Archive for the ‘philosophy’ Category

Progressive Liberalism Is Responsible For The Spread Of Islamic State Among U.S. Youth

May 21, 2015

Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ – Colossians 2:8

I vividly recall a former professor of mine who described the personal impact of his visit to Auschwitz.  The thing that hit him hardest, he said, was when he looked into the rooms where the Nazis had collected all the possessions of the death camp victims: a giant room filled with suitcases here, another room filled with human hair there.  And the thing that hit him at that moment was that ideas have consequences, and that the virus that created Auschwitz and all the camps like it had emerged decades before they were constructed.  It was ideas like atheism, Darwinism, Nietzscheism, existentialism and deconstructionism that became the intellectual foundation upon which those camps were built.  The virus began in the halls of academia – just as our most cancerous and most toxic ideas spread here and now – and spread throughout a German culture which had abandoned belief in God beyond any culture around it.  Because of the work of German liberal theologians such as Julius Wellhausen, Franz Delitzsch, Gerhard Kittel, Paul Althous, Emanual Hirsch, among others, the reliability and integrity of the Bible was stunningly undermined to the degree that the Bible was nothing more than a collection of myths and fables.  Oh, there were true Christian intellectuals such as the great Dietrich Bonhoeffer – who himself would perish in the camps – but these were too few and far between to counter the toxic avalanche of secular humanism all around them.  And as the impact of the vile philosophy and theology of Nazism began to spread, there was simply nothing substantial to counter it.

THAT is precisely where our culture is today and it is coming from the same theological and philosophical traditions.

Martin Heidegger was and actually remains a darling among liberal academia.  It is only a slightly embarrassing fact that the man’s existentialist philosophy enabled him and even drove him to be one of the most ardent Nazis in Germany – such that he first became a member of THE most radical Nazi faction and ultimately lost his rectorate at Frieburg after his political patrons were purged for being TOO extreme before Hitler was ready to take the next step.  Heidegger formally abandoned his Catholicism – which conflicted with both his philosophy and his Nazi politics.  His existentialism drove him to determine to break with “Hebraism” as well as all “metaphysics,” “But to achieve such a rupture, Christian and humanist values would have to be discarded too” [from The German Churches Under Hitler: Background, Struggle, and Epilogue by Ernst Christian Helmreich, 1979, p. 215].

Christian humanism and secular humanism went to war – and secular humanism won in pre-World War II Germany.  And then proceeded to murder all its Christian rivals.

Martin Heidegger was a profound influence upon many of THE most prominent atheists over at least the next thirty years.

Another example of this very same phenomenon is seen in the deconstructionist philosopher Paul De Man.  His work in deconstructionism was adored by the political left and the man was a devout Nazi

And then you’ve got Ezra Pound, the famous literary theorist – and Nazi – who denounced Christianity as something “riddled with semitism” as Hitler himself directly quoted in his Mein Kampf.

These men, along with Hitler, had the project of first tearing Christianity down and ultimately tearing it out by its roots and burning it.  They construed a conflict between “nature” and “anti-nature” (which is one of the reasons why Nazism – and its adherents such as Heidegger – was an environmentalist movement.  On their narrative, Judaism and Christianity were both “anti-nature” because of their focus on a transcendent God and transcendent moral values that restricted the freedom of man and nature.  Whereas nature is immanent.  The Nazi project was to forge a counter-spirituality that would enable the people to find fulfillment even as the Nazis were freed to exercise their power of will.  The Nazis attacked Christianity from hypocritical premises: on the one hand, they assailed Judeo-Christianity for its intolerance and its fostering of guilt even as they, on the other hand, attacked it for its altruism, for its protecting the weak against the strong, for its clear political implications resulting in liberty and equality.  Ezra Pound argued that there was “no sense of social order in the teachings if the irresponsible protagonist of the New Testament” (quoted in The Geneology of Demons, Anti-Semitism, Fascism, and the Myths of Ezra Pound by Robert Castillo, 1988, p. 95].  The Nazis blamed the Protestant Reformation for the revival of Hebrew texts (the Bible) and ways of thinking, and thus for the decline of Europe.  Even though the so-called “Enlightenment” began AFTER and BECAUSE OF the Protestant Reformation.

When the epidemic virus of Nazism became a full-fledged pandemic in German culture, it was because Judeo-Christianity had been weakened, if not eradicated, and because there was no competing intellectual, philosophical, religious, theological alternative to prevent, stop, or even slow down its rise.

