cultures over time. The key word is “evolved” instead of “infused.”

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 84).

Therefore, the principle of moral relativism is valid in that it is demonstrated to have been operative at various points in the evolution of cultures. The Catholic Church recognizes that a particular behavior may be right or wrong based on relative circumstances; however, its principal objection to moral relativism focuses on the principle that there are no universal moral truths.

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 64).

So you Christians think that the rest of the world is flat-out wrong?

The claim to be 100 percent right about God is not the same as saying everyone else is 100 percent wrong. The Catholic Church claims to have the fullness of truth about God, but it does not claim that every other faith is entirely wrong.

(Absolute Relativism, The New Dictatorship, and what to do about it, Chris Stefanick, location 635).

So in short, the Christian’s claim to be 100 percent right about God should not be equated with the claim that everyone else is 100 percent wrong. And it certainly shouldn’t be confused with a disrespect for other people.

(Absolute Relativism, The New Dictatorship, and what to do about it, Chris Stefanick, location 658).

In recent years it has become ever more precarious for institutions like the Catholic Church to teach some of the traditional ethics that it has taught and to which most of Western civilization has adhered for thousands of years. For instance, discussing the moral character of a sexual act is often labeled “bigotry” and “hate speech”—even if it is done charitably and respectfully (which it always should be).

(Absolute Relativism, The New Dictatorship, and what to do about it, Chris Stefanick, location 142).

Therefore, could moral absolutism not be interpreted as some kind of supremacy over and above primitive and indigenous peoples around the world? What about superstitious primitive innocence (SPI)? Can such as practices as human sacrifice, ritual cannibalism and witchcraft not be interpreted as some kind of naive primitive innocence (NPI) or gullible primitive innocence (GPI)? Is it not the politically correct view or consensus today that it was the Europeans (sanctioned by the Catholic Church) such as slavers, explorers, conquistadors and colonists etc that were the evil and oppressive white supremacists throughout history? Therefore, wasn’t the moral absolutism of the Catholic Church throughout history a kind of moral supremacy? If moral law or just the law was relative, maybe we would relax with each other’s morals, values and practices etc? In reality, I believe Europeans were probably traditionally and morally right over primitive, indigenous and native peoples around the world, concerning such barbarous practices as human sacrifice, ritual cannibalism and witchcraft etc, in fact, I believe that they were probably right throughout all of history up until the Holocaust. This is because Europeans were so much more civilised and so much further away from or out of such barbaric practices, than non-European indigenous peoples were around the world at that time. However, as you will see, I believe Adolf Hitler in the 1930s and 1940s committed a present crime far greater than human sacrifice, ritual cannibalism and witchcraft etc, and that is why Europeans are now the ones who are on the receiving end of righteousness and justice for the Holocaust, imperialism and colonialism etc. Therefore, that is why this blog deals with the forgiveness of everything, including killing and cannibalism etc. This is in order to forgive Adolf Hitler.

Normative moral relativism is the idea that all societies should accept each other’s differing moral values, given that there are no universal moral principles. Most philosophers disagree however. For example, just because bribery is okay in some cultures doesn’t mean that other cultures cannot rightfully condemn it.

Moral relativism is on the opposite end of the continuum from moral absolutism, which says that there is always one right answer to any ethical question. Indeed, those who adhere to moral relativism would say, “When in Rome, do as the Romans do.

https://ethicsunwrapped.utexas.edu/glossary/moral-relativism

As I said, I came across relativism myself 100% independently, however, the main differences between my version of moral relativism and traditional moral relativism is that firstly, my version fully incorporates time, in that I believe it is fact that moral law or just the law changes over space and time, I also believe that the further you go back in time the more primitive and innocent life becomes, and therefore, these beliefs connect my version of moral relativism to relativity or Einsteinism. Also my version of moral relativism probably goes much further or deeper with morality or moral values. My version of moral relativism deals with present crimes such as rape, murder and cannibalism etc, not just honesty, respect or bribery etc.

To reiterate, returning to maths, like my other blog https://squareoftime.com, mathematics is eternal and absolute, however mathematics is amoral or non-moral, like animals. However, morality is human yet it is transient and ephemeral.

Ice age Adolf Hitler, with spear.

What is a good example? Consider the sabbath or (Shabbat in Hebrew). The sabbath is (or was) was an absolute and eternal Mosaic law, commandment or covenant with God or YHWH, that was once in ancient or biblical times, punishable with death for transgression.

Six days may work be done; but in the seventh is the sabbath of rest, holy to the Lord: whosoever doeth any work in the sabbath day, he shall surely be put to death. Exodus 31:15

Now please don’t get me wrong, as I believe in holiness, however, how have our perspectives changed regarding the Lord’s seventh Holy day of rest? Thanks to Jesus Christ, in the Christian world we no longer observe the sabbath under pain of death. In fact, most of us do not observe it at all. Unlike the angles of a triangle which have always and will always add up to 180°, over time, observation of the sabbath has gradually decreased and almost disappeared.

One Sabbath Jesus was going through the grainfields, and as his disciples walked along, they began to pick some heads of grain. The Pharisees said to him, “Look, why are they doing what is unlawful on the Sabbath?”

He answered, “Have you never read what David did when he and his companions were hungry and in need? In the days of Abiathar the high priest, he entered the house of God and ate the consecrated bread, which is lawful only for priests to eat. And he also gave some to his companions.”

Then he said to them, “The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath. So the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath.”

(Mark 2:23-28).

Through his apostles such as St. Paul, Jesus liberated us from covenants and commandments such as circumcision, kosher food (kashrut) and the sabbath etc. I believe this example of the sabbath day proves that the law is not absolute or universal, but inevitably changes with space and time. However, remember that relativity is a 100% Jewish invention, therefore, by all rights, so is moral relativism. So please don’t shoot the messenger. Anyway, with time or spiritual time travel (STT) the law is bendy and the law can be bent, it depends where and when you commit your present crime. For example, if Homo antecessor kills and cannibalises in Europe in the Lower Palaeolithic, then he or she gets into a lot less trouble than Jeffrey Dahmer who committed murder and cannibalism in America in the 20th-century. You may say how can laws against cannibalism be flexible? How are laws against cannibalism not absolute? If moral law was absolute it would mean it was eternal, like the angles of a triangle which have always and will always add up to 180°, therefore, it would mean that cannibalism was as wrong 1 million years ago as it is today to us, which it wasn’t. Therefore, you can only say that laws against cannibalism are absolute today or now. Again the immorality of cannibalism is universal across the whole planet (I hope?) today or now. For example, in prehistoric times in Europe cannibalism was probably ok, and in the 16th century Caribbean it was okay for the Caribs etc. Therefore, the law is not absolute! To prove this, consider just murder, did prehistoric man murder? Well it depends on how far you go back in time, but for argument’s sake, quite frankly, no! For example, as you will see much later in this blog, I believe it is impossible to sin if you are not conscious and aware of the concept of sin, as in animals and children cannot sin. Therefore, when chimpanzees kill or cannibalise another chimpanzee (as they frequently do), they are never murderers, and they have not sinned.

Chimpanzees: Of all the great apes, chimpanzees resort to cannibalism most often. Typically, males will kill and eat the infant of another female, usually in their own group but occasionally in another. When chimps kill adults from other groups in a fight, they do not eat the body.

Gorillas: In the 1970s, primatologist Dian Fossey found remains of two gorillas in the faeces of a mother gorilla and her daughter. Nothing has been reported since.

Orang-utans: Two instances of cannibalism have been documented in orang-utans living wild in Sumatra. In both cases, the mothers ate their infants after carrying their corpses around for several days. David Dellatore of Oxford Brookes University in the UK, who observed both events, thinks they were due to stress.

Humans: Cut marks on 800,000-year-old hominin remains from Atapuerca, Spain, and more recent fossilised Neanderthal bones suggest that our distant ancestors ate the flesh of their own species. More recently, thousand-year-old bones discovered in the American Southwest bear clear signs of butchery. There are even signs of cannibalism in the human genome: a mutation has been found in Papua New Guineans that protects them from kuru, a prion disease transmitted through cannibalism.

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18454-hippy-apes-caught-cannibalising-their-young/#ixzz6ZdqtjJHR

Therefore, the same logic of chimpanzees applies to prehistoric man, in that up until some point, they were not conscious and aware of the concept of sin, therefore, they were never murderers when they killed another member of the same species. If moral law or just the law was absolute, universal and eternal throughout space and time, it would mean that as a judgemental Homo sapiens of the 21st century, you could travel back in time and judge or condemn such as Homo antecessor for their killing and ancient cannibalism. You must understand how this is wrong, and that you can never judge or condemn such as Homo antecessor. You can never travel back in time and judge or condemn. Therefore, the law is not absolute! To me this would prove to the Catholic Church (who disagree with moral relativism) that moral absolutism is questionable, and that moral relativism is real? For example, imagine if moral law was like the angles of a triangle which have always and will always add up to 180°, that is, absolute, eternal and the same throughout all space and time, even 13.7 billion years ago. This would be hell. In such as a universe with such an evil and eternally judgemental God you would not be able to get away with anything. You do not want moral law to be like the angles of a triangle. As a compromise to Catholicism, I can say that God may be absolute, that is, God may have been just as correct, moral, righteous and ethical regarding cannibalism 1 million years ago as he is today. However, the point is that we weren’t and therefore, God did not judge such as Homo antecessor in the Lower Palaeolithic for their ancient cannibalism, as he did Jeffrey Dahmer in the 20th century for his modern cannibalism. This is because of time and because the law, crime and sin are relative.

Middle Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, with hafted spear.

If moral law or just the law was absolute, there would be no forgiveness. There would be no leeway and no flexibility for criminals, which would mean criminals would never be able to get off with their crimes. If crime or sin were absolute, there would be no forgiveness. It would mean that it was just as wrong to commit cannibalism 1 million years ago as it is today. Therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer would condemned and that would be the end of it. There would be no hope for Jeffrey Dahmer.

Some people believe that there are moral truths that are absolute, meaning that those moral truths or principles do not change according to the circumstances. Other people believe that moral truth always depends upon the situation, meaning that their moral and ethical decisions depend upon the circumstances. How about you? Do you believe that there are moral absolutes that are unchanging, or that moral truth is relative to the circumstances?

https://barna.com

As you can see from the survey question above, philosophy, that is moral absolutism and moral relativism is or are usually non-temporal, that is, they do not fully incorporate or take into account time. By this I mean that they only deal with the present tense. By this I mean when the question states that moral truths or principles do not change according to the circumstances, it means that moral absolutism is just talking about making moral or ethical decisions in the present, today or now. Also, when the question states that moral truth is relative to the circumstances, again they are only dealing with present-day circumstances, as in making moral or ethical decisions relative to present-day circumstances, today or now. What I am saying is that when you fully incorporate or take time into account, then moral truths or principles do in reality change over time. For example, slavery was legal prior to 1833 in Britain, also what we today would call statutory rape was legal prior to 1885 in Britain and cannibalism was probably fine in the Lower Palaeolithic Europe etc. Therefore, it does depend on where and when you commit your present crime, and it does depend on your spatial and temporal circumstances as to how relatively innocent or guilty you are. All that I am saying is that moral law or just the law is not absolute. All that I am saying is that crime and sin are relative.

Moral relativism is on the opposite end of the continuum from moral absolutism, which says that there is always one right answer to any ethical question.

To me the above proves there is not always one right answer to any ethical question, especially when you bring time into the equation. For example, we could ask the ethical question is cannibalism right or wrong? First of all it depends on who you ask. If you ask an anthropologist as opposed to His Holiness the Pope, you may get a different answer. You may think it’s a no brainer or that we take it for granted, but it really depends, it is really not the right question to ask. Cannibalism is wrong now, but it was not always. The correct question to ask may be was cannibalism always wrong? No! It was not wrong for Homo antecessor. That is what I like about prehistoric man, because they are out of our realm or jurisdiction, we cannot judge them, despite their cannibalism etc. They are free. There is so much judgement in our own time. As a compromise to the Catholic Church I think I can state that the law is absolute now, or that it has been absolute for thousands of years, but the point is that you have to say now or bring time into the equation. Therefore, the forgiveness is just a matter of spiritual time travel (STT)? Therefore, laws are different in different places and in different periods of time, for example, consider that murder is a capital offence in some states in America, and that it entirely depends on which state you commit murder in. Also consider the decriminalisation of homosexuality in western countries such as the U.K. in 1967, whereas homosexuality is and has always been illegal under Quranic law in Islamic countries even up to today. To take Mosaic law once again, we can see how laws that are supposed to be eternal are not absolute but change over time and space:

“If there is a man who lies with a male as those who lie with a woman, both of them have committed a detestable act; they shall surely be put to death. Their bloodguiltiness is upon them.”

(Lev. 20:13).

‘You shall not lie with a male as one lies with a female; it is an abomination.”

(Lev. 18:22).

For example, only extreme Muslims throw homosexuals of buildings today. Homosexuality is a relative offence in that in the 1940s in Britain it was a crime and even today in Islamic countries it is still illegal, however, in most western countries today it is absolutely legal. Therefore, it depends on where and when you commit your relative offence. As an example, a Scottish man in 2017 in Dubai in the UAE was prosecuted for touching a man’s hip and sentenced to three months in jail. Jamie Harron who was 27 at the time was initially arrested for public indecency for touching a man’s hip as he carried a drink through a crowded bar in Dubai on 15 July 2017. The electrician, from Stirling, claimed he was simply trying to avoid spilling his drink when he brushed past the man at the Rock Bottom bar. This is how seriously Muslims take homosexuality. Why is there this fundamental incompatibility? The west would probably say Islamic countries are primitive and backward and western countries are advanced and progressive. Yes, but primitivism is innocence. Because moral relativism determines there are no universal moral principles, therefore, contrary to popular opinion today in the west, particularly in America, freedom is not a universal principle. Muslims do not like freedom, they have something much older and more important than freedom, that is Qu’ranic or sharia law. Similarly, I personally believe that although freedom is perfect in America, I believe it is not conducive in Europe or to European interests. I think the controversial legality of homosexuality in different countries and time periods really proves that the law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is relative. The law is flexible. Therefore, know if you are serving time for an offence that the British authorities have labelled ‘murder’ or ‘terrorism’ then know it is only a crime and you are only in prison because you are in the U.K. and because it is 2020. Check your watch! The law is bendy and not absolute. The law is different in different frames of reference and time periods. It is ironic or coincidental that moral law (or just the law) is converse to the laws of physics or the principle of relativity, which state that the laws of physics are the same in all nonaccelerated frames of reference, the laws of physics are the same everywhere.

Why does time flow in only one direction? You grow older, never younger (unfortunately). Can this flow be reversed? All the laws of physics remain unchanged if the flow of time is reversed. They work equally well in either case. All the laws except for one, that is: The second law of thermodynamics spoils it for us. It appears that the flow of time originates in the second law. And it points the arrow of time firmly in one direction.

(Einstein for Dummies, location 1339, 24%).

Pliocene (Australopithecus africanus) Jeffrey Dahmer, with bone and rock.

Absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness.

As another compromise to the Catholic Church, I believe that in order to forgive Adolf Hitler, that we need absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness, and that anything else will not do. For example, what if Jesus Christ is actually effecting Europe’s or Christendom’s demise as a punishment for the Holocaust? What if Jesus Christ is punishing us? Therefore, the only solution is absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness for Adolf Hitler and for absolutely all sins no matter how big or bad they are. You may say absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness is a contradiction in terms because it is both absolute and relative? I think that first of all we need absolute and universal forgiveness for Adolf Hitler, however, after this, because Adolf Hitler committed the biggest and most severe crime in history, that it relatively it leads to the absolute and universal forgiveness of all people for all of their sins throughout all of space and time.

Holy Tiktaalik roseae.

This blog started as nativism and was based on the following sentence, ‘the poorer you are the more native you are’. Although I thought nativism and primitivism were related the former is ethnic and nationalist while the latter is universal, neutral and benign. Hence, I dropped politically incorrect nativism and took up politically correct primitivism and the concept became ‘the older and poorer you are the more primitive and innocent you are’. However, although I still use this latter statement I have taken STT, EF and EPI in a different direction, because I want them to be as secular, ethical, benign and as politically correct as possible. Therefore, STT, EF and EPI also determine and try to stick to the following philosophy: The difference between all animals and hominins of the past, present and future, in all stages of primitive or advanced evolutionary anatomy is relative or just a matter of relativity. Whether you are primitive or advanced technologically or evolutionarily, relativity determines it makes no difference.

This means there must be universal equality and relativity between all races and all species? For example, as you will see, relativity may determine that it makes no difference if you were born a Homo erectus 2 million years ago or a Homo sapiens in 1981 AD. The only difference is that it was simply holier, braver and more innocent to come a Homo erectus in the Lower Palaeolithic period than a Homo sapiens in the 20th century. Therefore, Homo erectus is holier, greater and prouder. Therefore, if you like Homo erectus is even superior? As mentioned nativism is nationalist, racial and ethnic, while primitivism is not! Primitivism is neutral, universal, unbiased, generic and benign. Nativism is specific to a local geographic region such as Britain or Europe, whereas primitivism is universal across the whole planet, even the universe and even across all different species. Evolution is biological, however, it also definitely needs time. In fact evolution is time. For an example of spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) take the primitive tetrapodomorph, Tiktaalik roseae, a 375 million-year-old transitional species between fish and the first legged animals. We could sit here after 375 million years of evolution and say that Tiktaalik roseae is a primitive and inferior life form and that we Homo sapiens are a much more advanced and therefore superior life form than Tiktaalik roseae, but this is absolutely not the case. Tiktaalik roseae is holy! Why does life get more advanced (evolutionarily and technologically) as time passes? Why does life get more primitive (evolutionarily and technologically) the further you go back in time? Why didn’t we come the ultimate developed beings from the beginning? Why is their no culmination in biological or technological evolution? It is simply not good enough to say that earlier or so called ‘primitive’ creatures such as Tiktaalik roseae are dated and obsolete etc, there must be some kind of relative compensation for our older and more primitive ancestors? I believe this compensation for the primitive past must be holiness, innocence, pride, bravery, heroism and greatness etc. I am a firm believer that the earlier you come the holier and greater you are. I mean this is what the Nazis did to ‘non-Aryans’ with white supremacism. Just because you are an advanced species does not mean you are superior as you are less holy and innocent, therefore, the older you are the holier, greater and prouder you are. Tiktaalik roseae has 375 million years of time and experience on its side. Tiktaalik roseae has a 375 million year head start on us. Tiktaalik roseae is early. Tiktaalik roseae is holy and has a lot of early primitive innocence (EPI). We cannot possibly imagine what that is like or means. So you have been around since 1981 and you think that you are genetically superior to a 375 million year old creature? Therefore, don’t be surprised if you get to heaven find that you are equal or relatively equivalent to holy 400 million year old fish. In fact, think about it, what is our reaction to Tiktaalik roseae today? We say wow! That’s amazing! Tiktaalik roseae is a holy, great, important and beautiful creature. Something the Nazis are not.

This does not in any way mean that prokaryotes are “lower” than or inferior to eukaryotes!

(Cowen’s History of Life, Michael J. Benton, page 23).

Miocene (Orrorin tugenensis) Adolf Hitler, crouching with stick.

Therefore, Homo sapiens are not superior to Tiktaalik roseae, at the time Tiktaalik roseae was the equivalent of a human being, in that it was the most advanced tetrapodomorph of its day. Hence, it does not matter if like Tiktaalik roseae you are old and primitive as you are holier, greater and more innocent and this is in a way superior. Therefore, even though STT, EF and EPI attempt to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler and occasionally defend indigenous Europeans it can never be claimed that they are ever white supremacism or bigotry. As you will see, the main point of this blog is that being advanced can be a disadvantage. Therefore, how can I be a white supremacist if all that I am saying is that being advanced can be a disadvantage? For example, if you are far-right how can you respect Tiktaalik roseae and find it holy and beautiful, but not Africans? It may be advanced to be indigenous Europeans, but this never means that Africans are inferior as they are more innocent, also the difference between all animals and hominins of the past, present and future, in all stages of primitive or advanced evolutionary anatomy is relative or just a matter of relativity? In fact, as you will see, up until Adolf Hitler and the Nazis I do not believe many indigenous Europeans ever openly and publicly stated that they were superior to other people. For example, the Georgians and the Victorians never really openly or publicly stated that they were superior to other people, as they had more modesty and decorum than that. Only Adolf Hitler and the Nazis openly, publicly and loudly stated that they were superior. Even today I do not seriously believe that many of the far-right honestly believe that other people are inferior to themselves. Also, as will be seen, the way to forgive Adolf Hitler with humour is to make him the equivalent of an animal, primate, monkey or primitive hominin with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement. I also believe a solution to the Holocaust could be to humourlessly make all indigenous Europeans equivalent to monkeys? Therefore, if white people are monkeys how can they be supremacist? It is spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) never bigotry or supremacism.

Monkeys, time and relativity.

How is primitivism connected to relativity?‬ What exactly is early primitive innocence (EPI)?

We humans naturally and instinctively perform equivalent forgiveness all the time. For example, if someone seriously sins such as Adolf Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer, we often exclaim HE IS AN ANIMAL! We do this because being an animal is the only place and time we can understand such as Adolf Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer with any lightness. However, animals are funny, particularly for Homo sapiens dogs, cats and monkeys are funny, especially primates such as chimps and bonobos etc. Early primitive innocence (EPI) simply uses this animal comedy in conjunction with spiritual time travel (STT) or time and relativity to compare and make present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile the equivalent of animals, primitive hominins and apes etc in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. We have all made a monkey of ourselves, but I think Adolf Hitler gets the prize for making the biggest monkey of all time. You may say how can calling Jeffrey Dahmer an animal lighten his sins? For example, if you called or equated Jeffrey Dahmer to a raccoon wouldn’t that lighten his sins? Being a raccoon is about the only place and time or frame of reference that I can get Jeffrey dahmer with lightness, humour or comedy etc. Raccoons do crazy things as well?

Middle Eocene, (Eosimias) Jeffrey Dahmer, in tree.

You may think an animal or an ape is childish? However, childishness lighten sins. Think about it.

  • Extreme genocidal racism is evolutionary or anthropological, and the punishment for it is miscegenation.
  • Murder and cannibalism is only alright for an ape, a primitive hominin or prehistoric man etc.
  • Inappropriate sex definitely is a monkey act.
  • Apes rape.
  • Primates fight.
  • Monkeys steal.
  • Etc.
Miocene Adolf Hitler, brown headed spider monkey.

Can we teach the forgiveness of such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile to young people? Maybe if like above, we lightened their sins and made them animals or monkeys? I personally believe that Adolf Hitler would be great with kids, especially if he made himself a monkey to interact and play with them? What use do animals have other than equivalent forgiveness? Therefore, if someone who commits a crime or a sin makes themselves equal to or the equivalent of an animal, an ape or primitive homnin, this animal comedy lightens his/her sins and hence he/she is forgiven. In fact, what if a solution to the Holocaust could be if all indigenous Europeans were equivalent to apes? Therefore, using three eternal examples this blog demonstrates that all crimes or sins always equate to an animal, ape or primitive hominin etc, that is, crime is always anthropological, in that if you sin or commit a crime you literally make or equate to an animal, primate or primitive hominin, that is you make a monkey of yourself. To reiterate, if you sin like such as Adolf Hitler or Jeffrey Dahmer the only solution to your crime is spiritual time travel (STT) and equivalence to an animal, an ape or a primitive hominin etc. Therefore, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are all about how in the afterlife we never wait a long time for forgiveness, but instead, we spiritually go back in time to a much more primitive and innocent period to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence. Instead of going to prison and serving time, what if in the afterlife present criminals could simply travel in time? If a present criminal can travel in time, could he or she be a relative criminal?

What is early primitive innocence (EPI)?

To lose one’s early primitive innocence (EPI) could be like losing one’s virginity, in that for example, when a revolutionary new invention or discovery such as relativity comes along, is discovered or understood for the first time, it is as if humanity has lost some of its virginity or early primitive innocence (EPI)? What I mean by this is that those people who died before or can remember the days before relativity (when physicists still believed in the luminiferous aether) are holier and have more early primitive innocence (EPI) and are more primitive and innocent than those people who were born after 1905 who cannot remember the days before relativity, hence, these people are less holy, innocent and more culpable and guilty etc. How do you attain early primitive innocence (EPI)? There are two ways, either like Tiktaalik roseae, you can wait a long time or if you do not want to wait you can spiritually travel back in time. Early primitive innocence (EPI) is life itself. It doesn’t matter what race, creed or religion you are, we all want it, even Africans want it, indeed what else are Africans if not early primitive innocence (EPI)? Everybody understands what is meant by the the following old sayings:

  • Innocent times.
  • Innocent days.
  • Time is a great healer.
  • You made a monkey of yourself.
  • He is an animal.
  • It’s in the past.

Hence, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) take these notions very far indeed. Time for forgiveness is the best title or tag line for this blog, however, it is just a double-pun, it does not do anything. However, on the other hand, early primitive innocence (EPI) helps us travel in time with our thoughts and memories. For example, once you understand the term early primitive innocence (EPI), when you remember something from the past, usually an obsolete technology or the negation of having technology such as not having the internet, mobile phones or CDs etc, you can then instantly identify that technology and yourself as having early primitive innocence (EPI). EPI travels in time. As mentioned, I really like the term early primitive innocence (EPI) because it so precisely describes what this blog is about or how it works, which is that the further you go back in time the holier and more primitive and innocent animals such as Homo sapiens and life become. However, note, evolution is biological, however, it also definitely needs time. In fact evolution is time. Therefore, using this early primitive innocence (EPI) with equivalent forgiveness (EF) and spiritual time travel (STT) to the past, in theory we should be able to forgive all sins real or imaginable. However, primitive innocence on its own is not temporal, relative or relevant, and it definitely needs adjectives such as early to inject a little time into it, hence then I changed it into early primitive innocence (EPI), which again is temporal and biological and technological evolution. To reiterate, I believe early primitive innocence (EPI) helps us travels in time in our heads. For example, in the 1980s we had no internet or mobile phones and we did not understand smart things such as Spotify and FaceTime, therefore, we were much more primitive and innocent in the 1980s than the 2020s. By this relatively recent example, we can see that this holiness and innocence becomes stronger or purer the further you go back in time. Therefore, imagine how holy, primitive and innocent prehistoric people were? I believe prehistoric men were so holy, primitive and innocent that they could literally get away with rape, killing and cannibalism etc. Therefore, I believe if we could spiritually travel back in time to prehistory we could attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? For a demonstration of 1980s early primitive innocence (EPI) I earnestly advice you to watch the video of the song Shout by Tears for Fears (1985), specifically towards the end of the video, when all the people are dancing together. Note how the people are dancing. This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! And my Grandfather who was born in 1927 liked The Ink Spots, such as their song I Don’t Want To Set The World On Fire (1941). This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! Therefore, imagine how primitive and innocent classical music was? Imagine how primitive and innocent people were dancing to classical music in the 18th century? It is early primitive innocence (EPI)! As will be seen later in this part, instead of ridiculing the recent past, such as Shout by Tears for Fears or I Don’t Want To Set The World On Fire by The Ink Spots, we should try to say they are holy, classical and were very innocent!

