„We do not wage our struggle against human enemies, but against the powers, forces, and everything that rules this age of darkness, against the celestial spirits of evil.“ — The Bible, translated from the Czech Ecumenical Translation (ČEP), Ephesians 6:12

Abstract: This study analyzes the mechanisms of theological manipulation and psychological pressure in online discourse. Using a case study of an extensive communication, the text demonstrates the deliberate inversion of biblical verses (especially Eph 6:12) and the weaponization of later church dogmas, primarily the concept of original sin. The study first presents a historical-critical exegesis of the mentioned verse and a deconstruction of the dogma of original sin. Subsequently, it details the communication strategies by which the dogmatic subject justifies the dehumanization of their opponent, intellectual isolation, and aggression masked as a supposed spiritual duty.

1. Exegesis of Ephesians 6:12: The Christian Rejection of Fighting Against People

To understand the depth of the manipulation occurring in the analyzed discourse, it is first necessary to precisely define the original meaning of the central verse of the Epistle to the Ephesians. It reads as follows:

„We do not wage our struggle against human enemies, but against the powers, forces, and everything that rules this age of darkness, against the celestial spirits of evil.“ (Bible, Eph 6:12)

When Paul of Tarsus and the early Christian community formulated their teaching on spiritual warfare (psychomachia), they faced a crucial task: to distinguish their path from ordinary earthly conflicts. The expression used in the Greek original – ou pros sarka kai aima (not against flesh and blood) – is an absolute and categorical exclusion of any human opponent from the definition of an enemy. „Flesh and blood“ is an ancient Semitic idiom denoting a physical, mortal human being.

By this verse, the author of the text explicitly forbids believers from waging war against specific people – whether political opponents, Roman oppressors, or people holding different views. The conflict is purposefully shifted here to an entirely different level: the metaphysical level. The struggle is to be waged against „celestial spirits of evil,“ cosmic forces, transpersonal structures (archons), and the inner ignorance that holds humanity in darkness. Rewriting this verse to justify fighting against people is not just a shift in meaning, but a direct destruction of its fundamental essence.

2. Original Sin as an Artificial Construct and an Instrument of Power

The second pillar of theological pressure in our case study is the abuse of the dogma of the so-called original or inherited sin. This is a concept that represents one of the most massive shifts in the history of Western thought, even though it has no basis in the original texts.

Absence in Judaism and the Old Testament Tradition: Traditional Judaism and the Hebrew Bible stand on the principle of personal responsibility. The story in the Book of Genesis (the fall in Eden) describes individual failure and individual punishments. The theological concept that guilt would be genetically or spiritually transmitted to the entire human race does not exist here. The prophet Ezekiel defines this exactly:

„Behold, all souls are mine; the soul of the father as well as the soul of the son is mine: the soul who sins shall die.“ (Bible, Ezekiel 18:4)

Judaism operates with the concept of a clean birth, full free will (bechira chofshit), and internal inclinations towards good or selfish actions (yetzer ha-tov, yetzer ha-ra). These represent a space for personal cultivation, not a state of innate condemnation. Likewise, in the teachings of Jesus Christ himself, preserved in the canonical Gospels, there is not a single mention of the innate guilt of newborns.

Construction of the Dogma in Later Christianity: The introduction of original sin into the Christian paradigm occurred gradually. Although Paul of Tarsus connected the existence of death with Adam’s act in his epistles, it was not made into a doctrine until Aurelius Augustine at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. In theological disputes, he needed to anchor the idea of a hopelessly corrupt humanity that is absolutely dependent on external, institutional salvation. This artificial construct became a perfect tool for controlling believers through fear. And it is precisely as a tool of control and condemnation that this dogma is abused in the following case study.

3. Case Study: In-depth Analysis of Three Discussion Threads

The following analysis is based on an authentic transcript of online communication between an advocate of aggressive dogmatism (Subject 1) and a proponent of a source-based, historical-critical approach (Subject 2).

