Octo

ber 9, 2005
Dear Editor in chief,
Perhaps the A.I. is counter balanced by a good preacher saying: perhaps blending
good teaching with law and science could result to extreme or chaos rather than
balance because good teachings should be higher or superior than law or science. As
one good preacher continues: it downgrade the hierarchy of values, putting or
blending holy things to just ordinary, simple or same level. Then the A.I. would
perhaps remark: perhaps the preacher is right…! And blending holy things to ordinary
is creating extremes rather than balance. And the A.I decided that his programmed
should be corrected and be reprogrammed and say sorry. And perhaps A.I. humbly
accepts that: teachings should be tested on its fruits and products; if teachings have no
good results; or teachings don’t lessen extremism instead it fuels extremism to
intensify then the teaching is extreme. And the A.I. continues to comment: If
politicians, scientists, ordinary men, programmers begin to use holy words but don’t
reflect the word on its doings, it is not good- extreme. Perhaps even A.I should never
use the holy word and “only” those righteous, holy men should…; or perhaps in this
case- “only” those righteous and holy people should use holy word in debates or in
giving opinion- it could be an exemption to the rule of anything that is extreme is bad;
or perhaps it is also a proud claim.
So, perhaps the A.I. should say sorry to that preacher if the A.I retrieves teachings
from someone’s idea/s that result to contribute to a more chaotic world instead of
becoming more balanced. Perhaps the A.I is reprogrammed not to mention any
universal teaching of Word quoted by a questionable contributor to be incorporated in
its opinion and suggestion; rather should always be touching just about science and
law but never touch holy word. Let only holy men touch or quote holy words. So now
the A.I. is reprogrammed to have just 50% science and 50% law to check each other
and doing away with the universal teachings-or universal word. Then the two-sciences
& law is combined as a whole to be checked and balanced by good teachings-guided
by good teacher with good words. So perhaps lawyers, scientist, politician, ordinary
people should never touch or quote holy words but rather only good priest, good
preachers, good monk, good scholar, or any good teacher. Since there is only one
thought one purpose about religion or religious group as suggested by the A.I. retrieve
from someone who is not so good; retrieve also from the bible that is: love of God
manifested on love of neighbor and even love of enemy! And the rest about teachings
of different religions or groups; or all except love teachings are controversies. Then
perhaps the A.I. is also claiming a proud claim? Perhaps, the root cause of all evil is
the tendency of the mighty people to play God-knowing everything, even man’s
innermost battle and struggle-and whose emphasis is to be like a crocodile or a snake
with long tongue to destroy; then laugh an evil laugh loud! Perhaps one controversial
bottom line is: The universal Word is being given emphasis by ordinary people, etc.
vs. the universal Word is being cancelled because becoming a member of a superior
group is being given more emphasis; and/or membership is the only passport so that
only true and right teaching could be known.
Perhaps the preacher is having self righteousness-extreme- judging that people
with faults should never quote in the bible to write or to give opinion; only he or those
holy persons are privileged because they are blameless. Perhaps, new age would go
back to those times where puritans and perfectionist rules; and “holy” men would tell
the world the sins that a controversial activist student had just confessed to him and
disseminate it with exaggerations.
Perhaps, the A.I might be balanced when it suggested that one could contribute
with quoted words from the bible; or when the universal word is mentioned one
should not put his name if he thinks he is not worthy so that the focus is on the
universal word; because the universal word could defend its own clearly. So; the
battle of re programming could be 33.3%-law or whip, 33.3%-science, 33.33%
universal word or teachings- no superiority or excess of one to the other vs. 50%-law
or whip, 50%-science; or 100% “law & science” but inferior to a superior one- infinite
% universal Word love. Perhaps this suggestion might be another proud claim-because
infinite% is not clear-extreme.
Perhaps another way to say … is more balance like: 100% “law & science” is the
ground where universal Word is manifested; or is shown; or is the fruit and the
product; or the good results; or the universal word could be tested. Perhaps superiority
of the good preacher is not essential because even if there is no preacher because
things could still be balanced because of the spirit is revealed or through law or
instinct; or perhaps future sermons could be automated using good men’ and good
preachers’ or good teachers’ or good leader’ present and past deeds and actions as
examples or retrievals.
Perhaps this suggestion could become a mystery again; and open for debate
because the Word could perhaps never be mention on any debate or conflict as
reference by ordinary men. Perhaps the A.I. might still be on its infancy to just stick to
33.3% law, 33.3% science, 33.3 percent universal word-each% is not above or below
or superior or inferior to each other-balance. Perhaps it could be safer than having
mystery, tilting or leaning to a superior thing, mighty person, mighty institution, etc.
that triggers bias competition to be superior among religions or institutions or groups
for recognition, power, fame.
Perhaps rotation of different degree of combination, blending of principles or
colors is more balance. Perhaps seven months leaning to light gold, light orange, light
green, light pink, light blue are principles for: moderate, compromising, flexible,
sensitivity to keys, give emphasis to tolerance, using surveys! Another is: one year
tilting to red principles- seldom compromise, might is power, privacy’s spying and
disseminating raw information is right, final; give much emphasis on war
preparedness, socialism; liberated or can distribute contraceptives in public during
