Luke 13-16
Lorin Friesen, June 2025
The essay that I wrote on the Gospel of Luke in 2023 stopped at the end of chapter 12 because I ran out of history to map onto the biblical text. In addition, chapter 12 appears to be describing a major inflection point where the timeline of history could take a number of different directions. A lot has happened in the last two years and it is now possible to extrapolate from the present to make a plausible interpretation of Luke 13-16. I initially stopped at the end of chapter 15 because the parable of the prodigal son appears to be describing another major inflection point, and attempting to extrapolate into the future beyond a major inflection point is difficult to do accurately in a plausible manner. However, in August I was able to add an analysis of chapter 16.
As usual, we will be quoting from the Berean Literal Bible because it tends to be closest to the original Greek text. However, I occasionally found the BLB to be inaccurate when writing this essay. And when I looked at the other translations I usually found the venerable KJV to be more accurate.
Table of Contents
13:1-3 Mixing the Blood of the Sacrifice
13:4-5 Collapse of the Tower
13:6-9 Barren Fig Tree
13:10-13 Jesus Heals a Woman on the Sabbath
13:14-17 Indignant Response
13:18-21 Kingdom of Heaven
13:22-25 Narrow Door
13:26-30 Insiders Rejected
13:31-35 Lament over Jerusalem
14:1-6 Jesus Heals a Man with Dropsy
14:7-11 Being Invited to a Wedding
14:12-14 Inviting Guests to a Meal
14:15-24 Parable of the Great Supper
14:25-27 Cost of Following Jesus
14:28-33 Two Analogies
14:34-35 Good Salt
15:1-7 Parable of the Lost Sheep
15:8-10 Parable of the Lost Coin
15:11-17 Parable of the Prodigal Son
15:18-24 Young Son Returns
15:25-32 Older Son Complains
16:1-3 The Shrewd Manager
16:4-8 Minimizing Guilt
16:9-13 Unrighteous Mammon
16:14-15 The Law and the Prophets
16:16-18 Moving Beyond Protestantism
16:19-22 The Rich Man and Lazarus
16:23-26 Transforming Research
16:27-31 Transforming Education
Mixing the Blood of the Sacrifice 13:1-3
Verse 1 of Luke 13 begins, “Now at the same time some were present.” Time means time as opportunity. Thus, Luke 13 is not necessarily describing something that follows Luke 12 but rather something that is happening at the same time. Present is used once in Luke and combines ‘beside’ with ‘to be’. Some is a generic pronoun that could refer to something or someone. Thus, the circumstances are causing an alternative form of being to emerge but this being has no specific identity. This describes the type of people that have emerged as a result of wokeism. On the one hand, the focus is upon identity and being and not upon objective issues or topics. But on the other hand, those who are fixated upon identity have no concept of identity but rather are a generic ‘some’. And they are defining their identity in terms of opposing groups that they are standing beside. More generally, this un-group has emerged at an opportune time as a result of the interaction of various societal forces.
This un-group then speaks. “Telling Him about the Galileans whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.” Telling means ‘to declare from, which focuses on the original source’. About means ‘about, concerning’ when followed by the genitive. Galilean comes from ‘Galilee’ which comes from a Hebrew word that means ‘to roll’. This is interpreted as the cycles of society. In other words, this un-group is making declarations about the cycles of society. The emphasis of these declarations is not so much upon the group being described or the information but rather upon the un-group as the source of this declaration; the declaration is important because the un-group has spoken.
Blood is interpreted as personal identity, especially as it is being spilled or falling apart. The name Pilate means ‘skilled with the javelin’, and Pilate was the Roman ruler of Israel during the time of Jesus. A javelin is a weapon thrown through the air. Similarly, the three stages of personal transformation leave the human realm of Mercy experiences, travel through the air of Teacher thought, and then return to the human realm of Mercy experiences. The difference is that when throwing a javelin, only the object travels through the air while the human remains unchanged. Plus, the goal of throwing a javelin is to harm people rather than help them. In contrast, in the path of personal transformation, the person travels through the ‘air’ and becomes transformed. Mingled is used once in Luke and means ‘to mix, mingle’. Sacrifice means ‘an official sacrifice prescribed by God’.
Putting this together, religious mechanisms for dealing with guilt are becoming mixed up with identity falling apart. The goal of an official sacrifice is to prevent personal identity from experiencing the judgment of God; the sacrifice dies so that I do not have to. But in this case there is no substitution. Instead, the sacrificer is dying along with the sacrifice. This summarizes what is currently happening to evangelical Christendom. The doctrines and beliefs of salvation and forgiveness have become mingled with the feeling that evangelical Christendom itself is dying. This mingling is being done politically by secular rulers who do not have personal faith, whose goal is to control and harm people rather than help them. In other words, the existential crisis being experienced by evangelical Christendom is being exploited as a political target group by secular political leaders who are claiming to restore Christian beliefs. This mixing of the blood of the official sacrifice with the blood of the sacrificers can be seen in Trump’s exploitation of evangelical Christianity.
This may lead in the short term to some restoration of Christian morality, but in the long term it destroys cognitive mechanisms of atonement. That is because the fundamental premise of evangelical Christianity is that religious truth was revealed in the past by God to the apostles and prophets and recorded in the Bible. This leads to the certainty that God’s declaration that my sins are forgiven is ‘true’ because this declaration is based in Mercy sources of ‘truth’ that are far more significant than any experts in current society. Similarly, the death of Jesus on the cross is viewed as the most important event of human history that overshadows all other events in significance. However, emotional respect for the writers of the Bible has become overshadowed by emotional respect for Trump, the ‘anointed one’ who will restore Christian morality. Similarly the centrality of the death of Jesus has become overshadowed by the existential crisis being experienced by evangelical Christendom. The end result is a mixing of core mental networks within the mind of the typical evangelical Christian.
This mixing of core mental networks is not being noticed by most evangelical Christians. However, it is being repeatedly pointed out by liberal wokeism with its identity politics, which is observing that evangelical Christianity has turned into a marginalized cultural group that is trying to preserve itself from being torn apart by the cycles of society. Liberal wokeism notes that evangelical Christendom talks about God and forgiveness of sin while in practice focusing upon the preservation of the culture of conservative America. The goal of wokeism in pointing this out is not to analyze the situation factually in order to help evangelical Christianity to recover, but rather to establish the social pre-eminence of the un-group of identity confusion.
Jesus responds in verse 2. “And answering, He said to them, ‘Do you think that these Galileans were sinners beyond all the Galileans, because they have suffered such things?’” Think ‘directly reflects the personal perspective of the person making the subjective judgment call’. In other words, the liberal wokeist is not looking at this situation factually but rather imposing personal opinion upon the situation. ‘These Galileans’ would refer to some specific group that is going through the cycles of society. In this case, the liberal wokeist is focusing upon what is happening to evangelical Christendom.
Sinner means ‘to miss the mark’ which implies that some target exists to which one can aim. For the liberal wokeist, the official target is universal tolerance, and liberal wokeism continually attacks evangelical Christendom for committing the ‘sin’ of intolerance. Beyond means ‘alongside of’ when followed by the accusative. All means ‘each part of a totality’. ‘Beyond all’ conveys the feeling of being more extreme in Mercy thought. ‘Alongside of each part of a totality’ conveys the idea of Teacher universality. Evangelical Christendom is not just being viewed as sinning against universal tolerance. Instead, the personal opinion is being pronounced that every detail of evangelical Christendom must be regarded as sin without exception. The cognitive reason for this is that universal tolerance is a universal Teacher overgeneralization, and this level of overgeneralization will be threatened by the very presence of Perceiver facts. Thus, evangelical Christendom is being regarded as a total sinner not because of what it says, but rather because it has the gall to say something.
Were means ‘to come into being’. Thus, the total sin of evangelical Christendom is regarded as something that came into being as a result of the cycles of society: ‘No one thinks like that anymore. Evangelical Christendom is trying to preserve the old prejudices of Western colonialism’. Such things is just a generic pronoun. Suffer means ‘to experience feeling... especially the capacity to feel suffering’. The focus is not so much upon the actual suffering itself but rather upon the emotional vulnerability and the emotional response. This applies to evangelical Christendom because, generally speaking, evangelical Christians are not experiencing physical suffering nor are they being prevented from practicing their faith. But evangelical Christians are experiencing extreme ‘pathos’ as a result of the existential crisis being experienced by evangelical Christendom. Liberal wokeism is noting the extreme emotional response of evangelical Christendom and is focusing its attacks upon evangelical Christendom.
Looking at this more carefully, a Teacher overgeneralization of universal tolerance will be defended emotionally and not rationally. If some group receives less approval from society, then universal tolerance will advocate on behalf of this group—regardless of the behavior or thinking of this group. If some group receives excessive approval from society, then universal tolerance will condemn this group—regardless of what this group actually believes or practices. Universal tolerance looks at the emotional angst being expressed by evangelical Christendom and responds, ‘How dare you complain! You used to impose your social standards upon society and marginalize everyone else. You are screaming bloody murder when all we are trying to do is restore a moral balance to society.’ Notice that moral content is not being discussed. Instead, what matters is the personal opinion of liberal wokeism with its new morality of universal tolerance.
Jesus concludes in verse 3. “No, I say to you; but unless you repent, you will all perish likewise.” No means ‘definitely not’. ‘I’ is implied. ‘Say to you’ suggests that Jesus is not stating his personal opinion but rather applying content to the liberal wokeist. Repent means to ‘think differently afterwards’. The fundamental problem with liberal wokeism is that it does not ‘think differently afterwards’. Evangelical Christendom is based in MMNs (Mercy mental networks) of respect for the source of the Bible. Instead of looking for what is true it bases itself in who is ‘true’. Stated another way, it uses Mercy emotions to overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ what is ‘true’. Liberal wokeism uses the same form of thinking because it asserts that objective truth does not exist, and it declares that all supposed truth is merely the result of some dominant group using its emotional status to impose its personal opinions upon society. In both cases, Perceiver thought is not functioning but rather being overwhelmed by Mercy emotions. All aspects of society that practice this form of thought need to repent. That is because the ubiquitous presence of science and technology combined with the growing knowledge of cognitive principles is leading to the questioning of all Mercy-based absolute truth, which is being replaced by universal truth based either in the universality of cognitive principles or in the universality of modern Western civilization.
All means ‘each part of a totality’ and was used in verse 2 to describe the universal liberal wokeist condemnation of evangelical Christendom. Likewise means ‘likewise, in like manner’. This refers to a similar pattern, because all mindsets that base ‘truth’ in Mercy status will fall apart in a similar manner. This is a cognitive principle that expresses itself universally in many similar ways. Perish ‘implies permanent destruction’. In other words, a total shift is happening in the cycles of society in which the mindset of emotional ‘truth’ itself is coming to a permanent end. That is because both the moralizing of the liberal wokeist and the existential crisis of evangelical Christendom is happening within the general context of a modern technological world that has become transformed by Teacher order, as epitomized by the international economy, the Internet, smart phones, and AI. Almost everyone now carries around with them a smart phone that makes it possible to talk to anyone in the world, access a world of information, and order anything and have it delivered to one’s doorstep within a few days. This ever-present, ever-growing, pervasive Teacher order is inexorably swallowing up every way of thinking that is based in Mercy status. Evangelical Christendom is merely the first group to undergo an existential crisis.
The fact that Jesus has to point this out suggests that the average person is not aware of what is happening. For instance, wokeism insists that universal truth does not exist while conspiracy theories and personal opinions thrive on social media. However, the underlying rational universal Teacher order of the modern technological society makes it possible for people to pretend that rational universal Teacher order does not exist. Irrational conspiracy theories are being spread through ultra-rational computer systems. Wokeist dogma is being propagated by big mouths who assume that their technological society has unlimited resources to give to the marginalized and those who advocate for them. Such fundamental contradictions cannot continue endlessly.
Collapse of the Tower 13:4-5
Jesus gives another example in verse 4. “Or those eighteen on whom the tower in Siloam fell and killed them.” Those means ‘that one’. The previous example was mentioned by the un-group. This example is brought up by Jesus. Jesus is picking this example not because of the specific behavior of the group but rather by what happened to this group. I do not know what the number eighteen represents, but the only other time that this number is mentioned in the New Testament is in verses 11 and 16 which talk about a woman having a spirit of infirmity for eighteen years. This implies that there is a symbolic connection between the group in verse 4 and the woman mentioned a few verses later, which will be discussed when looking at verse 16.
A tower is ‘a tower; a fortified structure rising to a considerable height’. A mountain is interpreted as a pragmatic theory from which one can view the surrounding factual landscape. A tower is an artificial mountain, constructed by humans both to provide a big picture and to provide a place of protection from attack. In means ‘in the realm of’.
Siloam is mentioned three times in the New Testament and comes from the Hebrew word that means ‘to send’. And John 9:7 explicitly states that the word Siloam is translated as ‘sent’. A ‘tower named sent’ summarizes the mindset of evangelical Christendom, which believes that God sent prophets to reveal the Bible which was then sent to believers in the Bible who are then sent to preach the good news (evangelize means ‘to announce good news’) of forgiveness of sins. This emphasis upon evangelism is a hallmark of evangelical Christendom and thus acts as a tower in the sense of providing a general viewpoint from which to interpret Christianity and the Bible. It also acts as a tower in the sense of protection, because evangelical Christians are convinced that God has revealed all significant truth to them through the Bible, and this belief in the absolute truth of the Bible provides a way of fending off the attacks of secular skepticism. (Mental symmetry, in contrast, views the Bible as an accurate source of universal truth as opposed to the sole source of absolute truth. For instance, the prophetic sequences being described in the Gospel of Luke can also be discovered by cognitive and historical analysis, but Luke describes these cognitive sequences exceptionally accurately—before they happened.)
Fall means ‘to fall, to descend’. Moving down is interpreted as heading from generality to specifics. Kill means ‘to kill’. In this case, the tower fell upon the eighteen and killed them. Looking at this symbolically, those taking refuge within the tower of absolute truth were not persecuted by others. Instead, they lost their lives when their tower of ‘truth’ fell down from its height of generality to land upon the ground of specifics. Looking at this cognitively, a holy book is a specific book written by specific authors and belief in a holy book is ultimately backed up by Mercy feelings of respect for specific places, times, and people. But if everyone believes in the same holy book, then this will give the impression that the absolute truth of the Bible is actually universal truth.
It is important to distinguish between the content of the Bible and how people are approaching biblical content. After having analyzed 2/3 of the original Greek text of the New Testament (as well as some of the Old Testament), I can state with confidence that the Bible accurately describes universal principles of cognition. I initially assumed that evangelical Christians would be interested in learning what I discovered, but instead I encountered a total lack of interest. That is because the Bible-believing evangelical Christian is approaching universal truth indirectly. The typical evangelical Christian may say that the Bible contains universal principles that apply everywhere, but that is not an accurate statement. Instead, the evangelical Christian views the Bible as the only source of absolute truth and uses Mercy feelings of respect for the Bible and Christianity to overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ what is ‘true’. The Bible-believing Christian then feels that this absolute truth is universal because of living within a society where most people regard the Bible as true. In other words, this is a man-made tower of universality and not a natural mountain of universality. Using a similar example, if I lived in a society where everyone believed that the Quran was the Word of God, then I would feel that the Quran describes universal truth. But this feeling of universality comes because the Quran is honored universally in my society and not because the Quran describes universal principles.
The Bible ceased to be accepted universally by Western society in the 1970s. However, evangelical Christendom was able to extend the feeling of Teacher universality through the megachurch. A megachurch does not actually extend the content of the Bible to apply universally. Instead, it creates the feeling that the Bible applies universally by allowing people to conduct a wide range of activities within a church setting where everybody believes in the Bible. Creating the illusion of Teacher generality is imperative in a modern technological society that is governed by the Teacher universality of science and technology.
This artificial Teacher universality ceased to work when the man-made towers of pseudo-generality fell upon those who were taking refuge within. The final collapse happened when Pilate mixed the blood of the Galileans with their sacrifices. Sacrifice involves universal principles about God and atonement in Teacher thought. But the people performing these sacrifices are some specific cultural group in Mercy thought. These two will naturally remain distinct if one approaches the content of the Bible as an accurate description of universal cognitive principles, because universal principles in Teacher thought are being applied to personal identity in Mercy thought. But if belief in the Bible is supported emotionally by Mercy feelings of respect for specific people, specific buildings, specific rituals, and specific holy books, then the blood of the people has to be kept artificially distinct from the blood of the sacrifices, because both are based in Mercy thought. Saying this another way, those who are taking refuge in the man-made tower have to pretend that the tower is not man-made but rather made by God. This tower will crush people instead of saving them if the tower collapses from Teacher generality to Mercy specifics.
Such a collapse has become apparent with the evangelical Christian followers of Trump. They claim that they are trying to restore universal principles of Christian morality, but it has become obvious that they are using Mercy emotions to impose their cultural opinions upon the population. They claim that they are honoring the Bible, but it has become obvious that they are actually worshiping Trump. They claim that they are submitting to moral principles, but it has become obvious that following moral principles has become largely irrelevant. Evangelical Christendom has allowed itself to be treated as another political cultural group and by doing so it has lost the high ground—or more accurately the man-made high tower—of any claim to universal morality.
Jesus continues in verse 4, “Do you think that these were debtors beyond all the men dwelling in Jerusalem?” Think is the same word that was used in verse 2 that refers to personal opinion. Debtor is used once in Luke and means ‘one who owes’. Cognitively speaking, those who believe in absolute truth are debtors because they do not really own the truth that they are proclaiming. They have not made this truth their own but rather are borrowing this truth from some source of truth. One takes ownership of truth by learning through personal experience and personal observation that this truth is really valid. For instance, whenever I discover some new cognitive principle, I have repeatedly found that I need to make this truth my own by applying it within some emotional situation. The Bible-believing Christian is a debtor when he allows Mercy feelings of respect for the Bible and its sources to overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ that the Bible is ‘true’.
‘Beyond all’ is the same two words that were used in verse 2 which were interpreted as Teacher generality. The comparison in this case is not with the Galileans but rather with the men dwelling in Jerusalem. Man is the generic word for mankind. Jerusalem is interpreted as the center of established religion. Dwell means to ‘settle down as a permanent resident’. In verse 2, liberal wokeism was regarding evangelical Christendom as greater sinners than any other aspect of society because of their blatant disregard for the ‘morality’ of universal tolerance. In verse 4, the blind faith of evangelical Christendom is being regarded as more blind than any other form of established belief.
Jesus concludes in verse 5 that this is not the case. “No, I say to you; but unless you repent, you will all perish likewise.” Verse 5 is identical to verse 3 except for one word. Likewise in verse 3 means ‘in like manner’ and indicates similarity. Likewise in verse 5 is less common and combines ‘as’ with ‘the same’. Google AI summarizes from Biblehub that homoios in verse 3 focuses upon the nature of things being compared, highlighting their resemblance, while hosautos in verse 5 emphasizes consistency in behavior. In verse 3 the common factor is that all had the same fundamental nature of using Mercy status to overwhelm Perceiver thought. In verse 5 the common factor is that borrowing truth will lead to similar behavior of quoting authorities and being unable to think for oneself. But there are different kinds of mental borrowing. Both the scientist who quotes from the textbook and the evangelical Christian who quotes from the Bible are cognitive debtors, but the underlying mindset is different. The point of verse 5 is that understanding will only be retained to the extent that each generation takes ownership of the truth that it acquires from others.
This explains, for instance, why America has lost its greatness. Trump is currently imposing tariffs on many countries with the hope of bringing manufacturing jobs back to America. But Americans can only manufacture items if they understand how these items work, how to make these items, and how to make the tools that make these items. Much of that knowledge has been exported to other countries such as China, and America has become an intellectual debtor to China. If manufacturing jobs are to be returned to America, then this intellectual debt has to be paid off first. This requires a change in thinking from thinking about physical ownership to thinking about mental and spiritual ownership.
Verse 5 concludes that all will perish who do not change from a mindset of mental borrowing. This may be because robots and AI will eventually take over all jobs that involve following instructions blindly. For instance, I believe that two paragraphs earlier is the first time that I have used anything from AI in any of my essays or papers.
Barren Fig Tree 13:6-9
The next section speaks about a fig tree. The fig tree is the first tree mentioned by name in the Bible in Genesis 3:7 when Adam and Eve took fig leaves to cover their nakedness. Thus, fig leaves are interpreted as compensation mechanisms for covering up personal inadequacies. A fig fruit, in contrast, is interpreted as a legitimate way of dealing with personal inadequacy. In this section, the fig tree is not bearing fruit.
Verse 6 describes the situation. “And He was speaking this parable: “A certain man had a fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came seeking fruit on it, and not did find any.” A fig tree is only mentioned in Luke in this verse and the next. ‘Man’ is implied and certain is a generic ‘any, anything’. Plant means ‘to set out in the earth’. And vineyard means ‘vineyard’. Thus, the focus is not upon the person doing the planting but rather upon the fact that it was planted in the location where it was planted. Fig trees are mentioned sixteen times in the New Testament and this is the only mention of a fig tree being planted in a vineyard. A vineyard is normally used for growing grapes and wine is interpreted as pleasurable cultural experiences. The wine of culture involves mental networks that have some emotional content while figs deal with core emotional mental networks. Thus, the hope is that an ability to deal with core emotional issues will grow out of a context of pleasant emotional experiences. Saying this another way, the hope is that the peripheral pleasures of the consumer society will lead to an ability to handle deeper emotional issues. That is why the fig tree is planted in a vineyard. Planting is explicitly mentioned, implying that the explicit goal is to meet people’s deepest needs with some form of consumer society. For instance, this was the hope during the 1950s during the period of postwar economic prosperity.
Came means ‘to come’ and seek means ‘to seek by inquiring’. Thus, core emotional topics are being investigated and an explicit search for a solution is being made. The goal is to find fruit, and fruit from a fig tree is interpreted as legitimate methods for dealing with core emotional inadequacies. Find means to ‘discover, especially after searching’. In verse 6 no fruit is being found. Thus, the vineyard of the consumer society may be solving people’s peripheral needs with new-and-improved gadgets but it is not addressing peoples’ deeper personal needs. People are expecting the consumer society to meet their deepest needs and they are discovering that this is not happening.
The man responds in verse 7. “And he said to the vinedresser, ‘Behold, throughout these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and do not find any.’” Vinedresser is used once in the New Testament and combines ‘vine’ with the word for self-initiated action. To means ‘to, towards’. The vinedresser would represent those who are being internally motivated to come up with new aspects of culture, which describes all the researchers and inventors who come up with ideas for new gadgets and then produce these gadgets. Three is explicitly mentioned and a year would refer to some cycle of time. Throughout means ‘from, away from’. The words fruit, fig tree, come, seek, and find are then repeated. Thus, the man is not just looking once for figs but rather has been searching for fruit on the fig tree for three years.
Looking at this symbolically, there has been a long-term explicit attempt to meet people’s deepest needs through some form of consumer society, and this search has continued to be unsuccessful. Going further, the modern consumer society has gone through three major cycles. The first stage was the postwar prosperity of the 1950s. This obviously did not meet peoples’ deepest needs because it was followed in the 1960s by the hippie rebellion which explicitly rejected the materialism of the 1950s as being emotionally unsatisfying. The second cycle involved computers and international trade. The personal computer was invented in the 1970s leading to an entirely new kind of gadget that made it possible to have much more interactive fun. The development of computers encouraged people to emphasize the cognitive aspects of personal development. Similarly, manufacturing began to be outsourced in the 1970s, allowing Western society to export most of its dirty work of making things to other countries, giving them freedom to focus upon cognitive aspects of personal development. However, the resulting cognitive psychology did not successfully address people’s deepest needs. This was followed by the third attempt of taking a more holistic approach by moving away from individual cognition to social interaction. This was encouraged by the development of the Internet which also allowed people to go beyond interacting cognitively with personal computers to interacting socially through the Internet. However, the shortcomings of social media are now becoming apparent.
Mental symmetry has also gone through three corresponding shifts. It began in the 1970s as a system of cognitive styles which recognized that people are not all the same but rather fall into seven different categories. Mental symmetry turned into a cognitive model in the 1980s which focused upon personal development. Mental symmetry has recently been used as a meta-theory to provide a unified explanation for many different fields, consistent with the idea of taking a more holistic approach.
Continuing with verse 7, the man decides to end his attempt. “Therefore cut it down! Why even should it use up the ground?” Cut down combines ‘from out of’ with ‘to cut’ and means ‘to cut off, to cut down’. The idea is that the attempt to move beyond a consumer society to meeting people’s deepest needs will be ended. In other words, people will accept that there is a fundamental split between meeting objective needs and satisfying deepest desires. Ground means ‘the physical earth’ and is interpreted as rational thought based in physical reality. Use up means ‘to abolish, to nullify, to render ineffective’. It is used 27 times in the New Testament and this is the only time that it is translated as ‘use up’. Should means ‘in order that’. In other words, the man wants to cut off the fig tree because it is rendering ineffective the ground of human rational thought. Subjective search for meaning needs to be split off from the rational thinking of the consumer society in order to preserve rational thought from being overcome by peoples’ subjective needs. Saying this another way, the sciences need to be protected from wokeism because wokeism threatens to destroy all rational thought.
One last attempt is made in verse 8. “And answering, he says to him, ‘Sir, let it alone this year also, until I shall dig around it, and put in manure.’” Let alone means ‘to send away, to leave, to forgive’. Sending away is similar to cutting off because in both cases one is turning attention away from something. The difference is that cutting off deliberately attempts to remove something while sending away merely ignores it. In other words, rational thinking will stop trying to meet the needs of the subjective in a peripheral manner and instead will leave the subjective alone. Instead of attempting to meet people’s spiritual needs, the consumer society will leave the spiritual realm alone. Dig means ‘to dig’ and is used three times in the New Testament, only in Luke. Digging around means that a separation will be made between the subjective realm of the fig tree and the more objective larger vineyard. This summarizes the attitude being taken today of regarding the subjective as a realm of ‘alternate knowing’ that is distinct from the ‘earth’ of normal scientific knowledge.
Put means ‘to throw’ which is interpreted as moving through the ‘air’ of Teacher theory. Manure is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘dung, manure’. Physically speaking, manure is good fertilizer. Cognitively speaking, manure represents material that has been used and then rejected by humans. Instead of attempting to extend from the wine of pleasant experiences, the subjective will now try to grow from the manure of rejected experiences. This manure of the marginalized is then being ‘thrown’ through Teacher theory. This describes the approach taken by wokeism which builds Teacher theory upon advocating on behalf of marginalized groups, using a form of thinking that is distinct from the rational thinking used by the rest of the vineyard of the modern consumer society.
Verse 9 recognizes that this is a last ditch attempt. “And if indeed it should bear fruit in the time, so be it. But if not, you will cut it down.” ‘If’ and ‘if not’ describe two alternatives in the original Greek. Bear means ‘to make, to do’ which is interpreted as Server actions. On the one hand, the manure is being examined theoretically in Teacher thought. On the other hand, the larger society is looking for pragmatic results: does advocating on behalf of the marginalized work?
‘Time’ is implied and the original Greek simply says ‘into the’. So be it means ‘about to happen’. Thus, a more accurate translation is ‘if it should do fruit towards about to happen’. This conveys the idea that society is on the verge of going through a transition and the hope is that this alternate knowing will meet the coming emotional needs. Applying this to current society, everyone knows that society has to change, and wokeism claims that the key to dealing with the deepest needs that are on the verge of appearing is to advocate on behalf of the marginalized. This mindset can be seen in critical race theory. Quoting from one website, “The view from Social Justice is one that sees people in terms of their social group membership, the relationship of those social groups to societal power and privilege, and the ways those ‘positionalities’ intersect in a ‘matrix’ of domination, oppression, and marginalization that promotes the interests of the dominant while excluding or harming everyone else... Its goal is to identify, expose, disrupt, dismantle, subvert, and overthrow those dynamics in a radical revolutionary process that seeks to remake ‘the system’ itself in the name of its ideology.” Notice that theoretically embracing the ‘manure’ of societal oppression is seen as the key to ‘remake the system’.
But if not is an accurate translation. Cut down is the same word that was used in verse 7. Thus, wokeism is being temporarily permitted by the larger society in the hope that it will address people’s deepest needs. But people have also decided that if wokeism fails then it will be eliminated. This elimination of wokeism is currently starting under Trump.
Jesus Heals a Woman on the Sabbath 13:10-13
The next section looks at a positive alternative. Verse 10 sets the context. “And He was teaching in one of the synagogues on the Sabbaths.” Teach means ‘to teach, instruct’. Synagogue means ‘assembly, congregation’ and is interpreted as some system of organized learning. One is the number one. Synagogue is mentioned 56 times in the New Testament. Teaching in the synagogues occurs often but this is the only reference to teaching in one of the synagogues. This is interesting because it implies that there is an opportunity to teach but it is also limited. This matches my personal experience because I have had opportunities to teach about mental symmetry but they have also been limited and my opportunities have never extended beyond the level of ‘teaching in one of the synagogues’.
On means ‘in the realm of’. Sabbath refers to the Jewish day of rest which is on Saturday or Shabbat. The third of the Ten Commandments (or fourth depending on how one counts) says that one should stop all personal work on the Sabbath in order to focus upon God. Stated cognitively, behavior is normally driven by personal Mercy feelings. On the Sabbath, behavior becomes driven by general Teacher understanding about God. Thus, teaching on the sabbaths would involve talking about God, theology, universal understanding, and Teacher theories, as opposed to talking about me, society, my personal plans, and my culture. This summarizes the approach taken by mental symmetry during the last few years, because I have focused upon using mental symmetry as a meta-theory to analyze topics such as God, theology, interdisciplinary understanding, paradigms, and universal cognitive principles.
A woman appears in verse 11. “And behold, a woman having a spirit of infirmity eighteen years.” Behold implies that something new has appeared on the scene. Woman means ‘woman, wife’ and any mention of a woman is interpreted as referring to female thought, which focuses upon mental networks. This reference makes cognitive sense, because in verse 8 the core mental networks of female thought were separated from the normal cultural thinking of the vineyard. Spirit means ‘spirit, wind, breath’ and spirit is interpreted as mental networks because it appears that the spiritual realm interacts with the mind through mental networks and is capable of empowering mental networks. Infirmity means ‘want of strength, weakness, illness ’. I do not know what eighteen represents but the only other times that this number is mentioned in the New Testament are in verses 4 and 16. This implies that there is a cognitive connection between the collapse of the tower in verse 4 and the appearance of the woman in verse 11.
Looking at this cognitively, the fundamental premise of a mindset of absolute truth is that the source of truth has much greater emotional status in Mercy thought than personal identity. The great emotional status given to the source of truth will overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ that the words of this source define ‘truth’. Using the symbolism of verse 4, the source of truth is at the top of the tower which is much higher and more important than the bottom of the tower where people live. Perceiver thought will only remain in a state of blind faith as long as the source of truth is regarded as much more important than personal identity. Using the symbolism of the tower, the tower must not collapse.
When everyone within a society exhibits blind faith in the same source of truth, then there is no need to support the tower. Instead, everyone will recognize that one must respond with duty and self-denial when called upon to serve God, king, or country. That summarizes the mindset that drove citizens to serve in World War I. Such feelings of duty can motivate people to perform heroic tasks, as illustrated by the selfless heroism of World War I. However, when society loses respect for sources of truth such as the Bible and Christianity, then a mindset of blind faith must be actively maintained, which means that one must continually choose to demonstrate a mindset of religious self-denial. This will express itself as a ‘spirit of infirmity’.
Verse 11 continues, “And she was bent over and not able to lift herself up to the full.” Bent over is used once in the New Testament and combines ‘together with’ and ‘to bend forward’. Bending over implies an attitude of personal submission, consistent with a mindset of self-denial. ‘Bending forward together with’ indicates that this is a corporate mindset in which a group of people is being motivated to use self-denial to prevent the human-constructed ‘tower’ of blind faith in which they are taking refuge to stop from crumbling. Able means ‘to be powerful, able’ and is interpreted as active Perceiver thought, as illustrated by power tools that magnify the strength of Server actions. The woman in verse 11 lacks power, which means that Perceiver thought is unable to emerge from the mental state of being overwhelmed by MMNs of religious fervor. Lift up means ‘to lift up, to raise oneself’ and moving up is interpreted as heading towards Teacher generality. Full is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘each part of a totality’ with ‘end, purpose, goal’. In other words, some Teacher thought can be used to analyze some aspects of blind faith but it is not possible to complete this process and use Teacher thought to analyze all aspects of blind faith. This can be seen in Christian apologetics as well as Christian psychology which uses rational thought to analyze peripheral aspects of Christian belief and practice while still treating core Christian doctrines with an attitude of blind faith. The end result is that Bible-believing Christianity is unable to stand up completely but rather remains troubled by a spirit of weakness.
Going further, this weakness does not involve the male thinking of technical thought. Bible-believing Christians have no problem gaining technical expertise in some area, pursuing a secular career, or participating in the consumer society. Instead, the weakness involves the female realm of mental networks. And this mental weakness often spills over into the feeling that women need to be submissive. Female thought does need to submit to male thought when dealing with technical details, but female thought is superior to male thought when dealing with core emotional issues in a holistic manner. However, evangelical Christian is bent over and weak when it comes to dealing with these core emotional issues.
Jesus addresses the woman in verse 12. “And having seen her, Jesus called her near and said to her.” See means ‘to see with the mind’. See with the mind is precisely what the modern social perspective does not do. Instead, it has abandoned a cognitive approach in order to focus upon social interaction from an external perspective. Mental symmetry, in contrast, is a cognitive model. For instance, mental symmetry suggests that most social interaction is happening within people’s minds as mental networks are triggered and emotionally impose their structure upon the mind. I just wrote a paper on autism, and one of the key features of autism is that this internal aspect of social interaction is not happening. Call means ‘to call to’ and is only used seven times in the New Testament. ‘Calling’ is verbal while ‘calling to’ indicates a focus of attention. Throwing manure through the air at the problem starts with painful MMNs and then lifts them up to the level of Teacher theory in an ideological manner. Hoping that a fig tree will grow within a vineyard uses technical thought to improve experiences that have some emotion while ignoring deeper issues. ‘Calling to’ starts with a Teacher theory and then extends this Teacher theory to include subjective MMNs. ‘Saying to her’ indicates that this interaction remains at the level of verbal Teacher understanding without descending to some level of advocacy or submerging the problem with an endless stream of consumer trinkets.
Verse 12 then mentions what Jesus says. “Woman, you have been freed from your sickness.” Woman means ‘woman, wife’ and is interpreted as female thought. The term ‘woman’ implies that one is talking to someone who is a fellow human being who thinks differently than a man. This is different than social advocacy which ignores the person and focuses instead upon the manure of social oppression. It is also different than the consumer society which treats the person as a bundle of desires to be manipulated through marketing. Freed means ‘to release, let go, send away, divorce’ and is the standard word used for divorce. Thus, ‘woman you are freed’ could also be translated as ‘wife you are divorced’. Sickness is the word used in verse 11 that means ‘without strength’.
The woman is bent over because she has been mentally ‘married’ to the idea that she must preserve an attitude of blind faith. She has to prevent the man-made tower of religious respect from collapsing. ‘Have been freed’ is in the past tense. The freeing has already happened and the situation needs to be viewed from a different perspective. The tower of blind faith has collapsed. It is now impossible to restore a mindset of blind faith in the Bible because any attempt to do so will lead instead to dictatorship. But this is not a disaster. Instead it is a freeing from emotional bondage. Similarly, digging a trench around the fig tree of subjective thought and heaping manure upon this tree means that society has finally been freed from the misconception that the consumer society will fulfill peoples’ deepest needs. There is no longer any need for seeker-friendly churches to try to out-consumer the consumer society. Everyone now knows that the consumer society is not the ultimate answer.
Verse 13 describes the healing process. “And He laid the hands upon her, and immediately she was made straight and began to glorify God.” Hands are interpreted as the application of technical thought because people use their hands to perform technical manipulation. Lay upon means ‘to lay upon’. Laying hands upon someone means that one is applying technical thought to some personal area. ‘Her’ is explicitly mentioned. Most postmodern social research uses technical thought but it does not ‘lay hands upon her’. Instead, the mental networks of female thought are regarded as unchangeable. One can discuss these mental networks, but it is taboo to suggest that these mental networks are flawed or that they should be changed. ‘Laying hands upon her’ recognizes the significance of these mental networks but then uses technical thought to reshape them and put them together in a healthier way. This describes the approach taken by mental symmetry which recognizes that the human mind requires mental networks to function but then uses an understanding of how the mind works to satisfy core emotional needs in a more wholesome manner.
Immediately means ‘immediately, at once’. Made straight is used three times in the New Testament and means ‘to set upright, set straight again’. First, she is no longer emotionally bent over, indicating that she has become emotionally freed from the need to preserve a mindset of religious self-denial. Mental symmetry does this by replacing Christian doctrine based in blind faith in the Bible with a rational cognitive model of Christian doctrine. Second, she is straight, indicating that there is no longer an internal cognitive conflict between self-improvement and self-denial. This happens at once because it is the result of a paradigm shift. The same situation is being viewed from a different emotional perspective. Mental symmetry does this by noting that the subjective process of pursuing mental and spiritual wholeness is similar to the objective process of research and development that drives the consumer society.
‘Glorifying God’ indicates that this straightening does not lead to arrogance or to self-worship. Glorify is the verb form of ‘glory’. Glory is defined in Biblehub as ‘what evokes good opinion’, giving the impression that glorifying God means to approach God with a combination of deep respect and self-denial. However, glory is consistently used in both the Old and New Testament to describe the external manifestation of internal character and this has been pointed out by biblical scholars. ‘Glorifying God’ can be interpreted as giving honor to a universal Teacher understanding of holiness that is compatible with the character of the Trinitarian God as described in the Bible, which is what mental symmetry does. This is quite different than lifting up the manure of social oppression to the level of Teacher universality, which is what wokeism does. Glorifying God can also be interpreted as female thought becoming a visible expression of the wholeness of God in Teacher thought. This meaning became clear to me when analyzing Jordan Peterson’s book on theology because one of his primary shortcomings is an inadequate view of the ideal female woman. He is totally missing the idea of woman as an embodiment of the Teacher beauty and order of God. Instead, he views the ideal woman as mother-and-child, implying that the primary purpose of female thought is to be subservient to some form of immature thought. Finally, glorifying God can also be interpreted as saving the consumer society by replacing marketing to infantile mental networks with meeting legitimate needs of core mental networks.
Indignant Response 13:14-17
In verse 14, the local religious leadership ignores the healing. “And answering, the ruler of the synagogue, indignant because Jesus had healed on the Sabbath, was saying to the crowd.” Ruler of the synagogue combines ‘first’ with ‘synagogue’ and would refer to the local religious leadership. Crowd means ‘crowd, multitude, throng’. The leadership ignores the healing, it ignores the content stated by Jesus, and it does not say anything to Jesus. Instead, it addresses the crowd. This summarizes the response to mental symmetry that I have repeatedly received from local leadership. As far as they are concerned, my content means nothing; analyzing two-thirds of the New Testament in the original Greek means nothing; coming up—four times (Matthew, Luke, James, and Revelation)—with a prophetic interpretation that is far more detailed than any other book on prophecy means nothing. No reason is given for regarding this extensive content as nothing. Instead, the leadership act as if my work does not exist. And the primary response is to maintain emotional control over the crowd in order to belittle me as an expert in the eyes of the average person.
Looking now at the reason for this response, indignant is used once in Luke and means to ‘be greatly displeased, have indignation’. This describes an emotional response. Healed ‘usually involves natural elements in the process of healing’ and is the source of the English word ‘therapy’. Jesus has committed the ‘sin’ of using psychological and cognitive methods to address an emotional weakness on the Sabbath. He has bridged the mental split between objective and subjective. He has crossed the ditch that has been dug around the fig tree that separates it from the rest of the vineyard. My repeated personal experience is that the religious leadership are doing this because of underlying mysticism. Every theologian that I have encountered so far ultimately retreats to the idea that God is a mystery. The average Christian believer preserves Christian belief by giving great emotional respect in Mercy thought to religious sources and religious leaders. The average religious leader preserves Christian belief by viewing God as a Teacher overgeneralization that transcends the Perceiver facts of human existence. Mental symmetry violates this split by replacing mystical overgeneralization with rational generalization, explaining all Christian doctrine in terms of cognitive mechanisms. Teacher overgeneralization cannot handle any Perceiver content. Therefore, any attempt to use rational thought to analyze theology must be ignored, because discussing the issue uses rational thought to analyze ‘that which must not be named’. Instead, the leadership will respond with the feeling that the transcendent holiness of God is being minimized and will respond by emotionally belittling anyone who uses rational thought to analyze the transcendent.
The emotional response of the leadership is then verbalized. “There are six days in which it behooves one to work. Therefore coming, be healed in these, and not on the day of the Sabbath.” Behooves means ‘it is necessary’ and is interpreted as referring to natural cause-and-effect as opposed to personal opinion. Jesus uses this term a number of times in Luke, but this appears to be the only time that someone else uses this term. Work means ‘a deed that carries out an inner desire’ and is interpreted as internally motivated behavior. Jesus emphasizes that one should base morality upon inescapable principles of cause-and-effect rather than societal approval and that one should be intrinsically motivated rather than externally motivated by societal approval. The synagogue leader is explicitly recognizing these two principles, but limiting their application to the secular realm. This summarizes the mindset of modern mysticism which uses Teacher overgeneralization to form a mental concept of God that transcends the rational, self-centered thinking of secular existence. During the week, one lives within the rational complexities of secular existence. On the Sabbath, one focuses upon God in a way that transcends rational secular thought.
In means ‘in the realm of’ and ‘these’ would refer to the weekdays of secular existence. Therefore means ‘therefore, then’ which indicates that the split between secular and religious is being regarded as a starting assumption from which one logically reasons. Coming means ‘to come, to go’ which implies human activity. Heal is the same word used earlier in the verse that refers to natural therapy as opposed to supernatural healing. In other words, using psychology and cognitive analysis to deal with secular problems is regarded as appropriate. But one should not use rational analysis on ‘the day of the Sabbath’. A day is usually interpreted as some era of society that is lit by the ‘sun’ of some general understanding. Thus, one could interpret this statement as recognizing that using psychology may have been appropriate in the past but is not appropriate in the present where the existence of Christianity itself is being threatened. One could also interpret this statement as a mental split between peripheral Christian doctrines that can be analyzed cognitively and core Christian doctrines that must be accepted by blind faith. In both cases, there is a fundamental split between subjective and objective, between religious and secular. And maintaining the split is regarded as more important than any content and any healing. This type of response sounds crazy, but I have learned through repeated experience that the experience of mysticism is capable of utterly blinding religious leaders, even those who are highly educated.
Jesus points out the hypocrisy of this response in verse 15. “Therefore the Lord answered him and said, ‘Hypocrites! Does not each one of you untie his ox or donkey from the stall on the Sabbath, and having led it away, give it to drink?’” Instead of mentioning the name Jesus, the term Lord is used, indicating a response based in a position of authority. A hypocrite is ‘an actor under an assumed character’, ‘a performer acting under a mask’, which means that the religious leader is pretending to be one thing while actually being another. The term ‘hypocrite’ is in the plural indicating that the whole system is pretending. Each one means ‘each, every, every one’. ‘Each one of you on the Sabbath’ means that all religious leaders do this without exception in the realm that supposedly transcends rational human thought.
Ox refers to either male or female cows. A cow is a domesticated beast of burden which is interpreted as followers who are used to carrying out tasks for leaders. Donkey is mentioned once in Luke and is also a beast of burden, but a donkey is more stubborn than a cow. The ox is referred to as ‘of him’ but not the donkey, implying that the ox is more subservient than the donkey. Untie means ‘to loose, to release’. Stall is mentioned four times in the New Testament and means ‘a manger, feeding trough’. The other three occurrences are in Luke 2 which refers to Jesus lying in a manger. Food is interpreted as intellectual food. Thus, a manger represents a place in which both cooperative oxen and stubborn donkeys can be fed intellectual food from the Bible and/or esteemed religious sources.
But the focus in verse 15 is not upon feeding at the trough. Instead, the animal being fed is released away from the manger. This movement away from the manger is emphasized by the verb having led away, which combines ‘away from’ with ‘to go’. Drink means ‘to give to drink, to water’ and water is interpreted as the liquid of Mercy experiences. In other words, religious followers are being released from eating at the trough of religious knowledge in order to have a religious experience in Mercy thought. The average Christian attends church in order to have such religious experiences. And every religious leader uses a knowledge of psychological principles to help the religious follower make this emotional shift from doctrine to religious experience.
We now know the explicit nature of the hypocrisy. Religious leaders claim that psychological principles should only be used in secular society and that religious worship focuses upon a God in Teacher thought who transcends the rational thinking of secular society. But that is only a mask. In actual fact, the religious leader is using psychological principles to lead religious followers beyond factual learning about Christianity to experiencing a Mercy feeling of freedom from bondage. The goal is not a concept of God in Teacher thought but rather a religious experience in Mercy thought. And psychology is being used to create this religious experience.
Jesus continues in verse 16, “And this, being a daughter of Abraham whom Satan has bound, behold, eighteen years.” Abraham left his pagan world in order to follow God to some unknown destination. A ‘daughter of Abraham’ is applying a similar set of mental networks. This describes the genuine Bible-believing Christian, who is emotionally leaving behind cultural MMNs in order to be guided by MMNs of respect for God and the Bible. Being is explicitly mentioned, which means that God is being followed at a core level of being and not just at the peripheral level of having. In other words, the religious follower is not a hypocrite like the religious leader.