And the same thing not only IS happening but already HAS happened in the United States.  And we are seeing the consequences all around us as the National Socialist German Workers Party is reborn as the National Socialist American Workers Party driven by the identical philosophical and religious notions.

The same philosophical traditions – if not the same actual philosophers themselves – that enabled the rise of Nazism continue to dominate the leftist intellectual tradition today: postmodernism, existentialism, deconstructionism, logical positivism, religious liberalism.

It’s all too easy to document the American progressive liberal disdain for Judeo-Christianity and for the integrity and reliability of the Bible which informs it and is its source and foundation:

Obama mockingly asks, “Whose Christianity would we teach in the schools?”  Because Christianity is nothing more than a man-made religion and it is completely relative and totally bound by culture and subject to constant change for the simple reason that there is and can be no eternal, everlasting God to make it permanent.  And Obama mocks, “Which passages of Scripture should guide our public policy?”  Because the Word of God is nothing more than the word of man and bigoted, intolerant, racist man at that.  And it is immoral to allow Judeo-Christianity or the Bible to have ANY role in our culture as a result.

And we all shouted, “Sieg Heil!  Sieg Heil!  Sieg Heil!  Heil Obama!  Heil Obama!  Heil Obama!”  Because there is nothing left BUT Obama to hold this culture or this nation together.

I find it striking how liberal Democrats are exploiting race versus how the Nazis exploited race.  Both rose to power by making race and racism an issue and encouraging people of race to politically rise against another race due to perceived injustices.  The Nazis screamed, “The Jews have usurped power and they’re oppressing you!”  The liberal Democrats scream, “The whites (particularly white men) have usurped power and they’re oppressing you!”

I mean, “why is white America so reluctant to identify white college males as a problem population?”  I mean, after all, Hitler showed us how to do it with the Jews.

The Jesus whom the Nazis and whom Obama mocked told us, “In the last days, race will rise against race.”  but what did that white-male-embraced Jew know, anyway?

Crucify Him!  At least that’s what the Nazis did.  That’s what Islamic State is doing now.  And as for liberal Democrats, they not only are fine with crucifying Jesus, they’ll stick Him in a jar of urine while they do it.

Progressive liberals demanded that – back when America was STILL overwhelmingly Christian and believed in God – that in the cause of “free speech” we allow such vileness.

Now the same liberals who demanded the right to immerse Christ in piss demand that now that they’ve got the upper hand free speech should be abolished.  It’s who they are.

The Christianity of our founding fathers – and our very founding fathers themselves – – have been torn down in scorn.

“I think we can say that the Constitution reflected an enormous blind spot in this culture that carries on until this day, and that the Framers had that same blind spot. I don’t think the two views are contradictory, to say that it was a remarkable political document that paved the way for where we are now, and to say that it also reflected the fundamental flaw of this country that continues to this day.” — Barack Obama, Sept. 6, 2001

To me it is absolutely no surprise whatsoever that our first president to classify America as “a Muslim nation” prophetically declared the complete separation between America and its founding fathers and their Constitution a matter of FIVE DAYS before the very Islam that he would embrace and elevate to a status directly alongside Christianity would attack us.

The men who wrote our Constitution declared in their basis for it – the Declaration of Independence – that our rights come from God, not from any government.  But that didn’t work for liberal Democrats who wanted sodomy-perversion marriage and sixty million murdered babies.  So they agreed with the Nazis that there is “no sense of social order in the teachings if the irresponsible protagonist of the New Testament” and threw Christianity out.  So that “social order” could be whatever THEY declared it to by exercising the same power of the human will that Hitler exalted.

Precisely what is it that our liberal-Democrat-hijacked public schools are teaching our children about our God or our culture that will provide a powerful force for them to fight for what is right and fight against what is wrong?  Or to put it in Obama’s mocking terms, “Whose morality would we teach in the schools?”  Do we teach the morality of an everlasting God or do we teach the constantly adapting Darwinian bug morality of Obama?

We are watching the world unravel from without even as we are watching our very cities unravel from within.  Because this is a nation that stands for NOTHING that is transcendent just as Nazi Germany stood for nothing that was transcendent before us.  And we rabidly reject the very NOTION of transcendence because it interferes with our adoration of homosexual sodomy erected upon our altar of sixty million murdered babies.

Kids in liberal Democrat public indoctrination centers aren’t being taught to revere our foundations – they have been taught to mock and despise them.

So why not embrace the values of Islamic State?

Violence is encouraged by liberal Democrats.  First the rioters were given literal permission to riot.  The police were ordered to stand down and allow them to riot.  Then it became racist to criticize the rioters.

