Tuesday, June 19, 2012

bizarro, funny, sick, and/or monstrous

http://rr-bb.com/index.php?s=f472d3bfaf938e01174621f1b1d85303


http://www.abovetopsecret.com/Religion_Faith_And_Theology.php


http://www.abovetopsecret.com/Aliens_and_UFOs.php


http://human-stupidity.com/pt/stupid-dogma/religion/sucking-infants-penis-is-legal-in-the-us-if-you-first-cut-off-his-foreskin-without-anesthesia


http://www.subvertednation.net/jews-suck-baby-penises/


http://clergygonewild.com/sex-abuse/34-child-abuse


http://religiouschildabuse.blogspot.com/2011/01/infamous-pedophile-priest-who-was.html


http://www.fstdt.com/Default.aspx

Saturday, June 9, 2012

The most vile cult the world has ever known (although islam is in a virtual tie)

http://www.silentlambs.org/popecoveredupabuse.htm



See this page for a lot more:

http://www.silentlambs.org/



Monday, June 4, 2012

joey 'the liar' gallien

Check out the comments here:

http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?blogID=17489641&postID=6138876921232355144&page=1&token=1338813015413

joey is trying to lie his way out of the picture I found and posted being OF him, and is claiming that it's a picture of someone else, that he took. I submitted some comments at joey's site in the thread linked above but he's probably too much a coward to post them (he blocks most of my comments there) so here is what I submitted:

That picture is OF you and you know it joey. Who do you think you're fooling with your blatant lies?

That picture came from a creationist website and YOU are the one who sent them that picture OF you for your profile there. You have admitted (in several ways) that the picture is OF you. That picture OF you was on that creationist site for a long time, and there is absolutely no believable reason why you would send them a picture of someone else for YOUR profile.

Once I found and posted that picture OF you on my site and on ATBC you had the owner of the creationist site remove it from that site.

You had either forgotten about that picture OF you or you really didn't think that I or anyone else would ever find it. And when I did find it and posted it you knew that you were shit out of luck in ever having it disappear from the internet completely, but you did figure that you had better get it removed from the creationist site and then cook up a pack of lies about how it's a picture you took of someone else. You're slow in the head though joey and it took you awhile to come up with your lying claims that the picture isn't of you, and then only after verifying that it's you in your own words in various ways. It doesn't matter what you say anyway. Everything that comes out of you is a lie.

Hey, tell you what joey, if it's someone else (Ha Ha) then WHO is it exactly? Name, address, and phone number joey.

Hey, I know, you can make up more lies and just claim that the guy in the picture was killed in Iraq so there's no way to contact him. Yeah, that ought to fool, well, er, no one.

You're the biggest fool on the internet and you rank right up there with the biggest fools on Earth. And when it comes to liars you're one of the most inept, but you sure do try hard.

The only thing you're good for is free belly laughs and a target for well earned mockery.

Wouldn't you like to know exactly how I found that picture OF you on that creationist website joey? You'd probably be surprised.

I'm thinking of posting that picture OF you on various sites that are focused on the part of Massachusetts you live in (especially Gardner) and pointing out what a childish, incorrigible, lying blowhard you are, with copious links to your tardacious internet rampages. Where do you think I should start joey? How about the sites for the local schools and newspapers? I'm sure that it would really bolster your ID appreciation day or whatever you call it, and it would really put you in solid with all the decent people in your area.

Oh, and if you are too cowardly to post this it really doesn't matter because I'm going to post it on my site and maybe some other sites anyway.




Sunday, June 3, 2012

Hypocrisy?

Jerry Coyne posted some commentary about Karl Giberson and some things Giberson said in an article on HuffPo. I commented in the thread, and Jerry responded to my comments:


The whole truth
Posted June 2, 2012 at 7:37 pm | Permalink

“[S]ocial darwinism”, or just “Darwinism”, the dishonestly conjured up targets for god zombies to blame every bad thing on.

You, giberson, and many, many other godbots (and yes, you are a godbot) try to make it look as though nothing bad ever happened before Darwin lived and published his books, and that Darwin is responsible for ALL the bad thoughts and actions of every human being who has ever lived.

You obviously don’t realize, or won’t admit, that humans have been doing bad things to each other and to everything else on this planet since WAY before Darwin. You also don’t realize, or won’t admit, that RELIGIOUS people have done FAR, FAR, FAR more damage to humans and everything else on this planet than non-religious people or so-called “Darwinists” have ever done or could ever do.

Like other religious zombies you live in a fog of delusion and are blind to reality.

The hatred aimed at Darwin by you religious wackos is truly astounding. You need someone to focus your hatred on and Darwin is a convenient target. Your hatred of him is based mostly on your insecurity, and you’re insecure because deep down you know that your religious beliefs are total bullshit. You thumpers hate Darwin because he gets most of the credit (whether deserved or not) for exposing the fallacy of ‘special creation’, and you just won’t tolerate anyone dispelling any part of that self-serving, self-aggrandizing ‘myth’ that props up your ego. You, and other sky daddy pushers, just can’t stand the thought (or the evidence) that you are no more ‘special’ than an ape, a fish, or a sponge.

Grow up, and quit blaming Darwin for human nature. He didn’t CAUSE people or anything else to evolve. He didn’t CAUSE anyone to be a racist or a eugenicist. He didn’t CAUSE Hitler or anyone else to be genocidal. He didn’t CAUSE anyone to be violent, selfish, murderous, greedy, deceitful, sadistic, dishonest, vicious, immoral, amoral, indifferent, malicious, evil, or any of the other negative things that have been erroneously applied to Darwin or the term “Darwinism”.

Hey, do you want someone or something more deserving to blame for all of the bad shit? Someone or something that really should get all the blame from a Nazarene god believer like you? How about blaming your god? After all, you do believe that your god created everything, don’t you?

Reply


----------


whyevolutionistrue
Posted June 2, 2012 at 8:00 pm | Permalink

I barely let this comment through because of the invective. Look, we don’t call other posters “religious wackos” unless they’re really gonzo, and Karl isn’t. You could have made your points in a more civil manner, though I do understand your frustration at the Nazi card.

Please try to keep the discourse here a bit more respectful.

kthx,
Mgmt.

Reply


----------


The whole truth
Posted June 2, 2012 at 9:04 pm | Permalink

He’s “really gonzo” to me, and I think it’s hypocritical of you to say that my comments are “invective”, uncivil, and disrespectful to giberson when you spend so much time and effort in using what could be described as uncivil, disrespectful “invective” against religious people and their beliefs.

Just because you personally like giberson doesn’t mean that anyone else has to, and if you don’t think that what you say against religious people and their beliefs could be described as “invective”, or uncivil or disrespectful, just ask someone who’s religious.

Make up your mind, Jerry. You’re coming across like an accomodationist.

Oh, and since when is associating or equating the acceptance of naturalistic evolutionary theory to Hitler’s genocidal actions and all the other bad things that humans have ever thought or done NOT uncivil, disrespectful “invective”.

Apparently you’re not as sick and tired of being erroneously, maliciously, and self-servingly equated to murderous monsters, or as sick and tired of god zombies erroneously, maliciously, and self-servingly blaming everything bad on Darwin/”Darwinists”/”Darwinism”/evolutionists/atheists/etc., as I am.

Reply


----------


whyevolutionistrue
Posted June 3, 2012 at 4:15 am | Permalink

Sorry, but you don’t get to insult other commenters here. Yes, I occasionally use invective against people who aren’t posting on this community, but I don’t allow people posting here to call each other names. You will apologize to Karl for calling him a “religious wacko” or you’ll find yourself posting elsewhere.

By the way, I do agree with your sentiments and think that Karl’s comparison was was wrong. But that doesn’t give you the write to either call Karl a wacko or me a hypocrite.

Reply


------------------------------------------------------------


I just submitted a comment in a different thread and found that I'm now in moderation at Coyne's site.

I also see that Coyne posted a picture of joe g. The picture is from my site and I had posted a link to it in a comment I made on Jerry's site late last night. I don't mind that he took the picture and posted it on his site but it does seem a bit strange to me that he would do that while putting me in moderation.

And regarding the moderation, I think that Coyne is being really hypocritical. He and lots of other people there constantly denigrate religious people and call them names (which is fine by me), but when I did it to "Uncle Karl" it was a bad thing that won't be tolerated.

Apologize? Not no way, not no how.




This is the thread where I made my comments to and/or about Giberson and other religious wackos:

http://whyevolutionistrue.wordpress.com/2012/06/02/uncle-karl-disses-evolution-for-no-good-reason/#comments


Friday, June 1, 2012

Saw this on Craigslist

The Dawkins Delusion (God DOESN'T believe in Atheists!)

Date: 2012-06-01, 7:13AM PDT
Reply to: dmsjw-3050660783@pers.craigslist.org

A Christian response to the God-Hater's "God Delusion"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QERyh9YYEis


----------------------------------------

I can't watch the video because of my slow internet connection but maybe some of you will find it interesting.



Wednesday, May 30, 2012

Karma/good riddance/LOL

http://news.yahoo.com/serpent-handling-west-virginia-pastor-dies-snake-bite-173406645--abc-news-topstories.html



Tuesday, May 29, 2012

joe g, stone cold stupid

From his blog:

TUESDAY, MAY 29, 2012
Evolutionism- Evolution is Directed by the Surviving Reproducers
-
EvoTARDs love to spew that opponents of the theory erect a strawman when we say that the theory posits accumulations of random genetic events. EvoTARDs (wrongly) claim that together with the random genetic events there is the directing/ guiding factor of natural selection.

When it is pointed out that natural selection is a result and whatever is good enough is that result, the conversation basically ends.

The point being that whatever survives to reproduce is the result and therefor constitutes this mysterious "directing/ guiding" element of evolutionism.

So according to evoTARD "logic" the "direction" of evolution is "whatever it is/ whatever it happens to be". Pure genius.........
posted by Joe G @ 6:43 PM 0 comments


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


When or if the "conversation ends" it's because you and the rest of the IDiots don't listen and DON'T GET IT. You have been told many, many, many times about how natural selection works but you are just way too stupid to understand.

If I feel like it I'll come back later and try to explain it to you one more time.

Tuesday, May 22, 2012

The "righteous"

Read this:

http://blog.buzzflash.com/node/13354



(For some reason I am not able to make many urls into clickable links here. You'll have to copy the above url, paste it into your browser search bar, and hit enter. I'm sorry for the inconvenience.)



Wednesday, May 2, 2012

Many people have asked...