Satan means ‘adversary’. Bound means ‘to bind, tie, fasten’. The religious leaders are trying to loose followers from being bound to religious words. But there is a deeper binding to satan, because the evangelical Christian views the secular world from an adversarial perspective. This has grown within the mind of the Christian follower of Trump to the level of regarding anything that attacks secular liberalism as furthering the kingdom of God. Similarly, anything factual that does not come from a sufficiently right-wing or Christian source is rejected as fake news. This is a deep bond to a satanic mindset of ‘us versus them’. Mental symmetry frees a person from this satanic bondage by placing both religious and secular thought under the umbrella of a single integrated Teacher understanding, and by interpreting the conservative Christian path of denying the world as the first stage of a three-stage path towards mental and spiritual wholeness. The number eighteen is then mentioned again, suggesting a connection between the satanic bondage of verse 16, the spirit of weakness in verse 11, and the collapse of the tower in verse 4.
Verse 16 finishes, “Ought she not to be loosed from this bond on the day of the Sabbath?” Loosed is the same word that was translated as ‘untie’ in verse 15. (When the same Greek word is used in two adjacent verses, then why do translators use different English words? The NASB and NIV also use two different words while the KJV uses the term ‘loose’ in both cases.) ‘On the day of the Sabbath’ is the same Greek phrase that the religious leaders used in verse 14 to condemn Jesus. Thus, both Jesus and the religious leaders are using psychological principles to loose their followers on the Sabbath. But Jesus is doing a deeper loosing and the word bond means ‘bond, chain, fetter, imprisonment’. The religious leaders are freeing people from the feeling of being bound to objective rational thought. Jesus is freeing people from the bondage of being shackled to a mindset of absolute truth.
Ought is the same word used in verse 14 that means ‘it is necessary’. The religious leaders were recognizing that the secular world is guided by principles of natural cause-and-effect. Jesus is recognizing that the religious realm is also guided by principles of inescapable cause-and-effect. Similarly, mental symmetry suggests that the mind is governed by inescapable rules of cognitive cause-and-effect. And I have repeatedly discovered over the years that these cognitive principles guide how people will respond to even the most emotional and religious topics. Going further, all Christian doctrines as well as all of the Bible that I have studied so far makes sense from the viewpoint of pursuing mental wholeness guided by these inescapable cognitive principles.
Verse 17 describes the response. “And of Him saying these things, all those opposed to Him were ashamed.” Saying is the normal word for speech, and ‘on saying these things’ means that verbalization is necessary to bring these cognitive principles to light. Opposed combines ‘against’ with ‘to place’. Placing is interpreted as Perceiver stability. ‘Placing against’ means Perceiver stability in opposition to something else. Ashamed is used once in the Gospels and combines ‘down’ with ‘to shame’. This does not necessarily say that these are being shamed by Jesus. Instead, those who choose to follow a path that opposes or ignores inescapable principles of cognitive cause-and-effect are being driven by these same cognitive principles to experience failure. For instance, what has stunned me over the years is not that the cognitive analysis of mental symmetry is accurate but rather that it is far more painfully accurate than I ever would have imagined. Each episode has caused me to regard the words of the religious experts with less generality and to associate these religious experts with more shame. The point has now been reached where evangelical Christian supporters of Trump are generally regarded as a specific cultural group in Mercy thought that acts and thinks shamefully rather than as the messengers of universal moral principles in Teacher thought. And whenever evangelical Christians encounter mental symmetry, then I repeatedly find that their instinctive reaction is to set themselves against it.
The religious leaders also lose the respect of the crowd. “And the whole crowd was rejoicing at all the glorious things that were being done by Him.” Crowd was mentioned previously in verse 14 where the ruler of the synagogue was speaking to the crowd. All means ‘each part of a totality’. Rejoice is related to the word ‘grace’ and is interpreted as Teacher emotion. Rejoicing means that Mercy emotions of religious fervor are being replaced by Teacher emotions of generality. Glorious things combines ‘in the realm of’ with ‘glory’. Done actually means ‘to come into being’ and by means ‘under’. In other words, functioning under incarnation is leading to Teacher joy at all the various things that are emerging as an expression of submitting to Teacher understanding. For instance, I have found that submitting to the cognitive principles of mental symmetry consistently leads to positive Teacher emotion as good results keep emerging. More generally, the average person experiences positive benefits when applying the cognitive principles that are being discovered by psychological cognitive researchers. (A distinction needs to be made between legitimate cognitive research and wokeism.)
Mental symmetry has not received rejoicing from the crowd. But people like Jordan Peterson have received major rejoicing from the crowd as well as bringing shame upon official educational leaders. Peterson teaches many significant cognitive principles, and I have analyzed his book on biblical symbolism. Peterson originally became well-known for standing up to Canadian wokeism. He has had to leave academia because of the shameful way in which he has been treated. However, he has brought significant Teacher understanding to the crowds. As mentioned above, Peterson’s concept of the ideal woman is inadequate. Thus, he has not fully allowed female thought to stand up straight. And he has only partially freed the conservative from a satanic adversarial mindset. But he has made it possible to view many moral principles from a psychological perspective, substantially freeing the ‘woman’ of conservative mental networks from bondage. Anthony Robbins provides another possible example, because he also teaches many significant cognitive principles which have brought Teacher joy to the crowds. His primary limitation is that he treats God in Teacher thought as the servant of personal identity in Mercy thought rather than the other way around.
Kingdom of Heaven 13:18-21
Jesus then presents two short parables that describe the nature of the kingdom of heaven. Verse 18 begins, “And He was saying, ‘To what is the kingdom of God like? And to what shall I liken it?’” Like means ‘similar in appearance or character’ and this same word is also used in the verb form liken. ‘Kingdom’ was previously mentioned in 12:31-32 which instructed to ‘seek his kingdom’ because ‘your Father has chosen gladly to give you the kingdom’. God the Father uses Teacher thought. Therefore, when God the Father gives the kingdom, then this will express itself as growing Teacher understanding. These two parables describe how this Teacher understanding will grow—from the perspective of incarnation, which uses technical thought.
Verse 19 compares the kingdom with a grain of mustard. “It is like to a grain of mustard, which a man having taken, cast into his garden.” Like is the same word used in verse 18. ‘Is’ is explicitly mentioned, indicating that this similarity is at the subjective level of being. Mustard is mentioned five times in the New Testament, each time together with the word ‘seed’. Grain means ‘grain, seed’ and five of the seven times that this word is used in the New Testament refer to ‘mustard seed’. Biblehub points out that ‘The mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds that a Palestinian farmer would sow in his field. A mustard plant reaches a height of three meters’. The parable is also found in Matthew 13 and in Mark 4 which both refer to the small size of the seed, but this is not mentioned in Luke. What is unique about the Luke version are the two words ‘cast’ and ‘garden’. In Matthew a seed is sown in the field, while in Mark a seed is sown upon the earth. Cast means ‘to throw’ which is interpreted as moving through the air of Teacher thought. Garden means ‘garden’ and the other four times it is used it refers to the Garden of Gethsemane. Man is the generic word for mankind. In verse 19, the man is throwing the mustard seed into his garden. In other words, Teacher thought is being used to seed the ‘garden’ of one’s personal subjective experiences. The starting point is the seed of some theory in Teacher thought which is then being allowed to grow within subjective Mercy experiences. This is different than throwing manure upon a fig tree, which starts from some existing tree of knowledge of the subjective, adds Mercy experiences of rejection, and then uses Teacher thought to analyze what is happening.
For instance, mental symmetry started as a simple theory of cognitive styles based in the Romans 12 list of seven different spiritual gifts. This seed of a theory then grew within my garden of personal experience as I allowed it to analyze and guide my personal path of personal transformation. Similarly, many of Jordan Peterson’s insights have occurred as a result of personally experiencing psychological theory that he was teaching. This is different than the empirical method of science which looks for external evidence and then eliminates the subjective element by having different people with different personal biases confirm this evidence.
Verse 19 continues, “And it grew and came into a tree, and the birds of the air encamped in its branches.” Grow means ‘to grow, increase, become greater’. Came means ‘to come into being’. Tree means ‘tree’ and is interpreted as a tree of academic knowledge. A tree is a large living structure with many branches rooted within the earth of rational thought, consistent with the nature of the body of academic knowledge. Bird comes from the word ‘to fly’ and air means ‘heaven, sky’ which is interpreted as the realm of Teacher thought. Thus, a ‘bird of the air’ would represent an academic individual who ‘flies’ through the air of Teacher theory. Encamp means ‘to pitch one’s tent, encamp’ and branch means ‘branch, bough’. The same two words are also used in Matthew 13 and Mark 4. Applying this to mental symmetry, it began as a simple theory of personality, it grew into a cognitive model of personal transformation, and it has become a meta-theory within which many academic specializations can nest.
The similar parable in Matthew 13 is interpreted prophetically as referring to the birth of science in the 17th century. The seed in Matthew 13 is sown in the man’s field, suggesting a combination of personal observation and objective rational knowledge. Scientific research began as simple experiments such as dropping balls, looking through telescopes, and timing simple oscillations. Matthew 13 describes the mustard tree as being greater than the garden plants, suggesting that objective scientific research eventually surpassed the subjective scholasticism of the Middle Ages. In Matthew 13, the mustard seed becomes a tree, while in Luke it becomes ‘to or into’ a tree. Similarly, the tree of knowledge that emerges from science is based in the technical thinking of science. In contrast, the tree of knowledge that emerges from using mental symmetry as a meta-theory uses a semi-rigorous form of normal thought which then turns into a framework for technical specializations of science.
Both Matthew and Mark emphasize the small size of the mustard seed, implying that the most successful researcher will work alone. Working alone was important for the birth of science because it allowed the individual to focus upon simple physical observation without becoming distracted by various mental networks of academic and personal acceptance. Mark appears to be referring to a future transformation. The Gospel of Luke culminates in a theoretical resurrection in which blind faith is replaced by rational understanding.
Looking at this personally, I have reached the point where mere words are not enough. I need more. And I have found that I am able to make personal progress beyond words to the extent that I am willing to be a ‘small seed’ that is ignored and insignificant. Thus, individuals like Jordan Peterson and Anthony Robbins get huge crowds while I am basically ignored, even though mental symmetry is able to explain the cognitive principles taught by individuals such as Peterson and Robbins.
Verse 20 presents another parable which is also mentioned in Matthew 13, but not in Mark 4. Verse 20 begins, “And again He said, ‘To what shall I liken the kingdom of God?’” This is basically a repeat of verse 18 which uses the same Greek words, except the verb ‘to be’ is not mentioned in verse 20.
Verse 21 presents the parable. “It is like to leaven, which a woman, having taken, hid in three measures of meal, until it all was leavened.” The symbolic meaning of leaven is discussed in 1 Corinthians 5:7 where Paul suggests that the old leavening needs to be removed when celebrating the Passover. Leaven introduces pockets of air into the dough. Bread represents packages of knowledge that are eaten and digested in bite sizes. Leaven introduces the air of Teacher theory into the bread of knowledge. In other words, whenever one teaches some information one always teaches a combination of Perceiver facts and Teacher theory. The facts are taught together with a theoretical interpretation of these facts. A Passover represents a major shift in society. When this happens, then it is important to eat unleavened bread that is free of the old theoretical interpretations. That is because a paradigm shift views the same Perceiver facts from a different theoretical perspective. Therefore, it is important to distinguish between facts and how these facts are being interpreted in order to hold on to the facts while being willing to let go of existing interpretation.
Taken means to ‘actively lay hold of’. And this taking is being done by a woman, which refers to the mental networks of female thought. Looking at this cognitively, if a Teacher theory continues to be used, then it will eventually turn into a TMN that will actively impose the theory upon the mind when triggered. One then has a short window of opportunity during which one can suppress this TMN by refusing to talk about the theory. That describes how the vast majority of people have responded to mental symmetry. They have initially shown great interest and then totally stopped talking about it when it turned into a TMN that started to impose mental symmetry upon their thought and behavior. Actively laying hold of the leaven by a woman means emotionally embracing mental symmetry even when it turns into a TMN and start to ‘eat up’ the mind. Looking at this personally, I still remember exactly where I was when the theory of mental symmetry turned into a TMN that started to eat up my mind by invading all of my thinking.
This gradual eating up of the mind is described in the rest of the parable. Hid means ‘to hide, conceal’. This hiding is ‘to or into’. Meal comes from a word ‘to grind’ and is only used in this parable and in Matthew 13:33. Grinding suggests critical thinking, in which one dissects the grain of knowledge and grinds it into its component pieces. The leaven is concealed into the grinding. ‘Grinding’ uses primarily technical thought to analyze information. If the theory of mental symmetry is allowed to turn into a TMN, then using technical thought will triggers this theory and it will become apparent that mental symmetry explains this information better than existing theories. This hiding is ‘to or into’ because mental symmetry is not a technical theory but rather a semi-rigorous theory based upon repeated cognitive patterns that is compatible with technical thought.
The parable in Matthew 13:33 is identical to the parable in verse 21, except that the verb ‘hidden’ may be slightly different. I cannot tell for sure because there appears to be an error in Biblehub with the interlinear text using the verb ‘krupto’ and the other text using ‘egkrupto’. A similar eating up of the mind happened with the development of science, because it gradually became apparent that following the scientific method led to superior theoretical results than the existing methodology of scholasticism.
Measure is ‘a large measure equal to nearly three English gallons’ and is only used in this verse and in the parallel passage in Matthew 13:33. Three measures may refer to the three cognitive realms of Teacher theory, technical thought, and Mercy experience, which express the Trinity of God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit. All means ‘the total, which is greater than the mere sum of the parts’. Until means ‘until, till, as far as’. I suggest this interpretation because mental symmetry has thoroughly transformed my concept of the Trinity. My concept of God the Father is now based in universal truth rather than just absolute truth from the Bible. My concept of Jesus Christ has been transformed from extrapolating beyond the Jesus of the Gospels to descending from the Christ of abstract technical thought to the Jesus—or salvation—of concrete technical thought. And my concept of the Holy Spirit is no longer based in religious experiences and religious words but rather resembles Plato’s Form of the Good, an integration of Platonic forms of ideal perfection.
Looking at the bigger picture, Luke 13 has described several attempts to find fruit from the fig tree. These various failed attempts have filled subjective thought with many competing mental networks. A legitimate meta-theory of the subjective that resides merely within the ‘measure’ of verbal Teacher thought will lack sufficient power to displace the existing failed theories. I have learned that this is true through repeated experience. I have also learned through personal experience that adding technical rigor to a universal theory is insufficient. In other words, filling two measures is not enough. Instead, the genuine meta-theory has to have sufficient universality in Teacher thought, sufficient rigor in technical thought, as well as sufficient personal application in Mercy thought. I have also been developing mental symmetry at the spiritual level of MMNs, and these essays have only referred to some aspects of filling this ‘third measure’. The leaven of mental symmetry has now filled all three measures within my own mind and I am hoping beyond hope that this is sufficient to overcome the existing insanities of the subjective. Similarly, science finally overcame scholasticism when sufficient scientific theory was combined with sufficient mathematical analysis and sufficient experiential results. This is illustrated by the popular public lectures of the 18th century that both taught and demonstrated science to the public.
Narrow Door 13:22-25
The next section describes what happens after the leaven has sufficiently pervaded all three measures of meal. Verse 22 describes considerable success. “And He was going through by towns and villages, teaching and making progress toward Jerusalem.” Going through combines the term ‘through’ with ‘to transport’. Transporting is interpreted as movement that is accompanied by personal change. That is because it comes from a word that means ‘passageway’ and refers to ‘moving something from one destination to another’. By means ‘day-by-day, each day, according to, by way of’ when followed by the accusative. Town is actually the word for city, and a city is interpreted as a center of civilization because Greek and Roman cities were the centers of civilization. A village is a ‘country town, properly as opposed to a walled city’. The idea is that the message is maturing as it goes through various cultural centers. A city with walls implies some organized system of learning or culture, while a village suggests a more spontaneous and implicit kind of culture.
Applying this to mental symmetry, I have recently been using mental symmetry as a meta-theory to analyze systems rather than look just at specific facts or situations. What typically happens is that somebody will hand me a book to analyze and I will then use mental symmetry to analyze the concepts of this book in detail. For instance, I just finished writing a paper on autism. The primary source for this paper was a book on autism written by a recognized expert. My analysis tends to alternate between topics that are more academic, such as autism, and topics that are more cultural. For instance, before looking at autism I wrote an essay on a series of videos about dealing with growing fascism. Stated symbolically, I find it most effective to go through both towns and villages. This is a ‘going through’ as opposed to a mere visiting, because I take several weeks or months to analyze the topic in depth and write an extensive essay or paper on the subject. Every town or village that I go through ends up adding details to the theory of mental symmetry. Thus, the going through is also a transporting. Saying this another way, the transporting of making progress in developing the theory of mental symmetry is a ‘day-by-day’ process that happens ‘by way of’ various towns and villages.
Teaching means ‘to teach, instruct’. Progress is used twice in the New Testament and is the noun form of the verb ‘to transport’. Making means ‘to make, to do’ and is interpreted as Server actions. Verse 22 does not say that there are large crowds or that many people are listening. On the contrary, verse 23 says that this is not the case. Verse 22 also does not say that there is significant feedback from the audience. Instead, it refers to teaching. The goal of this teaching is not to acquire a large audience but rather to ‘make progress’. Similarly, I have found with mental symmetry that the doing of researching topics and writing essays is critical for developing both mental symmetry and myself. The goal of this movement is ‘toward Jerusalem’. Toward means ‘into, to’. And Jerusalem is interpreted as the center of organized religion. Similarly, the ultimate goal of my research is to rethink organized religion. That is because religion attempts to deal with the deepest emotional subjects. Using the language of Luke, rethinking religion is deeply related to getting fruit from the fig tree. My Perceiver and Server confidence in mental symmetry grows each time I successfully use mental symmetry to go through some ‘town’ or ‘village’. Such mental confidence is essential if one is to tackle the deepest emotional topics of organized religion.
Verse 23 observes that not many are listening. “And someone said to Him, ‘Lord, if those being saved are few?’” Someone is a generic pronoun. This is not the response of a large crowd but rather feedback from some individual. And the focus of this feedback is ‘him’, the person of Jesus. Lord means ‘Lord, master’ and indicates that this feedback is from someone who is submitting to the teaching of Jesus. If means ‘if, whether’. Few means ‘few, little, small’. And save means to ‘deliver out of danger and into safety’. The question is not whether many will listen to the message. Instead, the question focuses upon results. The reason for going to Jerusalem is that existing religious systems which claim to save people are not doing a good job. Instead of saving people, they are leading their followers to failure and disaster. For instance, I grew up attending an evangelical Christian church and I still attend a small church and participate in the services. However, I have seen evangelical Christendom implode in response to the covid crisis and Donald Trump. The evangelical church that used to preach a message of salvation and did deliver substantial salvation is doing a rotten job of saving people these days. Similarly, the educational system that used to preach critical thinking and managed to deliver substantial salvation is doing an increasingly rotten job of teaching and saving people. This has also become a religious problem, because ‘digging a ditch around the fig tree’ has made it possible to fill the subjective vacuum with various forms of ‘alternate knowing’ and ‘tribal spirituality’.
Jesus answers in verse 24. “And He said to them, ‘Strive to enter in through the narrow door.’” (The first phrase is actually part of verse 23.) Notice that Jesus is responding to the personal question with a general statement. Similarly, I find that personal questions are often starting points for helping me to discover general principles. Strive is used once in Luke, it means ‘to strive, to struggle’ and is the source of the English word ‘agonize’. This is not a physical struggle but rather an emotional struggle. That is because one is attempting to gain sufficient mental confidence to deal with the core emotional issues of Jerusalem. Gaining this confidence will require significant agonizing. For instance, rethinking the doctrine of the Trinity requires agonizing because one is trying to think carefully about a subject where inaccurate thinking leads to feelings of blasphemy. Similarly, rethinking personal salvation requires agonizing because one is trying to think carefully about what really leads to heaven and what leads to eternal damnation.
Enter in means ‘to enter, to go into’. Entering in means that these are not just abstract, theoretical questions that one can approach from a distance. Instead, one has to commit by entering in. Through means ‘through, throughout, by the instrumentality of’ when followed by the genitive. Door means ‘door, gate, entrance’ and narrow means ‘narrow’. Entering through a narrow door is cognitively important for two reasons: First, constructing a legitimate meta-theory requires following a long narrow path of focusing upon one narrow specialization after another. One goes through the narrow path of becoming conversant in some specialization in order to be able to analyze that specialization intelligently, and then as soon as this analysis is over, instead of broadening out into the wideness of success and acceptance, one chooses the narrow path of becoming conversant in another specialization. That describes my life. Whenever I managed to successfully analyze some field, the door would open for a little while and then slam in my face, forcing me to move on. This is agonizing but it is also the only way to construct a legitimate meta-theory that goes beyond vague platitudes to actual explanations. Second, this narrow agonizing is spiritually significant, because new mental networks of motivation will only emerge if old mental networks are inadequate. Agonizing to enter a narrow door ensures that the growth in understanding is accompanied by transformations in personal motivation. Notice that the agonizing is to enter through the narrow door. Verse 24 does not talk about what is on the other side of the door. That is because the ultimate purpose is to go towards Jerusalem, and agonizing to go through the narrow door builds the knowledge, the confidence, the expertise, and the spiritual maturity that is required to reach Jerusalem.
Verse 24 continues by presenting the alternative. “For many, I say to you, will seek to enter in, and will not be able.” Many means ‘high in number’. Seek means ‘to seek by inquiring’. Enter in is the same word used earlier in the verse. Able means ‘embodied strength’. Notice that there is no mention of a door. Instead, others are trying to enter in through the brute force of embodied strength. Entering by the door implies that one is meeting the entrance requirements; one is learning enough about the field to be at least competent. This is a narrow, agonizing option because it involves repeated hard work and a continual lack of social approval. It is much easier to use personal status in Mercy thought to impose ‘truth’ upon others, replace a genuine meta-theory with the feeling of a meta-theory backed up by the status of various experts, or replace actual knowledge with ‘alternate knowing’ backed up by reverence for some emotional source. Such methods ignore the door and try to force their way in through ‘embodied strength’. But one cannot enter in to a legitimate answer by faking expertise.
Verse 25 says that there is a limited window of opportunity. “From the time the master of the house shall have risen up and shall have shut the door.” From means ‘from, away from’. ‘The time’ is more accurately ‘that possibility’ and the KJV says ‘when once’. Shall have risen means ‘to raise, to awaken, to arouse’. Master of the house is a single word that means ‘master of the house’. It was used once previously in Luke in 12:39 to talk about the master of the house not knowing when the thief would break in. Shut is used once in the New Testament and combines ‘away from’ with ‘to shut’. And door is the same word that was used in verse 24. I think this relates to the idea of the woman placing the leaven secretly into the meal. One of the main reasons that I can successfully use mental symmetry to analyze various fields is because these fields are not aware of mental symmetry. Using the language of verse 25, the master of the house is not aroused.
My older brother’s current theory of ordered complexity illustrates what happens when the master is aroused. My older brother did the original work of analyzing about 200 biographies in order to turn existing teachings on Romans 12 spiritual gifts into an evidence-based system of cognitive styles. We then worked together for many years to develop the theory of mental symmetry. But we had a falling out in about 2004 when he demanded that I stop attending church and I did not comply. He then formulated a new theory of cognitive styles without informing me. I only found out when our mother told me that he had published a new book. I have tried several times to use mental symmetry to analyze his new theory and I have failed. That is because my brother’s new theory was specifically designed to exclude mental symmetry. In other words, it was not possible for me to enter through the door of understanding the theory because the master of the house was now aroused and had ‘shut the door away from’ the possibility of entering in from mental symmetry.
What happened cognitively is that the struggle had entered the realm of mental networks. Many years of working with the theory of mental symmetry had caused this theory to form a TMN within my brother’s mind. Therefore, he had to formulate a new theory of cognitive styles that was sufficiently different to ensure that this TMN would not be triggered, and as a Teacher person who has conscious control of Teacher thought, he was able to do that. But this obviously takes mental effort, because whenever he mentions my work, he emphasizes that I am following a dead-end which will lead nowhere. This is strange because what keeps me going is the fact that my research continues to lead somewhere without reaching a dead-end.
The specific arrangement in verse 25 is different but it contains the same element of a theory turning into a TMN and emotionally motivating a response. When mental symmetry was a partially developed theory, learning about it was difficult but not impossible. However, when mental symmetry became a full-fledged meta-theory with profound personal implications, then it became ruled by a ‘master of the house that has risen up’. This effectively shuts the door to learning about mental symmetry because the emotional gap is too great. One must move directly from the obscurity of objective scientific research or the semi-mystery of organized religion to the blinding glare of a rational meta-theory that turns into a TMN which shines moral light into the deepest corners of subjective existence. In the same way that my brother had to develop a new theory that was sufficiently distant from mental symmetry, so those who attempt to enter in to a fully developed meta-theory of mental symmetry through the door of technical learning find that attempting to learn about mental symmetry turns it into a TMN of universal moral principles that makes it emotionally challenging to continue. This emotional and moral repulsion is described in the following verses.
Verse 25 continues by describing the initial interest. “Then you shall begin to stand outside and to knock at the door, saying, ‘Lord, open to us.’” Begin means ‘to begin, to commence’. Stand means ‘to stand, to set, to establish’ and is interpreted as some source of Perceiver stability. Outside means that this Perceiver stability lies outside of the house. For instance, this would mean finding solid Perceiver truth in other systems that are distinct from mental symmetry. For instance, my brother’s new theory finds its Perceiver stability in the personality system of Myers-Briggs as well as the philosophies of Hegel and Heidegger.
Knocking uses the hand to create a noise. Hands are associated with technical thought and noise with Teacher thought. Thus, knocking on the door represents attempting to get in by using abstract technical thought. One is not forcing one’s way in but acquiring a technical proficiency in the subject. For instance, whenever I use mental symmetry to analyze some subject I try to get in the door by knocking. In verse 25, one is beginning with a source of Perceiver stability that lies outside of mental symmetry and then attempting to use technical thought to enter into this theory. Entering in becomes emotionally attractive as mental symmetry becomes an increasingly valid meta-theory. Lord indicates that this attempt to learn about mental symmetry is being carried out respectfully. The word open actually combines the prefix ‘up’ with ‘open’ implying that this opening will lead to greater Teacher generality.
Verse 25 finishes by describing the resulting response. “And he answering, will say to you, ‘I do not know from where you are.’” Answering implies that one is not just learning about some field but rather that the knocking will cause a TMN to form which will then respond in an intelligent manner. The answer in the Greek begins with not. Know means ‘seeing that becomes knowing’ and is interpreted as empirical evidence. From where indicates a focus upon personal origin. And this is followed by the verb ‘to be’. The BLB and NASB translate this as a single phrase but the Greek contains five words that form two phrases: not I-know you, from-where be? These two phrases are more accurately translated by the KJV. “I know you not whence ye are.”
Applying this to mental symmetry, the first thing I do when analyzing some system is to see whether the facts fit the evidence. Whenever the facts do not fit the evidence then I attempt to determine the underlying mental networks that are imposing their structure upon the facts and causing the evidence to be ignored. ‘Not I-know you’ indicates that the facts do not fit the evidence. ‘From-where be’ attempts to decipher the fundamental mental networks of being that are imposing themselves upon the evidence. For instance, when I analyze Christian theology I look to see if this theology is consistent with the facts of biblical meaning as well as the facts of how the mind works. When there is an inconsistency, then I look for an underlying motivation. And I have found that mental networks of religious self-denial have systemically imposed themselves upon Christian theology, coloring everything with the underlying assumption that ‘I am nobody and God is everything’.
Insiders Rejected 13:26-30
The response in verse 26 indicates an underlying assumption of objectivity. “Then will you begin to say, ‘We ate and drank in your presence, and you taught in our streets.’” Begin is the same word ‘commence, rule’ that was used in verse 25. This conveys the impression of being in charge because of being first. In other words, those who approach mental symmetry from the outside start with the assumption that their methodology takes precedence because they are following established procedures. Eat means ‘to eat, consume’ which is interpreted as consuming intellectual food. In presence means ‘in the presence of, in the eyes of’. Drink means ‘to drink’ and is interpreted as Mercy experiences. The order of the Greek words is ‘we ate in the presence of you and drank’ which suggests that the ‘in your presence’ applies to the eating but not the drinking. ‘Eating in your presence’ suggests that the meta-theory is explaining existing academic theories. For instance, mental symmetry does not replace most existing theories but rather provides a framework within which to place these theories. Thus, the intellectual food of these theories is being eaten in the presence of mental symmetry. Drinking indicates that these theories are being applied but mental symmetry does not interact with other theories at the level of Mercy experience. Thus, there is drinking but it is not ‘in the presence of you’.
Street means ‘street, broad street, public square’ and teach is the same word that was used in verse 22. The public square for academia is academic papers and academic conferences. ‘Teaching in our streets’ would mean writing academic papers and presenting papers at conferences. What is being emphasized in verse 26 is the commonality between mental symmetry and existing academic theories. Mental symmetry explains existing theories, and existing theories lead to applications. Mental symmetry has also written academic papers and has presented at academic conferences. Notice that there is no mention of actually learning from mental symmetry or of applying the principles of mental symmetry.
Verse 27 focuses upon this discrepancy. “And he will say, ‘I tell you, I do not know from where you are.’” This is the same Greek phrase as in verse 25. (The ‘you’ in ‘know you’ is in brackets implying that the word may not be repeated.) In other words, the same two questions are being asked: Does your information fit the facts? What are your mental networks of being? What has changed is that the response is now part of the evidence. For instance, when I use mental symmetry to analyze some topic, the response that I get to my analysis itself provides useful evidence for cognitive analysis. What has been learned in verse 26? There was factual openness but not experiential commonality. And the interaction happened objectively within the marketplace of ideas. But the topic being discussed involved the fig tree of core subjective issues. These were being discussed in an objective manner that did not affect personal experiences.
That leads to the conclusion of verse 27. “Depart from me, all you workers of unrighteousness.” Depart combines ‘away from’ with ‘to stand’. Standing is interpreted as some source of Perceiver stability. Therefore, ‘standing away from’ would mean finding some other source of Perceiver stability. And ‘me’ is explicitly mentioned. All means ‘each part of a totality’ but ‘you’ is implied. Worker comes from ‘work’ which means ‘a deed that carries out an inner desire’ and is interpreted as internally motivated action. Righteousness is interpreted as Server actions that are emotionally guided by a concept of God in Teacher thought, and unrighteousness adds the prefix ‘not’ to righteousness.
Looking at this cognitively, I have learned from developing mental symmetry that whenever I gain new understanding in Teacher thought, this has to be followed by applying my understanding through some Server action. Science recognizes this principle at the objective level of experiments and exemplars. For instance, verbal lectures are followed by homework and experiments. Verse 27 is saying that this principle is not being applied at the subjective level of internally motivated behavior. Instead, what internally motivates behavior is Mercy goals such as getting a good job, being honored by colleagues, publishing papers, getting grants, being an expert in some field, and so on. ‘Depart from me’ means that one must distance oneself from such a foundation of Perceiver facts. Looking at mental symmetry, I used to feel bad because of having to do my research outside of the system. However, the more I become acquainted with how the system works, the more I realize that I have to distance myself from the system in order to do my research. The system is inherently unrighteous because it makes a sharp distinction between Teacher-guided research and the Mercy-guided motivation, funding, and environment for that research. Telling those who are in the system to find their own sources of Perceiver stability is more self-preservation than explicit judgment.
Summarizing so far, we have seen several kinds of ‘masters of the house’. My interaction with my older brother illustrates how a ‘master of the house’ behaves. Using mental symmetry as a meta-theory for various academic disciplines illustrates what it means to knock on the door, because whenever I analyze some field I have to gain sufficient technical knowledge of that field to allow me to ‘knock on the door’. This leads inevitably to the response of ‘not I-know you, from-where be?’ In other words, ‘You are not a well-known expert. Which institution do you work in?’ I then point out that I am using mental symmetry to explain existing evidence and papers from that field, thus fulfilling the requirements of verse 26. The questions of academic legitimacy are then repeated. I then find that the Teacher emotions present in a meta-theory arouse the ‘master of the house’ who then keeps me out because I am a ‘worker of unrighteousness’ who is not working within the system and following accepted methodology.
But successfully using mental symmetry as a meta-theory has gradually turned mental symmetry into a house with its ‘master of the house’. People notice that mental symmetry has been used successfully to cognitively integrate several fields and they want to know more and so they ‘knock on the door’. However, the master of the house has become aroused because mental symmetry now includes a cognitive analysis of how people respond to mental symmetry. Thus, those who want to learn about mental symmetry have to look in the mirror and face questions about factual accuracy and underlying motives. Answering such questions by appealing to standard objective academic methodology is insufficient, because it leads to the conclusion that the objective researcher is unrighteous because he thinks that he can do research objectively without personally applying these findings.
Looking at one final ‘master of the house’, there is a finite window of opportunity for developing a meta-theory. Initially, it is possible to ‘knock on the door’ by gaining expertise in various fields. But when a meta-theory becomes sufficiently developed and well-known, then ‘the master of the house’ of academia becomes aroused. One is then no longer analyzing systems of thought, but rather being faced with the dilemma of attempting to analyze systems of thoughts that have modified themselves in response to encountering a meta-theory. That shift is illustrated by the new theory of ordered complexity developed by my older brother. Attempting to interact in a collegial academic manner as described in verse 26 will then fail. Instead, the system itself will instinctively respond in a manner that excludes further cognitive analysis and the excuse that will be given will be that one is using the wrong methodology.
Verse 28 describes the final result. “There will be weeping and gnashing of the teeth when you see Abraham and Isaac and Jacob and all the prophets in the kingdom of God, but you are being cast out.” Notice that this is in the future tense, which means that it has not yet happened. Instead, Jesus is looking forward to the ultimate result of having to work outside of the existing system. Be is explicitly mentioned which suggests that this will happen at the core level of being. Weeping means ‘to grieve audibly’ and is used once in Luke. Gnashing means ‘to grate the teeth’ and occurs seven times in the New Testament, always in the phrase ‘weeping and gnashing of teeth’. The teeth are used to chew food. If food represents intellectual food, then chewing food means breaking knowledge down into pieces in order to digest this knowledge. For instance, this essay is using the concepts of cognitive modules, cognitive mechanisms, and cognitively natural symbolism to break the Gospel of Luke down into bite-size chunks in order to digest what the book is saying. Gnashing of teeth means that this is not working; the methods that one uses to understand the text are failing. This failure is leading to painful Teacher emotions expressed as grieving audibly.
For instance, theologians have read Romans 12 for almost two millennia but it was only in the 1970s that the list of seven spiritual gifts was first interpreted as cognitive styles. Before then, theologians were using the wrong set of teeth to chew the text. Going the other way, Bible-believing Christians instinctively reject mental symmetry because they think that the wrong set of teeth is being used to analyze Scripture. But one can tell that the cognitive analysis of mental symmetry uses the right teeth because it manages to successfully chew the text while traditional analysis declares that the text is a mystery. Looking at another example, academia also thinks that mental symmetry uses the wrong set of teeth, because mental symmetry starts with the mind and cognitive patterns rather than with the brain and empirical evidence. Again one can tell that the cognitive analysis of mental symmetry uses the right teeth because it manages to chew the evidence.
See means ‘to see with the mind’ which implies an integrated understanding. The weeping and gnashing of teeth happens ‘when see’ (you is implied). In other words, Teacher thought realizes that there is order and structure to the text. One then realizes that one has the wrong set of technical skills—the wrong teeth—to analyze the text. Those who were outside were eating in verse 26, but in verse 27 it became apparent that the method of chewing used by those who were outside had to be rejected because it was incapable of chewing the text. In verse 28 those who are outside are realizing that their methodology is inadequate. The question of who is inside the house and who is outside is ultimately determined by the ability to chew. Those who can chew will eventually build a house, while those who experience gnashing of teeth will ultimately lose whatever house they have.
Abraham left his pagan society in order to follow God towards an unknown situation. Verse 16 referred to a daughter of Abraham, indicating that a mindset of absolute truth can be driven by feelings of religious self-denial to follow the first stage of personal transformation. In verse 28, all three stages of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob are mentioned. Abraham left cultural MMNs (Mercy mental networks) in order to learn about God in Teacher thought. Isaac represents the second stage of being emotionally guided by Teacher thought. The name means ‘he will laugh’ which implies Teacher joy. Jacob wrestled with an angel to receive his inheritance, and Jacob represents the third stage of returning to Mercy experiences after one has become transformed by Teacher understanding. More generally, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob represent following the three-stage path of personal transformation as an individual, while Egypt, the wilderness, and the Promised Land represent following the three-stage path as a group. Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob implies that the recognition of verse 28 will happen when the individual path has been completed and personal success is achieved.
Prophet combines the term ‘before’ with ‘bring to light by asserting one statement over another’. Cognitively speaking, a prophet predicts what is going to happen by extrapolating from certain trends in the present. All means ‘each part of a totality’. ‘All the prophets’ suggests that previous content that was looking forward to the present will be included. For instance, this essay is including the ancient Gospel of Luke as a prophecy of Western history. More generally, the content of the Bible is being included as ‘looking forward’ to cognitive principles and cognitive development. The cognitive principle is that those who initially prophesied about cognitive principles had to learn lessons of cognitive development to some extent through the personal path they went through.
Saying this more generally, making a major breakthrough requires a different set of teeth than merely teaching about this major breakthrough. The original pioneers and discoverers had to pay a personal price that the current experts who talk about these pioneers and discoverers do not have to pay. Going further, the current experts have the benefit of an academic environment which the original pioneers did not have. The end result is that the original pioneers and discovers have the right sort of teeth that is needed to chew subjective content, while those who are ‘standing upon the shoulders’ of the original experts do not.
A kingdom refers to ‘the realm in which a king sovereignly rules’. A ‘kingdom of God’ indicates a realm that is ruled by a concept of God in Teacher thought. I have discovered repeatedly with mental symmetry that the average academic and theological scholar will instinctively reject the idea of starting with a general theory in Teacher thought. Instead, the very idea of a ‘kingdom of God’ is foreign to those who are used to quoting from experts with Mercy status or building upon empirical evidence. But the initial religious and scientific pioneers made their breakthroughs precisely because they were guided internally by the conviction that the universe is guided by a Teacher order that can be discovered by humans.
Cast combines ‘out of’ with ‘to throw’. This is followed by out which means ‘outside’. Throwing means going through the air of Teacher thought. ‘Throwing out’ means being theoretically rejected. Being theoretically rejected from the kingdom of God means that one’s thinking and methodology is intrinsically opposed to the very idea of submitting to a concept of God in Teacher thought. And I have found from personal experience that this is generally the case. The typical secular scholar would rather embrace the feeling of an overgeneralized meta-theory than be mentally ruled by a legitimate meta-theory. Academia would rather embrace the irrationality of alternate knowing than be mentally ruled by an understanding of cognitive principles. Religious scholars would rather embrace the contentless God of mysticism than be mentally ruled by a rational concept of God.
Verse 29 says who will accept. “And they will come from east and west, and from north and south, and will recline in the kingdom of God.” The general principle is that anyone who arrives from some other place will experience some sort of personal change that the local person does not. For instance, those who grow up in America view the American dream from a Mercy perspective as something cultural to which Americans are entitled. In contrast, immigrants to America view the American dream as a goal to reach that requires personal transformation. Therefore, cultural outsiders have the personal element that is required to deal with subjective issues while cultural insiders do not.
Will come means ‘to have come, to be present’. East and West are combined as is North and South. East means ‘rising, East, dawn’ because the sun rises in the east. West means ‘setting, west’ because the sun sets in the west. These essays have been interpreting East as Eastern mysticism and West as Western rational thought. However, the Greek words are defined with respect to the sun. A rising sun indicates a new general theory to guide society. Overgeneralized mystical theories can serve as an initial inspiration to guide society and theories usually start as overgeneralizations. Going the other way, technical rules and regulations tend to multiply as the ‘day’ progresses, leading eventually to a disillusionment with current societal understanding due to excessive technical thought. Thus, there is a cognitive relationship between these two symbolic definitions of East and West. From East and West implies that it is the combination of mystical and technical that will motivate people to come. In other words, the cognitive stress of attempting to bridge subjective emotions with technical thought can encourage a person to look for a deeper answer. North is only used twice in the New Testament, it means ‘north wind’ and is ‘derived from a word meaning to be cold or North’. North is interpreted as absolute truth, because Perceiver thought is being frozen by strong Mercy emotions of respect, leading to Teacher winds of theology and dogmatism. South means ‘south wind’ and ‘the south wind was known for bringing warmth and sometimes rain’. This is interpreted as a ‘hot’ Latin personality that is driven by open emotional expression. The interaction between North and South can be seen in charismatic revivals. The doctrine of the North lays a foundation for a charismatic renewal from the South, which will sputter to an end when the doctrinal foundation is lost, leading to a return to the North.
Verse 29 does not say that everyone who combines East with West or North with South will come. Instead, it says that some shall come out of these combinations. That is because it is also possible to deal with such a combination by becoming mentally split. For instance, the typical scientist juxtaposes Western rational thought in the objective with Eastern mysticism in the subjective, maintaining that the mysticism transcends the rational thought. Such a person will not eat at the table of the kingdom of God. Similarly, it is possible to juxtapose submission to rules during the week with emotional fun on the weekend. That type of juxtaposition will also not eat at the table of the kingdom of God. Instead, one must respond to these two dichotomies by attempting to integrate them.
Looking at these directions personally, I grew up in a Bible-believing Mennonite church that emphasized the ‘North’ of doctrine. But I also grew up in the 1970s, during the ‘southern wind’ of the hippie revolution. Going the other way, I have a Master’s degree in Engineering, expressing the West of technical thought. But I also have a Fellowship diploma in violin and play professionally, expressing the East of emotional inspiration. I am keenly aware of these four directions interacting within my mind.
Recline means ‘to recline, to lay back’ and this describes how people in a Greek setting would eat. ‘In the kingdom of God’ is the same phrase used in verse 28. Reclining indicates that one is having a meal of intellectual food and it also suggests being comfortable in the surroundings. Verses 27-28, in contrast, indicated a lack of comfort in which those who were outside the kingdom were not comfortable with the thinking of those who were inside and vice versa. Saying this another way, academic and theological outsiders will find it natural to adopt the methodology required by the kingdom of God, while insiders who are culturally familiar with academia and theology will find this methodology uncomfortable.
This puts a twist on the wokeist emphasis upon the marginalized. Wokeism declares that those who are on the edges of society automatically deserve advocacy because they are receiving insufficient societal approval. Verse 29 says that those who are on the edges of society have an opportunity to participate which those who are receiving societal approval do not have. However, the marginalized still need to come from the edges in order to participate in the center. Wokeism says that mainstream society needs to give honor to the marginalized and that it is morally wrong to suggest that the marginalized need to change. Verse 29 says that the marginalized need to change in order to become part of the mainstream, but this struggle to become part of the mainstream gives the marginalized the ability to renew and revitalize the mainstream. Wokeism views marginalization as oppression that is externally overcome by societal approval. Verse 29 views marginalization as an opportunity to overcome internal inadequacies through personal transformation.
Verse 30 summarizes that this will lead to a shift in societal status. “And behold, there are last who will be first, and there are first who will be last.” Behold suggests that something new will appear. The verb ‘to be’ is used four times in this verse indicating that change is happening at the deeper level of being. Last means ‘end, last, uttermost’. First means ‘first, foremost, chief’. Verse 30 does not say that all the first shall be the last and vice versa. Thus, this is not an automatic reversal of societal status as promoted by wokeism. Verse 30 also suggests that this reversal will involve the top and the bottom and not necessarily the middle. When one is at the very top of society, then it is tempting to regard oneself as a source of ‘truth’ in Mercy thought. Donald Trump is the most visible current example of this, because his basic premise is that he is the most important person in the world and that whatever comes from his mind automatically defines ‘truth’ for everyone around him. When such self-worshiping experts fall, then they fall very far and very deep, because they have mesmerized themselves into becoming incapable of thinking factually at the most basic level. Going the other way, when one is at the very bottom of society, then one cannot rest upon Mercy feelings of societal approval. This is painful, but it is also motivating and mind clarifying. For instance, I have repeatedly found myself being pushed to the bottom by others. This has forced me to find higher, more internal sources of motivation. And it has also forced me to continue doing research. If I had been successful in giving seminars on cognitive styles in the 1980s, then I never would have discovered or followed the path of transformation, and I also would not have realized that mental symmetry can be used as a meta-theory.
Lament over Jerusalem 13:31-35
Jesus is interrupted in verse 31. “In the same hour certain Pharisees came near, saying to Him, ‘Go out and proceed from here, for Herod desires to kill You.’” ‘In the same hour’ indicates that something else is happening at the same time. What was happening in verse 30 is a shift in status as some revered authorities are being revealed to be arrogant frauds while it is becoming apparent that some outsiders are real experts. This is happening within a more general process of insiders being replaced by outsiders. For instance, most professors at most Western universities now come from a non-western background. Similarly, most evangelical Christians now come from outside of North America and Europe. Even within my Mennonite background, there are now more Mennonites in Ethiopia than in the US.
Pharisee means ‘a separatist, a purist’. This describes those who submit to absolute truth. In other words, a Christian ‘Pharisee’ is a legalist who regards the Bible as a special book that is different than other books and is morally guided by social MMNs based in the Bible that are different than the MMNs of society. For instance, my upbringing as a Mennonite could be described as pharisaical. The key characteristic is that both the Perceiver truth and the Mercy experiences of the group are separated from the outside world through internal and external walls. Come near means ‘to come to, to approach’. Certain means ‘someone, anyone’ which means that only some Pharisees are coming. ‘Saying to him’ indicates that this is a verbal interaction.