Hey, if you like violence you’ll LOVE Islamic State.  Why not join up and spread the love?  You can burn and loot and murder to your heart’s content.

In the rise of Islamic State, we are watching what the liberal-Democrats of Hollywood created: a culture of violence that stands for NOTHING BUT DEATH act out its “values.”

I keep seeing snippets of the numerous videos that Islamic State recruiters are spreading all over the internet.  And you know what I keep seeing?  I keep seeing a video game.  The Islamic State videos look just like what I see when I see the snippets of the video games that liberal Democrats of Hollywood and Silicone Valley pumped into our kids’ brains.

Hey, kids!  You can live our your video game fantasies!  Join Islamic State and you can actually BE in the video game world!

And why not?  Why shouldn’t you?  I mean, murder isn’t really all that “wrong” given that we’ve murdered sixty million babies and that’s “right,” right?  And the same intolerant Christian God who says murder is wrong also says homosexuality is wrong and we ALL know that’s right, right?  And I mean, seriously, whose version of Christianity are we going to teach?  Whose passages of Scripture should guide our public policy?

Come on, why not try the Qur’an instead, kids?  I mean, after all, this IS a Muslim nation, you know.

What I’m saying here is that the fact that for all practical purposes, Barack Obama and the Democrat Party have completely surrendered to radical Islam – whether you talk about Obama allowing and even outright encouraging Islamic State to spread by a) doing NOTHING in the Syria that now thanks to Obama controls more than half of that country and b) Obama’s completely cutting-and-running from Iraq in abandonment of EVERYTHING our generals demanded we do to preserve the security of that country; or whether you talk about Obama allowing and even outright encouraging Iran to develop a nuclear bomb and the ballistic missile system to deliver it and therefore encourage nuclear proliferation in the remaining Muslim countries as they talk about their bomb – the real crisis was already present and already metastasizing in our culture.

Islamic State is rising.  And neither so-called “moderate Islam” itself or the defiled formerly “One Nation Under God” America that is now “God Damn America” have anything to fight it with.

Which is why the once greatest nation in the history of the world – a nation that uniquely called upon the God of the Bible – will go down so hard, so violently, in such an ugly, awful manner.

It’s funny.  Progressive liberals claim to be anti-rape, but as a direct result of their moral system, we have seen rapes and sexual assaults SKYROCKET.  And I’m sure it’s a complete surprise to you, unless you first consider that it’s kind of obvious that the inevitable result of teaching children that they are NOT created in the image of God, that they WILL act like the animals their teachers claim they are.  I mean, Muslims love to slander Jews by labeling them “the descendants of apes and pigs.”   But according to evolutionary theory we are that and worse: the descendants of flies and roaches.  And surprise, surprise that our kids would start acting like what liberal progressives have said they are all along.

In the same manner, it’s the same way with the economy: should we really be surprised when the liberal progressive Democrats’ embrace of an economic system based entirely on atheistic godlessness (where omnipotent Government takes the place of God), class-warfare-incited envy and bitterness would necessarily fail every single time it is tried no matter how many times it has failed before?  And yet here we are, with Obama’s miraculous “wreckovery” sinking America year-by-year under Obama into the WORST labor participation rates – measuring the percentage of working-age Americans who actually have a job – we have seen in forty years.  Right now the labor participation rate – six years into Obama’s so-called “recovery” – has more than 93 million Americans without a job and little hope of ever finding one in a rate that is the worst we’ve seen since Jimmy Carter’s socialism was destroying America in 1977.  Under Barack Obama’s economic miracle “The yearly income of a typical US household dropped by a massive 12 percent, or $6,400.”  Obama has literally robbed us blind while telling us he’s making us rich – and pure fools believe his lies.  Meanwhile, in spite of the fact that Obama has demagogued class-warfare more than any president in history, his actual record has produced the widest gap between the rich and the poor in his economy EVER MEASURED.  Obama depicting himself or his policies as being the savior to the poor is rather akin to Adolf Hitler depicting himself and his Third Reich as the savior for Jews.

The beast is coming.  And he is coming because liberal progressives have “fundamentally transformed” America into a nation that WILL NOT reflect the image of a good God, but will rather exalt their will over Him.  Which is a prescription for judgment and doom.

 

A Radically Unsustainable, Toxic Worldview: The Massive ‘Moral Injury’ Caused By Atheism And Secular Humanism

May 18, 2015

Reading on page two of the main section of the May 14, 2015 edition of USA Today, I came across the following words from the article “Voices: Moral injury is also a war wound” by Gregg Zoroya, that screamed out at me:

The Department of Veterans Affairs estimates that nearly one in four Americans who served in Iraq or Afghanistan developed post-traumatic stress disorder. The VA has treated 640,000 mental disorder cases from the wars, more than half of them PTSD.