Ice age Jeffrey Dahmer, on mountain with bow and spear.

If you think about it this ridicule only happens to famous people because for example, they were the only ones who were recorded on video in the 1980s etc, while the vast majority of us normal people did not even have camcorders in the 1980s. And remember there were no digital cameras or camcorders in the 1980s and for most of the 1990s. Although we had cameras, camcorders only became small enough, cheap enough and widespread enough in the 1990s, therefore, most people do not even have any videos of themselves in the 1980s! Compare this with the 2020s, with everybody having pocket-sized smart phones with 12 mega-pixel digital cameras etc! This is a early primitive innocence (EPI)! If you think about it in terms of recorded history, most 1980s people do not have videos of themselves in the 1980s, therefore, most people in the Victorian period did not even have photographs of themselves in the Victorian period, therefore, most medieval people did not even have portraits of themselves in the medieval period, therefore, ultimately not only did we not know who prehistoric people were, we did not even know that they existed until the 19th century. Surely this must mean that prehistoric man is the ultimate early primitive innocence (EPI)? Therefore, the further you go back in time the holier and more innocent life becomes. You do not need to go back far in time to such as prehistory to find holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI), in fact, the more recent examples demonstrate it even better! For example, I remember the days before electronic music when there was just rock and roll and pop music etc, with such bands as Bon Jovi, Guns n’ Roses, Duran Duran and Wham etc. I remember when I first heard electronic beats or music, with such songs as Good Life by Inner City (1988), Sesame’s treet by Smart e’s (that was the first time I heard proper electronic beats or rave music, I was mind blown, that was in 1992) etc. My generation are the original generation of electronic music, we saw the transition from rock to rave, from drum kits to drum machines. Any electronic music that you listen to today comes from my generation. My generation understand somethings that kids of today will likely never fathom. Acid house, early rave or basically just electronic music is our own early primitive innocence (EPI)! You should try listening to Sesame’s treet by Smart e’s, listen to the drums, this was a breakthrough in 1992 and you can hear the early primitive innocence (EPI)! Another example is that in the 1980s we had no internet or mobile phones, we did not even have satellite TV, just 4 channel terrestrial TV and we still used the Yellow Pages, newspaper TV guides, four-star (leaded) petrol and coal fires etc, therefore, we were much more primitive and innocent in the 1980s than today. To reiterate in the 1980s we did not understand smart technologies such as FaceTime and Spotify, therefore, we were much more primitive and innocent in the 1980s than the 2020s. If you cannot remember the days before the internet and mobile phones or FaceTime and Spotify then you are much more advanced and therefore less holy and innocent. In the 1980s we could only imagine that a video call would be something like out of Star Trek or the Aliens films, we had no idea it would just be an app called FaceTime. This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! And music to us was simply cassette tapes, we could not even imagine that one day music would be streamed over the internet, in fact, we would not have even understood what you meant by streamed or the internet. This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! In fact even in the mid-1990s when the internet became known (I didn’t get internet until 1999), we imagined that in the future the internet would be the information superhighway, which was a very innocent description of the internet that we have today in 2020. This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! I even remember when CDs came out, we were all amazed by them, we never really thought it would get any better. This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! Therefore, imagine how holy, primitive and innocent Victorian, medieval, ancient and prehistoric people were? Prehistoric people were so holy, primitive and innocent they could literally get away with rape, killing and cannibalism etc. Therefore, evil is relative, in that for example rape, killing and cannibalism were relatively no sweat with prehistoric man because they had no advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc, therefore rape, murder and cannibalism today by such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile are only relatively evil because they are more modern and advanced. How is crime relative? Crimes is relative in that, for example, cannibalism was relatively no issue with such as Homo antecessor because Homo antecessor was so primitive and innocent because they had no advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc and because Homo antecessor came from such a distant time or epoch, therefore, killing and cannibalism were relatively less of an issue for them. However, therefore, murder and cannibalism today by such as Jeffrey Dahmer were so relatively evil or unethical compared with Homo antecessor because they are anachronistic and out of place and in the wrong time, or in the wrong space and time.

Medieval Jimmy Savile, on horse.

Smart.

I am not the smartest of people, however, I tell you this, I was even less smart in the 1980s and 1990s. Hundreds of times less smart. Why? Because we had no internet, mobile phones or CDs etc. We had no Wikipedia, no Amazon, no kindles, no apps, no math problem solvers, there was nothing smart in our time whatsoever. All we had was just video tape players, ghetto blasters, dinosaur-like Casio calculators and stationery etc. And my father even had to use slide rules. We were much less smart in the past. If we wanted information or to keep up to date, we got it off the four channel TV, radio, newspapers, books and teletext, and was about it. To be honest, I am 39, and I didn’t even pick up a book until I was 35. Think about it, this example of not having the internet and smart phones etc in the 1980s and 1990s really proves that the further you go back in time the less smart it gets. You would probably say how is being less smart is a good thing? Being less smart is an early primitive innocence (EPI)! Think about it, how thick was prehistoric man? How thick was Tiktaalik roseae? How thick was the very first protocell or the last universal ancestor of all life on Earth? Being smart is advanced which means you are less holy and innocent. You have to watch yourself. As you will see by reading this blog, prehistoric man saves us all from our sins, no matter what we have done. Prehistoric man can solve any problem. Therefore, we are all very proud of our thickness in the past. There was no animosity 1980s and 1990s because we had no social media such as Twitter or Gab. Those decades were blissful, primitive and innocent etc. You kids are too smart. Where are you going in such a hurry with all this smart technology?

Combination.

I believe the New Testament is all things, it is the ultimate teaching and there is nothing higher. I believe this because firstly, I believe in Jesus Christ and the Buddha. I believe there is no greater example than the Buddha’s example and His Great renunciation etc. In short, there is nothing greater than the Buddha. Also, because I am a European, I believe there is nothing greater than Jesus Christ. There is no greater example than Jesus Christ’s birth, life, teachings and death, in short there is nothing greater than Jesus Christ and His perfect obedience etc. Now after that panegyrising, the second reason I believe there is nothing greater than the New Testament is because, I am nearly 40 and I have read 140 books and wrote this 84k plus word essay on forgiveness. I have spent over four years trying to save my own people and to solve the Holocaust. I wouldn’t even read a single letter if my motivation wasn’t for Europeans. However, despite all this reading, research, writing and drawing etc, ultimately all science and academia leads to the New Testament and Jesus Christ’s words etc. There is nothing higher than Jesus Christ’s words and they are the ultimate knowledge. However, as a 39 year old, looking back at my childhood growing up in the 1980s and 1990s, I can see that I did not receive the slightest instruction or indoctrination in the New Testament whatsoever. That is why I mentioned that I am nearly 40, because I am very mature now and I am only now beginning to comprehend Jesus Christ’s teachings. I can see that serious and deep instruction and indoctrination of the New Testament is what I missed out on as a child. For example, I know that Matthew 23:12 should have been drilled into me a thousand times as a vain and show off child and teenager.

For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. Matthew 23:12

I seriously wish someone had drilled that one into me. And Matthew 18:3-4 is also very important, I really wished someone had made sure I understood that one.

Then he said, “I tell you the truth, unless you turn from your sins and become like little children, you will never get into the Kingdom of Heaven. So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven. Matthew 18:3-4

I really wished I had got that one. And also the message of Mark 10:43-45 would have been a good one to understand as well.

Not so with you. Instead, whoever wants to become great among you must be your servant, and whoever wants to be first must be slave of all. For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many.” Mark 10:43-45

It would have been very adjuvant if someone had firmly and squarely made sure I got that one. There are many more teachings in the New Testament such as the parable of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16:19-31). But as you will see in this essay, to me the ultimate teaching of Christ is to love your enemies in such as Luke 6:32-36.

If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ love those who love them. And if you do good to those who are good to you, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ do that. And if you lend to those from whom you expect repayment, what credit is that to you? Even ‘sinners’ lend to ‘sinners,’ expecting to be repaid in full. But love your enemies, do good to them, and lend to them without expecting to get anything back. Then your reward will be great, and you will be sons of the Most High, because he is kind to the ungrateful and wicked. Be merciful, just as your Father is merciful. Luke 6:32-36

Even after four years of studying I did not even think about loving your enemies and I never would have if I had not studied it in the bible. And so on and so on. There is a great and basic moral teaching in the story of Jesus Christ’s birth, life and death etc. We all understand such as that God or the King of the universe was born in a lowly manger etc. It is a basic moral that we get, however, going off my own example as a vain and show off youth in the 1980s and 1990s, I believe that kids today do not receive enough instruction or indoctrination in the Gospel and this along with or because of the Holocaust is why they do not respect their elders anymore and have bad attitudes etc. Who do our kids listen to? Superstar DJs and pop stars or Jesus Christ? Well they quite literally listen to EDM and pop music all day long on Spotify, so that is who they physically listen to and from whom they receive their indoctrination. The music scene is about drugs, it is immoral, and hence, it is not a place from which our kids should be receiving their indoctrination. What can superstar DJs and clubbing teach you morally? Nothing! Clubbing is not a religion. DJs are never gods. There is nobody as eternally cool, hip, happening and holy as Jesus Christ and the Buddha. Therefore, despite political correctness in schools today, I believe our children should be forcibly instructed and indoctrinated in the New Testament. When you discipline children, why not dish out impositions or 100 lines of Matthew 23:12? It does not matter how much you drill children in mathematics or physics they will never listen because they are amoral or non-moral, but they will listen to Jesus Christ and the Buddha if you teach them. Anyway why have I titled this section combination? I have titled it combination because the combination of Albert Einstein’s theory of relativity and Jesus Christ’s teachings is very powerful. To reiterate, the combination of relativity or Einsteinism and Jesus Christ’s teachings is very powerful and very beautiful. I am not saying kids should be indoctrinated in this work but they should definitely at least be instructed and indoctrinated in the New Testament.

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo habilis) Adolf Hitler, butchering animal.

Unfashionableness of holiness.

How did I come across early primitive innocence (EPI)? 

I figured out that the further you go back in time the more holy and innocent people were from Matthew 21:9.

The crowds that went ahead of him and those that followed shouted, “Hosanna to the Son of David!” “Blessed is he who comes in the name of the Lord!” “Hosanna in the highest heaven!”

It occurred to me that who on Earth would say “Hosanna in the highest heaven!” today except sarcastically? No one! For example, regarding a lazy teenager, we might exclaim “Hosanna in the highest heaven! Graham is up before noon!” Therefore, this led me to the conclusion that the people of Jesus’s day or the people of the past generally (who genuinely said such things as “Hosanna in the highest heaven!” without a shred of sarcasm) therefore, must have been much more holy and innocent than us today? As you read this blog you will see that I occasionally state that because of the Holocaust and because they are advanced, that indigenous Europeans, have lost their holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI), and that they may need to regain them? To reiterate, I believe that European Christians have lost their holiness and that it has become unfashionable to be holy. The church is holy and that is why church has become unfashionable. Not many people today are holy, apart from perhaps Orthodox Jews, vicars, priests and nuns etc. Today it is fashionable to be cool and hip not holy. So how can we make holiness fashionable again? Perhaps innocence or early primitive innocence (EPI) could help? Is early primitive innocence (EPI) connected to holiness? Yes, I believe innocence is a form of holiness. I honestly believe that most indigenous Europeans are actually handicapped today when it comes to saying such things as grace before dinner etc? It makes them squirm and uncomfortable. You may not believe that indigenous Europeans have lost their holiness or early primitive innocence (EPI), but think about it. Like people comfortably and genuinely saying things like “Hosanna in the highest heaven!”, the vast majority of Europeans today do not sing hymns, say grace before meals or attend church etc. Church makes them uncomfortable and cringe a little. It is as if most Europeans have an allergic reaction to holiness. At my school, saying grace before dinner was compulsory up to the age of 10. We had to say, “For what we are about to receive, may the Lord make us truly thankful!” I will never forget it. However, most Europeans are uncomfortable singing hymns and being in church today etc. For example, I myself am so indoctrinated in the western, capitalist and materialistic so called ‘Christian’ way of life and ‘values’ that I totally take for granted that taking the Lord’s name in vain is not a real consequential sin? I must take the Lord’s name in vain everyday. However, not or never taking the Lord’s name in vain is probably very good holiness or early primitive innocence (EPI)? Also, I have never observed the abstinence of eating meat on Good Friday either, however, the problem to me is that McDonald’s and Subway etc are still actually open on Good Friday. Why? It is the western, capitalist and materialistic so called ‘Christian’ way of life, that gives us the option to eat meat on Good Friday? It is freedom of religion and freedom of choice? Why? Surely McDonald’s or Subway will not go bankrupt for closing it’s doors for no rational or scientific reason whatsoever, for one day of the year for one holy Christian fast? Perhaps Muslims and Jews might respect you a little for that? Do the Muslims get a choice to participate in Ramadan? No! Do the Jews get an option to participate in Passover or the Shabbat? No! Let me guess, you are about to say daaaaang to God? In fact, concerning such as Shabbat, the authors of the Old Testament, such as Moses would probably agree with closing McDonald’s or Subway for one day of the year for one holy Christian fast for no rational or scientific reason whatsoever? That is what Jews and Muslims are about. What makes our secular, scientific, rational, advanced, cool and fashionable way of life so much better?

Pliocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, with bone and walking stick.

Anyway, they call such trends as the current unfashionableness of holiness and the decrease in church attendance in western societies the death of Christianity. This is what I meant about how Christianity is not working or does not work, particularly regarding the forgiveness of the Holocaust etc. Obviously, regular church attendance, singing hymns, being holy and saying such things as “with the riches of God’s grace” are no longer fashionable? But this is obviously not a good thing, because it is our holiness and our early primitive innocence (EPI)! We Europeans are too fashionable, cool and hip today and this demonstrates that we have lost our holiness and our early primitive innocence (EPI). For example, the term ‘wicked’ has come to mean something good, I mean why not have the terms ‘evil’ or ‘demon’ to mean something good as well? Only 100 or 200 years ago people were still innocent and holy enough to regularly attend church, sing hymns, say grace before dinner and use religious language etc. Growing up in Africa, I believe that most indigenous Africans have retained a lot of their holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI), as they still regularly attend church and use religious language etc. For example, if you ask an African how he or she is doing today, it is not uncommon for them to reply “Oh, by God‘s grace!” or “By His grace!” And, this means ‘I am well’. Similarly, are Muslims uncomfortable with their faith? Do they cringe when they pray or say things like “The Prophet Muhammad, may peace be upon him”? No! It is only indigenous European Christians who are uncomfortable with their own faith. It is only indigenous European Christians who have lost their holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI)! Trust me, I am the worst sinner with holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) and I know from my own weak or vain constitution and disposition how hard it is to say things like grace before meals etc. In fact, I believe holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) are probably a privilege and that God may have removed that grace or privilege from us indigenous Europeans because of the Holocaust? To prove all this, the next time your bro or blood asks you how’s it hanging, try replying to him with “By God’s grace” and without any sarcasm. Or try saying grace before a meal without giving the whole room the ‘wet willies’, and I do not mean rub a dub dub, thanks for the grub! I think that (even though it is not their fault) with superstar trance and house DJs spinning the wheels of steel in clubs today, it is hard to be holy and it is hard for young indigenous Europeans not to say daaaang to God! This is why we are handicapped with holiness, attending church, singing hymns and saying grace before meals etc. I have taught myself to properly beat match and mix trance and techno music since April 2019, and I am very good at it. Let me tell you mixing and beat matching is unbelievably cool. However, I have also tried my hand a scratching, and let me tell you, even though I cannot do it, there is literally nothing as cool on the planet! Scratching practically forces us to say daaaaang to God! Scratching is what vicars, priests and the church are up against? The Pope is no competition to a scratch DJ. Trust me, if you can scratch you are a metaphorical God! You can tell that scratching is an American invention, and that it was probably invented by African Americans, which is ironic in that real indigenous Africans are still so holy and purely innocent and still greet you by saying things like “By His grace!” It is also ironic that Europeans are a little more reserved than Americans when it comes to scratching, in that Europeans traditionally prefer just the beat matching and mixing of trance and techno music in clubs etc. This reservedness or conservatism with scratching in the European music scene, could be a little European early primitive innocence (EPI)? Scratching basically determines that you have to use hip hop, which is traditionally an American or African American genre of music. Anyway, to reiterate, I think that for example, (even though it is not their fault), because superstar DJs are so unbelievably and wickedly cool spinning the wheels of steel in clubs etc, that it is extremely hard to be holy and that it somehow makes us actually say daaaang to God! Even though I am a hypocrite, I think we should try being holy, rather than saying daaaang to God! So if it is not the DJs fault, then whose fault is it? It could be the same powers that be which permit McDonald’s and Subway to stay open for business on Good Friday or it could just be another consequence of Adolf Hitler? For example, the hymns that we infrequently sing in church today have become so unfashionable and make us cringe a little because they are holy and innocent. However, with their fast and precise electronic music, turntables, DJ controllers and sound systems etc, DJs are very advanced and cutting-edge etc and they are so unbelievably current, up to date and in the know, in that they know and play which songs come out literally every day or week etc. Therefore, DJs should probably be very careful regarding holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI)? However, having said that obviously the original DJs of the acid house and early rave movements of the late 1980s and early 1990s were or had early primitive innocence (EPI) because they were so early and ahead of their time. However, practically all DJs today follow or pursue the cutting-edge, cosmic, electrified and ultramodern, hence, that is why I have done the opposite and I have sought the holy, innocent, old, prehistoric and unfashionable. That is why I chose the name DJ Innocence. If you want to hear my DJing, see website below.

https://lithicmusic.com

What has relativity got to do with crime?

Time! Crime and sin are relative, because for example, slavery and statutory rape were legal or more acceptable in the ancient, medieval and Victorian periods. Therefore, the only issue with modern crimes is that they are anachronistic, in that they are out of place or in the wrong space and time, this is why they are so relatively evil compared to the sins of prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor. Also obviously there is the connection that criminals have to serve time in prison for their crimes or sins. In fact, I believe that time (or this blog) would be a very good thing to study or read in prison?

Physical versus spiritual time travel.

I think the idea of this blog that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period, the law changes over space and time, is not absolute, not universal, not fundamental, is relative and flexible etc has a lot to do with seeming. Crimes and sins seem different in different places and different times or in different frames of reference. It is relative. For example, slavery seems very inhumane to us today in Britain, however, it seemed alright prior to 1833 in Britain. And what we call statutory rape today in Britain seems really bad to us, however, prior to 1885 it relatively seemed alright? Therefore, seeming has a lot to do with relativity and frame of reference, because what seems bad to one observer in one place and time does not seem as bad to another observer in another place and another time. I am fully aware that the second law of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics determine that physical time travel to the past (in life or on Earth) is impossible.

You are growing older by the minute, and there’s nothing you can do about it. There is no traveling back in time. The second law of thermodynamics and statistical mechanics are the culprits.

(Einstein for Dummies, location 1510, 27%).

However, what about spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife? Would it truly be heaven if we could not see or study extinct creatures of the past such as dinosaurs or Australopithecus afarensis in the afterlife? Therefore, this blog gives us the noble and necessary reason or desire for spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife. There is also the grandfather paradox, in that if you travelled back in time and killed your grandfather before he met your grandmother, would you disappear like in the Back To The Future movies? Or if you travelled back in time to 1905 and told Albert Einstein about E = MC² before he had discovered it, and you then travelled back to the future, who is the real discoverer? There may also be philosophical, ethical or moral laws or reasons which prevent time travel to the past, for example, imagine if we could travel back in time to the Upper Palaeolithic period to Lascaux or Chauvet in France, the sites of the famous prehistoric cave paintings. Imagine if we could show these prehistoric cave painters 21st century photorealistic 3D animations of animals on an iPad? Although they would probably be amazed and think it was magic, there is something very wrong in this scenario. Relatively, it’s ridiculous! Prehistoric cave paintings are holy, sacred, timeless and priceless, whereas photorealistic 3D animations are complete worthless rubbish (trust me I have a Computer Animation degree). This proves that the state of being advanced does not matter in the least and it is not better. Primitive prehistoric cave paintings are magnificent, timeless and priceless, whereas advanced 21st century 3D animations of lions and aurochs are complete garbage. All that I am saying is that early primitive innocence (EPI), crime travel, equivalent forgiveness or time for forgiveness may give us the correct moral or ethical reasons for spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife?

Early Pleistocene (Paranthropus robustus) Adolf Hitler, butchering baboon.

For example, as a palaeobotanist would you not wish to be able to travel to the past in the afterlife, to see, touch and study primitive plants?

If you were transported back to the Early Devonian in a time machine and walked among the Rhynie fossils, the taller plants such as Asteroxylon and Zosterophyllum would barely have grazed your knees.

(Cowen’s History of Life, Michael J. Benton, page 116).

The above quote from Cowen’s History of Life may show that paleobotanists subconsciously wish they could spiritually time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife? To reiterate, in the afterlife wouldn’t you wish to be able to see real and alive dinosaurs, in the Jurassic or Cretaceous periods? I know it’s a wish but don’t you kind of presume it wouldn’t be heaven otherwise? There are many intellectual reasons for spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife. So please do not take me too literally when I say, ‘therefore, if Jeffrey Dahmer did not try to be advanced, special or superior to primates and instead became, thought like, acted or accepted that he was primitive, prehistoric or even equivalent to an ape, would we forgive him? If Jeffrey Dahmer spiritually went back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to a more primitive period could he attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or have relative innocence?’ The following demonstrates that the law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period, the law changes over space and time, the law is not absolute, the law is not universal, the law is not fundamental, the law is relative and the law is flexible etc. What I mean by this is that laws or crimes seem different in different places and different times. For example, the first age of consent was set in England, at age 12 (Westminster 1 statute) in 1275, and the Offences Against the Person Act raised the age to 13 in Great Britain and Ireland in 1875, then the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 raised the age of consent to 16. Therefore, relatively what seems statutory rape to us in Britain in the 21st century, did not seem statutory rape in the Victorian period. It is relative and frame of reference. This could determine that if such as Adam Johnson (who had relations with a 15 year old) or Jimmy Savile could travel backwards in time to the Victorian or medieval periods in the afterlife, then in or from this frame of reference, they might seem relatively less guilty? They may attain relative innocence, acceptance and forgiveness?

Victorian (pre-1875) Jimmy Savile, with cane.

In the context of this blog, time and relativity were adventitious discoveries. Initially I had absolutely no interest in time or relativity whatsoever, in fact, I spent the best part of a year just dealing with primitivism, innocence and forgiveness, and I did not even consider time or relativity. Yes, it was a bit of a eureka moment when I realised that the further you go back in time the more primitive life was and the more innocent humans were relatively, therefore, if criminals could travel back in time somehow they might seem more relatively innocent. However, then and only then did I get into time and relativity. Therefore, obviously I had/have absolutely no desire to prove how physical time travel to the past was/is possible. Only that the implications of the link between early primitive innocence (EPI) and time, led me to the conclusion that spiritual time travel (STT) (in the afterlife) to the past is simply necessary for criminals to seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? To reiterate, obviously I am in no way attempting to state, explain or discover how physical time travel to the past in life or on Earth is possible, however, I think spiritual time travel (STT) would be possible in the afterlife? How I do not know, only that it is desirable and necessary. For example, as an archaeologist or physical anthropologist wouldn’t you really wish or have the desire to be able to travel back in time in the afterlife to study genuine, real and alive ancient creatures in their own time periods and natural environments? Would it be heaven if we could not meet archaic hominins such as Homo antecessor and Australopithecus afarensis? Wouldn’t Donald Johanson and Tom Gray wish to meet Lucy? Don’t you believe you will be able to? I mean instead of still dealing with artefacts such as bits of stone tools and fossils such as fragments of bones and coprolites etc? This is what I mean in that how spiritual time travel (STT) to the past in the afterlife is possible we do not know, only that the desire and the intellectual requirement is there.

Traces of Earth’s ancient life have been preserved in rocks as fossils. Paleontology is the science of studying these fossils. Paleontology aims to understand fossils as once‐living organisms, living, breeding, and dying in a real environment on a real but past Earth that we can no longer touch, smell, or see directly.

(Cowen’s History Of Life, edited by Michael J Benton, page 1).

Miocene (Australopithecus africanus) Jeffrey Dahmer, collecting fruit with tribe.

Superstitious primitive innocence (SPI).