Looking at this cognitively, verse 27 indicated that there is a relationship between doing research in the subjective and personal lifestyle. One cannot approach truth in an objective manner but rather must apply understanding in righteousness. A Pharisee may have an inadequate concept of truth, but a Pharisee is applying truth in personal behavior. For instance, being raised in a conservative Mennonite home meant that I did not have the emotional or moral baggage acquired by those who followed the moral rebellion of the hippie generation.
The Pharisees warn Jesus in verse 31, “Go out and proceed from here, for Herod desires to kill You.” The Pharisees in verse 31 are looking at the collapse of absolute truth and are concluding that new walls of factual, moral, and societal separation need to be constructed. Go out means ‘to go out’ and indicates leaving the current location. Proceed means ‘to transport’ and is interpreted as movement that is accompanied by personal change. From here means ‘from here’ and is used twice in Luke. Looking at this cognitively, those who follow conservative Christianity in a separatist manner think that it is necessary to set up a new system of separatism. Setting up this new system will require leaving present society and setting up new separate communities that involve new ways of thinking and doing.
Herod means ‘son of a hero’. A hero has great personal status that was acquired through heroic deeds. A son of a hero inherits the great personal status but has not performed any corresponding heroic deeds. For instance, Donald Trump is the epitome of a herod, as are Vladimir Putin and Kim Jong-Un. They all act like heroes and demand the respect of being heroes, but none of them have committed any heroic deeds. Desire means ‘desire, be disposed toward, intend’. Kill means ‘put to death, kill’.
Looking at this cognitively, fading absolute truth can be restored by some sort of religious revival that emotionally reinvigorates Mercy respect for the source of ‘truth’. However, if respect for absolute truth fades sufficiently, then any attempt to reimpose Mercy respect for ‘truth’ will actually end up increasing Mercy respect for the leader who is attempting to reimpose this Mercy respect. For instance, Donald Trump is viewed by many American evangelicals as a chosen leader who will restore moral truth to America. Similarly, Vladimir Putin is viewed by Russians as a chosen leader who will save Russia from European moral decadence. In both cases, knowledge of biblical truth is no longer present. Thus, what is being portrayed as a restoration of moral truth is actually the imposition of fascism. Those who are looking to Trump and Putin to restore morality are overlooking the fact that both of these are utterly amoral, self-worshiping tyrants. Using the language of verse 31, they are herods who are manipulating religious conservatives.
The typical conservative American or Russian citizen does not recognize what is happening. But the Pharisee who still applies absolute truth within a cloistered environment does recognize that the rise of these herods means the end of absolute truth. That is why they are trying to retreat to some new, more cloistered environment that is free of the amoral corruption of Herod. Going further, these Pharisees are also convinced that breaking through to the kingdom of God is only possible if the rule of absolute truth is maintained within some cloistered environment. Saying this as clearly as possible, Trump has managed to fatally corrupt American evangelical Christendom. Those who still follow Christian principles are afraid that this means the end of Christianity. Therefore, they think that Christianity can only be preserved by setting up isolated Bible-believing communities.
Jesus responds in verse 32 with a different mindset. “And He said to them, ‘Having gone, say to that fox, “Behold, I cast out demons and I complete cures today and tomorrow, and the third day I am perfected.”’” Having gone is the past tense of ‘to transport’. Jesus does not stop them from setting up new separatist communities, but he does tell them what mindset they should have after they have become transformed by setting up a community. Fox means ‘a fox, figuratively cunning person’. Therefore, a fox will be interpreted as a cunning person. The primary characteristic of herods such as Trump or Putin is that they have ulterior motives. Nothing they do is honest and their primary purpose is to manipulate and control others. In other words, those who are following separatist morality need to realize that a desire to restore morality has nothing to do with the herods who are claiming to restore morality. A pharisaical lifestyle holds on to absolute truth and then submits to this absolute truth. A cunning fox has no concept of truth and does not submit to anything or anyone.
Behold indicates that something is appearing. Telling the Pharisees to behold means that they should focus upon what is happening and not just upon absolute truth. Cast out combines ‘out of’ with ‘to throw’. It was previously used in verse 28 to describe objective researchers being cast out. Casting out means to reject something in Teacher thought as being inconsistent with the general theory. A demon represents the Teacher mental network (TMN) of some undesired habit. For instance, the methodology of objective science is a demon. A demon is not inherently evil, but rather drives a person to behave in a manner that does not lead to greater Teacher wholeness. Casting out demons is only possible if one is guided in Teacher thought by a legitimate meta-theory. In contrast, the Pharisee has to avoid demons by living in a separate community. Thus, the Pharisee living in a separate community is supposed to notice that Jesus is solving the problems that the separatist is trying to avoid. For instance, the typical conservative evangelical views science as inherently ungodly, driven by demonic forces. However, mental symmetry can be used as a meta-theory to uncover and remove the demons of inadequate methodology from secular science.
Complete is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘away from’ with ‘to complete, to finish’. Healing means ‘healing, especially the spiritual process of God’s grace’. The Pharisee believes that the absolute truth of God needs to be applied personally, and the Pharisee is trying to preserve absolute truth by applying it in a separate community. Spiritual healing goes further by allowing an integrated understanding of God’s character in Teacher thought to transform all of Mercy identity and culture. The Pharisee can only preserve absolute truth. Jesus is extending universal truth. The Pharisee can preserve the morality of the past. Jesus can establish a new and better morality for the future. The conservative evangelical who merely talks about truth will not be open to looking at these results. However, the Pharisee who tries to set up a new community may be willing to look at results.
Jesus then mentions three days. There is today which is followed by tomorrow, which comes from a word that means ‘a breeze’. The casting out and the curing is being done today and tomorrow. Perfected means ‘to complete, to perfect’. Today would refer to the era in which this conversation is happening, an era in which herods are trying to kill Jesus and Pharisees are trying to escape from this killing. That corresponds prophetically to the time during which this essay is being written, in June 2025. At the moment it looks very much as if the world is in the process of being divided into three realms controlled by the herods of America, Russia, and China. Tomorrow would then correspond to the period of ‘beholding’ when those who have set up separatist communities can see that a more complete solution is being established. The third day probably represents a struggle between the existing regime and the new, more complete solution. Notice that these three days come before the three days of Jesus’ death and resurrection.
Looking at this personally, the rise of Trump and Putin, combined with the implosion of evangelical Christendom, is forcing me to rest totally upon my understanding of mental symmetry and scripture. I have no external reason to continue going, because everything looks bleak from an external perspective. Only my internal understanding gives me hope that today will be followed by a tomorrow of beholding.
Verse 33 looks at what is necessary. “But it behooves Me to proceed today and tomorrow and the following day.” But means ‘moreover, besides’. Behooves means ‘it is necessary’ and ‘me’ is explicitly mentioned. ‘It is necessary’ looks beyond social approval to inescapable principles of cause-and-effect. For instance, mental symmetry claims to describe inescapable principles of cognitive cause-and-effect. ‘Me’ means that these cognitive principles apply to Jesus himself. ‘Behooves’ indicates that what is happening externally in society is cognitively necessary. Jesus must go through these three days in order to be internally ready for the kingdom of God.
That brings us to the theological topic of the sinlessness of Jesus the Incarnation. This topic is discussed extensively in the essay on the Gospel of John. My general hypothesis is that Jesus was born sinless at the level of Teacher words and Server actions. Consistent with this, Jesus mentions several times in John that he always does what he sees the Father doing. This is also consistent with the concept of Jesus appearing in the Old Testament as the ‘Angel of God’, because angels are messengers who function at the level of Teacher words and Server actions. However, Jesus still had to go through the human process of being obedient at the level of Perceiver facts and Mercy experiences. Consistent with this idea, Jesus has to separate himself from the experts in verse 27 because he is righteous and they are unrighteous. But Jesus also has to go through three days of experiencing in order to be made perfect and complete.
Applying this to mental symmetry, as far as I can tell, whenever I have been faced with some major situation where I had to choose to apply my Teacher understanding through some Server action, I have consistently chosen to follow my understanding no matter what the personal cost. But I only have a limited experiential knowledge of what it means to behave this way out in the real world.
Verse 33 concludes, “For it is not possible for a prophet to perish outside of Jerusalem.” Possible is used once in the New Testament and combines ‘in the realm of’ with ‘to receive in a welcoming way’. The Pharisee who is setting up a new separatist society feels that he is ‘in the realm of receiving in a welcoming way’ the Christian message. However, Jesus says that ‘a prophet perishing outside of Jerusalem’ is not within this realm. Perish means ‘to fully destroy, cutting off entirely’ and was previously used in verses 3 and 5 to talk about all forms of absolute truth and borrowed knowledge perishing. The idea is that a true prophet both can and must continue until reaching the point of having a showdown with the organized religion of Jerusalem. Moreover, a true prophet needs to receive this in a welcoming way. Why? On the one hand, transforming established religion will solve the problem. On the other hand, this showdown will lead to a personal rebirth for the prophet that makes the entire struggle worthwhile. On the third hand, going through this process must be viewed as something positive in order to avoid turning into a judgmental cynic. And Luke 12:42-49 warned against ignoring this ‘third hand’.
Verse 34 then focuses upon Jerusalem. “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, killing the prophets, and stoning those having been sent to her.” In the Greek text, the word Jerusalem is repeated three times in a row. Killing means ‘put to death, kill’ and was previously used in verse 31 where the Pharisees said that Herod wants to kill Jesus. In verse 34, Jesus clarifies that it is Jerusalem and not Herod that wants to do the killing, and what is being killed is not the pharisaical lifestyle but rather the prophets. The basic premise of absolute truth is that all significant truth was revealed in the past through important sources and that ‘believers’ in absolute ‘truth’ now possess all necessary truth. A prophet questions this underlying premise by stating that something new will come along that goes beyond the existing system of absolute truth. Stated another way, a conservative Christian conserves, while a prophet innovates. A conservative mindset is threatened by innovation.
Going further, organized religion asserts that all important aspects of truth have been revealed to the existing religious leaders and that this truth is currently being adequately expressed through organized religion. A prophet threatens this assumption at an existential level. Saying this another way, organized religion insists that the current MMNs of religious authority, ritual, and culture are sufficient to reveal the character of God in Teacher thought. A prophet states that the current religious MMNs fall short of the character of God in Teacher thought and need to be transformed by a more adequate concept of God in Teacher thought. If a prophet is to transform existing organized religion, then it must become apparent at the deepest level of Mercy emotions and at the most universal level of Teacher emotions that existing organized religion falls short of the glory of God. Thus, there must be a showdown between the prophet and organized religion in Jerusalem.
Stoning is mentioned once in Luke and combines ‘stone’ with ‘to throw’. A stone represents a solid Perceiver fact. Throwing travels through the air of Teacher thought. Stoning uses Perceiver truth in a theological manner to kill the opposition. Stoning rejects opposition as heretical and blasphemous. Sent means ‘sent on a defined mission by a superior’. On the one hand, Jerusalem regards itself as the ultimate authority of religious truth and religion. On the other hand, the one being sent to Jerusalem is submitting to a higher authority than Jerusalem. For instance, my goal in using mental symmetry to reformulate Christianity is not to attack Christianity. Instead, my goal is to submit to the higher authority of universal principles of ‘how things work’. But if one approaches Jerusalem with such a mindset, one will find that it does not use religious truth to build Teacher understanding but rather to stone opposition.
We have associated Jerusalem with the center of organized religion. However, academia has also become a center of organized religion with the theory of biological evolution being the official dogma and Nature being the official ‘goddess’ of science. And scientists are very talented at using scientific facts to ‘stone’ voices they do not want to listen to. However, there is a higher authority than the authority of science, which is the authority of the integrated mind. Science is only possible to the extent that scientists are able to think scientifically and have a meta-theory that gives them a reason in Teacher thought to think scientifically.
Verse 34 continues, “How often I have wanted to gather your children, the way that a hen gathers her brood under the wings, and you were not willing.” How often means that this has happened many times. Want means ‘to desire, wish’ and was previously used in verse 31 to describe what Herod wants. Gather means ‘to gather together, to assemble’. And child means ‘a child living in willing dependence’. In other words, the official religious and academic leaders have many followers who look to them as sources of authority in Mercy thought. Jesus has wished many times that he could set up a Teacher system of ordered instruction for these followers. Similarly, the more that I succeed in using mental symmetry as a meta-theory to analyze different subjects as well as use mental symmetry to reformulate Christian doctrine, the more I see how useful it would be to build a Christian school/church curriculum around mental symmetry. Thus, it infuriates me when my province treats aboriginal alternate knowing as a meta-theory and declares that every subject must be taught in the light of aboriginal wisdom and spirituality. Natives do have legitimate expertise about the natural environment and they do emphasize the spiritual realm that modern secular society ignores, but it is academically and spiritually absurd to treat ‘Native knowing’ as a meta-theory while refusing to acknowledge the existence of a legitimate meta-theory of mental symmetry. Similarly, it is academically and spiritually absurd for the local Christian University to embrace biological evolution as a meta-theory while ignoring mental symmetry, which has being used to comprehensively reformulate Christianity as cognitive principles that are compatible with scientific thought. In fact, I can’t even talk about mental symmetry at the small church that I attend. Thus, I know deeply how Jesus felt.
Way means ‘manner, way, fashion’ and is used once in Luke. Hen is the word for ‘bird’ and is used in this passage and in the parallel passage in Matthew 23. ‘Her’ is explicitly mentioned. Brood occurs once in the New Testament and means ‘a brood of young birds’. Under and wings are both explicitly mentioned. This describes a meta-theory in Teacher thought. A meta-theory approaches subjects from the Teacher perspective of a bird. A meta-theory is feminine in the sense that it provides an integrated female Teacher understanding for various technical specializations of male thought. ‘Under the wings’ means providing a Teacher framework within which more specific ‘young birds’ can take shelter.
Willing is the same word used to describe what Jesus wanted to do. Jesus could not provide a Teacher meta-theory for followers because the existing religious and academic leaders did not want this to happen. Looking at this personally, I have found that technical specialists do not want some general theory looking over their shoulder and making moral judgments. Instead, they will cling to overgeneralizations that give the feeling of a meta-theory without imposing any substance. They will follow mysticism that gives the feeling of encountering God without learning anything about the character of God. They will embrace the meta-theory of biological evolution, even though this theory provided a basis for the horrors of World War I and World War II. Or they will promote the alternate knowing of aboriginal wisdom, even though it is clear that the aboriginal mindset did not invent modern science and technology and is incapable of incorporating modern science and technology.
Jesus concludes in verse 35, “Behold, your house is left to you.” Left means to send away, to leave, to forgive’. A house is a dwelling place for personal identity. Verse 35 does not say that Jesus is leaving the house but rather that the house is ‘left to you’. In other words, the existing subjective framework used by religious and academic knowledge has no connection with the integrated understanding of incarnation. Similarly, I keep realizing at a deeper level that mental symmetry has no place for overgeneralizations, mysticism, the theory of biological evolution, or native spirituality as a meta-theory. These various ‘houses’ leave themselves away from the integrated understanding of mental symmetry. Verse 35 is not saying that the content is being forsaken. Overgeneralizations often overgeneralize from legitimate principles, mysticism has inspired legitimate content, the theory of biological evolution has provided a framework for doing legitimate biological research, and native spirituality has pushed people to teach knowledge in a more holistic manner. But the houses themselves have no place in mental symmetry.
Verse 35 continues, “And I say to you, you shall not see Me until the time comes when you say, ‘Blessed is the One coming in the name of the Lord.’” See means ‘to see with the mind’ which refers to an integrated understanding. ‘Not seeing me’ means being mentally incapable of acquiring an integrated understanding of incarnation. Looking at this cognitively, it means that the mind only has room for one universal Teacher theory and will be emotionally driven to eliminate competing universal Teacher theories. Instead, a competing universal theory can only be accepted if it is a translation of the existing universal theory. For instance, classical physics can be restated as Lagrangian physics. The equations are quite different but the underlying principles are the same.
However, competing universal theories cannot be accepted if they are constructed using methods that are fundamentally different. For instance, overgeneralizations are fundamentally incompatible with mental symmetry, because overgeneralizations shut down Perceiver thought while mental symmetry uses Perceiver and Server thought in an analogical manner. Similarly, mysticism is fundamentally incompatible with mental symmetry, because mysticism insists that universal Teacher understanding transcends rational understanding while mental symmetry uses a Teacher theory to explain rational understanding. The theory of biological evolution is also fundamentally incompatible with mental symmetry, because evolution insists that there is no goal in Mercy thought and no underlying structure in Teacher thought while mental symmetry places everything within the Teacher order of mental wholeness while pursuing the Mercy goal of personal well-being. Finally, native spirituality insists that spirituality must be pursued using pre-scientific tribal thinking, while mental symmetry treats spirituality as an extension of integrated scientific thought. In each case, a house is being constructed using a methodology that is intrinsically opposed to the methodology used by mental symmetry.
This inability to internally see a competing meta-theory will continue until a requirement is met. Until means ‘until, till, as far as’. ‘The time’ is implied and the actual term is ‘to have come’. This same word was used in verse 29 to describe those coming from the four directions. Thus, verse 35 clarifies what it means cognitively to come from East and West, or from North and South. ‘Say’ means that something has to happen verbally in Teacher thought. Blessed combines the word ‘good’ with ‘logos’. Thus, saying that something is blessed means recognizing it as a good paradigm in Teacher thought. Coming means ‘to come, to go’. In means ‘in the realm of’. A name refers to some label in Teacher thought, ‘the manifestation or revelation of someone’s character’. Lord indicates submission to authority. The Greek phrase is more accurately, ‘a good paradigm is the coming in the realm of a name of a lord’. Cognitively speaking, this means recognizing that starting from a general theory in Teacher thought leads to good technical paradigms. I have repeatedly discovered that both academia and theology are utterly unwilling to start from a general theory in Teacher thought. One is allowed to tentatively stretch towards a Teacher theory from empirical evidence. One is allowed to quote and compare various authorities who have talked about Teacher theories. However, the approach taken by mental symmetry is regarded as fundamentally suspect because mental symmetry starts from a Teacher meta-theory of cognition.
Verse 35 does not refer to any specific lord but rather refers generically to submitting to a name of a lord. The critical point is not which meta-theory one uses but rather whether one is willing to start from a meta-theory. That is because competing meta-theories can be compared using the test of extent and clarity. A meta-theory that explains the most in the clearest way is the best meta-theory. But none of the four competing meta-theories mentioned above come in the realm of a name of a lord. An overgeneralization is not a name but rather a vague slogan. Mysticism cannot rule as a lord over any specific content because it transcends all content. Biological evolution substitutes randomness for a name while denying that any lord is guiding evolution. And aboriginal spirituality substitutes tribalism in Mercy thought for a name in Teacher thought.
Jesus Heals a Man with Dropsy 14:1-6
Chapter 14 begins with interaction between the Pharisees and Jesus. Verse 1 points out that the Pharisees are watching to see what Jesus will do on the Sabbath. “And it came to pass, on His going into a house of one of the rulers of the Pharisees on a Sabbath, to eat bread, that they were watching Him.”
Come to pass means ‘to come into being’ which means that we are now moving on from the overview of chapter 13. Going means ‘to come, to go’. House means a dwelling and was previously used in 13:35 to talk about ‘your house being left unto you’. Previously, Jesus stated that he could not live in the houses of outsiders, which we interpreted as their methodologies being fundamentally incompatible with mental wholeness. Pharisee means ‘a separatist, a purist’ which is interpreted as applying absolute truth within some separate environment. Ruler means ‘to rule, take precedence’. Thus, Jesus is able to enter into the house of a prominent Pharisee.
However, there are limitations to this interaction. First, this is a house of a ruler of the Pharisees. The average follower of absolute truth does not think for himself but rather is emotionally overwhelmed by Mercy respect for the experts. In contrast, a ruler of the Pharisees has sufficient personal Mercy status to cause emotional respect for absolute truth to fall into doubt, making some thinking both possible and necessary. Second, this is a specific leader of the Pharisees. That is because leaders of absolute truth who experience doubt often turn into cynical manipulators of the masses who only pretend to continue ‘believing’ in order to maintain their position. Or their rising Perceiver doubt may enable them to have a mystical experience, causing them to secretly practice mysticism. Only some leaders of the Pharisees will respond to growing doubt through rational moral analysis. Third, this visit is on a Sabbath, when the focus is upon rational understanding in Teacher thought. In contrast, it is stifling to interact with absolute truth during the weekday, because a Pharisaical mindset will block off many aspects of secular society that are necessary for human well-being. Fourth, the purpose is to eat bread, which is interpreted as consuming intellectual food. The goal is not to discuss the various taboos of pharisaical lifestyle. Instead, the goal is to understand absolute truth.
However, even within these limitations there is suspicion. They is a generic ‘they’. Watching means ‘closely watch with great personal interest’. And to be is explicitly mentioned, emphasizing the personal element. That is because a mindset of absolute truth always places strict limits on the extent to which Perceiver thought may be used. One is permitted to use Perceiver thought with peripheral topics but not with central doctrines. A Pharisee knows instinctively where the precise boundary is between using Mercy respect to overwhelm Perceiver thought and using Perceiver thought to analyze Mercy experiences. Looking at this personally, I have found when discussing mental symmetry with Bible-believing Christians that my attempt to use Perceiver thought will always reach some sort of brick wall where rational discussion turns into blind faith. This is especially evident in Christian apologetics, which uses rational dialogue about Christianity and Christian ethics to encourage people to take a blind leap of faith into believing core Christian doctrines. Mental symmetry, in contrast, examines core religious doctrines by using Perceiver thought to find similar connections in different contexts. Thus, my thinking naturally jumps between religious, secular, scientific, and holy in a manner that smells insufficiently reverent to the Pharisee. For the Pharisee, maintaining ‘correct’ divisions between holy and discussable topics, or between acceptable and taboo behavior, plays a great role in defining personal identity. Thus, when Jesus enters to discuss theological topics, then ‘they will closely watch with great personal interest’.
In verse 2 someone enters. “And behold, there was a certain man with dropsy before Him.” Dropsy is mentioned once in the New Testament and combines ‘water’ with ‘to appear, to be seen’. Medically speaking, this refers to fluid retention or edema. Symbolically, liquid represents Mercy experiences. Therefore, dropsy would represent an overemphasis upon visible Mercy experiences. Man is the generic word for mankind. Given the context of pharisaical absolute truth, dropsy probably refers to some sort of charismatic renewal. Cognitively speaking, studying some holy book such as the Bible will cause Platonic forms of heavenly perfection to form within Mercy thought. However, these internal images of perfection cannot be expressed in real life because they come from a holy book that is unrelated to real life. A charismatic renewal attempts to live within these ideal imaginary Mercy images.
Jesus poses a question in verse 3. “And Jesus answering, spoke to the lawyers and to the Pharisees, saying, ‘Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath or not?’” Answering means ‘to answer, to reply’. However, the Pharisees have not said anything—and do not say anything in the entire passage. Instead, Jesus is replying to the unspoken message being broadcast by the core mental networks of the Pharisees. It was mentioned earlier that determining the core mental networks of some group is a key element in analyzing the thinking of that group. A lawyer is an ‘expert in the law’. Thus, Jesus explicitly asks a question involving the boundaries of the Pharisaical system to both the experts who determine these boundaries and the leaders who impose these boundaries. Lawful means ‘permitted, lawful, possible’ and combines ‘out of’ with ‘to be’. In other words, something is lawful if it improves personal well-being. Sabbath refers to the time during which one focuses upon God and absolute truth. Heal is the word ‘therapy’ which ‘usually involves natural elements in the process of healing’. In other words, is it permitted to use psychological and cognitive principles when talking about the Bible and doctrine? One would think that this is an obvious question, but the average Pharisaical expert does not have to address it because secular psychology usually focuses upon objective topics and avoids directly addressing subjective matters of religious faith.
Verse 4 describes the response. “But they were silent.” They were silent is a single verb that means ‘to be quiet, to rest’. This is the same Greek word that is used to describe the Eastern Orthodox practice of mysticism. This response could be interpreted in three ways: First, it suggests that there is no rational answer. Rationally speaking, if one is using rational thought to discuss biblical doctrine, and if biblical doctrine is supposed to be applied, then it should be permissible to use rational thought to discuss the application of biblical doctrine. But explicitly applying psychological principles breaks down the division between religious follower and secular outsider upon which a separatist lifestyle is based. Second, silence suggests that the topic is undiscussable. Explicitly discussing the boundary between blind faith in absolute truth and rational analysis of absolute truth uses rational analysis to invade the realm of blind faith. What normally happens is that the topic is not explicitly discussed. Instead, everyone ‘knows’ where rational analysis stops and blind ‘faith’ starts. However, Jesus is discussing this topic with lawyers who are supposed to be the experts in determining precisely these questions. Third, the Greek word being used suggests a relationship with the practice of mysticism. In other words, silence is not just a way of preserving the boundary between morally discussable and undiscussable. Instead, silence is actively being used as a means of preserving the realm of the undiscussable through the practice of mysticism. That is because mysticism achieves the Teacher feeling of oneness by becoming silent in order to stop Perceiver thought from thinking factually in order to make room for Teacher overgeneralization.
Verse 4 continues, “And having taken hold of him, He healed him and let him go.” Having taken hold combines the prefix ‘on, fitting’ with ‘aggressively take’. By remaining silent, the experts have abrogated responsibility, making it possible for Jesus to intervene. In 13:34 Jesus wished that the religious experts would step out of the way and allow him to teach their followers. In verse 4, the religious experts do step out of the way, giving Jesus freedom to intervene. Therefore, Jesus takes advantage of the opportunity, but does so in an appropriate way. For instance, mental symmetry analyzes all Christian doctrine from a cognitive perspective. The typical cognitive researcher of religion also takes a cognitive perspective, but the goal of the cognitive researcher is to explain away Christian religion as merely a set of cognitive beliefs, while typically claiming at the same time not to be questioning religion. That is an example of inappropriate aggressively taking hold of. In contrast, mental symmetry uses cognitive analysis to make Christian doctrine more effective and more universal.
Healed means ‘healing particularly as supernatural’. In verse 3, Jesus asked the religious lawyer if it was lawful to use therapy. In verse 4 Jesus is delivering supernatural healing. The religious lawyer thinks that cognitively analyzing God and religion places a limit upon the supernatural power of God. This assumption lies at the heart of Pharisaical separatism, which assumes that one follows God more completely by turning one’s back upon rational secular thought. In contrast, I have found that using mental symmetry to cognitively analyze Christian doctrine in the Bible actually opens the door to much greater influence from the non-material realm. All charismatic revivals eventually come to an end as living within absolute truth comes into contact with reality and experiencing spiritual gifting erodes belief in absolute ‘truth’. This happens when the charismatic abandons common sense and starts to replace ‘the Bible says’ with ‘God told me that’.
This provides an explanation for the healing. A charismatic renewal attempts to live fully within the Platonic forms created by studying the Bible (or some holy book) by singing, hearing, and talking about these Platonic forms in charismatic meetings, by submitting emotionally to these Platonic forms through some form of being ‘slain in the spirit’, and by living ‘by faith’ in the secular world in a manner that ignores common sense and expects these Platonic forms to impact reality. A genuine meta-theory such as mental symmetry addresses these three limitations: First, focusing in Mercy thought upon charismatic experiences that are different than normal experiences is replaced by focusing in Teacher thought upon a meta-theory that ties together all experiences. Second, the Mercy experience of being slain in the spirit is replaced by allowing all of personal existence to be governed by a Teacher meta-theory. Third, ‘living by faith’ in a way that violates common sense is replaced by a larger comprehension of rational thought that includes the supernatural and the spiritual. This leads to the fourth effect which is that a charismatic renewal no longer has to carry within itself the seeds of its demise. (A concept of the Holy Spirit and charismatic renewal is discussed in the essay I wrote next.)
Let go means ‘to release, to set free’ and is the standard word for divorce. The typical Pharisaical leader who achieves success immediately starts a religious organization with him (or her) as the authoritative leader and transmitter of supernatural power. However, that type of response reinforces a mindset of blind faith in followers and is also morally corrupting to leaders. Therefore, Jesus has to divorce himself from his success in order to encourage those he has supernaturally healed to make a transition away from blind faith to universal understanding. This is similar to the way that absolute truth initially forms. The source of absolute truth has to have his words written down and then step out of the way so that these words can be read and studied in book form apart from the emotional status of the source of ‘truth’. Similarly, Jesus as the healer has to step out of the way so that his healing can be studied and understood apart from his emotional status.
Stated cognitively, Perceiver confidence cannot be acquired instantly but rather is gained gradually as one learns to use Perceiver thought in increasingly emotional Mercy situations. Going further, a charismatic renewal based in mental symmetry does not have to be controlled by religious leaders because it does not carry within itself the seeds of its demise; it does not automatically self-destruct. Instead, the more that one uses mental symmetry to explore the spiritual, the more one becomes both capable and motivated to use mental symmetry to explore the spiritual. The primary reason why a charismatic renewal comes to an end is because it is rooted in the blind faith of absolute truth. Therefore, by stepping out of the way, Jesus increases the probability that the charismatic renewal will continue, as well as increasing the probability that the followers of official religion will become free of their submission to the official leaders and learn to think for themselves.
Jesus follows in verse 5 with an analogy. “And He said to them, ‘Which of you whose son or ox will fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, also will not immediately pull him up?’” ‘Said to them’ means that he is taking his success as an opportunity to discuss the undiscussable. Son means ‘a son’ and would represent a doctrinal successor, a follower who maintains the technical content of Pharisaical doctrine. Ox comes from a word that means ‘grazing’ and was previously mentioned by Jesus in 13:15 where he talked about untying the ox, which was interpreted as the purpose of a religious service being to loose a person from bondage to doctrine in order to experience God in Mercy thought. In other words, the goal of the religious service is for the worshiper to have a miniature charismatic renewal. Ox was interpreted there as the typical religious adherent.
In verse 5 the son or cow falls into a pit. A pit is ‘a hole in the ground’ and four of the seven times this word is used are in Revelation 9 to talk about the bottomless pit from which scorpions ascend. Fall means ‘to fall, to descend’ and is interpreted as heading from Teacher generality to Mercy specifics. A charismatic renewal falls from general doctrine in Teacher thought to specific experiences in Mercy thought. Falling into a pit would mean fixating upon specific religious Mercy experiences, such as ‘speaking in tongues’ or ‘being slain in the spirit’.
In the English, ‘the Sabbath day’ comes next, implying that the falling is happening on the Sabbath. But in the Greek ‘the Sabbath day’ comes at the end of the verse, implying that the pulling up is happening on the Sabbath. Both the KJV and the NASB preserve the order of the Greek text. Pull up is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘to draw up, to pull up’. Stated symbolically, when charismatic followers fall into a hole of fixating upon specific Mercy experiences, then religious leaders will try to pull them up out of specifics in order to focus upon Christian experience in a more general and wholesome manner. Immediately means ‘immediately, straightway’. Immediately on the Sabbath day means that this refocusing will be done immediately within the context of the charismatic revival. The ‘lawyers’ and leaders of the charismatic movement will make immediate public statements that attempt to ‘restore balance’ to the charismatic revival.
That leads to the obvious, unspoken question. If Pharisaical leaders use their understanding of psychology to prevent a charismatic renewal from getting sidetracked into heresy, then it must be lawful for Jesus to use his understanding to ensure that a charismatic renewal will continue without coming to an end. A similar statement could be made about mental symmetry.
Verse 6 concludes, “And they were not able to reply to these things.” Able refers to ‘embodied strength’. Reply is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘against’ with ‘to answer’. The other occurrence is in Romans 9:20 which describes humans talking back to God. In other words, the lawyers and Pharisaical leaders can make verbal statements, but these words fall apart when coming into contact with what is happening within reality. The pharisaical leaders may not like the supernatural healing of Jesus, but how can they attack a spiritual movement that continues to grow without getting stuck in heresy or hypocrisy?
Looking at the bigger picture, at the time of writing in June 2025, chapter 13 could reasonably be regarded as happening in the present. The passage that we have just analyzed has not happened, but I have thought a lot about mental symmetry triggering some sort of charismatic renewal. This passage has been interpreted as a Christian charismatic revival, partially because that is the form that I have personally experienced. However, it is possible to come up with other scenarios where a system of absolute truth is being troubled by an excessive emphasis upon external Mercy experiences. One example involves academia and ‘alternate knowing’. Academia began as a rational search for scientific understanding but it has turned largely into a system of absolute truth that is maintained by respected academic authorities. Alternate knowing attempts to escape this academic straitjacket by focusing upon the external Mercy experiences of various oppressed, marginalized, and/or aboriginal groups. The challenge is to recognize cultural groups in the subjective without destroying the structure of academia. Another possible example involves evangelical Christendom and Trumpism. Evangelical Christianity used to follow the absolute truth of the Bible. But the Christian supporter of Trump now focuses upon the external Mercy experiences of taking political power and shutting down the liberals. The challenge is to deal with wokesim in a manner that does not destroy American democracy and prosperity. China provides another possible example. The rule of economic and political law is viewed primarily as a system of absolute truth that is imposed upon the Chinese population by the Chinese government and policed by the Communist Party. The typical Chinese businessmen, in contrast, focuses in an almost charismatic way upon the Mercy experiences of achieving financial success. The challenge is to control Chinese economic enthusiasm without destroying the Chinese economy. Finally, the Russian invasion of Ukraine could be interpreted as Western law and order being threatened by Russian fixation upon restoring Mercy experiences of Empire. The challenge here is to defeat Russia in a way that maintains Western civilization and does not lead to thermonuclear war. (Russian and Chinese communism are discussed in the next essay.)
Being Invited to a Wedding 14:7-11
Verse 7 indicates that this next section happens at the same time at the same meal. “And He was speaking a parable to those having been invited, remarking how they were choosing out the first places, saying to them.” Having been invited means ‘to call, to name, to invite’. Remarking is used once in Luke and means ‘to hold upon, to hold fast, to pay attention to’. In other words, this is a critical factor that attracts the attention of Jesus. First place means ‘a reclining first’, because guests would recline at a meal in Roman times. Choosing out means ‘to choose out of’. Jesus responds to this behavior by publicly saying something.
Comparing this section with the previous section, dropsy represents an excessive focus upon external Mercy experiences. The guests in verse 7 are exhibiting an excessive focus upon external Mercy experiences of personal honor. However, Jesus is not addressing this fixation at the specific level of ‘pulling someone out of a pit’ but rather at the more general level of being guided by MMNs of social approval.
Jesus explains in verse 8. “When you are invited by anyone to wedding feasts.” Wedding feast is the generic word for ‘marriage, wedding, wedding feast’ and this word is only used twice in Luke, the other time in 12:36. Verse 8 does not say explicitly that the guests are at a wedding but rather clarifies how they should behave when going to a wedding feast. Invited is the same word used in verse 7.
That brings us to the question of why a wedding is being mentioned. Male thought emphasizes technical thinking while female thought emphasizes mental networks. The lawyers and rulers in verse 3 would use technical thought to make legal decisions. The person with dropsy, in contrast, is emphasizing MMNs of female thought. A charismatic renewal emphasizes the mental networks of emotional experience as a response to an excessive focus upon the technical thinking of doctrine, and it requires continual correction from the technical thinking of doctrine. The long-term solution involves mentally marrying these two. For instance, mental symmetry uses the patterns and analogies of normal thought to integrate both mental networks and technical thought. Integrating mental networks requires having sufficient Perceiver and Server confidence to function within emotional pressure. A mindset of absolute truth lacks the Perceiver and Server confidence required to analyze core religious doctrines. Integrating technical thought requires having sufficient Perceiver knowledge and Server skills to be compatible with the standards of excellence required by technical thought. Jesus’ instructions about how one should behave when invited to a wedding feast indicate how one should behave when marrying male and female thought.
Verse 8 continues with instructions, “Do not recline in the first place, lest one more honorable than you might have been invited by him. Recline means ‘to recline down’. ‘Moving down’ is interpreted as heading towards Mercy specifics. The ‘son or ox’ of verse 5 fell into a pit, indicating some fixation upon specific Mercy experiences. The guest reclining in verse 7 is also moving down to recline. Reclining implies a position of rest from which it is difficult to move. First place is the same word ‘first reclining’ that was used in verse 7. Looking at this cognitively, if one adopts the attitude that one is more important than others in Mercy thought, then one will naturally tend to reject corrections from others, making it much harder to emerge from any pit of self-deception into which one has fallen. In means ‘to or into’ which means that one is aiming for first place. One may only succeed in occupying position four or five, but one is still reclining ‘to or into’ first place.
‘Lest’ is the word ‘not, lest’ followed by ‘at some time’. Invited is the same word that was used at the beginning of the verse. More honorable is used twice in Luke and combines the prefix ‘in the realm’ of with ‘honor, value’. ‘More’ is actually implied. (The other occurrence is in 14:8. The noun ‘honor’ and adjective ‘honorable’ are not used in Luke. The verb ‘honor’ is only used once in Luke in 18:20.) Thus, what seems to be happening is not that someone more honorable is appearing but rather that at some time someone is appearing in the realm of honor. ‘Honor’ indicates true value based upon internal character and actual worth, which is different than Mercy feelings of personal status. In other words, people are claiming positions of authority based upon their Mercy status and it is becoming apparent later on what is actually valuable and honorable.
Verse 9 describes the resulting conflict. “And the one having invited you and him, having come, will say to you, ‘Give your place to this one.’” Invited is the same word used in verse 8. Thus, the one organizing the wedding feast who invited the guests is coming. This is preceded in the Greek by having come, which means ‘to come, to go’. In other words, someone points out that the actual honor is less than the Mercy status being taken, and this observation is backed up by the one who is in charge of the wedding. In verse 5, the lawyers and leaders were rescuing people out of pits of Mercy fixation, guided by a desire to maintain balance. In verse 9, the organizers of the marriage feast are replacing Mercy feelings of self-importance with deeper feelings of actual value and honor. The goal here is to bring male technical thought together with female mental networks in a way that is consistent with value. Value involves a combination of facts and emotions. Suppose that I am comparing the value of various items. Factual analysis has to be used to determine which items are similar as well as compare the features of the various items. This factual analysis generates a feeling of value causing me to want one item more than the others. Thus, marrying male thought with female thought will automatically enable calculations of value.
Give means ‘to give, to grant’. This one is a generic pronoun. Place means ‘place, location’ and indicates some Perceiver fact within a general map of knowledge. Thus, arrangement based upon Mercy status is being replaced by location based upon Perceiver facts.
Verse 9 continues, “And then with shame you should begin to take the last place.” Should begin means ‘to begin, to commence’. With means ‘with, in company with’ when followed by the genitive. Shame is used once in the Gospels and means ‘shame, disgrace’. Last means ‘last, final, utmost’. Place is mentioned again. And take means ‘to hold fast’. This change in position is related to 13:30 which said that ‘there are first who will be last’.
One can see why there would be a change in position, but why would the first become the last? The one who takes the first is driven by feelings of personal status to take the first place. Someone who regards him or herself as more important than everyone else in Mercy thought will naturally be unteachable, because he will feel that he does not need to learn anything from anyone else. Going further, true value comes from a knowledge of how things work, and a mind that is focusing upon who is right will naturally tend to ignore what is right. When personal status is replaced by value, then the one who is deposed from first to last will not respond with factual analysis but rather with Mercy feelings of shame. Notice that taking the last place is accompanied by the primary emotion of shame. Thus, such a mind will naturally interpret progress as powerful groups coming in and humiliating and marginalizing the original inhabitants. One can see this mindset in wokeism, power politics, and decolonization. Scientific knowledge and rational thinking are ignored. Instead all that matters is the shame felt by those who used to be honored being demoted by progress.
Verse 10 describes an alternate scenario. “But when you are invited, having gone, recline in the last place.” Invited is the same word used in previous verses. However, having gone is the word ‘transport’ which is interpreted as movement that involves change. In other words, the process of combining male technical thought with female mental networks is leading to personal change because technical thought is being permitted to factually analyze mental networks of social status and identity. In contrast, the person in verse 8 was merely assuming Mercy status. Similarly, wokeism and power politics use technical thought to analyze mental networks of identity and culture, but the underlying assumption is that these mental networks must be accepted in totality without change. Instead of using technical thought to analyze mental networks, technical thought is being used in a manner that is subservient to mental networks. Thus, there is ‘going’ there is no ‘transporting’ because the emphasis upon Mercy status remains intact.
A different word for recline is also used which combines ‘upward, up’ with ‘to fall, to descend’. In other words, falling in the realm of Mercy status is being accompanied by rising in the realm of Teacher understanding. This will occur naturally because those who are attempting to use Perceiver and Server thought to determine what is actually happening do not want to become deceived by Mercy feelings of self-importance, and they will learn that the probability of gaining Teacher understanding can be maximized by minimizing Mercy feelings of personal status.
To means ‘to or into’. Obviously, only one person can physically occupy the lowest position, but it is possible for several like-minded people to recline ‘to or into’ the lowest position. And last place is the same two Greek words that were used to describe the last place taken by the demoted person. In other words, one is actively seek out a place at the bottom of the pecking order in order to avoid getting distracted by having to be guided by the need to maintain Mercy status. This is not an optimal strategy when doing objective research within some specialization, because doing objective research requires funding and getting funding requires maintaining Mercy status. However, I have found with mental symmetry that it is an optimal strategy when attempting to ‘marry’ objective technical thought with subjective mental networks. That is because the academic and social environments are littered with technical specializations and cultural mental networks begging to be ‘married’. Thus, no expensive research is required. One simply has to put the existing pieces together. Learning about some technical specialization requires being willing to be a beginner in that field without technical expertise or status. And analyzing some cultural mental network requires being willing to accept the Perceiver facts no matter how this makes one feel in Mercy thought. In both cases, being willing to sit at the back of the room is a prerequisite. Again, it needs to be emphasized that the context is being invited to a wedding feast. One is ‘feasting’ upon knowledge within the context of marrying male technical thought with female mental networks. This mental marrying provides a long-term solution for the ‘lawyers’ of absolute truth having to contend with emotional extremists troubled by ‘dropsy’.
Verse 10 continues, “So that when the one having invited you might come, he will say to you, ‘Friend, come up higher.’” So that means ‘that, in order that’. In other words, one is doing this for a reason and not just to express an attitude of personal self-denial. When means ‘at the time when the condition is met’. Might come means ‘to come, to go’ and is in the subjunctive which indicates a possibility. Having invited is the same word used in previous verses. Notice that there is no mention of some other person coming. Instead, the organizer of the wedding is coming and the promotion is only a possibility. Thus, there is no guarantee that the overall effort to marry objective and subjective will be guided by rational thinking. Friend is ‘philos’ and refers to someone with compatible mental networks that one feels comfortable being around. The hope is that focusing upon research rather than upon personal status will lead to a mindset that resonates with the overall project of marrying subjective with objective.
Come up is used once in the New Testament and combines ‘to, towards’ with ‘to go up, ascend’. Higher is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘higher, upper’. Moving up is interpreted as greater Teacher generality. In this case, one is both moving personally towards greater Teacher generality as well as heading in the direction of greater Teacher generality. For instance, I gave seminars on mental symmetry and cognitive styles in the 1980s and 1990s. This came to an end in 1994 when I gave a weekend seminar in a church and I received the response that my analysis was too secular. (You can download the booklet from that seminar.) In other words, I was committing the ‘sin’ of trying to marry religious mental networks with technical psychological analysis; I was moving from Mercy feelings of religious fervor to Teacher feelings of universal understanding. This rejection was eventually followed by the ‘coming up’ of using mental symmetry as a meta-theory to analyze many subjects at a more general level.
Verse 10 concludes, “Then glory will be to you before all those reclining with you.” Glory is interpreted as an external expression of internal character. And ‘be’ is explicitly mentioned. In other words, personal character will match expertise. One will not just have expertise but be an expert who has internally married mental networks of personal identity with rational technical thought.
Before literally means ‘in the face of’ which refers to the realm of social approval. All means ‘each part of a totality’. This goes beyond the feeling of a meta-theory that brings inspiration to an increase in Teacher generality that survives technical analysis. Reclining with combines ‘together with’, ‘up’, and ‘to lie, to be laid’. This suggests that the public praise will not necessarily come from everyone in the room but rather from those who rest in a similar Teacher understanding.
Verse 11 generalizes. “For everyone exalting himself will be humbled, and the one humbling himself will be exalted.” The previous verses looked at the two extreme cases. However, the principle also applies more generally. Everyone means ‘each part of a totality’ which indicates that this is a rule that actually applies and not just a platitude. Exalting means ‘to elevate’ and is used twice. Humbling means ‘to humble, to bring low’ and is also used twice. In both cases, what matters is what one does to oneself. If one tries to increase the Teacher generality of personal identity in Mercy thought, then one will end up losing Teacher generality. For instance, advocating for some specific marginalized group in the name of universal tolerance will end up bringing universal tolerance down to the level of tribalism. Similarly, attempting to impose conservative Christian morality upon America in the name of Christianity will bring evangelical Christian down to the level of tribalism. Going the other way, if one de-emphasizes Mercy feelings of personal identity, then one will naturally learn principles that are more universal and not just expressions of personal desire or prejudice.
Inviting Guests to a Meal 14:12-14
Jesus then turns to the one doing the inviting. Verse 10 expressed the hope that the one doing the inviting to this marriage feast would adopt an approach that resonates with rational analysis. Verse 12 says what the inviter should do to ensure that rational analysis takes precedence. “And also He was saying to the one having invited Him, ‘When you make a dinner or a supper, do not call your friends, nor your brothers, nor your relatives, nor rich neighbors.’” Invited is the same word that has been used several times and ‘him’ specifically mentioned. In other words, Jesus is turning his attention to the one who invited him to the meal.