Yet the science behind this disease that so emotionally paralyzes is still evolving and there is a heated debate among scientists.

Is it triggered purely by sudden, fear-based trauma to a sexual assault or an bomb explosion or the gathering of body parts of comrades from a battlefield?

Or is there a strain of PTSD, maybe a cousin of it, that has less to do with fear than with the ruthless disassembling of knowing what is right from what is wrong?

War is rife with good people feeling shame or guilt for what they did, whether it is opening fire on a car full of innocents because a driver fails to yield at a checkpoint, surviving combat while friends die or parsing the appropriate measure of abuse to pull confessions from an enemy.

Scientists are calling it moral injury. Former Navy psychiatrist William Nash, writing the introduction to Edmonds’ book, explains: “Moral injuries are wounds to beliefs and secondarily, to the identity of the person holding those beliefs, inflicted by events that violently contradict them.”

Nash, who today is director of psychological health for the Marine Corps, says, “We need to believe that the world is a good place; that we, ourselves, are good; and that our lives make sense somehow, that they are not just random chaos … Lose your grip on even one of (those assumptions) and it’s a long fall.”

And that’s PRECISELY what atheism and secular humanism amount to: “a long fall” into moral chaos and nihilism.

According to the Judeo-Christian worldview, God created the universe for man and created man as the capstone of His creation in His very own image (Genesis 1:26-27).  Over and over again, God calls His creation – which amounts to His self-expression – as “good.”  And He calls it good seven times (see Genesis 1:4, 10, 12, 18, 21, 25, 31), reflecting the sevenfold perfection and completeness of God.  Yes, there was a Fall, and man plunged into sin and creation itself was affected by this corruption.  But it began as “good” and as the good work of a holy, morally perfect God.

We can view the world as fallen, yet still bearing the stamp of the divine, just as we can see the divine within ourselves.  There IS good; we ourselves HAVE the capacity of goodness within ourselves; our lives DO make sense and are NOT just random chaos.

Now, consider the atheist/secular humanist worldview: how did it all get here?  By nothing more than godless, random chaos.  And we got here through a lengthy, random procession of chaos by which the most vicious, ruthless creature survived by killing off all the weaker or more inferior ones around it.  Only if the law of the claw is “good” can we call ourselves “good.”  On the story of atheistic evolution we can call ourselves “good” only because according to the results of atheistic evolution we proved to be better at wiping out all of our competitors than our competitors were at wiping us out in the struggle for survival.  And we continue to be “good” only because we continue to be better at murdering and exterminating our competition than any other creature under the sun.  Atheists are hypocrites who affirm “survival of the fittest” as a past fact only to claim to utterly renounce it as a present reality.  So no, on the secular humanist story of evolution, we are NOT “good.”  And do our lives make sense somehow?  Again, NOT.  Our lives mean NOTHING because we CAME from nothing and when we die we shall surely be NOTHING but the same meaningless dust of the ground that surrounds us.  And there IS no ultimate purpose, no ultimate destiny not only for you but for your entire family, your entire race, your entire nation, your entire species and in fact the entire universe itself as it all ultimately grinds to an end when the same random process that spat us out ultimately swallows us back up again in cold, cosmic death and nothingness.

I keep saying it: true science and any true or legitimate understanding of humanity SCREAMS OUT THAT THERE IS A GOD.

And ANY view that refuses to acknowledge God is the religion of wicked fools that amounts to fatal “moral injury” to the human race.

I want you to read this article – which was actually a lecture delivered by William Lane Craig – and then reflect on the wisdom of this Marine psychologist who deals with reality rather than the empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense of secular humanism:

The Absurdity of Life Without God by William Lane Craig, a lecture given at Biola University on 5 March, 2002

(Painstakingly transcribed from tape)

This a topic that is most serious and somber: the absurdity of life without God.