...the IDiots to explain exactly how the acceptance of "ID" (especially by biologists/evolutionary scientists) would change science for the better. What new and useful research avenues, methods, tools, etc., would be created and used?

Some IDiots (joe g, etc.) have said that reverse engineering would then be done on organisms, etc., but reverse engineering is already being done in every instance where it applies and can be done. The only other response IDiots have (when they have any at all) is that an "ID inference" could be made. Well, so what?

No matter how many times the IDiots are asked what new and useful difference the acceptance of "ID" would make in scientific research, they NEVER have a USEFUL answer, and they run from the question like chickens from a fox.

Let's take a little trip back in time:

http://pandasthumb.org/archives/2004/04/dembski-intervi.html#more

Pay close attention to the fact that dembski never actually answered the question, and nothing has changed since, and of course the real reason the IDiots never answer the question (and run away) is because the acceptance of "ID" or the "ID inference" would NOT create ANY new or useful research avenues, methods, tools, etc.

So, IDiots, here's another chance for you to answer the question: EXACTLY HOW would the acceptance of "ID" or the "ID inference" usefully change the way scientific research (especially biology/evolutionary science) is done?

Friday, March 30, 2012

joe gallien

aka joe g, joe, joseph, john paul, ID guy, jim, frisbee kid, frankie, virgil cain, etc.



                                           "Joe never picks a fight he can't run away from..." - JohnW

Saturday, February 11, 2012

gordo the homophobe

As most or all of you are likely aware, gordon e mullings of Montserrat puts himself on a pedestal and acts as though HE is the only one who can define good morals, and as though HE is the only one with the right to do so. Throughout his sanctimonious, dictatorial sermons from his self erected pedestal he constantly spews the typical christian crap that everyone is wicked, sinful, evil, fallen, etc., and everyone needs to repent and reform, and worship him and his imaginary god. Of course he doesn't really believe that HE needs to repent, reform, or do anything else to clean up his despicable act. He obviously believes that HE is Mr. Clean and that it's only other people who are destined for Hell if they don't eagerly and obediently bow down to him and his imaginary sky daddy.

Let's take a look at some of the things that gordo has said about gays and others who he sees as amoral, immoral, evil, etc.:

"The key issue here is that while evolutionary materialistic atheists [and their fellow travellers] are often fond of direct or indirect arguments from evil against God [e.g. the moral monster thesis of Dawkins et al], their own worldview is inescapably incoherent at this point: assuming and using the reality of objective morality, even as they hold to a worldview that entails amorality (and often thus enables immorality)."

"Because, for many decades now, there has been an active politically messianistic agenda driven by evolutionary materialist secularists, post-modernist neo-pagans, homosexualists and many others, to gain a critical mass of support to reject the Judaeo-Christian heritage of our civilisation, and to replace it with one species or another of a radical secularist-pagan utopia."

"Thus, too, we must restore a sound basis for ethics and morality, in the teeth of the acid that eats away at the foundation of ethics as a limit on public policy and personal behaviour in contemporary culture: evolutionary materialism."

"Notice, too, how sodomy/buggery legalisation -- e.g in the USA -- has rapidly led to the "mainstreaming" among "educated" cultural elites of the notion of so-called same-sex "marriage," never mind the actual effect: [in some cases quite calculated -- many know just what they are doing and have said or written as much] destruction of a foundational institution for society -- as, if something can mean anything, it means nothing. Some profess to not see any difference between Adam and Eve and Adam and Steve, or Eve and Shelly. Shades of Rom 1."

"It is plain that there is much moral confusion, decadence and perversion -- and indeed an air of defiance of God -- across Western culture, which they are exporting to the world; including the Islamic world. So, as we discussed in recent days, it is inherently credible that in part the consequences of that tidal wave of willful cultural sin are coming back to haunt the American nation and the wider West."

"Worth a few thoughts on the Tidal Wave # 1 front . . . secularism and its fellow travellers, modernist/liberal-liberationist apostasy and neo-paganism [with its fellow travellers inthe radical feminist and homosexual movements that wish to turn Western Civilisation on its head, starting these days with redefining marriage out of existence], from the north, brought right to your friendly little cable TV screen"


"In the end, materialism is based on self-defeating logic, and only survives because people often fail (or, sometimes, refuse) to think through just what their beliefs really mean.

As a further consequence, materialism can have no basis, other than arbitrary or whimsical choice and balances of power in the community, for determining what is to be accepted as True or False, Good or Evil. So, Morality, Truth, Meaning, and, at length, Man, are dead. . . . In Law, Government, and Public Policy, the same bitter seed has shot up the idea that "Right" and "Wrong" are simply arbitrary social conventions. This has often led to the adoption of hypocritical, inconsistent, futile and self-destructive public policies.

"Truth is dead," so Education has become a power struggle; the victors have the right to propagandise the next generation as they please. Media power games simply extend this cynical manipulation from the school and the campus to the street, the office, the factory, the church and the home.

Further, since family structures and rules of sexual morality are "simply accidents of history," one is free to force society to redefine family values and principles of sexual morality to suit one's preferences.

Finally, life itself is meaningless and valueless, so the weak, sick, defenceless and undesirable — for whatever reason — can simply be slaughtered, whether in the womb, in the hospital, or in the death camp."


"Finally, liberty is about establishing jusrice, which in turn protects our rights. But, a right, properly, is a moral claim we make on others based on our inherent nature as creatures under God fulfilling the purpose set for us by our Creator -- no other sustainable basis for rights exists. Indeed, the evolutionary materialist alternative [the relevant competing view] in the end boils down to this: might makes right, i.e power substitutes for rights; thence its absurd relativism and skepticism about rights, which wreaks havoc in the community, especially through manipulating institutions of power and law; it is a sign of the disintegration of Western culture as it seeks to forget God [Deut 8:17 - 20]. No wonder, then, that those caught up in a culture dominated by that self-referentially inconsistent worldview [follow up the links to see why I say that!] seek to undermine sexual morality and family life."

"Similarly, it is plain that the fact that so-called same-sex marriage is a novelty with serious moral questions and concerns that there are major harmful socio-cultural impacts attaching thereto is simply passed over in silence in the rush to accuse Christians who take say Romans 1 - 2 seriously, of hatred for homosexuals. [A pause to address the Christian principle of opposing sin while loving sinners would have made a difference, especially if joined to actually tracking down those who are dealing with this issue on the ground. Likewise, a reflection on recent cases where Gay activists and their supporters are moving to censor or persecute Christians for making a fundamental objection to the promotion of homosexuality as a desirable norm, should be looked at. For, there is a recognisable and material difference between Adam and Eve, and Adam and Steve; one that has at least potentially serious consequences. [Cf here Matt 19:3 6 for Jesus' view on the matter of marriage.]"

"In short, there is an intuitively recognised core of conscience-guided reason and awareness of the creation-based, morally conditioned nature of reality that leads us to God; if we would but listen. Sadly, we are instead tempted to suppress this as it is often inconvenient to our desired agendas, profits and pleasures. If we do so, we have no excuse and find ourselves victims of darkened understandings, benumbed consciences and out-of-control, sometimes perverted passions -- leading to massive social disruption and disintegration. In turn, when anarchy reaches a critical point, as Germany in the 1930s showed convincingly, the public will accept tyranny on the hope that it will restore order. In short, once we ignore the moral context of liberty, it becomes suicidally self-destructive."

"That is why we cannot accept the same-sex family. It serves no public purpose."

"Clearly, there is need for a serious re-thinking of our current rush to embrace hedonistic secularism and/or neopagan worldviews, lifestyles and agendas that play to our proclivities rather than our better angels."

"Credibility: Intellectually, the world is dominated by the
post-/hyper- modern mood of Western Secularised thought. So, while there is a more open attitude to the possibility of the
supernatural, those who stand in prophetic witness to truth or right [cf Ac 17:16 - 34] are immediately suspected of wishing to impose a narrow, intolerant agenda on the public in support of potentially violent so-called "fundamentalist" agendas. Consequently, the more welcome types of spiritual expression are neo- (or even paleo-) pagan, relativistic and welcoming of "diversity" – i.e. immoral, personally and socially destructive lifestyles. The inner inconsistencies (and even hypocrisies) of such post-/hyper- modern thinking need to be exposed, so that the evidence for the gospel can be heard on its own merits."

"Self-evident truths: If you reject them, you end up in foolishness. For instance, Psalm 14 points out that it is fools who say to themselves "there is no God" – for they thus become morally and intellectually bankrupt. Current events in North America and Europe provide abundant proof – e.g. contrast the rhetoric and the reality of counterfeit, so-called "same sex marriage." [Cf. Rom 1:16 – 32, 1 Cor 6:9 – 11, Eph 4:17 – 24.] Equally sadly, many of our brightest people in the region have also lost sight of the fear of God; which Prov. 1:7 highlights as the first point of wisdom."


""But, you cannot legislate morality!"

This is a popular saying nowadays, but it is simply wrong."


"Sadly, in Literary Arts secvtion, The SunDay Magazine, Jamaica Observer, p.2; a Ms Peta-Gaye Stuart has published a naive gush piece on the Pride Week events in Toronto, where "same sex marriages", so called, have been ever so unwisely recently given standing under the colour of law. That is, we see evidence that the "normalising" of perversion is happening among the Caribbean's upper and middle classes, who are most vulnerable to fashionable trends in secularist, apostate and neopagan thinking."

"Taking specific action on the threats we face, and the global challenge to be witnesses to Christ, including in the lands of the 10/40 window and in the now secularised and paganised apostate, formerly Christian countries of Europe and North America. (The recent sodomy issues in the USA and Canada just serve to underscore this.)"

"So, let us understand: we live in an ideologised, deeply polarised age dominated by ideologues influenced by avant garde evolutionary materialism and related ideas, which are inherently amoral and both personally and socially destructive."

"Thus we may see in outline — notice onlookers how the objectors protest ever so loudly when a detailed exposition is either developed or linked — why it is that Judaeo-Christian redemptive theism is a solid ground for morality. We also see why pagan and neopagan altenatives and skeptical evolutionary materialistic — which last, on the testimony of Plato in the Laws Bk X, go back to 400+ BC and men like Alcibiades — alternatives are inherently amoral, thus the pattern of moral disintegration of Rom 1"


"For, if a civilisation insists on living out of Rom 1:19 ff . . .

