Emerging families of mankind in prehistoric times were geographically separated from one another by great distances. In isolation, they were free to develop their own languages, worship their own Gods and fashion their own unique cultural fabrics complete with definitive codes of acceptable human behavior.

As populations increased, distances between people evaporated.

In modern times we find ourselves jammed together in a conglomeration of dissimilar societies and ethnicities in a world-wide mingling of those with different religions, philosophies and cultural traditions than our own.

As a result there’s been conflict.

What’s considered wicked in one country is celebrated in another. What’s permitted in one state is a crime in another. Revered practices in one religion are sins in another.

Christians, Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Buddhists, Shintoists, agnostics, atheists and humanists are now packed together in the same apartment buildings, neighborhoods and workplaces; each person striving to honor and preserve their own specific cultural heritage, follow their own personal religious beliefs and live their own preferred lifestyles.

In the not-too-distant past, when there was conflict between individuals, religions, ethnicities or nations, these conflicts were often settled by the use of physical violence. Those with the most power to annihilate others traditionally dictated what was right, wrong, good or bad in the area of their influence.

The same is pretty much true today on the international level even though development and application of the rule of law in most western societies is providing citizens with pathways to a peaceful resolution of their conflicts.

There is however no International Code of Acceptable Human Behavior that seven billion people (7,000,000,000) on Earth have agreed to follow in over 200 sovereignties. As a result there’s been devastating wars between nations and religious groups who’ve attempted to enforce their way of life upon others with the use of the sword.

Aristotle (teacher of Alexander the Great 384-322 BC) proposed that rational thought, instead of the sword, was capable of producing an indisputable and universally acceptable answer to the question of how man could best live together while on Earth. All one had to do was to conclude whether or not the living model was to benefit the group as a whole or benefit just one aspect of the group, or any given family or individual.

If one concluded that the beneficiary of any proposed living model would be the group as a whole, then purely selfish behavior would be deemed irrational. If the model benefited only one family, one religion or one aspect of the whole, then altruistic behavior of the benefactors would be irrational.

In the western world there’s been an unmistakable shift away from living models benefitting warlords, kings, religious states and dictatorships. There has been a trend toward social compacts wherein the natural rights of man are being protected by laws created through consensus of the governed or recognized by enlightened monarchies. More and more governments are recognizing the natural and inalienable rights of its citizens and are striving to promote their common good.

Examples are the French, Spanish and American revolutions in which the natural and inalienable rights of the individual were championed and held in the highest esteem; the powers of the church and monarchies were marginalized and the duty of government became more and more focused upon protecting and guaranteeing the natural and inalienable rights of man.

The Age of Enlightenment/Age of Reason (1600’s-1700’s) brought with it an opportunity for people to openly engage in public discourse with others holding different points of view. It was a time when opposing parties earnestly sought to establish the truth of any matter by reasoned analytical thought and debate.

No longer could codes of right and wrong be defined solely by a medley of strict, diverse and conflicting religious dogma handed down through revelation of God’s plan to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Moses, Jesus or Muhammad. Since the plans were all different and conflicting, the Christian, Judaic and Islamic religions had no indisputable common ground and were all pronounced irrational by leading political thinkers of the day.

In particular Englishman Thomas Paine set about to do something about it. He was instrumental in helping formulate the American Declaration of Independence.

The basis of Paine’s rational argument was that “The only idea man can affix to the name of God is that of a first cause; the cause of all things. Incomprehensible and as difficult as it is for a man to conceive what a first cause is, he arrives at the belief of it from the tenfold greater difficulty of disbelieving it.”

“It is difficult beyond description to conceive that space can have no end; but it is more difficult to conceive an end.”

“It is difficult beyond the power of man to conceive an eternal duration of what we call time; but it is more impossible to conceive a time when there shall be no time”

Thomas Paine identified, exposed, discussed and published glaring critical and unarguable discrepancies, contradictions and irrationalities contained within the core precepts of the Jewish, Christian and Muslim religious systems. He dismissed them all as inventions set up to terrify and enslave mankind and monopolize power and profit.