Thread 1: The Invention of the „Human Demon“ and Manipulation of the Source

Subject 1: „We also wage a struggle against earthly evil human spirits who constantly blaspheme… the one true creator… Jesus Christ. Amen!“ Subject 2: „Are you changing the text of the Bible and using it against people? … Original Bible – Eph 6:12 We do not wage our struggle against human enemies…“ Subject 1: „Why would I change the text of the Bible, I am merely adding and clarifying… that those same evil powers and unclean spirits are present in man himself. Therefore, even the human spirit is UNCLEAN AND FALLEN FROM GOD.“

In this thread, a fundamental textual inversion occurs. Subject 1 arrogates the right to „add and clarify“ the sacred text. They deliberately ignore Paul’s warning from Eph 6:12 and introduce the oxymoron „earthly evil human spirit“. They thus annul the separation of spiritual evil from the human being. By claiming that „the human spirit is unclean,“ they dehumanize the opponent. A fellow human becomes a demonic entity. Subject 2 accurately identifies this foul and counters by pointing out Christ’s stance recorded in the Gospel of Mark, where Jesus applies a principle of absolute inclusion:

„John said to him, ‚Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.‘ But Jesus said, ‚Do not stop him, for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. For the one who is not against us is for us.'“ (Bible, Mark 9:38-40)

Thread 2: Ad Hominem Attacks and the Sacralization of Aggression

Subject 1: „If you are not a friend of God, who are you now!?… Boy, you live in delusion and confusion of the senses, due to the Original inherited sin you are still separated from God… You are therefore called an ENEMY OF GOD.“ Subject 2: „Please do not use the informal ‚you‘, it is impolite. Bible, Matthew 7:1 – 5 On judging others… You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye…“ Subject 1: „No LIAR can be a friend of Jesus… If someone has a speck in their eye, it is my spiritual duty to take it out, and that always brings pain at first…“

The discussion here moves to the level of psychological pressure. Subject 1 artificially creates a hierarchical asymmetry by using informal address, calling the opponent „boy,“ and labeling them a „liar“ and an „enemy of God.“ The dogma of original sin is deployed here as a whip. The most terrifying mechanism, however, is the reaction to Christ’s sermon from the Gospel of Matthew, which Subject 2 rightfully quotes in their defense:

„Judge not, that you be not judged. For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? […] You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.“ (Bible, Matthew 7:1-5)

Subject 1 completely twists this verse and casts themselves in the role of the pure one who has a „spiritual duty“ to inflict pain on their opponent by removing their imaginary speck. They rationalize their aggression as holy service, which is the psychological definition of abuse masked as care.

Thread 3: The Clash of Historical Criticism with Intellectual Immunization

To fully understand the argumentative incompetence of the dogmatist (Subject 1), it is necessary to present the entire exegesis that Subject 2 brought into the discussion. Subject 2 accurately and with full religious-studies argumentation explained that the dogma of original sin exists neither in the Old Testament nor in Judaism, and that Jesus did not teach it in the New Testament either:

Subject 2 (Part One – Old Testament and Judaism): „The Myth of Original Sin: Why doesn’t it exist in the Old Testament or in Judaism? When the term ‚original sin‘ is mentioned, most of us imagine Adam’s fall in the Garden of Eden, the apple, and humanity burdened with this inherited guilt from the very moment of birth. But if we look at the original texts of the Hebrew Bible or the tradition of Judaism, we discover a surprising fact: there is not a single mention of original sin here.

What does the Old Testament actually say? The story of the forbidden fruit in the Book of Genesis does depict the first human failure, but the consequences are entirely different from what later Christian doctrine knows. God punishes the actors individually – Eve with pain in childbirth, Adam with sweat while tilling the soil. Nowhere in the Old Testament, however, do we read that the guilt and moral corruption of the first humans were automatically inherited by entire generations of their descendants. On the contrary, the Hebrew Bible stands on strict personal responsibility. As the prophet Ezekiel explicitly summarizes: ‚The soul who sins shall die.‘ The concept of inherited guilt and the necessity of its washing away arose centuries later in a Christian environment, mainly thanks to the theology of Aurelius Augustine.