Rom 1:19 . . . what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20 For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities--his eternal power and divine nature--have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

RO 1:21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. 22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools 23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles [yesteryear, in temples, today, often in museums, magazines, textbooks and on TV] . . . .
[I deliberately omit vv 26 - 27, as I am not over-emphasising this particular notorious and all too publicly manifest sign of a civilisation falling into decadence as it rturns its back on God. It is the whole pattern that v 28 on lays out that we need to be concerned about!]
RO 1:28 . . . since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. 29 They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity. They are full of envy, murder, strife, deceit and malice. They are gossips, 30 slanderers, God-haters, insolent, arrogant and boastful; they invent ways of doing evil; they disobey their parents; 31 they are senseless, faithless, heartless, ruthless. 32 Although they know God's righteous decree that those who do such things deserve death, they not only continue to do these very things but also approve of those who practice them.

. . . sooner or later, it will end up facing the force of Deut 8:17 ff:
Deuteronomy 8:17-20 (New International Version)
17 You may say to yourself, "My power and the strength of my hands have produced this wealth for me." 18 But remember the LORD your God, for it is he who gives you the ability to produce wealth, and so confirms his covenant, which he swore to your forefathers, as it is today.
19 If you ever forget the LORD your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed. 20 Like the nations the LORD destroyed before you, so you will be destroyed for not obeying the LORD your God.

Right now, Western Civilisation is obviously being weighed in the balance -- church and all -- and is found severely wanting.

Let us now repent and seek renewal and reformation, before it is too late."


"As has become clear, our mandate is far broader than just the making of converts; instead, we are expected to disciple the nations, filling every aspect of life in the world with the glory of Christ under his Lordship."


And be sure to read these:

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/caribbeankairos/message/628

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/caribbeankairos/message/592

http://uk.groups.yahoo.com/group/caribbeankairos/message/597


And don't forget that gordo says:

"I am NOT open to going along with bigotry. Period."

"It is high time we move the discussion on beyond malicious caricatures"

And:

"Morality is not anterior to God--logically prior to Him--as Bertrand Russell suggests, but rooted in His nature. As Scott Rae puts it, "Morality is not grounded ultimately in God's commands, but in His character, which then expresses itself in His commands."[9] In other words, whatever a good God commands will always be good"

Yep, according to gordo, whatever his imaginary god does or commands is good, including commanding or personally carrying out genocide (including women, children, and animals), plagues, sacrifices, slavery, drowning/destroying almost everything on Earth in a world wide flood, and a long list of other monstrous atrocities as depicted in the bible, but homosexuality is BAD, and according to the bible that gordo thoroughly believes and promotes, those people and all other alleged sinners deserve death, destruction, and eternal torment.


The above is just a small amount of gordo's insane condemnation of anyone who doesn't kiss his sanctimonious, narcissistic ass.

Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Stupid is as stupid does

8.1.1.1.1
Joe
February 8, 2012 at 6:21 am

(eigenstate): And the earth isn’t an isolated system, and is inundated with new inbound energy from the sun every second.

The universe is an isolated system and the energy from the sun has never been observed to construct anything biological.

8.1.1.1.2
eigenstate
February 8, 2012 at 8:20 am

@Joe,

The universe is an isolated system, but the earth isn’t the universe. It receives enormous amounts of energy from the sun. And photosynthesis is an everyday process happening around you that harnesses the sun’s energy to grow and sustain plants. Those plants store energy received from the sun, which is available for work, and can, in turn sustain grazing animals or other organisms that can convert that stored energy in the plant into energy available for their use.

Biology is sun-powered.

8.1.1.1.3
Joe
February 8, 2012 at 9:53 am

The earth is part of the universe and therefor part of a closed system. And energy from the sun does not explain photosynthesis, nor does it explain biology.

From here:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/physics/why-science-cant-study-the-supernatural-a-physicists-view/comment-page-1/#comment-419482

And see comment number 8.1.1.1 for more from eigenstate

--------------------------------------------------------

Ya know, I've scraped dog shit off of my shoe that is smarter than joe. The 2LoT, and photosynthesis, are obviously WAY over joe's empty head.

Hey joe, your imaginary designer/god has never been observed to construct anything biological, or anything else. Strange that... go figure. LMAO!

By the way joe, your skull is definitely a closed, isolated system peanut shell that long ago lost all energy and therefor can't do any work or construct a rational thought.

Monday, February 6, 2012

Hey gordo, FOR RECORD part 2

With these statements from gordo still in mind (and everything else he spews)...

"I never ever said that atheism as proposition was a worldview, but if you have projected that misreading, all else follows, down to the gratuitous (though relatively subtle) ad hominem."

And:

"So, madam, let me be direct, I explicitly deny — having warranted it yet again — that I am: promoting the libel that atheists (or “evolutionary materialists) are dangerous amoral nihilists"

...here are some other things he has said:


"Thus, there is a call to repentance, renewal, revival and reformation in the Caribbean as the church re-awakens to the continuing mission of the Church of God to and in the Caribbean region.

5] At the same time, we have never been as blessed, educated, accessible to travel, or resourceful as we are now, in an era of global threat and challenge. Thus, we face a call at such a time as this to be a part of the mission of the church from the region to the world, especially in the lands of the 10/40 window [including the Islamic world] and in the North that are so rapidly falling victim to a tidal wave of secularist, post-Christian/apostate pseudochristian and neopagan dechristianisation."



"PS: I have continued to visit over at the ID in the UK blog, and the back-forth there has slowed down my pace here. Hopefully, that will now be settling down. (I felt it important to at least give some balancing perspectives and highlight the resort to abusive rhetoric on the part of evolutionary materialism advocates through insistent misrepresentations and slanders; whilst dodging tor dismissing the issues on the merits. That is telling."



"I think the below aptly exposes the thought police mentality that stalks western secularism today. In short, the stuff I have shared on the agendas exposed in blog visits is real. Some of hte same key characters show up, especially the NCSE that coordinated the inquisition against Dr Richard Sternberg for publishing in a journal an ID-supportive paper tha tpassed proper peer review. Lo and behold, the same Eugemie Scott would support censoring and blocking Bible-believing scholars from getting their EARNED qualifications.

Do we want the world -- academic, media, popular, governental, international -- ruled by people like this? [Or, is this that we are now seeing the formerly hidden power games exposed . . .]"



"Ironically, most scientists, PhD level or otherwise know little or nothing about any coherent study of history and phil of sci. They are these days too often little more than glorified technicians, often contemptuous of the philosophical and historical studies and issues that underpin the methods they use. But, when a crisis mounts up, as it is now mouning up for evolutionary materilaism across the board "from hydrogen to humans" [maybe that's why I so strongly felt led by our Lord to study physics way back when . . .], these issues become central."



"Worth a few thoughts on the Tidal Wave # 1 front . . . secularism and its fellow travellers, modernist/liberal-liberationist apostasy and neo-paganism [with its fellow travellers inthe radical feminist and homosexual movements that wish to turn Western Civilisation on its head, starting these days with redefining marriage out of existence], from the north, brought right to your friendly little cable TV screen . . ."



"The persistent pattern of careless, ill-informed or willfull misinformation, and associated attitude of contempt and want of civility on the part of advocates of secularism, are highly revealing. Indeed, sadly, in my earlier comments I had occasion to observe that the mythical "moral and decent atheist" is too often missing in action, especially as the moral restraints of Christendom wane in an ever more militantly apostate Western Civilisation. That accords far better with Rom 1 - 3 than it does with the typical opinions broadcast in our media, education syste,ms amnnd increasingly on our streets and verandahs!

We must be prepared to handle it, and especialy, to nip it in the bud before it becomes so deeply entrenched that many thingk that uncivil, often false accusation is their "right."

Similarly, it is all too easy for slanderous and willfully deceptive misinformation to become entrenched in the public mind as the truth on a matter. Then, it is very hard indeed to break down the walls of misunderstadning and mistrust -- and that is often exactly what was intended. But by God's grace, Him who is the Truth himself shall prevail."



"Sufficient has been shown to see that there is good reason to accept that the NDT and the wider evolutionary materialist paradigm are in unacknowledged crisis, and that the evo mat advocates at various levels are resorting to ruthless tactics to cling to power and domination in the teeth of mounting anomalies and a rising credible challenger. The resort to personal attacks and to persecutions and inquisitions is diagnostic of a thought-police mentality, and are reflective of -- in too many cases -- the underlying point: evolutionary materialism underwrites a lifestyle of amorality in which might makes right so I do whatever I think I can get away with and show myself utterly;y disrespectful to the rights of others, their reputation and persons, as well as old fashioned truth and logic. (So much for that mythical species,the wonderful, highly principled atheist -- now on the deeply endangered list as the waning influence of Judaeo-Christian morality lets loose the forces of amorality.)"



"In short, like Dawkins, you cannot use a particular theory frame in science as a prop for your worldview and for evangelising atheism in the classroom and public square without properly drawing fire from those who know that that is what is going on, and who can point out the yawning gaps in such evolutionary materialism. The well-documented resort to censorship and persecution of such dissenters in that context then takes on the atmosphere of an inquisition."



"First, the conflation of Design theory with the [Biblical] Creationist movement is propagandistic distortion.

For, design thought's roots go back to such “red-necked, Bible-thumping fundy yankees” -- NOT -- such as Plato, Socrates and Cicero, as I have documented by linking. Biblical Creationism is just that -- it often [though not always] uses the Bible as a source-book on what in its estimation is accurate data on the real as opposed to projected past. Design theory does not do this; it is a scientific movement that infers from empirical data in the present, and in the general context of the general [but not complete] consensus among scientists on the dating of the past [which BTW has its own problems, which are immaterial to this context of discussion], especially the signs of intelligence at work, to the existence of a source of such FSCI, agency. Had it not been for the dominance of an atheistic worldview in certain institutions of science, such inferences would simply be st the “no-brainer” level of obviousness."



"Picking and choosing "experts" who tickle your itching ears with what you want to hear, H, is simple folly."



"Atheism is the denial of the existence of a personal God, which is often embedded in worldviews that function as quasi-religions, e.g secular [descriptive use] humanism, as can be seen from the three relevant manifestos."



"The dangers of asserting universal negatives on matters of claimed fact are of course a notorious problem in epistemology and logic."



"The most credible, and long-standing answer in philosophy is: contingent beings -- e.g. that which begins to exist has a cause -- are best explained in light of necessary beings that are self-explanatory. In that PHILOSOPHICAL context [i.e. it does not belong in the exposition of science in the classroom, but in the discussion of its phil context,the cause of a life-friendly, vast and power-packed cosmos is by IBE a personal, intentional, necessary being. That is of course far from modern theism [e.g. Plato's Demi-Urge irresistibly playing with forms will at least arguably adn in part do . . .] but it is a large advance over both atheism and agnosticism."



