There's not a resource problem; there's a sin problem.

The purpose here is to explain intuitively why sin never ends, what the alternatives are and what the consequences are.

For a starting context, what is "turning the other Cheek?" Christ said, if someone strikes you on one cheek, offer the other as well (Mat 5:39). There are two angles for viewing this. One is the moral state of the person, and the other is the social consequence.

Turning the other cheek is the moral thing to do. Therefore, it defines oneself as being moral and leaves the taint of sin off one's soul.

A person should define himself as moral. Definitions are permanent unless corrected. Redefining oneself morality is very difficult. It is the essence of repentance. If a person does not define himself as moral, he has no respect in the moral world, because the complexities of creating and defining life cannot move forward when the process is undermined by persons who do destructive things.

Why is not retaliation virtue? Because it is almost impossible to be cause over anything without perpetrating more injustices. But is it not irresponsible to do nothing? Yes. But more sin is not the answer. The most irresponsible thing to do is stack sin on top of sin endlessly, which is what retaliation is. All corruption is rationalized as necessary. Retaliation supposedly makes more corruption necessary.

The only responsible thing to do about sin is produce truth. Sin cannot exist in the light of truth. Nothing else ends sin. Persons who do not use truth to end sin will use force and violence. One response or the other will always be used, because sin always increases until something is done about it.

The social consequence of returning sin for sin is a never ending war with destroyers whose goal is to produce no other result. Destroyers use conflict as a justification for all of their corruptions. They deliberately create conflicts as a tool for advancing their motives. There is no perversion they do not justify through a conflict.

Truth of course cannot be produced rapidly enough or effectively enough to immediately solve problems. So action needs to be taken to prevent injustices. To not prevent injustices is to be responsible for the cause. But it is important to understand the difference between preventing injustice and retaliation. Retaliation does not prevent anything.

Preventing injustices could be called police action. Police are not supposed to retaliate. Describing how police should prevent injustices goes beyond the purpose here. There is no perfect way to produce force. Police action is a compromise in a corrupt environment where good and evil interact. It is not a part of moral existence in the absence of sin. Certainly, there are right ways and wrong ways for police to proceed, but describing them changes the subject.

There is a high tendency in the world to assume that intimidation and coercion are the only responsible methods of controlling enemies. The scheme never works, but there is such a strong driving force behind it that a lot of pretending is associated with it. It never works for two major reasons: One, it is sin, which puts justice and the universe on the other side. Two, the victims eventually gain the upper hand, and then they retaliate. There has never been a destroyer who hasn’t fallen to his victims—not the least reason being that destroyers stack victims on top of victims until they have more victims than they can intimidate and coerce.

Since this description is intuitive, a look inside the mind of a coercive intimidator is telling. The intimidator tells himself that the victims are powerless and incapable of responding. Being blinder than a bat, he doesn’t realize that the victims will not always be so powerless. Also escaping his awareness is the multitude of potential victims who also feel threatened, and they are not as powerless as the immediate victims. Looking farther into the abstractions, the intimidator defines himself as a destroyer and loses respect of the moral world.

This leads to another major element of retaliation and intimidation, which is hypocrisy. The retaliators or intimidators (about equivalents) want to switch back and forth between opposite conditions. After getting someone thoroughly victimized, they then want to switch premises and have everyone view them as givers of life and friends. Defy us and be destroyed, or support us and live happily ever after, they say. What sort of friends are destroyers? What sort of life do they have to offer? They convince no one but themselves. They have a lot of wanabes supporting their corruptions, but they all destroy themselves in a pit and are replaced by more constructive persons.

This description pertains to the use of force. Force is the basis of sin, because it destroys realities, while life is made up of realities. Force is only definable as that which destroys realities.

The attitudinal element of morality and sin is based on power. The number one reason why sin exists is because power drives it. Power is the reference for direction in life by gullible fools who destroy themselves in sin.

There is not an entirely conscious awareness of this standard in the minds which are corrupted by it. In fact, the degree of corruption inversely correlates with the degree of abstract understanding that anyone has. It takes abstract understanding to see what power is and how people destroy themselves in subservience to it.