I think primitivism is related to gullibility, naivety and superstition (as well as innocence), for example, in South Africa in the April or May of 1856 the Kaffir tribes commenced a “national suicide” or “cattle killing delusion” because of a so called prophet called Umhlakaza that arose among them and told them that there was going to be a resurrection of heroes and cattle, therefore, he told them to kill all of their cattle and destroy all of their stores of corn in anticipation of this resurrection that was supposed to occur on the 18th of February 1857. There were two groups among the Kaffirs, the Abatamba or believers and the Amagogotya, the faithless unbelievers. By the 4th of January 1857, not less than 300,000 to 400,000 cattle were culled. Obviously the resurrection did not materialise on the 18th of February 1857 and consequently there was a widespread and disastrous famine and many tens of thousands of people died. This is superstitious primitive innocence (SPI)! In fact, you can use any of the following terms also: naive primitive innocence (NPI) and gullible primitive innocence (GPI). We relatively advanced Europeans of the 21st century can never judge, or look down with askance, anger and annoyance at primitive people of the past because they were gullible, naive, had such superstitions and witch crafts etc, it is just superstitious primitive innocence (SPI)! Even we Europeans probably had such superstitions not too long ago? For example, in the 1980s and 1990s, I think we were possibly a little more gullible, naive and superstitious than we are today? We tended to believe a little more in ghosts, mysteries, myths and phenomena such as UFOs, ghosts, the Loch Ness monster (like the surgeon’s photograph), Bigfoot (like the Patterson-Gimiln footage) and crop circles etc. There was a fad for UFOs in the 1990s which possibly had a lot to do with the TV show The X-Files? Post-millennium and with the coming of the widespread availability of the internet, I believe there was a sharp decline in the popularity of The X-Files and possibly the belief and interest in UFOs, and the world became more rational and sceptical? Therefore, I believe the further you go back in time the more gullible, naive and superstitious people were, for example, the Victorians had a fascination with seances and early modern people had a predilection to believe in witches (like the Berwick and Salem witch trials) and early medieval people had an inclination to believe in miracles etc. We relatively advanced and rational 21st century Homo sapiens need to accept that like children, primitive people make things up, and that we have to respect that and go a long with it. If we ever get to meet prehistoric people in the afterlife we should be prepared for the fact that they also probably had a lot of superstitious primitive innocence (SPI).

But anthropologists can be reasonably sure that humans were using myths at the time of cave art, which flourished in Europe around 30,000 years ago. Many archaeologists believe that, apart from being decorative, cave art depicts at least four main concepts:

Shamanic voyages, wherein shamans (traditional healers) traveled to a spirit world to fix problems such as poor health in the material world. Traditional shamans continue to do this today, recording their voyages in rock shelters.

Hunting magic depicting scenes people wanted to see, such as large herds of fat, vulnerable animals.

Myths or narrative parables instructing people how to live properly.

Rites of passage, which ritually ushered people into various stages of life. These ceremonies were then recorded on cave walls.

(Anthropology For Dummies, Cameron M. Smith and Evan T. Davies, page 130).

In fact, even today if you were to go on an anthropological or ethnographic expedition, for example, to the Amazon rainforest or Papua New Guinea you should be prepared to deal with some forms of superstitious primitive innocence (SPI). Superstitious primitive innocence (SPI) is a beautiful thing. I think we of the 1980s also had naive primitive innocence (NPI) in another technologically primitive way, in that, yet again, (like rave or electronic music), our generation was another generational first, that meaning we were the first generation to see photorealistic 3D special effects or CGI. Before SFX or CGI, films were made with practical effects, or just puppets and animated plasticine models etc. I specifically remember watching the original Clash of the Titans (1981) with Perseus fighting animated plasticine models of warrior skeletons, Medusa and the Kracken etc. These types of primitive practical effects we called ‘camera tricks’ at the time. The first time I saw photorealistic CGI that amazed me was the liquid metal or mercury antagonist robot in Terminator 2: Judgment Day, that was 1991. And again by 1993 with the original Jurassic Park film, the CGI of the dinosaurs blew me away. As you will see, although such films are primitive, there is a certain magic or je ne sais quoi about such films as the original Jurassic Park and the original Star Wars movies, that somehow makes them relatively superior to or more nostalgic than the more recent 21st century sequels or prequels. This is something we of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s all know, it is something which on is on the tips of our tongues and that we cannot fully grasp or fully explain. I believe that certain magic (or je ne sais quoi) about older or earlier Stephen Spielberg or George Lucas films is early primitive innocence (EPI). It is something that even Stephen Spielberg or George Lucas cannot recreate in their own more modern sequels or prequels. So how is this related to gullible primitive innocence (GPI)? I believe photorealistic CGI took a away a lot of our superstitious primitive innocence (SPI) because there were a lot of hoax films made with photorealistic CGI showing UFOs and crop circles in the 1990s that did actually fool us. Basically what I mean is that photorealistic CGI may have removed some of our naive primitive innocence (NPI) and made us more sceptical and rational?

More early primitive innocence (EPI).

To reiterate, I remember the days before the internet and mobile phones, when CDs came out and when the first handheld computers came out, that being the Nintendo Game Boy, the Sega Game Gear and Atari Lynx. Before handheld computers, we played things called ‘electronic games’ which were LCD games, that looked something like an LCD or Casio watch. My favourite was Donkey Kong. I can also remember Pong, that primitive tennis-like TV game from the 1970s, my elder brothers (both 1970s born) had an old orange Pong console. I can also remember the days before unleaded fuel when we used environmentally unfriendly, four-star (leaded) petrol. I can also obviously remember not only the days before DVDs (which I was amazed at) when we used VHS tapes, but I can also remember Betamax videotapes. Also in the 1980s and 1990s if you wanted to listen to music properly you used vinyl records, cassette tapes or CDs on something called a ‘stack’ which were fairly big pieces of kit. This is in sharp contrast to streaming mp3s over WIFI from Spotify on your iPhone through your wireless speaker over Bluetooth! To wrap it up I remember the Atari, the Commodore 64 and the Amiga 500. Early primitive innocence (EPI) makes us proud to be old, for example, I am proud that I can remember the days before the internet and mobile phones! I am also proud I can remember the days before CDs! Therefore, we all want to say ‘I remember the days before this!’ and ‘I remember this old thing!’ etc. Early primitive innocence (EPI) makes us want to be as old as possible. We want to age like fine wine and be ancient, classical and thousands of years old like Plato or Socrates etc. For example, if you were born in the early 1980s etc do you consider yourself a generation X person or a millennial? Do you consider yourself a twentieth-century or a twenty-first-century person? Do you consider yourself a second-millennium or a third-millennium person? I am the generation X, twentieth-century and second-millennium type! Even those born recently in the 2000s and 2010s desire early primitive innocence (EPI)! Do not worry if you were born in the 2000s or 2010s and cannot remember the days before much. It is time and relativity. It will happen to you. Just give it 20-30 years. For example, if you were born in the 1990s can you not at least remember the days before Bluetooth? I remember the first time I heard of Bluetooth, two students in my class at Newcastle College in 1999 or 2000 did a presentation on it before it came out. They described it, what it did and told the class to look out for it coming out in the future. Also can you remember ball mice? That is a good one! Youth is the most attractive and desirable condition down here on Earth, however, I believe the opposite is true in the afterlife, in that the older you become the holier, greater, prouder, wiser and more graceful, famous and illustrious you become.

17th century (tech savvy) Jimmy Savile.

My grandfather was born in 1926 and I remember him telling me in the 1990s that what he got for Christmas as a child was ‘an apple and an orange and a penny in a stocking.’ This is early primitive innocence (EPI)! Unfortunately, we born in the 1980s were relatively spoiled as children at Christmas, we received anything we wanted, for example, an Atari, a Commodore 64 or an Amiga etc, plus all the sweets and chocolate we could ever eat. What does this mean? It means that we should look forward to the past, meaning we should look forward to ageing like fine wine and being very old indeed, imagine being 1000s of years old, like Plato and Socrates, instead of childishly seeking youth. I was a youngster of the 1980s and 1990s and yes even the 1990s were much more primitive and innocent than today, however, most importantly, we kids of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s were never ever supposed to get old. We were supposed to be young forever. Therefore, I believe that an application for spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) is to help us (especially the Jackass generation of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s) come to terms with or overcome ageing and getting old. However, hopefully, with early primitive innocence (EPI), we can grow old gracefully? Considering the 1980s were more primitive and innocent than today, how primitive and innocent do you think the, 1920s, 1930s and 1940s were? Think back to those black and white films. Therefore, imagine how primitive and innocent Victorian, medieval, ancient and prehistoric people were? As you will see, because the, 1920s, 1930s and 1940s had so much early primitive innocence (EPI), this might atone for and ameliorate the Holocaust and the two world wars?

The future is less innocent.

On a different but related note, remember, this blog is entirely about the past, however, to prove that the future is less innocent, I will categorically and emphatically stake my own life on the following metaphor: Kids today get away with murder! I know this because, first of all, I myself as a youth and my generation of the 1970s, 1980s and 1990s in general got away with murder. I am also a father myself and I can see that the next generation is getting away with even more murder. I can also see this trend in the older generations, for example, my grandfather was born in 1926 and I can tell you that my grandfather was a true gentleman, he never, and I mean NEVER swore, cursed, used foul language or told a dirty joke etc. It was somehow physically impossible for him to do so. In fact, all the people born in the 1920s are the same, in that it is physically impossible for them swear, curse, use foul language or tell dirty jokes etc. The 1920s generation are or were the ultimate early primitive innocence (EPI). However, I know from growing up in the 1980s and 1990s that my parents generation, that is, those born in 1950s, are or were relatively less innocent than my grandfather’s generation. What I mean by this is that my parents generation DID swear, curse, use foul language and tell a dirty jokes etc. Therefore, my generation, that is, those born in the 1970s and 1980s are even less innocent than my parents generation, and this is demonstrated through things such as the Jackass and Dirty Sanchez TV shows that somehow represent my generation. Therefore, what on God’s clean Earth are my generation going to leave for the next generation? So on and so forth. I think we can see the future? The future is less innocent, it will simply be more of the Jackass TV show and it will simply be ruder and breakdown more barriers.

Temptation of technology.

16th century (tech savvy) Jimmy Savile II.

Technology is very much like evolution, in that it constantly evolves and becomes more advanced every 6 months or so. Like evolution technology tempts us into a mad dash for the latest, most advanced and most highly evolved technologies. For example, all those amazing gifts we children of the 1980s received at Christmas such as Ataris, Commodore 64s, Amigas and Nintendos etc have all become worthless junk. Like evolution advanced technology is a temptation in that it tempts or lures us to exist in the present or future instead of living in the blissful, primitive and innocent past. The present and future are valueless, while the past and prehistory are priceless. For example, iPads and iPhones tempt us that were born in the 1980s to sever our connections to and to ridicule the unfashionable, dinosaur-like and knuckle dragging 1980s and to exist in the fashionable, advanced and smart present and to look forward to the cutting-edge future. Technology coaxes us out of the decade of our birth, the primitive and innocent 1980s and into the advanced and evil twenties of the 21st century. Without spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), obsolete technologies become worthless junk, and we lose ourselves in a frantic race to seek the next new advanced technologies, the forefront and the cutting-edge, whereas with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), we slow down, relax and are comfortable with the past and such old technologies are not so bad and at least the memories of them do have some value and worth. I can remember when CDs came out, this is my own early primitive innocence (EPI)! I can also remember ball mice and floppy disks etc.

Middle Palaeolithic (Neanderthal) Jeffrey Dahmer, with rock and antelope skull.

Recent past ridicule!

On a slightly different note, there are possibly two ways in which we can look at the past, for example, we can say that in a way the original Star Wars films of the 1970s and 1980s were much better than the prequels of the 1990s and 2000s, because they had a certain magic or je ne sais quoi? (I think that je ne sais quoi is early primitive innocence (EPI)? Or we can ridicule the original films for their primitivism and say that the prequels were better because they were far more advanced? I personally believe that despite their primitivism the original Star Wars films were relatively superior to the prequels, however, why were they? We can also say that in a way The Second Summer of Love and the acid house youth culture in the U.K. of 1987 to 1990 with pioneering clubs such as Shoom and Spectrum in London and the Hacienda in Manchester were way more powerful and much better than the clubs and dance music scene of today? Or we can ridicule the antiquated music, fashion and hairstyles of the late 1980s and say that today’s dance music is far superior technologically and that’s the end of it? I think that despite the fact that dance music is of a far superior quality today, that in a way The Second Summer of Love was definitely a lot better and bigger relatively than today’s dance music or club scene. You may ridicule Sesame’s treet by Smart e’s (1992) or Good Life by Inner City (1988) today because they are the recent past, but you should not, as such early rave songs are classical. You have all heard the terms classics or classic anthems in term of trance or house music, and that is exactly what they are. They will age like fine wine and become relatively holy and classical etc, like well, classical music! It is just hard to see that something is classical in the recent past. Also, for example, you may ridicule Rick Astley’s Never Gonna Give You Up (1987), but it is so innocent! Why do we laugh and snigger at something which is early primitive innocence (EPI)? Are we evil? Unlike the Buddha and Jesus Christ, Inner City, Smart e’s and Rick Astley will never be young, hip or cool ever again down here in life, however, they will age like fine wine and become classical. I mean if kids today say daaaaang to Good Life by Inner City (1988), what is the point in saying daaaang to prehistoric man, Tiktaalik roseae or single felled life forms? Good Life is classical and it was revolutionary at its time!

Victorian (pre-Offences Against the Person Act of 1875) Jimmy Savile, with gloves.

I think that early primitive innocence (EPI) can be seen throughout time, particularly on TV, in our changing fashions and haircuts. Early primitive innocence (EPI) is like a bubble which gets burst every decade? Looking back at the 1980s and 1990s from the 2020 frame of reference you can see that all the fashions and haircuts have changed. Although, at the time I swear our haircuts were fine. Relative to us, only the 1960s and 1970s had bad haircuts, yet now it is 1990s turn to be the ‘hippies’. As one last example, concerning say the 1960s, we can say that the 1960s were much better in a way for Europeans, in that Europeans were more powerful and secure in the 1960s. Secondly, we can ridicule the 1960s and say ‘Daaaaaang! It is so dated and old fashioned! Look how primitive it was! I’m glad I’m in 2020!’ This is the temptation of technology. For example, London in 1969 was 99% indigenous European, however, non-Europeans may therefore, tend to ridicule the past by saying ‘Oh my God! The 60s!? How old fashioned is that!? Look at the haircuts! Daaaang!’ Imagine if we could ask The Beatles what decade they thought was better the 1960s or the 2010s? Despite advancements in technology, what would you think their answer would be? I went clubbing in the late 1990s during the superclub explosion of that decade and although I prefer techno and trance music to rock and roll, I am wise enough to know and understand that (like the British Invasion of the US with rock and pop acts during the mid-1960s) the 1960s were relatively much more powerful, much better and much bigger for Europeans. Hence, if I could I would sensibly choose the 1960s over the 1990s, despite the lack of techno and trance music in that decade. Techno and trance music are the temptation of technology. You have got to watch yourself, we all do it, we all ridicule the past and say ‘Daaaaang! Look at the haircuts! That’s so last week!’ The original DJs of the acid house youth culture of the late 1980s and early 1990s, and up to the present day probably do this a lot? They likely believe that with their advanced, fast and precise electronic music that they have really ‘done one’ on the dated rock and roll of the 1960s and 1970s etc? However, trust me, relatively, The Beatles are much better. You would rather be a Beatle in the 1960s than a trance DJ in the 2020s? On a different note, in the afterlife, would The Beatles choose to live in 1969 London or 2020 London (which is over 50% non-European)? Considering the 1960s were much more primitive and innocent, and because their fame and fortune may depend on it, I expect they will choose to exist in 1969 London in the afterlife? In fact, despite every European’s outspoken leftist tendencies down here on Earth, I bet you the vast majority of Europeans in the afterlife (when fashion does not matter) hypocritically choose to live and exist in the time periods of their birth or youth, in that most people will go back in time as far as possible? That is, unless they are tempted by an iPad to exist in the 21st century? I know I will at the least live in the innocent 80s! This is because the further you go back in time, relatively the more primitive and innocent life was and the more powerful and secure indigenous Europeans were?

Mesolithic Adolf Hitler, hunting deer.

Currently hip.

On the subject of fashion, ironically, older music artists should like spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) because they look back to the poor, primitive, unfashionable, prehistoric and past, instead of the rich, advanced, fashionable, modern and future. Early primitive innocence (EPI) does not ridicule the recent past and it makes things age like fine wine and become classical etc. Pop stars and their songs date quickly and become old but like old technologies, with early primitive innocence (EPI), they could still retain their value and avoid the ridicule? If you watch or listen to 1960s or 1980s music you can see and hear the early primitive innocence (EPI)! All pop stars have their 15 minutes of fame and then as soon as it started, it is all over. They are no longer fashionable. And there is not a lot they can do about it, as the next generation of teenagers are into something else, something new, more modern and more fashionable. And it’s the kids who do the ridiculing. Every generation thinks theirs is the best! In fact, do kids today even know who Rick Astley, Oasis or The Beatles are? ‘Daaaang! That is sooo last millennium!’ Do they care? It is eternal and perpetual progress into rubbish. It is like the eternal relevance of Jesus Christ and the Buddha, in that they (unlike pop stars) never date or go out of fashion. Jesus Christ and the Buddha are eternally relative or relevant like twenty-somethings and they are always the forefront, fashionable and the cutting-edge. If there is such a thing as a come back for over the hill artists such as The Beatles, early primitive innocence (EPI) may help because it gets rid of the ridicule and makes things classical? For example, I believe Madonna is or will become unbelievably classical, she was the ultimate icon of the 1980s, she was so early and ahead of her time and she was so influential on my and future generations. There is something about pop stars, DJs and artists etc in that they always try to be the coolest and hippest in the present or at the time, however, ultimately (unlike Jesus Christ and the Buddha) they all date and become classical, or attain early primitive innocence (EPI)! You would definitely want to be Madonna in the 1980s as opposed to Justin Bieber in the 2010s, this is because Madonna was earlier, and therefore, bigger and more classical etc. Concerning music artists, such as The Beatles and Madonna it is a case of the earlier the better because you attain early primitive innocence (EPI). Early primitive innocence (EPI) makes us appreciate older pop stars in a much longer lasting, deeper and more satisfying way than being currently hip, cool or fashionable for a year or so. Just as some respectful advice, as an outspokenly liberal pop star, if you do not care about our uncool, unhip and currently unfashionable ancestors such as Henry the Navigator, Edward Colston or Horatio Nelson etc then why on Earth should anyone care about Rick Astley, Oasis or The Beatles? Artists such as The Beatles are also the past, just a relatively recent one. If you want us to care about your past, you have to care about the whole past not just your own, by this I mean you have to care about our politically incorrect (or uncool, unhip and currently unfashionable) ancestors such as Horatio Nelson and Cecil Rhodes etc. So what do you choose 1969 or 2020 London? Do you ridicule or praise the past? Do you choose power and security or fashion? Fashion is ephemeral and insignificant. I personally choose power and security. However, in the afterlife, we will be both powerful and fashionable.

Lower Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, flint knapping.

THE DOUBLES.

You have to remember just how complex and important symbols really are. At least two kinds of symbolism are critical to the issue of behavioral modernity:

Shallow symbols, which can only stand for one other thing — for example, a monkey’s aerial-predator-warning screech, as opposed to its ground-predator-warning screech.

Deep symbols, which can stand for many different things, perhaps even simultaneously — for example, humans can say “That guy is a real snake,” and other humans understand that he’s not a physical snake, but that he has snakelike characteristics.

Shallow symbols are pretty common in animal communication, and their real significance isn’t clear until you consider how different they are from the deep symbols that can stand for several different ideas. What these deep symbols really reveal is the capacity for metaphor; however complex any other animal communication system is, none of them use metaphor. But humans can’t seem to get away from it; even saying I can’t “get away from it” is a metaphor. Metaphor is ingrained in our language, and its power to foster complex and cross-pollinated thoughts is tremendous.

(Anthropology For Dummies, Cameron M. Smith and Evan T. Davies, page 130).

Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are the work of doubles or double puns. This is probably because they are all about time and anthropology. So far I have found at least 8 double puns, I will adumbrate each.

Time forgiveness as mentioned is a double pun because spiritual time travel (STT) is firstly quite literally time for forgiveness, as time for the purpose of forgiveness. Secondly, it definitely about time for forgiveness, as in today please.

Bipedalism is the first step is a double meaning in terms of anthropology, because bipedalism is metaphorically the first step on the road to advancement or humanity, and bipedalism is also quite literally the first physical step.

Sticks and stones as mentioned is a double pun because firstly prehistoric man had nothing but sticks and stones for technology and weapons etc. Secondly, we have all heard the old rhyme, sticks and stones will break my bones but names will never hurt me. This rhyme is adjuvant to forgiveness because present sinners such as me need protection from name calling and slander etc. Hence, sticks and stones.

It’s in the past is a double meaning because firstly the key to forgiveness lies in spiritual time travel (STT) to the distant past such as the Victorian, medieval, ancient and Palaeolithic periods etc. Secondly, we have all heard the old saying, it’s in the past, as in the clouds have blown over and our troubles are in the past.

The art of forgiveness is a double meaning because firstly as you can see by the images in the essay that my art is quite literally the art of forgiveness, as in art for the purpose of forgiveness. Secondly, this whole blog including the method is the art of forgiveness, as in the martial arts or feng shui.

Get the picture? is a double meaning in terms of the art in this essay, because first of all, we have all heard the saying get the picture, as in do you understand something? On the other hand, in terms of the art in this essay, you have to get what all the pictures portray, which is crime travel and equivalence?

Cutting-edge trance (rock music) has a double ironic meaning because DJs, trance and techno music are unbelievably the forefront, current and cutting-edge, in that DJs are literally up to date with the latest releases day by day and week by week, however, the irony is that prehistoric man used flint and rock or stone scrapers and choppers etc literally as a cutting-edge.

Light punishment is at least a double meaning because first of all this blog is about lighthearted humour or comedy for present criminals, secondly (or similarly) the punishment for present criminals a light as can possibly be, and lastly, time and relativity or spiritual time travel (STT) is actually connected to physical light.

Medieval Jimmy Savile, with axe and shield.

PRIMITIVE AND ADVANCED DOUBLE CONVERSE.

Why and how is primitivism linked to innocence?

For example, for a surgeon to take drugs is unbelievably sinful, but to a bricklayer taking drugs is not even a sin? Why? Because a surgeon is advanced and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent, while a bricklayer is primitive, and therefore, less responsible and therefore more innocent.

South Africa’s 70,000-year-old Blombos Cave has yielded dozens of stone tablets bearing scratched x’s, some divots that look like o’s, parallel lines carved into their surfaces and rows of notches suggesting counts of something; these markings are clearly the products of symbol-using minds (and perhaps the world’s first tic-tac-toe fiends).

(Anthropology For Dummies, Cameron M. Smith and Evan T. Davies, page 121).

For example, I know it’s infantile, but as an experiment, if as an adult modern Homo sapiens you were to doodle a simple crosshatch design on a piece of paper right now, this achievement is relatively absolutely trivial and totally valueless today.

Simple crosshatch doodle.

Only if a modern Homo sapiens child or infant doodled such a crosshatch design would it be relatively impressive. However, similarly, when archaic Homo sapiens engraved simple crosshatch designs on ochre pieces in the Blombos cave in South Africa between 70,000 and 100,000 years ago, (which represented a kind of early abstract or symbolic depiction and is arguably among the most complex and clearly formed of objects claimed to be early abstract representations), this achievement is or was relatively amazing. Notice from the above examples, there are definitely at least two converse ways in which one can be relatively primitive or advanced. We can use the term ‘early years’ as in infants, who are younger than us, and are as primitive and innocent as new born babies. Or for example, we can use the term ‘early men’ as in cavemen, who are much older than us, and are as primitive and innocent as a new born babies. The former is younger than us, yet more primitive and innocent than us, while the latter is older than us, yet more primitive and innocent than us. Either way, this means that if you are alive and mature enough to read this blog then YOU are advanced, less innocent, more culpable and guilty etc. Relative crime works similarly to this relative difference in value between modern and prehistoric crosshatch designs. One is extremely valuable while the other is completely valueless. Also, if prehistoric man is early primitive innocence (EPI), then Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust are late advanced guilt (LAG). And as mentioned the further you go back in time the more primitive life was and animals (such as humans) were, therefore, relatively the more innocent they were. I will adumbrate or explain each of the 4 components of the primitive and advanced double converse in more detail as follows:

  1. Early primitive innocence (EPI) or young primitive innocence (YPI) : The younger you are the more primitive you are therefore the more innocent you are. The older you are the more advanced you are therefore the less innocent you are.
    • This means that children get into much less trouble than adults for sin.
    • This means, for example, today if a 15-year-old boy has relations with a 14-year-old girl he gets into a lot less trouble than an adult, because he is younger or more juvenile and therefore more primitive, and therefore more innocent. However, therefore, if today a 28-year-old man has relations with a 14-year-old girl, he will get into a lot more trouble than a teenager because he is older or more adult and therefore more advanced, and therefore less innocent.
  2. Early primitive innocence (EPI) or old primitive innocence (OPI): The earlier you are the more primitive you are, therefore the more innocent you are. The later you are the more advanced you are, therefore the less innocent you are.
    • This means that slavery was relatively less of an issue in ancient and medieval times for such as the ancient Egyptians as compared to early modern British slavers such as Edward Colston because the ancient Egyptians were earlier and more ancient, therefore, they were more primitive, and therefore more innocent. The only difference between the ancient Egyptians and early modern British slavers such as Edward Colston is time, in that the latter was much more recent.
    • This means that Jeffrey Dahmer got into much more trouble for modern cannibalism than did Homo antecessor for ancient cannibalism, because Jeffrey Dahmer was later and more modern, therefore, he was more advanced, and therefore less innocent.
    • This means that later and more advanced countries such as America are less innocent than earlier more primitive countries such as Muslim countries. This determines that Muslim countries can probably, therefore, get away with more violence than America?
Early primitive innocence (EPI) as in early years, as in infants in life.Early primitive innocence (EPI) as in early men, as in cavemen in the afterlife or those older than you in life.
Late advanced guilt (LAG) as in adults in life.Late advanced guilt (LAG) as in modern or contemporary man in life or the afterlife.
Primitive and advanced double converse table.

As you can see early primitive innocence (EPI) is double as there are two types of EPI and two types of LAG, yet they are completely different. The table below explains the primitive and advanced double converse more distinctly with four unique components or states.