Loren Eisley writes, “Man is the cosmic orphan.He’s the only creature in the universe who asks, ‘Why?’Other animals have instincts to guide them, but man has learned to ask questions: ‘Who am I?’‘Why am I here?’‘Where am I going?’”Ever since the Enlightenment, when men threw off the “shackles” of religion, man has tried to answer those questions without reference to God.But the answers that came back were not exhilarating, but dark and terrible: you are the accidental by-product of nature – the result of matter, plus time, plus chance.There is no reason for your existence; all you face is death.Modern man thought that when he got rid of God he freed himself from everything that stifled and oppressed him; instead, he found that in killing God, he had only orphaned himself.For if there is no God, then man’s life becomes, ultimately, absurd.If God does not exist, then both man and the universe are inevitably doomed to death.Man, like all biological organisms, must die.With no hope of immortality man’s life leads only to the grave.Compared to the infinite stretch of time, man’s life is but a brief infinitesimal moment; and yet this is all the life that he will ever know.And therefore every one of us must come face to face with what theologian Paul Tillich has called, “the threat of non-being.”For even though I know that now I exist, that now I am alive, I also know that someday I will no longer exist, that I will die.I will no longer be.And this thought is staggering and frightening; to think that the person I call I, myself, will no longer exist, that I will be no more.It is an overwhelming thought that the majority of us encounter first as children.Most of us simply grow to accept the fact, as we all learn to live with the inevitable.But the child’s insight of horror remains true.As the French existentialist, Jean Paul Sarte, observed, “Several hours or several years make no difference, once you have lost eternity.”

And the universe, too, faces a death of its own, scientists tell us that the universe is expanding, and the galaxies are growing further and further apart.As it does so it grows colder and colder as its energy is used up: eventually all the stars will burn out, and all matter will collapse into dead stars and black holes – there will be no light at all.There will be no heat.There will be no life.Only the corpses of dead stars and galaxies, ever expanding into the endless darkness, and the cold recesses of outer space – a universe in ruins.The entire universe marches irretrievably toward its grave.So not only is the life of each individual person doomed, the entire human race is doomed.The universe is plunging toward inevitable extinction; death is written throughout its structure.There is no escape.There is no hope.

If there is no God, then, man and the universe are doomed like prisoners awaiting execution; we await our inevitable death. There is no God. There is no immortality. And what is the consequence of this? It means that life itself becomes ultimately absurd. It means that the life that we do have is without ultimate significance, value, or purpose. Let’s look at each one of these.

First, there is no ultimate meaning without immortality and God. If each individual person passes out of existence when he dies, then what ultimate meaning can be given to his life? Does it really matter whether he ever existed or not? It might be said that his life was important because it influenced others or affected the course of history. But that shows only a relative significance to his life, not an ultimate significance. His life may be important relative to certain other events. But what is the ultimate significance to any of those events? If all of the events are meaningless, then what can be the ultimate significance of influencing any of them? Ultimately it makes no difference. Or look at it from another perspective: scientists say that the universe originated in a great explosion called ‘the Big Bang’ about 15 billion years ago. Suppose the Big Bang had never occurred: what ultimate difference would it have made? The universe is doomed to die anyway; in the end it makes no difference whether it ever existed or not. And therefore it is without ultimate significance. The same is true of the human race; mankind is a doomed race in a dying universe. Because the human race will eventually cease to exist, it makes no ultimate difference whether it ever did exist. mankind is thus no more significant than a swarm of mosquitoes or a barnyard of pigs, for their end is all the same: the same cosmic process that coughed them all up in the first place will eventually swallow them all up again. And the same is true of each individual person; the contribution of the scientists to the advance of human knowledge, the researches of the doctor to alleviate pain and suffering, the efforts of the diplomat to secure peace in the world, the efforts of good people everywhere to benefit the lot of the human race, all these come to nothing; in the end they don’t make one bit of difference. Not one bit. Each person’s life is therefore without ultimate significance. And because our lives are ultimately meaningless, the activities that we fill our lives with are also meaningless. The long hours spent in study at the university, our jobs, our interests, our friendships, all of these are, in the final analysis, ultimately meaningless. This is the horror of modern man. Because he ends in nothing, he ultimately is nothing.

But it’s important to see that its not just immortality that man needs if life is to be meaningful. Mere duration of existence does not suffice to make that existence meaningful. Man and the universe could exist forever, but if there were no God, that existence would still have no ultimate significance. To illustrate one science fiction short story told of a space traveler who was marooned on a barren chunk of rock lost in outer space. And he had with him two vials: one containing a potion that would give him immortality, and the other a poison to end his life. Realizing his hopeless predicament, he gulped down the vial of poison. And then, he had discovered to his horror, that he had drunk the wrong vial; he had swallowed the potion for immortality. And thus he was doomed to exist forever in a meaningless, unending life. Now if God does not exist, then our lives are just like that. They could go on, and on, and on, and still be utterly without meaning. We could still ask of life, ‘So what?’ So its not just immortality that man needs if life is to be ultimately significant. He needs God and immortality.And if God does not exist, then he has neither.