"Banning quasi-religions, such as secularistic humanism and associated fundy atheism, from:

preaching and evangelising evolutionary materialism in the classroom in the name of science without giving room for debate on the worldviews issues and the limitations on the relevant theories and models [cf Wells on the all too often misleadingly presented Icons of Evolution here]

. . .is equally proper as a defense of science from being abused to push a worldview agenda by propagandistic indoctrination as opposed to entertaining responsible worldviews dialogue and debate.."



"In short, observe that as soon as serious answers are put,the goal posts are moved and new issues are raised that are equally ill-founded. These are the marks of a desperate defensive for a system that has lost offensive power but can use its remaining defensive power to stave off obvious defeat as long as possible. In short the issue is to end the horror with dignity, or to insist on a prolonged horror sustained as long as possible. (That is, Hitler, circa June - September 1944, would have been well-advised to make peace. His failure to do so simply made things worse for the German people.)"



"As the above and linked documents -- and other threads in this and many other blogs will document in nauseating, shocking details -- they have made many ill-founded, even slanderous assertions against those who differ with them, whether commenters, bloggers or even distinguished scientists."



"In short, we see imposition of secularist apartheid wherein the victim cannot be trusted within reason to speak in his own behalf truthfully.

5] Some now wish to assert - again, in the teeth of long since proffered evidence -- that the historically and the philosophically unwarranted imposition of evolutionary materialist philosophy in the name of the alleged true definition of science as "methodological naturalism" has not distorted the nature or success of science."



"So, let us note: scientific inference to intelligent action from empirical traces in finite material objects is not at all the same as worldview-level inference to the supernatural, as â€Å“intelligent agent” and â€Å“supernatural agent” are plainly not the same thing. [And, if the evidence points to agency in matters of the origin of life and the cosmos, why then is it an alleged SCIENTIFIC -- as opposed to philosophical -- objection to claim that such a proposed intelligent agent just may be beyond the material cosmos we observe? Other than, smuggling in of the obviously inappropriate worldview level idea that science is/must be applied atheism? Would it not be wiser to simply refuse to censor out known causal sources in scientific explanation a priori, then let the philosophical chips fall where they may, as the worldview advocates debate to their hearts' content the meaning of the findings of such uncensored science?]"



"In short, deception is exposed by want of coherence and correspondence between what is said and the material facts, but the "simple" (or, naive and undiscerning) person will too often fail to take the time to distinguish between what they feel or hear from those they look up to and what is credibly so."



"It is plain that there is much moral confusion, decadence and perversion -- and indeed an air of defiance of God -- across Western culture, which they are exporting to the world; including the Islamic world. So, as we discussed in recent days, it is inherently credible that in part the consequences of that tidal wave of willful cultural sin are coming back to haunt the American nation and the wider West."



"For, the repeated, insistent public parading and media trumpeting of decadence and perversion and the associated subverting of the language of liberty and rights in the cause of licence, amorality and perversion, have indeed helped lend credibility in much of the world to the Islamist denunciation of America as "The Great Satan.""



"Or, worse, like Mel White and Soulforce, they set about redefining Christ and the Bible (or other religions such as Islam) to accommodate their particular “orientation,” which is actually a bent toward perversion that must not be indulged – just as “heterosexual” men must not indulge their seemingly inborn and natural “orientation” toward lust for women (pornography, etc.).

Do you, dear reader, see why, even in more moderate Islamic [note, not just "-ist"!] circles, such blatant misbehaviour and such God-defying attitudes lend strong support to the feeling that many in the decadent West are at minimum the spiritual heirs of those people of covenant under God whose defiance of God's commands caused him to turn them into pigs and apes? [For, this is what a traditional Islamic story (alluded to several times in the Quran: Q 2:65, 5:59 - 60, & 7:166) states.]
In short, the insistent, in-your-face failure to properly distinguish liberty and licence, rights and perversions, is plainly inadvertent enabling behaviour for those who hate the West and seek to gain support for their own otherwise indefensible bloodthirstiness, by highlighting the decadence of those whom they hate. Borrowing Mao's celebrated metaphor of guerrilla warfare: the stench of the West's moral decay is a factor in creating the "sea" of passive -- or even sometimes active -- support in which the Islamist terrorist "fish" swim."



"In short, there are a great many ways to be wrong, and a comparatively few to be right."



"First, let us state the obvious, as a reality-check: Terrorism is a tactic and sometimes even a strategy used in a war, in which the side resorting to such atrocities feel itself unable to otherwise force the other side of the war into compliance with its demands."



"Truly, it is hard for us to kick against the pricks . . .

So, let us pray that we too will listen to that inner voice."



"In short he whole picture painted by P above is false, materially misleading and blame-shifting. Worse, it is mischievously accusatory and atmosphere-poisoning.

P: accusations are not proofs, and assertions are not evidence. Worse, loaded language distorts the ability to see the truth."



"So, please back down the rhetorical voltage."


"“Final solution,” anyone?"


"Power tends to corrupt . . ."


"Namely, it is high time for the many truly moderate Muslims and for the many other concerned people outside the Islamic faith to communicate a clear message: violence and attempted world conquest in the name of any ideology, including religious ones, is unacceptable in today’s world. Period."



"Islamic theology, unlike Christian theology, does not allow for the separation of state and religion [NB: all that stuff Jesus said about render to Caesar, render to God . . .] . . . . since Islam must declare war on unbelief, they [the jihadis] have declared war upon the whole world] . . . . this reclassification of the globe as a Land of War (Dar ul-Harb) allows any Muslim to destroy the sanctity of the five rights that every human is granted under Islam: life, wealth, land, mind and belief"



"But the turnabout accusation that creates a sense of immoral equivalency in the minds of the unwary, is an ever so easy and too often effective rhetorical and propaganda resort."



"Not to mention, the arguments must especially avoid the pernicious error of selective hyper-skepticism, especially in the form of the distracting red herring leading out to a straw-man twisted and impotent caricature, burned so as to cloud the atmosphere with the noxious smoke of closed-minded hostility."



"Sad. But, straight out of the play-book that has been used several times over the past months. [Which is what I have reported to my Chairman on; towards further doing something about it, in light of live-fire tested interventions.]"



"In fact, we can show that Darwinism and Secularism — hardly to be identified with “religion” — have been associated with serious abuses leading to in excess of a 100 million deaths across the last Century."



"So, how can we tell shadow-plays from reality?"



"This is a classic dismissal of the source rather than addressing the facts — FYI the truth or falsity of a claim does not depend on WHO said it."



"It is improper to try to compare a real world situation with some imaginary ideal."



"Nor is it fair to say that “God” is the issue that is causing the problems. People will always try to “justify” their actions, however wrongful, in the name of doing good. If God is off the table, they will absolutise something else, e.g. the French Revolution’s mockery of Liberty, Equality, Fraternity."



"For, the issue in the main was raised in your first objection and demand for an apology, to which I responded specifically above — inter alia showing that, given the well-known rhetorical device you used to introduce a known fallacious argument to maximum effect while shielding yourself from objections to its fallacious nature; I owe you no apology at all on the point."



"In short, the university movement in North America has been in large part captured by a particular portion of the North American [and European] ideological spectrum, one largely associated with the more "Liberal" wings of their Democratic Party."



"In turn, that is highly significant, given the increasingly discernible influence of that party's approaches on our region's politics, opinions and policy agendas. For, it is little known and less understood in our region, that the US' political and media culture, over the past generation, has been undergoing a steadily accelerating, significant, evolutionary materialism-anchored radically anti-Christian secular humanist trend, as Louis Bolce has pointed out in his Fall, 2002 Public Interest article, "Our secularist democratic party""



"But there is also the issue of the hungry hyena lurking in the shadows as the live donkey kicks at the dead lion."



"Have these Educators never heard of the Parable of Plato's Cave, on the dangers of social consensuses enforced by power games, and of suppression of principled dissent? [Surely, the ghost of Socrates can tell us better than this!]

Or, that Science is supposedly an empirically controlled, open-ended, fallible and hopefully progressive investigation of the truth about the world through inference to best current explanation, not an atheistical dogma to be imposed by state power?

Or, that Science is in no position to pronounce that by force of the current "consensus" of finite, fallible and possibly even ill-willed "Scientists" atheism or whatever doctrine is fashionable at any given time must monopolise education, science or otherwise?

Worse in some ways [as both Science and Education should hold values such as truth and fairness dear], they have utterly, and by either criminal negligence or willful slander, missed the mark on ID."



"A good first stop-off to look at how this issue is deeply revealing on the way the de-Christianising, hyper-/ ultra-/ post- modernist tidal wave from the North works from its bases in academia, education and the media outwards -- and thus of how it is increasingly impacting our region -- starts from what I have now taken to terming "Materialism-leaning 'prof' Wiki" [that is, the well-known but, sadly, far too often secularist- and materialism- biased Internet Encyclopedia]"



"In this light, I find the self-laudatory idea that "I don't have to believe in God to be 'decent' or 'moral' . . ." deeply troubling. For therein lies a want of self-critical reflection on one's own imperfection and moral struggles. Indeed, this is exactly what Mr Harris tried to point out during the "Crystal-Clear Atheism" conference -- and plainly failed to get across.

--> Indeed, it is not without relevance to note that Evolutionary Materialism, a foundation-stone of modern Atheism (on which it grounds its claim to be "Scientific"), has no firm basis for morality as a binding obligation. Indeed, the very fact that in quarrelling we appeal to just such a binding moral law raises the direct question of a Lawgiver, i.e God."



"Mr Dawkins blunders badly by citing the alleged Jewish monopoly on US Foreign policy. In so doing, he immediately shows his habitual want of care over truth and fairness in his public statements. The claim is also inexcusibly bigoted. It is further revealing: in a context where Atheistic thought and its associated secularism actually dominate the Campus, the media, many courtrooms and much of the public square, Mr Dawkins declares that Atheists are "downtrodden," and hopes to monopolise the public square. Given the now routine censorship, misrepresentation of other views and even career-busting that prevail and the declared intents as cited above, the fruit of such control would plainly be destructive and oppressive in the extreme."



"The real question is whether one's faith-point stands serious scrutiny on its own account or relative to other possible worldviews. On that score, Evolutionary Materialism [the hard core of current atheism] spectacularly self-destructs:

materialism . . . argues that the cosmos is the product of chance interactions of matter and energy, within the constraint of the laws of nature. Therefore, all phenomena in the universe, without residue, are determined by the working of purposeless laws acting on material objects, under the direct or indirect control of chance."



