889. But Jesus continues: "But whoever says, 'You fool,' shall be in danger of hell fire". What great mystery or secret lies hidden in these two utterances since they cannot be compared with the previously mentioned abusive words that cause their originator to be answerable to the council or the authorities, but on the contrary make it answerable to an altogether different kind of authority: "hell fire"? Here we should understand that in biblical terminology the term "fool" is an expression of something more than we usually associate with this word. Whereas nowadays "fool" is taken to mean at worst a being that is slightly mentally deranged and in less serious cases a being that is naive, simple-minded or backward, in biblical accounts the word denotes a being that denies all laws of morality due to its total denial of the existence of God and that consequently leads a depraved existence or life-style. Among other things, the Bible says: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God'. They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none who does good." "Fools despise wisdom and instruction." "It is an abomination to fools to depart from evil." "Wisdom is too lofty for a fool." As we can see, "fool" is the term that describes a totally godless, immoral being. To accuse one's brother or one's neighbour of being identical to such a being will, according to the words of the world redeemer, make one answerable to "hell fire". So, what has one done that cannot be dealt with by "the council" (the authorities or the common judicial system)? One has criticised another being's mental standard, that is to say their mental and spiritual high point. To call another human being a "fool" here means the same as to reproach a being for something that is quite beyond the control of its will, and for which it is completely blameless. Just as a human being today can do nothing about the fact that he has blue or brown eyes, or is 180 or 150 cm tall, similarly he cannot help the level of its abilities and thereby the level of its morality and wisdom. To be able to understand that God and the highest cosmic moral laws connected with this being do exist, is not an act of will. Either one possesses to a greater or lesser extent the ability to understand or to "believe" these exalted phenomena, or one completely lacks it. If one lacks such an ability, it makes no difference if one is imprisoned for a certain number of years, or is tortured or subjected to other forms of torment. A less gifted human being does not become a genius as a result of such measures. There is thus in the individual an area that lies totally outside all terrestrial authority. Consequently, the individual with respect to this area of its consciousness, that is to say, the spiritual and mental structure of its mentality, cannot be "in danger of the council" or justifiably be sentenced to punishment by any kind of "terrestrial judicial authority". One can be made responsible only for actions that are brought about through the control of one's will, when these actions are anti-social or a danger to other beings' lives and well-being. It is only in this category of actions or manifestations that one can be answerable to "the council". Phenomena that lie beyond the control of the individual's will, such as race, religious hunger or satiation, character and moral standpoint, in short, everything that together makes up its stage of development, cannot suddenly be changed by a prescribed, day-conscious act of will. Here no judicial dictate whatsoever can make any difference. Negroes are Negroes, Bushmen are Bushmen and Eskimos are Eskimos no matter how strict a prohibition, with corresponding punishment and torture, one might set up to the contrary.
      As we have now witnessed, the individual possesses a domain that terrestrial judges are totally unable to touch. It is in this domain that, according to Christ, the individual is "in danger of hell fire".