20th century man came to understand this fact. Read Waiting for Godot by Samuel Beckett; during this entire play two men carry on trivial, mind-numbing conversation, while waiting for a third man to arrive, who never does. And our lives are like that, Beckett is saying. We just kill time waiting – for what, we don’t know. In a tragic portrayal of man Beckett wrote another play – Breath – in which the curtain opens revealing a stage littered with junk. And for 30 long seconds the audience sits and stares in silence at that junk; and then the curtain closes. That’s all there is. The French existentialists Jean Paul Sarte and Albert Camus understood this as well. Sarte portrays life in his play No Exit as hell. The final line of the play are the words of resignation, “Well, let’s get on with it.” And thus Sarte writes elsewhere of the “nausea” of existence. Camus also saw life as absurd. At the end of his brief novel The Stranger, Camus’ hero discovers in a flash of insight that life has no meaning, and that there is no God to give it one. The French biochemist Jacques Monot seemed to echo these sentiments when he wrote in his work Chance and Necessity, “Man finally knows that he is alone in the indifferent immensity of the universe.”Thus if there is no God, then life becomes ultimately meaningless.Man and the universe are without ultimate significance.

Secondly, there is no ultimate value without God and immortality. If life ends at the grave, then ultimately it makes no difference whether one has lived as a Stalin or as a saint since one’s destiny is ultimately unrelated to one’s behavior. You may as well just live as you please; as the Russian writer Dhostyevsky put it, “If there is no immortality, then all things are permitted.” On this basis a writer like Ayan Rand is absolutely correct to praise the virtues of selfishness. No one holds you accountable; you might as well simply live totally for self. Indeed, when you think about it, it would be foolish to do anything else since life is too short to jeopardize it by acting out of anything but pure self-interest. Sacrifice for another person would be stupid. Kai Nielson, an atheist philosopher, who attempts to justify the viability of ethics without God, in the end admits, “We have not been able to show that reason requires the moral point of view, or that all really rational persons, unhoodwinked by myth or ideology, need not be individual egoists or classical amoralists. Reason doesn’t decide here. The picture I have painted for you is not a pleasant one; reflection on it is depresses me. Pure practical reason, even with a good knowledge of the facts, will not take you to morality.”

But the problem becomes even worse. For regardless of immortality, if there is no God, then there can be no objective standard of right and wrong. All we are confronted with, in Jean Paul Sarte’s words, is “the bare, valueless fact of existence.” Moral values are either just expressions of personal taste, or else the by-products of socio-biological evolution and conditioning. In the word of one humanist philosopher, “The moral principles that govern our behavior are rooted in habit and custom, feeling and fashion.” In a world without God, who is to say whose values are right, and whose are wrong? Who is to judge that the values of an Adolf Hitler are inferior to those of a Mother Theresa? The concept morality loses all meaning in a universe without God. As one contemporary atheistic ethicist points out, “To say that something is wrong because it is forbidden by God is perfectly understandable to anyone who believes in a law-giving God. But to say that something is wrong, even though no God exists to forbid it, is not understandable. The concept of moral obligation is unintelligible apart from the idea of God. The words remain, but their meaning is gone.” In a world without God, there can be no objective right and wrong, only our culturally and personally relative subjective judgments. But that means that it is impossible to condemn war, oppression, or crime as evil. Nor can one praise love, brotherhood, or equality as good. For in a universe without God, good and evil do not exist. there is only the bare, valueless fact of existence. And there is no one to say that you are right, and I am wrong.

Thirdly, there is no ultimate purpose without immortality and God. If death stands with open arms at the end of life’s trail, then what is the goal of life? To what end has life been? Has it all been for nothing? Is there no purpose at all for life? And what of the universe? Is it utterly pointless? If its destiny is but a cold grave in the recesses of outer space, then the answer must be yes. It is pointless. There is no goal, no purpose, for which the universe exists. The litter of a dead universe will just go on expanding and expanding forever. And what of man? Is there no purpose at all for the existence of the human race? Or will it simply peter out someday, lost in the indifference of an oblivious universe? The English writer H.G. Wells foresaw such a prospect. In his novel, The Time Machine, Wells’ time traveler journeys far into the future to discover the destiny of man. And all he finds is a dead earth except for a few lichens and moss orbiting a gigantic red sun. The only sounds are the rush of the wind, and the gentle ripple of the sea. “Beyond these lifeless sounds,” writes Wells, “the world was silent. Silent? It would be hard to convey the stillness of it. All of the sounds of man, the bleating of sheep, the cries of birds, the hum of insects, the stir that makes the background of our lives, all that was over.” And so, Wells’ time traveler returned. But to what? To merely an earlier point on the same purposeless rush towards oblivion. One reading this might exclaim, “No, no! It can’t end that way!” But this is reality in a universe without God. There is no hope; there is no purpose. Reflect on T.S. Elliot’s haunting lines:

This is the way the world ends

This is the way the world ends

This is the way the world ends

Not with a bang but a whimper.