"In the end, materialism is based on self-defeating logic, and only survives because people often fail (or, sometimes, refuse) to think through just what their beliefs really mean.
As a further consequence, materialism can have no basis, other than arbitrary or whimsical choice and balances of power in the community, for determining what is to be accepted as True or False, Good or Evil. So, Morality, Truth, Meaning, and, at length, Man, are dead."



"for those who are self-seeking and who reject the truth and follow evil, there will be wrath and anger."



"All that has changed, plainly and sadly, is the technology of the images, where they are located, and the particulars of the myths that substitute for the truth of Creation and moral accountability before God. In the old days, we had images of wood and stone, in temples and scandalous legends about gods. Today, we have computer-generated images and fossil reconstructions in Museums or on television or the Internet, and the stories are those of Evolutionary Materialism in the guise of science.

Nothing truly fundamental has changed.

Unsurprisingly, the results -- as the very conference of atheists we have examined above so painfully but plainly reveals -- are the same: en-darkened minds and hearts, arrogance, boastfulness, loss of the voice of conscience so that one is insensitive to the evil one is advocating or doing, out-of-control dark and plainly destructive passions.

So, let us pray for, counsel with and patiently correct [cf. 2 Tim 2:23 - 26] these sad, self-deluded, self-important people, that they wake up before it is to late.

Eternally, too late.

And, let us understand the implications of the ideas and agendas they espouse, that we may defend our hard-won liberties from this latest threat."



"Morality is grounded in the immutable character of God, who is perfectly good. His commands are not whims, but rooted in His holiness."



"Could God simply decree that torturing babies was moral? "No," the Christian answers, "God would never do that." It's not a matter of command. It's a matter of character."



"I and other Bible-believing, Born Again Christians -- i.e. sinners saved by grace and being transformed by that grace's resurrection power as (however stumblingly) we learn how to walk with the Living God -- stand"



"Jesus was supremely confident in the Bible of his day as the Word of God, and confirmed its authenticity by fulfilling its prophecies, including those of Isaiah 53"



"'Fundamentalism' is really akin to [C. S.] Lewis's 'mere Christianity' discussed earlier, or the rules of faith in the early church; it means adherence to the fundamental facts - in this case, the fundamental facts of Christianity. It is a term that was once a badge of honour, and we should reclaim it.

At the end of the nineteenth century, evolution and the new higher biblical criticism began to challenge biblical authority. This assault affected even great theological institutions such as Princeton Seminary, which, though once orthodox, began questioning fundamental doctrines such as the Virgin Birth and inerrancy of Scripture. Meanwhile, a lively social gospel was also surfacing. Strong in good intentions, it was weak in biblical doctrine and orthodoxy.

So a group of theologians, pastors and laypeople published a series of volumes titled "The Fundamentals". Published between 1910 and 1915, these booklets defined what had been the non-negotiables of the faith since the Apostles' Creed:

1. the infallibility of Scripture

2. the deity of Christ

3. the Virgin Birth and miracles of Christ

4. Christ's substitutionary death

5. Christ's physical resurrection and eventual return.

These were then, as they are today, the backbone of orthodox Christianity. If a fundamentalist is a person who affirms these truths, then there are fundamentalists in every denomination - Catholic, Presbyterian, Baptist, Brethren, Methodist, Episcopal [i.e. Anglican] .... Everyone who believes in the orthodox truths about Jesus Christ - in short, every Christian - is a fundamentalist. And we should not shrink from the term nor allow the secular world to distort its meaning."


"I am not a liar."

---------------------------------------------

Actually, gordo, you ARE a CHRONIC LIAR, and you DO want to conquer and control the entire world and shove your Dominionist religious insanity down everyone's throat whether they like it or not. Your crazy agenda is plastered all over your blog and elsewhere.

I'm a USA citizen, gordo, and even though the USA has it's problems, you have NO business talking shit about the USA, so shut the fuck up!!! Keep your arrogant mouth out of USA politics and everything else! You've threatened people (including me) with slander lawsuits and criminal charges and the wrath of your fake god, and you like to say that people aren't as "anonymous" as they think they are. Well, you sniveling blustering cowardly bastard, I'm not one bit afraid of you, and you're not as "anonymous" as YOU think YOU are, gordon elliott mullings of Manjack, Montserrat, formerly of Jamaica. What are you going to do about me gordo, sic your murderous friends on me? Bring it on fuckface.

You also have a lot to say about nuclear and other types of bombs/explosives and what it takes to build them, in minute detail. Maybe the FBI or the CIA would like to hear about you. You've left a lot of your slimy trail on the internet and it's very revealing of how insane you are and how much you hate the USA and some other countries, and certain people and leaders in those countries. We North Americans don't take kindly to threatening, subversive, maniacal, terroristic tirades from raging lunatics like you.

It's WAY past time for YOU to live up to all of your two-faced projectile vomit about repentance, reformation, humility, love, truth, morality, and all that other bloviating shit you constantly DEMAND from everyone else, but NOT from yourself. You are as big a hypocrite as could possibly be and your god complex is WAY out of control. You piss people off whenever you open your big fat arrogant mouth, so it would be a good idea for you to SHUT IT, PERMANENTLY, you worthless piece of stinking, genocide supporting trash.

As I showed in the previous post, you said this:

"We must therefore pause to say that we have a Dominical warning to those who would put up such misleading that can deceive the innocent and naive: ’twere better that a millstone be put around their necks and that they would then fall into the deepest sea."

That sounds like a murderous threat, gordo. Why don't you come here and try to put a millstone around my neck and make me fall into the deepest sea? Go ahead, make my day.

Saturday, February 4, 2012

Hey gordo, FOR RECORD

gordo said:

"I never ever said that atheism as proposition was a worldview, but if you have projected that misreading, all else follows, down to the gratuitous (though relatively subtle) ad hominem."

And:

"So, madam, let me be direct, I explicitly deny — having warranted it yet again — that I am: promoting the libel that atheists (or “evolutionary materialists) are dangerous amoral nihilists"

If I remember correctly, they're both from this thread:

http://www.uncommondescent.com/atheism/church-burning-video-used-to-promote-atheist-event/

He sure does like to play deceptive word games, as is apparent in the "as proposition" crap.

Let's take a look at some of the things that gordo has said about evolutionary materialism/materialists, atheism/atheists, wordlviews, etc.:

"Athism in disguise:On the further absurdity that evolutionary materialism ands functional atheism do not constitute atheism, the word “tantamount” is as good a rebuttal as any.
Let’s see:
(a) atheists affirm they know there is no God and so any reference to God is based on delusion.
(b) as a major force in modern intellectual thought, references to God are ruled out a priori, by appeals to the incredibility of such, or by appeals to the rule of methodological naturalism.
Why is (b) imposed, in contexts where in fact theistic worldviews are plainly live options, and where comparative diffiulties across live options are the only way to get out of question-begging? Elementary, my dear Watson: it is atheists who hold power in critical institutions and are imposing their beliefs by exerting censorship. The case of Sternberg and especially the chilling effect on others who had at any time expressed theistic leanings is a telling illustration in point."


"In short, science redefined in terms of MN becomes a game played by evolutionary materialist — or more bluntly atheist’s — rules, with no reference to seeking to discover and discern truth."


"Evolutionary Materialism as a [quasi-]religion: When the core of the concept, “religion,” is provisionally identified, evolutionary materialism turns out to be, functionally equivalent to a traditional religion, thougfh of course not a theistic one. This observation will be hotly contested, but it is plainly true and goes to the heart of the contradictory decisions and arguments that come from secularists, most recently as highlighted in the Dover decision. Thus, some serious soul-searching is in order for those who, through the fact that secularism is not a theistic religion, are in fact de facto establishing their quasi-religion as the state church of the united states, complete with the atheist’s veto on public policy, censorship on education and what can be viewed in the public square, and a question-begging redefinition of science as, in effect, the best evolutionary materialist explanation of the cosmos from hydrogen to humans."


"And BTW, evolutionary materialistic systems are equally amoral, as they have only survival, not morality save as a convenient, culturally relative, social fiction."


"On Judaeo-Christian monotheism [theism for short], the morally virtuous Creator-God is the IS who grounds OUGHT in his character. that is the cosmos and especially that aspect where mind enters the picture, has morality built-in, AND morality is reasonable not an arbitrary, capricious imposition. So, it is improper to try to extend the Euthryphro dilemma to such theism."


"Thus we may see in outline — notice onlookers how the objectors protest ever so loudly when a detailed exposition is either developed or linked — why it is that Judaeo-Christian redemptive theism is a solid ground for morality. We also see why pagan and neopagan altenatives and skeptical evolutionary materialistic — which last, on the testimony of Plato in the Laws Bk X, go back to 400+ BC and men like Alcibiades — alternatives are inherently amoral, thus the pattern of moral disintegration of Rom 1"


"So, let us understand: we live in an ideologised, deeply polarised age dominated by ideologues influenced by avant garde evolutionary materialism and related ideas, which are inherently amoral and both personally and socially destructive."


"We must therefore pause to say that we have a Dominical warning to those who would put up such misleading that can deceive the innocent and naive: ’twere better that a millstone be put around their necks and that they would then fall into the deepest sea."


"This is of course precisely a case in point of diverting the naive reader from being critically aware on a significant and dangerous possibility for abusing science for indoctrination in various avant garde schools of thought that are often precisely capital examples of propagandistic advocacy, misleading or outright deceptive manipulation and indoctrination. And, given the painful and at points horrendous history of Social Darwinism, the eugenics movement and several other claimed scientific schools of thought over the past 100 years, this is inexcusable. In our day, the self-referentially incoherent and amoral worldview of evolutionary materialism often operates under the false colours of "Science," even seeking to redefine science to suit its agenda."


"I find it rich that in a context where atheists demand to make a definition of atheism that conveniently allows them to duck the challenge of warranting a worldview on comparative difficulties –across factual adequacy, coherence, and explanatory power on first principles of right reason and warranted, credible first truths — they wish to project a loaded definition on design thought.

But then, self-servingly loaded definitions now seem to be a standard rhetorical device of evolutionary materialists: for science, for atheism and for design theory."


"In short, the common observation of angry and disrespectful atheism so common online, is linked to some plausible psycho-social dynamics. (For those struggling with the problem of evil, deductive, inductive or existential/pastoral, I suggest this may help at a first response level."