Dinner is used three times in the New Testament, it means ‘breakfast, morning meal’ and comes from a word that means ‘without boundary, designation’. If one views a day as a period of time during which society is illuminated by some theory, then the first meal would be unbounded in the sense that the understanding is still somewhat vague and open-ended. Supper means ‘the chief meal, usually in the evening’. This would be when all the various loose ends of understanding are eliminated and a coherent system of technical rules is established. Verse 8 started with ‘when you are invited to a wedding feast’. Verse 12 is not talking specifically about weddings, but instead begins ‘when you make a dinner or supper’. The word make means ‘to make, to do’ and is interpreted as Server actions. Call means ‘to emit a sound’. This is not intelligent communication but rather merely attracting attention in Teacher thought. Friend is the same word that was used in verse 10 where the one sitting at the bottom was hoping that the inviter would refer to him as a friend and tell him to sit higher.
Verse 12 seems to say the opposite, by telling the inviter not to invite his friends. However, I suggest that a distinction should be made between what happens before a wedding feast and what happens during the feast, as well as distinguishing between wedding feasts, and dinners and suppers. The goal of a wedding feast is to integrate subjective mental networks with objective technical thought. Here it is very important to use rational thinking and then collaborate with like-minded individuals. That is because we saw in 13:35 that mental networks and technical thought can be integrated in several different, incompatible ways. A ‘dinner’, in contrast, involves the early stage of building an understanding where intuition guided by mental networks is still permitted, while a ‘supper’ involves the late stage of building an understanding where technical thought is being used to create a coherent system. During these transition points it is very important not to limit interaction to those with whom one is comfortable, because different points of view need to be included.
Continuing the verse 12, brother means ‘from the same womb’, which indicates having been mentally born by similar formative mental networks. For instance, evangelical Christians consider each other to be brothers. Looking at a secular example, Canadian identity was born in World War I as a result of Canadian success at the battle of Vimy Ridge. Relative combines ‘together with’ and ‘race, kind, nation, offspring’. For instance, Europeans consider citizens of other European countries to be relatives. Neighbor means ‘as adjoining one’s ground’, which indicates those who are next door either physically or rationally. Rich means ‘fully resourced, rich’. A rich neighbor is a source of resources because he or she is close by and fully resourced. For instance, Canada is a rich neighbor of the United States because it is (or at least was before the endless tariffs of Donald Trump) a primary source of oil, lumber, steel, aluminum, potash, and other resources for the United States. Verse 12 is saying that these various groups should not be invited. Cognitively speaking, this is because explicitly including these groups will merely reinforce existing biases.
Verse 12 continues by giving a reason. “Lest ever they also should invite you in return, and recompense be made to you.” ‘Lest ever’ is the same two Greek words that were used in the middle of verse 8, which actually mean ‘not, lest’ and ‘at some time’. In other words, something may happen at a future time to change the situation. Invite in return is used once in the New Testament and combines the word ‘anti’ with ‘to call’. Be made means ‘to come into being’. Recompense is used twice in the New Testament as a noun and means ‘to give matching payback’. I think the problem is that the wrong type of thinking is being used with the wrong elements. When developing an understanding, thinking needs to be guided by Teacher emotions of universality, wholeness, integration, order, and structure. Recompense is guided by Mercy emotions of economic and social exchange. The danger is that building a Teacher understanding upon how things work will be replaced by creating Teacher order out of my family, my relatives, and my neighbors. For instance, Europe thinks in terms of Germans, French, British, Spanish and so on, and the goal of the European Union is to bring harmony to these various cultural groups. This is good, but it is not fundamental. Instead, cognitive styles and cognitive modules are fundamental. However, when one thinks in terms of Germans, French, and British, then one will not think in terms of Mercy thought, Perceiver thought, and Teacher thought. The end result will be a Teacher ‘sun’ that is partially natural and partially artificial.
Verse 13 describes what one should do instead. “But when you make a feast, call the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind.” Feast is used twice in the New Testament and is the noun form of ‘to receive in a welcoming way’. Call means ‘to call’; it is different than the word translated ‘call’ in verse 12 that means ‘to emit a sound’. The idea is that when you call relatives, friends, and neighbors, then the mental networks of relationship will overwhelm any verbal content being said, turning the verbal call into a mere emitting of sound. In contrast, a verbal message is being conveyed in verse 13 because there are no competing mental networks.
A list of four kinds of handicapped people is mentioned. This same list is repeated in verse 21 in the next parable. Poor means ‘to crouch or cower like a beggar’. This describes people or groups who feel overwhelmed by the mental networks of others. Crippled combines ‘up’ with ‘maimed or disabled’ and is only used in this verse and in verse 21. This describes being incapacitated at the level of core mental networks in a manner that affects one at the level of Teacher generality. Lame means ‘lame, deprived of a foot’. The feet support the body. Similarly, core MMNs and core TMNs support the mind. ‘Deprived of a foot’ means that one is missing either Mercy or Teacher core mental networks. Blind means ‘blind, physically or mentally’. The eyes are used to construct a mental map of the environment. Thus, blindness is interpreted as being unable to use Perceiver thought to evaluate the surroundings.
Welcoming such people sounds at first glance like the advocating for the marginalized that is done by wokeism. However, I suggest that there are two crucial differences: First, wokeism starts with the Teacher overgeneralization of universal equality. An overgeneralization is incapable of altering the facts of reality. Thus, advocating for the marginalized turns into giving social approval to the marginalized without actually helping them. In contrast, a legitimate meta-theory such as mental symmetry places the marginalized within a cognitive map of mental wholeness. Wokeism replaces any moral map with the mental networks of the marginalized. Mental symmetry places the mental networks of the marginalized within a moral map of wholeness. Second, wokeism makes people feel good about their disabilities by reclassifying them as ‘lifestyles’. Wokeism demands that mental poverty, disability, lameness, and blindness be honored by the rest of society as moral goodness. Mental symmetry recognizes that the goal is help the poor, heal the crippled, cure the lame, and give sight to the blind.
The reason that one calls such people is because they realize that they need help at the level of core mental networks. Looking at this another way, Christians typically say that God’s grace is a free gift. Grace may be a gift but it is very definitely not free. Instead, the cost of grace is recognizing that one is a sinner in need of salvation. For instance, the average Christian supporter of Trump is convinced that others—especially liberals and wokeists—are sinners in need of salvation. But even when Trump betrays his closest allies, lies incessantly, befriends dictators, appoints idiotic sycophantic goons to his cabinet, and does his best to turn America into a fascist dictatorship, his Christian supporters are still convinced that they are not sinners in need of salvation. Likewise, wokeism is morally convinced that even the most deviant and self-destructive ‘lifestyle’ is not a sinner in need of salvation.
Looking at the four groups more closely, the poor recognize that their cultural and personal mental networks are inadequate and need saving. The crippled recognize that they suffer from fundamental flaws that prevent them from living a normal life. The lame recognize either that they are stuck in theory and need to live a real life, or stuck in concrete experience and need an education. The blind recognize that they cannot see because they keep bumping into painful situations in the real world. Sharing a legitimate understanding with such individuals will focus upon developing effective answers to real problems. Does such an invitation include the physical poor, crippled, lame, and blind? Maybe, but I think that two requirements need to be met: First, it must be possible to help these people, otherwise Teacher understanding will become mentally hijacked by physical and mental disability. Second, these people must want help, otherwise Teacher understanding will become mentally hijacked by emotional fixation.
The order may be significant. The poor recognize their need at a Mercy level. Thus, they do not have any existing Teacher theory to try to protect and they can be assisted at the Mercy level of specific experiences. The crippled suffer from deeper flaws. Thus, helping them is more challenging. The lame are missing an entire aspect of human thought, which means that one has to understand both abstract and concrete thought before it becomes possible to help this group. Finally, helping the blind requires an entire internal cognitive map. Summarizing, it appears that successfully helping one group does the homework that is required to successfully help the next group.
Applying these four categories to mental symmetry, evangelical Christendom is ‘poor’ in the sense of feeling threatened by the power and status of modern science and technology. Mental symmetry replaces the ‘poverty’ of following absolute truth based upon some marginalized book with the ‘wealth’ of reformulating Christian doctrine as universal cognitive truths. Cultural groups are prevented from living a ‘normal life’ in technological society by their fixation upon mental networks. Mental symmetry describes the process of transforming mental networks to become compatible with science and technology. Objective science is ‘missing a leg’ because it rests upon the Teacher emotion of paradigms while suppressing subjective Mercy feelings. Mental symmetry extends scientific thought to include the other ‘leg’ of subjective Mercy experience. Technical specializations are ‘blind’ because they fail to see the bigger picture. Mental symmetry gives sight to technical specializations by placing them within a larger meta-theory. In each of these cases, I have not been repaid. Instead, evangelical Christendom has turned to Trump, cultural groups have embraced advocating for the marginalized and the oppressed, objective science has filled its subjective vacuum with alternate knowing and/or mysticism, and specializations have embraced Teacher overgeneralizations that provide the feeling of a meta-theory.
Verse 14 describes the benefits. “And you will be blessed, because they have nothing to repay you. For it will be recompensed to you in the resurrection of the righteous.” The first benefit is blessing. Blessed means to ‘become long, large’ and this word is used in the Beatitudes in Matthew 5. Becoming long and large means acquiring generality in Teacher thought. For instance, mental symmetry is blessed because it is capable of being used as a meta-theory in Teacher thought. The verb ‘to be’ is explicitly mentioned, which means that this Teacher generality will happen at the level of being. Repay and recompense are the verb form of the noun ‘recompense’ used in verse 12 which combines ‘corresponding back’ and ‘give’. (The same Greek word is used twice in the same verse. The NASB, KJV, and three other literal translations all use the same English word for both occurrences of the Greek word. The BLB does not.) The first repay is preceded by the verb have, and objective ‘having’ is distinguished from subjective ‘being’. The temptation when dealing with subjective issues of being is that the interaction will degrade to the more objective realm of having. In other words, the focus will shift from underlying causes to symptoms. Interacting with those who cannot repay at the level of having reduces the probability that the focus will shift from underlying causes to symptoms.
The second benefit has to do with what I call a spiritual economy. Resurrection combines ‘up’ with ‘to stand’ and is the normal word for resurrection. Cognitively speaking, a new Teacher theory is bringing stability to Perceiver truth. Righteousness is defined as Server actions that are guided by Teacher understanding.
Looking more closely at righteousness, mental networks take ownership of behavior that they motivate. Behavior is normally motivated by personal, cultural, and social MMNs. Such mental networks guide interaction with family, relatives, friends, and neighbors. A person becomes righteous when behavior is motivated by a TMN of understanding and is not motivated by various MMNs. There are no social or family reasons to interact with the group mentioned in verse 13. Therefore, the only alternative is to be motivated by TMNs of understanding. The underlying assumption, of course, is that such TMNs of understanding exist. The resurrection of the righteous is described as something happening in the future. In the present, one is merely blessed for dealing with the needy by gaining Teacher understanding and by becoming righteous. In the future, one will be repaid by being able to access spiritual power at the level of Teacher generality and wholeness. Looking at this personally, I have been blessed mightily by mental symmetry, but I am looking forward to being recompensed in the resurrection of the righteous.
Parable of the Great Supper 14:15-24
Verse 15 begins with someone at the feast looking forward to the future. “And one of those reclining with Him, having heard these things, said to Him, ‘Blessed is he who will eat bread in the kingdom of God.’” Having heard means to ‘comprehend by hearing’ and this common word was previously used in 12:3, implying that not much comprehension has happened between. Reclining with was previously used in verse 10 to refer to the neighbors noticing one being promoted to a better seat. Other than the inviter saying ‘friend, come up higher’ in verse 10, this is the first time that anyone other than Jesus has spoken in the chapter. Bread is interpreted as intellectual food. The same two Greek words ‘eat bread’ were previously used in verse 1 to describe Jesus being invited to a house of the Pharisees to eat bread.
Blessed means to ‘become long, large’ and is interpreted as potential Teacher generality. The speaker postpones this Teacher generality to some future kingdom of God. In other words, research and teaching will be wonderful in the future when society is ruled by general Teacher understanding. The implication is that today’s world is too messy and too complicated to be guided by universal Teacher theories.
Jesus answers in verse 16 with a parable. A similar parable is also mentioned in Matthew 22 which is interpreted as the technological revolution of the 1970s being unaccompanied by any corresponding personal transformation. Verse 16 sets the stage. “But He said to him, ‘A certain man was preparing a great supper, and invited many.’” Man is the generic word for mankind. Supper refers to ‘the chief meal, usually in the evening’ and was previously mentioned in verse 12. This supper is referred to as great, which means ‘large, great, in the widest sense’ and is interpreted as Teacher generality. The meal in Matthew 22:2 is referred to as a ‘wedding feast’, indicating that the goal is to ‘marry’ objective with subjective. The goal of a ‘great supper’, in contrast, is to bring Teacher integration to all the technical specializations that have arisen during the course of the day. For instance, mental symmetry has been used as a meta-theory to tie together several technical specializations in a manner that is compatible with technical thought. Thus, mental symmetry could be described as a ‘great supper’. Invite means ‘to call’ and implies the use of intelligent Teacher thought. Many means ‘high in number’. For instance, mental symmetry uses a rational Teacher theory to ‘call’ to ‘many’ technical specializations.
In verse 17 the invitation goes out. “And at the hour of the supper, he sent his servant to say to those having been invited, ‘Come, for now it is ready.’” Supper is the same word for main evening meal that was used in verse 16. Ready comes from a word that means ‘fitting’. Now means ‘now at length, now after all this waiting’. Using Teacher overgeneralization to formulate a fake meta-theory is easy. One simply has to make some vague, general statement and then get a number of experts to agree that this vague pronouncement transcends their technical specializations. For instance, I encountered this kind of vague meta-theory when using mental symmetry to analyze second language acquisition. Larsen-Freeman has proposed complexity theory as a meta-theory for second language acquisition. The essence of this theory is that complexity orders itself. Larsen-Freeman recognizes that her meta-theory of complexity theory is more vague than the mathematical field of complexity theory, but in one paper she mentions about sixty scientists and philosophers from different fields who might be proposing a similar theory. This is all discussed, along with the appropriate references, in the paper that I wrote on second language acquisition.
Actually constructing a meta-theory is far more difficult, because one has to stumble across the right meta-theory and then spend a significant portion of one’s life becoming competent in a number of different technical specializations. That is why the invitation to ‘come for now it is ready’ happens at the hour of the supper. Such work can only start at the end of the day when many technical specializations have emerged. Constructing a ‘fitting’ supper requires going through a long process of learning about various technical specializations and then putting them together into a ‘great supper’.
Servant means ‘slave’ and is used five times in verses 17 to 23. In other words, the invitation to the great supper is not being based upon personal status in Mercy thought. This is not some revered expert making a public proclamation. Instead the inviting is being done by someone who is a ‘slave’ of Teacher understanding. For instance, what drives me to continue developing mental symmetry is not any feeling that I am some exalted person in Mercy thought. I have experienced sufficient personal rejection to have that burned out of me fairly thoroughly. What remains is the deep feeling that I am a slave to mental symmetry because it describes inescapable universal cognitive principles. This feeling is conveyed by the verb sent, which means ‘sent on a defined mission by a superior’. At this point, I do not just feel that I am being cognitively driven by the TMN of a meta-theory. I also sense that there are angelic forces behind this ‘sending’ who will ensure that I carry out my task, and this sense is supported by essays such as this which suggest that the God of the Bible is guiding human history.
Verse 18 summarizes the response. “And all with one voice began to excuse themselves.” That describes the kind of response that I have received to mental symmetry. The Greek begins with began (after an ‘and’) which means ‘commence, rule’. In other words, this is the primary response that immediately pops up and takes precedence over other responses. With actually means ‘away from’ and is almost never translated as ‘with’. One is the number one. And ‘voice’ is not in the original Greek. Thus, the Greek actually says, ‘and starting away from one’. That describes beginning from Teacher overgeneralization. All means ‘each part of a totality’ which means that wherever one goes one finds the same ‘starting away from one’. And excuse themselves means ‘to beg from, to beg off’. In other words, everyone is starting from the presupposition of a Teacher unity that transcends rational thought, and the ‘great supper’ is being rejected because it is replacing Teacher overgeneralization with a legitimate Teacher meta-theory. ‘Begging off’ means that no rational reasons are being given for this refusal. That is because the very use of rational thought threatens Teacher overgeneralization. ‘Away from’ is also appropriate because the assumption of unity is seldom stated explicitly, since any talking about Teacher overgeneralization imposes verbal content upon the Teacher overgeneralization that will threaten the overgeneralization. Instead, one observes that the rational statements are all proceeding ‘away from’ an overgeneralization of oneness.
I have experienced this again and again with mental symmetry. Educated technical specialists do not want a rational meta-theory. They want mysticism, mystery, universal equality, universal tolerance, unconditional love, alternate knowing, or random evolution—any kind of vague meta-theory that conveys the feeling of intellectual unity without actually imposing any content.
Verse 18 continues by mentioning the first excuse. “The first said to him, ‘I have bought a field, and I have need, going out, to see it. I beg of you, hold me excused.’” A field is ‘a field, especially as bearing a crop’. If grain is interpreted as intellectual food and ground as rational thought, then a field would represent some field of learning. Bought means ‘to make purchases in the marketplace’. This brings to mind 13:26 where those outside said that ‘you taught in our streets’, and ‘street’ actually refers to an open square. Have refers to having as opposed to being. Need means ‘a compelling need requiring immediate action’ which describes an emotional drive. Going out means ‘to go or come out of’. To see means ‘to see with the mind’. Buying a field would mean making an investment of time and energy within some specialization. Continuing to work within a specialization will cause the paradigm of that specialization to turn into a TMN that emotionally drives the researcher to continue thinking about that specialization. As Thomas Kuhn pointed out, the typical specialist solving technical puzzles is not aware that this thinking is being emotionally driven by the TMN of some paradigm. However, encountering a meta-theory will cause the specialist to become aware of this emotional paradigm creating a ‘compelling need requiring immediate action’ to ‘go out ’ and ‘mentally see’ the paradigm. Using an analogy, the technical specialist is like the tribal chief over some valley who is blissfully aware of what is happening outside this valley. Encountering a meta-theory is like realizing that other towns and villages lie outside the valley. This realization would create a strong need to define the borders of the tribal lands.
Beg means to ‘make an earnest request’. Hold means ‘to have’ and refuse is the word ‘beg off’ used earlier in the verse. ‘Begging’ implies an emotional need, while ‘having’ implies objective thought. Thus, some objective excuse will be given that masks the underlying emotional need. For instance, when I tried to publish my meta-theory on second language acquisition, a professor told me that professors do not like having a theory ‘look over their shoulder’. Similarly, I have been told in an objective manner that ‘your submission does not meet the requirements of our paper’ when this was obviously not the case. However, when I tried to push further, then this objective response was immediately followed by an emotional rejection. Stated analogically, it appears that it really is disconcerting for the ‘tribe’ of some specialization to emotionally realize that it is only one valley within a larger civilized world. The technical specialist may know objectively that his or her specialization is only one of many within academia, but encountering a meta-theory will generate an internal, emotional realization that goes further than recognizing that one occupies only one building on an academic campus.
The next excuse is in verse 19. “And another said, ‘I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I am going to prove them. I beg of you, hold me excused.’” Another means ‘another of a different kind’ which indicates that the second response is unrelated to the first. Yoke means ‘yoke, pair’ because animals are yoked in pairs. The other occurrence of this word in Luke was in 2:24 which referred to a pair of turtledoves. Oxen is the same word that was used in 14:15 to describe the ox falling into a pit. Buying is the same word that was used in verse 18 which was interpreted as some form of academic purchase. Verse 19 says that five pairs of oxen have been purchased. Five is interpreted elsewhere as five of the seven cognitive modules. Objective, specialized, technical thought minimizes Mercy thought by being objective and it minimizes Teacher thought by being specialized, leaving five cognitive modules. It compensates for this by ‘yoking’ mental processes with external methodology and institutions.
Going means ‘to transport’ which is interpreted as movement accompanied by change. Prove means ‘to put to the test to reveal what is good’. This is followed by the same Greek phrase of excuse. I think what is happening is that institutional consensus and experimental testing have substituted for being guided by a meta-theory that includes the subjective. Science began when individuals were guided by the meta-theory of a rational God creating a rational universe to pay the personal price required to discover the order of the universe. However, this has been replaced by institutional empirical research. Science still pays lip-service to the idea of adding to the body of knowledge, but the integration of this knowledge happens primarily because different disciplines all reside within different buildings on the same physical campus.
Verse 20 mentions the third excuse. “And another said, ‘I have married a wife, and because of this I am not able to come.’” Another again means ‘another of a different kind’. Wife means ‘woman, wife’. Married is the verb form of the word ‘wedding feast’ used in verse 8. Because of means ‘because of’ when followed by the accusative. Able means ‘to have power’ and is interpreted as active Perceiver thought. Notice that this third response gives an actual reason and not just an excuse. A ‘great evening meal’ presumably focuses upon integrating the various specializations of technical thought. Marrying a wife means adding mental networks to technical thought by finding some cultural or social application of this technical thought. Integrating objective and subjective is good but this is a ‘great evening meal’ and not a ‘wedding feast’. Applying some field of research will emotionally attach this technical thought to the MMNs of the application, and Perceiver thought will have insufficient confidence to move from these MMNs of application to the TMN of a meta-theory. For instance, this would have happened to me if I had been successful in giving seminars on cognitive styles.
The slave reports his failure in verse 21. “And the servant having come, reported these things to his master. Then the master of the house, having become angry, said to his servant.” Servant is used twice and actually means ‘slave’ implying that the servant is emotionally bound to submit to the TMN of the meta-theory. Having come means ‘to become near’. The implication is that doing this inviting will make the slave more aware of the meta-theory. Similarly, attempting to publish papers about mental symmetry in various fields has made me more aware of mental symmetry as a meta-theory. In addition, analyzing the responses that I received has helped to develop mental symmetry. Report means ‘to declare from’. This reporting is being done to ‘his lord’. This is a strange combination. On the one hand, slave and lord indicate an attitude of submission. On the other hand, ‘declaring from’ suggests that one is announcing with confidence from some other authority. Speaking from personal experience, mental symmetry has had two opposing emotional effects. On the one hand, the more I use mental symmetry, the more I feel like I am a slave to the theory who would find it impossible to stop using the theory. On the other hand, the continued success of being able to use mental symmetry to analyze new fields gives me great confidence in the validity of this theory, making it possible for me to make statements with authority.
Become angry means ‘to show settled opposition’ as opposed to some burst of anger. This describes Teacher anger in which Teacher thought becomes emotionally opposed to people and or groups who deliberately choose to reject Teacher understanding. Teacher thought thinks in terms of generalities. Therefore, Teacher anger motivates general changes that thoroughly deal with offending parties.
Master of the house means ‘master of the house’ and was previously used in 13:25 to describe the master of the house closing the door. Permanently closing a door is an example of the kind of thorough action that is motivated by Teacher anger. For instance, I mentioned earlier that my brother who is a Teacher person got angry at me in about 2004 for continuing to attend church. He responded by coming up with a totally new theory of personality that excludes essentially all of the cognitive principles being mentioned in these essays. In addition, he no longer accepts anything that I say about personality but rather belittles everything that I have done. That is an example of permanently closing a door. It is total and it is permanent.
The master of the house responds in a similarly radical manner in verse 21 by turning to a different audience. “Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the city, and bring in here the poor and crippled and blind and lame.” Go out was used in verse 18 to describe acquiring a big picture of the field. Quickly means ‘quickly, swiftly, speedily’. This speedy response is required because a ‘great supper’ has been prepared and no one wants to come to eat. Into means ‘to or into’ and street is the same word ‘street, public square’ that was used in 13:26. This would refer to various kinds of public forums. Lane is used once in Luke and means ‘the rush of a moving body, hence a crowded street’. This would refer more to social media with its flow of current trends and followers. These are both in the city, and a city is interpreted as civilization because cities were the centers of Greek civilization. This suggests going beyond academia and established academic thought to popular opinion.
Bring in means ‘bring into, lead into’ and here means ‘here, in this place’. This suggests that people who are outside of academia are being brought into the realm of academia in order to partake of the ‘great supper’. This is followed by the same list of four disadvantaged groups that was mentioned in verse 13. At first glance, this may sound like wokeism causing academia to fixate upon the marginalized and the oppressed. But wokeism only has a Teacher overgeneralization of universal equality while what is being served here is the ‘great supper’ of a legitimate Teacher meta-theory. The order of the four groups is slightly different. Verse 13 mentioned poor, crippled, lame, and blind. Verse 21 mentions poor, crippled, blind, and lame. This may be significant. What matters is that inviting these groups was suggested as an option in verse 13 but becomes a necessity in verse 21 because family, relatives, and neighbors refuse to come.
This is done in verse 22. “And the servant said, ‘Sir, as you did command, it has been done, and there is still room.’” Sir is the word ‘lord’ and the English suggests that a command is being obeyed. But done actually means ‘to come into being’ which suggests that the results are happening organically and naturally. And command means ‘to command which appropriately orders things’. This is not submitting to authority in Mercy thought but rather generating appropriate order in Teacher thought. What is happening is that the Teacher order of the meta-theory is naturally causing the various elements to come together in an ordered manner. Calling to the poor, crippled, blind, and lame ensures that no cultural or social mental networks will hinder this ordered rearranging, while going outside of academia to public squares and social media ensures that no TMNs of paradigms will prevent the rearranging.
Looking at this personally, I have done my best to prepare mental symmetry as a ‘grand supper’ but at the time of writing, there are merely a handful of people who are eating the meal. In other words, the supper has been prepared and an invitation has been sent out but almost everyone is giving excuses.
Room means ‘place’ and would refer to some location within the Perceiver map of knowledge. Be is explicitly mentioned indicating that some aspects of the subjective have not yet been populated.
The master responds in verse 23. “And the master said to the servant, ‘Go out into the highways and hedges and compel them to come in, so that my house may be filled.” ‘Lord’ and ‘slave’ indicate that this response is motivated by submission to authority and not by a desire to impose authority. This is different than wokeism which claims to submit to a Teacher theory of universal equality while actually using personal status to impose personal opinion.
Go out means ‘to go out’ and is the same word that was used in verse 21. Highway means ‘road, way, journey’ and refers to some path in Server thought. Hedge means ‘a fence or enclosing barrier’ and would refer to Perceiver walls that separate one region from another. Compel is the verb form of the noun that was used in verse 18 by the first excuser who felt compelled to mentally see his field. Come in means ‘to enter’. The compelling of verse 18 was caused by the feeling of the technical paradigm being threatened. This suggests that the compelling of verse 21 is driven by existing Server paths and Perceiver walls being threatened. This sounds scary, but it also describes a thorough solution being motivated by Teacher anger. This shaking of existing Server sequences and Perceiver walls could happen in many different ways, some more painful than others. However, the goal of this shaking is not to destroy Teacher order but rather to fill the house. Fill means ‘to fill entirely’.
Verses 21 and 23 describe the two stages in which a new Teacher theory is established. In the first stage, the old theory is replaced by the new. In the second stage, all exceptions to the new theory are eliminated.
Verse 24 describes the closing of a door. “For I say to all of you that not one of those men having been invited will taste my supper.” Not one means ‘no one, nothing at all’, it ‘shuts the door objectively and leaves no exceptions’. Men is not the generic word for mankind but rather means ‘man’ which is interpreted as male technical thought. Thus, verse 24 is referring to all branches of male technical thought without exception. However, this is limited to those who have been invited. Taste means ‘to taste, to experience’. Being unable to taste the supper suggests that positive Teacher emotions generated by the meta-theory will be overridden by negative emotions of being explicitly explained by the meta-theory. Looking at this cognitively, using mental symmetry to analyze some new specialization will generate positive Teacher emotions of ‘tasting the great supper’. In contrast, those whose specializations have been explicitly explained by mental symmetry will experience the unpleasant sensation of having a theory ‘look over their shoulder’ combined with the loss of reputation and social status that comes from having ignored a valid theory. Verse 24 does not necessarily say that these technical experts will not eat the meal, but rather that they will not be able to taste the meal.
The Cost of Following Jesus 14:25-27
Verse 25 says that the appeal to the masses is successful. “And great crowds were going with Him, and having turned, He said to them.” Going with combines ‘together with’ and to ‘transport’. It occurred once previously in Luke in 7:11 which was interpreted as the huge societal shifts during the 1970s. Crowd means ‘crowd, multitude’ and great means ‘high in number’; these same two words were also used in 7:11. Turn means ‘to turn, to change, to convert’. Turning to the crowds suggests a shift in attention from academic interaction to popular interaction.
Jesus speaks harshly in verse 26. “If anyone comes to Me, and does not hate his father and mother and wife and children and brothers and sisters and yes, even his life, he is not able to be My disciple.” Come means ‘to come, to go’. Hate means ‘to hate, detest, abhor’. Father would represent one’s source of male technical thought and ‘of himself’ is explicitly added. Mother indicates one’s source of female mental networks. Wife means ‘woman, wife’ and indicates the mental networks through which one applies male technical thought. Child means ‘anyone living in full dependence’ which refers to subsidiary mental networks. Brother means ‘from the same womb’ which indicates common sources of core mental networks. Sister is the feminine form of brother. Mentioning both brothers and sisters suggests that this includes colleagues with similar educational backgrounds as well as cultural compatriots. And yes means ‘still, yet, even’. Life is the word ‘soul’ which is interpreted as the integrated mind.
Biblehub tries to soften the intensity of this verse, explaining that hate means ‘to love someone or something less than someone else’, mentioning explicitly this verse as an example of loving family less than loving Jesus. However, verse 26 is not saying that one should hate family. Instead, verse 26 is presenting an if-then connection. The verse begins with if. And the list is followed by able which means ‘to have power’. ‘Able’ is followed by ‘to be’, which refers to subjective identity. Disciple means ‘a learner, a disciple’; it was last used in 12:22 and will be used three times in the rest of chapter 14.
The previous verses have made it clear that people are being emotionally prevented from following the TMN of a meta-theory because other mental networks are getting in the way. In verse 21 the master the house became angry in Teacher thought at this repeated rejection of rational Teacher understanding. Jesus is stating in verse 26 that Perceiver thought will only have sufficient confidence to follow the Teacher meta-theory if a person is emotionally repelled from competing mental networks. One must find the ‘father’ of the educational system repulsive. One must dislike the ‘mother’ of one’s background culture. One must find the ‘wife’ of the consumer society with its marketing distasteful. One must also dislike what is happening to the next generation. One must become estranged from both colleagues and from fellow believers. This distaste must extend to the way that everything is put together. When stated this way, it becomes apparent that most of these feelings are already present. Aboriginal knowing has recently been put at the center of secular education in Canada because we hate our ‘fathers’. Judeo-Christian culture is reviled as colonialism because we hate our ‘mothers’. People are looking for an alternative to consumerism because we hate our ‘wives’. Older people find it difficult to interact with younger people because we ‘hate’ our children.
It is interesting that both mothers and fathers are mentioned, as well as both brothers and sisters, but only wives and not husbands. I suggest that there is a cognitive reason for this. Male technical thought has become transformed by modern science and technology. Science and technology are often blamed for today’s social problems because of the inhuman nature of science and technology. But hating the ‘husband’ of male technical thought is not the solution. Instead, the problem is that female mental networks have not been transformed. Existing bonds of common expertise and common life experience are breaking down because we hate our ‘brothers’ and ‘sisters’. This hatred is sufficiently severe to cause many to feel as if their existing mental structure is falling apart. I am not suggesting that this hatred is good, and verse 26 also does not suggest that this hatred is good. Instead, it should be viewed as a cognitive necessity. If this level of extensive emotional distaste for existing societal mental networks is not present, then people will not be able to use Perceiver thought to study and embrace a Teacher meta-theory. ‘Be my disciple’ indicates that this level of emotional involvement is required to follow Jesus at the subjective level of core mental networks. The implication is that some of the crowd will try to follow a lesser message or attempt to follow in a more objective manner.
I wish that this principle were not true, but extensive experience has led me to conclude that it is an accurate assessment. Looking at this personally, I have mentioned my estrangement from my older brother. I am also currently estranged from my older sister over the deeply corruptive effect that Trump is having upon American evangelical Christendom. Without these estrangements, I am not sure if I would either be able or feel the need to embrace mental symmetry 100%.
Given the extensive disruptions that are happening in current society, the various hatreds mentioned in verse 26 will be present. It is vital to acknowledge these emotions and allow them to be expressed. It is equally vital to redirect these negative emotions in the positive direction of embracing rational Teacher understanding. Do not repress the hate and do not dwell on it. Instead redirect it in a positive direction, even if this means temporarily falling apart inside. For instance, Canada recently elected a new prime minister in response to Trump’s economic war on Canada. I have major questions about Mark Carney’s wokeist leanings. However, I really appreciate that he is trying to redirect Canadian hatred for Trump in the positive direction of building a new and better Canada.
Before continuing, it needs to be clarified that there are different kinds of hatred and they are not the same. The evangelical Christian is hated by secular society for daring to impose biblical morality upon society. That type of hatred is destructive because history shows that this societal imposition of biblical principles laid the foundation for modern wealth and prosperity. One can also hate evangelical Christianity for the parody of ignorant moral hypocrisy that it has become as a result of attempting to reimpose absolute truth upon society. That summarizes my hatred for current evangelical Christendom. Going the other way, one can hate secular academia for becoming tainted by wokeism and alternate knowing. That type of hatred is destructive because secular academia has discovered and continues to discover significant scientific and psychological principles. One can also hate secular academia for the hypocrisy of claiming to search for integrated, rational understanding while embracing irrational overgeneralizations and rejecting legitimate meta-theories. That summarizes my hatred for current secular academia. In both cases, one needs to hate what the system has become rather than hating and rejecting the system as a whole.
Verse 27 states this more simply. “Whoever does not carry his cross and come after Me is not able to be My disciple.” Carry means ‘to bear, carry, endure’. A cross is the implement of death by crucifixion, and ‘cross’ was mentioned once previously in Luke in 9:23 which talked about ‘taking up his cross’. That was interpreted as the digital revolution of about 2000 triggered by the development of the World Wide Web. A criminal carries his cross on the way to being crucified. In 9:23 the cross was being lifted up, suggesting greater Teacher generality. In other words, people kept increasing the Teacher generality of the World Wide Web even though they knew that this would lead to the end of existing societal structures, such as the demise of brick-and-mortar stores. In verse 27, people are embracing a Teacher meta-theory even though they know that they will have to endure the overturning and rethinking of existing cultural and personal MMNs. I know what this feels like because every time I start a new project with mental symmetry, I know that this will deepen the cognitive and social gulf between me and the average person.
However, there is no inherent salvation in merely carrying one’s cross. Instead, this must be accompanied by the positive element of ‘coming after me’. Comes means ‘to come, to go’ which indicates that this is an active process that goes beyond passively assenting to some set of beliefs in Perceiver thought. After means ‘behind, after’, and ‘me’ is explicitly mentioned. Coming after means that a process of transformation is starting and that one has to keep up with the new that is emerging by continually being willing to allow the old to fall apart and die.
Verse 27 concludes with the same Greek phrase that finished verse 26. If one does not continually allow the old to die in favor of the new, then Perceiver thought will lose the ability to follow Jesus at the level of being. Looking at this more carefully, Perceiver thought can gain the confidence that is needed to function within emotional topics but Perceiver thought by itself is incapable of tackling core mental networks. Instead, Perceiver thought has to be helped by some positive emotion, such as the positive Teacher emotion of growing understanding, or in this case, the positive emotions of identity and society being transformed. The important point is that these positive emotions only provide a temporary window of enabling transformation. One must embrace the change when it is happening or else one will turn into a conservative who becomes incapable of embracing further change. I do not know how long these windows of opportunity last, but I do know that they eventually close.
Two Analogies 14:28-33
Verse 28 turns to an analogy. “For which of you, desiring to build a tower, does not first, having sat down, count the cost, whether he has enough for its completion?” Tower means ‘a tower or castle’ and is used one other time in Luke in 13:14 which talked about the tower of Siloam collapsing. That was interpreted as the collapse of the mindset of regarding the Bible as the source of absolute truth. In verse 28, a new tower of truth is being constructed. Desire means ‘to desire, wish’. Of means ‘out from within’ which suggests that this desire is emerging out of the disciples of Jesus. Build means ‘to build a house’. In other words, those who are following this new meta-theory want to create a new tower of refuge from the outside world within which they can live. Looking at this cognitively, developing a Teacher understanding will lead to the formation of Platonic forms of ideal possibility within Mercy thought. These Platonic forms will attract the attention of Exhorter thought, leading to a desire to express these internal images of perfection externally in the real world. However, wanting to externalize Platonic forms is quite different than actually turning Platonic forms into reality. History shows that attempts to turn utopia into reality usually fail when meeting the hard facts of the real world.
First indicates the first step. Sit down means ‘to sit, to set’ which means pausing in order to evaluate the situation before starting. Count is used twice in the New Testament and literally ‘means to use pebbles in enumeration’. A pebble represents a small fact. Enumerating pebbles means using technical thought to look at the simple facts of reality. Cost is used once in the New Testament and comes from a word that means ‘to tear, consume’. Thus, sitting down and counting the cost means descending from Platonic forms to the cold hard facts of reality in order to determine precisely what one will have to lose in order to achieve the goal. If is ‘a conditional conjunction’ which indicates that the cost might be too great. Has means ‘to have’ which implies that one will have to pay a price at the objective level of having in order to gain at the level of being. For means ‘to or into’ and ‘enough’ is not in the original Greek. Completion is used once in the New Testament and comes from a word that means ‘from now on’. ‘Having enough for its completion’ implies that one pays the price once at the beginning. But the original Greek is more accurately ‘having to or into from now on’ which suggests that there will be an ongoing cost at the objective level of having and there will be no indication of how long this cost will continue.
I think that the following cognitive principle is involved. One can demand emotional certainty either at the level of Teacher understanding or at the level of Mercy experiences. If one wishes to follow Teacher understanding, then one must be willing to endure uncertainty at the level of Mercy experiences. If one demands Mercy certainty, that one will be unable to follow Teacher understanding. The cost being described here is not something that one calculates at the beginning, pays, and then returns to a mindset of Mercy certainty. Instead, the cost is the willingness to remain within an uncertain state at the level of specific Perceiver facts and Mercy experiences. Using the language of physics, light can be either a Teacher wave or a Mercy particle but it cannot be both at the same time. Demanding that light exhibit the properties of a particle prevents light from acting as a wave and vice versa.
Verse 29 describes what happens if one does not pay the cost. “Otherwise, he having laid its foundation and not being able to finish, all seeing it may begin to mock him.” Laid means ‘to place’ which is interpreted as foundational Perceiver facts. Foundation literally means ‘something put down’. Thus, one is establishing certain Perceiver facts as foundational and decided to build upon these Perceiver facts. Otherwise means ‘for the purpose that’ which means that one does verse 28 for the purpose of avoiding verse 29. This is followed by ‘not, lest’ and ‘at some time’. Thus, it seems to me that there are two possible interpretations. One interpretation is that one builds a foundation of Perceiver facts and then at some time loses the Perceiver confidence that is required to continue building. The other interpretation is that one verbally asserts some foundational set of Perceiver facts but lacks the Perceiver confidence to actually use these facts as a foundation for building. In both cases, the fundamental problem is insufficient Perceiver confidence. (Insufficient Server confidence is usually not a fatal problem because Server confidence can always be increased through practicing and repetition.)
Finish is only used twice in the New Testament, in this verse and in the next verse. It combines ‘from out of’ with ‘to complete, to finish’. Being able means ‘embodied strength’ which indicates an ability to go from theory to practice. ‘From out of completion’ indicates that one is being motivated by Teacher feelings of wholeness and completeness. ‘Being able to finish’ means that Teacher feelings of wholeness continue to motivate even when one comes face-to-face with various MMNs within the real world. If this is inadequate, then one will still claim to be pursuing wholeness in Teacher thought while actually being guided by cultural and social MMNs.
That hypocrisy explains the reaction. All means ‘each part of a totality’. Seeing means to ‘gaze on for the purpose of analyzing’ and is the source of the word ‘theatre’. This is not just a simple looking but rather examining some situation in order to analyze what is happening. Mock combines ‘in’ with ‘play’. In other words, someone is not serious but is playing games. Begin means to ‘commence, rule’ and is in the subjunctive which indicates a hypothetical. Thus, the mocking may be the primary reaction that overrides other reactions. Putting this together, people will see that high claims about following a Teacher meta-theory are being made while in practice MMNs of culture are being preserved and promoted. Careful analysis may lead observers to conclude that this is all a game.
This can be self-fulfilling, because a Teacher meta-theory will only succeed in transforming cultural and social MMNs if it is followed fully to the end. Otherwise, following this meta-theory will turn merely into a game with no real consequences—even if the meta-theory itself is totally legitimate. What matters in verse 29 is not the validity of the meta-theory but rather the embodied strength that is required to turn a valid meta-theory into reality.
Verse 30 concludes, “Saying, ‘This man began to build and was not able to finish.’” Man is the generic word for mankind. This means that a specific human is being referred to. Began is the same verb used in verse 29 which means to ‘commence, rule’. Build means ‘to build a house’. Able and finish are the same two words that were used in verse 29. The specific person has insufficient embodied strength to behave out of completing and finishing. Teacher emotion will guide completing because Teacher emotion comes from structure and wholeness. Teacher emotion will also guide finishing because Teacher thought feels bad when there is an exception to the general rule. Note that the meta-theory itself is not being belittled or questioned. Instead, what is being questioned is the ability of some specific person to turn the meta-theory into reality.
Verse 31 uses another analogy. “Or what king, proceeding to engage with another king in war, will not, having sat down.” A king rules over some domain, and in verse 31 one king is fighting another king. Proceeding is the word ‘to transport’ which implies movement accompanied by change. And another is ‘another of a different kind’. Engage with combines ‘together with’ and ‘to throw’. This word is used one other time in Luke in 2:19 to describe Mary ‘pondering’ these things in her heart. Throwing is interpreted as moving through the air of Teacher thought. In this case, both kingdoms are using Teacher thought. War means ‘war, battle, conflict’.
A king could be viewed from Mercy thought as someone with great personal status but a king can also be viewed from Teacher thought as a ruler over some domain. The term ‘engage’ indicates a struggle at the level of Teacher thought. A struggle between two Teacher theories happens during a paradigm shift. In verse 31 a new theory is being developed, indicated by the ‘transporting’. This new theory is then challenging the existing theory leading to an intellectual war. The context has been discussing Teacher meta-theories and we saw earlier that most meta-theories that are followed today use a methodology that is incompatible with a legitimate meta-theory such as mental symmetry. Thus, a legitimate meta-theory is challenging competing meta-theories that are ‘of a different kind’.
Verse 31 continues, “first take counsel whether he is able with ten thousand to meet the one coming against him with twenty thousand?” Having sat down and first are the same two words used in verse 28 except in a different order. Take counsel is used once in Luke and is the verb form of ‘a resolved plan’. Able means ‘powerful’ which is interpreted as active Perceiver thought. ‘Is’ is explicitly mentioned indicating that Perceiver thought is having to deal with mental networks of personal identity. The first with is ‘in the realm of’. The second with means ‘among, with’ when followed by the genitive. I do not know what 10,000 and 20,000 represent. They are both big numbers and 20,000 is bigger than 10,000. Meet means ‘to meet, to encounter’. Coming means ‘to come, to go’. The idea here is that a new theory has to include enough details to be able to replace an existing theory. The term ‘in the realm of’ implies that the replacement theory has Teacher generality while ‘among, with’ suggests that the existing theory is more a collection of related theories.
Verse 32 suggests one alternative. “And if not, of him being still far off, having sent an embassy, he asks for peace.” ‘And if not’ indicates that the new meta-theory does not have sufficient detail to challenge the existing meta-theory. Far off means ‘far, far away’. This is followed by ‘being’. A theory is ‘far away’ from another theory when they are still interacting at the level of generalities. ‘Being far away’ suggests that the personal implications of following one theory versus the other have not yet become apparent. Embassy is used twice in the New Testament, it is related to the English word ‘presbyter’ and comes from the word ‘an older, venerated person’. Sent means ‘sent on a defined mission by a superior’. Peace means to ‘tie together into a whole’. In academia, the ‘older venerated persons’ are those who are recognized as historical experts in a field. For instance, Thomas Kuhn and Jean Piaget are recognized authorities. In neurology, Ann Graybiel and Edmund Rolls are examples of recognized authorities. ‘Sending an embassy’ would mean including the concepts of such established experts within a new theory. The goal is to maintain some form of academic wholeness by showing that the new theory may use different methods but it still has continuity with major aspects of the existing theory.
Putting this together, if one wishes to replace one meta-theory with a new meta-theory of a different kind, then one option is to overcome the existing theory through sheer numbers by including more details than the existing theory. If this is not the case, then the new meta-theory has to include sufficient established experts and theories from the old meta-theory—before the personal implications of a paradigm shift become apparent. Sending an ambassador is more than just quoting from academic papers and including academic references. Those merely add to the size of the army. For instance, I have spent the last fifteen years using mental symmetry as a meta-theory to explain a wide range of topics and systems, which includes writing academic papers with many references. This increases the size of the ‘army’ of mental symmetry. Sending an ambassador means showing that the new meta-theory include the theories and findings of major experts. For instance, mental symmetry refers often to the fundamental research done by Thomas Kuhn and Jean Piaget. Similarly, the paper that I just wrote on autism begins by saying that mental symmetry provides an integrated explanation that builds upon the primary existing theories of autism. Starting with this ensures that the new meta-theory will be seen as a ‘more whole’ version of the existing meta-theory rather than as a competitor.
‘Sending an embassy’ does not mean that the new meta-theory is merely a variation of the existing meta-theory. There are fundamental differences making them theories of a different kind. However, it is still usually possible to find ‘older venerated persons’ within the old meta-theory whose theories fit well into the new system. This is difficult to do with theology, because the combination of blind faith and mysticism really has messed up the thinking of theologians. However, it is still possible to show that one remains consistent with established theological doctrine and ancient authoritative texts such as the Nicene Creed, as well as being consistent with the ultimate ancient authority of the biblical Greek text.