And what is true of mankind as a whole, is also true of each of us individually. We are here to no purpose. If there is no God, then your life is not qualitatively different from that of a dog. That may sound harsh, but it’s true. As the ancient writer of Ecclesiastes put it, “For the fate of the sons of men and the fate of beasts is the same. As one dies so dies the other; indeed, they all have the same breath and there is no advantage for man over beast, for all is vanity. All go to the same place. All came from the dust and all return to the dust. (Ecc 3:19-20). In this book that reads more like a piece of modern existentialist literature than a book from the Bible, the writer demonstrates the futility of pleasure, wealth, education, political fame, and honor, in a life doomed to end in death. His verdict? “Vanity of vanities, all is vanity!” (Ecc 12:8). If life ends at the grave, then we have no ultimate purpose for living.

But more than that, even if life did not end in death, without God life would still be without purpose. For man and the universe would then be mere accidents of chance thrust into existence for no reason. Without God the universe is a result of a cosmic accident, a chance explosion. There is no reason for which it exists. And as for man, he’s nothing but a freak of nature, a blind product of matter, plus time, plus chance. There’s no more purpose in life for the human race than for a species of insect – for both are the result of the blind interaction of chance and necessity. As one philosopher has put it, “Human life is mounted upon a sub-human pedestal, and must shift for its self alone, in the heart of a silent and mindless universe.” And what is true of the universe and of the human race is also true of us as individuals. We are here to no purpose. We are the results of certain combinations of heredity and environment. We’re victims of a sort of environmental roulette. Psychologists following Sigmund Freud tell us that our actions are really the result of repressed sexual tendencies. Sociologists following B.F. Skinner argue that all of our choices are really determined by conditioning so that freedom is an illusion. Biologists like Francis Crick regard man as an electro-chemical machine which can be controlled by altering its genetic code. If God does not exist, then you are just a miscarriage of nature, thrust into a purposeless universe to live a purposeless life. So if God does not exist, that means that man and the universe exist to no purpose (since the end of everything is death), and that they came to be for no purpose (since they are only blind products of chance). In short, life is ultimately without reason.

Do you understand then the gravity of the alternatives before us? For if God exists, then there is hope for man. But if God does not exist, then all we are left with is despair. Do you understand why the existence of God is a question that is so vital to man? As one writer has aptly put it, “If God is dead, then man is dead too.” Unfortunately, the mass of people do not understand this fact. They continue on as though nothing had changed. Consider the story told by Frederick Nietzsche of The Madman, who in the early morning hours burst into the marketplace, lantern in hand, crying, “I seek God! I seek God!”Since many of those standing about did not believe in God, he provoked much laughter.‘Did God get lost?They yelled.Or, is He hiding?Or, perhaps He’s gone on a voyage, or emigrated!And thus they yelled and laughed and taunted the madman.And then, Nietzsche writes, the madman turned in their midst and pierced them with his eyes.“Whither is God?” he cried.“I shall tell you!We have killed him!You and I!All of us are His murderers!But how have we done this?How were we able to drink up the sea?Who gave us the sponge to wipe up the entire horizon?What did we do when we unchained this earth from its sun?Whither is it moving now?Away from all suns?Are we not plunging continually backward, sideward, forward in all directions?Is there any up or down left?Are we not straying as through an infinite nothing?Do we not feel the breath of empty space?Has it not become colder?Is not night and more night coming on all the while?Must not lanterns be lit in the morning?Do we not hear anything yet of the noise of the gravediggers who are burying God?God is dead!And we have killed Him!How shall we, the murderers of all murderers, comfort ourselves?”The crowd stared at the madman in silence and astonishment.At last he dashed his lantern to the ground.“I have come too early!”He said.“This tremendous event is still on its way.It has not yet reached the ears of men.”People did not truly comprehend what they had done in killing God.And yet, Nietzsche predicted that some day, people would realize the implications of atheism, and this realization would usher in an age of nihilism that is the destruction of all meaning and value in life.“This most gruesome of guests”, he said, “is standing already at the door.Our whole European culture is moving for some time now with a tortured tension that is growing from decade to decade as toward a catastrophe, restlessly, violently, headlong, like a river that wants to reach the end, that no longer reflects, that is afraid to reflect.”Most people still do not reflect upon the consequences of atheism, and so, like the crowd in the marketplace, go unknowingly on their way.And yet, when we realize, as did Nietzsche, what atheism really implies, then his question presses hard upon us: “How shall we, the murderers of all murderers, comfort ourselves?”