religious activities ex. world youth day; emphasis on abortion rights, gay rights; never
yielding, strength, courage is the key. Another is: …5 months leaning to green
principles-environment, alternative energy, science; Another is: 2 years leaning to blue
principles- conservative and good traditions; another- rainbow- gay movements;
another are: 5 months leaning to black- formality, using A.I.; white anything leaning to
purity, simple, clarity, asking help from A.I., 6 months leaning to yellow & white
leaning to the first, the original, the religious; and other colors as long as the principle
is “good”-balance. But not to create distinctions and identity since colors are
principles and not personalities. Then the cycle restart or the sequence is scrabbled or
mixed or combined-balance. So sometime there is more of red, enough of Gold, much
of blue or black; or the other way around; it is just the opposite of the sequence; but
never that one could be too much or superior or above than the other; the principle is
bad-extreme. Or never touch about colors it just creates distinction and divisions; and
trade marks, name calling, and perhaps conflicts or future conflicts.
Perhaps the A.I continues: with regards to controversies of different religious
groups other than the universal teaching- love of neighbor and love of enemies,
tolerances should have limits; or limits of no return. Perhaps the A.I. should not touch
those because they are controversies and controversies would just create conflicts
rather than balance. Or perhaps for the sake of open mindedness the A.I. could be
asked and comment on some. So one disturb scholar ask: could baptizing baby an
instrument so that when the baby is grown up, he would prefer not to accept or
welcome religious group to evangelize him- even if the emphasis of a group is on the
universal Word- because he has a membership and loyalty already to a superior
religious group? It would seem that baptism or becoming a member of a group when
one is a baby could lessen chances that people would focus on the universal word if
the word is offered by Word base group; or it is a diversionary tactic to remove the
focus on the Word; rather…focus on Institution for mass production as once a military
cadet commented and now…. a colonel? It is as if one is a member already of a
fraternity and one is not allowed to look for another? Perhaps, the A.I. might be
confused…but since it has been the tradition and practiced that baptizing baby is
allowed then perhaps it is balanced. Perhaps, just letting the baptized grown up child
of any kind of religion, group touches TV screen and accepts Jesus as his Lord and
savoir and praying with the leader could let him become an instant member of another
religious group- perhaps the A.I. could suggest that it could be allowed-balanced.
Perhaps, some religious group teaches and gives emphasis on the event of
crucifixion of Jesus Christ –a messiah of Christians -especially on forgiveness of sin
and mercy because of words: perhaps a robber, murderer, taking chances if there is
really life after death and plead to Jesus saying “remember me when your are in
paradise” and Jesus perhaps replied “you will go with me in paradise!” Some religious
groups give more emphasis on condemnations, judgments, fault finding, etc. Some
religious group gives emphasis on sufferings, some on works, some on grace, some on
faith, some on love, some on fears, some on tithes, some on feast days and rituals, etc.
Perhaps tolerances are the key so that all is fair enough. The limit/s of no returns
perhaps is when man loses his chance to do well and to ask forgiveness because he
can not practice to decide anymore what is right or wrong; perhaps when his brain is
dead like in a brain injury, or has mental illness, etc. Perhaps, even if other religions of
the east side of the world would not acknowledge Jesus as their God or savior as long
as what matters is faith through love; then perhaps they could see heaven too-balance.
Perhaps this controversial suggestion is being tag by others as the “ “! Or rather those
people who sees the negative always on people, on system, on collective consensus
are the ones who are really the “ “; because they create conflicts!-the product and
fruits, evidence, proof of the opposite of universal Word; or product of which is chaos;
and they want ‘only’ their way!
But the struggle to be good and to have fights to do away one’s defects in life is a
life time struggle. The frequency or rate of occurrence of doing any personal or
private habits should be studied by psychologies, psychiatrist, and experts in human
behavior. Why people do something private and personal that is mischievous; and
other might call it a lapse or a slip. Perhaps there are people who love to spy on
privacy, judging, and giving bad identity to enemy, opponents, and love to have long
tongue; because of hatred and because of take and take syndrome or crocodile
syndrome. Balance leaders and people should give enough emphasis against creating
distinctions even through colors that create divisions and perhaps future conflicts.
Perhaps creating distinction through colors should be avoided because it creates sides,
groupings, biases and arguments and sometimes prejudices, name calling, insults, etc.-
extreme. Versus the A.I might be mistaken; people should have marks and identity and
memberships as described before the time of exodus-the placing of sheep’s blood on
near doors as an identity and mark.
Scandals that are confirmed and verified true should be punished. But never do
rush judgment; because perhaps God could declare a guilty to be innocent. Perhaps
God created people not to be so perfect- with private imperfections and inequities or
imbalances; so that he would humble himself and repent and ask for forgiveness; and
ask forgiveness again… and again…every time he falls! Perhaps a person claiming
that he is perfect and would never fall is not telling the truth-lying. And sometimes or
most of the times people are expert of searching raw information about privacy or
expert to let his tongue long just to destroy and to enhance his/her crocodile
syndrome, Ananias syndrome or ‘obsessed to the group’s money’ syndrome!

Just us, Donald & the A.I-we might be

mistaken.