Verse 33 concludes, “So therefore every one of you who does not give up all that he himself possesses, is not able to be My disciple.” So means ‘in this manner, in this way’ which means that the previous stories provide patterns to follow. Everyone means ‘each part of a totality’. Of means ‘from out of’. ‘You’ is in the plural and refers to disciples. In other words, this is how one should treat the new meta-theory. One must remain at the level of Teacher thought without descending to the tribal level of MMNs. And one must add sufficient details to the new meta-theory and/or build upon existing established experts. ‘From out of you’ suggests that these two parables are being directed to those who want to ‘come out of’ being merely followers to developing the meta-theory further.
Give up is used twice in Luke and combines ‘away from’ with ‘to arrange in an orderly manner’. All means ‘each part of a totality’ which indicates that this must be done in all areas and not just in a general hand-waving manner. ‘Giving up all’ means letting go of all the Teacher order of the existing meta-theory. That is because there is only room for one meta-theory, especially when competing meta-theories are of a different kind. Possess means ‘what pre-exists, is already under one’s discretion’. This describes any expertise or status that one has acquired within the existing system with its existing meta-theory. One has to be willing to let go of any connections with the old system.
‘Not able to be my disciple’ is the same Greek phrase that was used at the end of verse 27. Jesus is not demanding this as a dictator but rather stating that one will not have sufficient Perceiver power to be able to follow the new meta-theory if one violates these requirements. In verse 27, one had to be emotionally repelled by existing cultural and personal mental networks. In verse 33, one has to commit to the new Teacher meta-theory in a way that continues to focus upon Teacher integration and Teacher understanding.
Good Salt 14:34-35
The final two verses talk about salt. Verse 34 begins, “Therefore salt is good, but if even the salt becomes tasteless, with what will it be seasoned?” Good means ‘attractively good’ as opposed to intrinsically good. Therefore means that this statement follows logically from the previous statements. Salt preserves and seasons. Tasteless is actually the verb form of the word ‘moron’ which means ‘dull, stupid, foolish’. It occurs four times in the New Testament. It is translated twice as ‘fool’ or ‘foolish’ and it is used twice as an adjective for salt. Seasoned is used three times in the New Testament, each time connected with salt. However, Biblehub suggests that the word comes from a root that means ‘to raise, take up, lift’.
The reference to salt as a preservative makes sense within the context of being emotionally repelled by existing cultural and personal mental networks. When existing mental networks are being hated, then the natural response will be to turn into a conservative who tries to preserve mental networks of morality. This is acting as salt, which is a preservative. For instance, the typical evangelical Christian has responded to liberal rejection of traditional biblical standards by trying to be a salt to society that preserves and promotes social standards in order to prevent society from decaying. Verse 34 says that this is attractively good. For instance, the lifestyle, dress, and manner of the typical conservative Christian family looks far cleaner and neater than the average citizen. Just south of where I live is the conservative Dutch Christian town of Lynden, Washington. Wikipedia relates that “At one time, Lynden claimed to hold the world record for most churches per square mile and per capita, although that is unsubstantiated.” The town is clean, neat, pleasant, and attractively good.
However, since the implosion of evangelical Christendom as a result of the covid crisis and Trumpism, the typical American conservative Christian has literally become a moron, because rejecting secular liberalism has turned into rejecting anything that comes from mainstream media or secular universities. When one observes Donald Trump and his current cabinet, the primary adjective that comes to mind is moron. When conservatives turn into morons, then how does one lift them up into Teacher generality? Mental symmetry takes the content of biblical Christianity and lifts this up into a cognitive meta-theory of personal transformation guided by the goal of reaching mental and spiritual wholeness. I have tried many times to share my understanding of Christianity with Bible-believing Christians, but instead of being willing to be lifted up in Teacher thought, they have stubbornly insisted upon turning into morons. Not all of them are morons, but enough of them are sufficiently moronic that evangelical Christendom is now regarded as a tribe of morons. I know that these are harsh words, but I fear that they are accurate.
Verse 35 then examines two possible options. “It is fit neither for soil nor for manure; they cast it out.” For means ‘to or into’. Soil means ‘earth, land’ and is interpreted as the ground of human rational thought. Manure is used twice in the New Testament and the other occurrence was in 13:18 which talked about fertilizing the fig tree with manure. That was interpreted as wokeism focusing upon the marginalized and oppressed of society. Verse 35 says that neither of these options is possible. One cannot lead conservative morons to the ‘earth’ of practical common sense because even simple facts are now being rejected as fake news. Going further, one also cannot treat conservative morons as another example of the marginalized and the oppressed because they refuse to recognize that they are sinners in need of salvation. That is because they remain convinced that all significant absolute truth has been revealed and entrusted to them, while at the same time thinking and behaving like morons who have no concept of truth.
Fit is used three times in the New Testament and combines ‘well’ with ‘placed’. This is followed by the verb ‘is’. Thus, when one examines the conservative Christian at the core level of being, one concludes that they have become incompatible both with common sense and as some oppressed minority. Cast means ‘to throw’ which represents moving through the air of Teacher thought. Out means ‘outside, without’. Stated simply, nothing remains that is compatible with rational Teacher understanding. Everything has to be rejected. For instance, when I going to a Christian bookstore now, I find that most of the books are intellectual, cognitive, and spiritual garbage. I did not feel this strongly twenty years ago. Plus, I keep finding more shelves devoted to Christian fiction, emphasizing the growing disconnect between Christianity and reality. This does not mean that mental symmetry, or the Bible, no longer applies to evangelical Christendom. Mental symmetry can still be used to analyze the path that evangelical Christendom has taken to reach this condition. And the passage that we are currently analyzing suggests that the Bible still has meaningful things to say about evangelical Christendom.
One might think that the Bible would never talk about God being finished with evangelical Christendom. But I recently wrote a 160 page essay that analyzes the epistle of James as a detailed prophecy of Protestantism. All the other prophetic books that I have analyzed, such as the Gospel of Luke, place the current era within the middle of the book. The epistle of James is the only book where the current era corresponds prophetically to the end of the book. Thus, it literally appears that God’s book on Protestantism is coming to an end.
One might also think that verse 35 already applies now in June 2025. But I think that this verse is describing an even greater level of moron-ness than today. That is because verse 25 talks about great crowds following after a new meta-theory. I have learned through repeated personal experience that the Bible-believing Christian will naturally be repelled from mental symmetry because it ‘smells wrong’. Bible-believing Christianity emphasizes a Pharisaical mindset of absolute truth while mental symmetry looks for common cognitive mechanisms in different fields in order to uncover universal truth. Thus, if mental symmetry became well-known, then evangelical Christendom would instinctively reject it which would lead to an even fuller embracing of moron-ness than today. Looking at the bigger picture, the moron-ness of evangelical Christendom appears to be emerging in stages. The covid crisis removed the average person from ‘earth’ of common sense through extended quarantine. And many evangelical Christians rejected the organized, international response to covid as humans encroaching upon the universal domain of God. This laid the foundation for the current deeper rejection of common sense and societal organization. I suspect that verse 35 is referring to a still deeper level of conservative insanity.
Chapter 14 concludes, “The one having ears to hear, let him hear.” Having refers to having rather than being. Ears indicate the ability to hear words. The verb hear occurs twice and means ‘to comprehend by hearing’. The second occurrence is in the singular imperative, which is telling individuals to hear! (Biblehub has been updating its definitions. The webpage for ‘hear’ used to say ‘Usage: I hear, listen, comprehend by hearing’ and this phrase can still be found by searching for ‘comprehend by hearing’ but this specific phrase has been removed from the definition page. I hope that this is not the start of a trend.) The point is that hearing implies comprehension and understanding and the current definition is ‘To hear, to listen, to understand’.
Stated simply, verse 14 is saying, ‘If you currently have the ability to understand words at an objective level, then use that ability!’ Do not destroy your ability to understand words by appealing to some form of mystery or overgeneralization, by defending some cultural group, by retreating to blind faith, or by rejecting words from other groups as ‘fake news’.
Parable of the Lost Sheep 15:1-7
In verse 1, Jesus gets a new audience. “Now all the tax collectors and the sinners were drawing near to Him to hear Him.” Draw near means ‘to draw near, to approach’. In 14:25 great crowds were ‘transporting’ with him, indicating that both the message and the audience were being transformed as they interacted. Drawing near implies something deeper, which is a desire to get closer to the message. This sounds trivial, but my experience over the years is that the vast majority of people do not want to ‘draw near’ to mental symmetry. Instead, as soon as the theory starts to turn into a TMN, then people do their best to try to prevent themselves from drawing near to the theory. All means ‘each part of a totality’, which means that an entire group is drawing near and not just a few individuals within the group. Hear means to ‘listen, to understand’ and was used in the previous verse to warn people to understand the message if they had the ability to do so. Thus, the audience is not just listening but they are actively listening in order to comprehend.
However, this attentive audience consists of ‘tax collectors and sinners’. A tax collector is ‘a tax-collector, gathering public taxes from the Jews for the Romans’. The word combines ‘end, purpose, goal’ with ‘to buy’. One Bible Encyclopedia explains that “there were many forms of indirect taxation. Charges were made on all imports and exports, including the transportation of slaves. These were collected by the τελῶναι of the gospels. They examined goods and collected tolls on roads and bridges. There was also a market toll in Jerusalem introduced by Herod.” This term was used three times in Luke 5:27-29 where it was interpreted prophetically as the rise of the European Coal and Steel Community, the precursor to the European Union. Tax collector was also used twice in Luke 7:29-34 which was interpreted prophetically as the combining of Christianity with American conservatism in the 1970s. Sinner means ‘to miss the mark’ and the term ‘sinner’ was also combined with ‘tax collector’ in the two previous references in Luke just mentioned.
Verse 1 does not say that people whom others regard as sinners are coming to Jesus. That is mentioned in verse 2. Instead, verse 1 suggests that people who recognize that they are sinners are coming to Jesus. This is a huge step up, because the very concept of being a sinner is currently vehemently rejected. However, the word sinner actually means to fall short of some positive standard, which is different than the typical American evangelical definition of crossing some moral boundary. A new standard of thinking and behavior became evident in Luke 14. Verse 1 suggests that many people are realizing that they fall short of this standard.
Verse 2 makes it clear that the Pharisees and scribes do not regard themselves as sinners. “And both the Pharisees and the scribes were grumbling saying, ‘This man receives sinners and eats with them.’” Grumbling is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘through’ with ‘grumble, murmur’. In other words, there is no open verbal condemnation, consistent with the idea that the salt of society has become moronic. This brings to mind the current response of the conservative right to wokeism. Everyone is complaining, but very few are making coherent arguments or stating their opinions openly. Instead, everyone is grumbling and muttering. The addition of ‘through’ means that this grumbling will be even more pervasive than the grumbling of current conservatives about wokeism.
Pharisee means ‘a separatist, a purist’. A scribe is a ‘scribe or secretary’ and is less educated than the lawyers mentioned in 14:3. In 14:1, Jesus entered the house of a ruler of the Pharisees and spoke to the lawyers and Pharisees. In 15:2 the Pharisees and scribes are complaining that Jesus is receiving sinners and eating with them. Receive combines ‘towards, interchange’ with ‘to receive in a welcoming way’. Eat is used once in Luke and combines ‘together with’ and ‘to eat’. Eating represents consuming intellectual food. The complaint is that Jesus is ‘eating with sinners’. In other words, he is interacting at a collegial level with those who miss the mark. He is not just preaching to sinners, but rather interacting with them at an intellectual level that involves both teaching and learning. Verse 2 does not say that Jesus is drinking with sinners; he is not interacting with them at the level of Mercy experiences. However, there is mutual learning happening at an intellectual level.
That brings us to the larger question of the identity of these ‘tax collectors and sinners’. I am not exactly sure who they represent. That is because I think that we have now entered into the second day of the three days that it will take to reach Jerusalem. I say this because a ‘new day’ of society being illuminated by the sun of some theory has just begun which means that there is now a discontinuity between the present and the period being prophesied in Luke 15. Until now, we could extrapolate from the present because we were still in the same ‘day’. Such extrapolation no longer works when society enters a new ‘day’. However, some educated guesses can still be made.
The basic premise of absolute truth is that all important truth has been revealed to the group that now possesses this absolute truth. For instance, the evangelical Christian believes that all ‘truth’ has been revealed to Christians through the Bible. A Pharisaical mindset takes this one stage further by following the absolute truth of the Bible in a separate society. The Pharisees and scribes are not complaining in verse 2 about interacting with tax collectors but rather complaining about interacting intellectually with sinners. As far as a Pharisee is concerned, a sinner is someone who lives outside of the separatist community with its standard of absolute truth. Extrapolating from today, Christian evangelical support of Trump indicates that today’s Pharisees are willing to condone all manner of sinfulness, but they regard anything that smells of liberalism as sinful. Thus, I am guessing that the Pharisees in verse 2 are complaining about interaction with liberals. Looking at this personally, I was raised conservative and taught to reject secular liberalism. However, as I continue to develop mental symmetry, and as I continue to see evangelical Christendom implode, I find myself increasingly wondering if the so-called secular liberal might be potentially more open to mental symmetry, because the secular liberal does recognize the supremacy of Teacher thought as well as recognize the need for democracy, the rule of law, and rational thought. Verse 1 does not say that Jesus is entering into the house of a sinner. They are drawing near to him. Similarly, I feel no desire to turn into a secular liberal. However, I think that it would be mutually beneficial to interact with secular liberals within the context of the meta-theory of mental symmetry. I say this from personal experience, because for decades I have been developing mental symmetry by reading secular academic papers. What is new about verse 1 is a bidirectional interaction, because until now most of my interaction has been one way—though my academic papers are getting read. For instance, I just passed 6000 reads on Researchgate, which is respectable.
Going further, today’s Pharisee is not bothered about secular research, but rather simply ignores it as irrelevant fake news. However, evangelical Christians would get bothered if secular liberals started to talk about the Bible and Christian doctrine. Such interaction is possible because mental symmetry has been used to reformulate all Christian doctrine from a cognitive perspective, and I have now written essays on most of the New Testament. The response would be ‘thorough grumbling’. On the one hand, how could Bible-believing Christians complain if secular thinkers started discussing the Bible in detail? After all, today’s conservative Christian continually complains that the Bible has been marginalized by secular society. But on the other hand, mental symmetry approaches the Bible rationally from a cognitive perspective using a methodology that smells totally wrong to the conservative Christian because it lacks a sense of divine mystery and religious self-denial. Thus, there would be grumbling rather than open opposition and this grumbling would be thorough. This grumbling would come primarily from Pharisees who were attempting to follow absolute truth as well as scribes who base their theology in the opinions of religious experts. As for the tax collectors, my guess is that this implies some sort of economic application. I have written two long academic papers that examine economics from a cognitive perspective. These papers contain sufficient detail to make intelligent interaction possible.
Jesus responds in verse 3 with a parable. “And He spoke to them this parable, saying.” The parable begins in verse 4. “What man of you, having a hundred sheep, and having lost one of them.” Man is the generic word for mankind. Of means ‘from out of’. Thus, the parable is illustrating how Pharisees and scribes would respond to some situation. Having indicates the peripheral realm of having rather than being. Sheep are only mentioned in Luke in this verse and two verses later. Sheep are typically viewed as dumb animals but they are actually strongly social creatures. Thus, sheep would represent sheeple, people who are strongly motivated by social MMNs. Those who live a separatist lifestyle may claim to be following the Bible or some other holy book, but the moral behavior of the separatist group as well as the doctrinal statements of the separatist scribes are motivated primarily by MMNs of approval and disapproval from other members of the group. ‘Having’ indicates that social approval can only monitor external behavior. People cannot read each other’s minds. A separatist society has no way of monitoring or judging internal thoughts and motivations. Instead, what matters is never talking or behaving in a manner that triggers mental networks of forbidden behavior. One must always give the appearance of conforming to the separatist standards. This explains why the interaction with sheeple is at the level of having rather than being. I am not sure what hundred represents, but it is a nice round number which implies completion. The number 100 is used in one other parable in Luke in 16:6-7 which suggests that these two parables may be related.
Lost means ‘to destroy fully’ and is used eight times in chapter 15, suggesting that this is a theme of this chapter. One is the number one. The phrase is more accurately, ‘and having been destroyed fully from out of them one’. This is traditionally interpreted as one of the sheep being lost and the parallel passage in Matthew 18 uses the term ‘lead astray’, consistent with the idea of one of the sheep being led astray and getting lost. The sheep of Matthew 18 are interpreted prophetically as the soldiers of World War I. But what is the point of searching for a sheep that has been destroyed fully? Thus, another possible interpretation is that the mystical oneness that brings unity to absolute truth has been fully destroyed. This would happen if Christian doctrines that are currently regarded as incomprehensible mystery became widely discussed as cognitive principles in a manner that referred directly to Bible verses. It would then become very difficult to continue asserting that core Christian doctrines are a mystery. What would have been destroyed is the mental ability to pull oneness ‘from out of them’.
Verse 4 continues. “Does not leave the ninety nine in the open field, and go after the one having been lost, until he finds it?” Leave behind means ‘to leave behind, to forsake’. In Matthew 18, they are ‘sent away, released’, a weaker verb. Open field means ‘an uncultivated, unpopulated place’ and is usually translated as wilderness or desert. In means ‘in the realm of’. In Matthew 18, the sheep are left on a hill, implying that some Teacher order remains. Being forsaken in the realm of an unpopulated place suggests that the main response of the separatist movement is to separate itself from society by occupying places where there are no people. This could include setting up communities out in the country apart from cities, and it could also mean adopting cultural practices that are uncommon. For example, Mennonites have traditionally responded to persecution or government control by setting up colonies in unpopulated places. Looking at a more abstract example, the new theory that my brother constructed to replace mental symmetry is a complicated theory based upon hundreds of loops that is unlike any other theory of personality that I have encountered. The primary purpose of this theory appears to be to occupy uninhabited intellectual territory.
Go means ‘to transport’ which means that searching for the lost sheep generates personal change. Having been lost is the same word ‘to destroy, to perish’ used earlier in the verse. This searching continues until he finds it. This searching matches the process by which a religious leader typically finds mysticism. The starting point is some complexity exemplified by 99 sheep. This complexity is then forsaken and a search is continued until breaking through to some feeling of cosmic unity. Scientific mysticism regards cosmic unity as a oneness that transcends the existing fragmented complexity of scientific specializations. Verse 4 may be describing a new religious method of achieving cosmic unity, driven by the goal of restoring the feeling of mystery that was lost when secular thinking started to analyze the Bible and core Christian doctrines. This would create a motivation to re-discover the feeling of divine mystery that was lost. One possible route is to start with a separatist community which uses content that is different than the content of society and then move beyond this isolated context to a feeling of cosmic unity.
In verse 5, the lost sheep is found. “And having found it, he lays it on his shoulders, rejoicing.” Found is the same word used three words earlier in verse 4. Lay combines ‘upon’ with ‘to place’. Shoulder is only used twice in the New Testament. The other occurrence is in Matthew 23:4 which contains the same Greek phrase ‘lay upon the shoulders’. That was interpreted as the excessive technical regulations of modern society. In Matthew 23, the laying was upon the shoulders of humanity, while in verse 5, the laying is upon his own shoulders. Rejoice means ‘glad for grace’ and is one of several related words that are associated with positive Teacher emotion. Putting this together, when the search to rediscover mysticism is successful, then the searcher is driven by positive Teacher emotions to ‘shoulder’ various technical responsibilities. Catholic and Orthodox writings on mysticism describe in extensive, painful detail what this entails.
In verse 6, this Teacher joy spreads to the rest of the community. “And having come to the house, he calls together the friends and the neighbors, saying to them.” Having come means ‘to come, to go’. House means ‘house, household’ and would represent the separatist community. The order is significant. That is because one starts with complexity and then breaks through emotionally to a mystical encounter. The mystical experience itself transcends rational thought and cannot be discussed. However, thinking about the mystical encounter after it has happened will cause a TMN to form, which will drive the mystic to talk about the mystical experience. That is why the calling together happens after having come to the house. Call together combines ‘together with’ and ‘to call’. Calling indicates something happening verbally, while calling together indicates that this is bringing unity to the group. ‘Saying to them’ emphasizes the presence of a verbal message. Thus, the verbal description of the mystical experience provides an alternative to a Teacher meta-theory.
Friend is ‘philos’ which is interpreted as people with compatible mental networks. Neighbor comes from the word for ‘ground’, which is interpreted as human rational thought. Luke 14:12 explicitly instructed not to invite friends and rich neighbors to a ‘great evening meal’. In verse 6, fellow members of the community who share similar social mental networks are being called together. The reference to ‘neighbor’ suggests the presence of locally rational thought. In other words, the typical evangelical Christian is able to use rational thought locally when dealing with local issues. However, rational thought is not supposed to be used when thinking about larger issues, such as global warming or covid pandemics.
Verse 6 continues. “Rejoice with me, for I have found my sheep, the one having been lost!” Found is the same word used at the beginning of the verse. Lost means ‘to destroy, to perish’. Rejoice with is in the imperative and is the word ‘glad for grace’ used earlier with the prefix ‘together with’. Thus, the mystical breakthrough of the searcher becomes imposed upon the rest of the community as a Teacher meta-theory. Notice the inconsistent language. On the one hand, this rediscovery is described verbally merely as finding one sheep among many. But on the other hand, everyone is told to participate in the Teacher joy and this sheep is described as one that was destroyed and not just lost. Saying this more carefully, the mystical encounter that motivates the leaders will not be described to followers but rather will tend to remain hidden. Instead, the average ‘sheep’ will view the leaders from a Mercy perspective as sources of ‘truth’. What the sheeple will notice is that their leaders are emphasizing the mystery of God while also relating the joy of having personal encounters with God.
Jesus concludes in verse 7. “I say to you that in the same way there will be joy in heaven over one sinner repenting.” The previous verses have described what the leaders of the sheep are saying (notice that they are not referred to as shepherds). In verse 7, Jesus comments. The same way means ‘in this manner, in this way’ which means that the parable provides a pattern that can be fulfilled in another manner. Joy means ‘joy because of grace’ and is related to the word ‘rejoice’ that was used in the previous two verses. However, the joy in verse 7 is happening within the realm of heaven rather than some nebulous mystical realm of oneness. Heaven is defined by mental symmetry as a region within Teacher thought that is compatible with human existence. This definition can be applied cognitively and also to an actual heaven. Be means that this is happening at the level of being. In verse 4 the adjective ‘one’ was not followed by anything else, implying that what has been destroyed is the oneness. In verse 7, ‘one’ is followed by ‘sinner’, and the sinner repents, which means to ‘think differently after’. Thus, there is a change in thinking as opposed to a breakthrough into mystic oneness. Looking at this cognitively, Teacher thought feels good when exceptions to the general rule are eliminated.
Verse 7 finishes, “Rather than over ninety nine righteous ones who have no need of repentance.” Righteous is defined as Server actions that reflect Teacher understanding. Righteousness presupposes the existence of a general theory in Teacher thought that is capable of emotionally guiding behavior. A mystical concept of God cannot lead to righteousness because mysticism transcends all human content. Need means ‘need, necessity’ and have suggests that this need is at the level of having. Repentance means ‘a change of mind’ and is the noun form of ‘repent’ used earlier in the verse. Clarifying that this has nothing to do with mysticism, the ‘mind’ in ‘a change of mind’ means ‘mind, understanding, intellect’ which refers directly to rational thinking. ‘Having no need’ implies that there may be a need at the deeper level of being. Thus, there may be righteousness in most areas but this righteousness is lacking when dealing with the subjective level of being.
This relates to an asymmetry between Teacher thought and Mercy thought which can be illustrated by the physical body. From a Teacher level, the laws of physics apply equally to all physical matter including biological physical matter. But from a Mercy level, the physical matter that makes up my physical body is far more important to me than the physical matter contained within some table or chair that I have. Therefore, what Teacher thought may regard as merely removing some exception to a universal Teacher theory, Mercy thought may regard as essential for personal existence.
Verse 7 indicates that the parable of the lost sheep can be interpreted from a different perspective that involves the Teacher content of heaven and righteousness. Therefore, we will go through verses 4 to 6 again from the perspective of extending a rational Teacher meta-theory. What has been destroyed by mysticism is the idea that it is possible to use a meta-theory to bring oneness to various technical specializations. For instance, interacting with secular specializations guided by mental symmetry has made it apparent that secular thought does not have an adequate rational meta-theory. In fact, the very idea of a rational meta-theory has become destroyed by various inadequate substitutes. However, the only way to build a legitimate meta-theory is by interacting extensively with secular technical specializations, because a legitimate meta-theory provides a framework for these specializations. Thus, one has to ‘receive sinners and eat with them’.
14:25 talked about great crowds ‘transporting together with’ Jesus. Presumably this mutual transporting will lead to unpopulated regions that are new to human society. These crowds have to be ‘abandoned’ for two reasons. On the one hand, they need to learn to think for themselves so that they can stop being ‘sheeple’. On the other hand, the problem of mysticism has to be addressed because progress will come to a halt if it is not. Speaking from personal experience, whenever I have attempted to make progress with other people I have eventually run into a mental brick wall of mystery and cosmic unity. Thus, this oneness eventually has to be addressed. And I have found that attempting to pursue this question is itself a transporting that requires a change in personal character. Discovering a legitimate meta-theory also leads to a burden that one must shoulder. The burden is that one can no longer appeal to mystery. Instead, one must always follow rational thought. For instance, the main reason that I am continuing to go through Luke is not to convince others, though I do hope that others will benefit. Instead, the primary reason is that I have to follow a path that starts from understanding and then extends to application. Therefore, this cognitive analysis is providing me with a rational foundation that makes further progress possible. There is rejoicing in that path because gaining understanding generates positive Teacher emotions. And the purpose of a meta-theory is to bring unity to the technical specializations of others so that they can do their research within the framework of a meta-paradigm.
Going further, I have found that using mental symmetry as a meta-theory frees secular specializations from the mental bondage of materialism. That is because mental symmetry remains consistent with empirical evidence while being one step removed from physical evidence. This makes it possible to include the supernatural, the spiritual, and the divine in a rational cognitive manner while continuing to approach the physical world in a rational manner, which leads to rejoicing in heaven. Going the other way, using mental symmetry as a meta-theory also makes it clear that so-called secular disciplines are actually partial examples of the righteousness of God. Secular science does not need to be abandoned or destroyed as evangelical Christianity now asserts. It also does not need to repent because it already is righteous. But this secular righteousness is at the peripheral level of having. Thus, the righteousness that secular science already has needs to be extended to include the subjective. That is why the repenting of the one sinner leads to rejoicing in heaven, because the repenting of this one sinner extends the righteousness of science to the subjective, making it possible to go beyond materialism to include cognitive, religious, and real heaven.
Putting this parable into a larger context, the Teacher overgeneralization of mysticism has been interpreted as a cognitive process and it has also been noted that a similar cognitive process is used when developing a legitimate meta-theory. Such a reformulation is cognitively important because it ‘covers’ the raw Teacher overgeneralization with a Server sequence that is compatible with rational thought. The basic premise of mysticism is that God in Teacher thought transcends all rational content, and pursuing mysticism requires disabling Perceiver thought. The parable of the lost sheep added rational content to mysticism by pointing out that the mystical experience actually follows a standard cognitive sequence in Server thought that can be rationally described.
Parable of the Lost Coin 15:8-10
The next parable involves a woman. References to women are interpreted as the mental networks of female thought. Verse 8 begins, “Or what woman having ten drachmas.” Woman is the normal word that means ‘woman, wife’. Drachma is only used in the New Testament in this verse and the next. It means ‘as much as one can hold in the hand, a drachma (a Gr. coin made of silver)’. Both silver and gold represent wealth, but silver represents the exchange of wealth while gold represents the accumulation of wealth. Hands represent the use of technical thought, but hands are being used here not to manipulate objects but rather to hold the silver. I am not sure what ten represents, but it is a smaller number than 100. The verb having is again used. These ten drachmas probably were part of a dowry that was passed down from mother to daughter. Putting this together, the parable is talking about economic exchange from the female perspective of mental networks. Economics normally involves male technical thought and business is a prime example of male technical thought. The hands of technical thought are being used in this parable but at the larger level of a handful. And the wealth involves mental networks of family history.
The previous parable pointed out that the mystical experience actually follows a predictable cognitive Server sequence. A mystical encounter combines Teacher overgeneralization with Mercy identification. Teacher thought asserts that ‘all is one’ and then Mercy thought identifies with this cosmic oneness. Mysticism is a cognitive ‘dog in the manger’ because it disables the subjective realm of mental networks from functioning. It occupies the subjective realm of a Teacher meta-theory, refuses to eat from the hay of intellectual food, and growls at anyone or anything that dares to approach. This parable describes what can happen within subjective mental networks if the dog in the manger of mysticism is removed.
What can emerge is what I refer to as a spiritual economy, based upon cognitive ownership and cognitive exchange. A mental network will take ownership of any behavior that it motivates, which I refer to as cognitive ownership. This fits the parable because silver coins represent economic exchange and these belong to a woman which represents mental networks. My hypothesis is that the spiritual realm interacts with the human realm by empowering mental networks. Thus, an economy that involves mental networks could be referred to as a spiritual economy.
For instance, when a person is put on trial for some crime, one of the primary questions is determining the motive for the criminal behavior, and the punishment will vary depending upon the motive. Similarly, motive provides a fundamental role in the process of personal transformation. Cognitive ownership changes whenever some behavior is motivated by a new mental network and not motivated by the existing mental network. Jesus describes a cognitive exchange in Matthew 6 where he says that one will only receive a reward from God for righteous deeds if one does not receive a reward from people. Stated cognitively, behavior is normally motivated by MMNs of social approval. But if one develops a concept of a God who behaves in a righteous manner, then this concept of God can turn into a TMN that is capable of motivating behavior. Matthew 6 says that this TMN of a righteous God will only take ownership of righteous behavior if this behavior is not motivated by MMNs of approval.
Notice that this type of cognitive exchange requires the concept of a righteous God. A God of mysticism is incapable of guiding human behavior in a righteous manner because mysticism transcends all human behavior. Thus, mysticism will cause the ‘coin’ of ownership by a TMN to become destroyed. However, verse 7 described a heaven of Teacher thought that is characterized by righteousness, making it possible to establish a spiritual economy that includes the ‘coin’ of righteousness. Verse 8 begins with an or suggesting that this parable provides an alternative viewpoint to the previous parable.
In this parable, the silver drachmas are not being used to purchase items but rather are being preserved as items of value and adornment that could be used to purchase items. Similarly, the goal of a spiritual economy is to perform cognitive exchanges in order to become a ‘beautiful’ person who is mentally capable of being guided by higher motives when interacting with others.
Verse 8 continues, “If she should lose one drachma, does not light a lamp and sweep the house, and seek carefully until she finds it?” Verse 8 specifically states that what is being lost is one drachma and not just a generic ‘one’. Lose is the same word ‘to destroy, to perish’ used earlier but it is in the subjunctive, indicating a hypothetical situation, as opposed to the sheep which is described as definitely lost. If a drachma has been destroyed, then this implies that some aspect of a spiritual economy has been destroyed. For instance, determining motive and assigning cognitive ownership is a fundamental aspect of current society, and it is possible to experience cognitive exchange and become motivated by different mental networks. But mysticism has removed the coin of righteousness from this spiritual economy.
Light means ‘to fasten to’ and is used for lighting a lamp or a fire. A lamp is ‘a portable lamp’. Light represents the light of Teacher understanding. A lamp indicates a Teacher understanding that illuminates me and my surroundings. Mysticism combines Teacher overgeneralization with Mercy identification. A lamp, in contrast, is a Teacher generalization that shines light upon personal surroundings in Mercy thought. And ‘fastening to’ a lamp suggests that this lamp of Teacher understanding is being permitted to shine upon personal identity by fastening to it in some way. Such fastening would naturally happen with female thought, because female thought combines TMNs of beauty, wholeness, and understanding with MMNs of personal identity.
Sweep means ‘to sweep, to clean by sweeping’. This verb occurs one other time in Luke in 11:25 which talks about an unclean spirit returning to an empty house that has been swept and put in order. That was interpreted prophetically as the World Wide Web sweeping clean the house of social interaction while leaving a vacuum that has since been filled by the unclean spirits of social media. In verse 8, the woman is sweeping the house, which suggests a cleaning and clarifying of the subjective.
In other words, suppose that one wants to determine one’s motives. This requires the lamp of a Teacher understanding that makes it possible to determine motive. One then ‘sweeps the house’ in order to clear away any secondary elements that would disguise underlying motives. Seek means ‘to seek, to search for’ which implies that one is looking for some specific item. The man looking for the lost sheep was not described as ‘seeking’, because one cannot seek a mystical experience that has no form. Carefully is used once in the New Testament and combines ‘upon’ with ‘to care, to be concerned’. This implies that one is being motivated by feelings of concern for some living mental network. This searching continues until the coin is found.
Verse 9 is almost identical to verse 6, except in verse 6 the calling of friends and neighbors and rejoicing is preceded by the man coming to the house, while the calling together begins in verse 9 with ‘having found’. With mysticism, a mental transition has to be made between the formlessness of the mystical experience and talking to others about this experience. In contrast, it is possible to explicitly discuss the coin of righteousness with others without having to make some mental transition.
Verse 10 is similar to verse 7 but is more personal than verse 7. “Thus I say to you, there is joy before the angels of God over one sinner repenting.” Thus means ‘in this manner’ which means that there is an analogy. Both verse 7 and verse 10 talk about joy, which refers to Teacher emotion. In verse 7, the joy is ‘being’ which indicates that Teacher understanding has extended to the subjective realm of being. In verse 10, the joy comes into being, indicating the gradual emergence of a new form of Teacher pleasure. Similarly, making a transition from mysticism to righteousness is a paradigm shift at the level of being. This would enable a spiritual economy to develop as people chose to become righteous by being motivated by the TMN of a God of righteousness.
Discussions about the spiritual economy in other essays suggest that this will be accompanied by spiritual power empowering mental networks. We will see when looking at the parable of the Prodigal Son that verse 25 appears to be describing some form of charismatic renewal, but I do not think that a full-fledged spiritual economy will emerge in Luke. Instead, I suspect that verse 10 may be referring to a spiritual economy functioning primarily at a cognitive level expressing itself as some form of charismatic renewal, while the giving of the Holy Spirit in Acts 2 is describing a more complete version of the spiritual economy. I say this because the book of Acts historically follows the Gospel of Luke. Thus, it makes sense that it would also follow it prophetically. The Gospel of Luke culminates in chapter 24 with an integrated cognitive understanding of history and incarnation which would lay the foundation for a spiritual economy to merge in Acts.
Before means ‘in the presence of’ which indicates the personal realm of social interaction. But this social interaction is not happening with people but rather ‘before the angels of the God’. Angel means ‘angel, messenger’ and can refer either to humans who work with the messages of abstract thought or to angelic beings who live within the angelic realm of heavenly messages. ‘Angels of God’ indicates that these messages are coming from a concept of God in Teacher thought. This is not possible with a mystical God because mysticism transcends all human communication. In fact, mysticism is threatened even by communicating about mysticism. However, angelic communication is possible with a God of righteousness.
In verse 7, the 99 sheep are described as righteous who have no need of repentance. The other nine coins are not mentioned in verse 10. Instead, verse 10 refers only to the sinner who is repenting. This implies that the coin that is being found involves the concept of righteousness and that Teacher joy emerges gradually as a result of finding this coin.
Looking at this from a scientific perspective, Thomas Kuhn pointed out that science thinks in terms of exemplars, viewing Server actions as an explicit part of learning science. That is because the student learns science by following the Server sequences of solving characteristic problems. Kuhn contrasted this with philosophy, which tends to regard Server actions as something added to logical reasoning rather than something inherent within rational thinking. Using the language of the parable of the lost coin, science has discovered an additional coin of Teacher pleasure in which one goes beyond merely studying abstract theory in a philosophical matter to learning through righteousness in a scientific manner.
Using mental symmetry as a meta-theory has given me a feeling for how this parable works. When I evaluate some book or system, I ‘sweep the floor’ in order to determine what is truly foundational and what is merely a matter of opinion or social convention that needs to be ‘swept away’. The premise of postmodernism is that everything is merely a matter of opinion or social convention and needs to be swept away. But when everything is swept away then all that remains is the sweeper doing the sweeping, who then becomes by default the source of absolute truth. Instead, the goal of mental symmetry is to discover missing coins of value.
The lamp-guided sweeping and searching of mental symmetry is itself a form of righteousness because one is being guided by a Teacher understanding of how the mind works to evaluate what is truly foundational in the subjective—the ‘floor’ of the ‘home’. And when one questions the emotional assumptions of some system or group, then one will obviously not receive approval from that system or group. Thus, the only remaining option is to be motivated by the lamp of Teacher understanding. Continuing this searching will lead to many cognitive exchanges in which one chooses to follow the TMN of a concept of God rather than MMNs of social approval. This TMN of ‘how things work’ will take ownership of this repeated sweeping and searching, and one will eventually find the ‘coin’ of being motivated by righteousness—because one is continually following a path of behaving in a righteous manner.
Once this ‘coin’ of righteousness becomes found, one then becomes motivated by Teacher thought to share with others what it means to seek the coin of higher motivation. Verse 6 says, ‘rejoice with me, for have found the sheep of me, the destroyed’. Verse 9 says, ‘rejoice with me, for have found the drachma that destroyed’. Notice the extra ‘of me’ in verse 6. That is because there is an essential subjective element to mysticism. The mystic has a subjective personal experience of mysticism which then becomes the emotional basis for making universal statements in Teacher thought. In contrast, a search for righteousness discovers a coin of value that is based in universal principles.
The reason that the ‘coin’ has been lost is because methodology and peer approval have replaced the search for understanding. Science began as a search for universal understanding in Teacher thought. Science still claims to be driven by a Teacher-driven search for universal understanding, but I have learned through repeated experience that scientists will instinctively reject a universal understanding when presented with one. Postmodernism insists that there is no such thing as universal understanding, methodology rejects any universal understanding that was not generated using officially approved methods, and the need to seek funding means that scientists have to seek approval from people and groups who lack Teacher understanding. Thus, the coin of research for the love of learning has been destroyed. This loss is apparent at the female level of mental networks because the male technical thinking is still present and dominant. The way to find this coin that has been destroyed is to continue sweeping the floor of the subjective guided by a lamp that throws Teacher light upon the house of the subjective until one learns again what it means to be motivated by a love of understanding in Teacher thought.
Verse 10 does not say that the angels are rejoicing but rather that there is joy in the presence of the angels. Thus, learning what it means to be motivated by a Teacher love of understanding generates Teacher joy that becomes an example to those who live within the realm of abstract messages. For instance, it was mentioned in 14:18 that the average technical specialist does not want a meta-theory ‘looking over his shoulder’. Thus, presenting a legitimate meta-theory will not necessarily bring joy to the ‘messengers’ who work within technical specializations. But if a meta-theory continues to explain more and more topics, then this will demonstrate Teacher joy to the messengers of abstract technical thought.
Parable of the Prodigal Son 15:11-17
The rest of chapter 15 contains well-known parable of the Prodigal Son. This story appears only in Luke and not in the other Gospels. The length and uniqueness of this parable suggests that it is prophesying something significant that will happen at this period in history. If one treats this parable as following the previous two parables, then the identity of the two sons becomes apparent. The older son is established Christian religion. The younger son is secular scientific thought. The older son was born during the Middle Ages with its Christian monasticism and scholasticism. The younger son of scientific thought was born during the Renaissance. Science left the family of Christendom and went to a far country where it squandered its intellectual inheritance of Judeo-Christian thought. However, the previous two parables have made it possible for secular science to return to its Christian roots. Meanwhile, the older son of Christian religion has followed a joyless path of religious duty to the father.
The parable begins in verse 11. “And He said, ‘A certain man had two sons.’” Man means ‘mankind’. Had means ‘to have’ which these essays are interpreting as a reference to the peripheral realm of ‘having’. Son is interpreted as male technical thought. Stated symbolically, human society has given birth to two kinds of male technical thought and both of these function at the peripheral level of having. Science avoids the subjective realm of being through objectivity. Science focuses upon objective facts while ignoring the personal character of the people who discover these facts. One might think that theology deals with the subjective but we have seen that theology uses male technical thought to deal with peripheral topics while regarding core doctrines as divine mystery.
The younger son demands his inheritance. “And the younger of them said to the father, ‘Father, give to me the portion of the property falling to me.’” Younger means ‘recently revealed or what was not there before’. The younger is not referred to as the ‘younger son’ but rather as the ‘younger of them’, implying that the younger son is dependent upon the older. This describes an essential difference between scholasticism and science. Scholasticism studied old books written by esteemed ancient experts. Science learned new facts about nature by performing experiments, acquiring knowledge that ‘was not there before’. Said indicates a verbal response. Speaking to the father means that science is verbally interacting with its father of Western Christendom.
Give means ‘to give, to grant’. ‘Giving to me’ means that science wants to be free of being controlled by Western Christendom. Falling combines ‘upon’ with ‘to throw’. Portion means ‘part, share’. Throwing is interpreted as moving through the air of Teacher thought. Property is only used in this verse and the next and comes from the word ‘to be, to exist, to happen, to be present’. The Greek says literally ‘give to me the falling upon portion of the existing’. In other words, the younger son of science wants control over anything that results from using Teacher thought to analyze existing reality. The older son of scholasticism can study holy books, ancient tomes, and think about heavenly and philosophical realms. But the younger son wants total freedom to think theoretically about the here-and-now, free of any interference from the father of Western Christendom. Stated more simply, science wants the freedom to function within some secular realm that is free of religious dogma.
Verse 12 continues, “And he divided the property between them.” ‘He’ is implied by the tense of the verb. Divided is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘through’ with ‘to take, to choose, to prefer’. The other occurrence is in 1 Corinthians 12:11 which talks about the Spirit distributing spiritual gifts. Property does not mean property but rather is the word ‘bios’, which refers to ‘the present state of bodily existence’. (The KJV says more accurately ‘living’. In contrast, the BLB, which is supposed to be an ultra-literal translation, mistranslates both ‘existence’ and ‘bios’ as well as giving the mistaken impression that these are both the same Greek word that means ‘property’. Argh!)
Looking at this cognitively, a division between these two sons is being made based upon personal preference. The younger son asked for a division to be made based upon existence, implying that science will study what exists while leaving scholasticism to study what does not exist. However, the division that actually occurred was different. Science focused upon biological life because of being naturally attracted to physical evidence. Scholasticism, instead, focused upon the metaphysical because studying books leads naturally to a focus upon ideas, theories, and Platonic forms.
The younger son leaves in verse 13. “And not many days later, the younger son having gathered together all, went away into a distant country.” Day means ‘the time space between dawn and dark’ and is interpreted as an era of society that is lit by some sun of a general theory. ‘Not many days later’ suggests that society goes through some eras but not that many. Gathered together means ‘to lead together’. All means ‘each part of totality’. In other words, science takes everything that relates to the materialistic and biological and packages it within an integrated worldview that is free of Christian religion. As far as the younger son is concerned, nothing exists, has ever existed, or will ever exist apart from the biological and the material. This godless, materialistic philosophy of science developed during the 19th century.
Verse 11 referred to ‘the younger of them’. Verse 13 talks about ‘the younger son’, consistent with the idea that science has graduated from being an offshoot of Christian scholasticism to being an independent entity of male technical thought. Went away means ‘absent from one’s own people’. Country means ‘country-land, a wide-open area’. Distant means ‘long in place or time’. Similarly, science ‘went away’ by becoming objective, and it entered ‘a wide-open area’ of new scientific discovery, one that was distant from existing culture and reality. This describes the scientific progress made during the Industrial Revolution which opened up vast new territories but also lacked humanity.
Verse 13 describes what happens in this distant land. “And there he wasted his estate, living prodigally.” Wasted combines ‘thoroughly’ and ‘to scatter, to disperse’. Estate is the same word that was translated as ‘property’ in verse 12 which actually means ‘substance, essence, being’. ‘Wasted his estate’ conveys the impression of squandering money. But the Greek says that he became thoroughly scattered at the level of being. Science claims to have an integrated worldview of physical, biological existence. But this integration is at the objective level of having, and science has splintered into countless specializations filled with technical experts who are thoroughly fragmented at the subjective level of being.
Living means ‘to live, to be alive’. Prodigally is used once in the New Testament and adds the prefix ‘not’ to ‘saved’. ‘Not saved’ means that objective, specialized science may have transformed the objective realm of things but has not brought any salvation to the subjective realm of living. We saw this when looking at the parable of the fig tree in the vineyard in chapter 13, because modern Western society assumed that a fig tree of subjective life could be successfully grown within a vineyard of consumerism. Notice that ‘not saved’ is being interpreted as debauchery and reckless living based upon the assumption that being saved means staying within the walls of socially acceptable behavior. Instead, ‘not saved’ actually means that one is not being transformed by rational Teacher understanding. Thus, the very name given to this parable comes from a mistranslation based upon a Pharisaical approach to the Bible.
Verse 14 describes what happens next. “But of him having spent all, there arose a severe famine throughout that country, and he began to be in need.” Spent occurs once in Luke and refers to ‘cost, expense’. This spending is ‘of him all’ which means that there are no resources left. There arose means ‘to come into being’. Famine means ‘a scarcity of food’. Severe actually means ‘strong, mighty, powerful’. Interpreting the parable literally, there is obviously no connection between running out of money and a famine arising, but the Greek suggests that running out of resources causes a ‘mighty scarcity of food’ to ‘come into being’.