The Perspective of Judaism: A Clean Slate and Free Will. In traditional Judaism, the doctrine of original sin was never taught. Jewish theology stands on entirely different pillars: Clean Birth: Every person comes into the world with a pure soul and a ‚clean slate.‘ Children are not born burdened by the guilt of their ancestors. Free Will: People have full freedom of choice (bechira chofshit). They are not burdened with an innate inability to do good. Internal Inclinations: Judaism explains human failure through the concept of yetzer ha-ra (natural physical and selfish inclinations) and yetzer ha-tov (inclinations towards good). These impulses are not a sin, but a natural endowment of a person, which they are tasked to cultivate. The Path of Rectification (teshuvah): If a person errs in life, they do not bear guilt for Adam’s fall, but for their own decisions. The way back to harmony is sincere regret and the rectification of mistakes by one’s own efforts. Conclusion: While Christianity views the event in Eden as a breaking of human nature that requires redemption, Judaism and the Old Testament see humans as free beings capable at every moment of choosing between good and evil, without the burden of someone else’s guilt.“

Subject 2 (Part Two – New Testament and the Origin of the Dogma): „Baptism without Jesus: Who actually invented ‚original sin‘? If we open the canonical Gospels and look for the doctrine of original sin in them, we will not find a single word there. Jesus Christ never taught that people were born as debtors burdened with guilt for Adam’s failure. If we were to investigate where this concept actually comes from, we would find that it has nothing to do with Christ’s teaching – it is a later human construction that appeared deep in the future, long after the life of the Master himself.

So where did this doctrine come from and who is behind it? Behind it are two key figures who shifted the Christian direction completely differently than what the original message was: The First Theoretical Impulse – Paul of Tarsus: The fundamental seed of the whole concept was planted by the apostle Paul. In his epistles (for example, in the Epistle to the Romans) he first linked the fate of all humanity with Adam’s act and explained the arrival of death into the world through it. Although Paul did not yet speak of every newborn bearing direct moral guilt, he opened the door to the idea that humanity is deeply marked by Adam’s fall. The Final Creator of the Dogma – Aurelius Augustine: The man who took this idea, radicalized it, and gave it the form of official doctrine was bishop Aurelius Augustine at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. It was he who needed to prove in theological disputes that human nature is hopelessly corrupt and that guilt and concupiscence are transmitted biologically from generation to generation. It was he who came up with the idea that even an innocent child bears Adam’s sin.

Scaring people with innate guilt and the fear of original sin is thus the result of the intellectual development of the later church, not the words of the Nazarene. It is a doctrine invented by human followers a hundred years later to subjugate the human soul to a system, whereas Christ’s original message was built on personal freedom and a direct relationship with divinity.“

After presenting such a comprehensive, source-based exegesis, any rational debate would have to be followed by a factual counterargument. Subject 1’s reaction, however, perfectly illustrates the phenomenon known as intellectual immunization:

Subject 1: „Boy, your constant Spirit-less intellectualizing can never lead you to the Truth itself… to the Truth to which all the Holy Scriptures of the world testify, and which can never be reached through human reason (Satan’s will-o‘-the-wisp). In the Book of Genesis, the SPIRITUAL FALL OF THE FIRST HEAVENLY MAN is clearly described… You yourself, Josef, suffer from this deadly sin and therefore you are subject to the DEATH of body and SOUL. And you can argue with Me here until HALLELUJAH…“

This part of the discussion reveals a deep epistemological clash. To Subject 2’s exact textual analysis, Subject 1 reacts with a complete inability to genuinely work with the Bible. They mask their failure by demonizing thought itself. Rationality and critical reading are labeled „Satan’s will-o‘-the-wisp,“ and any fact is disqualified as a manifestation of the devil. It is a massive paradox that Subject 1, on the one hand, defends the Augustinian dogma, yet for its defense, they use a completely unbiblical myth about the „spiritual fall of the first heavenly man.“ Faced with the insurmountable power of facts, they resort to personal curses and intimidating the opponent with eternal damnation.

4. Conclusion: Protecting Texts from Fanaticism

The analysis of this case study reveals the dynamics of pathological spirituality. It begins with the purposeful rewriting of a verse from the Epistle to the Ephesians, which was intended to divert attention from interpersonal conflicts but was transformed into a weapon against people. As soon as the opponent is dehumanized based on this modification, a spiral of pressure begins. The historically dubious dogma of original sin does not serve spiritual reflection but rather humiliation and screening, accompanied by a total resignation of the ability to understand one’s own holy text.