Young primitive innocence (YPI) as in early years, as in infants in life.Old primitive innocence (OPI) as in early men, as in cavemen in the afterlife or those older than you in life.
Old advanced guilt (OAG) as in adults in life.Young advanced guilt (YAG) as in modern or contemporary man in life or the afterlife.
Primitive and advanced double converse table.

To differentiate between the two types of EPI, we can use the second table as in YPI (as in babies) and OPI (as in cavemen).

To explain a bit better:

  • I believe obviously babies, infants and children are YPI (or EPI).
  • I believe child abusers such as Jimmy Savile and Adam Johnson are OAG (or LAG).
  • I believe older people (dead or alive) and such as prehistoric men etc are OPI (or EPI).
  • I believe serious criminals such as Jeffrey Dahmer are YAG (or LAG).

I believe Adam Johnson is OAG because he had relations with a 15 year old girl. Therefore, he is old advanced guilt (OAG) relative to a child or teenager who is young primitive innocence (YPI).

I believe Jeffrey Dahmer is YAG because he committed modern cannibalism in America in the 20th century. Therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer is young advanced guilt (YAG) relative to a prehistoric hominin such as Homo antecessor, who practiced ancient cannibalism in say the Lower Palaeolithic period and who is therefore, old primitive innocence (OPI).

I will also explain the above table as an urgent warning. The top two rows are good, however, what you want to be is OPI (or EPI) which is the best. The bottom two rows are bad, however, you never want to be YAG, Jeffrey Dahmer is YAG! YAG is the worst. Jeffrey Dahmer is young advanced guilt (YAG) because he is recent. Therefore, how can we give Jeffrey Dahmer old primitive innocence (OPI) or early primitive innocence (EPI)? The only way I can think of is some form of spiritual time travel (STT) in the afterlife for Jeffrey Dahmer to such as the Lower Palaeolithic period where and when cannibalism was usual or was not a problem.

Text.

Now I have shown you the primitive and advanced double converse table, I will now show you how to write it with words:

  • A surgeon is advanced and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent, than a bricklayer for doing drugs, because a bricklayer is primitive, and therefore, less responsible and therefore more innocent.
  • A child is primitive in years and therefore, less responsible and therefore more innocent, for having relations with a young girl than an adult who is advanced of years, and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent.
  • Ancient Egyptian slavers were relatively primitive and therefore, less responsible and therefore, more innocent than early modern slavers, such as Edward Colston, who was relatively advanced, and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent.
  • Homo antecessor were relatively early and primitive and therefore, less responsible and therefore, more innocent for ancient cannibalism than Jeffrey Dahmer was for modern cannibalism, because Jeffrey Dahmer was relatively recent and advanced, and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent.
  • Older countries such as Muslim countries are relatively primitive and therefore, less responsible and therefore, more innocent for violence than younger countries such as America, which are relatively advanced, and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent.

In writing the primitive and advanced double converse with responsibility we can therefore, use the concise statement: the less the more, the more the less.

For those who exalt themselves will be humbled, and those who humble themselves will be exalted. Matthew 23:12

And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. So anyone who becomes as humble as this little child is the greatest in the Kingdom of Heaven.” Matthew 18:3-4.

As you will see by reading this blog what Jesus Christ meant by humbling ourselves as little children is early primitive innocence (EPI) as in early years, as in infants, and He also meant early primitive innocence (EPI), as in early men, as in cavemen. The above list always means that if you are in a state of being advanced then you should know better, whereas primitive people can literally and metaphorically get away with murder. For example, Jeffrey Dahmer should have known better than Homo antecessor about modern cannibalism because he was more recent, modern and advanced, and early modern British recent slavers such as Edward Colston should have known better than the ancient Egyptians about slavery, again because they were much more recent, modern and advanced. Early primitive innocence (EPI) is relative because to take me as an example, I am 39 years old or about half way through life, and I have quite a lot of EPI in that I can remember the days before the internet, mobile phones, electronic music, photorealistic 3D special effects and CDs etc, therefore, I have quite a lot of EPI. However, this is only relative to a teenager, born say in the 2000s who only remembers a small amount of primitive or obsolete technologies and the days before recent technologies such as say smartphones and iPhone etc. Therefore, teenagers only have a relatively small amount of EPI. However, relative to an nonagenarian born say in 1928, who can remember say horse and cart and the days before, fridges, freezers, washing machines, colour television, penicillin and a very long list of many other life-essential things that I ignorantly cannot fathom, therefore, in this case, I humbly have a tiny amount of EPI relative to a great nonagenarian. However, obviously it is relative again, because even for a great nonagenarian down here on Earth or in life, there are people in the afterlife who relatively have infinitely more EPI than us all such as prehistoric man, who can remember stone tools and the days before metal, agriculture, animal domestication and an infinite amount of other life-essential things that we cannot imagine. Therefore, concerning the converse between early primitive innocence (EPI) and late advanced guilt (LAG), it is ironic that children and babies have all the innocence yet although we all want our youthful bodies and vitality back, we do not in any way want EPI or YPI in the mind in the least, in that we do not want to remember so little an amount of obsolete technology and the days before so little. Therefore, EPI or OPI is in the mind, it is all that matters and the more you have of it the better. Also, concerning the converse between EPI and LAG, because there are those younger than us who are more primitive and innocent than us and there are those older than us who are more primitive and innocent than us, this must determine than there is some unhappy middle or medium that is relatively advanced guilt? For example, it could ironically be 18 year olds and those in their twenties who are the most advanced and most culpable and guilty etc? This is because they are physically mature, however, they grew up with the internet, mobile phones, Facebook and Spotify etc and hence are very tech savvy and advanced etc, and yet simultaneously cannot remember the days before them. This is ironic because who doesn’t want the physical body of an 18 year old or those in their twenties? However, no one wants their minds or their relatively small amount of EPI. This determines that the best way to practice spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) is to honour, respect and revere your elders especially your recent or close elders such as your parents and grandparents! However, you also even need to honour and respect those kids in school who are a year or two older than or above you. You need to honour and respect your recent elders before you honour and respect your distant ancestors such prehistoric man, because that is easy. And remember you do not need advanced qualifications to attain EPI, all you need is age, time and memories. Think about it, what would you rather have an advanced medical doctorate or PhD etc or a lot of EPI? Think about it, in the afterlife you will have all the time in eternity to attain advanced qualifications such as a doctorate, but nobody can purchase time, EPI or memories etc. Therefore, would you rather be a 92 year old with a lot of EPI or a twenty 23 year old with a doctorate qualification? I would rather have a lot of EPI than advanced qualifications. This determines that if you feel trapped in life with no qualifications, over the hill, passed it, and that you will have to wait until you die before you can attain qualifications or get a second chance, that EPI can set you free in this life. If you are old enough you already have a priceless qualification of time called early primitive innocence (EPI)! However, as a warning, I will prove to you that you will not get or attain your early primitive innocence (EPI) qualifications unless you first forgive relative criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. Therefore, if you don’t forgive the above, this means that a 23 year old with a masters or a doctorate qualification is above your station.

Relative value and worth of time and EPI.

To prove that advanced technology, wealth, fame, youth and beauty do not matter in the least compared to time and EPI consider this. As a present day alive 92 year old ex-coal miner born in 1928, if the devil himself were to offer you all the riches in the world and beautiful youth, nay, if the devil himself even offered you to take the place of the very future king of England, that is, 7 year old, Prince George Alexander Louis of Cambridge, on the condition that you have to be born in his birth year (2013) and live an entire life in his time and generation, would you accept this offer and swap your 92 years of time and EPI for this materialistic and earthly paradise? Nay! If the devil himself even offered you to take the place of the very richest man on Earth, that is, William (Bill) Henry Gates III, on the condition that you have to be born in his birth year (1955) and live an entire life in his time and generation, would you accept this offer and swap your 92 years of time and EPI for this materialistic and earthly paradise? You would say to the devil, HELL NO! Being serious now, it is quite literally hell to be younger than you are. The only life you would live again is your own or someone’s older than yours. You would never swap your priceless time or EPI for any earthly paradise, riches, wealth, fame or beauty, if that life was even a day younger than yours. This proves that advanced technology, riches, wealth, fame, youth and beauty do not matter in the least compared to time and EPI, and that time and EPI are the most important commodities in this life and the next. Thank God for Albert Einstein!

“Don’t store up treasures here on earth, where moths eat them and rust destroys them, and where thieves break in and steal. Store your treasures in heaven, where moths and rust cannot destroy, and thieves do not break in and steal. Wherever your treasure is, there the desires of your heart will also be.” Matthew 6:19-21.

Those older than you have treasures!

https://advancedguilt.com

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo erectus) Jeffrey Dahmer, kneeling.

Recent slavery.

Just to expound on the slavery example, it was obviously much less of an issue for ancient, medieval, early modern and even Victorian people to slave than it is for us modern people to slave today.

For example, hundreds of years ago there was little or no opposition to the death penalty in the United States of America (USA). However, over the past 50 years there have been concerted efforts to restrict or eliminate the death penalty. The same can be said about slavery in the history of the USA. For centuries, indeed millennia, slavery was a universal norm throughout the world. The abolitionist movement in the mid-19th Century CE and the Civil War led to the elimination of slavery in our country. What had been accepted as an unquestioned norm, indeed, a given for centuries, eventually was questioned and a new moral sensitivity emerged that compelled the elimination of slavery based on humanitarian principles even though the Bible, for example, regards slavery as part of the natural order.

The examples of slavery and the death penalty support the principle of moral relativism in that as a particular culture matures its views of right and wrong behavior can and do change.

(Why The Catholic Church’s Position On Moral Relativism Is Incorrect, James M. Mataya, location 44).

I have read many contemporary books on the discovery and exploration of West Africa, and two books particularly were related to slavery, one by Carl Bernhard Wadstrom and another by Jean Barbot. I learned that Carl Bernhard Wadstrom was a passionate abolitionist while Jean Barbot was a practising slaver by trade. How was slavery less of an issue in Henry the Navigator’s or Jean Barbot’s time and more abhorrent in ours or Carl Bernhard Wadstrom’s time? Because medieval and early modern people were more primitive and modern people are more advanced. Carl Bernhard Wadstrom’s generation should have known better than Jean Barbot’s generation. Also ‘in the beginning’ nobody forewarned medieval men, such as Henry the Navigator, ‘thou shalt not slave!’ Therefore they obviously slaved. We cannot sit here in the 21st century and reverse condemn Victorian, medieval, ancient or prehistoric men such as Jean Barbot or Edward Colston from our high and mighty frame of reference. To reiterate, the only difference between the ancient Egyptians and early modern British slavers such as Edward Colston is time, in that the latter was much more recent. Apart from the Holocaust, you cannot genuinely condemn the past. This is because relatively there was nothing wrong with such acts in those periods. It is only in the 20th and 21st-century frame of reference that slavery seems abhorrent. We should not judge primitive people such as Henry the Navigator, Jean Barbot or Edward Colston from our frame of reference, even the Old and New Testaments, Plato and Moses spoke positively of slavery. Are you going to pull down statues of Plato or Moses? Again, it is only because Plato and Moses were much older, and therefore much more primitive, and less responsible and therefore, more innocent than Edward Colston as to why you do not castigate them. However, now that you understand that it is only because of time, perhaps you would go easier on relatively recent slavers such as Edward Colston? I will say this once and for all, recent slavers such as Edward Colston are nothing more early primitive innocence (EPI)! For example, prehistoric man did some unspeakable things such as rape, killing and cannibalism, but would we judge them? No! It is only a matter of relativity. The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible.

“Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven.”

Luke 6:37

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo erectus) Adolf Hitler, using fire to make tools.

Ethics.

How is crime or sin relative?

I believe that there is forgiveness for everything in the afterlife, including the Holocaust, however, remember forgiveness is never justification. Obviously, I am in absolutely no way condoning people’s crimes. People who commit crimes obviously have to serve time in prison, however, the point of what you are about to read below (and throughout this blog) is that there should at some point in time be forgiveness, that is once people are in prison or in the afterlife. While someone is a living, active or practising present criminal then they have to wait for forgiveness, and waiting is time. However, once the perpetrator is caught, incarcerated or is dead then it is time for forgiveness. Crimes and sins are relative in that, for example, cannibalism was relatively no issue with such as Homo antecessor because Homo antecessor was so primitive and innocent because they had no advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc and because Homo antecessor came from such a distant time or epoch, therefore, killing and cannibalism were relatively less of an issue for them. Rape is another example of equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) because today rape is so bad. However, mythically to some medieval people such as the Vikings, it was less of an issue and it was likely absolutely no issue for prehistoric people? I mean there was only something like 10,000 to 30,000 humans on Earth 200,000 years ago, therefore, rape may have even played some evolutionary advantage or benefit for the survival of the species in distant prehistoric times? Therefore, if modern rapists could go back in time somehow 200,000 years or so, they could probably attain early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? To reiterate, rape is so evil today because there are 7 billion of us and because we are advanced. However, therefore, murder and modern cannibalism today by such as Jeffrey Dahmer were so relatively evil compared with Homo antecessor because they are out of place and in the wrong time. Again, for example, we would never judge Homo antecessor for killing and ancient cannibalism, therefore, we should bear this in mind when judging and condemning people such as Jeffrey Dahmer, as he was only relatively evil because he was more modern and advanced. The only difference between Homo antecessor and Jeffrey Dahmer is time. It was ethical for Homo antecessor to kill and cannibalise in Europe in the Lower Palaeolithic period because they had less advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure than us and because it was such a long time ago. Therefore, it was unethical for Jeffrey Dahmer to cannibalise in America in the 20th century because he did have advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure and because he was much more recent. Therefore, as will be seen, if such as Jeffrey Dahmer became, thought like, acted or accepted that he was primitive, prehistoric or equivalent to an animal, ape or a prehistoric hominin, then his sins would be much lighter. Only with these primitive hominins and in these places and times could he be accepted and forgiven. Time determines that Jeffrey Dahmer was relatively unethical that is the main difference.

How do you practice spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI)?

As mentioned, the best way to practice spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) is to honour, respect and revere your elders especially your recent or close elders such as your parents and grandparents! And remember you do not need advanced qualifications to attain EPI, all you need is age, time and memories. You can also practice spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), by reading, writing and by creating art, like the images in this blog. I also practice generosity. Animals do not have money yet they still survive, similarly, natives and primitives like Palaeolithic man did not even comprehend the meaning of money or currency. Prehistoric men had no money yet they still survived. Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are without sin because they pay every single last penny, this is because natives or primitives such as bushmen or prehistoric man are/were literally penniless.

Truly I tell you, you will not get out until you have paid the last penny.

(Matthew 5:26).

When you give to someone in need, don’t do as the hypocrites do–blowing trumpets in the synagogues and streets to call attention to their acts of charity! I tell you the truth, they have received all the reward they will ever get. But when you give to someone in need, don’t let your left hand know what your right hand is doing. Give your gifts in private, and your Father, who sees everything, will reward you.

(Matthew 6:2-4).

Give, even if you only have a little.

(The Buddha, Dhammapada, verse 224).

Live in harmony with one another. Do not be proud, but be willing to associate with people of low position. Do not be conceited.

(Romans 12:16).

2. MODERN PRIMITIVE INNOCENCE (MPI).

Pliocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, involved in a kill.

The privilege.

Like the primitive and advanced double converse, there is also one more adscititious pair of opposites, however, they are both primitive innocence and are only opposites in time. For example, you can be ancient or in the past as in prehistoric man and by definition you are by now relatively primitive and innocent, however, if you are modern or in the present you can be either relatively advanced as in Steve Wozniak or Bill Gates or you can be relatively primitive such as bushmen, native Papuans or indigenous Amazonians etc. Basically what I am talking about is modern day, living primitivism as opposed to caveman. This is the realm of cultural anthropology. This would require one more term to distinguish between ancient and modern primitivism. As you already know I have called one term early primitive innocence (EPI) as in prehistoric men, therefore, to distinguish, I have called the second term modern primitive innocence (MPI), as in modern day bushmen, native Papuans or indigenous Amazonians etc. Travelling to Africa is a bit like travelling back in time, therefore, sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of the world can give us many examples of modern primitive innocence (MPI). For example, Africans are innocent and funny a bit like prehistoric man because they are poor and primitive in that their countries are much less developed than ours, and therefore they can do or get away with things that we advanced, clumsy and pedantic indigenous Europeans cannot do. Primitivism or early primitive innocence (EPI) is almost like a talent that primitive people have such as Africans, that we advanced, clumsy and stupid Europeans do not have. It is unfair. They can do things or get away with things we cannot. Remember greed, theft, rape, killing and cannibalism were relatively no issue with prehistoric men, similarly, many things that are taboo, sinful or illegal in the UK are no sweat in the continent of Africa. For example, it always astonishes me how public nakedness is much less taboo for Africans in the continent of Africa, it is not rude or unacceptable, even in capital cities, (I saw full male nudity in Accra in 2012) whereas public nakedness for Europeans in Europe (or anywhere else), is rude, unacceptable and would lead to your arrest for indecent exposure? This disparity concerning nakedness between Africans and Europeans always perplexes me when I compare the two scenarios. I have thought about such differences long and hard, and to me it is only a case of that Africans are more primitive and Europeans are more advanced. However, remember primitivism is innocence! Another example is that drink driving (especially in the bush) is not an issue in the continent of Africa, in fact, it is a bit of a tradition, whereas in the UK it is a very serious offence. Even in capital cities, such offences are handled with a £50 bribe to the police. I have witnessed a nameless paralytic ‘oburoni’ (white man) pay 300 GHC (£42) to bribe a policeman to ignore his drunkenness while driving in Accra in 2012. I had to finish the journey and drive us home and I wasn’t exactly sober myself. That’s Africa!

Upper Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, with tribe, family and wolves.

Why is drink driving a tradition in Africa and an absolute no no in the UK? Because Africa is more primitive and the UK is more advanced. Which would you prefer? Again I think this proves that the law is not absolute, for example, getting drunk and driving in the bush of tropical Africa is not the same as getting drunk and driving in the densely populated and highly urbanised civilisation of the United Kingdom. It entirely depends on where and when you drink and drive. Which would you prefer? This difference, could prove that the law is not absolute, in that if you have highly developed or advanced infrastructure such as roads, motorways, bridges, flyovers and streetlights etc, then you cannot drink and drive. However, if you have less developed and primitive infrastructure such as mud roads with giant potholes and no streetlights etc, then you can drink and drive. Which would you prefer? Not to encourage any incorrect behaviour, however, I can tell you that the unspoken tradition of drink driving in Africa, as well as many other things, is quite an exhilarating and liberating privilege. An example of European (or specifically European Union) highly advanced and overly ethical pendant is the 2016 TPD legislation limiting e-liquid bottle and e-cigarette tank sizes or volumes. I have used an e-cigarette for the best part of a decade and they are completely harmless. However, in 2016 the European Union brought in an overly ethical, highly advanced and pedantic directive or legislation called the Tobacco Product Directive (TPD), which is a regulatory act in the European Union placed on the sales of tobacco products including e-liquids and vaping devices. On May 20th of 2016, TPD compliance went into full effect wherein manufacturers, retailers, and vapers have to follow the guidelines laid out in the TPD Article 20. Among other things TPD means that:

  • Vaping devices cannot have an e-liquid capacity of more than 2 ml.
  • Each E-liquid bottle containing nicotine is restricted to 10 ml per bottle.
  • Nicotine strength in e-liquid cannot exceed 20 mg/ml or 2.0% nicotine.

Having e-cigarette tank sizes limited to 2 ml is completely ridiculous as it means you have to annoyingly refill far too often. However, the absolute worst is the limitation of e-liquid bottle sizes or volumes to 10 ml. This is utterly pedantic and ridiculous because it means you have to fiddle around with tiny 10 ml bottles all day and you go through 2 or 3 bottles a day. It is so inconvenient. To be honest I still buy 100 ml bottles from an secret e-liquid retailer online. 100 ml bottles are so much more comfortable and convenient. Again, to me TPD is a pedantic and highly ethical or advanced European law, that more primitive continents such as Africa would not entertain? Which would you prefer? Returning to Africa, traffic lights are not observed for motorbikes in Africa, everybody does it and it is not a problem. MOTs or Road Worthiness Certificates are nowhere near of the same pedantic high standards of the UK. To get a Road Worthiness Certificate all you have to do is pay (ahem bribe) someone then he doesn’t even check the car and gives you the certificate. A high percentage of cars in Africa would never be deemed roadworthy in the UK. In Africa it is a case of if she goes, she goes. No palaver! The risk is worth it. Vehicle insurance is extremely cheap in Africa, it has to be as nobody can afford it, and for the continent to function properly people need to get around quickly, despite the risks. I’m talking like £10-15 for 750 cc motorbike insurance. You see many ‘roadworthy’ cars in Africa with severe body damage and unfixed signs of collisions. Like drink driving, speeding tickets are simply handled at the side of the road with a bribe to the police. Similar to red traffic lights, although wearing helmets for motorbikes is compulsory and the police do sometimes enforce it, most motorcyclists in Africa flagrantly ignore this rule. Again Europeans are quite pedantic with safety. When learning to ride a motorbike in Ghana in 2012 my Muslim ‘instructor’ and I shared one bike and one helmet. Also, there are no L plates or overdramatic and pedantic high-viz vests etc. I did not take a test. To get a license I simply asked. Then I literally drove around the block to get the hang of a 750 cc bike, then spent a few days driving around Accra, and then to a more distant village called Abandze, a couple of hours away from Accra, and then I was done. All in all, it took less than a week to go from a total beginner to be a competent motorcyclist. Get on! Another recent innovation in the UK is recycling, in that every homeowner in the UK has to recycle their garbage, whereas in Africa recycling is not a priority of life and has probably not yet been entertained ubiquitously. I once walked over a makeshift 1 ft wide by 100 ft wooden plank bridge across a bottomless-framed railway bridge over a small valley between two opposing train tracks in Accra, Ghana in 2012. I was terrified. I saw a 50-year-old Ghanaian walk across it like he was walking down the main street, so stupidly I thought I could do so as well. I learned that there are just somethings that skilled native Africans can do that clumsy/stupid ‘oburonis’ (white men) should never do or even attempt. Also 5 minutes after I had crossed the bridge, a train came hurtling passed. I thought to myself, the Africans probably know the times when the trains come? Needless to say the health and safety, hazard and death trap issues would lead to the immediate removal of the plank bridge in the UK. Whereas in Africa it is absolutely fine and serves a useful local function. It would be taken down in the UK because:

  1. It is a dangerous 1ft wide plank bridge across a bottomless railway bridge over a small valley.
  2. It is in between and parallel to two opposing train tracks.

Although the above makeshift bridge is lethal, Africans are nowhere near as pedantic as Europeans about such health hazards. However, who is winning today? Is it not because of the Holocaust, that third world indigenous and primitive people are winning? As another example of the haphazard ‘oburoni’ (white man), when I was about 6 years old, myself and two other ‘oburonis’ of about the same age went out exploring on an adventure with machetes in the jungle and bush of Obuasi, in the Ashanti region of Ghana in 1987. We hacked our way through the jungle up a hill, then suddenly an old local Ghanaian man came rushing out of his house screaming and shouting at us, ‘Why you cut down my plantain flower!?’ We were absolutely terrified. In fact, I have never felt in so much trouble in all my life! The old man really scolded us and threatened to report us. The moral of the story is DO NOT under any circumstances aimlessly cut down vegetation in Africa or other primitive places, you could be cutting down someone’s sustenance! Another example of 1980s early primitive innocence (EPI) is that we were much less squeamish and much less soft than people and children of today. We had much less compassion for animals. For example, as a child in Obuasi, a gold mining town in the Ashanti Region of Ghana, West Africa in the 1980s, an ‘oburoni’ friend and I hunted and mercilessly killed on a daily basis the West African Agama agama lizard as well as various exotic birds with catapults which the locals called a “gat” or a “tie” (although I never succeeded in killing a bird my elder friend did). We literally collected dead lizards in large cardboard boxes, we must have killed scores over the years. I mean today not even I would kill an Agama agama, as I am much more advanced and therefore, more ethical than I was in the 1980s. Today I would simply study Agama agama in a scientific or naturalist kind of way, but this just shows how primitive and innocent the 1980s were! We didn’t even hesitate to kill Agama agama in those days. To be honest, we were so primitive and innocent in those days I or we didn’t even know the correct scientific name of Agama agama, I only found that out with the advent of the internet and Wikipedia relatively recently. We just called them “lizards” and it was always better and a win to kill an “orange head” (these were the large males as opposed to the all-grey and smaller females). Also, Onyinasi in Obuasi in the 1980s wasn’t just home to a plethora of exotic mammals, reptiles and birds, but also a veritable paradise with a salubrious abundance of weird and exotic fruits that my ‘oburoni’ friend and I would hunt, gather and collect on a daily basis, as sweets such as chocolate were a rare luxury and had to be imported via an international delivery service called ‘Kings Barn’. These fruits included such as Terminalia catappa (tropical almond), again I only just found out the correct scientific name of this fruit via Wikipedia recently. Terminalia catappa were delicious and one of our favourites, they had a thin fleshy and delicious skin with a very difficult to access almond in the centre surrounded by a hard shell. They came in yellow/orange or red/purple colours. Guava or common guava (Psidium guajava) was also a favourite, the West African equivalent of a Mars Bar in the 1980s! Pawpaw (Carica papaya) was also on the menu, not my favourite though. Carambola, or star fruit (Averrhoa carambola) were also there. Very sour! Cocoa (Theobroma cacao) was also there to be found, it had sweet fleshy beans in the centre. To wrap it up there were also bananas, oranges and limes all ripe for the taking. Like I said Obuasi was a veritable paradise in the 1980s. So as children, we were hunter-gatherers. There are other parts of the world where people are still primitive and innocent or have modern primitive innocence (MPI), for example, Papua New Guinea. The native Papuans make rope bridges across gorges purely from natural materials such as tree vines. Imagine if the native Papuans had to get planning permission and fill out endless red tape in order to build a bridge. It would be unethical as well as undesirable to do so. In the UK obviously, health and safety regulations would never allow such a death trap structure to be built, whereas the native Papuans do not care, the risk is worth it.

