Psychological studies have found two contradictory results about how people respond to rules. Some research has found that, when there are new restrictions, you rationalize them; your brain comes up with a way to believe the restriction is a good idea. But other research has found that people react negatively against new restrictions, wanting the restricted thing more than ever.

Kristin Laurin of the University of Waterloo thought the difference might be absoluteness—how much the restriction is set in stone. “If it’s a restriction that I can’t really do anything about, then there’s really no point in hitting my head against the wall and trying to fight against it,” she says. “I’m better off if I just give up. But if there’s a chance I can beat it, then it makes sense for my brain to make me want the restricted thing even more, to motivate me to fight” Laurin wrote the new paper with Aaron Kay and Gavan Fitzsimons of Duke University…

Laurin says this confirms what she suspected about absoluteness; if a restriction is definite, people find a way to live with it. This could help explain how uprisings spread across the Arab world earlier this year…

And how does this relate to unrequited love? It confirms people’s intuitive sense that leading someone can just make them fall for you more deeply, Laurin says. “If this person is telling me no, but I perceive that as not totally absolute, if I still think I have a shot, that’s just going to strengthen my desire and my feeling, that’s going to make me think I need to fight to win the person over,” she says. “If instead I believe no, I definitely don’t have a shot with this person, then I might rationalize it and decide that I don’t like them that much anyway.”

This is directly applicable to the two major displacement theologies. Christians are indoctrinated from the time they can understand language that their Διαθηκη Καινη (NT) is the absolute "Word of god." So they grow up thinking that there is no argument against their NT. Their sole hope of salvation is absolute, and absolutely bound up in their NT.

Similarly, Muslims are indoctrinated from the time they can understand language that their Quran is the absolute "Word of god." So they grow up thinking that there is no argument against their Quran. Their sole hope of salvation is absolute, and absolutely bound up in their Quran.

Both Christians and Muslims are hopelessly indoctrinated that they are inextricably bound by their respective book. Convinced that they have no hope of changing it, therefore having no other option, they can only rationalize the best reasons they can conceive of for living under their clerics' tyrannical, often ruthless, impositions. This is exactly the type of situation described by this research.

As the quickening pace of disillusionment and exodus from Christianity has shown over the last few decades, when the N^әtzâr•imꞋ  shatter the absoluteness of their situation with documented history and inescapable logic, their alternative changes from rationalization to disillusionment, rebellion and, inexorably, eventual revolution.

We are igniting the fires of a global revolution that, literally, scares hell out of the humanist (anti-Bible) socialists. Biblical prophecies are continually becoming history—unrecognized by most (see The 1993 Covenant) and to the consternation of the rest. The time of distinguishing between Yi•s^ә•râ•eilꞋ  and the goy•imꞋ  approaches inexorably. The problem is apathy, disinterest and inaction. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

Note to the wise: It is to preclude disillusionment, rebellion and revolution within Orthodox Judaism and the Jewish Community globally that I implore the rabbis to reverse their present course of increasing radicalism and authoritarianism and rely instead on historical documentation, logical reason and science—like Ram•ba"mꞋ , for example.