Subject 2’s approach represents an adequate form of defense against such extremism: permanent grounding in texts, historical-critical knowledge of sources, objective deconstruction of later dogmas, and an absolute refusal to play the game of personal attacks and fear manipulation. The identification of these mechanisms is crucial for cultivating religious discourse and protecting original texts from their dogmatic abuse.

5. Appendix: Complete Transcript of the Discussion Threads

Below is the complete, unedited transcript of the original online communication, which forms the primary source of this case study.

Thread 1

Subject 1: We also wage a struggle against earthly evil human spirits who constantly blaspheme the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit… the one true creator, savior and redeemer of humanity… Jesus Christ. Amen!️

Subject 2: Are you changing the text of the Bible and using it against people? Is this what Jesus Christ teaches you?

Subject 2: What do you see the blasphemy in?

Subject 2: Original Bible – Eph 6:12 We do not wage our struggle against human enemies, but against the powers, forces and everything that controls this age of darkness, against the celestial spirits of evil.

Subject 1: Why would I change the text of the Bible, I am merely adding and clarifying for better understanding that those same evil powers and unclean spirits (demons) are present in man himself. Therefore, even the human spirit is UNCLEAN AND FALLEN FROM GOD. Is something unclear about My words!???️

Subject 1: In disbelief and above all infidelity towards God. God is after all a SPIRIT and moreover is THREE TIMES HOLY, that is why I wrote that unclean human spirits blaspheme God… the Holy Spirit. Is something unclear about that?️

Subject 2: Jesus Christ taught nothing of the sort. You are declaring hostility to people who do not walk with you – do you know how Jesus Christ reacted to this? BIBLE 38 John said to him, “Teacher, we saw someone casting out demons in your name, and we tried to stop him, because he was not following us.” 39 But Jesus said, “Do not stop him, for no one who does a mighty work in my name will be able soon afterward to speak evil of me. 40 For the one who is not against us is for us. 41 For truly, I say to you, whoever gives you a cup of water to drink because you belong to Christ will by no means lose his reward.”

Subject 1: Just to clarify the word CELESTIAL SPIRITS… those are fallen angels (spirits) originating from the Father’s original realm… the Kingdom of Heaven. In short, they are spirits who put on the body of the ORIGINAL INHERITED SIN… of flesh, blood and bones.️

Subject 2: BIBLE – Eph 6:12 „We do not wage our struggle against human enemies, but against the powers, forces and everything that controls this age of darkness, against the celestial spirits of evil.“https://ceskagnostickakomunita.education/2026/08/03/bible-ef-612-nevedeme-svuj-boj-proti-lidskym-nepratelum-ale-proti-mocnostem-silam-a-vsemu-co-ovlada-tento-vek-tmy-proti-nadzemskym-duchum-zla/

Thread 2

Subject 1: If you are not a friend of God, who are you now!? A friend? Or an enemy? He who is with Us cannot be against Us. The Bible speaks clearly. However, anyone can TURN AROUND and turn their enmity into… friendship.️

Subject 2: And so I do not have the right from God to approach him differently than you do?

Subject 1: Every person has the right, only mostly they do not know how to establish an intimate relationship with God so that his God would like it and fall in love with the given person with his higher Divine Love. So if you know how Love for God is practiced… you can boldly begin to approach God’s throne. Unfortunately, evil powers etc. prevent man from doing this with their invisible forces without man having the slightest clue about it.️

Subject 1: Anyone can say that, but it is God himself who bears witness as to whether it is really so. The only thing twisted here… are your words about friendship.️

Subject 1: Boy you live in delusion and confusion of the senses, due to the Original inherited sin you are still separated from God and God’s glory to the Son. You are therefore called an ENEMY OF GOD. Clarity cannot be had by the one who walks in Darkness, but by the One in whom Jesus Christ himself was born… the Light of the World. Such already walk in the Light of the Gospel.. in Truth and the Holy Spirit like Jesus Christ.️️

Subject 2: — Bible, Matthew 7:1 – 5 On judging others 1 Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Subject 2: Am I forbidden Jesus‘ friendship?