Therefore, a more detailed description of the characteristics of power is needed. Power is an element of all activity. It cannot be purged from anything. Yet it corrupts. For this reason, the difference between proper and improper relationships to power is critical.

It’s not good to define power, because a definition would cause it to be over-simplified. Of course, it is something in the area of control. It is also too large of a subject to describe entirely here. Instead, the purpose here will be to describe some of the basic errors that people make concerning power.

One of the most basic and common errors is to view power as the test and reference for morality, while in fact it is the cause of sin. This error can be called bigotry—defined as the subconscious assumption that power is virtue and powerlessness is sin. One sees this attitude in the smugness of persons who dominate. They assume their corruption is virtue because of their supposed superior position of domination. In other words, by taking a dominating position they not only subdue someone else, they assume they are more righteous because of their supposedly superior position. They don’t know that domination is another sin. They get the morality reversed in assuming domination is a virtue, because the dominator puts himself in a position of power over someone else, and power is assumed to be the magic that does the sanctifying as well as the fixing.

There is a trace of cheap philosophy that goes with domination or bigotry. Why would the dominator be above someone else if he were not superior, and why would not such superiority be a test of righteousness? Those questions would be easy to answer, but corrupters never allow a rational analysis of their corruptions. They are a bunch of nihilists.

Elitism is striving for the magical fix of power. It is as sanctimonious as bigotry and domination, because power is that way. It is the god of corrupt persons. It does their fixing and sanctifying.

To put elitism into perspective, consider an example. Some persons who undergo an experience called alien abduction are glad to get raped and molested by the aliens, because the victims in question assume aliens to be gods over technology, minds and other persons. Who wouldn’t want to get raped by such gods? In the same way, some persons will commit any sin for satan, because satan is god to persons who lust for power. There is no such thing as sin with that much power. Satan acquires power rivaling God’s through spirit cannibalism, as describe on the page pertaining to the spirit world. In fact, it is satan and crew who create the alien abduction experience, and they focus on persons who cannot see through their schemes due to limited religious understanding. A fingerprint of satan and crew is their desire to play doctor and molest people, which is the largest part of so-called alien abductions.

Words cannot touch the sin problem, because sin is not produced through analysis, it is produced through feel. Power makes sin feel right. Power feels good; so it causes all of the sin associated with power to feel good, which means righteous. To argue against something that feels right to corrupters is like mugging their grandmother.

Among the consequences of sin which need to be noted here are the wall corrupters use to insulate themselves from criticism and the blame they cast upon their victims. When you get sinned at, you get blamed for it. There’s a satanic philosophy that goes with it, which says the best defense is a good offense.

Corrupters inadvertently judge their own corruption by a wall that they use to prevent criticism of it. Promoters of truth and virtue do not use a wall of obstruction for the purpose. The wall around corruption is constructed at the micro level (like personal communication) through threats, intimidation, etc. which accuses the critic of being too negative should he question the corruption. At the intermediate level of mongering power, authority and status are insulated from accountability through institutional barriers. At the broadest level, corruption is protected by attitudes of nihilism. See no evil, speak no evil, do no evil is how evil is promoted.

For example, there are oceans of so-called alternative media describing nearly every imaginable corruption in society. They include first-hand and knowledgeable sources of information, but they consist of a few hundred books on a subject, or web sites which have been shoved off the search engines, because the public would rather be lied to than find out the truth. Often the media is blamed for not producing the truth; but in general, it goes much farther in describing than the public does in looking.

So let’s muddle around in the question of why. How is anyone to know what the truth is? Should not the most reliable sources be put above less reliable ones? Hypothetically, the answer is simple. The difference between lies and truth is extremely obvious. But too often, the supposedly most reliable sources are the biggest frauds. The persons who claim they can turn lead into gold are put in control of peoples’ lives, while the persons who say it cannot be done due to the chemistry and crucified for it.

In other words, persons who do not have good abstract understanding do not know who to trust, so they operate by feel. The lies feel good; the truth does not. Evidence clearly shows what the truth is, but the evidence is not looked at due to nihilism.

So the corruptions keep getting back to the nature of sin. Satan taught the world how to sin and protect and promote sin. The barriers and reactions that go with sin prevent words from correcting the problems.