"Darwinist objectors to design thought, your side has crossed the nuclear threshold here, to outright criminality, and your side has now underscored the nihilistic amoral bankruptcy of what all too many on your side have been doing and the implications of the inherent amorality of evolutionary materialistic factionalism, as Plato warned against in The Laws, Bk X, 2,350 years ago."


"Thus, secularist, materialistic philosophies, science and technology — both Marxist and Capitalist — have proved themselves to be spiritually barren, and too often environmentally devastating, economically impotent, corrupt, unjust and morally bankrupt. Further, as the current fears over environmental degradation, global warming and genetically modified foods and organisms show, science and technology have now lost their heroic stature in the popular mind."


"We must seize the initiative in the battle of ideas. In spiritual warfare we "demolish [deceptive] arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ." [2 Cor. 10: 5.] Let us take the Christian case to the campus, the school, the media, the Internet, business, institutions, the man in the street and people in their homes. The recent issue in Barbados over a proposal to use the Sai Baba Book of Human Values for School Assemblies is only the tip of the iceberg."


"the evolutionary materialist worldview is, sadly, evidently and demonstrably:

1] Blatantly factually inadequate to account for the origin of the cosmos, life, mind and morals relative to explanations that infer to a Cosmogenetic Designer.
2] Absurdly reduces mind to delusion and morals to contests of power.
3] Resorts to questrion-begging ad hoc assertions and prejudiced rules of reasoning, such as the one cited above: functional atheism, and its cognate in scientific circles, methodological naturalism.
In short, it is high time that the dominant status of evolutionary materialism in the hearts and minds of many of the educated across western culture was seriously re-examined."


"Further to that, B’s gutter tactics illustrate the point that the evolutionary materialist worldview’s censorship of theistic thought and even of entertaining the possiblity that empirical evidence supports that intelleigent agency is at work in the origin of life and the cosmos, is unjustified, question-begging censorsip designed to protecyt a view that cannot stand the scrutiny of comparative difficulties on the actual merits."


"My own interst in this thread is that through Scalia’s review of Smith, we again see the reductio ad absurdum of evolutionary materialism and its handmaiden functional atheism."


"That is, he pointed out the inherent amorality of evolutionary materialism, which BTW is one way ti reduces itself to self-refuting absurdity."


"It further documents a pattern of irrationality: making a self-refuting epistemological claim on the begetter of knowledge, confusing a question-begging censoring a priori imposition of materialistically redefined science for a self evident truth about the world and accessing truth about it, imposition of a censoring a priori."


"For many, the acceptance of evolutionary materialism is organically linked to their rejection of GOd."


"Second, evidentialism [the underlying point in the Sagan quote], is plainly logically incoherent, through self-referential inconsistency, and arguably so is the wider evolutionary materialist project. In short, these are credibly rejected by rational people as IRRATIONAL systems of thought."


"this pattern extends across man other issues raised in this blog over the past several months, during which skeptical and evolutionary materialist commenters have almost invariably ducked the issues of comparative difficulties, and tried to shift the burden of proof, often resorting to red herrings, strawman fallacies, ad hominems [sometimes tot he level of slander] and other rhetorical stratagems used by those whose core case is weak."


"Indeed, your just above is a turnabout rhetorical attempt, in which your hinted-at subtext is that I habitually accuse people of the trifecta rhetorical pattern without foundation." (YOU do exactly that, CONSTANTLY, gordo)


"The trifecta combination fallacy: distractive red herrings dragged away from the track of truth and led out to caricatured strawmen soaked in (implicit or explicit) character-assassinating ad hominems and ignited to cloud, confuse, polarise and posion the atmosphere for discussion" (See what I mean?)


"It is high time we move the discussion on beyond malicious caricatures.." (YOU FIRST, gordo)


"Deal with the issue on the merits, rather than attacking people as if they were threats." (Wow, your hypocrisy and lack of self awareness are ASTOUNDNG, gordo)


"The evidence in hand increasingly inclines me to the view that I am seing a hysteria driven by rhetorical manipulation and propaganda pushewd by a dominant secularist elite who see their view under threat." (Buy a fucking mirror gordo, you paranoid, deranged douchebag!)


"Then, he has compounded the crime by wishing to adopt a policy of indoctrination in evolutionary materialism, in the name of science education.

Sorry, I am not a propagandist, nor will I entertain such deception." (gordo, that last sentence could very well be the most dishonest and WRONG statement I've ever read)


"I am NOT open to going along with bigotry. Period." (Then, gordo, why do you hate and bash gays, and anyone else who doesn't agree with EVERY word you spew?)


"That is, it is a cheap, guilt by association rhetorical trick." (You mean the rhetorical trick that YOU use CONSTANTLY and dishonestly, gordo?)


"Of course, that is on the assumption that one has a respect for . . . the truth." (Well, it's ABUNDANTLY clear that YOU have NO respect for the truth, gordo)


"Plainly, you don’t get it: JUDGES AND LYING PHILOSOPHERS – who HAVE to know better — AND PHILOSOPHICALLY AND HISTORICALLY IGNORANT SCIENTISTS DO NOT GET TO DEFINE SCIENCE, BY PLAYING LAWYER GAMES IN COURTROOMS." (Oh, but IDC lawyers and you LYING IDiotic bible-thumping armchair judges DO get to define science?)


"Radical skepticism refutes itself, and evidentialism-rooted selective hyper-skepticism -- as we saw -- is just as bad."


"This sharpest edge of the blade of the problem of the one and the many cuts clean across today's evolutionary materialism and other monist views that simplistically reduce reality's diversity to just one essence or entity. Indeed, it is also a deep challenge for pantheism and panentheism. (Redemptive Trinitarian Monotheism has a complex not a simple unity at the core of reality, successfully integrating unity and diversity in the heart of its worldview. [For a discussion of he related problem of evil, in light of Plantinga's Free Will Defense, cf here.])"


"I have pointed out, on evidence:

1: just how evolutionary materialist atheism is inescapably self-contradictory and necessarily false.
2: just how it is inescapably amoral and so cannot ground OUGHT in a foundational IS, so it undermines rights and justice.
3: how a step by step analysis of credible worldview options leads to the conclusion that generic ethical theism is the soundest worldview option.
4: how the specific, Judaeo-Christian worldview and tradition is grounded in the historic evidence that undergirds the gospel as truth that brings us hope for redemption and transformation under God.
5: just how destructive and willfully, slanderously unfair is the attempt to smear Bible-believing, gospel-teaching Christian disciples with the false accusation that we are in effect the same as Al Qaeda's terrorists, would-be theocratic tyrants and general menaces to liberty, progress and democracy.

Unfortunately, this commenter, TWT (the same who threatened my family mafioso-style some months ago), amply underscores just how hateful, recklessly irresponsible, angry, and potentially dangerous -- please, listen to the podcast, here -- are all too many of today's new atheists." (The ONLY thing you've pointed out on evidence, gordo, is that you're a LYING, insane piece of SHIT)


"Mr Dawkins has also been caught on video tape unable to ground opposition to infanticide, or for that matter Hitler's holocaust; unsurprising given the inherent and inescapable amorality of evolutionary materialism; which likes to dress itself up in a lab coat in our day, claiming the prestige of science for what is an ancient worldview long since exposed as inherently self-refuting and inescapably amoral, i.e. it is intellectually and morally absurd."


"Will Hawthorne, similarly as a sampler, unerringly puts his finger on the sore spot on inherent amorality:

Assume (per impossibile) that atheistic naturalism [[= evolutionary materialism] is true. Assume, furthermore, that one can't infer an 'ought' from an 'is' [[the 'is' being in this context physicalist: matter-energy, space- time, chance and mechanical forces]. (Richard Dawkins and many other atheists should grant both of these assumptions.)

Given our second assumption, there is no description of anything in the natural world from which we can infer an 'ought'. And given our first assumption, there is nothing that exists over and above the natural world; the natural world is all that there is. It follows logically that, for any action you care to pick, there's no description of anything in the natural world from which we can infer that one ought to refrain from performing that action.

Add a further uncontroversial assumption: an action is permissible if and only if it's not the case that one ought to refrain from performing that action . . . [[We see] therefore, for any action you care to pick, it's permissible to perform that action. If you'd like, you can take this as the meat behind the slogan 'if atheism is true, all things are permitted'.

For example if atheism is true, every action Hitler performed was permissible. Many atheists don't like this consequence of their worldview. But they cannot escape it and insist that they are being logical at the same time.

Now, we all know that at least some actions are really not permissible (for example, racist actions). Since the conclusion of the argument denies this, there must be a problem somewhere in the argument. Could the argument be invalid? No. The argument has not violated a single rule of logic and all inferences were made explicit.

Thus we are forced to deny the truth of one of the assumptions we started out with. That means we either deny atheistic naturalism or (the more intuitively appealing) principle that one can't infer 'ought' from [a material] 'is'."


"Secularist thinking is explicitrly post-christian and apostate, and it has set the basis
for the rise of neopagan trends."


"It is only through Christ's work of redemption,
renewal and reformation that people, families, communities and their institutions can make real progress."


"The Secularists and neopagans frame the issues and decide what are issues."


"First, early twentieth century Christian thinkers had to reckon with the impact of evolutionary materialism (the atheistic philosophy often adopted by those who accept Darwin’s picture of the origin of life on earth)."


"The underlying rejection of the biblical view that God acts supernaturally in creation, redemption, healing, prophecy and judgement, which owes more to debatable atheistic philosophies and associated skeptical assumptions than to established facts."


"That is, godliness and commitment to righteousness are non-negotiables." (Eat shit gordo, you two-faced bastard)


"In short, those who would isolate the gospel and godliness from the affairs of day to day life at once deny the Lordship of Christ, and fall into deepest heresy."


"Red herrings, led away to strawmen soaked in vicious ad hominems [the false charge of support for genocide fairly drips with the implied accusation, Nazi] and ignited through incendiary gotcha rhetoric are rhetorically very effective. But hey come at a terrible price: clouding the issues, poisoning the atmosphere, polarising it, and stirring hostility that all too soon becomes hate and scapegoating, leading on to violence, overt mob violence or covert violence by abuse of the power of law and policy and institutional dominance.

Those are the tactics that Dawkins et al have been indulging for decades, and it is high time that they were called to public account for that.

That will not happen if we keep on following red herrings and cheering on the burning of ad hominem soaked strawmen." (Could you be any more two-faced, gordo?)


"Likewise, a secularised, apostate and neopagan Gentile world needs to hear again that message: this same Jesus God has raised up and vindicated. he is the One who shall judge us all at the Last Day. In token of this, for two thousand years, we have had a church that has borne witness, worked miracles in his name and even now calls all men to repent.