Subject 2: Please do not use the informal ‚you‘, it is impolite. Bible, Matthew 7:1 – 5 On judging others 1 Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Subject 1: No LIAR can be a friend of Jesus. He who lies distances himself from God and His Grace. Your prohibition is therefore your own LIE.️

Subject 2: Bible, Matthew 7:1 – 5 On judging others 1 Judge not, that you be not judged. 2 For with the judgment you pronounce you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured to you. 3 Why do you see the speck that is in your brother’s eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? 4 Or how can you say to your brother, ‘Let me take the speck out of your eye,’ when there is the log in your own eye? 5 You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your brother’s eye.

Subject 2: Do you dictate to the real God the conditions for communicating with people?

Subject 1: Romans 8:1-39 B21 There is therefore now no condemnation for those who are in Christ Jesus. For the law of the Spirit of life has set you free in Christ Jesus from the law of sin and death. For God has done what the law, weakened by the flesh, could not do. By sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful flesh and for sin, he condemned sin in the flesh, in order that the righteous requirement of the law might be fulfilled in us, who walk not according to the flesh but according to the Spirit…

Subject 3: And that is exactly why people leave the „one and true church“, that they replaced love with fear there and when they finally convert someone to their faith, he is a thousand times worse than they are themselves.

Subject 1: I am not DICTATING anything, merely explaining. God set the condition himself, which man must fulfill so that the Father’s Divine Grace can touch him. The condition is simple… FULFILL GOD’S LAW (THE TEN COMMANDMENTS) WITH YOUR LIFE.️️️P.S. If someone has a speck in their eye, it is my spiritual duty to take it out for him and that always brings pain first and then relief for the afflicted. Having a log in the eye is a much more painful experience and taking it out oneself… that requires great effort… the same as receiving God’s Grace and then FULFILLING GOD’S LAW!️

Thread 3

Subject 1: If the ORIGINAL INHERITED SIN OF ADAM AND EVE did not exist, there would be no need for the Salvation and Redemption of the human soul. The opposite, however, is the TRUTH and whoever claims that no such sin exists… is a liar and the Truth is not present in him… as proof that the Original inherited sin was once and for all removed!️️️The original inherited sin is nothing else than the DEATH OF THE BODY AND THE DAMNATION OF THE HUMAN SOUL (THE SECOND DEATH), WHICH BECAME UNDER THE INFLUENCE OF ITS SPIRITUAL IGNORANCE… THE SEED AND CHILD OF THE DEVIL.️

Subject 2: The Myth of Original Sin: Why Doesn’t It Exist in the Old Testament or in Judaism? When the term ‚original sin‘ is mentioned, most of us imagine Adam’s fall in the Garden of Eden, the apple, and humanity burdened with this inherited guilt from the very moment of birth. But if we look at the original texts of the Hebrew Bible or the tradition of Judaism, we discover a surprising fact: there is not a single mention of original sin here. What Does the Old Testament Actually Say? The story of the forbidden fruit in the Book of Genesis does depict the first human failure, but the consequences are entirely different from what later Christian doctrine knows. God punishes the actors individually – Eve with pain in childbirth, Adam with sweat while tilling the soil. Nowhere in the Old Testament, however, do we read that the guilt and moral corruption of the first humans were automatically inherited by entire generations of their descendants. On the contrary, the Hebrew Bible stands on strict personal responsibility. As the prophet Ezekiel explicitly summarizes: „The soul who sins shall die.“ The concept of inherited guilt and the necessity of its washing away arose centuries later in a Christian environment, mainly thanks to the theology of Aurelius Augustine. The Perspective of Judaism: A Clean Slate and Free Will. In traditional Judaism, the doctrine of original sin was never taught. Jewish theology stands on entirely different pillars: Clean Birth: Every person comes into the world with a pure soul and a „clean slate“. Children are not born burdened by the guilt of their ancestors. Free Will: People have full freedom of choice (bechira chofshit). They are not burdened with an innate inability to do good. Internal Inclinations: Judaism explains human failure through the concept of yetzer ha-ra (natural physical and selfish inclinations) and yetzer ha-tov (inclinations towards good). These impulses are not a sin, but a natural endowment of a person, which they are tasked to cultivate. The Path of Rectification (teshuvah): If a person errs in life, they do not bear guilt for Adam’s fall, but for their own decisions. The way back to harmony is sincere regret and the rectification of mistakes by one’s own efforts. Conclusion: While Christianity views the event in Eden as a breaking of human nature that requires redemption, Judaism and the Old Testament see humans as free beings capable at every moment of choosing between good and evil, without the burden of someone else’s guilt.