He accused every national religion of establishing itself by pretending some special mission from God, communicated only to certain individuals. The Jews had their Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses; the Christians had their Jesus Christ, their apostles and saints; and the Muslims had their Mohammad, as if the way to God was not open to every man alike.

Paine wrote “Each of these churches show certain books, which they call revelation, or the words of their God. The Jews say their words from God were given to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses, face to face by Elohim and Yahweh. The Christians say words from their God Jehovah came by way of divine inspiration. The Muslims say their word of God (The Quran) was brought by an angel from Heaven directly into the ears of Muhammad. Each of these churches accuses the others of unbelief.”

Using the power of reason, Paine hypothesized the only way to know the one true God (The Creator and First Mover of the Universe) was to behold his works. He wrote, “We have only a confused idea of his power, if we have not the means of comprehending something of its immensity. We can have no idea of his wisdom, but by knowing the order and manner in which it acts. The principles of Science lead to this knowledge; for the Creator of man is the Creator of Science; and it is through that medium that man can see God face to face.”

Paine believed in one God, and no more; he hoped for happiness beyond this life. He believed that religious duties consisted of doing justice; extending loving mercy; and endeavoring to make our fellow creatures happy.

In defining his God, Albert Einstein (1879-1955) said “My religion consists of a humble admiration of the illimitable superior spirit who revels himself in the slight details we are able to perceive with our frail and feeble minds. That deeply emotional conviction of the presence of a superior reasoning power, which is revealed in the incomprehensible universe forms my idea of God.”

Einstein said, “I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones.”

The arrival of the nuclear age has made it imperative that man shed the religious and cultural armor of differences that have pitted Christian against Jew, Jew against Gentile and Muslim against Infidel. Each of these religions have, at one time or another, charged themselves with the violent destruction of one another. At the same time, each professes to be following the words and directions of the one and only almighty God and first mover of the universe.

There is no way to judge whether any of these competing Gods are real or not, since it is claimed God revealed himself only to Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Moses of the Hebrews; only through the divine inspiration given to Jesus Christ and his disciples; and only to the prophet Muhammad of the Muslims. These religions rest upon common foundations of hearsay.

It is irrational to believe the creator of the universe and all things would single out one particular biological family, identify it as his favorite and give them land belonging to others.

It is irrational to believe that the one and only first mover and creator of the universe and all things in it would be three people; the Father, Son and Holy Ghost and then inspire followers to kill every Jew and Muslim they could find.

It is irrational to believe that the one and only God Almighty would command a camel driver to convert the world to a belief in a religious system that required chopping off a person’s hands, depriving women of the right to go to school, follow a profession or appear in public without full body cover and to furthermore call for a tax to be paid by those who refuse to convert to Islam and to kill all those who didn’t convert or pay the tax.

Insanity is the absence of rational or reasonable thought and actions that don’t make common sense. The warring elements of all three religions are insane relics of the past and completely out of place in the age of reason, enlightenment and particularly in the current modern era of the atomic bomb and other weapons of mass destruction.

Adherence to those certain laws and tenants embodied in each of these religious systems requiring followers to annihilate those with differing beliefs has caused and continues to cause the majority of bloodshed and misery on our planet.

There are so many things man can be doing for himself and others on Earth instead of going to war over real estate. With the advancement of science, technology and our burgeoning communication capabilities, it’s absolutely stupid for man to be warring against one another when there is plenty of land for everyone. But here we are today, in the Middle East, continuing a 3,000 year old war over the question of who should be able to rightly occupy the ancient land of Canaan.

For 1,400 years prior to the mass immigration of the Zionists into the Palestinian Territories, the land of Canaan was occupied by Arabs and Persians. At the time the Zionists took military control of the Palestinian Territories and declared themselves the Jewish State of Israel, 90% of the indigenous population were Arab Sunni Muslims.

Through the years, approximately four and a half million (4,500,000) of these Sunni Muslim Palestinians have been run off their land by the Zionists and have become refugees. Their armies have been decimated by Zionist Israel which is backed up and staunchly supported by the financial aid and military might of the United States of America.