And so does the Islamic world."


"Is it coincidence that Islam is to hand as an
instrument of chastisement against the decadent, secularist neopagan and apostate west?"


"The Declaration is the birth certificate of a movement, not only to respond directly to the Islamic tidal wave now hitting our region, but also to address the underlying core cultural issues that are being manipulated by the Islamic advocates/strategists and also by the even more dangerous secularist-neopagan-apostate tidal wave. The latter, as fifth columnists in our own communities, are all the more dangerous."


"Several lines of action emerge:
Studying and responding to the Islamic (and allied secularist-neopagan-apostate) arguments and agendas that are intended to undermine the credibility of the church, the Gospel and the Bible"


"Taking specific action on the threats we face, and the global challenge to be witnesses to Christ, including in the lands of the 10/40 window and in the now secularised and paganised apostate, formerly Christian countries of Europe and North America. The recent sodomy issues in the USA and Canada just serve to underscore this." (The "sodomy issues" gordo is referring to is gay marriage)


"Thus, we need to go beyond just shoring up defences against the Islamic and Secularist-Neopagan-Apostate tidal waves now battering the region. While we need to study and equip our people to respond to misleading arguments and agendas that seek to block the true knowledge of God, we also need to see ourselves strategically: a potential major Mission Force in the world, to carry the Gospel of the Kingdom to all nations."


"Sadly, in Literary Arts secvtion, The SunDay Magazine, Jamaica Observer, p.2; a Ms Peta-Gaye Stuart has published a naive gush piece on the Pride Week events in Toronto, where "same sex marriages", so called, have been ever so unwisely recently given standing under the colour of law. That is, we see evidence that the "normalising" of perversion is happening among the Caribbean's upper and middle classes, who are most vulnerable to fashionable trends in secularist, apostate and neopagan thinking."


"Insofar as "evolution" here means the philosophy of
evolutionary materialism (which often and deceptively disguises itself as "science""


"July 1925. Dayton, Tenn. It was one of the first battles in a cultural war that continues today. On trial was 24-year-old John Scopes, who admitted teaching evolution in the classroom. Leading the prosecution was William Jennings Bryan, who believed that any explanation for how man was created, other than the Book of Genesis, was the end of
religion as we know it. "If evolution wins, Christianity goes," huffed Bryan. Insofar as "evolution" here means the philosophy of evolutionary materialism (which often and deceptively disguises itself as "science"), Bryan was, and is, right. Those who accept an atheistic world-picture and have been taught that it is "scientific fact" -- in a context where "unscientific" is tantamount to irrational -- are most unlikely to think that theistic views are credible; without having first addressed the relevant criteria: comparative difficulties of philosophical worldviews [cf. my brief introduction: http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/Intro_phil/toolkit.htm ] . Indeed, the attempts over the past 25 years to redefine science as the best current naturalistic explanation of phenomena we observe in
the world thereby demonstrate the vicious philosophical circle at work: instead of laying on the table the alternative philosophical start-points that have been adopted by great men of science over the years, and allowing the differences and difficulties to be compared on a level playing field, one view is suddenly imposed as THE scientific
worldview, period. That foreclosing before the fact begs the question and abandons the search for truth; which is supposed to characterise true science. Bryan was no scientist or theologian, but he surely and accurately understood the ultimate issue at stake: unless we are the
creation of God, we have no proper basis for claiming an inherent value that can demand rights from others and most of all the state, including what underlies this case: a right to be told the truth about science and the nature of man. That is the context for the "self-evident" truths asserted in the 2nd paragraph of your 1776 DOI: we know of an intuitive moral certainty that we have rights; as C S
Lewis was fond of highlighting, that is why and how we quarrel. Otherwise plausible views that imply that we do not have such rights beyond rhetorical and power games thereby directly reduce themselves to absurdity. The implications of the triumph of Darwin are everywhere visible: how many of the 44 million unborn babies slaughtered in the US since 1973 have been slaughtered in part based on the discredited,
fraudulent Haekelian argument that embryos at a certain stage are not truly human as they are recapitulating a fish or a reptile or something like that? What about the underpinnings of Nazi racism and extermination camps, or the Marxist gulags and killing fields: 100+ millions slaughtered in the name of evolutionary progress! FOR SHAME!!!!!!!"


"Rather, macroevolution -- as opposed to microevolution -- is an attempted explanation of various phenomena, reinforced by the dominance of Naturalistic thought in our time among the academic, educational and media elites. This is being challenged by the ID theorists, and as with the ecclesiastical elites of C17, rhetorical tricks and institutional power is being resorted to, rather than an
honest assessment of the evidence."


"It seems to me that if the Cobb Board wishes to help students see that, they are aiding rather than undermining true science as opposed to evolutionary materialistic
scientism, a philosophical wolf that is often fond of hiding under the sheepskin of science."


"In fact, thought-through morality is based on worldviews, and all worldviews have theological components [even atheists believe that there is no God, and draw out implications.] You cannot but have some worldview foundation for thinking, and that includes ethics."


"we should pray about the direction western culture is taking: for, truth – like healthy vegetables -- is an acquired taste, and truthfulness and sound thinking, like a healthy lifestyle, are very much acquired habits." (Well, you certainly haven't acquired a taste for the truth, gordo)


""But, you cannot legislate morality!"

This is a popular saying nowadays, but it is simply wrong."


"Self-evident truths: If you reject them, you end up in
foolishness. For instance, Psalm 14 points out that it is fools who say to themselves "there is no God" – for they thus become morally and intellectually bankrupt. Current events in North America and Europe provide abundant proof – e.g. contrast the rhetoric and the reality of counterfeit, so-called "same sex marriage." [Cf. Rom 1:16 – 32, 1 Cor 6:9 – 11, Eph 4:17 – 24.] Equally sadly, many of our brightest people in the region have also lost sight of the fear of God; which Prov. 1:7 highlights as the first point of wisdom."


"after all, in many an atheist's opinion, Christian faith is merely a discredited, damaging superstition and only the weak-minded cling to it. There is another word for such prejudiced, arrogant contempt: BIGOTRY. For, in fact
God has shown that he will judge all men with perfect justice, by raising Jesus from the dead: with over 500 eyewitnesses -- there is convincing proof of the truth of the gospel, if only we would humbly listen. Moreover, if one is honest, s/he will also have to admit that all of us are a strange mixture of the glory and the shame; the wise and the stupid; the good and the bad – this simply shows that while God made us in his glorious image, we are ALL fallen sinners
who need to repent and be reformed." (YOU are CERTAINLY a FALLEN SINNER, gordo, and a BIGOT, and stupid, and bad, and weak-minded, and arrogant, and prejudiced, and a shame on the human race)


"selective hyperskepticism: once one rejects the credible truth, one is forced to accept incredible myths as a substitute.

And then when one uses belief in what is patently false to judge what one accepts, one ends up rejecting the objective truth."


"There ARE angels who are glad to accept worship: fallen angels, i.e devils or demons."


"PS: And, remember just what you are mucking around with when you start to play footsie with pagan gods.

[And on this subject the real authority is Jesus of Nazareth; the risen Christ. he took demons very seriously and he has the resurrection from the dead with 500+ witnesses to prove that he know what he was talking about. Acts 19:8-20]

PPS: My recommendation is that you go find yourself a solid pastor who knows what he is dealing with, if you have been playing footsie with pagan gods. No joke!"


"5 –> Thus, it is no surprise that mockers would come, to distract us from that hope, and to lead us into the ways of the world; in the lusts of the flesh, the lusts of the eye and the pride of life. [1 Jn 2:15 - 17.]

6 –> And, one anchor to their materialism, their this-worldliness, is that they try to twist the blessings of science into a story that ignores the warning of Job 38: we were not there when the foundations of the world were laid, so we do not and cannot know the deep past by our own speculations on what we see. But, soon, instead of listening to and heeding the counsel of Him who was there [for he is our Creator-Sustainer] such men would darken God’s counsels by words without knowledge; falsely presented as SCIENTIA — literally, “knowledge.”"


"8 –> And, in the face of the chaos caused by our sins and permitted by God to stir us and remind us to reach out to him, however blindly [Ac 17], such men make up a different eschatology: progress to paradise on earth, by science, by technology, by clever political and bureaucratic messiahs; now in a unified global Babylon-ish world system."


"11 --> Only a small remnant was saved then [only 8 out of millions! so stubborn were men's hearts and so closed were their minds], and relatively speaking the same may yet happen. That is, we must beware!"


"PS: Remember the awful significance of shutting one’s eyes to the truth one knows or should know — as the prophesied mockers of 2 Pet 3 do — as discussed also in the Deception thread, Dec 15, here. Resemblance to some of what has been going on at BU for months is NOT coincidental. So, mockers, take heed; and, repent before it is too late! Eternally, too late . . ."


"the Bible is in major respects — both OT and NT — historical record, and abundantly confirmed as good record too."


"Further, since what God does, says and decrees will be good, creation is good at its root."


"Morality is not anterior to God--logically prior to Him--as Bertrand Russell suggests, but rooted in His nature.

As Scott Rae puts it, "Morality is not grounded ultimately in God's commands, but in His character, which then expresses itself in His commands."[9] In other words, whatever a good God commands will always be good . . . ." (Like genocide, gordo?)


"the scripture cannot be broken"


"17 –> For, God is gracious and has given us many points of evidence whereby we may see just how credible and authentic — thus trustworthy and authoritative (even as as a top class dictionary is trustworthy and authoritative) — is the witness of the Scriptures, NT and OT."


"As we turn to the OT, it is worth noting again that we have some rather direct authentication in hand, from the Lord of truth Himself."


"So, we have now laid out a framework for the authenticity of the Scriptures, anchored in the resurrection of Jesus, but with ample corroboration and a system for understanding why we can trust the record.

That is important in an ate where just as peter predicted in 65 AD or so, mockers would come, dismissing the testimony of the said scriptures.

But, only to their own self-deception and the misleading of those unwise enough to take them seriously.

A word to the wise . . . "


"As Kupelian pointed out, the idea and strategy in marketing evil and deception as ideology and “truth” or”rights” is to :

(1) desensitise us to the evilness of evil through oversaturation and sympathetic portrayal, to

(2) jam out those who object by making hem look bad [using turnabout false accusation tactics] and to then

(3) induce conversion and support through manipulating guilt and perceived peer pressure of a manipulated “consensus” or similar strong emotions and socio-psychological forces.