Victorian (pre-1875) Jimmy Savile, against fence.

Parable of the first contact native Amazonians.

There were two English cultural anthropologists who were attempting to make first contact with an indigenous native Amazonian tribe in the 1960s. After months of searching and hacking their way through the Amazon rainforest with machetes, and dealing with insects, animals and disease, they finally found what they were looking for, a pristine and virgin un-contacted tribe of indigenous Amazonians. The initial contact was precarious, the English anthropologists offered the Amazonians trifles and food and the Amazonians tentatively accepted. However, all of a sudden like a wild animal one of the Amazonians clubbed one of the anthropologists over the head with a club, smashing his skull, the other anthropologist tried to defend himself but was also clubbed to death and struck with poison arrows. The Amazonians then took the carcasses of the two English anthropologists back to their village and cannibalised them.

The End.

What is the moral of this parable? Would it be moral for the British or Brazilian governments to catch the un-contacted native Amazonians who killed the English anthropologists and charge, prosecute, extradite and incarcerate them? No! You might as well send a lion to jail. It would be a far greater crime to incarcerate the un-contacted native Amazonians. Why then? Because the indigenous Amazonians are more primitive and the English anthropologists are much more advanced. Because the un-contacted Amazonians are primitive, they do not live under our laws or jurisdiction. I think it is a case of magnanimity and omnipotent compassion. For example, you could say that the Amazonians were warriors? Therefore, was it an act of war? If it was it would hardly be a fair contest, that is the might of the (advanced) British army against a (primitive) tribe of un-contacted Amazonians? It is similar to our compassion toward animals, for example, when a lion kills a human we do NOT declare war on all lions! However, did prehistoric man declare war on large predators? Yes probably. This is because prehistoric people were not yet omnipotent masters over the animal kingdom, therefore, they could not have as much compassion towards animals as we have today? Therefore, as will be seen later in the next part of this blog, this determines that the reason that the British are magnanimous and compassionate towards un-contacted Amazonians (and lions) is ironically because they have highly advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc. This is compassionate omnipotence as will be seen later. The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible. Relatively it would be unethical to charge, prosecute and incarcerate the indigenous un-contacted Amazonians for killing the two English cultural anthropologists. Modern primitive innocence (MPI)! Relatively, they have done nothing wrong! We should bear this in mind when judging and condemning our own cannibals and murderers in the developed world. It is only a matter of relativity. For example, because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, this means his crimes or sins were relatively in the wrong place and time, to reiterate the only reason Jeffrey Dahmer’s cannibalism was ‘unethical’ compared to Homo antecessor or indigenous Amazonians is that Jeffrey Dahmer carried it out in America in the 20th century and because he was advanced. Prehistoric people probably enjoyed cannibalism, but would you judge them? No! It is only a matter of relativity. Therefore, the only thing Jeffrey Dahmer can be or equate to is a prehistoric hominin or a medieval primitive or indigenous native of some sort.

Yes, the odious collection of human skulls, in particular, was like something one would see at a Ripley’s Believe or Not museum that originally came from a primitive tribe of cannibals in the Amazonian Basin or New Guinea, not Milwaukee, Wisconsin.

(Jeffrey Dahmer, Jack Rosewood, page 107).

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo habilis) Jeffrey Dahmer, hunting rabbits.

If he accepts this then his sins would be lighter. So if Jeffrey Dahmer today did not try to be advanced, special or superior to primates and became, acted or accepted that he was primitive, prehistoric or even ape would we forgive him? Instead of waiting ages for forgiveness, if Jeffrey Dahmer spiritually went back in time hundreds of thousands of years to a more primitive period could he attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? Therefore, if you are in prison in say the U.K. for homicide, for example for an armed robbery that went wrong, then simply know that you are only in prison because you were born and raised in the U.K. and therefore, live under our laws. However, therefore, know that the law is not absolute! The law is relative. The law is flexible. It depends on where and when you commit your crime. You are only in prison because you are in the U.K. and it is 2020. Check your watch! The law is different in different spaces and times. For example, if you had committed your crime in the Amazon basin or New Guinea not too long ago, you would not have been reprimanded or incarcerated. To reiterate, the law is not absolute!

There are actual recorded cases such as the killing of Englishman Richard Mason by indigenous Amazonians in 1961.

“Accompanied by a member of the Brazilian Indian Protection Service, Hemming left gifts such as machetes and fishing line at the spot where Mason had been killed to show they bore no ill will to his killers.“

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Mason_(explorer)

Education.

What is it that primarily makes (or made) Europeans today and in the past more advanced, culpable and guilty than people of the past and modern primitive people such as bushmen, native Papuans and first contact indigenous Amazonians? It is education. The more or less universal literacy that we have in Europe today means we are very educated, advanced, less innocent, more culpable and guilty etc, both individually and collectively. We Europeans have relatively always been highly educated compared to more primitive and third world people around the world. Today the vast majority of Europeans are relatively highly educated and as time goes on, over all or generally our levels of education increase on average. For example, my Grandfather was born 1926, he was a primitive coal miner and he was literate and that was about it. Whereas today everyone has GCSEs in the U.K. and most people have college level education and a lot of people have graduate level education. This means Europeans are highly advanced, relative to people of the past and modern primitive people such as bushmen, native Papuans and first contact indigenous Amazonians. Now don’t get me wrong education is the most important thing in the universe, and I am very studious myself, however, think about it, you know yourself that being so advanced as we are means that we have to really watch what we are doing because we are less innocent, more culpable and guilty etc. Concerning such as native Papuans and un-contacted indigenous Amazonians who have in effect zero education means firstly, they can have a lot of superstitious primitive innocence (SPI), also being uneducated means they are out of our jurisdiction, therefore, they can quite literally get away with murder and many other things we cannot do in Europe. Therefore, this determines that if you are in incarcerated in the U.K. for say manslaughter, that in a way, you are only in prison because you are educated and literate and therefore advanced, by this I mean that you were raised in the U.K. and therefore, because of your relatively privileged education and literacy you are more advanced than such as native Papuans and un-contacted indigenous Amazonians and therefore, you are under our radar and under our jurisdiction. This means that the law is not absolute or universal.

Modern primitive innocence (MPI)?

As another example consider Africa, most if not all of Africa is relatively westernised or civilised, certainly contacted, although there are hunter-gatherer bushmen in Southern Africa for example. In the 1980s in Ghana, you still saw people who had never seen an indigenous European before, especially young children would be frightened and cry at the sight of an ‘oburoni’ (white man). This is rare today. Therefore, the vast majority of Africans would go to prison for killing a westerner. However, would we incarcerate a bushman for killing a westerner? Remember, for a surgeon to take drugs is unbelievably sinful, but to a bricklayer taking drugs is not even a sin? Why? Because a surgeon is advanced and therefore, more responsible and therefore less innocent, while a bricklayer is primitive, and therefore, less responsible and therefore more innocent. Therefore, we possibly would not incarcerate a bushmen for killing another human? This could highlight that it is subtle or technical primitiveness that determines an individual’s relative innocence or guilt or if they should go to prison for killing another human etc? For example, if a bushman lives in a mud hut and has to hunt wildebeest or gazelle to eat meat, then technically he is primitive, and therefore less responsible, and therefore more innocent. Therefore, it is more likely he can get away with murder. Prison is a better dwelling place than a mud hut and the free food in prison would certainly ameliorate the situation? Therefore, technically if you live in a Persimmons brick house and do your shopping at Tesco, then you are technically advanced and therefore more responsible and therefore less innocent, therefore, you would definitely go to prison for manslaughter or homicide. Which would you prefer? Most people would say Persimmons, Shoprite and ASDA, but then you would have to watch yourself. Do not, for example, go drink driving (another African custom) and accidentally kill someone. However, some people such as bushmen would probably say mud huts and gazelle? You may say how does shopping at ASDA make me advanced? Think about it in terms of caveman and hunting. Even though I am utterly ignorant, supermarkets such as ASDA and Tesco must be mind-bogglingly ginormous, national and global logistical operations? That is how we ‘hunt’ and ‘gather’ today. The food in our kitchens involves farmers, abattoirs, butchers, factories, food processors and packagers etc. How we feed ourselves and the whole nation today is surely a very advanced and collective effort that is only possible through being a highly advanced civilisation? Think of even the amazing and genius engineering that goes into the manufacturing, food processing and packaging factories etc. How do they pod so many peas or shell so many pecan nuts and package them on such an industrial scale? So how do they do it? Therefore, think of all of that next time you are eating your 99p blueberries from Chile or your £1.50 strawberries from Morocco or your £3.00 lamb from New Zealand etc. So therefore appreciate your supermarkets and appreciate your food! Therefore, know that because you live in an advanced western society and because you do your shopping in a supermarket, that you are therefore, highly advanced, therefore, you are more responsible and therefore, you are less innocent than un-contacted native Amazonians, bushmen or prehistoric man etc. YHWH is watching you!

Middle Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, hunting and aiming spear.

Disability.

Another example of the modern primitive innocence (MPI) of Africa, is how they look after (or don’t look after) their physically crippled or disabled etc. I am on ESA (employment and support allowance) and PIP (personal independence payment) because of my schizophrenia. And to be honest I think it is amazing how kind and compassionate the British government is with how it cares for and looks after its own disabled and handicapped citizens. In Africa you honestly see truly crippled and seriously deformed people everyday on the roads and motorways of Accra for example. I have seen many crippled people using skateboards on the motorways near traffic lights. When the lights are on red they all scurry up to the motionless vehicles, on the skateboards and beg for a pittance of change in order to get their daily bread. They call this begging hawking. This is how Africa looks after (or doesn’t look after) its crippled and disabled. Because Africa is still relatively poor and primitive it cannot have as much compassion for its disabled citizens as we do in the UK for example. A makeshift skateboard and casual charity is the equivalent of ESA and PIP in Africa. I mean I don’t think there is actually a real equivalent of ESA and PIP in Africa. As an example, I get about £850 a month for being schizophrenic, whereas, even fully healthy Africans earn only about £50 a month for working very hard. Like people who underwent fully awake amputations in the Victorian period and earlier, this is an early primitive innocence (EPI) that Africans should be very proud of, and it would put a lot of mentally disabled people like me in the advanced developed world to shame. Africa still has real and genuine begging cripples, that we Europeans only had in the medieval period etc. Again I believe it is advanced compassion that makes us so unbelievably compassionate towards our physically and mentally disabled in the UK. We have so many facilities for disabled people in towns, shopping centres and places of work such as ramps, parking spaces and elevators etc. It is absolutely true that there is not a single begging cripple on the streets of the UK today. How do we do it? How come there is this huge economic disparity between Africa and Europe concerning disabled people? How come one continent is so much more advanced and so much more wealthier than the other? Let me tell you, because Africa still has the equivalent of what we would call genuine medieval cripples and beggars, therefore, Africa can, get away with more God damn it of what we advanced, clumsy, stupid and pedantic Europeans would call sin, such as drink driving. Believe me, despite what you may conclude about this, because of the Holocaust Africa is going to win anyway. We Europeans are so advanced, yet because of the Holocaust we are in hell.

Miocene Adolf Hitler, chimpanzee (arboreal) perched on branch.

Relative barbarism.

Why are all these things acceptable in Africa and other parts of the world, but not in the UK? Because Africa and other countries are more primitive and the UK is more advanced. Which would you prefer? Because I grew up in the Ashanti region of Ghana from 1985 onwards and because of my family having a permanent residence in Ghana for over 30 years, I can tell you I prefer Africa in many ways. This might demonstrate that having such high living standards in the UK, is not necessarily a better way of life? Like hunting and killing Agama agama in the 1980s, we are glad that some primitive customs and attitudes have gone, for example, such as duelling, fox hunting, gladiators and cannibalism etc. Why was duelling considered a gentlemanly way to resolve disputes in the 19th century and earlier? Why was fox hunting more acceptable in the 20th-century and earlier British society? Think about it, fox hunting is an early primitive innocence (EPI) that children of today and people of the future can never have or understand. In hundreds of years time, people may look back at 20th century Britain and think we were a little cruel? It is relative, like how we can never appreciate or understand how the Romans had gladiatorial sports, and the Romans presumably would never appreciate or understand how prehistoric people were cannibalistic, people of the future may look back at 20th century Britain and think we were a little cruel? Therefore, like recent slavery, is fox hunting a curse for us 20th century people? Similarly, is gladiatorial combat an embarrassment for the Romans? Is cannibalism a shame for prehistoric people? No! Of course it isn’t! It is early primitive innocence (EPI) and we are all proud of our relative barbarism! Why was gladiatorial combat deemed acceptable in ancient times? Why was cannibalism deemed acceptable in prehistoric times? We all vehemently claim early primitive innocence (EPI)! Older people had more primitive weapons, technologies and infrastructure therefore, they were less compassionate towards foxes, gladiators and other people etc. Therefore, again we should not judge 19th and 20th century people for duelling or fox hunting, Romans for gladiatorial spectacles or prehistoric people for cannibalism etc. This is because they were much more primitive technologically and therefore, more innocent for their (and our) relatively barbaric sports. We should bear this mind when condemning people today, it is simply a case of relativity. Perhaps one day rugby, boxing and the martial arts may also be deemed relatively barbaric? Even though there are rare cases of concussion and death in rugby, today even advanced indigenous Europeans deem rugby acceptable or that the risk is worth it! Another controversial example of early primitive innocence (EPI) is corporal punishment in schools. I cannot remember corporal punishment, and was never physically punished by a teacher at my school, however, I was a little acratic when I was young and probably could have used it? A lot of parents today are so protective of their children, and threaten teachers by saying things like ‘don’t you lay hands on my child!’ etc. However, teachers that practiced corporal punishment in the 1950s and 1960s would all claim early primitive innocence (EPI)! Both my parents and grandparents told me stories of receiving corporal punishment at their schools, however, I think my generation look back at corporal punishment and see it as an overly strict, rough and possibly barbaric practice. However, like how people underwent fully awake amputations with nothing more than a stiff drink and twig between their teeth before the Victorian period, similarly people who can remember and who received corporal punishment at school are probably very proud of that fact and can therefore look down on us spoilt brats of the 1980s and 1990s etc. Corporal punishment is their own early primitive innocence (EPI)! Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) determine that Africans and other developing and third world people should never worry about the fact that they have not invented much, whereas Europeans have invented the vast majority of technologies. This is obviously because the law of primitivism determines they are more innocent than indigenous Europeans, and that indigenous Europeans have lost their holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) because of the Holocaust. The Nazis proved that being advanced failed. Therefore, being advanced is not relevant today. Even though indigenous Europeans have nuclear submarines and Queen Elizabeth-class aircraft carriers etc, because of the Holocaust none of this advanced technology and engineering matters. They cannot overcome anti-racism and human rights. Therefore, today, the third world is the real winner. There are limitless examples of how Africa and other parts of the world are primitive and innocent or have modern primitive innocence (MPI) and metaphorically (and literally) get away with murder especially when it comes to health and safety hazards and death trap structures and vehicles etc. Primitivism or modern primitive innocence (MPI) should be studied, preserved and recorded where it is still present in the world, as we can learn a lot from examples. For example, imagine if as a cultural anthropologist you could go on a expedition to Papua New Guinea or the Amazon rainforest in order to carry out an ethnography of native Papuans or un-contacted native Amazonians either in an etic or emic sense. Imagine if you could teach them spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) and then were able to ask them for genuine advice from their vast and timeless experience of primitivism. For example, they might say that ancestors are very important, and they might say respect your elders, they might even say appreciate your food. These wisdoms of primitivism probably have a lot of bearing on us relatively advanced Europeans, as because of the Holocaust we no longer appreciate ‘our ancestors’ in fact we often ridicule the ‘knuckle-dragging past’ and our kids certainly do not ‘respect their elders’ and my generation thinks it a bit uncool to ‘appreciate your food’ etc. If you cannot go to Papua New Guinea or the Amazon ask your elders, such as your parents and grandparents. What can they remember? Flatter their eternal wisdom and knowledge. As mentioned, you do not need qualifications such as a doctorate to practice or teach early primitive innocence (EPI), in fact like native Papuans or indigenous Amazonians, it is probably better if you don’t. To attain early primitive innocence (EPI) qualifications all you need is time, age and memories. For example, I remember the days before the internet and mobile phones, when CDs came out and fox hunting etc. I have asked my Mother who was born in the 1953 and she said her grandmother had no tumblers or washing machines, hence, they used outside boilers that you heated water with wood and coal to clean white clothes in, using something called a “dolly blue” (detergent), mangles to strain and dry clothes, tin baths that hung on the wall, that you filled with water heated on the fire, no plumbing or hot water, no fridges, no freezers, no electric blenders etc. Coal used to be delivered by dumping on the road/path outside your house that you shovelled into a bunker. And she remembers that my grandfather told her that he used to deliver milk in urns in a horse and cart from a farm where he worked in the 1930s/1940s. Above all she said, they did not have lots of money, but as kids, they were happy and “innocent” days!

Victorian (pre-Offences Against the Person Act of 1875) Jimmy Savile, bending cane.

Primitive freedom.

Was there more or less freedom in the past? This is not as so straightforward a question as one might think. For example, if the past was more primitive and innocent than the present or future, therefore, people of the past could get away with more things than we can today? Therefore, there was more freedom in the past? Also, remember drink driving is less taboo in Africa even today, which is a very exhilarating and liberating privilege for Europeans. On the other hand, for hundreds or thousands of years people have fought and died for their civil liberties, political rights and freedoms etc. For example, in England we had the Barons’ Wars of the 13 century, Magna Carta, the English Civil War and the struggle against absolute monarchy or the ‘divine right’ of kings and the slow establishment of a constitutional monarchy etc. For thousands of years people have struggled for their liberties against monarchy and tyranny etc. For example, John The Baptist was imprisoned and decapitated for stating that King Herod had sinned by marrying his brother Philip’s wife Herodias.

What a righteous man John was to tell the king himself – who not even the high priest dared approach – that he needed to repent; and that at the cost of imprisonment, and eventually his life.

More Than A Prophet, Isaac Gross, location 3667, 85%

Therefore, the instant thought is that the further you go back in time the less freedom people had? Or our automatic thought is that we humans have never been as free as we are today in the 21st century? However, simultaneously you would never be allowed to live in the wilderness and eat locusts and wild honey in today’s world, without being sectioned and declared a lunatic? Therefore, contrary to contemporary popular opinion or consensus consider the following. I think there is another way in which we can look at freedom that goes against the grain. For example, did prehistoric man such as Homo erectus have the freedom to rape, kill and cannibalise anyone he wanted at will? Did Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin have more freedom than us today when he removed about half of the surviving sculptures of the Parthenon (known as the Elgin marbles), between 1801 to 1812? Again I believe it was the primitivism of his day which allowed Thomas Bruce, 7th Earl of Elgin to remove the Elgin marbles. Today, such an unethical act would not even be dreamed of by archaeologists etc. Similarly, did Italian explorer Giuseppe Ferlini have more freedom than us today when he blew up several of the Meroe pyramids in Sudan in his search for treasure in the 1800s, leaving many of the tombs missing their pointy tops? Again it was primitivism which allowed Giuseppe Ferlini to carry out this highly unethical act. Did Christopher Columbus have more freedom than us today when he sailed across the Atlantic and discovered the New World? Did Captain James Cook have more freedom than we have today when he made his three voyages to the Pacific Ocean, during which he achieved the first recorded European contact with the eastern coastline of Australia, the Hawaiian islands and the first recorded circumnavigation of New Zealand? Did he or indeed did the British in general have more freedom in the past to sail to anywhere on Earth they wanted at will? Did we not have more freedom when we could go anywhere on Earth we wanted without passports or visas? Did Napoleon Bonaparte have more freedom than us today when he commenced the French campaign in Egypt and Syria (1798–1801)? Did he have more freedom than us today when he brought back the Rosetta Stone to Europe? Therefore, I think it depends on who you are talking about and what kind of freedom you are talking about? For example, to people of African descent there was probably less freedom in the past, because of recent slavery, but for Europeans there may have been more freedom in the past? Concerning the types of progressive freedoms that we supposedly enjoy today, are they not possibly superfluous? We seem to be just breaking down conservative barriers with such as Monty Python’s The Life of Brian film, which was banned in the U.K. in 1980s, but which seems trivial to us today. And for example, is it not simply just such as the freedoms of the Jackass TV show that we have, or is it not just freedom of sexuality that we enjoy today? Do we need or even want these freedoms? So therefore, think about it. Do we Europeans have more freedom today than in the past? I think the above examples may suggest that in a way, because it was primitive, the further you go back in time, the more freedom humans had, for example, prehistoric man had or lived by no laws and was therefore, a law unto himself?

3. ANCESTRAL WORSHIP (STICKS AND STONES).

Recorded history.

Upper Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, cave painting.

There is no eternity without recorded history, that is that prehistoric man (excepting cave art) did not attain eternity because they left no writing or literature behind. We do not know who they were or their names or deeds, so they are not eternal. For example, cave paintings, such as the Chauvet, Lascaux and Altamira cave paintings in France and Spain respectively, are eternal, because they have survived until today and this means the images have now become recorded and digitised as well as recreated as prints and posters etc, however, the names of the actual painters are forever lost to us because they had no writing, therefore, the painters are not eternal down here on Earth but only in heaven. However, thanks to themselves and archaeology, it was firstly the ancient Egyptians who invented recorded history (note it was actually the Sumerians who invented systemic phoneticism) and architecture and who put thousands of years of time, energy and devotion into eternity and the afterlife through religion, writing, mummification and tombs etc, that accomplished this. Recorded history is eternity. To reiterate, with the cult of the ruler, funerary cults, mortuary cults, mummification, pyramids, saff-tombs and mastaba-tombs (meaning “eternal house”), the ancient Egyptians put thousands of years of effort and devotion into the eternal life or afterlife for themselves and the god-kings. We know their names and deeds, hence they are eternal.

Compassion.

Animals have little or no compassion for example animals rarely take care of their own sick and injured and certainly do not conserve other species as humans do. For example, male chimpanzees will kill and eat the infant of another female, usually in their own group but occasionally in another, without a shred of remorse. Another example is that male lions will kill all the cubs of other male lions with absolutely no regret. There is no such thing as a stepdad or foster father lion. I think the further you go back in time the less and less compassion hominins had. You may say how were 1980s less compassionate than the 2020s? Well it is hard to see less compassion in the recent past, but for example, because of the Holocaust, clearly the 1930s and 1940s were less compassionate than us today? For example, certainly 17th century Europeans were much less compassionate than us today toward life, animals and even humans, because for example they practiced recent slavery and were generally a lot harsher than us? This is probably because they had relatively less advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure than us and were a little less secure in the natural world and not the invincible and omnipotent masters of the natural world as we are today. For example, they had no diggers or excavators, therefore, to move earth they had to rely on manual labour, picks and shovels etc, this necessity of manual labour may therefore, be related to why recent slavery was more acceptable in those times? This connection may help ameliorate recent slavery? Therefore, because we today do have excavators and many other ginormous Earth moving machines, it means that we are omnipotent over and above the natural world, therefore, we have to be more compassionate. Also, 17th century people had no tanks, therefore, ironically, if you have tanks you can be more compassionate towards animals and each other. This irony could determine that the real purpose of advanced and lethal weapons is compassion towards animals and each other? It is a pity that the British and Germans did not understand this ironic use of weapons during the build up to World War One, when they had a huge arms race, and then put them all to disastrous use? For example, like declaring war on all lions because one lion killed one human being, if we modern Homo sapiens wanted to today, we could wipe out every single last large predator or carnivore on the planet? But thank god we don’t! Why? Because we are so advanced and safe and secure from the natural world that we don’t need to, even if a few of us do still occasionally get killed by wild animals today. However, prehistoric man did wipe out other predators which proves that you can only be compassionate toward animals once you are safe and secure or omnipotent in the natural world. For example, the last Scottish wolf was killed by Sir Ewen Cameron in 1680 in Killiecrankie, which means that 17th century people did not have a conscience regarding the ethical conservation of other species as we do today. And the Romans were less compassionate than us because they practiced ancient slavery, and had gladiatorial sports for entertainment etc. Again this is because they had relatively less advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure than us and were a bit less secure in their environment and not quite the invincible and omnipotent masters of the world as we are today. For example, how could Australopithecus or Lower Palaeolithic man have been compassionate toward animals, when they themselves were not yet omnipotent masters of the animal kingdom or even worse still prey themselves? It is impossible, compassion simply did not exist. Compassion is omnipotence, in that you must, for instance, first attain advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure such as gunpowder, muskets, rifles, tanks, excavators and nuclear warheads etc before you can be compassionate toward animals. It is not a case of compassion for compassion’s sake like the Buddha. Compassion is not free of charge, it is a definite and tangible deal. Only now that I am omnipotent and invincibly safe and secure from wild animals in my city, town or fortress and surrounded by guns, and now that I have an overabundance and surplus of food, energy and resources can or will I be compassionate toward animals. Compassion is like kindness or generosity, in that, generally speaking, you can only be kind or generous with your money, food or energy if you have enough or a surplus. If you have £10 to your name it’s harder to be kind or generous than if you have £500. Prehistoric man needed to kill, it is simple if they did not kill they would die. It is only when you do not need to hunt or kill animals, can you then be compassionate. Therefore, the Buddha and Jesus Christ could not have come prehistoric men and only came at a certain level of civilization, when we no longer needed to hunt or kill animals in order to survive. The Buddha and Jesus Christ were relatively blessed compared to prehistoric man. Therefore, compassion toward animals was probably only attained with sophistication, collective development and civilisation (perhaps through agriculture, domestication and the Neolithic revolution etc) because then and only then did Homo sapiens become invincible and omnipotent masters of the animal kingdom. To be compassionate means you are not an animal. It is like saying to ‘bear’ ‘I have a nuke now, therefore I am compassionate toward you.’ This is something bear will never understand, in that it is ironic that once you attain nuclear weapons that you are therefore by definition compassionate toward animals. Therefore, the Buddha and Jesus Christ could never have come a prehistoric men. Also without recorded history, they would never have been famous or remembered. To reiterate, compassion is omnipotence, it is only attained through a collective effort, through taming the wild and through civilisation. You can only be compassionate once there is no competition.

Mesolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, with bear headdress and bow and arrow.

Examples of possible requirements of compassion (not literal):

  1. Must be omnipotent?
  2. Must have attained relatively advanced weapons, technology and infrastructure, such as gunpowder, rifles, cannons, nuclear weapons, tanks and excavators etc?
  3. Must be masters of the world and the animal kingdom?
  4. Must no more or rarely be prey?
  5. Must be top of the food chain?
  6. Must not need to hunt or kill animals anymore in order to survive?
  7. Must have an overabundance and surplus of food, energy and water?
  8. Must have agriculture?
  9. Must domesticate animals?
  10. Must be sedentary?
  11. Must have villages, towns and cities etc?
  12. Must have architecture?
  13. As a species you must have no other competition?

Compassion is not free of charge. It is a definite or tangible deal or bargain, in that you must have something like all the above before you can be compassionate. Don’t get me wrong compassion is a good thing, but it is advanced, however, this does not mean as Buddhists or Christians we should look down at prehistoric people because they had less compassion. It was equally good for them to have no compassion. I think it is a case of it was wrong for prehistoric people to have a lot of compassion and it is equally wrong for us today to have no compassion. Prehistoric man had no time for compassion. This must mean that the Buddha and Jesus Christ did. Consider this, Adolf Hitler in the 1930s and 1940s did not have a lot compassion, in fact, he was the opposite of the Buddha when it comes to compassion, nor did Jeffrey Dahmer for that matter. However, bear this in mind, because as will be seen this lack of compassion in the 1930s and 1940s may help ameliorate the Holocaust as it must determine that such as Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer were, in fact, ancient or prehistoric men in the 20th century and therefore, relatively, this must mean that they existed in the wrong place and the wrong time. It is ironic that despite Adolf Hitler’s claims of racial superiority that in reality, he was probably a prehistoric man, an ape or (and I quote) a “subhuman” himself. You may say aha! If it is a law that the more advanced you get the more compassionate you get, how come the Buddha was 2500 years older than Adolf Hitler? That is exactly my point, in that Adolf Hitler was anachronistic, he spoils it, he spoils the linearity of time. The same goes for Jeffrey Dahmer, because even though the Romans were 2000 years older than Jeffrey Dahmer, even they were never cannibalistic. This is why Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer get into so much trouble in the 20th or 21st centuries. They were anachronistic. Therefore, if Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer spiritually went back time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to a more primitive period, they might attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence?

Lower Palaeolithic (Homo ergaster) Jeffrey Dahmer, escaping from a wild boar.

The older the better.

In heaven, prehistoric men such as Neolithic and Palaeolithic men have tens or even hundreds of thousands of years of time on their side. Can you imagine the wisdom that would come with? It is time, and the more you have of it the better! Time does not come cheap. You cannot purchase for any price tens of thousands of years of experience or time. All that you can do is wait and look forward to the past. Also, imagine in the afterlife if you could meet a 1 million-year-old Homo antecessor woman or a 2000-year-old Roman man. Wouldn’t that be the most amazing thing? Would the Homo antecessor woman still look and act the same as she did 1 million years ago, or would she have evolved into a beautiful modern Homo sapiens woman? Would the Roman man still wear a toga or would he wear modern fashionable clothes? I think either scenario would be desirable. Sometimes you may want to see them in their natural environment and time period, other times not. Also, I think the most amazing thing about these two examples, is that even if they now look and dress like us they can always say ‘I was a Homo antecessor 1 million years ago’ or ‘I was a Roman citizen 2000 years ago’. I think this shows how in the afterlife, especially if everyone regains their youth, that time and early primitive innocence (EPI) would, therefore, be the most important commodities, in that the older you are the wiser, greater, prouder, more famous, illustrious, classical and holy you become. I mean for example like Homo antecessor imagine being 1 million years old. It is hard to imagine but there are potentially people up there in the afterlife who look just like me and you who are over 1 millions years old? As mentioned, like how medieval, ancient and prehistoric art is more timeless, classical and priceless than contemporary art, I believe spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) determine that in heaven the older you are the holier, prouder, wiser, more famous and illustrious you are, (as in prehistoric, ancient or medieval people). In life youth is the most important or valuable condition, as in children, teenagers and those in their twenties are the most relevant age groups and the most envied by those older than them. Down here the elderly do not have much biologically desirable, only their mental or spiritual early primitive innocence (EPI). However, it would be too obvious if the same natural law governed the afterlife, in that if the youngest were still the most relevant, attractive and desirable. This would be hell and therefore, I believe the opposite is true in the afterlife, in that the older you become the holier, more graceful, famous and illustrious you become. This could determine that in the afterlife the older you are the more beautiful and attractive you are? For example, if you are 2000 or 3000 years old, like Socrates or Plato this is very great, refined and holy, therefore, the older you become, like fine wine, the holier and greater you get. For example, in the afterlife how famous do you think the Israelite patriarchs of the bible are such as Abraham, Issac, Moses, Aaron and Joshua etc? Imagine meeting them. There is no one more holy and famous in the world. And despite the fact that no one has seen a photograph or video footage of Christ or the Buddha, because they are the most famous men in history, we all feel like we have seen their faces. Therefore, also imagine if you were a real soldier who fought in the Greco-Persian Wars or the Trojan War (if it were real). Even if you were a grunt in these wars, you would be so proud because it is great EPI. Or imagine if you were an authentic Roman citizen. Even if you were a plebeian you would be so proud you were a Roman in real life because it is awesome EPI. Or imagine if you were a Roman gladiator. Even if you died quickly in the colosseum you would be so impossibly proud that you were a Roman gladiator in life because it is tremendous EPI. Or imagine if you fought heroically in a medieval battle, like the battle of Hastings. Imagine running at the enemy with a sword or axe on the battlefield into close combat, it must have been such a rush! Again it is awesome EPI that we in 21st century can never have. And although ancient and medieval people did have writing and recorded history they had no cameras or photography, therefore, because we know so little about prehistoric, ancient and medieval people on Earth, therefore in the afterlife they will be the holiest and most famous and illustrious. Consider ancient geniuses such as Pythagoras, Plato and William Shakespeare. It seems that it was relatively much easier for ancient people to discover and attain relatively amazing achievements such as Pythagorean theorem, philosophy and literature than it is for us modern people to do the equivalent today. For example only Albert Einstein (with the most advanced theory of all time) has matched the relatively amazing achievement of Pythagoras. This determines that the earlier you come the wiser you are because it is relatively easier to discover and achieve novelties such as Pythagorean theorem, philosophy and genius literature. It is relatively much easier to attain amazing achievements the earlier you come. Think about it, if you came between the 6th century BC and 0 AD, you had the chance of not only discovering Pythagorean theorem (which is an absolute truth and was always there) but also to come as the Buddha or the Christ. This must determine that the earlier you come the better. Think about it, if you wanted to attain a relatively equivalent achievement as Pythagoras did in the 6th century BC today you would have to be so unbelievably advanced like Peter Higgs who discovered the Higgs Boson or God particle. This determines that the later you come or the more modern you are the harder it is to discover something novel and groundbreaking. Think about it, all that Plato had to do to be eternally famous, classical and holy etc was philosophise and write, this is because at the time writing was still a relatively new, novel and amazing invention. It is practically impossible to attain the relatively equivalent achievements of Plato today by just philosophising and writing. And the same goes for William Shakespeare, in that he was so far ahead of his time. The English language that William Shakespeare used in his plays is so archaic, yet it is eternally relevant even today, that is why it is so relatively beautiful and amazing. It is impossible for a writer to attain a relatively equivalent achievement as that of William Shakespeare today by just writing. Again this proves that the earlier you come the better.

The art of forgiveness.

Upper Palaeolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, sculpting a Venus figurine.

Among these was the Catholic priest and archaeologist Abbé Henri Breuil, who was able to attest to the great antiquity of the caves [Lascaux] and described them as ‘The Sistine Chapel of Prehistory’. Another early visitor was Pablo Picasso, who on emerging from the cave, is said to have remarked – in reference to modern art – “We have invented nothing”.

(Humans: from the beginning, by Christopher Seddon, page 176).

Art is related to time in a couple of ways, in that the older the art the more priceless it is. When you look at such as the Lascaux cave paintings mentioned above, although the light reflecting and bouncing off the images into your eye and retina is for all intents and purposes instantaneous, something goes on in your brain that appreciates how long ago or how much time has passed since the pigment was applied to the cave wall. Also, art is always much better understood in its temporal context, that is, with the title of the piece of art, the artist’s name and most importantly the date or year it was finished. Art could be time? It is certainly timeless. Time pervades through the medium of art. If you like the images in this blog you can see more on my art website.

https://lightpunishment.com

Therefore, how famous do you think the painters of the Lascaux or Altamira cave paintings are in the afterlife? Imagine in the afterlife if prehistoric man was still making art such as paintings and Venus figurines and was trading his/her timeless and sacred prehistoric art to you, how much do think a genuine prehistoric piece of art or sculpture would go for? Never mind Leonardo Da Vinci, Vincent Van Gogh or Pablo Picasso. Genuine prehistoric art would be priceless. In fact in heaven, just about everything prehistoric man makes or touches probably has value? For example, I have recently purchased two prehistoric stone tools from Etsy, one is a Mousterian Palaeolithic Neanderthal knife blade scraper from 60,000 BP, which cost £10.40. The other larger piece is a Palaeolithic Acheulian knife blade or pick from 200,000 BP, which cost £17.99. Basically, these artefacts are indistinguishable from geofacts or stones and if I were to recreate them today I doubt that I could make them attractive to you. However, for two reasons do these stones have value, firstly because prehistoric man made them and second of all time, because the tools are 60,000 and 200,000 years old. Compare an authentic prehistoric Venus figurine to a 10-year-old iPad. See the relative difference in value? A genuine prehistoric Venus figurine is priceless while a trashy 10-year-old iPad is worthless junk. The present and future are valueless, while the past and prehistory are priceless.

Zero Commandments.

According to tradition, the Hebrew calendar started at the time of Creation, placed at 3761 BCE. The current (2019/2020) Hebrew year is 5780. Imagine if that really was the beginning of life? That would mean that 3761 BCE would be as far back in time as we could go to absolve our sins, that is back to Adam and Eve in The Garden of Eden and coincidentally back to the original sin! Thank God, YHWH, Allah what ever you may call Him for Charles Darwin and his theory of descent with modification through natural selection! Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) determine that there is an urgent need or desire to have the freedom to be able to spiritually travel back in time much much further than 3761 BCE, for example, as will be seen, because Jeffrey Dahmer was not human, he may need to go back to a time before the derivation of genus Homo from Australopithecus, that is 3 to 2.4 million years ago? And Adolf Hitler may need to go back even further? Therefore, why put a limit on it? We should be able to use all 3.5 billion years of life on Earth to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or to seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence. Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) could surely be the final nail in the coffin for Creationism? However, in reality I believe that the Bible and story of Creation and Adam and Eve is the utmost early primitive innocence (EPI)?

Miocene Adolf Hitler, Charles Darwin.

Evolution is biological, however, it also definitely needs time. In fact evolution is time! Anyway, there is always a threshold in evolution, as in the threshold between apes and humans or the threshold between cannibalism not being a problem and cannibalism being a problem etc. For example, ‘in the beginning’ nobody forewarned prehistoric man not to be harsh, nobody forewarned prehistoric man not to be greedy, nobody forewarned prehistoric man not to steal, nobody forewarned prehistoric man not to rape, nobody forewarned prehistoric man not to kill and nobody forewarned prehistoric man not to cannibalise. Similarly, nobody forewarned the British and Germans in the first half of the 20th century not to carry out total war? What the hell!? We living creatures of life receive no help or forewarning from YHWH or anyone whatsoever, we are on our own, we are 100% independent and we learn on our own through natural selection. It would have been fine if YHWH had come down and given unto Homo habilis ‘uzzi guns’ and said unto them, this is the law! Thou shalt not steal, rape, kill or cannibalise etc. However, He did not! It would have been fine if YHWH had built roads, buildings and bridges for Homo erectus and said now you cannot kill or do cannibalism etc! But he did not! Therefore, greed, theft, rape, killing and cannibalism were relatively no issue with prehistoric men. Because there is no help or forewarning for such things as total war, there must be forgiveness and a second chance? Our primitive ancestors had Zero Commandments. How did our primitive ancestors such as Homo erectus figure out or learn what was ‘good and what was evil’? I mean did they at all? If not then who did work out what was ‘good and what was evil’? At what point in time or evolution does killing another member of the same species become murder? In fact, why do things go wrong at all? Why is there sin? Why didn’t humans come perfect beings from ‘the beginning’? It may be because the law is not absolute, in that if the law was universal and absolute, that is fundamental and the same throughout space and time (like mathematics or physics) perhaps nothing would ever go wrong? Perhaps if the law was absolute even chimpanzees would never kill another chimpanzee etc? ‘In the beginning’ the universe or life came absolutely lawless. Think about it 100,000 years ago there were no laws. Were there laws in the sense that we know and understand the today, before the invention of writing? I mean were there oral or verbal laws in prehistory? I mean there probably were verbal laws in prehistoric times, but I doubt they carried as much weight as written laws do today? In fact, in the beginning, for 13.7 billion years or since ‘the Big Bang’, the universe came with Zero Commandments. Concerning the animal kingdom and evolution, the universe has always been utterly lawless. However, like The Ten Commandments, only we modern Homo sapiens in the last several thousands of years have created laws and attempted to order the place. On the subject of The Ten Commandments it has always occurred to me why there wasn’t an 11th Commandment on forbidding of statutory rape? I don’t know, perhaps it wasn’t an issue back then? Anyhow, animals have absolutely no laws. A bear has or lives by no laws. The same laws of physics have been governing the universe for 13.7 billion years, however, for all that time the universe had Zero Commandments and was utterly devoid of moral law. Like the Ten Commandments, moral law or just the law is something which took billions of years of evolution to achieve. Moral law is a relatively and extremely recent invention by us humble hominins. On another note, I believe primitive anatomy probably determines if or what amount of trouble a creature can get in for its actions. For example, if a hominin still has fur then there is probably nothing YHWH or anything else can do to it for anything it does. To reiterate primitive anatomy probably determines if YHWH can judge or punish you for your actions or sins, for example, if a hominin still has fur (such as Australopithecus) then there is probably nothing that YHWH can do to it for its actions. I mean for example, you can probably literally get away with killing and cannibalism if you still have fur for example?

Middle Palaeolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, with fur skins and spear.

Homo erectus or Homo antecessor did not feel guilty for killing or cannibalising another member of the same species, and it was never murder. However, at some point, (perhaps when they lost their fur for example), YHWH had had enough and then more evolved or advanced hominins probably began to feel guilty or gutted for so-called ‘killing’ or ‘cannibalism’? However, we have all felt gutted, in fact, who hasn’t felt gutted for their sins? However, as will be seen later guilt is relatively good! It could be only through natural selection, through learning the hard way, through the mistakes of early hominins and prehistoric man that we learned ethics and morality? As mentioned, there is always a threshold in evolution, as in the threshold between apes and humans or the threshold between cannibalism not being a problem and cannibalism being a problem etc. You would never pat or shake hands with a lion, therefore, could you pat or shake hands with Australopithecus without being eaten? Could you shake hands with Homo habilis without being ripped from limb to limb? Could you shake your hand with Homo erectus and keep it? Therefore, who could you shake hands with? Applying the same logic, could you ‘shake hands’ with Jeffrey Dahmer without being killed and eaten? This may mean that such as Jeffrey Dahmer would need to go back in time to a period where there was no trust or ‘handshakes’ between hominins? Humanity has clearly won the struggle for life and has come to dominate life on Earth, however, was it by being good, moral and compassionate or was it the other way round? Was it simply by conquering the animal kingdom with sheer muscle and remorseless brutality that enabled us to then technically feel compassion? Is being good, moral and compassionate a huge benefit not only to yourself but also your species? Or did we literally have to conquer the animal kingdom one wolf at a time, before we, therefore, attained compassion? I think we had to conquer and master the world first before we attained compassion. Homo sapiens probably got more and more compassionate over time toward animals through the invention of more and more advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc. For example, fighting a lion with spears and bows and arrows is fair or brave, however, fighting a lion with a piece or a machine gun is never fair or brave. It is relative. On another note, someone or something may have had to learn the hard way by fighting over food in order to learn that sharing is good and leads to things like manners and etiquette and that greed is evil and leads to things like anger and hate. In fact manners and etiquette may be a very ancient invention indeed? Also, natural selection may choose manners and etiquette over greed or having the most food?

Professional survivalists.

Ice age Jeffrey Dahmer, walking with spear.

There is a difference between such as the TV survivalist Bear Grylls or the SAS and prehistoric man, in that Bear Grylls or the SAS do not really have to do what they do, they have a choice. Although the SAS do obey orders and have to go on dangerous missions, Bear Grylls just does what he does for leisure, entertainment or sport. It does not matter where you are, but when you are. For example, imagine if Bear Grylls or the SAS had to go back in time to the Palaeolithic period instead? That is a lot different from being dropped off in Afghanistan or the Sahara desert today with GPS and radio and when you are never really more than a few clicks from civilisation. Whereas for prehistoric man there was absolutely no civilisation anywhere on Earth. Ultimately when it comes to life or death it matters. Although Bear Grylls looks the part, if he died on one of his TV shows, this would never be entertainment. Therefore, Bear Grylls and the SAS can always use GPS, radio or cell phones to call up a helicopter to pull themselves out of any serious situation they are not comfortable with. Whereas prehistoric man had absolutely no choice whatsoever! Prehistoric men had to deal with absolutely any situation that was presented to them. Food, water and fire were a constant problem for prehistoric man. Prehistoric man had no advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc or anything whatsoever, if they were lost, attacked by large animals or broke a bone etc they were entirely on their own. This is why prehistoric man could get away with rape, killing and cannibalism etc. We have all felt a little scared on a hike, or in slightly remote places with map and compass etc, but prehistoric man had absolutely none of this and they had no choice. Prehistoric men were constantly in remote places and dangerous environments etc. It is almost impossible for us today to recreate the same psychological situations prehistoric men were in constantly, as we are never more than a few clicks from civilisation. Never mind Bear Grylls or Ray Mears prehistoric men were 100% expert survivalists. There is a huge psychological or mental difference when you know there is no possibility of help coming and when it really matters. Exactly like how people today are expert or professional engineers, doctors or lawyers etc prehistoric men were expert and professional survivalists. Prehistoric men were tough and then some.

Who are you?

Lower Palaeolithic (Neanderthal) Adolf Hitler, with dead rabbit.

I think that because they left no writing or literature behind, and because we do not know their names or deeds etc that the most profound question of all for prehistoric man is who are you? We have no idea who they were? We didn’t even know they existed until modern times. I mean they lived entire lives that we have no inkling about? I mean we have no idea what their particular or unique characters or personalities were like? Some might have been humorous? Some might have intelligent? They are an enigma. They are a mystery. They had no national insurance numbers, birth or death certificates. Indeed, was there anything official in prehistoric times? Therefore, by what right or authority did they exist? Similarly, animals such as pigeons are ‘unofficial’ as they also have no national insurance numbers, birth or death certificates. We know about the majority of human births or deaths on Earth today, but the birth of pigeon or the death of a pigeon is unrecorded and unofficial. I suppose the birth and death of pigeon is only for YHWH to account for. I suppose prehistoric humans were similar to animals in their ‘unofficialness’ in that they were 100% natural and simply came from and returned to YHWH like the animals. Who wants a national insurance number anyway? Who wants to be a statistic? In fact, I think the difference between prehistoric humans and animals is the question: who are you? Not what are you? An animal is a what and a human is a who. You would not say who are you to an animal, but at some point, hominins left the animal kingdom and stopped being a what and became a who? I would have so many questions for prehistoric man. Who are you? What is your name? What are your memories? What was it like? Do you have any stories?

Miocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, bending branch.

Weird monkey.

What are humans? What makes humans non-animal, non-monkey or non-ape? In reality humans are supposed to be animals and we humans are technically primates, and anthropologically speaking we should refer to animals as non-human animals. However, why do we humans appear so separate from and completely out of or above the rest of the animal kingdom? What is so special about us compared to other animals? What is so special about this particular weird species of ape that decided to bizarrely walk up-right about five million of years ago? What is so special about monkeys anyway? Lions and tigers with their sharp fangs and claws seem more like it. In fact, it is an anatomical feature of hominins that our teeth evolved to get smaller and smaller. Consider this, if we humans identify as non-animal, non-monkey and non-primate higher intelligent beings or entities, does this not mean that YHWH would then judge us and say that we are not in fact that impressive or amazing for so called non-animal higher beings? Therefore, this must determine that if we did admit that we are just humble monkeys, apes and primates, are we not therefore, relatively the most amazing animals and apes in the universe? So what do we say? Are we relatively unimpressive non-animals, non-monkey higher beings or are we the most amazing and beautiful apes that ever walked the face of the Earth? 

Middle Pleistocene (Homo heidelbergensis) Adolf Hitler, with rocks.

Compassion analogy.

Prehistoric, ancient and medieval people were brave simply by being alive such a long time ago if they were attacked by large animals such as lions, wolves, bears, rhinoceroses, and mammoths etc they were entirely on their own. This is why prehistoric man could have no compassion toward animals. Imagine this scenario. You have worked hard all week, it’s payday and you go to your local supermarket (let’s say Tesco) to get your weeks groceries. You take your trolley and calmly enter the supermarket and spend an hour choosing and selecting your delicious groceries etc. You then take your trolley to the counter and pay for your groceries with your hard-earned cash. You then calmly walk out of the supermarket entrance with your trolley full of bags of your groceries intending to take them to your car to unload them. All of a sudden a ginormous, drooling and stinking grizzly bear comes charging at you, attacks you and muscles in on your hard-earned groceries. You ditch the trolley and your groceries and run for your life. The bear then runs off with the trolley and the Tesco bags full of your groceries to gorge himself and you are left cold and starving for the rest of the week. Now feel compassionate towards bears. This is how prehistoric man felt all the time. As they do in the wild today with other animals, bears and lions probably muscled in on prehistoric man’s kills all the time. Predictable prehistory?

Ice age Jeffrey Dahmer, with equipment, axe and bow.

Why is it that we can predict so many things about prehistoric man? I mean for example, we know that they must have used stone tools and wood etc for technology, as their was nothing as readily available as stone and wood. And we know that to cut their nails they must have simply bit them or filed them down with an abrasive stone? This is the purest early primitive innocence (EPI) because they were so innocent, and that we can predict so many things about prehistoric man.

The most dramatic evidence for Neanderthal hunting comes from the 130,000-year-old site of Lehringen in Germany, where a wooden spear with a fire-hardened tip was found lodged between the ribs of a mammoth. Neanderthals clearly weren’t afraid to take on the largest of mammals.

(Humans: from the beginning, by Christopher Seddon, page 100).

Upper Palaeolithic Hitler clan, killing a mammoth.

Prehistoric, ancient and medieval people also had no option but to fight for their lives, for example against wild animals, conquerors and Viking marauders etc. In fact the further you go back in time the harsher and more violent it was.

In the scheme of things, (3.5 billion years).

Life has existed on this planet for 3.5 billion years, and in all that time there has been nonstop violence and carnage without a single drop of regret. Most wild animals have either killed and eaten other animals or been killed and eaten by other wild animals. Therefore, in contact with humans (or other animals), all wild animals automatically presume the worst, that is that you are going to kill them and eat them. We have all seen for example how a trapped wild animal, such as a bird or rabbit reacts to you trying to help it. Because they have no language, no matter what you do you cannot explain to that animal that you are not trying to kill it, but that you are trying to help it. 3.5 billion years of trained instincts and statistics determine animals just do not understand that another animal species would ever try to help them. There is no such thing as trust in the animal kingdom. After 3.5 billion years of viciousness, violence and eat or be eaten, animals do not trust us in the slightest. Forgiveness is relative, in that after 3.5 billion years of killing and carnage without a single drop of regret, in the scheme of things and with His timeless perspective of time, evolution and creation, how much do you think YHWH will appreciate the fact that one animal species feels remorse? After 3.5 billion years of life on Earth, YHWH has seen it all, this is why He is so ready to forgive you any sin. After 3.5 billion years of killing and cannibalism without a single drop of regret, how much do you think YHWH will appreciate mankind? ‪Concerning sin and forgiveness one must have the vast and eternal eyes of YHWH or His perspective of time, evolution or creation. After 3.5 billion years of life or from YHWH’s frame of reference or in the scheme of things, with several mass extinctions, how small and insignificant does Adolf Hitler’s modern genocide seem? Therefore, how small and insignificant do your minor sins seem? It is relative. YHWH was around billions and hundreds of millions of years ago, in the time of single-celled life forms and Tiktaalik roseae respectively, who do not really care about the Holocaust. If the very first single celled life form, protocell or last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth is still alive in the afterlife and has evolved, then it has quite literally seen it all before? For example, if the whole time of the Earth was crammed into one single day or 24 hours, then relatively humans have been around since 11:58:43 pm.

Miocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, collecting fruit.

Non-animal humans.