Looking at this cognitively, materialistic science does not provide a basis for practicing materialistic science. That is because science implicitly assumes that the materialistic realm is guided by hidden non-materialistic universal laws. Thus, doing materialistic science incurs an intellectual cost that undermines the mental foundation for doing science. These resources became used up in postmodernism, because postmodernism is characterized by a deep skepticism of universal truth and general theories. This led to a scarcity of intellectual food, because scientists no longer had any reason to do science. This intellectual famine was ‘strong and mighty’ because it was backed up by the strong and mighty personal opinions of postmodernists, who used their intellectual status to declare with great might that truth and universality do not exist.
Country is the same word used in verse 13 that means ‘a wide-open area’. Throughout means ‘of the place’ when followed by the accusative. ‘Throughout that country’ is more literally ‘of the place of that wide-open area’ which implies that this strong famine is a characteristic of the wide-open area of objective, materialistic science. In other words, the intellectual famine was not imposed upon science by some outside force but rather came into being as a fundamental characteristic of objective, materialistic science.
Be in need means ‘to come late, be behind, come short’. Begin means ‘to begin, to commence’ which suggests that something is coming to the front to rule. This is a strange juxtaposition because one is beginning with being behind. This summarizes the mindset of postmodern science which starts with the assumption that it should defer to alternate forms of knowing. This conclusion is not based upon scientific evidence but rather is a presumption of deference. This is the result of doing science without having any reason to do science. Objective materialistic science cannot come up with a reason for existing. Thus, it is hoping that something subjective and non-material can give it a reason to exist.
In verse 15, the younger son starts feeding pigs. “And having gone, he joined himself to one of the citizens of that country, and he sent him into his fields to feed pigs.” Having gone means ‘to transport’ which indicates a movement accompanied by a shift in thinking. Join is used twice in Luke and means ‘to glue, to stick’. Citizen comes from the word ‘city’ which is interpreted as a center of civilization. ‘That country’ is the same two Greek words used in verse 14 to describe the location of the strong famine. Interpreted symbolically, objective science initially went to the unoccupied region of new technology, leading to the ‘city’ of a technological society. A ‘citizen of the country’ would refer to those who regard technology as a place that defines their identity and citizenship. This ‘gluing together’ can be seen in the joining of objective science with business and marketing. Science no longer had its own reason for existence, but business found science very useful for developing new gadgets to market. Business and marketing viewed the virgin territories opened up by science as a city within which citizens could live. The result was the symbiosis of the technological consumer society, in which science and technology develop new gadgets for business to market to people. This shift involved a ‘transporting’ of objective science from the pure research of understanding the natural world to the applied research of developing technologies.
Send means ‘to dispatch, especially on a temporary errand’. Field means ‘field, countryside’ and refers to a smaller region than ‘country’. This field is ‘of him’. Interpreted symbolically, a business will send scientific research on ‘temporary errands’ of researching some restricted field that belongs to that business. Thus, research and development limits the scope of scientific research, it limits the time period of this research, and it directs the research to topics that are related to the business.
Feed means ‘to feed, to tend’. Pigs are only mentioned in Luke in this parable and in 8:32-33. That reference was interpreted as the initial degradation of content-based online user groups into opinion-based social media. Copying the interpretation of pigs from that section, a pig was considered an unclean animal. Pigs are also mentioned in 2 Peter 2:22 (The Greek word is different, but both words refer to pigs.) The proverb mentioned there is that ‘A sow, after washing, returns to wallowing in the mire’. Pigs love to wallow in the mud, for temperature control and to get relief from parasites. Mud (or mire) has the characteristic of being neither liquid nor solid. It is neither a solid Perceiver object, nor liquid Mercy experiences. Thus, a pig would represent a mindset that wallows in some combination of Perceiver facts and emotional Mercy experiences.
This describes business and especially marketing. Business has to juggle two competing standards. Business has to recognize Perceiver facts in order to build and distribute products. But business also has to recognize MMNs of consumer desire in order to sell these products. The result is a deep conflict between engineering and marketing. Engineering is guided by scientific research to develop and construct products that work. Marketing tries to sell products by manipulating societal MMNs. The principles of modern marketing were initially described by Edward Bernays, a nephew of Sigmund Freud. Most modern marketing is an example of a pig, because it wallows within a ‘mud’ that juxtaposes solid Perceiver facts with emotional mental networks. The job of scientific research and development in a modern business is to feed the ‘pig’ of marketing. Marketing determines what people want and/or what people will buy, and research and development is then supposed to feed this desire with a diet of new-and-improved consumer gadgets. There may be exceptions to this harsh generalization, but I think that it accurately describes the majority of cases.
Verse 16 describes the feelings of the younger brother. “And he was longing to fill his belly from the pods that the pigs were eating, and no one was giving to him.” Longing means ‘to show focused passion... what a person truly yearns for’. Fill means ‘to fill entirely’. Belly means ‘belly, stomach, womb’ and is translated as ‘womb’ about half the times that it occurs. ‘His belly’ indicates that this describes what the younger brother truly yearns for. From means ‘from out of’. Pod is used once in the New Testament and means ‘something horned’ because the pods of the carob tree look like horns. Eating means ‘to eat, consume’. A horn represents power and strength. Thus, a pod would represent a packet of intellectual food that portrays power and strength. This summarizes the way that marketing typically sells new technology to the masses. ‘Science has developed a new product that is more powerful and stronger than what you currently own. Our new gadget is faster, better, more efficient, more powerful, with more features’.
No one means ‘no one, none, nothing’. Give means ‘to give, to grant’ and indicates a change in ownership. It was previously used in verse 11 where the younger son demanded to be given control of a secular realm free of the control of the ‘father’ of Western Christendom. Looking at this symbolically, modern science would love to ‘entirely fill its belly’ with the scraps of research done to develop new gadgets. But modern science continually has to feed marketing in some way, because even pure scientific research now has to seek for funding from various funding organizations in order to do research. Modern science would really like to do science for the sake of science, but this control is never given to science. Instead, science continually finds itself hobbled by the demands of the consumer. The English translation gives the impression that the younger son is being prevented from eating any of the pods, but ‘entirely fill his belly’ suggests that the younger son is unable to fulfill his deep desire of filling his belly with pods. And the relationship between belly and womb implies that modern science feels that it could give birth to new understanding if it were only given the freedom to feed fully upon the pods of consumer-driven research.
The younger son reaches a conclusion in verse 17. “But having come to himself, he was saying, ‘How many of my father’s hired servants have abundance of bread, but here I am perishing with hunger?’” Come means ‘to come or go’. ‘Come to himself’ could be interpreted as thinking rationally, but more literally it means focusing upon one’s own needs and desires rather than following the desires of others. Hired servant only occurs in this parable and means a ‘wage earner’. How many means ‘how much, how many’. These hired servants are ‘of my father’. Thus, the younger brother of objective science is looking more broadly of all of the groups that interact with Western Christendom. Abundance means to ‘be in excess, these superfluous’. Bread represents intellectual food. Notice that the younger brother of materialistic science does not think of his older brother of absolute Christian truth based in respect for ancient tomes. Instead, he turns his attention to all of the various groups that interact commercially with the society of Western Christendom. And he notices that they seem to have sufficient intellectual bread. Unlike postmodernism, which prevents materialistic science from making definitive statements, these other societies seem to have no problem saying many things with confidence.
I is explicitly mentioned, indicating that the younger son is thinking about himself. This self-reflection is new for materialistic science which has focused upon the physical rather than the cognitive. Hunger comes from a word that means ‘lacking’. Here means ‘here, in this place’. Perish means ‘to destroy, to perish’, a word that is seen several times in this chapter. In other words, materialistic science is facing an existential crisis. That is because the doubting of postmodernism has infected most of the soft sciences, leading to a ‘lacking’ of Perceiver knowledge. Materialistic science observes itself and realizes that it faces destruction if it remains in its current location of materialism.
Younger Son Returns 15:18-24
In verse 18, the younger brother decides to act. “Having risen up, I will go to my father, and I will say to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you.’” Risen up means ‘to raise, to rise’ and is the normal word for resurrection. This could be interpreted as a revitalization of materialistic science or as heading up in the direction of Teacher generality in order to find some meta-theory that can integrate the fragments of materialistic science. Go means ‘to transport’ which indicates that this upward movement will involve a personal change. In other words, this search for a meta-theory will involve a change in the way that science functions. ‘To my father’ indicates that materialistic science will return to its source within Western Christendom.
Sin means ‘to sin, to miss the mark’. Heaven means ‘heaven, sky’ and is interpreted as the realm of Teacher thought that is compatible with human identity. ‘Sinning against heaven’ means falling short of the target of using Teacher thought in a way that is compatible with human identity. This statement is being made ‘in the presence of you’. Notice that the younger son of materialistic science is not apologizing to the father of Western Christendom. Instead, the apology is for pursuing objective inhuman science and this apology is being made in the presence of Western Christendom.
The younger son continues in Verse 19. “No longer am I worthy to be called your son. Make me like one of your servants.” No longer means ‘no longer, more’. Worthy means ‘weighing as much as’. And ‘I am’ is specifically mentioned. Thus, materialistic science is coming to a conclusion about its subjective identity. ‘Son of you’ represents a son of Western Christendom. Stated symbolically, materialistic science is coming to a subjective conclusion that it does not deserve to be regarded as a son of Western Christendom. This feeling of inferiority pervades postmodern science which is driven by a subjective feeling of lack of worth to deny its family relationship with Western Christendom. More specifically, the scientifically-driven colonialization by Western Christendom of the rest the world is viewed as deeply morally wrong.
The apology of the younger son to the father is typically interpreted by Bible-believing Christians as a shining example of religious self-denial. But it also expresses a denial at the level of being, because the younger son is denying his family connection with father. Similarly, postmodern apologizing for Western colonialism is also viewed as a shining example of self-denial, but it is historically dishonest. Materialistic science is flawed, but it is a son of Western Christendom. It is not a child of aboriginal societies with their alternate knowing. That is a historical fact.
Make means to make, to do’, and is interpreted as referring to Server actions. Like means ‘as, like’. Servant is the word ‘hired servant’. Thus, materialistic science wants to be treated merely as another tool used by Western civilization, another way of acquiring information that is not intrinsically superior to any of the other methods used by other groups that interact with Western society—one of many ‘alternate’ forms of ‘knowing’.
Notice that this is all happening within the head of the younger son. He is deciding internally what he will say before he meets his father. Similarly, postmodern science has pre-decided how it will reconnect with Western Christendom based upon its own internal dialogue and internal presuppositions. It has pre-decided, based upon its own internal feelings of guilt and inferiority, that it will apologize before Western Christendom for its existence. This is strange because a mindset that supposedly bases itself totally upon objective material evidence is being guided internally by subjective emotions in a manner that ignores objective material evidence.
The actual meeting happens in verse 20. “And having risen up, he went to his father. And he still being far distant, his father saw him.” Having risen up is the same word ‘resurrection’ that began verse 18. Went means ‘to come, to go’. In verse 18, the younger son said that he would transport to the father, implying that there would be personal change, but verse 20 indicates that there is merely movement without any personal change. The rest of the phrase ‘to his father’ is the same as in verse 18. The implication is that the public apology is not accompanied by any personal change in the subjective. Stated bluntly, postmodern science claims to be more humble than modern science, but postmodern scientists are just as arrogant, self-assured, methodology biased, and materialistic as previous scientists. Nothing has changed as far as personal character is concerned.
Distant means ‘to have by separating from’. Far means ‘far, far away’. Saw means ‘to see with the mind’. Notice the contrast. The younger son is moving but experiences no personal change. The father, in contrast, mentally observes the younger son from a distance while the son is coming closer.
So far, our interpretation of the parable has been able to look at history. But we have now reached the present and thus need to shift from description to prediction. Our interpretation is assuming that society has started the second day of ‘heading towards Jerusalem’. That is because 14:25 said that ‘great crowds were transporting with him’, something which is not true within today’s society.
Thus, the rest of the interpretation will assume that ‘the father’ refers to Western Christendom as reformulated by mental symmetry. Such an interpretation is cognitively legitimate because Thomas Kuhn observed that whenever a paradigm shift happens, then the textbooks will be rewritten to reinterpret history in the light of the current paradigm. Thus, if mental symmetry did become widely known, as suggested by the previous sections, and if evangelical Christendom collapsed into total moron-ness, as suggested by 14:34, then the ‘father’ of Western Christendom would become reinterpreted from the cognitive perspective of mental symmetry.
Applying this viewpoint to the father, mental symmetry has been used to acquire a mental image of materialistic science from a distant perspective while science is still using the objective mindset of ‘having’ combined with the ‘separating’ of academia from normal society. On the one hand, I have been using mental symmetry to analyze materialistic science without being observed by science. This has led to a mental ‘seeing’ of scientific thought. On the other hand, I have noticed that materialistic science is gradually coming closer to topics that have traditionally been regarded as belonging to Christianity and religion. However, I have also noticed that this approaching of materialistic science to Christianity has not been accompanied by any major changes in the biases, methodology, or presuppositions of materialistic science.
Verse 20 then describes the behavior of the father. “And was moved with compassion, and having run, fell upon his neck and kissed him.” Moved with compassion means ‘to have the bowels yearn’. This describes a gut response that is different than the Mercy emotions of the heart. This verb was previously used in Luke 10:33 to describe the response of the Good Samaritan, which was interpreted prophetically as Eastern mysticism interacting with Western society. Eastern mysticism uses the Teacher overgeneralization of cosmic unity to integrate the complexities of human existence. Eastern mysticism resonated with the fragmented state of Western technological society and offered mysticism as a way of finding emotional unity. Similarly, my attempt to develop mental symmetry as a meta-theory has been driven by the realization that mental symmetry is capable of bringing theoretical unity to the fragments of Western technological society. The difference between these two is that mysticism only provides a feeling of unity while mental symmetry is a genuine meta-theory.
Run means ‘running wide open’ and is only used twice in Luke, it ‘conveys intense desire to get to the goal as quickly as possible’. The other time is in 24:12 where Peter runs to the tomb of Jesus. Similarly, my primary task during the last dozen years has been to acquire a closer understanding of various scientific disciplines in order to become capable of using mental symmetry as a meta-theory. During this period, I have made most of my money through tutoring various subjects, which itself has helped me to become acquainted with a variety of scientific subjects. This seemingly endless work has been motivated by an ‘intense desire to get to the goal as quickly as possible’. It should be noted that running still traverses the ground of human rational thought. Thus, I have not just made vague statements within the air of Teacher theory but rather have attempted to ‘ground’ my statements within a factual knowledge of the various fields that I have analyzed.
Fall means ‘to fall upon’ and moving down is interpreted as heading from generality to specifics. The neck connects the head with the body. The head represents intelligent thought while the body generates feelings and interacts with the world. Similarly, when I use mental symmetry to analyze some field, I start with the general theory of cognition and then descend to specifics by focusing upon the ‘neck’ where the rational thinking of the field interacts with the behavior and emotions of that field. I have found that focusing upon this interaction leads most quickly to a cognitive explanation for the fundamentals of that field. For instance, absolute truth allows Mercy emotions of respect for some source of truth to overwhelm Perceiver thought into ‘knowing’ what is ‘true’. If one wishes to analyze evangelical Christendom, it is imperative to understand the impact that a mindset of absolute truth has upon thinking and behavior.
Kiss means ‘to kiss fervently’ and adds the prefix ‘according’ to ‘phileo’, which refers to the friendship of compatible mental networks. This verb is used six times in the New Testament, twice to describe Judas kissing Jesus during his betrayal. Similarly, I invariably find when analyzing some scientific field that there are aspects of the field that resonate with my personal path of using mental symmetry to follow a path of personal transformation. Looking at this from the other direction, when I search for an example to illustrate some principle of cognitive transformation, I usually find this illustration in some branch of science and not in some theological work. In contrast, I usually find nothing of value when looking at some biblical commentary for clarification, though I do find Bible dictionaries and encyclopedias to be useful.
In verse 21, the son repeats his pre-rehearsed phrase. “And the son said to him, ‘Father, I have sinned against heaven and before you; no longer am I worthy to be called your son.’” Verse 21 is a precise repetition in the Greek of verses 18-19. Looking at this from the perspective of mental symmetry, all my efforts so far to use mental symmetry as a meta-theory have been like talking to a brick wall. My papers have had 6000 views on Researchgate, but the personal feedback has been essentially nil. Instead, the social sciences continue droning on about apologizing for Western colonialism, the deep moral guilt of Western scientific thought, and the need to look to other forms of knowing for a more holistic approach.
The father ignores these words and responds in verse 22. “And the father said to his servants, ‘Quickly bring out the best robe and clothe him, and give him a ring for his hand and sandals for his feet.’” The word for servant here is ‘slave’ and not hired servant. Quickly means ‘quickly, swiftly, soon’. Bring out means ‘to bring out’. A robe is ‘a long flowing robe worn by the elite’. A long flowing robe extends further than a regular robe to cover the legs. Best means ‘first, foremost, chief’. Clothe means ‘sinking into a garment’. Clothing are interpreted as the fabric of social interaction, and sinking into a garment implies social interaction that matches the character of the person. Looking at this symbolically, the normal ‘robe’ of academic interaction does not cover the ‘feet’ of subjective movement but rather ignores the subjective. Mental symmetry extends this ‘robe’ to include the subjective by providing a rational theory of cognitive styles and how they interact. It is possible to ‘sink into this robe’ because it is based in maintaining a mindset of scientific inquiry. Stated another way, it gives science a reason to exist.
In verse 16, the younger son was not given the privilege of filling himself with the pods. In verse 22, the son is given a ring. Ring is used once in the New Testament and is related to the word ‘finger’. Hands are interpreted as the application of technical thought. Thus, ‘a finger ring for his hand’ suggests a tool that can be used to make technical thought more effective. Looking at this symbolically, academic thought uses technical thought without fully understanding either the nature of technical thought or the mental foundation for technical thought. Mental symmetry provides a framework for technical thought that is consistent with the functioning of technical thought, thus acting as a ‘finger ring for the hand’ of technical thought.
Sandal means ‘something bound under the feet’. The body rests its weight upon the feet. Similarly, the mind rests its weight upon core mental networks. Sandals protect the feet from coming into direct contract with the hard ground. Thus, sandals would represent a way of buffering core mental networks from coming into direct contact with the hard facts of reality. Academia ignores the mental impact of core mental networks while postmodern academia fixates upon the mental impact of core mental networks. Mental symmetry translates the Christian message of atonement, justification, and sanctification into cognitive language that is compatible with academic thought.
The fattened calf is killed in verse 23. “And having brought the fattened calf, kill it, and having eaten, let us be merry.” Bring means ‘to bear, carry’. Calf means ‘a young shoot, a calf’ and is used three times in the Gospels, only in this parable. Fattened means grain-fed and is only used in this parable. Grain represents intellectual food while a calf is a young beast that has not yet become a beast of burden. Kill means ‘to kill as a sacrifice and offer on an altar’. Eat means ‘to eat, consume’. Merry is used four times in this parable and combines ‘well’ with ‘the parts around the heart, visceral opinion’. Putting this together, a ‘calf’ of innocent science that has been fed only upon the grain of knowledge is being given to objective, materialistic, specialized science to consume as intellectual food. This is being done in an official religious manner. And this concept of innocent science is supposed to be consumed with a positive mindset that focuses upon the benefits of science rather than its shortcomings. Applying this to mental symmetry, postmodern science keeps apologizing for its existence and keeps turning to other forms of ‘knowing’ for a more holistic approach. Mental symmetry, in contrast, explores how science would ideally behave if it focused in an innocent manner upon a search for understanding. Instead of fixating upon the shortcomings of science in a postmodern manner, mental symmetry focuses upon the positive elements of science, interpreting it as an incomplete, partial version of a more complete path of personal and societal transformation.
Looking further at the idea of a sacrifice offered on an altar, merely coming up with a new concept of innocent science is not enough. Instead, this concept has to become alive as a mental network and then this mental network has to fall apart and die in submission to a concept of God in Teacher thought. For instance, my primary motivation for using mental symmetry as a meta-theory of science is to rescue science from the destructive impact of postmodernism, wokeism, and alternate knowing. I have experienced sufficient rejection from academia for my mental network of innocent science to die within my mind. But I have continued with this quest, guided emotionally by the TMN of what it means to pursue mental and spiritual wholeness. That is what it means emotionally and cognitively to sacrifice a fattened calf. This sacrifice at the level of mental networks performs the economic exchange that is required to move the cognitive ownership from MMNs of approval to the TMN of a concept of God, making it possible for science to function in a righteous matter at the level of being.
The father concludes in verse 24, “For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’ And they began to be merry.” The younger son has pre-decided that he will deny his connection with his father. Similarly, postmodern academia has pre-decided that it will deny its connection with Western Christendom. The father, in contrast, refers to ‘this the son of mine’, recognizing that materialistic science is a legitimate offspring of Western Christendom. This is different than the evangelical Christian who views secular science as a tool of the devil that God will destroy in The Great Tribulation. In contrast, mental symmetry analyzes current secular, objective, materialistic science as a partial expression of Christianity that needs to be extended from the objective to the subjective.
Dead means ‘a corpse, a dead body’ and ‘was’ is explicitly mentioned. In other words, the content was there, but it was not filled with the life of mental networks at the level of being. Similarly, mental symmetry views current science as a lifeless objective form that does not extend to the subjective realm of being and life. Alive again is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘to recover life, live again’. The other occurrence is in Romans 7:9 where Paul talks about sin becoming alive again. Early science had some life, because pioneering researchers were guided by the subjective conviction that God had created a world of order that humans could discover. Quoting from Wikipedia, “Science historian Noah Efron has written that Christianity provided the early ‘tenets, methods, and institutions of what in time became modern science’. Modern western universities have their origins directly in the Medieval Church. They began as cathedral schools, and all students were considered clerics.” But science eventually turned into an objective, specialized use of technical thought that ignored personal identity in Mercy thought and universal understanding in Teacher thought. (Physics claims to be searching for a ‘grand theory of everything’ but this search is being done in a specialized, hyper-mathematical manner that is completely divorced from the experiences of normal life.) Mental symmetry, in contrast, brings science back to life by placing scientific thought and behavior within a universal theory of cognition—a comprehensible meta-theory that applies directly to normal behavior and normal life.
Lost is the word ‘to destroy’ that has been used several times in this chapter. Objective, specialized science could be described as ‘lost’ because postmodernism has destroyed science by pointing out that science has no reason to exist and then turning this into a dogma imposed by academic status. Found means ‘to find, discover, obtain’ and the same word was used for finding the lost sheep and the lost coin. In each case, the breakthrough did not occur instantly but rather required significant searching. Similarly, mental symmetry does not just take some overgeneralization or system of alternate knowing and declare it to be a meta-theory. Instead, I have taken decades to become proficient in many academic fields and I have posted around 7000 pages of analysis on my website as well as hundreds of pages of academic papers.
Began means ‘to begin, to commence’. To be merry was used in verse 23 and will be used two more times in this parable when talking about the older son. It is described as ‘having a merry outlook because feeling the sense of victory’. This may sound like a throwaway statement but it reflects a choice that I have to make almost every day. What is happening in the world today is so depressing that my natural tendency is to become cynical. However, mental symmetry, backed up by essays such as this one, assure me that society is following a path of transformation that will lead to salvation. I have to continually choose to allow my Teacher understanding of the mind, history, and theology to be the paradigm that will guide my thinking and behavior. I have to decide to allow myself to be guided by the TMN of my rational concept of God. Notice that this choice is an example of the spiritual economy that was discussed when looking at the lost coin. My TMN of mental symmetry is taking cognitive ownership of my behavior because it is obvious that no other mental network exists that could motivate this behavior. Evangelical Christendom, in contrast, asserts that God will remove Christians out of secular world through a Rapture and then rain divine judgment upon the godless world.
Older Son Complains 15:25-32
Verse 25 mentions the older son for the first time in the story and the rest of the parable deals with the older son. The older son was interpreted as medieval Christian scholasticism, which focused upon studying old books written by revered authors. A similar mindset characterizes modern Protestant and Catholic theology, which also focuses upon studying old books written by revered apostles and church fathers. One might think at first glance that these essays are using a form of scholasticism. However, a quick glance at the typical biblical commentary or theological work will make it immediately apparent that there is a vast gap between the approach taken in these essays and the approach taken by the typical theological scholar. Similarly, the total lack of interest that I have received from theological scholars makes it clear that I am following a different method of analysis than they are. This does not mean that there is no overlap, because I do occasionally come across meaningful articles.
Verse 25 introduces the older son. “And his elder son was in the field, and while coming up, he drew near to the house; he heard music and dancing.” Elder is the word ‘presbyter’ which is translated as an elder of the church most of the time that it occurs. This supports the idea of symbolically connecting the older son with the elders of the Christian church because the same Greek word is used to describe them both. The Greek is literally ‘the son of him the elder’. The average secular person today tends to view the evangelical Christian as an extremist who has nothing to do with Western society. Mental symmetry, in contrast, regards the ancient book of the Bible as supernaturally written—as illustrated by this essay, and explicitly recognizes that Bible-based Christianity is the older son of Western Christendom.
Thus, we will be interpreting the rest of the parable as the father of mental symmetry interacting with the ‘older son’ of elder-based, Bible-believing Christianity.
Field means ‘field, farm, piece of land’ and was previously used in verse 15 to describe the fields where the younger son fed the pigs. The older son is ‘in the realm of’ a field, indicating that scholastic-like theology is regarded as one field of study within academia. While means ‘in that manner’ and coming means ‘to come, to go’. ‘In that manner’ suggests that the older son will be treating the situation using the same approach taken within theology as an academic field, which means quoting church fathers and using traditional theological arguments and categories.
Draw near means ‘to draw near, to approach’ and was previously used in verse 1 to describe the tax collectors and sinners drawing near to hear Jesus. Thus, the initial response to a scientifically compatible reformulation of Christianity is one of interest. House means ‘house, household’ and a house is a home for personal identity. Notice the irony. On the one hand, religious scholarship claims to be the expert on subjective topics such as sin, forgiveness, and personal salvation, but it is following an objective approach out in the field of theological study. On the other hand, using mental symmetry to reformulate Christianity is typically rejected as being too objective, but this reformulation is creating sufficient activity within the house of personal identity to attract the attention of theology.
Hear means ‘to hear, to listen, to understand’ which refers to rational language and understanding. Thus, there is comprehension rather than mystery. Music is the word ‘symphony’ which combines ‘together with’ and ‘voice, sound’. It is used once as a noun in the New Testament. The adjective also occurs once in 1 Corinthians 7:5. Music is a form of nonverbal communication that focuses upon Mercy emotions. (A melody, for instance, can be interpreted cognitively as personal identity taking a journey away from home and then returning.) In a symphony, many different musical voices play together in harmony. Thus, ‘music’ means that different Mercy voices are interacting in a way that generates Teacher order. Dancing is the word ‘chorus’ which means ‘a ring, round dance, choir’. It also appears once in the New Testament. Dancing is movement that is emotional driven. But a ‘chorus’ or ‘round dance’ indicates movement that expresses Teacher order as opposed to dancing that expresses raw Mercy feelings.
Summarizing, what attracts the attention of theological Christianity is Mercy-driven personal behavior that expresses Teacher order. This is like a charismatic renewal in the sense that people are expressing themselves freely in Mercy thought. But it is different than the typical charismatic renewal because this emotional freedom is characterized by Teacher understanding and order. It is a charismatic renewal that remains doctrinally sound.
In verse 26, the older son asks for an explanation. “And having called near one of the servants, he began inquiring what these things might be.” Call near means ‘to call toward oneself’ and is used to describe Jesus summoning his disciples or some crowd. Servant means ‘a child under training’. In other words, the elders are not interacting at a theological level but rather trying to recruit some of the followers of this new movement. Inquire means ‘to inquire, to ask, to learn by inquiry’. Might be is ‘to be’ and ‘these things’ is just a generic pronoun. Thus, theology is trying to understand what is happening by observing the personal identity of followers. Notice again that there is no theological interaction. Content is not being discussed. Instead, the personal motivation of followers is being examined, which suggests that attention is shifting away from abstract theology to personal identity. However, one gains the impression that what really matters to the Christian elders is whether the new movement is generating potential followers who can be slotted into the existing religious system of clergy and laity, the underlying assumption being that they are the legitimate clergy.
The follower answers in verse 27. “And he said to him, ‘Your brother is come, and your father has killed the fattened calf, because he has received him in good health.’” ‘Said to him’ indicates that the follower is capable of thinking for himself and making intelligent statements, as opposed to deferring to the experts. ‘The brother of you’ indicates that the follower recognizes the family relationship between the younger son of materialistic science and the older son of scholastic theology. Come means ‘to reach the end-destination’ and was previously used in 13:35 where Jesus said that they would not see him until the time comes when they say ‘Blessed is the one coming in the name of the Lord’. This suggests that verse 27 is at least a partial fulfillment of that statement. This time may not have come for the elders of Jerusalem, but it has come for the follower with whom the elder of Jerusalem is interacting.
‘Your father’ indicates that the follower also recognizes the family connection between scholastic theology and Western Christendom. ‘Kill the fattened calf’ uses the same three Greek words that were used in verse 23, except the follower adds that this was done by the father. If the father represents mental symmetry, then this implies a recognition that the innocence of original science has been restored by mental symmetry, and the follower recognizes that this restoration of scientific innocence did not emerge gradually but rather required a sacrifice. In good health means ‘in good working order’ and is the source of the English word ‘hygiene’. Notice again the focus upon Teacher order. The younger son of materialistic science has not just returned to the father of Western Christendom in some magical or mysterious manner that involves alternate knowing or mysticism. Instead, this returning has led to the Teacher order of proper functioning. Received combines ‘away from’ with ‘actively lay hold of’ indicating that reborn science has been actively received away from a different state that was different than the father of Western Christendom. Similarly, using mental symmetry as a meta-theory for existing scientific specializations has required actively taking hold of these specializations away from the inadequate meta-theories that currently motivate them.
Putting this all together, this ‘child under training’ has a fairly mature grasp of the nature of science, history, theology, and society.
The elder son responds with anger in verse 28. “But he was angry, and was not willing to go in. And his father, having gone, was begging him.” The Greek begins with the word angry which refers to Teacher-based ‘fixed anger, settled opposition’. This term occurs one other time in Luke in 14:21 where the owner of the house gave a ‘great supper’ and the invited guests did not come. Willing means ‘to desire, wish’. Enter means ‘to enter, to go into’. In other words, scholastic theology is driven by Teacher emotion to refuse to enter into this ordered charismatic renewal. One would think at first glance that Christian theologians would love a charismatic renewal that respected and maintained Christian theology. But the problem is that continuing to think about theology in a scholastic manner will cause a TMN to form that will emotionally impose this methodology upon thinking and behavior. More specifically, the revival of science replaces divine mystery with rational Teacher understanding, and it replaces Mercy feelings of religious self-denial with joyful, ordered self-expression.
Stated bluntly, Christian theologians are rejecting this salvation of God because they ultimately do not believe in either God or salvation. Instead, they believe in divine mystery and religious self-denial. This is not apparent today because the current technological consumer society uses a materialistic concept of Nature to save gadgets, and scholastic theology can accept this limited, objective expression of God and salvation by asserting that divine mystery and religious self-denial transcend the partial expression of the consumer society. But in verse 27 a more complete expression of God is driving a more complete form of salvation, directly contradicting the scholastic theological concepts of divine mystery and religious self-denial. The result is emotional revulsion at the level of Teacher thought.
‘The father of him’ recognizes the connection between Western Christendom and scholastic theology. Similarly, these essays recognize the family relationship between mental symmetry and biblical scholarship. These essays may not be quoting from religious commentaries, but the definitions of the Greek words are being taken from a popular biblical scholarship website that has collated official definitions from official theological dictionaries. Having gone means ‘to go out, to come out’. Similarly, these essays are using mental symmetry to discuss the biblical Greek text in a detailed manner that goes far beyond any theological text that I have encountered so far—using religiously compatible concepts that go beyond the materialistic blinkers of current materialistic science. Begging means to ‘make a call from being close-up and personal’ and the noun form of this word is used in John 14-16 to describe the Holy Spirit. Similarly, I am not just making abstract, theoretical, logical arguments in these essays. I am not writing the typical objective academic paper on religion. Instead, I know from personal experience the deep cost of truly following God and the Bible. When I attempt to share mental symmetry with scholastic theologians, I emphasize that I know from personal experience what it means to be a disciple of Jesus.
The older son answers in verse 29. “And answering, he said to his father, ‘Behold, so many years I serve you, and never did I disobey a commandment of yours.’” Behold means ‘behold, look, see’ and means that something visible needs to be observed. ‘So many years’ indicates a long period of time, but it also indicates that scholastic theology has not delivered upon the promises it has made. Instead, the promised kingdom of God has always remained just around the corner. Serve means ‘to be a slave’, and being a slave of God expresses the mindset of religious self-denial.
Stated more clearly, belief in absolute truth will only survive as long as I feel that the source of truth is far more important in Mercy thought than personal identity. Suppose that I start to experience the personal benefits of following the biblical message. This personal success will raise my personal status causing my ‘belief’ in absolute truth to fall into doubt. The end result of preserving this mindset of absolute truth will be ‘many years of slavery’. The older son of scholastic theology is presenting this as a positive feature. But it actually expresses a fundamental weakness of absolute truth. Reformulating Christianity as universal cognitive principles makes it possible to experience the positive benefits of applying the biblical message in a manner that continues. That is because experiencing success does not automatically cause the believer to doubt the biblical principles that are responsible for this success. Instead, these universal Perceiver principles can be emotionally supported by Teacher emotions of order and understanding, as illustrated by the intelligent response of the follower as well as the Teacher order of symphony and choir.
Never means ‘not even at any time’. Commandment means ‘commandment, order, instruction’. It contains the idea of reaching a goal but not the idea of working within some Teacher structure. And these commandments are described as ‘of you’. Obey means ‘to pass by, to pass away’. This word is used 30 times in the New Testament and is usually translated as ‘pass away’. It is never translated as ‘obey’ by either the KJV or the NASB. (More generally, writing this essay on Luke 13-15 has caused me to lose respect for the Berean Literal Bible.) The English gives the impression that the older son never disobeyed any biblical commandment. But the Greek seems to be saying that all moral decrees have been theologically preserved. In other words, scholastic theology has faithfully transmitted the moral do’s and don’ts of the Bible. This is presented as a positive feature, but it also indicates a Christianity of moral legalism. This describes a Pharisaical mindset that maintains walls of taboo which separate what is morally permitted from what is morally forbidden. Such walls naturally emerge when Perceiver truth is based in MMNs of holy experience, holy people, holy places, and holy rituals.
Continuing with verse 29, the older son complains, “And never did you give to me a young goat, that I might make merry with my friends.” Give indicates a transfer of control, illustrated by the younger son asking to be given a secular realm free of the control of Western Christendom in verse 12. Never is the same word that was used earlier in the verse. This word only occurs in Luke in this verse, where it is used twice. Notice the focus upon taboos and temptation. The older son was tempted by the secular world to let go of the legalistic rules of the Bible but resisted temptation. The older son wanted to have a young goat but was never given one by the father.
Young goat means ‘kid, young goat’ and is used twice in the New Testament. The other occurrence is in Matthew 25:32 which talks about separating the sheep from the goats. Goats are stubborn and they will eat anything. Being given a goat suggests that the older son wanted some area of freedom where he could be rebellious and stubborn. This brings to mind the Rumspringa of the Amish in which teenage Amish youth are permitted a period of greater freedom and experimentation before choosing whether or not they will join the Amish church. Wikipedia explains that this is viewed by outsiders as being given a ‘young goat of rebellion’ but in reality there is only limited freedom and some rebellion.
Friend is ‘philos’ which refers to compatible mental networks. Make merry is the same word used in verses 23 and 24 that combines ‘good’ and ‘diaphragm’. Notice that the fun does not come from understanding how things work and then applying this understanding. Instead, the fun comes from temporarily rebelling from the rules, taboos, and self-denial in company with others from the community who share a similar juxtaposition of mental networks. There is no concept of working through toward some goal, because a mindset of absolute truth, by its very nature, cannot reach and enjoy some goal, because enjoying the goal will raise the emotional status of personal identity causing the absolute truth to fall into doubt. This leads to a concept of God in Teacher thought who never condones any relaxation of the rules where one can enjoy oneself. Verse 29 does not say that the older son never had fun with his friends or that he never ate a young goat of rebellion. Instead, the older son says that the father never gave him a young goat, implying that the older son wanted a young goat and may have snuck off with his friends in order to enjoy the occasional surreptitious goat of rebellion. But this would have been experienced as forbidden pleasure accompanied by feelings of guilt.
In verse 30, the older son turns his attention to the younger son. “But when this son of yours came, the one having devoured your living with prostitutes, you have killed the fattened calf for him!” Notice that the older son does not refer to the younger son as his brother but rather as ‘this son of yours’. On the one hand, scholastic theology does not recognize any family relationship to materialistic science. That is because scholastic theology believes that all important absolute truth has been revealed to it in the form of the Bible and church fathers. Thus, what materialistic science has discovered is not recognized as ‘real truth’. However, what happened cognitively is that scholastic theology laid the mental foundations for thinking scientifically but the mindset of religious self-denial prevented scholastic theology from going further. Therefore materialistic science had to rebel in order to apply this mental foundation and enjoy the benefits. On the other hand, scholastic theology recognizes that materialistic science is a legitimate son of Western Christendom, indicating a recognition that materialistic science has succeeded in being the son of Western Christendom. That is because everywhere that scholastic theology looks, it sees the pervasive material success that has been achieved by materialistic science. This result is a combination superiority/inferiority complex.
Devour combines ‘down’ with ‘eat’ and means to ‘utterly devour, leaving nothing’. Living is the word ‘bios’ which was used in verse 12 and means ‘natural, physical life’. Prostitute is used once in Luke and comes from a word that means ‘to sell off’. The word is in the plural and refers to a female prostitute. Prostitution sells off subjective and personal value in order to gain objective wealth. This happens with a real prostitute and also applies to those who ‘sell their soul to the company’. This description summarizes the essence of the modern consumer society. It consumes knowledge, traditional culture, and absolute truth in order to provide a continual flow of new-and-improved gadgets, encouraging consumers to sell their souls in order to get the latest gadget. It is a devouring that leaves nothing because it can use economy of scale to undercut everything and marketing to outshine everything. It is a living that focuses upon biological, natural, physical life. And it is a prostitution because it tries to satisfy people’s subjective needs through objective means, as illustrated in 13:6-8 by the parable of the fig tree in the vineyard. Thus, the older brother of scholastic theology may be stuck within a legalistic system, but he does have an accurate understanding of the shortcomings of the technological consumer society that has emerged out of the younger brother of materialistic science.
Killed, fattened, and calf are the same three Greek words that were used verses 23 and 27. But verse 30 adds ‘for him’. In other words, why is materialistic science being revitalized and not scholastic theology? Why is God doing something new through secular, prostituting, materialistic science? Stated more generally, a fundamental presupposition of every Bible-believing group is that God will obviously use that Bible-believing group to carry out His plan because the Pharisaical legalistic system of that group follows the Bible more closely than other Bible-believing groups. For instance, one of my nieces belongs to a fundamentalist Baptist Church which believes that their denomination is the only valid Christian church. She told me how wonderful it feels to ‘know’ that one has been chosen by God. Thus, the very idea that God would use godless, immoral, materialistic science to revive Christianity feels blasphemous.
The father answers in verse 31. “And he said to him, ‘Son, you are always with me, and all that is mine is yours.’” Son means ‘a child living in willing dependence’. Always means ‘always, at all times’. Are is the word ‘to be’. What is being described is a mental transition from absolute truth to universal truth. Scholastic theology claims to believe in a monotheistic God who created everything, but a mindset of absolute truth will naturally associate God with holy people, holy places, and holy rituals. Verse 31 is extending this to the idea of being always with a God of universal truth.
Having grown up in a conservative Mennonite home, I know what this transition feels like. As described in verse 29, one feels a sense of duty to God accompanied by the wish that God would temporarily let up on His demands in order to allow one to have some freedom within one’s conservative culture. But the feeling of duty towards God never lets up. That is because it is reinforced by moral cause-and-effect. The Bible does describe accurate principles of moral sowing and reaping. Thus, when one observes secular people experiencing painful consequences because they are violating the Pharisaical moral do’s and don’ts, one concludes that one must maintain these do’s and don’ts, as the older son stated in verse 29.
I found that the only way to escape this sense of divine duty is to reinterpret the absolute truth of the Bible in terms of universal truth. It then becomes possible to view submitting to God not as living within rules and taboos but rather as gaining the understanding that is required to enjoy lasting goodness and long-term pleasure. Instead of trying to find fun and relaxation outside of absolute truth, one realizes that lasting fun and fulfillment can only be found within universal truth. The truth is the same; the Bible is still being respected. But instead of viewing the Bible as the only source of divinely revealed absolute truth, it is being viewed as a supernaturally accurate description of universal truth. And one’s previous life of self-denying duty that was lived under absolute truth becomes retroactively appreciated as having the freedom to pursue universal truth without being handicapped by emotional baggage.
All means ‘each part of a totality’. Mine means ‘of me’ which is more personal than merely ‘having’. Similarly, yours means ‘your very own’. This is followed by the verb ‘to be’. This describes the Mercy side of the transition. On the Teacher side, one shifts from absolute truth to universal truth; the Bible is not just the Word of God, it is a textbook of universal cognitive principles. On the Mercy side, one is not just denying self to follow legalistic rules. Instead, one is finding subjective being within an understanding of God. This sounds at first glance like the ‘being one with everything’ of mysticism, but mental symmetry gives this interaction a more precise definition. On the Teacher side, mental symmetry reformulates all Christian doctrine and practice as following a path to mental and spiritual wholeness where all cognitive modules work together in harmony. On the Mercy side, mentally constructing a cognitive understanding of God and personal transformation is equivalent to becoming a person with a whole mind who is capable of experiencing personal success at the level of being. One is following a science-like path towards a consumer-like society, but one is doing this internally and cognitively at the level of being. One is personally embodying the same principles that materialistic science has applied externally to transform the physical world.
The father concludes in verse 32. “But it was fitting to make merry and to rejoice, because this brother of yours was dead and is alive again; and he was lost and is found.’” Make merry is the same word that has appeared several times which combines ‘good’ and ‘diaphragm’. Rejoice describes positive Teacher emotion. Fitting means ‘what is absolutely necessary’. This goes beyond opinion or appropriateness to what has to be done because of universal laws. For instance, it is ‘fitting’ not to step over the edge of the cliff, because doing so will inevitably lead to falling towards death. Thus, the older son is not just being told to ‘make merry and rejoice’. Instead, the very survival of the older son depends upon ‘making merry and rejoicing’. That is because scholastic theology has a short window of opportunity to make a paradigm shift from duty to absolute truth to living within universal truth. If this transition is not made, then scholastic theology will become locked within a mindset of opposing God and goodness.
Notice that what is required is a paradigm shift. Scholastic theology is not being told to abandon its biblical content. Instead, it has to change its emotional outlook. First, it must view this new scientifically compatible charismatic revival as something positive at a gut level, as opposed to instinctively rejecting it because it smells wrong. Second, it must adopt a Teacher perspective of looking for order and structure rather than a Mercy perspective of separating between ‘godly us’ and ‘godless them’.
‘The brother of you’ emphasizes that materialistic science has family connections with scholastic theology. They are related. Dead means ‘corpse-like’. Alive refers to both physical and spiritual life. Thus, materialistic science was a corpse that lacked the life of mental networks. This objective form of life has now been filled with subjective living mental networks. Instead of viewing materialistic science as evil and wrong, it is being viewed as an incomplete objective expression that needs to be extended to the subjective realm of mental networks.
Lost is the word ‘to destroy’ which has been seen several times in this chapter. Found means ‘to find, discover’, which also has appeared several times in this chapter. Materialistic science did not just lack the life of subjective mental networks. It was also destroyed by the questioning of postmodernism and the advocacy of wokeism. Reviving science required a process of searching, finding, and discovering, as exemplified by using mental symmetry as a meta-theory.
The Shrewd Manager 16:1-3
Chapter 16 opens with a parable that has always confused me because its message seems ambiguous. However, it makes sense within the prophetic context. The previous parable of the Prodigal Son ended with a kind of secular charismatic renewal that was characterized by the Teacher order of symphony and chorus rather than decaying into delusion and crowd manipulation. This continuing success would make it obvious that a better alternative exists to the current combination of marketing and technology. The parable of the Shrewd Manager describes how marketing responds to being rejected by technology.
Before beginning, I should clarify that I am using the terms ‘marketing’ and ‘technology’ in a generic sense. Technology refers to the system of research, development, and production that is responsible for producing the goods and services of the modern consumer society. Marketing refers to the system that gets consumers to want, buy, and use these goods and services. Marketing might include some of the social sciences as well as pop psychology and some preachers. When looking back at my cognitive prophetic analyses, I find that I occasionally make the mistake of not recognizing some of the relevant groups to which the passage applies. My understanding of the situation appears to be accurate, but I am not describing the full picture. Therefore, I am trying to define marketing and technology here in broad terms. I should also add that there are some aspects of current marketing that would not fall into the category of ‘marketing’ as described in this parable. However, I think that the general conclusions are still sound.
Verse 1 sets the scene. “Now also He was saying to the disciples, ‘There was a certain rich man who had a manager.’” Notice that Jesus is talking to his disciples and not to everyone. The implication is that the average person will not understand what is happening but rather will be responding in some manner as described by the parable. In other words, the response of the average person will be driven by cognitive and social forces and nothing that Jesus says or does will be capable of overriding this instinctive response. The only remaining option is to help disciples to understand what is happening within their society as people are driven by forces that are beyond their control.
