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 “intelligent agent†and “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.