Humans are animals but not really, in fact concerning Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer instead of referring to animals as non-human animals, perhaps we should refer to normal people as non-animal humans? Jokes aside, humans have been non-animal for quite a long time, perhaps over 2 million years or so and YHWH knows this or can see this in an instant or in a way that we cannot see. It is relative, in that YHWH waited billions of years or for nearly an eternity of time simply for a living being to feel guilt or remorse. That being is by definition non-animal. YHWH has seen it all. Compared to the animal kingdom we Homo sapiens sapiens are marvellous. To reiterate YHWH is amazed by you because He has waited so long, and because you are not animal and you feel guilt, therefore, YHWH will readily forgive you more or less any sin. However, the probable consequence is that if someone sins against you, you cannot have the eternal eyes of YHWH or His eternal perspective of time, evolution and creation until you forgive first? To reiterate after 3.5 billion years of life on Earth or from YHWH’s frame of reference or in the scheme of things, how small and insignificant does Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism seem? Therefore, how small and insignificant do your minor sins seem? It is relative. I will say to you now that in the scheme of things Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism IS actually insignificant, the only problem with it is time, in that it is simply in the wrong space and time or simply anachronistic. Therefore, it is simply a matter of spiritual time travel (STT) to remove or ameliorate it. Homo sapiens sapiens should compare themselves to animals more often and appreciate themselves. Compared to the animal kingdom we are awesome. But hypocritically we Homo sapiens sapiens should not make ourselves superior to animals, as it is not healthy. YHWH does not really care, in fact, YHWH loves it when you make yourself not superior to animals. To make yourself equal to animals is very modest and humble. Like a 6 year old learning arithmetic compared to adult learning arithmetic, what is relatively more impressive to YHWH a primitive animal who feels guilt or an advanced 21st century human who feels guilt? This is relative guilt. For example, imagine the very first creature or hominin that felt bad or guilt for killing or cannibalism, would YHWH be angry at this creature or hominin for what it did or would YHWH simply be relatively over joyed after enduring 3.5 billion years of killing and carnage without a single drop of regret, simply for an animal to feel guilt or remorse? This is relative guilt. We know that if we ever commit a sin or a crime that humans are better than the animal kingdom because we feel guilt. Do not think of Jesus Christ all the time, because he was without sin, think of prehistoric men because they did many sins. If you have sinned go back in time and do not be too advanced, special or a supreme being, be primitive, prehistoric or even animal and then your sin is much lighter or even forgiven. YHWH loves and is amazed by humans because we are not animals and we feel guilt. Guilt is human. Guilt is relatively good. Guilt is relatively good because animals do not even feel guilt.

Late Paleocene (Plesiadapis) Adolf Hitler, arboreal quadruped.

Good.

Animals do not sin; neither do they practice virtue. They are not immoral; they are amoral or non-moral. … No animal stoops to the level of a perverted man. Nor does the animal rise to the height of the godly man.

(Genesis versus Darwinism, Desmond Ford, page 351).

Animals have zero compassion, however, it is impossible for them to have compassion because they are nowhere near masters of the animal kingdom, in that they still have to seriously compete with other animals for their own survival and resources. It is no mystery why Homo sapiens have compassion, it is because they have advanced weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc and have conquered the natural world. Homo sapiens rarely compete with animals anymore for survival, hence, they can be compassionate. To YHWH the knowledge, consciousness or awareness of sin is intrinsically noble and good because animals are completely ignorant of sin. To YHWH it is simply a miracle that at least one animal species (i.e.: hominins) is conscious and aware of sin. This is why He is so ready to forgive you any sin. You cannot sin unless you are conscious or aware of sin. That is that children and animals cannot sin. Therefore, the consciousness or awareness of sin is intrinsically noble and good. After billions of years of evolution of life on Earth, YHWH simply appreciates the fact that one animal species is not wholly ignorant of sin. (Notice we have to say “wholly” because of the Holocaust). Early hominins or hominids did not sin because they were ignorant of sin. In a way despite the viciousness and violence, because of their ignorance of sin, the animal kingdom is perfect or without sin. Sin is human because humans are conscious and aware of sin, and because we are conscious and aware of sin we are non-animal. That is what is amazing about sin because only non-animals are conscious they have sinned. Homo sapiens are awesome because they do not have to care about sin, nobody makes them, and there is no reason why they should care. What is the benefit of knowing? It is a miracle we know about sin at all. We could be animals and get away with sin. Descent with modification through natural selection may choose those creatures who are most conscious and aware of sin? That is what is amazing about sin because the idea or knowledge of it is by definition non-animal. It is miraculous because we do not have to care about sin. It is intrinsically noble and good that one animal species has taken it upon itself to know and learn about sin for YHWH. It is amazing that one animal species has taken it upon itself to become ‘good’. That is what humans are, we bravely come here without consent to learn about sin for YHWH. Humans are brave, we feel unpleasant things like guilt, shame, embarrassment, wrath, anger and hate then we die. That is the difference between humans and animals. Sin is beautiful. Animals do not feel guilt. Guilt is relatively good.

Pliocene (Ardipithecus) Adolf Hitler, just hanging around.

4. SPIRITUAL TIME TRAVEL (STT).

My brothers and sisters, if one of you should wander from the truth and someone should bring that person back, remember this: Whoever turns a sinner from the error of their way will save them from death and cover over a multitude of sins.

James 5:19-20.

On hearing this, Jesus said to them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners.”

Mark 2:17.

Let’s recap.

If prehistoric man is early primitive innocence (EPI), then Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust are late advanced guilt (LAG).

Forgiveness is inevitable!

Time has no animosity.

The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period.

The law changes over space and time.

The law is not absolute.

The law is not universal.

The law is not fundamental.

The law is relative.

The law is flexible.

Spiritual time travel (STT) is time for forgiveness on two levels, first of all, it is quite literally time for forgiveness, as in time for the purpose of forgiveness, and second of all, it is definitely about time for forgiveness, as in right now please!

Crime is relative.

Innocence is relative.

Primitivism is innocence.

Because prehistoric man, such as Neolithic man had stone tools, they were as primitive and innocent as newborn babies!

Good guys can go deranged (trust me).

After 3.5 billion years of life on Earth or from YHWH’s frame of reference or in the scheme of things, how small and insignificant does Adolf Hitler’s genocide or Jeffrey Dahmer’s modern cannibalism seem? Therefore, how small and insignificant do your minor sins seem? It is relative.

Sin and guilt are good because early or primitive hominins and animals were/are ignorant of sin and did/do not feel guilt.

Sin is intrinsically good because the knowledge, consciousness or awareness of sin is by definition non-animal.

YHWH loves and is amazed by humans because we are not animals, we are not ignorant of sin and we feel guilt.

Guilt is human. Guilt is relatively good.

Guilt is relatively good because animals do not even feel guilt.

The difference between all animals and hominins of the past, present and future, in all stages of primitive or advanced evolutionary anatomy is relative or just a matter of relativity.

For example, animals are funny, particularly for Homo sapiens dogs, cats and monkeys are funny, especially primates such as chimps and bonobos etc. Early primitive innocence (EPI) simply uses this animal comedy in conjunction with spiritual time travel (STT) or time and relativity to compare and make present criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile the equivalent of animals, primitive hominins and apes etc in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. We have all made a monkey of ourselves, but I think Adolf Hitler gets the prize for making the biggest monkey of all time. You may say how can calling Jeffrey Dahmer an animal lighten his sins? For example, if you called or equated Jeffrey Dahmer to a badger wouldn’t that lighten his sins? Being a badger is about the only place and time or frame of reference that I can get Jeffrey dahmer with lightness, humour or comedy etc. Badgers do crazy things as well?

Early Eocene (Archicebus) Jeffrey Dahmer, with insect.

You may think an animal or an ape is childish? However, childishness lighten sins. Think about it.

  • Extreme genocidal racism is evolutionary or anthropological, and the punishment for it is miscegenation.
  • Murder and cannibalism is only alright for an ape, a primitive hominin or prehistoric man etc.
  • Inappropriate sex definitely is a monkey act.
  • Apes rape.
  • Primates fight.
  • Monkeys steal.
  • Etc.
Miocene Adolf Hitler, (chimpanzee) with right hand.

What use do animals have other than equivalent forgiveness? Therefore, if someone who commits a sin makes themselves equal to or the equivalent of an animal or an ape, this animal comedy lightens his/her sins and hence he/she is forgiven.

Primitive anatomy probably determines if YHWH can chastise or punish a hominin for its actions, for example, if a hominin still has fur (such as Australopithecus) then there is probably nothing that YHWH can do to it for its actions? A hominin can probably literally get away with killing and cannibalism with fur for example.

If someone who commits a sin (such as Jeffrey Dahmer) does not try to be advanced, special or superior to primates and instead becomes, thinks, acts, accepts or makes himself/herself the equivalent of a primitive hominin, prehistoric man, an ape or even an animal etc, then his or her sin is much lighter or even forgiven.

For example, because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, therefore the only thing he can be or equate to is a prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor, an animal or an ape. If he accepts this then his sins would be lighter.

For example, because Adolf Hitler killed so many innocent people in Europe in the 20th century and because he cared so much about racism and “subhumans”, therefore justice scientifically determines that the only thing he can be or equate to is (and I quote) a “subhuman” such as an ape or an archaic hominin. If he accepted this then his sins would be lighter.

Spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are without sin because they pay every single last penny, this is because natives or primitives such as bushmen or prehistoric man are/were literally penniless.

Case study 1, Adolf Hitler, (modern genocide).

By reading spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement you will see that I am never a Holocaust denier. I am real and I fully acknowledge the Holocaust happened and I fully know and accept (from reading Martin Gilbert’s book about it), how unbelievably horrendous and soul destroying the Holocaust was. All that I am saying is that we should try or that it is time to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler and the Nazis. Why? Because not doing so is detrimental to both the spiritual and mental well being of the Jews and the spiritual and political wellbeing of Christian Europeans.

You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.

(Matthew 5:43-48).

I ❤️ U Antifa! 🙏

Miocene (silverback) Adolf Hitler, DISPLAYING!!

Remember forgiveness is never justification or support. The Jews are the most offended people in history, therefore, how can we make it up to them? Adolf Hitler and the Nazis were unchristian and the Holocaust is the biggest foul-up in history in that it is so unbelievably anachronistic, in that the most tragic and heartless act in history happened so relatively recently in the 20th century in Europe. In antiquity the Greeks and Romans considered Northern Europeans as barbarians, evidently, the Nazis proved they still are. I have researched the Holocaust and to me, the worst thing that Adolf Hitler and the Nazis did (and as bad as it got) was this:

On 2 November 1942 the head of the Ancestral Heritage Institute in Germany, Dr Sievers, wrote to Dr Karl Brandt, asking for 150 skeletons of Jews. ‘We have the opportunity’, Dr Sievers had explained earlier, ‘of obtaining real scientific evidence by obtaining the skulls of Jewish Bolshevik commissars, who are the exemplification of the sub-human type, the revolting but typical sub-human type.’ Each head, Dr Sievers explained, must be detached from its body, dipped in preservative liquid, and put in a specially prepared hermetically sealed tin. The corpses were duly provided. Seven months later Eichmann was informed that 116 people had been killed for their skeletons: seventy-nine Jews, thirty Jewesses, four central Asians and two Poles. In this way, mass murder was made to serve the cause of one of the most bizarre, and obscene, forms of ‘science’.

(The Holocaust: The human tradgedy, Martin Gilbert, page 515).

Early Eocene (Archicebus) Adolf Hitler, insectivorous.

That is about as bad as the Holocaust got, therefore that is what we are up against and what we have to try to forgive. How are we to forgive such a thing? I believe it is possible to forgive all sins real or imaginable with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) (and remember relativity is a Jewish invention). The way that crime travel operates or works is that through spiritual time travel (STT), present criminals must become past criminals or relative criminals and you definitely do not want to become a future criminal. Hence, the main hypothesis of crime travel is that in order to forgive contemporary or modern present criminals, they should therefore, be equivalent to animals, primates, prehistoric hominins or ancient people of the past etc. Therefore, if or as along as a present criminal or sinner can spiritually travel back in time in the afterlife and/or make him or herself equal or equivalent to an animal, ape, primitive hominin, ancient, medieval or Victorian human etc, then in theory all crimes or sins real or imaginable can be forgiven. Therefore, this blog is about spiritual time travel (STT) for present criminals in order to attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or seek forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence.

Fish for forgiveness?

If prehistoric man is early primitive innocence (EPI), then Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust are late advanced guilt (LAG). I cannot think of a place in time where the Holocaust would not seem so anachronistic, it is hard to find, but for example, the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth or single-celled life form, Tiktaalik roseae and Australopithecus afarensis probably don’t care about it? I think it is the scale of the Holocaust that is the problem, for example, would you care if Adolf Hitler had killed 6 million fish? Would you care I killed 6 million fish? Not really? Therefore, this may determine that Adolf Hitler is not even a hominid, but would need to hypothetically go back in time to such as the Devonian period, that is, 419 million years ago, when most life on planet Earth was oceanic? Hitler may need to equate to a fish for forgiveness?

Devonian (aquatic) Adolf Hitler, a fine specimen.

Cell for forgiveness.

Or if the Devonian period is not quite good enough for you what about going back in time to the Archean or Precambrian eons, that is 3.5 billion years ago, to the very first single-celled life form, protocell or last UNIVERSAL common ancestor of all life on Earth? Because Adolf Hitler treated perfectly healthy and normal human beings like animals or specimens what if he had to equate to a protocell or single-celled life form for forgiveness?

Archean last (universal) common ancestor single-celled life form Adolf Hitler.

Anyway, if we are being forgiving let’s for arguments sake just deal with hominins? Concerning time, if the Holocaust had happened in the ancient or medieval periods it may have been less of an issue by now? It is time, for example, certainly, if the Holocaust had happened 1 million years ago it would not be a problem by now. Again I think it is the scale of the Holocaust which is so bad, for example, if we think about it, up until fairly recently, there has always been massacres and mass-murders throughout time? Man, woman and child, an entire village here, an entire city there, there has always been such atrocities throughout prehistory and history. The only difference, between prehistoric, ancient or medieval massacres and the Holocaust, is first of all time, in that the Holocaust is so very recent, then also the scale, how organised and how advanced the Nazis were about it. I mean I think say for example, if a king, chief or tribe massacred another tribe or an entire village in the ancient or medieval periods, because it was quite a long time ago, because they were primitive and because they carried it out with swords, spears, bows and arrows etc and because they wore different clothes and unique armour (as in not identical uniforms like the Nazis), that therefore, time and these primitive qualities or aspects somehow ameliorated their deed? Therefore, that is why the Holocaust is particularly bad, because it was so anachronistic, because of its scale and its highly organised and highly advanced nature. Adolf Hitler planned the Holocaust with precision, efficiency and like clockwork which is why it is so much worse than an ancient or medieval massacre carried out by a rag-tag band of soldiers. On another note, concerning Adolf Hitler, remember that it was technically impossible for prehistoric man to feel compassion towards animals, because they had primitive weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc, therefore, they were not yet masters of the world or the animal kingdom. You cannot feel compassion when you are still competing with animals and are still prey yourself. Similarly, animals have zero compassion. How can you have compassion when everything is voraciously trying to eat you? Therefore, Adolf Hitler was the opposite of the Buddha when it comes to compassion, hence, because he had no compassion, the only thing he could be or equate to is a prehistoric man such as Homo erectus or an ape. However, because Adolf Hitler equated to a prehistoric man such as Homo erectus in the 20th century, this means he was relatively in the wrong place and the wrong time, therefore he was anachronistic and therefore he was relatively evil. This may mean Adolf Hitler would need to spiritually go back in time to a period that had no compassion? Therefore, if Hitler spiritually went back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years he might find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? Concerning ancient/recent slavery and barbaric sports such as fox hunting, duelling, dog fighting and gladiatorial combats, it is easy to claim early primitive innocence (EPI) and to say that we should not judge ancient and medieval people for ancient slavery, 19th century and earlier Britons for fox hunting, duelling and dog fighting or Romans for gladiatorial sports. This is because they had much more primitive weapons, technologies and infrastructure etc than us and hence they had less compassion towards life and animals than us, they were also much more innocent than us. But how can we say this for the Holocaust? How can Adolf Hitler claim early primitive innocence (EPI)? Considering that the 1980s were thicker or more innocent times compared to the 2020s because we had no internet or mobile phones etc, this obviously means that the 1930s and 1940s were way more primitive technologically and therefore, much thicker or more innocent. Think back to those innocent black and white films, for example, take the comedy duo act Laurel and Hardy who became well known during the late 1920s to the mid-1940s for their slapstick comedy, with Laurel playing the clumsy and childlike friend of the pompous bully Hardy. Laurel and Hardy were current during the early Classical Hollywood era of American cinema. Even though they are as old as cinematography can be, when we watch Laurel and Hardy films today we cannot help but laugh at their pure innocence. This proves that the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s were unbelievably primitive and most importantly very innocent at their times. It is impossible today to recreate the same (relatively equivalent) innocent humour as Charlie Chaplin and Laurel and Hardy. For example, today the relative equivalent of Laurel and Hardy would be I suppose such as Jim Carrey, Sacha Baron Cohen or Jackass etc, however, these comedy actors or groups all have to be extreme or go over the top in order to make us laugh. This is because they are more advanced and therefore, less innocent. Whereas such as Charlie Chaplin and Laurel and Hardy can make us laugh with such simple and innocent humour. Which would you prefer? Therefore, it is true that the 1930s and 1940s had a lot of early primitive innocence (EPI)! This fact may absolve or ameliorate two world wars and the Holocaust? Therefore, most importantly, the solution to the Holocaust is not just to forgive Hitler but to forgive Germany as a whole. In order to accomplish this Germany may need to regain its holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI)? To reiterate, because the Holocaust is late advanced guilt (LAG), therefore, we need to counteract it with early primitive innocence (EPI). Therefore, for the sins we do not like to forgive, for example, the Holocaust, the way to forgive them is to use spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement and call or make them equate to prehistoric man, primitive hominins or primates etc, in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. For example, because Hitler cares so much about racism and “subhumans”, this scientifically determines that he is definitely at the very least equivalent to an ape or archaic hominin! To reiterate the only way I can understand Adolf Hitler with any lightness is if he were equivalent to (and I quote) a “subhuman” such as an ape or archaic hominin.

Pliocene (Australopithecus africanus) Adolf Hitler, using tools and feeding.

If he accepted this then his sins would be lighter. With these primates or in this place and time he might be at ease, forgiven and accepted. If he accepted this then his sins would be lighter. There is nothing as humble as making or equating yourself to an ape. So if Hitler did not try to be advanced, special or superior to primates and instead became, thought like, acted or accepted that he was the equivalent of a primitive hominin, prehistoric man or even ape etc, would we forgive him? If Adolf Hitler spiritually went back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to a more primitive period could he attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or could he find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? Therefore, Hitler made a monkey of himself. This example may demonstrate that all crimes or sins are always an animal, ape or anthropological, in that if you sin or commit a crime you always make or equate to an animal, primate or primitive hominin, that is you literally make a monkey of yourself. To reiterate, if you sin like such as Adolf Hitler the only solution to your crime is spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF), relative anthropology, an ape or an archaic hominin. Sin is always anachronistic. Why is it we humans hate our own evolutionary past? Why would we rather be anything except an ape? In fact, what if a solution to the Holocaust could be if all indigenous Europeans (instead of being advanced) equated to monkeys? Don’t call him a genocidal megalomaniac call him a genocidal megalomaniac in the 20th century. Do not say slavery say recent slavery. Do not say offence say relative offence. Do not say sin say relative sin. Do not say crime say relative crime. Do not say criminal say relative criminal. Sin is always relative, in that it depends on your temporal context or frame of reference. For example, concerning spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), we can say in the 20th century frame of reference, Adolf Hitler seems relatively advanced, more responsible and therefore less innocent, therefore, Adolf Hitler is a present criminal. However, in the Lower Palaeolithic frame of reference, Adolf Hitler seems relatively primitive, less responsible and therefore more innocent, therefore, Adolf Hitler is a past criminal. Therefore, in theory, if Adolf Hitler could spiritually travel back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to the Lower Palaeolithic period, then in or from this frame of reference Adolf Hitler would seem relatively less evil, therefore, Adolf Hitler is a relative criminal. Always use time or incorporate the temporal. Time lightens the sin. Time has no animosity. Can you or your people un-evolve? Yes! If you commit a present crime such as Adolf Hitler then you and your people will un-evolve through miscegenation. You will also need to go back in time to the required period in order to seek forgiveness and acceptance or relative innocence. The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible.

Middle Eocene (Eosimias) Adolf Hitler, insectivorous.

Mental images.

As stated at the beginning, I would like to advise you to stay positive and to not dwell on the horrendous examples and statistics of the Holocaust, torture, cannibalism and necrophilia etc. I find that when an unpleasant image pops up in my mind from the Holocaust and I feel cross or animosity towards Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, that just forgetting about it, staying positive, thinking of spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness, these lighthearted images and not dwelling really helps with forgiveness.

Seasoning.

From working on this blog for over a year or so, and even though I am fairly a seasoned forgiver, I would like to state the following advice primarily as a reminder to myself, but to everyone else as well. The way to strengthen the forgiveness of Jeffrey Dahmer and Adolf Hitler is that you need to mentally stop blocking them out of your own head. You need to forgive Jeffrey Dahmer and Adolf Hitler yourself in your own head before other people will do so. Therefore, imagine that you are in Jeffrey Dahmer’s and Adolf Hitler’s real presence in your own head. Make friends with Jeffrey Dahmer and Adolf Hitler. If you find friendship difficult, equate Jeffrey Dahmer to a raccoon and inject lightness, comedy and humour into the relationship. Friendship is never justification and it never means you are a Nazi. It is a little difficult to not block out or make friends with Jeffrey Dahmer and Adolf Hitler, because there is a fear concerning one nagging doubt as to whether it is right to forgive Jeffrey Dahmer and Adolf Hitler? That is what I am trying to prove, that it is right to forgive such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. What I can say about Jeffrey Dahmer is that, as there is more benefit in forgiving Adolf Hitler because his present crimes were committed on a governmental, national or international scale, therefore, if it was adjuvant to the forgiveness of Adolf Hitler, then it would mean that it is right to forgive Jeffrey Dahmer. Also, probably most importantly, I have read one book on Jeffrey Dahmer and relatively he makes Jimmy Savile look like an angel! The relativity of this blog or crime relativity does not really get anymore complicated than that. Relatively, Jimmy Savile doesn’t even need to be in this blog, but as there is so much fear in society emanating from the media and vigilantes etc concerning such as Jimmy Savile, therefore, unfortunately he needs to be included in this blog as well. I do not block out Jimmy Savile in my own head, as I do the other two.

Case study 2, Jeffrey Dahmer, (modern cannibalism).

I will just quickly run through Jeffrey Dahmer’s sins. He liked to have complete control over his victims, in that he liked “pliant” inanimate bodies to have sex with. To that end, he lured his victims back to his abode, drugged them with a drink spiked with sleeping pills, so they passed out, then strangled them to death and then had sex with their corpses. He then dissected their bodies, dipping their corpses, bones and body parts in a vat of acid, although keeping their heads and genitals in his fridge and freezer for sexual purposes. He then cannibalised their hearts and some of their muscles to feel at one with his victims. He had such a fetish with “pliant” inanimate bodies, on some of his victims he experimented by drilling holes in their heads and pouring acid and hot water on to their brains in order to turn them into living “zombies” that he could have complete control over and have sex with again and again. He did not succeed in creating “zombies“. Jeffrey Dahmer was sexually aroused by dissecting the bodies of humans and by body parts such as decapitated heads and dissected biceps and calf muscles. It turned him on. At one point before he became a full-blown serial killer he even scoured the obituaries in the local newspapers for young men who had died recently in order to exhume their bodies to have sex with, this was so that he didn’t have to kill. He did try to dig up the corpse of a recently deceased 18-year-old man but gave up as the digging was too hard. Jeffrey Dahmer was different, he was not quite like you and I, his brain was wired up differently to yours or mine. Unfortunately, Jeffrey Dahmer was not human. This is what I meant by how the church in the early medieval period was concerned with sins such as sex for pleasure and wet dreams, however, what you have read above clearly shows that these are the only ‘sins of the flesh’ that we give a damn about?

From the safe confines of his Milwaukee apartment, which doubled as a torture chamber and abattoir, Dahmer conducted bizarre experiments on his subjects, including drilling holes into their heads and pouring acid and hot water into their brains. After his victims died, Dahmer continued to use the corpses of his victims to indulge his macabre fantasies by engaging in necrophilia and cannibalism.

(Jeffrey Dahmer, Jack Rosewood, page 1).

That is about as bad as serial killing gets, therefore that is what we are up against and what we have to try to forgive. How are we to forgive such a thing? For the sins we do not like to forgive, for example, serial killers, the way to forgive them is to use spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement and call or make them equate to prehistoric man, primitive hominins or primates etc, in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. Because Jeffrey Dahmer was a cannibal in America in the 20th century, therefore the only thing he can be or equate to is a prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor (who was also cannibalistic) or an ape. In fact, because Jeffrey Dahmer ‘was not human’ he may have to spiritually go back in time to a period before the emergence of the genus homo? That is about 3 to 2.4 million years ago? To reiterate, because Jeffrey Dahmer equated to a prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor in America in the 20th century, this means he was relatively in the wrong place and the wrong time, therefore he was anachronistic and therefore he was relatively evil. With these creatures or in this place and time he might be at ease, forgiven and accepted. If he accepted this then his sins would be lighter. There is nothing as humble as making or equating yourself to an ape. Going off the un-contacted indigenous Amazonian and bushman examples, in that it could be subtle or technical primitiveness that determines a person’s innocence or guilt, for example, if a bushman lives in a mud hut and has to hunt wildebeest or gazelle to eat meat, then technically he is primitive, and therefore less responsible, and therefore more innocent. Therefore, it is more likely he can get away with killing another human. However, because Jeffrey Dahmer did have advanced weapons, technology and infrastructure, in that he lived in a brick house and did his shopping at a supermarket, which as explained earlier is a highly advanced and global logistical operation, therefore, he was more advanced and responsible, and therefore less innocent than such as un-contacted indigenous Amazonians, bushmen and Homo antecessor for killing and cannibalism. That is the only reason he gets into so much trouble here with us, in this place and time. You may say Homo antecessor only cannibalised when they were hungry and this is why it was ethical for Homo antecessor to cannibalise, not necessarily time. Jeffrey Dahmer did not need to cannibalise because he was never hungry, he could have always have gone to the supermarket or his fridge to eat. Yes but the only reason Jeffrey Dahmer is never hungry is because he was advanced and because the food in our kitchens involves supermarkets, farmers, abattoirs, butchers, factories, food processors and packagers etc. How we feed ourselves and the whole nation today is a highly advanced and collective effort that is only possible through being a highly advanced civilisation? Being so advanced implies much time has passed. I believe drugs such as heroine and cannibalism are quite similar, in that they both depend on time and context. For example, for a lower class smack head to take heroine in a dark and dingy flat in a rough end of Glasgow, this is dirty and unacceptable to us, and this is because we are advanced. However, for a shaman or an indigenous Amazonian to take barbiturates or opium to get into spiritual trances, in Lower Palaeolithic period or Amazon rainforest respectively, in this time or context, taking opiates is even good, in fact, it is probably educational for a prehistoric shaman. This is because they are primitive. Similarly, cannibalism may depend on time or context, for example, for Jeffrey Dahmer to practice cannibalism in his Milwaukee apartment in the 20th century, this is completely unacceptable to us, because we are advanced. However, for the Aztecs to practice ritual human sacrifice and cannibalism on the top of a pyramid in the 16th century Mexico, or for Caribs to practice cannibalism on Caribbean islands in the 15th century or for Homo antecessor to practice cannibalism in a cave in Lower Palaeolithic Europe, in these contexts cannibalism is somehow less of a problem to us. This is because they are primitive. Jeffrey Dahmer ate human hearts to feel at one with his victims which was probably ritualistic. Therefore, the state of being hungry is not the only excuse for cannibalism, but primitivism and time are.