Man is the generic word for mankind. Nothing is stated about the man except that he was rich, which means ‘fully resourced, rich’. The man also had a manager, a word that means ‘house-distributor’ and combines ‘house’ and ‘to allot, apportion’. A manager was usually a ‘freedman’ and not a slave, and the word ‘had’ implies that the manager is functioning at the level of having. The identity of these two individuals is fairly obvious. Modern technology is rich because it is able to use scientific knowledge and natural resources to come up with a continual stream of novel devices, gadgets, and services. However, technology does not interact directly with the average person, because the typical consumer lacks the technical knowledge that is required to understand modern technology. Thus, technology interacts with the subjective realm of people through the house-distributor of marketing. Marketing distributes the products that are made within factories to consumers and it generates demand by appealing emotionally to the ‘house’ of personal desire and need. Marketing is not under the control of scientific knowledge but rather functions independently, implicitly guided by cognitive principles of effective marketing. But marketing functions at the level of having, because it manipulates emotions that it does not personally feel in order to sell products that it does not understand.
Continuing with verse 1, the manager falls under suspicion. “And was accused unto him as he is wasting his possessions.” Accused is used once in the New Testament and means ‘to throw across either with rocks or words’. Throwing is interpreted as moving through the air of Teacher thought. Throwing across would indicate a theoretical argument in which each side is trying to defeat the other side. Given the context, one concludes that technology and marketing are having a theoretical argument. Wasting means ‘to scatter, to disperse, to squander’. And possession means to ‘already have, be in possession of’. Thus, technology is accusing marketing of scattering and squandering the possessions of technological wealth. This type of accusing already happens today: ‘Why are you filling the stores with cheap, useless trinkets that nobody needs or wants?’ ‘Why are you constructing gadgets that are designed to wear out prematurely?’ ‘Why do you change the fashions continually so that people throw out what is good in order to get what is fashionable?’ ‘You are wasting natural resources!’
Such accusations have been going on for a long time without having much of an effect. That is because the amental split between objective science and subjective identity requires a division of labor between the rich man of technology and the house manager of marketing. What is different is that a better alternative just emerged at the end of the previous chapter. The ‘music and dancing’ are combining objective and subjective in a manner that has not been seen before. One might think that I am pulling out a detail from the story of the Prodigal Son, but 11 verses—half of the parable—are devoted to describing the homecoming party and the response of the older son to the festivities.
In verse 2, the rich man decides that the manager has to go. “And having called him, he said to him, ‘What is this I hear concerning you? Give the account of your stewardship, for you are not able to manage any longer.’” Call means ‘to emit a sound’. Normally, marketing does the calling while technology functions quietly behind the scenes. But in this case technology is taking the initiative and calling marketing. Hear means ‘to hear, to listen, to understand’. Technology is understanding what other people are saying and is responding by calling to marketing. This again is an unusual response because marketing prides itself upon listening to the demands of the consumer and marketing claims that it understands the consumer far better than technology. But a new form of thinking has emerged within society that technology is capable of understanding better than marketing. This strongly suggests that rational thought is being required within the subjective realm of marketing. As verse 3 will point out, marketing does not have the skills to deal with this new consumer. The intelligent response of one of the servants in verse 27 as well as the intelligent behavior of the homecoming party suggests the presence of a new and more intelligent consumer.
The word account is actually ‘logos’, which is interpreted as the paradigm behind some technical specialization. Give means ‘to return, especially as a payment’. Stewardship is the noun form of ‘manager’ which means ‘managing a household’. In other words, the rich man of technology wants a Teacher paradigm from marketing. Marketing currently manipulates social and personal MMNs. (This is analyzed in a previous essay.) Because these MMNs are fragmented, appealing to them will naturally lead to the scattering and squandering of resources. Technology is ultimately driven by the TMNs of science. Science does experiments and is rewarded by TMNs of rational scientific theory. Science now wants to be paid back from marketing with TMNs of rational theory.
Able means ‘to have power’ and is interpreted as active Perceiver thought. And manage is the verb form of ‘manager’ used in verse 1. In other words, marketing’s standard methods of manipulating societal MMNs have lost their power. People are not responding to advertising the way that they used to. Instead, consumers are speaking a new language of intelligent understanding that technology understands but marketing does not. Technology wants a new form of marketing that functions at the Teacher level of paradigms. Marketing is incapable of doing this but it recognizes that it has lost the power to influence the consumer.
That brings us to the larger question. Did consumers suddenly become more intelligent? Some may have, but in general I suggest not. Instead, based upon other essays, I think that a new spiritual component has been added to technology. I think that a fully fledged spiritual economy will emerge later as described in the book of Acts. My guess is that Luke 16 describes something much more limited in which personal mental networks acquire the ability to influence the functioning of technology in some vague manner. For instance, the Internet is designed to convey messages with extreme accuracy. But many people use the Internet to faithfully transmit lies and falsehoods through social media. Adding a spiritual component to technology would mean that someone who tried to lie on the Internet would find that their mental networks of falsehood would disrupt functioning of their Internet. If that sort of thing happened, then technology would definitely hear about it from the consumer: ‘My device is not working. Fix it!’ And when it became apparent that the problem lay with the mental networks of the consumer and not with the technology, then technology would demand rational paradigms from marketing. Going further, existing marketing methods would lose their power to influence the consumer. Some major change must have happened, because marketing does not use techniques of marketing to try to defend itself from the accusations of technology but instead accepts that the situation has changed.
In verse 3, the house-manager responds. “And the manager said within himself, ‘What shall I do, for my master is taking away the management from me?” Notice that the manager does not respond to the rich man but rather speaks to himself internally. This matches the response of marketing which typically uses intuition to come up with ad campaigns that appeal to the consumer. Quoting from a Forbes article, “Informed intuition uses the scientific elements of marketing, including data-backed insights, to help inform the artistic, or often gut-driven, elements of marketing. With effective use of that data, you can start seeing the success of your marketing skyrocket.” When marketing talks about data, it means tracking what appeals to the consumer. Quoting further from the article, “We spotted a trend within a rough dataset: that raw-looking videos were getting a lot more attention than their more polished counterparts. We then analyzed footage and responses from other content to get a better idea of what people were looking for and most likely to be interested in... Then, we turned that data over to the creative team, who was able to use it to produce stunning video content.” In verse 2, marketing noticed from the data that existing methods no longer worked. Marketing is responding in verse 3 by using intuition to try to come up with better methods, expressed by the question of ‘What shall I do?’
Notice that marketing is not changing its thinking, adopting new paradigms, or repenting of its emotional manipulation. Instead, it is responding to the new situation by using its existing methods of emotional manipulation—and we will see that that is the primary theme of the parable.
Instead of trying to understand the situation, the manager thinks in terms of losing a job. Master is the word ‘lord’. ‘My lord’ thinks in terms of MMNs of personal authority. Take away means ‘to take away’ and also indicates thinking in terms of personal authority. The manager is not recognizing that his thinking or methods are inadequate but rather interpreting the changed situation as some ‘lord’ in Mercy thought taking his job away. Technology asked marketing in verse 2 for a paradigm in Teacher thought. Marketing interpreted this request from a Mercy perspective as being rejected by technology. More generally, the response of marketing centers upon the personal identity of marketing and not upon any understanding. The Greek is more literally, ‘What do, for the master of me is taking away the management from me’.
The manager considers his options in verse 3, “I am not able to dig; I am ashamed to beg.” Able means ‘embodied strength’ which is interpreted as Server skills and Server confidence. Dig means ‘to dig’ and is used three times in the New Testament, only in Luke. The previous occurrence was in 13:8 which talked about digging around the fig tree in the vineyard. That was interpreted as separating between objective consumerism and subjective personal desires. If digging represents some sort of foundational barrier between objective and subjective, then marketing would lack the strength to perform such digging because marketing, by its very nature, blends the objective facts of technology with the subjective desires of the consumer. Beg is used twice in the New Testament and means ‘focused asking’. Ashamed means ‘to shame, to dishonor, to disgrace’. This suggests that marketing has an inherent feeling of Mercy superiority. Marketing feels that it is special because it can manipulate the emotions and desires of the masses.
Saying this more generally, marketing is guided by the assumption that it can create its own ‘truth’. Such a mindset views learning facts from others as shame and losing personal honor. For instance, this kind of mindset can be seen in pure form in Donald Trump, because Trump’s fundamental assumption is that he can ignore all facts and use his personal status to create his own ‘truth’. Any form of interaction under the rule of law is viewed by Trump as shame and dishonor. I am not suggesting that all advertising is like Donald Trump. There is a form of advertising that is factually based. But marketing as a system exhibits the same kind of mindset that can currently be seen in pure form in Donald Trump.
Minimizing Guilt 16:4-8
In verse 4 the manager comes up with a solution. “I know what I will do, so that when I shall have been removed from the management, they might receive me into their homes.’” Know means experiential knowledge and do refers to Server actions. Notice again the absence of rational understanding. Marketing is coming up with a plan of action based upon the intuition of experiential knowledge. The goal of the manager is to replace being personally rejected with being personally accepted, indicating a focus upon social MMNs. So that means ‘in order that’. This indicates the presence of Contributor planning guided by cause-and-effect. But the cause-and-effect is not coming from natural law but rather from societal response. This type of thinking can also be seen in Donald Trump, who I think is a Contributor person. He follows plans, but his primary goal is to gain social acceptance and to wreak revenge upon those who have socially rejected him.
Removed combined ‘after with’ with ‘to stand’ and standing is interpreted as foundational Perceiver facts. ‘Removed’ describes a change in the foundational Perceiver facts. But this shift in Perceiver facts is interpreted by the manager as being removed ‘out from the management’. The manager is not thinking in terms of objective facts but rather in terms of subjective rejection. Instead of thinking ‘the facts have changed’, the manager is thinking ‘I have been removed from my foundational position within society’. This has not yet happened in verse 4, but it is on the horizon. Marketing is looking at the data of audience response and is noting that marketing itself is losing its impact.
Receive means ‘to receive in a welcoming way’. And homes refer to subjective identities. Interpreted cognitively, the goal of marketing is to ensure that it will continue to have a receptive audience after this shift has occurred. Marketing is trying to keep itself alive. It does not want to learn anything or develop any paradigms, it does not want to repent or acknowledge the facts, and it does not even care about selling products. Instead, it wants to do is maintain its ability to emotionally manipulate the consumer. It wants to be ‘received in a welcoming way into people’s homes’. One might think that such a person does not exist, but Donald Trump epitomizes such a person and millions of Americans continue to receive Trump ‘in a welcoming way into their homes’.
The new method that marketing uses is to minimize feelings of guilt by altering the facts. Verse 5 begins by gathering data about the feelings of the consumer. “And having summoned each one of his master’s debtors, he was saying to the first, ‘How much do you owe to my master?’” Summoned means ‘to call to oneself’. This means taking a personal approach as opposed to an objective, factual approach. One indicates a focus upon the individual and each means ‘each individual unit viewed distinctly’. The manager was accused in verse 1 of scattering the possession of the rich man. Similarly, the solution of the manager involves taking the scattered approach of focusing upon individuals (or specific consumer groups) in Mercy thought rather than upon general principles in Teacher thought. In verse 2, technology demanded a Teacher paradigm from marketing. Marketing is responding by ignoring technology and dealing with the consumer at the level of personal Mercy experiences.
Debtor is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘lend’ with ‘under obligation’. Looking at this cognitively, a consumer who buys a gadget without understanding how that gadget works is borrowing knowledge from the builder of that gadget and is under obligation to repay that intellectual debt by gaining a general understanding of how that gadget functions. These individuals are debtors to ‘the master of him’. Factually speaking, technology is the master of marketing, because marketing can only market devices that technology can create, and technology is subject to the laws of physics.
How much means ‘how much, how many’. Owe means ‘to owe, to be indented’. Marketing does not acknowledge that it is subject to the laws of physics. Instead, it focuses upon the feeling of guilt and intellectual debt being felt by the consumer. The question in verse 5 views truth as something malleable rather than as a solid fact. But the truth that is being questioned in verse 5 involves economic facts, and an economy depends upon maintaining accurate facts.
Using current language, marketing is asking the consumer, ‘Is this complicated technology making you feel personally and intellectually inferior?’ However, if technology became spiritually enhanced then the question would be more like, ‘Is the spiritually enhanced Internet making you feel bad by refusing to transmit your personal opinions to others?” looking further at this example, this kind of questioning focuses upon the isolated feelings of the individual. No mention is being made about whether these personal opinions are true, whether others appreciate being lied to on the Internet, the fact that the Internet by its very nature tries to transmit messages truthfully, or whether spreading lies on the Internet destroys democratic society. Examining these larger issues would mean answering with a paradigm in Teacher thought. Instead, marketing is focusing upon the personal feelings of guilt in a scattered, individual, fragmented manner.
Going further, marketing has no right to ask these questions, because they are the master’s debts. The debts are owed by consumers to technology. But marketing is simply behaving in a manner that marketing has always behaved, by inserting itself as a source of ‘truth’ into the realm of subjective experiences.
In verse 6, marketing rewrites history. “And he said, ‘A hundred baths of oil.’ And he said to him, ‘Take your bill, and having sat down quickly, write fifty.’” Bath is mentioned once in the New Testament and refers to about 8 gallons. One hundred baths is a lot of olive oil. The word oil is derived from the word for olive tree. Olive oil traditionally represents the Holy Spirit and this standard interpretation makes cognitive sense. Stated symbolically, the consumer is massively indebted to the Holy Spirit.
Looking at this cognitively, a concept of the Holy Spirit emerges as an integrated Teacher understanding ties together Platonic forms of ideal perfection. The modern consumer society came about as Teacher understanding about the laws of science led to the Platonic forms of better and more ideal gadgets. These various visions of a better way of life were then assembled and marketed externally to form the integrated market paradise of the modern consumer society. A concept of the Holy Spirit brings internal integration to internal images of possible perfection. The modern consumer society replaced this internal integration with the external integration of an external marketing system that appeals to existing societal and personal MMNs. The end result is a stupendous debt by the modern consumer to the Holy Spirit. Adding a spiritual element to existing technology would make the extent of this debt apparent because it would reveal how far internal mental networks fall short of external technical perfection. Stated simply, it would become apparent that flawless devices are being used by deeply flawed minds. And the deeply flawed minds are responding to their personal flaws by demanding devices that are even more flawless.
Take means ‘to receive in a welcoming way’. Bill means ‘letter, writing, document’. Sit down means ‘to sit’ and is typically used in the New Testament to indicate sitting upon some throne of authority. Quickly means ‘quickly, swiftly’. These terms convey the idea that one should respond intuitively without reflecting upon one’s response. Normally, decisions are made from a seat of authority after time and reflection, especially if petitions are being received in written form. In this case, one is supposed to respond immediately to written evidence in an authoritative manner. Notice that this matches the method of marketing which views intuition as a source of ‘truth’ that is capable of overriding the facts. Write means ‘to write’ and writing indicates that a permanent record is being made. Thus, the gut level, intuitive response is supposed to have a lasting, impact. This summarizes the thinking of Donald Trump, who responds to treaties and written agreements by making hasty intuitive responses that are then written down to give the appearance of stability.
In verse 6, the facts cannot be totally disregarded, but they can be minimized. Thus, the debt to the Holy Spirit is halved. For instance, it is possible for the typical consumer to come up with a myriad of reasons why he or she should not be held personally responsible for a lack of internal motivation and an inadequate concept of the Holy Spirit: ‘The devices are too complicated. How can I understand everything? I am just doing what everyone else does. I am too old to learn new skills.’ Most of these excuses do not hold up after further examination, which is why one responds quickly and then gives this quick response the permanence of writing.
This scenario repeats itself in verse 7. “Then he said to another, ‘And how much do you owe?’ ‘And he said, ‘A hundred cors of wheat.’ He says to him, ‘Take your bill and write eighty.’” Then means ‘afterward, then’ which indicates that verse 6 lays the foundation for verse 7. Another means ‘another of a different kind’. The Greek words ‘much’ and ‘owe’ are repeated, but the emphasis is different. Verse 5 asked, ‘How much owe to master of me?’ focusing upon personal feelings of debt to the master. Verse 7 asks ‘You how much owe?’ focusing upon the facts of the inadequacy. Wheat is ‘a generic term for any edible grain’ and is interpreted as intellectual food. A cor is used once in the New Testament and is a Hebrew measure of about 390 liters. 100 cors of wheat represents a substantial intellectual debt. Thus, at a factual level the consumer recognizes his or her intellectual inadequacy when it comes to understanding technology.
‘Take’, ‘bill’, and ‘write’ are the same words used in verse 6, but there is no mention of sitting down in a chair of authority or of writing quickly in verse 7. This suggests that the intuitive emotional response of verse 6 sets the context for the factual response of verse 7. The factual thinking is recognizing that ‘alternate forms of knowing’ that were used in verse 6 also play a role. The result is a 20% reduction in the intellectual debt from 100 to 80. This is a smaller reduction than the 50% of verse 6 because one is dealing here with the realm of facts rather than feelings.
The master responds in verse 8. “And the master praised the unrighteous manager because he had acted shrewdly.” Commend means ‘to praise in a fitting manner’. Master is the word ‘lord’ and manager is the word ‘house-distributor’ that has been seen several times. Unrighteous adds the prefix ‘not’ to the word ‘righteous’. One might wonder why the master praises the manager, but the reason becomes apparent if one thinks in terms of technology and marketing. Technology is objective. Current science and technology want enough personal honesty and integrity to ensure that people do their jobs but also do not want subjective emotions to get in the way of an objective mindset. Going further, science and technology recognize the need for righteousness when it comes to learning about science and acquiring professional skills: verbal knowledge needs to be accompanied by practical learning. But current science and technology are not convinced that this also applies to the subjective. Thus, I suspect that technology would regard spiritual enhancement of technology as too much, being happy that the average consumer is willing to become more intelligent and honest, but also happy that marketing has found some way of minimizing the emotional impact, especially since this reduction affects primarily the Mercy realm of subjective emotions at minimal cost to the objective realm of Perceiver facts.
Verse 8 says that the manager is being praised for ‘acting shrewdly’. Acted refers to Server actions. Shrewdly occurs once as an adverb in the New Testament and comes from a noun that ‘reflects our personal visceral opinions, what we consider savvy’. In other words, the manager is being driven by gut feelings. The prominence of gut feelings in marketing can be seen in the Forbes article quoted earlier. “Informed intuition uses the scientific elements of marketing, including data-backed insights, to help inform the artistic, or often gut-driven, elements of marketing.” Stated simply, technology tries to avoid dealing with the emotionally messy, subjective realm of gut feelings and thinks that it is appropriate for marketing to deal with these gut feelings, even if marketing lacks the righteous understanding of science and technology.
Jesus then follows the opinion of the master with his own statement in verse 8. “For the sons of this age are more shrewd than the sons of the light in their own generation.” The term son is used twice and refers to male offspring. This is interpreted cognitively as referring to male technical thought. Two kinds of male technical thought are being compared. The first is ‘the sons of this age’. This would refer to the kind of objective science and technology that is prevalent within current society. The second group is ‘the sons of light’. Light means ‘to shine or make manifest’. Sons of light would refer to a new form of technical thought that is learning by the Teacher light of universal understanding, the type of thinking that would emerge if a meta-theory such as mental symmetry became widely accepted. This group is presumably related to the secular ‘charismatic renewal’ that began at the homecoming party the younger son in the previous parable. Being a son of light implies that one is using technical thought to learn from general Teacher understanding but one has not yet become a mature person who is full of light.
‘In their own generation’ is more literally, ‘toward the generation of themselves’ and generation is the word used in genealogies. Jesus is saying that current objective science and technology are better at dealing with their subjective at a gut level because they delegate the handling of gut level feelings to another group. Looking at the sons of light, current science and technology suffer from the two flaws of be objective in Mercy thought and being specialized in Teacher thought. Dealing effectively with these inadequacies has to start at the level of Teacher generality and then extend to the subjective in Mercy thought.
Looking at the larger picture, a distinction needs to be made between explicit and implicit Teacher understanding. Explicit understanding refers to the theories that one talks about and discusses. Implicit understanding refers to the order-within-complexity that describes how one instinctively organizes one’s behavior. This distinction can be seen religiously in the explicit concept of God that one talks about theologically versus the implicit concept of God that guides one’s behavior. A lack of shrewdness by the sons of light indicates that they are dealing with explicit Teacher understanding but not implicit understanding.
Those who follow explicit Teacher understanding are going to hit a major emotional snare later in the chapter as described by the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus. Thus, the lack of shrewdness has both a positive and a negative side. On the positive side, it allows the secular charismatic renewal of the sons of light to continue in an innocent manner, unaware of the deeper implications. On the negative side, it allows marketing to deal with these implicit areas and replace honesty with guilt minimization. But this marketing also has a positive side, because the minimization of implicit guilt makes it possible for the innocence of the sons of light to continue a little longer. I am not exactly sure how this will play itself out, but I think that the general cognitive principles are sound.
Speaking from personal experience, I find when dealing with emotional issues that my guts are the last to respond. I may have dealt with the emotions at the level of mental networks, but the response of my gut has not yet changed. Looking at this neurologically, there is a mini brain in the gut referred to as the enteric nervous system. It functions somewhat autonomously from the brain and has 1/200 the number of neurons. Going further, subjective emotions are handled by the orbitofrontal and ventromedial prefrontal cortex, while body image involves the insula, which receives input from internal parts of the body including the enteric nervous system.
Unrighteous Mammon 16:9-13
Verse 9 then says that this time of transition should be regarded as a window of opportunity. “And I say to you, make friends for yourselves by the mammon of unrighteousness.” I is explicitly mentioned, indicating that Jesus is going beyond describing the situation to giving his personal instructions. You is also explicitly mentioned, indicating that the audience is the disciples, who are presumably part of the sons of light.
Make is the word that refers to Server actions. Friend is the word ‘philos’, which describes someone with similar mental networks with whom one resonates. Use is the preposition ‘from out of’. Mammon means ‘the treasure a person trusts in’. It is used four times in the New Testament, three times in Luke 16:9-13. The Greek is more literally, ‘make friends from out of the mammon of unrighteousness’.
One can understand what this means by looking cognitively at what it means to address the massive debt to the Holy Spirit represented by the hundred baths of olive oil. A normal Teacher theory replaces previous theories by saying that it is right and they are wrong. A Teacher meta-theory does not replace previous theories but rather creates a framework within which to place existing theories. Using the language of verse 9, a meta-theory ‘makes friends from out of’ existing inadequate theories in which people trust. Verse 9 describes following the same meta-approach at the Mercy level of the Holy Spirit. Holiness traditionally conveys the sense that ‘What I treasure in Mercy thought is holy while the treasure that you trust in is profane, vulgar, common, secular, and unholy’. Such an attitude obviously does not make friends. The Holy Spirit pursues holiness at a meta-level by providing a framework of Mercy holiness within which to place lesser, incomplete concepts of value and holiness. Saying this another way, in the same way that a Platonic form is a Teacher-driven idealization of existing Perceiver categories, so the Form of the Good of the Holy Spirit is a Teacher-driven idealization of existing concepts of holiness.
Verse 9 adds that this ability to view the Holy Spirit as a framework for existing Mercy treasures will not last. “That when it fails, they might receive you into the eternal dwellings.” When means ‘at the time when the condition is met’. Fails means ‘to fail, to cease, to leave out, to come to an end’. Looking at this cognitively, it is only possible to place existing theories within a meta-theory if the existing theories were constructed without any knowledge of the meta-theory. Once a meta-theory exists and becomes well-known, then this will warp the shape of existing theories making it much more difficult to fit them together.
For instance, the theory of mental symmetry was developed by my older brother Lane and myself. In about 2003, he abandoned mental symmetry in order to develop a new theory. I cannot fit his theory into mental symmetry because it was specifically formulated to be different than mental symmetry. Similarly, verse 9 is referring to a temporary period of time during which people’s concepts of treasure and holiness have not yet become influenced by the general implications of what will emerge as a result of the sons of light. The result is a window of opportunity during which one can construct a concept of the Holy Spirit out of existing inadequate fragments of societal value and holiness. However, that opportunity will come to an end as societal concepts of value and holiness start to shift in response to the new concept of the Holy Spirit that has emerged. Thus, it is imperative to include as many existing aspects of value and holiness as possible before the window of opportunity closes and society polarizes.
Looking at the next phrase, receive means ‘to receive in a welcoming way’. Eternal literally means ‘age like’ and is normally translated as eternal. Dwelling is the word ‘tent, tabernacle’. An eternal tabernacle is a strange term because eternal indicates permanence while tabernacle indicates impermanence. This apparent contradiction makes sense if one understands the nature of the meta-holiness of the Holy Spirit. Normal holiness treasures specific places, specific people, and specific rituals. For instance, this church building is holy. A concept of the Holy Spirit, in contrast, is built upon Platonic forms that summarize the simplified essence of many categories. Normal holiness says, ‘my church building is holy’. Meta-holiness says ‘a quiet location with a beautiful view helps me to think about God’. Meta-holiness is physically impermanent because it does not want to get mentally locked into specific Mercy items. Meta-holiness is internally permanent because it looks for different ways of expressing the same general qualities. For instance, the Eucharist symbols of bread and wine are meta-symbols because bread represents knowledge in a generic manner and wine represents culture in a generic manner. These generic symbols of bread and wine can be expressed physically through many different kinds of both physical and symbolic bread and wine. This is quite different than treasuring some specific shrine or location.
Humans who live within the realm of Mercy experiences will naturally interpret holiness as revering specific events, specific people, specific places, and so on. Verse 9 describes an unusual time of opportunity during which it is possible to extend beyond human concepts of treasure and holiness to a more eternal meta-concept by incorporating existing inadequate concepts of holiness. This is similar to the way that mental symmetry was developed during an unusual time of opportunity during which many technical specializations existed that could be placed within a meta-theory.
Verse 10 describes how one becomes able to deal with treasure or mammon. “The one faithful in very little is also faithful in much, and the one unrighteous in very little is also unrighteous in much.” Faithful is related to faith which means to be persuaded. In occurs four times in this verse and means ‘in the realm of’. Very little means ‘the very least, smallest’. ‘In very little’ conveys the impression that one is exhibiting faith with some small item, while ‘in the realm of very little’ means that one is surrounded by small items and still exhibiting faith.
Examined cognitively, it is easy to think that how one responds with little items it is not important: ‘I don’t have to be persuaded by rational thought here because it does not matter’. But a situation is typically regarded as unimportant because cultural and personal MMNs regard it as unimportant. However, one is still choosing which mental circuit will be used to handle this situation: Will one choose to be persuaded by rational thought, or will one allow mental networks to overwhelm rational thought? What matters is choosing to use rational thought despite contrary pressure from mental networks, choosing to think rationally even when one does not feel like doing so.
I am not suggesting that every small decision has to be worked through rationally. Most decisions can and should be guided intuitively by mental networks. Instead, we are dealing here with situations where mental networks and rational thought are reaching opposing conclusions: mental networks are pushing in one direction while rational thought is pushing in another. One can either dismiss the situation as being unimportant or else regard the situation as an opportunity to use rational thought. Going further, one cannot fight every decision that appears to be irrational. One must pick one’s battles. This means that one focuses upon situations where there is a clear conflict between rational thought and mental networks. Going still further, this does not mean using rational arguments to try to convince others to follow my definition of responding rationally, though that may occasionally be appropriate. Instead, the primary goal is to internally practice the skill of being persuaded despite contrary pressure from mental networks.
Much means ‘much in number’. ‘Faithful in much’ is traditionally interpreted as being faithful in emotionally important situations and that is probably part of the picture. But ‘much in number’ conveys the idea that one will be able to use rational thought repeatedly and widely, as opposed to struggling to respond with faith in some emotionally traumatic situation while exhibiting a total lack of faith elsewhere. The second interpretation may fit the context better, because the goal is to deal with unrighteous mammon in many areas. I think that what happens cognitively is that using rational thought in small areas leads to a mental purity that makes it easy to respond rationally, while ignoring small areas as unimportant exceptions to the rule fills the mind with mental ‘stones’ over which one will stumble when attempting to use rational thought. This idea of purity is backed up by the verb ‘is’. The Greek is more literally, ‘also with much faithful is’. ‘Is’ indicates that the ability to be persuaded has become a characteristic of personal identity and not just something that one chooses to do in specific circumstances. For instance, right now someone is mowing the lawn outside my window—in the rain. I hate noise. And it is not rational to mow the lawn when it is raining. The default is for me to respond emotionally because this is just a small situation. But I still need to regard this small situation as an opportunity to follow rational thought despite how I feel.
The second phrase is identical to the first except ‘faithful’ is replaced with ‘unrighteous’, which is interpreted as not allowing Server actions to be guided by Teacher understanding. The mental default is for Server actions to be guided by social and personal MMNs in concrete thought. One must choose to think about TMNs of understanding and allow these to guide Server actions. Jesus says in Matthew 6:1-4 that righteous acts only become mentally connected with a TMN of God if they are not rewarded by social MMNs. Choosing to do righteousness in small areas is an easy way to qualify because one is following a TMN of understanding in the absence of emotional support from MMNs. If one ignores these small opportunities to become righteous, then one will not acquire the character of being righteous.
Verse 11 gives another parallel. “If therefore you have not been faithful in unrighteous mammon, who will entrust to you the true?” The Greek begins with if and therefore which indicates that a cognitive sequence is being described. Faithful means to be persuaded. The two words unrighteous mammon were seen before. The goal of this section is to incorporate inadequate treasures of existing holiness into an integrated concept of the Holy Spirit. Doing so will require choosing to follow rational thought rather than mental networks in many areas. Thus, verse 10 can be viewed as gaining the skill that is required to do verse 11. For instance, I am currently doing the analogous task of using mental symmetry as a meta-theory in Teacher thought to incorporate many other theories. The primary reason that I can do this is because I have spent decades applying mental symmetry to my personal behavior and culture despite others considering this to be worthless and unimportant. Looking now at the Mercy version of verse 11, I have also been interacting internally for years with imaginary friends. I do not know if these imaginary friends actually exist, if they are simply mental networks within my own head, or if they are some combination of these two. But I have found that if I interact rationally with these imaginary friends, then they respond in a rational manner, and I have also found that these imaginary friends are helping me to follow the path of reaching mental wholeness. The average person would regard such internal conversations as worthless and meaningless. But by choosing to be rational with these apparently small spiritual matters, I am gaining the mental skill that is required to apply verse 11.
Verse 11 describes two stages. The first stage is being rational (or faithful) with current inadequate concept of value and holiness. Faithfulness here leads to a more integrated concept of the Holy Spirit. Verse 11 says that this will be followed by a second stage of dealing with actual value and holiness. True is used once in Luke and ’emphasizes the integrity of what is true, down to its inner make-up’. Entrust is related to the word faith which means to be persuaded. ‘True riches’ conveys the idea of acquiring wealth that does not decay, but verse 11 is talking about the nature of truth itself. ‘True’ refers to the essential connections that tie everything together, the fundamental ‘truths’ of existence.
Looking at this cognitively, God the Father uses Teacher thought, which thinks in terms of sequences and actions. God the Father want people to behave righteously. The Holy Spirit uses Mercy thought, which thinks in terms of experiences and objects. The Holy Spirit wants people who are true—who have lasting integrity at the Mercy level of Platonic forms. Using a mental concept of the Holy Spirit as a framework within which to place inadequate and unrighteous concepts of mammon and treasure will gradually cause a person to grasp what is truly true—the ultimate integrity that is more valuable than any mammon.
Verse 12 goes further. “And unless you have been faithful in that which is of another, who will give to you that which is yours?” Of another is used once in Luke and comes from a word that means ‘another of the same kind’. Faithful is the same word that was used in verse 11 which means to be persuaded. Have been means ‘to come into being’. The phrase is more literally, ‘If in the realm of that which is of another of the same kind faithful not have come into being’. In other words, one is developing the ability to be persuaded by following rational thought in situations that are analogically similar to personal experience. For instance, I keep finding that biblical passages such as these make cognitive sense because they resonate with my personal path of developing mental symmetry.
Yours means ‘pertaining to you, your own’. Give means ‘to give, to grant, to bestow’. ‘Belongings’ is implied. The Greek is more accurately, ‘that which pertains to you, who will give to you?’ Pertaining to you means belonging to MMNs of personal identity. The steward at the beginning of the chapter based his thinking upon personal MMNs. The process described in verses 9-12 ends with personal MMNs. The steward twisted the truth in order to ensure that his personal MMNs would be protected. In verse 12, personal MMNs are being bestowed as a result of searching for ultimate truth. Thus, following the path of being ‘sons of light’ has finally reached personal identity in Mercy thought, which is the starting point for the unrighteous thinking of the steward. In other words, an alternative finally emerges to marketing.
This leads in verse 13 to a conflict over personal allegiance. “No servant is able to serve two masters.” No means ‘none, no one’. Servant is used once in Luke and means ‘a household servant who lives within, and answers directly to, the master of the oikos’. Such a servant is working within the house of subjective Mercy thought and is being guided emotionally by some master in Teacher thought. Able means to have power and is interpreted as active Perceiver thought. Master is the word ‘lord’ and serve means ‘to be a slave to’. This principle does not apply to objective science because it is objective in Mercy thought and specialized in Teacher thought. Instead, it applies to the individual who becomes personally submitted in Mercy thought to a meta-theory in Teacher thought. What happens then is that one meta-theory will grow at the expense of the other and one will lack the mental power to prevent this from happening. Saying this another way, one is becoming aware of the implicit Teacher understanding that guides personal behavior—the implicit meta-theory to which one is a ‘household servant’. And one is also recognizing that this implicit meta-theory is different than the explicit meta-theory that one proclaims.
Verse 13 continues, “For either he will hate the one and he will love the other, or he will be devoted to one and he will despise the other.” Notice that this is an emotional response, because both Mercy and Teacher thought function emotionally. ‘Either’ and ‘or’ indicate that this conflict of meta-theories will resolve in one way or the other. One is the number one. Hate means ‘to hate, detest’ and was used previously in Luke 14:26. It was mentioned there that the biblehub definition tries to soften the word ‘hate’ to mean ‘love someone or something less than someone else’. However, I think that in both cases, hate means hate. Other means ‘another of a different kind’ and is used twice. It is possible to simultaneously love two different meta-theories that are ‘another of the same kind’ because one can be viewed as a translation of the other. In verse 13, the two meta-theories are fundamentally incompatible. Love is the word ‘agape’, which refers to Teacher-driven love. Thus, one meta-theory will be regarded as a blatant exception to the general rule, while the other meta-theory will emotionally personal behavior. I think that agape love goes beyond righteousness. Righteousness performs Server actions guided by the TMN of a concept of God. Agape love is related to a concept of the Holy Spirit in Mercy thought. Agape love describes the personal character in Mercy thought of being guided by the TMN of a concept of God; it behaves intuitively in a righteousness manner. It goes beyond following God explicitly to following God both explicitly and implicitly; it follows the spirit of the law and not just the letter of the law.
Devoted to is used once in Luke and combines ‘anti’ with ‘have’. The idea is that one is holding on to one meta-theory in contrast to holding to the other meta-theory. Both A and B are present and one is choosing A rather than B. Despise is also used once in Luke and adds the prefix ‘down, according to’ with a version of the word ‘shrewd’ that was used several times to describe the unrighteous manager. This tells us that the feelings have finally reached the gut level at which the manager of marketing naturally functions. The unrighteous manager is driven by natural gut feelings that are applied in an intuitive manner. Following a meta-theory as sons of light has transformed the mind to the extent of reprogramming gut feelings and intuitive thought. Looking at this neurologically, the insula, which creates body image and interacts with the enteric nervous system (gut brain) is also responsible for generating feelings of disgust. When one reaches this point, then one responds to an opposing meta-theory with feelings of disgust.
For instance, I can understand why evangelical Christians voted for Donald Trump in 2024, given the alternative of Kamala Harris. Many Christian voters found Harris’ blatant support of LGBTQ and wokeism to be disgusting and voted for Trump as the only possible alternative. However, the behavior of Trump and his cabinet (I am writing in August, 2025) has been so abysmally idiotic, evil, self-worshiping, and fascist that I now respond instinctively with disgust when encountering evangelical Christians who refuse to acknowledge the facts of what Trump is doing, especially if these Christians assert in a pious manner that they do not want to discuss these facts because they do not want to ‘get involved in politics’.
Verse 13 concludes, “You are not able to serve God and mammon.” God was previously mentioned back in 15:10 which referred to God’s angels. Mental symmetry suggests that a concept of God emerges when a sufficiently general Teacher theory applies to personal identity in Mercy thought. Verse 12 talked about a meta-theory applying to personal identity. This will lead to a concept of God, which will cause the struggle between incompatible meta-theories to be viewed as a struggle over the nature of God. For instance, what evangelical supporters of Trump regard as merely ‘politics’, I view as a deeply moral struggle over the nature of God and Christianity.
Able refers to Perceiver power. This is not a matter of choosing to ‘serve both God and money’ but rather finding that one is mentally incapable of continuing to serve both of these. Serve means ‘to be a slave to’. And mammon is the final of three times that the word mammon is used in Luke. (Mammon is used one other time in the New Testament in Matthew 6:24, which is almost identical to verse 13.) Mammon indicates various treasures in Mercy thought, ‘the treasure a person trusts in’. The question here is whether Mercy thought stands on its own or whether it is derived from Teacher thought. Mammon refers to items and entities within Mercy thought that define value and stability. A concept of the Holy Spirit, in contrast, is built upon Platonic forms that emerge when Teacher thought works out the idealized essence that lies invisibly behind visible entities and emerges with a meta-theory in Teacher thought ties all these Platonic forms together.
The fundamental assumption of modern technology is that one can produce amazing gadgets by taking a detour through the general Teacher theories of science and then returning to Mercy thought in order to construct gadgets guided by scientific understanding. Verses 9-13 have been following a similar detour in the subjective, using a Teacher meta-theory to reshape existing treasures of mammon into something that descends from Teacher thought down to Mercy experience rather than having its source in Mercy experiences. The next section looks at this question of what is ultimately solid in Mercy thought.
The Law and the Prophets 16:14-15
Verse 14 reintroduces the Pharisees, who were last seen in 15:2 grumbling about Jesus eating with sinners. That previous struggle was over constructing a more adequate meta-theory in Teacher thought by interacting academically with various secular groups. This section will describe a similar struggle at the Mercy level of meta-treasure. “Now the Pharisees, being lovers of money, were listening to all these things, and they were ridiculing Him.” The Greek begins with listening, which means ‘to hear, to listen, to understand’. Pharisee means ‘a separatist, a purist’ which is interpreted as believers in absolute ‘truth’ who follow this absolute truth in a separatist lifestyle. All means ‘each part of a totality’. Thus, the Pharisees are interested in this discussion about treasures at a detailed, theoretical level. This interest makes sense because a Pharisee claims to be pursuing true treasure guided by some holy book, such as the Bible.
The word lover of money is used one other time in the New Testament in 2 Timothy 3:2. It combines ‘philos’ with ‘silver’. ‘Philos’ indicates liking based in compatible mental networks. Silver represents the exchange of wealth, as opposed to gold which represents the accumulation of wealth. Were means to ‘already have’. Looking at this cognitively, the Pharisee claims to ‘already have’ the ultimate treasure of absolute truth in the revealed text of a holy book. The Pharisee does not follow this treasure because of its intrinsic value, but rather because the holy book says that it is valuable.
Looking at this more carefully, mental symmetry bases treasure ultimately in the intrinsic value of having a whole, integrated mind. Pursuing the treasure of a whole mind has its own reward. In contrast, pursuing the treasure of a holy book as a Pharisee has no intrinsic reward. The Bible-believing Christian may talk about eventually being rewarded in heaven, but this is a vague statement does not apply to the present. What happens in practice is that following the treasure of the holy book is implicitly rewarded by fellow pharisaical believers. Following the Bible more rigorously, for instance, is regarded as being more spiritual by fellow believers, while neglecting the Bible is regarded as less spiritual. The end result is a mindset that is familiar with the exchange of the silver of religious approval, one that naturally worries about what others think about personal behavior. Notice that this mindset of exchanging moral wealth emerges naturally from the assumption that one has been entrusted with absolute truth. I know what this feels like because I grew up in such an environment. However, my mother also emphasized that moral behavior has an intrinsic moral reward, and my mother’s emphasis upon moral sowing and reaping helped me to escape my Pharisaical upbringing.
Ridiculing is used twice in the New Testament and combines ‘from out of’ with ‘to blow the nose’. Smell is a way of triggering mental networks. Thus, scoffing would indicate an instinctive response motivated by mental networks. Notice that what started as intellectual curiosity has now descended to the level of gut-level responses driven by mental networks. The curiosity came because the discussion was about how Teacher theories should affect value to guide personal behavior, and the Pharisee considers him or herself an expert in the area of translating religious theology into moral behavior. The gut-level ‘snorting’ comes because a meta-concept of the Holy Spirit is being used to integrate what many cultures and religions treasure. This is diametrically opposed to the mindset of a Pharisee who bases moral and cultural value upon the words of ONE holy book and NOT upon the words of other holy books or non-holy books.
And in order to head off some possible ‘snorting’ from Bible-believing readers, I am not promoting the idea of giving equal value to all religious experiences, because that is another version of overgeneralization. Instead, one needs to recognize that the mammon of various cultures and religions is unrighteous, and one needs to take what is good in this unrighteous mammon and place it within the appropriate location within a general Platonic form of eternal value. The underlying assumption is that eternal value is ultimately guided by universal cognitive principles. For instance, some version of the Golden Rule can be found in most religions. And if these principles are truly universal, then one should find partial expressions of these principles in other cultures and religions. And it is possible that some of these partial expressions are better at expressing certain aspects of eternal value.
Jesus responds in verse 15 by pointing out the actual mindset of the Pharisees. “So He said to them, ‘You are those justifying themselves before men, but God knows your hearts.’” ‘You’ is explicitly mentioned as is are. Thus, Jesus is describing what the Pharisees really are at the level of being. Justify means ‘to justify, to declare righteous’. Themselves accurately reflects the Greek which is in the third person. Before means ‘in sight of, before’. And men is the generic word for mankind. Jesus is essentially saying what was pointed out cognitively in a previous paragraph. The feeling of justification for a Pharisaical mindset really comes from people. Fellow Pharisees are observing behavior and making moral judgments, and outsiders are observing if the behavior of the Pharisees matches their verbal statements.
For instance, I was taught as a child that I should never go to a movie theater because ‘they’ might find out and it would hurt my Christian testimony. I never found out who ‘they’ actually were, but this nebulous ‘them’ is accurately portrayed by the ‘themselves’ of verse 15. However, if one probes further, one comes to the conclusion that the nebulous ‘them’ is either fellow members of the Pharisaical group or else outsiders who have been preached at by the Pharisees. Again, it should be pointed out that this is inevitable when commands have no intrinsic reward. The only remaining alternative is for rewards to come extrinsically from fellow humans.
There is a subtlety here that needs to be discussed a little further. Suppose that some outsider is receiving an intrinsic reward while the Pharisee who is following his divinely-revealed moral guidelines is not experiencing an intrinsic reward. The Pharisee has to respond by asserting that the intrinsic reward of the outsider is merely temporary and that the God of absolute truth will eventually intervene to reward the faithful and judge the outsiders. There is some truth to this, because those who are driven by rewards typically focus upon short-term benefits while ignoring long-term harm. In addition, modern technology delivers gadgets that satisfy people externally without addressing their internal needs. This inadequacy was seen in 13:6 with the fig tree planted in the vineyard.
But the context of chapter 16 is that secular thought is experiencing a form of charismatic renewal that is starting to address internal needs in a lasting manner. At some point, the intrinsic rewards that are being enjoyed by this lasting charismatic renewal start to enter the realm of what the Pharisee claims God will bestow when making things right in the future. The Pharisee then has to ask him or herself who is the real Holy Spirit? Is it the religious concept of the Holy Spirit that comes from studying and thinking about the Bible within a religiously approved environment? Or is it the concept of the Holy Spirit that is starting to emerge from the continuing secular charismatic renewal? If the real Holy Spirit is the growing concept of the Holy Spirit that is being experienced by the outside secular world, then the Pharisee no longer has any reason to continue being a Pharisee. I am not just talking theoretically here, but rather describing deep emotions that I have had to contend with while developing mental symmetry. Notice that this dilemma will still be faced even if the Bible is being studied and applied by those who are partaking of the secular charismatic renewal. What matters here is the mindset of absolute truth versus the mindset of rational cognitive analysis. The secular studier of the Bible will smell wrong to the Pharisee. I know that this is the case, because my cognitive analysis of the Bible smells wrong to most evangelical Christians.
God is then mentioned in verse 15 as an alternative to social approval: “But God knows your hearts.” Know refers to experiential knowledge. And heart refers to personal identity in Mercy thought. And ‘of you’ is specifically mentioned. The cognitive principle is that people have to use Theory of Mind to guess which mental networks are motivating the behavior of other people based upon external clues. People may think that they experientially know the mental networks of other people, but this is merely an educated guess. In contrast, a concept of God in Teacher thought is continually aware of the emotions being expressed by personal identity in Mercy thought. (And presumably a real God is also aware of everyone’s thoughts and motives.) Saying this another way, social approval can only judge public behavior while a concept of God can judge all thoughts and all behavior. Therefore, if one has a problem controlling thoughts and private behavior, that this is a strong indication that one is following approval conscience and not God. Similarly, a good way to follow God rather than social approval is to allow the moral code of the holy book to judge thoughts and private behavior. This is a way of becoming righteous by following righteousness in the absence of social approval. Saying this clearly, the Pharisee can become truly righteous by following God even when others are not looking.
Looking briefly at something totally unrelated, I just realized when writing the analysis of chapter 16 that I have been quoting from the Berean Standard Bible rather than the Berean Literal Bible. I have gone back and replaced all the biblical quotes in chapter 16 with the BLB and hopefully I have not made any mistakes. I mention this because I noticed that the BLB translated several Greek words accurately which the BSB did not, indicating that the BLB is a more literal translation than the BSB.