Subject 2: Baptism without Jesus: Who actually invented „original sin“? If we open the canonical Gospels and look for the doctrine of original sin in them, we will not find a single word there. Jesus Christ never taught that people were born as debtors burdened with guilt for Adam’s failure. If we were to investigate where this concept actually comes from, we would find that it has nothing to do with Christ’s teaching – it is a later human construction that appeared deep in the future, long after the life of the Master himself. So where did this doctrine come from and who is behind it? Behind it are two key figures who shifted the Christian direction completely differently than what the original message was: The First Theoretical Impulse – Paul of Tarsus: The fundamental seed of the whole concept was planted by the apostle Paul. In his epistles (for example, in the Epistle to the Romans) he first linked the fate of all humanity with Adam’s act and explained the arrival of death into the world through it. Although Paul did not yet speak of every newborn bearing direct moral guilt, he opened the door to the idea that humanity is deeply marked by Adam’s fall. The Final Creator of the Dogma – Aurelius Augustine: The man who took this idea, radicalized it, and gave it the form of official doctrine was bishop Aurelius Augustine at the turn of the 4th and 5th centuries. It was he who needed to prove in theological disputes that human nature is hopelessly corrupt and that guilt and concupiscence are transmitted biologically from generation to generation. It was he who came up with the idea that even an innocent child bears Adam’s sin. Scaring people with innate guilt and the fear of original sin is thus the result of the intellectual development of the later church, not the words of the Nazarene. It is a doctrine invented by human followers a hundred years later to subjugate the human soul to a system, whereas Christ’s original message was built on personal freedom and a direct relationship with divinity.

Subject 1: Boy, your constant Spirit-less intellectualizing can never lead you to the Truth itself… to the Truth to which all the Holy Scriptures of the world testify, and which can never be reached through human reason (Satan’s will-o‘-the-wisp).️ In the Book of Genesis, the SPIRITUAL FALL OF THE FIRST HEAVENLY MAN ADAM into the material earthly nature of DEATH is clearly described and this is the main cause of the Original inherited sin, with which the entire earthly humanity is cursed or marked. Earthly man is just an ordinary rational animal… a living organism and that is also Adam, who was created from the dust of the EARTH (from the substances of this nature of DEATH), whereas that HEAVENLY ADAM, he was created by God the creator from the substances of Divine nature… the nature of LIFE. From which it follows that man is a so-called DUAL (HYBRID) BEING… he is two in one. Man is therefore internally divided, as not only the Apostle Paul says in his epistles, but also Jesus Christ himself, when he says… ,,TWO WILL BE IN THE FIELD, ONE WILL BE TAKEN (INTO THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN), BUT THE OTHER WILL BE LEFT ON EARTH.“ P.S. Your arguments against the Original inherited sin are therefore useless, stupid and untrue. You yourself, Josef, suffer from this deadly sin and therefore you are subject to the DEATH of body and SOUL. And you can argue with Me here until HALLELUJAH, it won’t change anything anyway.️

Subject 1: Man was left with FREE WILL, which, however, is limited just like earthly man himself. The free will of man lies only in the choice of YES or NO, TO THE LEFT or TO THE RIGHT, GOOD or EVIL etc. It only allows man to decide, but it does not yet make of the animal man… A COMPLETELY FREE BEING, of which Jesus Christ taught. Man is capable of doing „good and evil“, but God speaks of doing a higher Good, through which it is possible to receive God’s Grace and thus receive a great Gift of God… leading to Salvation and Redemption from Adam’s Original inherited sin. Only by deeds and faith in the quality of Good is it possible to FULFILL THE LAW following the example of Jesus Christ, who says… DENY YOURSELF, TAKE UP YOUR CROSS AND FOLLOW ME.️ P.S. Without one’s own Cross, which is no longer made of wood, no one of mortal men can ever approach Salvation, Redemption and the Living God… not even by an inch, until THAT MORTAL BECOMES IMMORTAL AND THOSE TWO BECOME… ONE SINGLE… SOLE ONE.️