Lower Palaeolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, (Homo antecessor), with human femur.

To reiterate the only way I can understand a serial killer such as Jeffrey Dahmer with any lightness is if he were the equivalent of an animal or a prehistoric man such as Homo antecessor. Therefore, if Jeffrey Dahmer did not try to be advanced, special or superior to primates and instead became, thought like, acted or accepted that he was equivalent to a primitive hominin, prehistoric man or even an ape, would we forgive him? If Jeffrey Dahmer spiritually went back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to a more primitive period could he attain holiness and early primitive innocence (EPI) or find forgiveness, acceptance and relative innocence? Therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer made a monkey of himself. This example may demonstrate that all crimes or sins are always an animal, ape or anthropological, in that if you sin or commit a crime you always make or equate to an animal, primate or primitive hominin, that is you literally make a monkey of yourself. To reiterate, if you sin like such as Jeffrey Dahmer the only solution to your crime is spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF), relative anthropology, an ape or archaic hominin etc. Sin is always anachronistic. Why is it we humans hate our own evolutionary past? Why would we rather be anything except an ape? Don’t call him a cannibal call him a cannibal in the 20th century. Do not say cannibalism say modern cannibalism. Do not say slavery say recent slavery. Do not say offence say relative offence. Do not say sin say relative sin. Do not say crime say relative crime. Do not say criminal say relative criminal. Sin is always relative, in that it depends on your temporal context or frame of reference. For example, concerning spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), we can say in the 20th century frame of reference, Jeffrey Dahmer seems relatively advanced, more responsible and therefore less innocent, therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer is a present criminal. However, in the Lower Palaeolithic frame of reference, Jeffrey Dahmer seems relatively primitive, less responsible and therefore more innocent, therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer is a past criminal. Therefore, in theory, if Jeffrey Dahmer could somehow spiritually travel back in time millions or hundreds of thousands of years to the Lower Palaeolithic period, then in or from this frame of reference Jeffrey Dahmer would seem relatively less evil, therefore, Jeffrey Dahmer is a relative criminal. Always use time or incorporate the temporal. Time lightens the sin. Time has no animosity. The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible.

Upper Palaeolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, fighting with spear.

https://crimetravel.co.uk

Case study 3, Jimmy Savile, (modern statutory rape).

As mentioned, I have read one book on Jeffrey Dahmer and relatively he makes Jimmy Savile look like an angel! Concerning Jimmy Savile, I think every red blooded man on Earth can at least technically understand how Jimmy Savile was attracted to teenage girls. It’s just simply that the vast majority of us can apply a lot of resistance to our feelings and urges. Therefore, we can at least technically understand him. Jimmy Savile was very human. As you can see with the art in this essay that Jimmy Savile’s pictures are not quite as funny as Adolf Hitler’s and Jeffrey Dahmer’s, this is because Jimmy Savile is NOT an animal. He only needs to spiritually go back in time to either the medieval or Victorian periods. Therefore, for the sins, we do not like to forgive, such as child abuse, the way to forgive them is to use spiritual time travel (STT) equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement and call or make the perpetrators equate to ancient, medieval or Victorian people etc, in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. However, before that consider this. In 1275, the first age of consent was set in England, at age 12 (Westminster 1 statute). In 1875, the Offences Against the Person Act raised the age to 13 in Great Britain and Ireland, and ten years later the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 raised it to 16. In 1917, a bill raising the age of consent in Great Britain and Ireland from 16 to 17 was defeated by only one vote. Therefore, Jimmy Savile may need to spiritually go back in time to either the medieval period, that is, before 1275 AD or the Victorian period, that is before 1875 AD? Therefore, the term ‘child abuse’ is relative, because what we consider ‘child abuse’ or ‘statutory rape’ in the 20th/21st centuries frames of reference, was not ‘child abuse’ or ‘statutory rape’ in the Victorian or medieval periods etc. Therefore, relatively child abuse was less of an issue in ancient, medieval and even Victorian times. Therefore, I think slavery and ‘child abuse’ are quite similar, in that relatively they were both acceptable in more primitive and ancient times? We would not judge ancient, medieval or even Victorian men for having relations with 12-year-old girls or for slaving, so we should bear this in mind when judging and condemning modern men such as Jimmy Savile or medieval slavers such as Henry the navigator. It is relative, frame of reference and perspective. We cannot sit here in the 21st century and reverse condemn Victorian, medieval or ancient men such as Muhammad (who married a 9-year-old) for having relations with young girls, or Jean Barbot who was a practising recent slaver by trade, from our high and mighty frame of reference. You cannot condemn the past. Like recent slavery, this is because relatively there was nothing wrong with such acts in those periods. It is only in the 20th and 21st-century frames of reference that child abuse and slavery seem particularly bad. As late as the 1880s in Britain, before the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885 raised the age of consent to 16, it was not uncommon for gentlemen to pay to have intercourse with 13 year old virgins. In fact, it was a journalistic investigation into such activity which led to the Criminal Law Amendment Act of 1885. Therefore, for example, the England footballer Adam Johnson (who had relations with a 15-year-old girl) would be absolutely fine in the Victorian period. Remember, especially for Adam Johnson’s sake, that the law is not absolute! You may think that three milliseconds past 16 years of age is the absolute legal age of consent today, but it was not at all only 135 years ago! Another example, I personally had sexual relations with a 14-year-old girl when I was 15 years old. It is relative! It was only okay because I was 15 years old. Which is time! Therefore, this could mean that people such as Jimmy Saville might be forgiven in the ancient, medieval or even Victorian eras? Although such as Jimmy Savile may not have to go back as far as the other two case studies, he still kind of made a monkey of himself. Therefore, with these ancient, medieval or Victorian people or in these places and times such as Jimmy Savile would be accepted and forgiven. Hence, if such as Jimmy Savile accepted this then his sins would be lighter. To reiterate, because Jimmy Savile equated to an ancient, medieval or Victorian man in Britain in the 20th century, this means he was relatively in the wrong place and the wrong time, therefore he was anachronistic and therefore he was relatively unethical. With these people or in these places and times he would be at ease, forgiven and accepted. So if Jimmy Savile did not try to be advanced, special or superior to ancient, medieval or Victorian people and instead became, thought like, acted or accepted that he was the equivalent of a Victorian man, medieval or ancient man, would we forgive him? If Jimmy Savile spiritually went back in time thousands or hundreds of years to a more primitive period could he have relative innocence? Therefore, Jimmy Savile kind of made a monkey of himself. This example may demonstrate that all crimes or sins are always historical or anthropological, in that if you sin or commit a crime you always make or equate to an ancient, medieval or Victorian person, that is you metaphorically make a monkey of yourself. To reiterate, if you sin like such as Jimmy Savile the only solution to your crime is spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness and the medieval or Victorian periods. Sin is always anachronistic. Don’t call him a child abuser call him a child abuser in the 20th century. Do not say slavery say recent slavery. Do not say offence say relative offence. Do not say sin say relative sin. Do not say crime say relative crime. Do not say criminal say relative criminal. Sin is always relative, in that it depends on your temporal context or frame of reference. For example, concerning spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), we can say in the 20th century frame of reference, Jimmy Savile seems relatively advanced, more responsible and therefore less innocent, therefore, Jimmy Savile is a present criminal. However, in the medieval frame of reference, Jimmy Savile seems relatively primitive, less responsible and therefore more innocent, therefore, Jimmy Savile is a past criminal. Therefore, in theory, if Jimmy Savile could spiritually travel back in time thousands or hundreds of years to the medieval period, then in or from this frame of reference Jimmy Savile would seem much less guilty, therefore, Jimmy Savile is a relative criminal. Always use time or incorporate the temporal. Time lightens the sin. Time has no animosity. The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible.

Medieval Jimmy Savile, King Henry VIII.

Relative criminals.

After all that time travel, if you find forgiveness of such relative criminals as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile offensive, remember at the beginning that I stated that I believe offence is relative, in that what causes offence to one person does not cause offence to another person, especially if they are separated by time. Also ask yourself this question: If your life depended on it, how would you forgive them? I am fairly confident that your answer would be with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI). This is especially important for the afterlife, in that I believe that spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement may be how forgiveness or absolution is achieved in the afterlife? And it must happen, there must be forgiveness at some time, as there is no hell. Adolf Hitler is not in hell. However, we do not have to wait until we are dead, we can also use spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) to forgive down here in life or on Earth as a well? All that I am saying is that if in the remotest possibility spiritual time travel (STT) were possible either in the afterlife or the future, then at least we can therefore imagine the forgiveness of such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile? Also considering this blog is 100% the result of Albert Einstein, as Jew, if Albert Einstein is now saying it is time to forgive Hitler, it is time to forgive! Being vehemently anti-racist has no risk or consequences down here on Earth, whereas being vehemently anti-forgiveness has a risk and potentially has consequences. The thing I like about spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) is that if you are in trouble you are by definition on my side. For example, you could be the type of judgemental and condemning person who is vehemently against the forgiveness of such relative criminals as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile, much like how a vehemently anti-racist person who goes out of his or her way to subdue any form of racism. However, the risk or consequence in being vehemently anti-forgiveness is that it is all fine and dandy to be against it, until you, your child, a relative or someone you know makes a mistake and therefore needs spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI). It is risky and not wise to be vehemently against spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI). Being anti-forgiveness is not the same as being anti-racist. It is just a coincidence that the biggest sinner of all time was a racist and needs forgiveness. For example, you could drink drive and kill someone, you could hit and run, you could kill someone at work through negligence, similarly you could be an air traffic controller who caused an accident through incompetence etc. To reiterate, although spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) try to genuinely forgive Adolf Hitler (for the benefit of all indigenous Europeans) it is not racism, as it determines and stands by the idea that the difference between all animals and hominins of the past, present and future, in all stages of primitive or advanced evolutionary anatomy is relative or just a matter of relativity. It also deals with the forgiveness of Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile and what has that got to do with racism? Therefore, if you are the vehemently anti-forgiveness person, you better watch yourself, because if you ever did need it you would be a hypocrite. It is wise to be pro-forgiveness just in case.

Ice age hunter Jeffrey Dahmer, with woman and wolf.

Christ came into the world to save sinners. Even his enemies admitted: “This man receives sinners.” And Luke 19: 7 tells us he went to be the guest of a sinner.

(Genesis versus Darwinism, Desmond Ford, page 50).

The following well known New Testament verse I think has particular bearing today between Nazis and Antifa.

“For if you forgive other people when they sin against you, your heavenly Father will also forgive you. But if you do not forgive others their sins, your Father will not forgive your sins.”

(Matthew 6: 14-15).

I forgive Antifa! ❤️

Miocene (silverback) Adolf Hitler, DISPLAYING!!

“In him we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, in accordance with the riches of God’s grace.”

(Ephesians 1:7).

“If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just and will forgive us our sins and purify us from all unrighteousness.”

(1 John 1:9).

Then Peter came to him and asked, “Lord, how often should I forgive someone who sins against me? Seven times?” “No, not seven times,” Jesus replied, “but seventy times seven!

(Matthew 18: 21-22).

“Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.”

(Ephesians 4: 31-32).

“Bear with each other and forgive one another if any of you has a grievance against someone. Forgive as the Lord forgave you.”

(Colossians 3:13).

“And when you stand praying, if you hold anything against anyone, forgive them, so that your Father in heaven may forgive you your sins.”

(Mark 11:25).

No bones.

What is the point of all the above verses regarding forgiveness if they are only concerned with minor sin, such as a vicar feeling guilty for taking the largest slice of pie? Or with Theresa May running through a field of wheat as a child? There is no point and it would mean these verses are practically useless. Why only go so far and stop halfway or above the belt, for example, why say drug use is the limit of forgiveness? Drug use is pie! There is actually a physical limit to the sins and crimes that can be committed even to our own wildest imaginations. Hollywood horror movies are constantly innovating and pushing the boundaries of violence with such films as 31 and the Saw series etc. Also, everything that we can possibly imagine that can be committed has already been done, by such as Adolf Hitler and Jeffrey Dahmer etc. So because there is a fundamental physical limit to crimes or sins that can possibly be committed, therefore, you know it cannot possibly go any further. Therefore, because you have no fear of anything going any further, therefore why not go all out and fix them all once and for all? JESUS CHRIST WAS EXTREME WITH FORGIVENESS. Even his dying words on the cross were about forgiveness. Therefore, so am I extreme with forgiveness. Therefore, we have to go way below the belt or beyond slices of pie to fix crimes and sins. I mean we should make no bones about dealing with and talking about the forgiveness of relative sin such as genocide, cannibalism, homicide, child molestation and rape etc. Also, concerning our early primitive innocence (EPI) such as the internet, mobile phones, CDs etc and classical pop stars etc, although spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) are a very nice idea, they would not work without forgiving such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile etc. I mean all those memories of our younger days would mean nothing. All those old beautiful songs and music videos would just be dated and cheesy. And all those primitive technologies of our youth would just be dated and obsolete with no value or meaning whatsoever, and the perpetually and eternally young, teenage, advanced and cutting-edge would be all that matters. The past would simply decay and turn to dust. To reiterate, as a warning, as I have proven to you, you will not get or attain your EPI qualifications unless you first forgive relative criminals such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. Therefore, if you don’t forgive the above, this means that a 23 year old with a doctorate qualification is above your station.

Pliocene (Australopithecus afarensis) Adolf Hitler, offering fruit.

How to remove pure hatred. Nazis or Antifa?

Other than Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile who else do I find hardest to forgive? Antifascists. Antifa come very late in the game, they are an afterthought, they only show up when Europeans are vulnerable. Only now when Europeans have made peace and equality with the world, decolonised and exposed themselves etc have Antifa decided to get “brave”. This is what Antifa are, they exploit anti-European laws such as the Equalities Act, and because anti-European laws are (bendily) against it, they are too cowardly to fight non-Europeans, so they make up for their lack of bravery by being violent towards Europeans, so that they appear tough. Let me tell you this, Antifa are forever, they are eternal with Europeans. By this I mean that Antifa have made themselves the eternal enemies of Europeans. They even have stickers or signs saying that all white people are Nazis. Antifa are eternal because they have sided with rest of the non-European world or 6 billion non-Europeans, therefore, they are making a new human race that shall dominate the Earth into the eternal future. However, please remember that this blog was entirely about our ancestors and the past. And please remember, the key to forgiveness lies in the past. Antifa are the eternal enemies of Europeans on both sides of life. Germany is just 80 million people, it is not eternal. However, let me tell you this, even if the Nazis bigoted me personally or came on to me racially for not having aryan features such as blond hair and blue eyes (which I don’t), still the hardest to forgive for me (between Nazis and Antifa), would still be Antifa! Why? Because Antifa are forever! For example, on 7 June 2020 in Bristol, U.K. BLM and Antifa pulled down Edward Colston’s statue (a 17th\18th century recent slaver and philanthropist) and replaced it with a sculpture of BLM protester Jen Reid. However, remember, concerning such 17th and early 18th century recent slavers as Edward Colston, you cannot judge or condemn the past! The law in one frame of reference or time period is not the law in another frame of reference or time period. The law changes over space and time. The law is not absolute. The law is not universal. The law is not fundamental. The law is relative. The law is flexible. Having said that, because (and only because) of Jesus Christ’s relatively extreme teachings on forgiveness of loving your enemies, and also because spiritual time travel (STT). equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) determine no one is unforgivable, hence I DO forgive Antifa.

Bless those who persecute you; bless and do not curse.

(Romans 12:14).

God bless you Antifa! ❤️

As you can see from reading Jesus Christ’s teachings above on what I call His extreme forgiveness, is that the way to remove pure hatred in the world is to love your enemies. I know we all sigh with despondence at old Jesus with the heavy prospect of forgiving or even loving our eternal and mortal enemies, but honestly that is how to remove pure hatred. Well that in conjunction with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI). I would like to advise the far-right not to fight with Antifa, and most importantly never react with hate toward Antifa! This is because the whole point of Antifa is to cause you to react with hate and to in-fight. It is futile to fight with Antifa because the whole world is on Antifa’s side. Therefore, do the exact opposite and react to them with love! LOVE YOUR ENEMIES! Amen.

Miocene (silverback) Adolf Hitler, DISPLAYING!!

Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, he is a new creation; the old has gone, the new has come! All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and gave us the ministry of reconciliation: that God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ, not counting men’s sins against them. And he has committed to us the message of reconciliation.

(2 Corinthians 5:17-19).

Anthropological apology.

Because of the Holocaust, spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI) clearly demonstrate that primitive, developing and third world people are still primitive and therefore much more innocent than indigenous Europeans. Whereas advanced, developed and first-world people, especially Europeans, have lost their early primitive innocence (EPI). Because Europeans are advanced, and because of the Holocaust, they are more responsible and therefore less innocent, more culpable and guilty etc. Developing and third world people have won the trivial matter of race and will demonstrate this in the future. Before anything else at all, Europeans must regain their early primitive innocence (EPI)? Therefore, as the entire world would like an apology from former European powers for empires, colonialism and recent slavery etc, I will take this opportunity to earnestly, humbly and deeply apologise to all primitive peoples of the world, especially those that still have modern primitive innocence (MPI), such as African, American and Australian natives etc on behalf of my people and especially my ancestors such as recent slavers and conquistadors etc for any abuses of power and suffering that they may have caused? To reiterate, with spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), we definitely and categorically do not and never have thought that we are superior than anyone in any way at all. Most importantly, I would like to personally apologise to the Jews for Nazism. To reiterate, apart from Adolf Hitler and the Nazis, we all know and have always known that we are not superior to anyone at all, as we know that the difference between all animals and hominins of the past, present and future, in all stages of primitive or advanced evolutionary anatomy is relative or just a matter of relativity.

Paradox?

Finally, I suppose you are thinking it is a paradox because it doesn’t matter what I do I will be forgiven? No! Of course it matters, it is time. And you will need a lot of it if you sin. Especially once you have read this blog that is! And I suppose you are wanting to ask what if I read this blog and decide to commit a crime anyway? In that case, I would say to you remember how crime travel operates, which is that you definitely do not want to become a future criminal.

Middle Palaeolithic Jeffrey Dahmer, with companion and spear.

There is something about a PhD of Forgiveness in that it is ironic or a catch-22 because it requires a person with several qualities. It requires someone with a lot of time on their hands, someone who is not bound or constrained by institutional political correctness in any way at all, someone with nothing to lose and someone who is a bit of a nut. It basically requires a schizophrenic. The only thing stopping or preventing people from forgiving or associating with relative sinners such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile is fear. It is the fear of society and fear of vigilantes. Whereas I am a schizophrenic who’s life is over and I have nothing to lose. Most importantly the way I achieved spiritual time travel (STT), equivalent forgiveness (EF) and early primitive innocence (EPI), or crime travel, time for forgiveness, light punishment and light judgement was because I made no bones! I know anybody would do their utmost to get such as Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile off with their relative sins, only that fear prevents them. The only problem with you forgiving, being alright with or associating with relative sinners such as the above mentioned is fear of other people and fear of what other people think. Between you and such as Jimmy Savile there is no problem, only that you fear other people. People are nasty given half a chance, for example liberal demonstrators and vigilantes etc. And remember, the ubiquitous animosity in the world today emanates from the left and Antifa. In fact, I will tell you now I have absolutely no fear whatsoever of the law for sticking my neck out and writing and publishing this blog. If the law chastised or put an end to this blog, I would consider myself a martyr or a political prisoner and I would feel very righteous about it. However, what I do fear is vigilantes and violent anti-racist demonstrators and activists such as Antifa. However, vigilantes and Antifa are not the law, therefore, what I fear is lawlessness! To me this proves that such as vigilantes and Antifa stop forgiveness! Antifa is about stopping the forgiveness of Adolf Hitler and the Holocaust! To me the law needs to seriously check vigilantes and Antifa instead of turning a blind eye to it. Therefore, people today are too scared to forgive, and that is a genuine tragedy. Please, do not be afraid to forgive! With time the forgiveness of Adolf Hitler is inevitable. Therefore, why delay the inevitable? As stated spiritual time travel (STT) belongs to Albert Einstein, I simply dared to go there with Adolf Hitler, Jeffrey Dahmer and Jimmy Savile. I mean I simply dared to forgive them.

How I made a monkey of myself!

You are probably wondering what sins I committed? As stated I am a schizophrenic, which just means I am clown who cannot work. I was sectioned in 2012 for 2 months. Prior to my section, I had a severe mental breakdown in 2006 and 2007 from which I will never fully recover (the section did help though). I am mentally disabled, I see things and I hear voices, however, not real things but in a purple haze, however, I am not stupid. During my phase of extreme paranoid and delusional psychosis, I suffered from an extreme case of acrasia and I did many things that I deeply regret. In short I made a big monkey of myself. Therefore, I know exactly what it is to be a psycho! I am not quite prison material, but put it this way, relative to me you are a slice of pie!

Conclusion.

Muslims will say: Christianity does not work.

  1. Because it had a Holocaust.
  2. Because it could not save itself from said Holocaust.

Therefore, it is not the Holocaust itself that is the downfall of Europe, but what is even worse is that Europeans did not allow Jesus Christ to forgive the Holocaust. Therefore, the reason that Europe is being conquered by Islam is because Christianity is not working. Christians will probably blame Jesus Christ for not saving us from the Holocaust but this is rubbish, Jesus Christ was crucified, there is nothing more he needs to do. Therefore, like this essay, it is down to us Christians to catalyse or actuate Jesus Christ’s forgiveness of Adolf Hitler. We need to make it so. If we sit around twiddling our thumbs and praying for Jesus Christ to come and save us, it will never happen. Like this essay, we all need to shoulder the cross. We all need to risk our lives and to be crucified. I am not saying that we should ditch our iPhones and iPads and then go around beating our chests, wearing skins and waving spears about. What I am saying is that humanity should have infinitely more forgiveness! In fact, I am saying that because crime is relative, and because moral law or just the law is not universal, absolute, fundamental and the same throughout all of space and time, (like the angles of a triangle which have always and will always add up to 180°), therefore, humanity should have absolute, one and universal (relative) forgiveness for all people for all sins throughout all of space and time. Therefore, I believe we should equate relative criminals to animals and prehistoric hominins of the past in order to lighten their sins and forgive them. I am saying that as long as present criminals can spiritually travel in time to the past that therefore we should say that they are past criminals or relative criminals instead of present criminals and that they have committed relative crimes instead of present crimes. I am saying that we should look forward to the past instead of the future. I am saying that we should stop childishly seek youth and instead seek early primitive innocence (EPI) instead. By this I mean:

  • We should seek to the old and ancient like Prehistoric man, Plato and Socrates etc.
  • We should seek to be and look forward to being old, classical and ancient like Prehistoric man, Plato and Socrates etc.
  • We should take pride, enjoy and revel in being old and having lots of EPI.
  • We should definitely honour, respect, revere and look up to all of our elders and all of our ancestors.
  • I am saying we should stop ridiculing recent past and we should stop saying ‘Daaaang! That is soooo last week!

I am saying that I believe the older something or someone becomes the more early primitive innocence (EPI) it or they attain and the more classical it or they become, however, it is difficult to see this innocence or ‘classicalness’ in the recent past, and this is why we ridicule it. Therefore, while we are using or creating our advanced technologies, engineering feats and works of music or art etc that we should be very conscious of, aware of and appreciative of the past, our ancestors and early primitive innocence (EPI). Therefore, would you rather be advanced or primitive? Well, I suppose down here on Earth or in life you may want to be advanced, like America or Apple Inc. etc? However, as you have seen there is a lot in primitivism or being primitive, for example innocence, holiness and you can also get away with more sins than advanced people can, you can do things advanced people cannot. Plus, there is no avoiding it, you will become relatively primitive and attain innocence at some point, just give it 100 years, in fact, even Apple Inc. will one day be relatively primitive? Therefore, why try to avoid the inevitable? No one, not even Steve Jobs can fight against the passing of time. Therefore, relax, calm down, be alright with the past and accept that you will one day become relatively primitive, innocent, classical, divine and holy like Plato and Socrates etc. Embrace the past, your ancestors and your inevitable and relative primitivism. I am saying it is probably only because of the Holocaust that we ridicule the recent past. I mean it is only the recent past that we ridicule fashionably, such as the 1960s and 1980s, but what is the point in saying ‘Daaaang! That is soooo last week!’ to Upper Palaeolithic man, Tiktaalik roseae or the last universal common ancestor of all life on Earth? The only person who can say ‘Daaaang!’ is probably Albert Einstein? Also, before you go judging me and blatantly and inaccurately calling me a Nazi (anyway) because I have forgiven Adolf Hitler, please remember that I have proven to you by how I used a combination of the powers of two great Jews (Albert Einstein and Jesus Christ) to forgive all sins real or imaginable, that I am in no way a Nazi!

Middle Palaeolithic Adolf Hitler, with club.

And remember the key or secret is…

…in the past.

IF YOU HAVE SERVED TIME YOU ARE A RELATIVE CRIMINAL.

SEVENTY TIMES SEVEN!

STICKS AND STONES!