Verse 15 concludes, “For that which is exalted among men is an abomination before God.” Among means ‘in the realm of’ and men refers to mankind. Exalted means ‘high, lofty, exalted’. High is interpreted as Teacher generality. Thus, exalted in the realm of humans would refer to what humans regard as general in Teacher thought. And the context is talking about moral generality. Abomination means ‘to reek with stench’. It is used in Matthew 24 and Mark 13 to describe the ‘abomination of desolation’, in Revelation 17 to describe the Great Harlot, and in Revelation 21 to describe those who do not come into the New Jerusalem. Stench is an emotional response triggered by mental networks. Reeking with stench would indicate violating the TMN of a concept of God in a major way. I do not think that everything that a Pharisee currently does is automatically repulsive to God. Instead I think that the typical Pharisaical mindset is driven by a combination of motives. This makes it possible to escape a Pharisaical mindset by following a concept of God in areas of thought and private behavior that others do not see. However, verse 15 is describing a polarization in which Pharisees are being exposed to a lifestyle of universal morality and are choosing to reject this standard. What is happening at a Mercy level is similar to what happens at a Teacher level when theories become modified in response to a well-known meta-theory. Similarly, the morality of the Pharisees would become modified to emphasize public behavior that was visibly different than the behavior of the ongoing secular charismatic revival.
Moving Beyond Protestantism 16:16-18
Verse 16 then looks at the larger picture. “The Law and the prophets were until John. From that time the kingdom of God is proclaimed, and everyone forces his way into it.” Law refers to some written standard of rules and ‘the law’ usually refers to the law of Moses. Prophet means ‘elevating one idea over another, especially through the spoken word’. Until means ‘as far as, until’. John can refer either to the apostle John or to John the Baptist, but most of the references in Luke refer to John the Baptist. In this verse, Jesus is obviously referring to John the Baptist. John the Baptist is interpreted as Protestant Christianity based upon his message of repentance. ‘Until John’ would then represent Jewish and Western society before the Protestant Reformation. During this earlier period, the Bible was assumed to be the standard of society. (Matthew 11:12-13 is similar to verse 16 and is interpreted in a similar manner as the absolute truth of Protestant Reformation.)
From means ‘from, away from’ and then means ‘then, at that time’. The word proclaimed is the word ‘evangelical’ which means ‘to proclaim good news’. Kingdom means ‘the realm in which a king sovereignly rules’. Before the Protestant Reformation, the Catholic Church (catholic means universal) was assumed to rule over Western Christendom. The Protestant Reformation introduced a new form of Christianity as a kingdom of God whose domain could be increased through the Ievangelization of an evangelical message. Force his way is only used in this verse and in Matthew 11:12. It means ‘to use power to forcibly seize’ and is probably related to the word ‘bios’, which refers to the energy of natural life. Everyone means ‘each part of a totality’.
Looking at this cognitively, the Protestant Reformation introduced the concept of absolute truth based in the Bible. Before this time, the Bible did not stand as a separate source of truth and authority apart from the church. This idea of the Bible as a source of moral authority has largely faded today and would completely fade if a new concept of the Holy Spirit based in a meta-theory became widespread. A holy book is a mental hybrid that combines Mercy reverence for the book with Teacher study of that book. It is ‘entered by force’ because one has to use verbal proclamation combined with some form of emotional pressure to overwhelm Perceiver thought in the listener into ‘believing’ that the holy book is the source of absolute truth. This method attempts to look spiritual, but it actually uses cognitive mechanisms of biological existence to emotionally overwhelm the Ilistener.
Jesus is responding to the Pharisees by pointing out that the Pharisaical method of absolute truth was the only one method that could be used to enter the kingdom of God during the time of Protestantism. That is because people did not understand the cognitive principles being described in the Bible, but they could still experience the personal and societal benefits of these cognitive principles if they applied them with an attitude of blind faith in the Bible.
Verse 17 is typically interpreted by a mindset of absolute truth as saying that the Bible is more solid than shifting circumstances. “But it is easier for heaven and earth to pass away than one stroke of a letter of the Law to fail.” These essays are showing that the Bible is a solid book. However, a careful reading of the Greek leads to a different interpretation. Easier combines ‘good’ with ‘labor, trouble, weariness’ and means ‘with easier labor’. Thus, two paths of labor are being contrasted and Jesus is saying that one path involves more work than the other path.
Looking at the first path, heaven is interpreted as the realm within Teacher thought that is compatible with humanity. Earth is interpreted as the realm of human rational thought. The Greek refers to ‘the heaven and the earth’ in the singular. Pass away means ‘to pass by, to come to’. The primary meaning is not that something is being destroyed but rather that something is coming close and then moving away. Therefore, the first path is for the heaven of academic thought and the earth of human rational thought to come close and then move away. This has just been described as two windows of opportunity. There is a window of opportunity when the ‘heaven’ of academic thought comes close to use a meta-theory to bring integration to various technical theories. And there is also a window of opportunity when the ‘earth’ of human rational thought comes close to use a meta-concept of the Holy Spirit to bring integration to various mammons. However, both of these opportunities will eventually pass by and move away.
Looking now at the second path, stroke of a letter means ‘a little horn’. It is only used in the New Testament in this verse and in the parallel verse in Matthew 5:18. It refers to the corners and tittles that are added to Hebrew letters. This is interpreted cognitively in Matthew 5:18 as the details of abstract technical thought. But it could also be interpreted as ‘the little horn’ of some authoritative technical theory being applied to some detail. Fail means ‘to fall, to descend’ and is related to the word ‘to fly’. It is translated as ‘fall’ 88 of the 91 times that occurs in the New Testament and is only translated as ‘fail’ in 1 Corinthians 13:8 which says that ‘love never fails’ (and I think that ‘fall’ makes more cognitive sense there because it means that agape love always remains guided by Teacher universality rather than falling to the level of Mercy specifics). Falling is interpreted as moving from general to specific and flying is interpreted as Teacher thought. One is the number one. Law refers to a system of law and is preceded by ‘the’. Putting this together within the context of Pharisaism, the system of pharisaical law is descending from the realm of generality to deal with some specific topic in an authoritative manner.
Now let us look at the comparison. Jesus is saying that it is less work to allow the opportunity to use biblical truth as a meta-theory or a meta-mammon to pass by than it is to use biblical truth to analyze specific technical details in an authoritative matter. That matches my personal experience. As soon as one starts using the Bible to make specific ‘heavenly’ technical statements, one enters the realm of objective science and academic thought and one will immediately be attacked and ridiculed for the academic crime of thinking non-rigorously. It takes decades of laborious work learning technical specializations to bring biblical doctrine up to a level of scientific and academic rigor where it is capable of being used as a meta-theory for technical specializations. Similarly, as soon as one starts using the Bible to make specific ‘earthly’ technical statements one enters the realm of postmodern morality and one will immediately be excoriated and shunned for making definitive moral statements. It takes decades of laborious work studying moral issues from a psychological and cognitive perspective before one can make moral statements in a scientifically and socially acceptable manner. It is much easier to remain within a Pharisaical ghetto at the level of abstract theology and religious culture and let ‘the heaven and the earth’ pass by.
Letting the heaven and the earth pass by is not just something that happens passively but it also involves active labor. This can be seen in the response of evangelical Christendom to the covid crisis and to Donald Trump. Those who rejected covid vaccines and demanded that churches stay open worked hard to ensure that ‘the heaven and the earth’ of rational applied scientific thought would pass them by without touching their personal existence. Similarly, the Trump administration, which has strong evangelical Christian support, is currently working hard to ensure that ‘the heaven and the earth’ of scientific, medical, and ecological research will pass America by. As far as Pharisaical American evangelical Christians are concerned, it is less work to reject all secular scientific research than it is to do the homework that is required to address scientific issues in a detailed, technical manner. More specifically, evangelical Christians are more willing to destroy all science to remove wokeism than they are to come up with rational reasons why wokeism is flawed. If I did not see this happening right now before my very own eyes, I would never have believed that Pharisaical evangelical Christians would descend to such belligerent insanity. For me personally, this mindset has reached the point where I have become estranged from my one and only sister whom I love deeply. But condemning the outsider is less work than doing the homework necessary to interact intelligently with the outsider.
I do not think that verse 17 applies directly to today. Instead, I think that what is happening today is a partial example of what is happening in verse 17 and that a more complete expression of this will happen in the future when society reaches verse 17. That is a scary conclusion, because what is happening right now as I write frightens me deeply.
Verse 18 is usually quoted out of context as a proof text against divorce. “Everyone putting away his wife and marrying another commits adultery. And the one marrying her put away from a husband commits adultery.” I think that this verse does apply to actual marriage but a more general meaning emerges if one thinks in terms of male technical thought and female mental networks. Putting away means ‘to set free, release’ and is also the normal word for divorce. Wife means ‘woman, wife’ and is interpreted as female mental networks. ‘His’ is explicitly mentioned. Looking at this cognitively, every system of male technical thought eventually becomes mentally ‘married’ to some associated ‘wife’ of mental networks. This can be seen, for instance, in the culture of some company or the culture of some academic environment. ‘Putting away his wife’ would mean that some technical system is trying to distance itself from its implicit cultural elements. Marry means ‘to marry, to wed’. Another means ‘another of a different kind’.
Applying this to the context, the rich man at the beginning of the chapter was ‘married’ to the house-manager. The ‘rich man’ of technology emphasized male technical thought, while the ‘house-manager’ of marketing focused upon mental networks. That parable began with the rich man ‘putting away his wife’.
Commit adultery occurs twice in verse 18 and refers to ‘the act of adultery’—a man having sex with someone who is not his wife. The Bible refers to both physical and spiritual adultery and this is the Greek word used when referring to the 6th (7th?) Commandment ‘Do not commit adultery’. Looking at this cognitively, male technical thought is associating itself emotionally with two incompatible sets of mental networks, the mental networks of one woman, and the mental networks of another woman. The term ‘another of a different kind’ emphasizes that these two collections of mental networks are incompatible.
Thus, the problem with the rich man sending away the house manager is that this long-term ‘marriage’ has affected the mental networks of technical thought. Technology has shaped itself to interact effectively with the mental networks and mindset of marketing. A new potential ‘wife’ of meta-mannon has just emerged. Technology will want to ‘marry’ this new collection of societal moral mental networks. But the result will be cognitive adultery, because the behavioral patterns that were developed interacting with the old ‘wife’ will collide with the behavioral patterns required by the new ‘wife’. What happens in a real marriage is that emotional baggage from the old relationship limits the ability to enjoy and develop the new relationship. Saying this another way, this ‘wife’ of male technical thought relates to the implicit Teacher theories mentioned earlier that implicitly guide personal behavior.
Looking now at the second phrase, her put away is the same verb ‘put away’ but is in the passive feminine form. From means ‘away from’ and husband means ‘man, husband’. Notice that the nature of the new wife is described in detail while the new husband is not mentioned but simply referred to by a generic ‘the’. Putting the story together, husband A divorced his wife B. Some other man then marries ex-wife B. Verse 18 says that this second marriage also leads to adultery. The nature of this love triangle can be easily deciphered by looking at current society. Back in the mid 20th century, the ‘husband’ of modern technology was married to the ‘wife’ of optimistic consumerism. This ‘marriage’ becomes apparent when one looks at the typical advertising of the 1950s. But modern technology has now acquired a new ‘wife’ of pessimistic, postmodern, alternate-knowing cynicism. Evangelical Christendom has responded by marrying the ‘ex-wife’ of modern technology; following Jesus is now interpreted as restoring the secular culture of the 1950s. But this is a form of spiritual adultery, because mental networks of cultural and political conservatism are becoming juxtaposed with mental networks of evangelical Christendom, to the point where the term ‘evangelical’ has lost its original meaning.
I think that verse 18 is referring to something similar happening in the future. Technology will divorce its current ‘wife’ of marketing and attempt to ‘marry’ the new ‘wife’ of integrated mammon. Pharisaical Christendom will find the very idea of integrated mammon to be repulsive and will respond by marrying the ‘ex-wife’ of marketing. This will lead to a juxtaposition of the Christian message of justification and salvation with the marketing message of minimizing feelings of guilt.
The general conclusion is that all of these aspects of society will be prevented in some way from making a full shift to a new integrated lifestyle. That leads us to the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, because the parable describes Lazarus making a full shift to a new location where the rich man cannot go.
The Rich Man and Lazarus 16:19-22
This is a long parable, and like the parable of the Prodigal Son, it is only found in the Gospel of Luke.
Verse 19 sets the scene. “And there was a certain rich man, and he was clothed in purple and fine linen, making good cheer in splendor every day.” The phrase ‘and there was a certain rich man’ is almost identical to the phrase that began the parable of the Unrighteous Steward in verse 1. The only difference is that verse 19 adds a ‘now’. Thus, it is reasonable to suggest that both parables are referring to the same rich man, namely the modern system of research, development, production, and distribution that generates the flow of modern gadgets and services, which we have been referring to as technology.
Clothed means ‘to put on, be clothed with’ and is used one other time in Mark 15:17 to describe Jesus being clothed in purple during his trial, and the same term ‘purple’ is also used in both verses. Purple means ‘purple, symbolic of royal status’. Clothing is interpreted as the social fabric of society. Clothed in purple would mean having a respected role in society. That describes the current view of modern technology. We all love our new smartphones, our fancy cars, and our other technologically endowed gadgets. Going further, billionaires who run tech companies have become the social and political elite who are ‘clothed in purple’. Fine linen is used once in the New Testament but a similar term is used four times in Revelation and biblehub explains that ‘In the ancient world, limestone‐bleached flax produced an almost snow-white cloth prized by Egypt, Phoenicia, and Rome. Because of its sheen, breathability, and expense, fine linen was reserved for royalty, temple service, or extravagant wealth.” White represents the light of Teacher understanding, while sheen suggests the transparency of a Platonic form. This describes modern technology, which is governed by the Teacher light of scientific understanding and generally exhibits the Platonic forms of effortless interconnectability and replaceability. (A Platonic form is an idealized image that represents many related items. When specific items all function in a similar manner and interconnect flawlessly and effortlessly, then one can think in terms of Platonic forms rather than having to focus upon the specific quirks and features of each item. Anyone who remembers the old RS-232 serial standard will remember how difficult it was to get one device to communicate successfully with another.)
Making good cheer adds the prefix ‘good’ to a version of the word ‘shrewd’ used earlier, which refers to gut feeling. Day is interpreted as some era of society that is lit by the sun of some general Teacher understanding. Splendor is used once as an adverb in the New Testament and comes from a noun that means ‘lamp, torch’. In other words, as modern society goes through various cycles, technology continues to produce gadgets that appeal to people at a gut level, gadgets that are illuminated by the ‘lamp’ of rational Teacher understanding.
Verse 20 introduces another man. “And a certain poor man named Lazarus, being full of sores, was laid at his gate.” Poor means ‘to crouch or cower like a begger’ and ‘man’ is implied. This describes not so much a lack of wealth, but rather a mindset resulting from repeatedly being suppressed and denigrated by others. Verse 20 is not talking about all socially marginalized people and groups. Instead, it is talking about a certain poor man named Lazarus. Name refers to a label in Teacher thought that describes the essence of some person or thing. The name Lazarus comes from the Hebrew Eleazar and the only other New Testament reference to Lazarus is to the brother of Mary and Martha who was resurrected by Jesus in John 11. This is also the only time that Jesus gives a name to a character in his parables. Thus, the name Lazarus is significant.
There is a fascinating connection between Lazarus, the anointing by Mary of Jesus, and the Jewish ritual of the red heifer, which is described in detail in a previous essay, and I strongly suggest reading that section at this point. Stated briefly, mental networks are providing an emotional covering for the death and resurrection of technical thought. Looking at some of the highlights, Eleazar means ‘God has helped’ and was the son of Aaron the brother of Moses. The ritual of the red heifer was delegated to Eleazer and this ritual was a way of restoring holiness after it had been defiled by rebellion and death. The previous verses of Luke 16 have just described the holiness of the Holy Spirit being defiled by technology, marketing, and evangelical Christendom. Looking now at the raising of Lazarus in John 11, the story begins in John 11:2 by explaining that Lazarus was the brother of the Mary who had anointed Jesus for his burial, and the story of Mary’s anointing is described in John 12. Mary’s anointing of Jesus is cognitively similar to the ritual of the red heifer because in both cases a covering is being provided for a defilement of holiness.
This same sequence can be seen in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, with the poor man Lazarus playing the role of the anointing of Mary or the sacrificing of the red heifer. In each of these cases, mental networks of female thought are helping male technical thought to make a major transition. Mary, a woman, anoints Jesus, a man, with fragrance for his burial, representing the ‘smell’ of positive mental networks. Likewise, a heifer is a female cow, in contrast to the male bulls that were generally sacrificed in the Old Testament. The anointing by Mary is associated in the Gospel of John with the raising of Lazarus. Similarly, in the parable of the Rich Man and Lazarus, the rich man dies while Lazarus is able to cross to the other side of a chasm.
Continuing with verse 20, laid means ‘to throw, cast’ and is interpreted as moving through the air of Teacher theory. At means ‘to, towards’. A gate is ‘the passage which led from the street through the front part of the house to the inner court’. Thus, Lazarus is laid within the entrance way to the house of the rich man. Stated symbolically, Lazarus is theoretically at the entrance way to science and technology. For instance, this describes my location with mental symmetry over the years. I am not within modern science and technology, but I am theoretically aware of the trends of both science and technology. Being full of sores is a single word used once in the New Testament. It comes from a word meaning ‘sore, ulcer, wound’ that is used in the next verse. The skin is the primary source of emotional Mercy experiences from the environment. ‘Full of sores’ would represent many unresolved Mercy experiences of deep hurt that have been caused by the environment. For instance, Mercy thought within my mind contains many unresolved Mercy experiences of deep hurt. Looking at just a few examples, my brother got schizophrenia when I was in Grade 6 (?) and I spent almost a decade living at home with my schizophrenic brother and my parents. When I was in Grade 12, I was made assistant concertmaster the local symphony and was kicked out because I would not join the Musician’s Union. Moving forward a few years, I had to take a non-thesis option in my Master’s degree in engineering because my supervisors refused to examine my research on mental symmetry. I could add another dozen similar events which were equally traumatic which remain unresolved.
Verse 21 describes the desire of Lazarus. “And desiring to be fed from that falling from the table of the rich man; but even the dogs, coming, were licking his sores.” Desire means ‘what a person truly yearns for’. Fed means ‘to feed, to fill, to satisfy’. This goes beyond eating a few morsels to being satiated. Fall is the same word that was translated as ‘fail’ four verses earlier in verse 17. Table means ‘a table, dining table’. Rich means ‘fully resourced, rich’ and ‘man’ is implied. Notice the contrast with verse 17. In verse 17 the Pharisees did not want to ‘fall’ from religious generality to technical specifics because this involved too much work. In verse 21, Lazarus truly yearns to be filled with the intellectual food that is falling from the table of the riches of science and technology. Lazarus wants to do fully what the Pharisees refuse to do. Notice also that this is a one-way path. Lazarus is lying in the gateway feeding from the scraps of science and technology, but the rich man is not learning anything from Lazarus.
However, we saw earlier that it is precisely this sort of one-sided interaction that makes it possible for a meta-theory to incorporate more specific theories, because this kind of incorporation can only happen as long as technical thought keeps developing without being aware of the meta-theory. Going further, the unresolved Mercy ‘sores’ provide the emotional stick that is required to drive a person to perform the difficult work of seeking the Teacher pleasure of a more fully developed meta-theory.
Dogs are mentioned once in Luke and biblehub explains that ‘a loose dog was disdained in ancient times – viewed as a ‘mooch pooch’ that ran about as a scavenger’. A dog is interpreted in 2 Peter 2:22 as a mindset that returns to painful experiences because they are familiar, guided by the parable ‘a dog returns to its own vomit’. Coming means ‘to come, to go’. Licking is mentioned once in the New Testament and means to ‘lick off, to lick clean’. Sore is the root word of ‘full of sores’ that was used in verse 20. Sores being licked by dogs sounds gross but in this case the sores are being licked clean. In other words, the ruminating that normally causes emotional sores to fester is leading in the case of Lazarus to emotional healing. Speaking from personal experience, I have found that thinking about my episodes of personal rejection has helped me to understand cognitive mechanisms. What has emerged from my rumination is not depression, but rather the Teacher joy of greater understanding. My open sores of Mercy rejection are still open and unresolved but they are much cleaner and only hurt a little, because I can now view them as necessary stepping stones in the positive journey of pursuing mental wholeness. This is consistent with the name Lazarus which means ‘God has helped’. God really has helped me in the form of acquiring a much more adequate concept of God in Teacher thought.
In verse 22 the poor man dies. “And it came to pass that the poor man died, and he was carried away by the angels into the bosom of Abraham.” Notice that it does not say that Lazarus dies. This is also the final reference to ‘the poor man’ and the three next references in the parable refer to Lazarus without mentioning ‘the poor man’. Poor man is the same word ‘to crouch or cower like a beggar’ that was used in verse 20 with ‘man’ being implied. Came to pass means ‘to come into being’. Die means ‘die off, focusing on the separation that goes with the dying off’. Because this is the last mention of ‘poor’, this could be interpreted as the mindset of crouching and cowering gradually dying off. Speaking from personal experience, all of the episodes of rejection that I have received formed an attitude of crouching and cowering within my mind. However, as I have continued to feast on the morsels that fall from the table of science and technology, use mental symmetry to learn from my emotional sores, and observe what is happening to society around me, I have found that my attitude of crouching and cowering has gradually died off. I can now stand much taller inside, based upon the certainty that I really have acquired an understanding of how things work.
Carried away means ‘to carry or bring away from’. Angel means ‘angel, messenger’. Both human and angelic messengers live within a realm of Teacher messages. Being carried away by angels means being guided the pleasure of working with messages in Teacher thought. ‘Being carried away from’ means that this Teacher pleasure is replacing the Mercy pain. Verse 22 specifically adds ‘he’, indicating that Lazarus himself is being carried away. In other words, Lazarus is not just working with messages. Instead, he has become his messages; they have transformed his personal identity to the extent that when angels come with their messages, Lazarus as a person is carried along.
Bosom means ‘the upper part of the chest where a garment naturally folded to form a pocket... the position synonymous with intimacy’. Abraham represents the first stage of the three-stage process of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, in which one leaves current society in order to follow God to some unknown destination. The ‘bosom of Abraham’ would presumably represent being personally comfortable with the idea of leaving current society in order to follow God. The evangelical Christian who is waiting for the Rapture gives the impression of being within the bosom of Abraham, but such an individual has no concept of how heaven functions or what it would mean to live in heaven but rather interprets following God as attempting to restore the secular culture of the past. In contrast, writing these essays about biblical prophecy makes the future almost feel like a neighboring country to me with well-known customs and beliefs.
Verse 22 finishes with the rich man dying. “And the rich man also died and was buried.’ This is also the last mention of the term ‘rich man’ in the parable. Rich means ‘fully resourced, rich’ and ‘man’ is implied. Die is the same verb used earlier in the verse which means to ‘die off, focusing on the separation that goes with the dying off’. Unlike the poor man, the rich man is buried. Burial places a body within some location in the ground. Cognitively speaking, burial examines some now dead group or social movement and places it within the appropriate location within the ground of rational understanding. Looking at this symbolically, the implication is that the existing technological system comes to an end to the extent of being written off and analyzed as part of history. A year ago, I did not see how this could happen, but Trump seems to be doing his damnedest (and that is not too strong a word) to try to destroy the current integrated economic system of production that builds and distributes modern technology. I suspect that something similar but even stronger would be responsible for the death of modern technology in the future. This does not mean that technology itself would end or that factories would cease to exist but rather that the system of technological production and distribution would become defunct.
Transforming Research 16:23-26
Verse 23 describes the situation of the dead rich man. “And in Hades, having lifted up his eyes, being in torment, he sees Abraham from afar, and Lazarus in his bosom.” Hades adds the prefix ‘not’ to the verb ‘seeing that becomes knowing’ and therefore means ‘the unseen place’. Modern science and technology are based upon the ‘seeing that becomes knowing’ of empirical evidence. Thus, being in the realm of Hades would mean being in a realm that is characterized by a lack of empirical evidence. Hades is mentioned one other time in Luke in 10:15 which is interpreted as technology leading to a postmodern world of technologically inept consumers who ignore physical evidence and interpret everything in terms of people. If the mental networks of people became empowered by some sort of spiritual empowering that affected the functioning of their technological devices, then this would plunge the ‘rich man’ of technology into a Hades of the unseen because gadgets would function sporadically influenced by the spiritual vibes of users. I do not think that this would involve a full-fledged spiritual economy as described in the book of Acts. Instead, it would merely require a magnification of an effect that some people claim already exists to some extent. As the linked article mentions, “While the phenomenon we are about to discuss is very real for many people (I’ve personally seen it in action many times) it is not necessarily widely recognized by the scientific or technical communities as a real causality of computer / electronics issues.”
Having lifted up means ‘to lift up, to raise’ which is interpreted as heading towards Teacher generality. The eyes are used to scan the environment in order to build up a Perceiver map. Thus, ‘having lifted up his eyes’ would mean examining the environment factually in order to come up with a theory in Teacher thought. Being means to ‘be in possession of’. Torment is used three times as a noun in the New Testament, two times in this parable. It refers to ‘a touchstone to test the purity of precious metals’. And in means ‘in the realm of’. Putting this together, this describes being surrounded by possessions whose purity is continually being tested. This describes what it would feel like if electronic gadgets malfunctioned in the presence of people with unhealthy mental networks. One would be in an environment where mental and spiritual purity was continually being tested. If this were the situation, then technology would respond by attempting to examine the effect rationally in order to gain a general Teacher understanding.
See means ‘to see with the mind’. Thus, the result of the investigation is not empirical evidence but rather an internal understanding. Abraham represents leaving existing society in order to follow God to the unknown. Mentally seeing Abraham would mean internally grasping that there is something beyond empirical evidence. One does not know what this is, but one does know internally that it is possible to go beyond physical evidence and find rational Teacher understanding. For instance, mental symmetry is a cognitive model of the mind and not the brain. Mental symmetry maps in detail onto the brain, but it is a model of the unseen realm of the mind. As a model of the unseen, it can be extended rationally in the directions of spiritual and supernatural existence. From afar means ‘from a distance or afar’. And this is preceded by ‘from, away from’. Thus, when technology attempts to understand this unseen affect, it grasps dimly from a distance that it is possible to move beyond the seen.
Having mentally seen Abraham, it also sees ‘Lazarus in the bosom of him’. Lazarus means ‘God has helped’ and bosom implies intimacy. If the interpretation given in this essay is accurate, then technology would go beyond dimly grasping that it is possible to exist rationally in the unseen to recognizing that the meta-theory of mental symmetry is intimately acquainted with that sort of existence. (It is possible that this passage could be fulfilled in another manner, because biblical prophecy is usually given in a generic manner that can be fulfilled in several different ways. My prayer in developing the theory of mental symmetry is that prophecies such as these will be fulfilled in the way suggested by mental symmetry, because I think that the alternative forms of fulfillment are much worse for humanity. More specifically, if Lazarus means God has helped, and if God helps through theories in Teacher thought, then asking for God to help would imply the development of a more effective understanding in Teacher thought, which implies a meta-theory.)
The rich man responds in verse 24. “And having cried out, he said, ‘Father Abraham, have mercy on me and send Lazarus’.” Cry out means ‘to call, to cry out’. This indicates responding at the level of Teacher thought but not necessarily in an intelligent manner. The rich man addresses Abraham as father. This recognizes the historical basis for technology, because technology began as individuals went beyond the cultural assumptions of their society to be guided by the unseen theories of science. Mercy means ‘to have or show compassion’, which indicates focusing upon reducing the discomfort in Mercy thought as opposed to learning a lesson in Teacher thought or completing some plan in Contributor thought. Calling for ‘mercy on me’ is asking for the pain to stop. Send means ‘to send’. Sending Lazarus would presumably mean asking for the theory of mental symmetry to get rid of the unpleasant spiritual energy effects that are preventing technology from functioning properly.
This is followed by a rather specific request. “That he might dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue; for I am suffering in this flame.” In other words, the rich man is not interested in learning from Lazarus or submitting to the meta-theory of Lazarus. Instead he wants Lazarus to perform some specific action. Dip means ‘to dip, to immerse’. Tip means ‘tip, top, highest point’ and is used once in Luke. Finger means ‘finger’ and water means ‘water’. Hands represent technical thought because the hands are used to perform technical manipulation. A finger would represent some detail of technical manipulation. The highest point of a finger would mean the general Teacher theory of some specific aspect of technical manipulation. In other words, the rich man does not want a meta-theory that rules over many technical specializations. Instead, he wants a specific theory of some specific technical feature. He wants spirituality to be reduced to some specific phenomena of nature that can be studied in a specialized manner that will not spill over into other topics. This specific theory is then supposed to be immersed within the ‘water’ of Mercy experience.
The goal is to ‘cool my tongue’. Cool is used once in the New Testament and means ‘to cool down, to refresh’. Tongue means ‘tongue, language’. Heat is interpreted as emotional excitement and cooling down would mean removing emotional excitement. For instance, the stories that talk about human energy fields causing electronics to stop working mention that this impact is worse when a person is emotionally excited. In other words, the rich man of technology wants a specific theory of ‘the human energy field’ that will minimize the impact of this effect in order to allow science and technology to continue functioning in an objective manner. Notice that the rich man does not want to learn a new language in Teacher thought. Instead, the rich man wants a specific theory that can be used to cool the heat of spiritual vibes so that the rich man can continue using his current language of objective scientific thought.
This is similar to the way that economics deals with neuroeconomics. Researchers have learned that humans do not make rational economic choices, as described in economic textbooks. Instead, economic choice is heavily influenced by mental networks within the ventromedial prefrontal cortex. Economics has largely responded to this research by ignoring the larger implications of mental networks and attempting instead to reduce the emotional impact of mental networks to a set of technical models and mathematical equations, as epitomized by the prospect theory of Kahneman and Tversky. The goal is to reduce the impact of mental networks upon economics to a specific subdiscipline that will allow economists to continue using their current objective language of economics. The rich man in verse 24 is responding to a more extensive impact of mental networks in precisely the same way.
Suffering means ‘to experience intense emotional pain’ and comes from a root that ‘literally means go down’. This verb will be repeated in verse 25. Flame is used once in Luke and means ‘to flash or flame’. Fire is interpreted as an energy of frustration that consumes and purifies. Suffering from the flame would mean experiencing intense emotional pain as a result of continually facing frustration. The going down implies that this frustration is gradually causing current theories to fall into doubt. In other words, the continued application of the language of materialistic science is resulting in repeated frustration that is gradually causing existing methods and theories of objective materialism to be questioned. Saying this another way, the continual impact of mental networks is gradually causing science and technology to conclude that the language of technical thought is not enough and that mental networks cannot just be reduced to some technical specialization that functions within technical thought. I have interacted sufficiently with scientific thought to know that this realization would be a painful process.
Abraham replies in verse 25. “And Abraham said, ‘Child, remember that you did fully receive your good things in your lifetime, and Lazarus likewise the evil things.” Child refers to ‘anyone living in full dependence’. In verse 24, the rich man wanted a specific technical theory that would allow the existing language of technical thought to continue without being troubled by the heat of emotions. In verse 25, Abraham reminds the rich man that he is a child who is dependent upon the ‘Abraham’ of leaving existing culture to follow Teacher thought into the unknown. Stated more simply, technical thought is not the ultimate master. Instead, scientific technical thought actually depends upon Abraham.
Remember means to ‘actively remember’. Fully receive means ‘to receive, specially, in full’. Good means ‘intrinsically good’. Lifetime is the generic word for physical or spiritual life. What is being mentioned here is the fundamental principle of a spiritual economy. One will only receive a reward from the TMN of a concept of God if one does not receive a reward from MMNs of approval. Saying this more carefully, one cannot just be taught a theory in Teacher thought. Instead, one must learn this theory and then apply it without receiving any reward from MMNs of social approval. When this happens, then there will be a change of cognitive ownership at the level of mental networks because a TMN of understanding will take ownership of the behavior. Objective technology cannot experience such a change of cognitive ownership because it has already received a full reward at a Mercy level. Likewise means ‘likewise, in like manner’. Thus, the same principle of cognitive ownership applies to Lazarus. Evil means ‘inwardly foul, rotten’. Instead of being rewarded in Mercy thought like the rich man, Lazarus experienced Mercy foulness. Lazarus’ lack of reward from social MMNs meant that the TMN of growing understanding within his mind could take cognitive ownership of Lazarus’ desire to become satiated by the intellectual crumbs that fell from the table of the rich man. These mental networks would presumably generating the spiritual vibes that would be causing electronic devices to malfunction. Being motivated by a TMN rather than a MMN might cause a device to function better rather than worse.
Verse 25 continues, “But now he is comforted here, and you are suffering.” Here means ‘here, in this place’. Comfort means ‘to call to one’s side, to exhort, to encourage’ and is used in Romans 12:8 to refer to the cognitive style of Exhorter. On the one hand, Exhorter thought in the rich man is experiencing the flame of frustration. On the other hand, Exhorter thought within Lazarus is functioning very nicely. Similarly, I sense internally that Exhorter thought within my mind would be quite happy to function within a spiritually enhanced, technical environment. Suffering is the same word that was used in verse 24, which means ‘personal anguish expressed by great mourning’. This suggests that the technological paradigm of objective materialism is being plagued by continual counterexamples.
Verse 26 adds, “And besides all these things, a great chasm has been fixed between us and you.” Besides is ‘in the realm of’. ‘Besides’ gives the idea of an unrelated additional item. ‘In the realm of’ indicates that this is a natural and inevitable byproduct of the situation. Between means ‘between’ and ‘us’ and ‘you’ are explicitly mentioned. Chasm is used once in the New Testament and means ‘a chasm, wide space’. Great is ‘mega’ and is interpreted as Teacher generality. Fixed means ‘a support that fixes, plants down’. Putting this together, there is a fundamental incompatibility at the theoretical level between the rich man and Lazarus. I think that I know the nature of this chasm because I have encountered it several times in my research. Stated briefly, objective technical thought implodes when encountering the idea that Teacher theories function emotionally. I discuss this on page 33 of a paper I wrote on mental networks and the ventromedial prefrontal cortex.
Looking at this in more detail, objective thought recognizes that subjective Mercy emotions can twist Perceiver facts and it handles this problem by being objective. This wins the battle, but it loses the war. That is because objectivity is being pursued as a general strategy, and when some general strategy continues to be used, it will turn into a TMN that will use emotional pressure to impose itself upon the mind. Thus, the objective scientist will be emotionally driven by Teacher emotions to avoid being emotionally driven by emotions. A mental network will function silently under the surface as long as it continues to experience consistent input. Therefore, this inherent contradiction of being emotionally driven to avoid being emotionally driven will not surface as long as the objective scientist does not think about Teacher emotions and paradigms. But directly thinking about Teacher emotion will uncover the problem, causing scientific thought to implode.
For instance, Thomas Kuhn is famous for having developed the concept of paradigms, and mental symmetry interprets a paradigm as the TMN that lies behind some technical specialization. Thomas Kuhn has been cited over 140,000 times, but after Kuhn wrote the second edition of his book in 1970 he abandoned his concept of paradigms in favor of something more technical. Similarly, Semir Zeki pointed out in a 2014 paper that many different kinds of beauty activate the same brain region in the medial frontal cortex. Beauty is a form of Teacher emotion. However, in a 2019 paper, Zeki spent the first two pages rejecting historical definitions of beauty in favor of a vague definition that says nothing and he then gave a circular definition to beauty: “Beauty is an experience that correlates quantitatively with neural activity in a specific part of the emotional brain, namely, in the field A1mOFC; the more intense the declared experience of beauty, the more intense the neural activity there” (p.109). Both of these are examples of scientific thought imploding.
Verse 26 continues, “So that those desiring to pass from here to you are not able, nor can they pass from there to us.” Desiring means ‘to desire, wish’. Pass means ‘to cross over, to pass through’. Able means Perceiver power. ‘From here to you’ would mean going from a meta-theory in Teacher thought to objective specializations. In order to do that, one would have to pretend that one did not have a meta-theory in Teacher thought while dealing with subjects that can be explained by the meta-theory. A mental network generates extreme pain when it continues to be triggered and receive input incompatible with its structure. Going further, it is not possible for a person to attack the core mental networks that hold the mind together. The mind of Lazarus is held together by a Teacher meta-theory. In order to cross over into specialized technical thought, Lazarus would have to continue pretending that he did not have a meta-theory. For instance, this explains why I do not have a PhD. In order to get a PhD I would have to focus upon some technical specialization and pretend that I did not have the general understanding of mental symmetry. And I would have to do this for several years with sufficient conviction to fool a thesis supervisor who thought in terms of objective, specialized technical thought.
A different word is used for the second ‘pass’. The first pass combines ‘through’ with ‘basis’. The second pass combines ‘through’ with ‘other side’. Moving from a meta-theory to specialization would require a change of basis, because a meta-theory ties everything together. Moving the other way from specialization to meta-theory does not require letting go of any theory but rather involves going through the extended emotional pain of having a meta-theory look over one’s shoulder and emotionally judge what one is doing before eventually emerging to the other side of having the meta-theory generate positive Teacher emotions at the presence of a subsidiary theory. Stated more simply, the technical specialist would have to go from suppressing emotions to facing strong emotions for an extended period of time. For instance, when I attempted to publish a meta-theory of second language acquisition, one professor told me that my paper would never get published because researchers do not want some outsider telling them how to think and they do not want a theory looking over their shoulder.
Transforming Education 16:27-31
The rich man makes another request in verse 27. “And he said, ‘Then I implore you, father, that you would send him to my father’s house.’” Implore means ‘to ask on special footing, intimacy’. The term father indicates that the rich man is making a special request based upon Abraham being his father. We saw earlier that Abraham is the father of modern technology, because inventors have to break free of cultural preconceptions in order to explore the unknown. Send means ‘to send’. A house is a home for personal identity, which means that objective technology is now finally thinking in terms of subjective identity. Similarly, I have found that academic papers are capable of analyzing subjective Mercy emotions to some extent.
But this is a curious request, because the rich man mentions two fathers. There is father Abraham with whom the rich man is talking, and there is ‘my father’, the personal father of the rich man. A father is a source of technical thought. The problem is that objective technical thought has two fathers. There is the publicly proclaimed ‘father’ of leaving social convention in order to invent something new—this is father Abraham. But there is also the ‘my father’ of the approved official methodology of doing proper objective, specialized, technical research. This second father of scientific methodology is the one that controls and shapes the daily life—the ‘home’—of the rich man. Summarizing, verse 27 appears to be asking a meta-theory such as mental symmetry to modify official scientific methodology. Saying this another way, Abraham is the explicit father of technology while official methodology is the implicit ‘my father’ of technology.
The rich man explains in verse 28. For I have five brothers—so that he might warn them, that they also might not come to this place of torment.” Brother means ‘from the same womb’. Have is interpreted as referring to the peripheral realm of having rather than being. Five brothers implies five related forms of male technical thought. This number five occurs elsewhere, sometimes in connection with the number two, such as five loaves and two fishes or five talents and two talents. Those occurrences of five are interpreted elsewhere as the five cognitive modules that are not emotional, which would include Perceiver, Server, Exhorter, Contributor, and Facilitator, but not Teacher and Mercy. This interpretation fits the context because objective thought suppresses Mercy while specialized thought suppresses Teacher. Notice that the rich man is still limiting is thinking to the realm of male objective, specialized, technical thought. This describes the essence of the implicit meta-theory that guides the thinking of the rich man, from which he is incapable of mentally escaping. Saying this more generally, any Teacher theory that continues to be used will eventually turn into a prison that emotionally confines a person. For instance, mental symmetry has turned into a mental prison for me, but this is a good thing because this is a prison of long-term success based upon fundamental principles of how things work.
Warn is used once in Luke and adds the prefix ‘through’ to ‘bear witness, testify’. This goes beyond verbal warning to sharing thoroughly based upon personal experience. This is a good step, but it still falls within the accepted methodology of starting from empirical evidence. I have found when interacting with academia that it is permissible to stretch from empirical evidence to theory, but it is not acceptable to go the other direction of starting with a general theory and then using that theory to explain empirical evidence. That is because this second path requires directly facing the existence of Teacher thought and Teacher emotion.
Might come is the verb ‘to come, to go’ in the subjunctive. Place is ‘place, location’. And torment is the same word that was used in verse 23 which means ‘a test to prove the genuineness of a thing’. The rich man appears to be asking Lazarus to modify existing education so that personal experience is added to the curriculum in order to prevent students from suddenly encountering a Teacher theory that continues to look emotionally over their shoulder to ‘prove the genuineness’ of their thinking. Placing this within the context of spiritual vibes, the rich man is asking that students be taught the skill of handling spiritual vibes as part of their curriculum of learning objective, specialized, technical expertise.
Abraham answers in verse 29. “But Abraham says, ‘They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.’” This sounds like a brusque response, but I think that Abraham is actually providing an answer that would resonate with the empirical basis of objective science. Have means ‘to have, to hold’ which means possessing something in the realm of the objective. Moses was previously mentioned in 9:33 during the Transfiguration. Moses means ‘to pull out’ and Exodus 2:10 explains that Moses was given this name ‘because I drew him out of the water’. Moses represents a system of law that is drawn out of the water of Mercy experience. This applies to the real law of Moses which came out of a tribal society and it also refers to a system of absolute truth which is drawn out of the ‘water’ of Mercy reverence and Mercy experience. In other words, there already exists extensive moral material that has been drawn from the water of empirical evidence in psychology, cognitive science, and the Bible. ‘The prophets’ probably refers to the Bible and similar books written by those who did not have scientific understanding but did have practical wisdom. All of these present their moral content in a fragmented and empirical manner that makes it possible to deal with subjective Mercy feelings without having to directly face the Teacher emotions of a meta-theory. For instance, I have found that I can state many aspects of mental symmetry if I focus upon some specific aspect and use the language of an established expert to describe this aspect. Let them hear is the verb ‘to hear, to listen, to understand’ in the imperative. In other words, the material is already there. Just read it!
The rich man complains in verse 30. “And he said, ‘No, father Abraham, but if one from the dead should go to them, they will repent.’” No means ‘definitely not, absolutely out of the question’. And the rich man uses the full name ‘father Abraham’, suggesting that is becoming clear to him which of the two fathers is his real father. I suspect that this is because continuing exposure to spiritual interference would be messing up with official methodology, making it apparent that this official methodology had turned into a form of culture from which science now needed to escape.
Dead means ‘dead, deceased’. Go means ‘to transport’ which is interpreted as movement that is accompanied by change. To means ‘to, towards’. Repent means to ‘think differently afterwards’. Verse 30 does not say that someone is being raised from the dead. (That is mentioned in verse 31.) Instead, the rich man’s complaint appears to be again about methodology. The rich man appears to be rejecting the idea of reading and believing old sources. Instead, the dead works of the Bible and other old sources are supposed to be transformed into a form that is compatible with modern objective thought. For instance, I have noticed that actually believing in ancient texts is not academically acceptable while spending one’s life analyzing and comparing what the ancient texts say is academically acceptable. Mental symmetry is an example of ‘transporting from the dead’ because it reformulates the biblical text in terms of modern cognitive mechanisms. Similarly, psychology and cognitive research also reformulate traditional moral beliefs using the modern language of scientific experiments. However, even though I have learned a lot from psychological research and cognitive papers, I find that the researcher seldom looks in the mirror and applies the theory to himself. Stated bluntly, the researcher who is studying the mind ignores the fact that he is using the mind to study itself. This is also a symptom of objective specialization, because objectivity pretends that the researcher does not have a mind while specialization focuses upon the minds of the subjects without generalizing to the mind of the researcher.
Summarizing verse 30, objective science and technology are rejecting the idea of teaching blind faith in the Bible and religious authorities, but rather wants this ‘dead’ material to be ‘transported’ into the modern language of psychology and cognitive theory. The rich man is convinced that this reformulation of the ancient message will convince students to change their thinking.
Abraham replies in verse 31. “But he said to him, ‘If they do not hear Moses and the prophets, not even will they be persuaded if one should rise out from the dead.’” Moses and the prophets were mentioned in verse 29, which was interpreted as empirical morality that is compatible with the culture and statements made by older respected sources such as the Bible. Hear means ‘to hear, to listen, to understand’. Hearing means focusing upon what the text is saying rather than just studying it as a historical document. Not even means ‘If A isn’t true, then B is also not valid’. Persuaded is the word ‘faith’ that means to ‘be persuaded’. One is a generic pronoun. Out from means ‘from out of’. Dead is the same word that was used in verse 30 that means ‘dead, deceased’. But verse 31 adds the word rise which is the standard word used for resurrection.
Putting this together, using mental symmetry to reformulate all of Christianity is an example of ‘transporting from the dead’. I thought that such a reformulation would be attractive, but I have found that verse 31 is accurate. A cognitive reformulation of Christianity does not convince people to repent. Verse 31 goes one step further by rising from the dead. This would describe a cognitive reformulation of Christianity that has acquired ‘life’ through the addition of spiritual vibes. Verse 31 is saying that even that would not be enough to convince students to change their thinking.
Verse 31 is typically interpreted as a final, hopeless word of rejection, but it can also be interpreted positively as an educational suggestion. Secular education starts with rote learning and then eventually replaces this with critical thinking. Similarly, verse 31 is saying that starting with rote learning in the Bible and religious sources is a prerequisite for being able to approach Christianity and spiritual vibes from a cognitive perspective. Secular education may respond with a huge No! at the idea of teaching the Bible as blind faith, but that may be the only way to lay the mental moral foundation that would be required to study scientific thought in an era of spiritual vibes. Based upon my personal experience, I strongly suspect that this is the case.