Stoking these fires of advancing Zionism still raging in the Middle East is the fact that, without a conventional military force, Sunni Palestinians have had to rely solely on the use of terrorist warfare tactics in order to continue at least some resistance to the further takeover of their land and the unwanted presence of the United States of America in the Middle East.

One example was the Sunni crashing of two passenger jetliners into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City on 9/11/2001 wherein over 3,000 American civilians were killed. A third hijacked airliner was sent crashing through the walls of the Pentagon. A fourth hijacked plane, believed to have been headed for the While House, was taken down by passengers who prevented these Sunni hijackers from reaching their destination.

To make matters even worse, the Muslim World in the Middle East is going through fragmentational changes within itself as Shia is pitted against Sunni; Shia is pitted against Shia; and Sunni against Sunni. These splintered factions each have their own religious armies that at times struggle together against Zionism and the United States for supporting what many Muslims see as being the wrongful theft of Islamic Sunni Palestinian land.

If one were to suggest a rational living model that would end this 3,000 year old war, it would have to include a universal denunciation of the warring elements of each religion.

An international code of acceptable human behavior has been formulated in such a way that all non-destructive elements of each religion may be retained, protected and followed so long as these tenants do not conflict in any way with the spirit and intent of the code.

This International Code of Acceptable Human Behavior includes snippets from the Hammurabi Code, parts of The Ten Commandments, The Magna Charta, portions the American Declaration of Independence and Bill of Rights and the Boy Scout and Girl Scout oaths.

It’s an agreement and pledge every human being on Earth should want to make if they want to take the first mandatory step forward on the one and only path to peace.

For those who hate war, it’s time to stand up, identify yourself and be counted as a member of the Modern Human Race.

Worldwide adherence to this International Code of Acceptable Human Behavior may seem unachievable, but it would be irrational to believe we could not make it happen.

The cold reality of the moment is that we can never expect peace in The Middle East or freedom from anti-American terrorism throughout the world, until there is a Justice for the Sunni Palestinian people whose land has been almost totally swallowed by advancing Zionism.

Time is running out.

It’s becoming more and more apparent that anti-Zionist and anti-United States of America elements may soon be able to coalesce themselves into a formidable striking force capable of inflicting their own brand of Justice on Israel and the United States for helping Zionism erase the name Palestine from world maps.

The purpose of this book is to encourage an understanding of the unarguable historical facts which will help illuminate the one and only path to peace.

This book is dedicated to members of the Modern Human Race (MHR) who believe in following the International Code of Acceptable Human Behavior. It is an open invitation to every Muslim, Christian and Jew alike to shed their allegiance to any part of their religion which fails to meet the minimum standards of the International Code of Acceptable Human Behavior .The Preamble and Code can be found on the website modernhumanrace.com and is presented in Chapter 19 of this book.

There are no initiation fees required to join the Modern Human Race. There are no membership dues. This is not a club. There are no leaders. There are no meetings. There is no Board of Directors. There are no sponsors. The Modern Human Race is a movement.

You become part of this movement toward peace simply by pledging to follow The Code.

Your membership identification card is any marking, clothing or jewelry you care to create or buy that contains the movement’s symbolic icon consisting of the semaphore letters MHR flashed simultaneously within a circle symbolizing unity. See www.modernhumanrace.com for a variety of applications. By displaying this symbol you’ll be announcing to the world you have modified your personal, religious and political beliefs in a manner conforming with The International Code of Acceptable Human Behavior and are therefore a member in good standing of the Modern Human Race (MHR).

If you hate war… it’s time to stand up for peace!

Read this book.

See copies of the original historical documents responsible for creating the fires of war still raging in the Middle East. Once you’ve become aware of and consider the simple irrefutable facts shared in this impartial investigative reporting, the path to peace may become as crystal clear to you as it has become to me.

If my sons are called to war in the Middle East, I will now be able to give them my advice as to whether or not they should go. It’s no longer a difficult decision for me to make.

It’s time to make up your own mind, once and for all, as to who has been right and who has been wrong all these many years.

Menu