[Notice, anticipating yet another turnabout slander, how such tactics NEVER teach us to use critical thinking, help us escape selective hyperskepticism, never help us learn principles of warrant for claimed facts, nor help us analyse worldviews and show us how to select one in a world of diversity, error and deceptive rhetoric. All of which I have made freely available in this thread -- having taught the principles at High School and College levels, and even in public (guess why NGO and CBO ZOPP-twisting advocates?)-- and have taken time to explain and apply.]

How else do you think we have reached a pass where people who know the obvious implications of maleness, femaleness and the requirements of sound nurture of children can look you in the face and call you a bigot or worse for suggesting that the novelty that Adam can “marry” Steve and Eve can “marry” Sue is obviously a distortion of marriage? (Go back and read George Orwell’s 1984, folks, and compare with what now obtains!)

So, let us understand: we live in an ideologised, deeply polarised age dominated by ideologues influenced by avant garde evolutionary materialism and related ideas, which are inherently amoral and both personally and socially destructive."


"Credibility: Intellectually, the world is dominated by the
post-/hyper- modern mood of Western Secularised thought. So, while there is a more open attitude to the possibility of the
supernatural, those who stand in prophetic witness to truth or right [cf Ac 17:16 - 34] are immediately suspected of wishing to impose a narrow, intolerant agenda on the public in support of potentially violent so-called "fundamentalist" agendas. Consequently, the more welcome types of spiritual expression are neo- (or even paleo-) pagan, relativistic and welcoming of "diversity" – i.e. immoral, personally and socially destructive lifestyles. The inner inconsistencies (and even hypocrisies) of such post-/hyper- modern thinking need to be exposed, so that the evidence for the gospel
can be heard on its own merits."


"In a global world with at least three major contenders for
the global mindset and agenda, we dare not neglect the intellectual challenges to the credibility of our Faith, neither here in the Caribbean nor globally. This requires that we study, assess and respond to: (a) post-/hyper- modern secularist thought, (b) neo- pagan trends, and (c) the Islamic Dawah; recognising valid concerns but also highlighting key fallacies that demonstrate the fundamental
intellectual and spiritual failure of these systems, and calling for appropriate action in response to the truth and the right. For, in spiritual warfare, we are to "demolish arguments and every pretension that sets itself up against the knowledge of God, and . . . take captive every thought to make it obedient to Christ." [2 Cor. 10:5.]

Similarly, as we listen to and then address local, regional
and international issues, we must discern the underlying agendas, assumptions and worldviews that are the root of the persuasiveness of proposals for action. For, secularists, neo-pagans and islamists alike seek to promote their goals through exploiting current issues to advance and institutionalise their agendas"


"We will also need to focus on a well thought through regional and global intellectual and cultural response to
other global agendas, most notably the Islamist and the post-modern secularist-neopagan.."


"It seems, the underlying problem is the blinding influence of the hedonistic, secularist and/or neopagan worldviews that are now a rising (and arguably damaging) influence in our society."


"Clearly, there is need for a serious re-thinking of our current rush to embrace hedonistic secularism and/or neopagan worldviews, lifestyles and agendas that play to our proclivities rather than our better angels."


"I guess it is time to again note the situation we face
in the Caribbean, now that the US is ever so plainly
on a race to Gomorrah.

About ten years back, i saw that by about y2k, we
would face inundation by two tidal waves: one from the
N, the other from the E. I believe God was then
opening my eyes to see the dynamics that have now
played out:

1] As cable Tv, education [so called] and other forces
have accelerated secularisation and paganism in the N,
this has begun to flood into our region."


"That is why we cannot accept the same-sex family. It serves no public purpose."


"From the North, There is a massive wave of dechristianisation, as many "post-moderns" now eagerly seek to dismiss and forget the God and Father of our Lord and Saviour Jesus of Nazareth, resenting him as an oppressor instead of remembering and thanking him for being our loving Father who has so richly blessed us."


"In short, there is an intuitively recognised core of conscience-guided reason and awareness of the creation-based, morally conditioned nature of reality that leads us to God; if we would but listen. Sadly, we are instead tempted to suppress this as it is often inconvenient to our desired agendas, profits and pleasures. If we do so, we have no excuse and find ourselves victims of darkened understandings, benumbed consciences and out-of-control, sometimes perverted passions -- leading to massive social disruption and disintegration. In turn, when anarchy reaches a critical point, as Germany in the 1930s showed convincingly, the public will accept tyranny on the hope that it will restore order. In short, once we ignore the moral context of liberty, it becomes suicidally self-destructive."


"Similarly, it is plain that the fact that so-called same-sex marriage is a novelty with serious moral questions and concerns that there are major harmful socio-cultural impacts attaching thereto is simply passed over in silence in the rush to accuse Christians who take say Romans 1 - 2 seriously, of hatred for homosexuals. [A pause to address the Christian principle of opposing sin while loving sinners would have made a difference, especially if joined to actually tracking down those who are dealing with this issue on the ground. Likewise, a reflection on recent cases where Gay activists and their supporters are moving to censor or persecute Christians for making a fundamental objection to the promotion of homosexuality as a desirable norm, should be looked at. For, there is a recognisable and material difference between Adam and Eve, and Adam and Steve; one that has at least potentially serious consequences. [Cf here Matt 19:3 6 for Jesus' view on the matter of marriage.]"


"So, on historically and legally proper grounds, Judge Moore was right -- but the usurpation of the words and intent of the First Amendment have turned it into almost the opposite: quasi-establishment of the secular humanist philosophy, which functions as a religion substitute."


"Thus, our region is plainly at kairos. For, on the one hand, we are increasingly a part of the ongoing bewitching and captivity of the Christian West by those riding on a tidal wave of secularism, apostasy and post-modern neo-paganism."


"Science, therefore, is not the only discipline giving us true information about the world. It follows, then, that naturalism as a world view is also false."


"Men like Mr Dawkins are highly confident that they are not going to be publicly called on their philosophical blunders in a way that will discredit them, because they know that the public has been long since indoctrinated in evolutionary materialism under the label "science" and that the public is woefully ignorant of and despising of philosophy."


"Likewise, few will know that there are excellent works on Bible difficulties that give quite good answers to the sort of questions that used to be a favourite tactic of the resident village skeptic/atheist/idiot. [Cf here for a good start, at the CARM web site. Archer's Encyclopedia of Biblical Difficulties is a good first resort as a print resource.]"


"This is all of a piece with Mr Dawkins' longstanding, notoriously village atheist level claim that those who reject the neo-darwinian, evolutionary materialist account of origins are "ignorant, stupid, insane . . . or wicked." (Dawkins was apparently thinking of you when he said that, gordo)


"And, BTW, on what rational basis does an evolutionary materialist thinker assert moral -- as opposed to self-servingly rhetorical -- claims?" (ALL of your rhetorical claims are self serving, gordo)


"Now, if the secularist progressivist, evolutionary materialist wing of western culture is so polarised and so often slip-shod in assessing worldview level issues, can it long survive?"


"Finally, liberty is about establishing jusrice, which in turn protects our rights. But, a right, properly, is a moral claim we make on others based on our inherent nature as creatures under God fulfilling the purpose set for us by our Creator -- no other sustainable basis for rights exists. Indeed, the evolutionary materialist alternative [the relevant competing view] in the end boils down to this: might makes right, i.e power substitutes for rights; thence its absurd relativism and skepticism about rights, which wreaks havoc in the community, especially through manipulating institutions of power and law; it is a sign of the disintegration of Western culture as it seeks to forget God [Deut 8:17 - 20]. No wonder, then, that those caught up in a culture dominated by that self-referentially inconsistent worldview [follow up the links to see why I say that!] seek to undermine sexual morality and family life."


"I do not pretend to perfection, or to having in hand perfect answers." (What a steaming crock of shit, you LYING butt chunk)


"That is an ever more pressing concern, as we see an emerging tripolar global age: the West caught between dechristianisation, moral disintegration and and demographic decline, the rising Islamist challenge from the Middle East, and the impact of the now century-old Southern Christian Reformation.

For instance, there is the issue that the West is in an internal cultural clash between the remaining legacy from the last reformation [and let us note that the Catholic church was renewed itself in reaction to that, so the reformation also impacted that church] with the secularising and apostate and even pagan forces. The balance in Europe is much farther along in dechristinisation than in the US, which seems to be roughly 50-50 now so that relatively small shifts in public sentiment driven by the rhetoric of rage and fear dramatically tip elections. [NB: Notice how the US Mainstream Media did not say much about "negative campaigning" now that it was Democrats who were mostly doing it! No prizes for guessing why.]

Through the West's domination of the mass media and the academy, surges from this struggle have surged forth all over the world. Here in the Caribbean, this has added force to the currents of moral disintegration from within that have long characterised our culture, as a legacy of slavery. So we desperately need to very carefully reflect on what would otherwise be dry academic matters, issues such as evolutionary materialism, the engine of the secularisation of the West"


"Worldviews and world-agendas: Religions and philosphies of life, as well as the associated characteristic psychologies, are actually examples of worldviews and their associated agendas; which implies that there can be clashes of both ideas and agendas for society."


"In the end, materialism is based on self-defeating logic, and only survives because people often fail (or, sometimes, refuse) to think through just what their beliefs really mean.

As a further consequence, materialism can have no basis, other than arbitrary or whimsical choice and balances of power in the community, for determining what is to be accepted as True or False, Good or Evil. So, Morality, Truth, Meaning, and, at length, Man, are dead. . . . In Law, Government, and Public Policy, the same bitter seed has shot up the idea that "Right" and "Wrong" are simply arbitrary social conventions. This has often led to the adoption of hypocritical, inconsistent, futile and self-destructive public policies.

"Truth is dead," so Education has become a power struggle; the victors have the right to propagandise the next generation as they please. Media power games simply extend this cynical manipulation from the school and the campus to the street, the office, the factory, the church and the home.

Further, since family structures and rules of sexual morality are "simply accidents of history," one is free to force society to redefine family values and principles of sexual morality to suit one's preferences.

Finally, life itself is meaningless and valueless, so the weak, sick, defenceless and undesirable — for whatever reason — can simply be slaughtered, whether in the womb, in the hospital, or in the death camp."


"Indeed, instead, he doubled down on false accusations and slanders, playing the Hitler card."


"Sorry, I am not a propagandist"



---------------
That is just a small sampling of gordo's lunacy, LIES, and hypocrisy.

kairosfocus (gordon e mullings of Montserrat) is simply a TERRORIST, and is as insane and amoral as any other terrorist. If anyone is dangerous, it's gordo