About the only solution which the atheists can offer is that we just face the absurdity of life bravely and live valiantly. Bertrand Russell, for example, wrote that “we must build our lives upon the firm foundation of unyielding despair. Only by recognizing that the world really is a terrible place can we successfully come to terms with life.” Camus said that we should honestly recognize life’s absurdity and then live in love for one another.” But the fundamental problem with this solution is that it is simply impossible to live consistently and happily within the framework of such a world view. If one lives consistently, he will not be happy. If he lives happily, it is only because he is not consistent. Francis Schaeffer explained this point well, saying, “Modern man lives in a two-story universe. In the lower story is the finite world without God. Here life is absurd (as we have seen). In the upper story are meaning, value, and purpose. Now modern man lives in the lower story because he believes that there is no God. But because he cannot live consistently and happily in such a world, he therefore makes leaps of faith into the upper story to affirm that life has meaning, value, and purpose, even though he has absolutely no right to since man and the lower story does not believe in God. Modern man is totally inconsistent to make this leap because these values cannot exist without God, and man and the lower story does not have God.”

Let us look again, then, at each of those three areas in which we saw that life was absurd without God, to show how modern man cannot live consistently and happily with his atheism.

First, the area of meaning. We saw that without God life has no ultimate meaning. And yet, philosophers continue to live as though life were meaningful. For example, Sarte argued that one may create meaning for his life by freely choosing to follow a certain course of action. Sarte, himself, chose Marxism. Now this is utterly inconsistent. It is inconsistent to say that life is objectively meaningless and then to say that one can create meaning for his life. If life really is absurd, then man is trapped in the lower story. To try to create meaning in life represents a leap to the upper story. But Sarte has no basis for this leap. Without God, there can be no objective meaning in life. Sarte’s program is thus actually an exercise in self-delusion – for the universe doesn’t really acquire a meaning just because I happen to give it one. This is obvious. For suppose you give the universe one meaning, and I give it another. Who is right? Well, the obvious answer is neither one. For the universe without God remains objectively meaningless no matter how we happen to regard it. Sarte is really saying, ‘Let’s pretend that life and the universe have meaning.’ And that is just fooling yourself. The point is this: if God does not exist, then life is objectively meaningless. But man cannot live consistently and happily as though life were meaningless. And so in order to be happy, he pretends that his life has meaning. But this is of course utterly inconsistent; for without God, man and the universe remain without any real significance.

Turn now to the problem of value.Here is where the most blatant inconsistencies occur.First of all, atheistic humanists are totally inconsistent in affirming the traditional values of love and human brotherhood.Camus has been rightly criticized for inconsistently holding both to the absurdity of life, on the one hand, and to ethics of human love and brotherhood on the other.The two are logically incompatible.Bertrand Russell, too, was inconsistent.For although he was an atheist, he was also an outspoken social critic, denouncing war and restrictions on sexual freedom.Russell admitted that he could not live as though ethical values were simply a matter of personal taste and that he therefore found his own views, and I quote, “incredible.”“I do not know the solution,” he confessed.The point is that if there is no God, then objective right and wrong do not exist.As Dhostovesky said, “All things are permitted.”But Dhostovesky also showed that man cannot live this way.He cannot live as though as though it’s perfectly all right for soldiers to slaughter innocent children.He cannot live as though it’s perfectly acceptable for dictatorial regimes to follow systematic pograms of physical torture of political prisoners.He cannot live as though its all right for dictators like Stalin or Pol Pot to ruthlessly exterminate millions of their own countrymen.Everything in him cries out to say that these acts are wrong, really wrong.But if God does not exist, then he cannot.And so, he makes a leap of faith to affirm values anyway.And when he does, he reveals the inadequacy of a world without God.

The horror of a world devoid of value was brought home to me with new intensity several years ago as I viewed a BBC television documentary called “The Gathering.” It concerned the reunion of certain survivors of the Holocaust in Jerusalem where they shared experiences and rediscovered lost friendships. Now I had heard stories of the Holocaust before and even visited camps like Dachau and Buchenwald. And I thought I was beyond being shocked by further tales of horror. But I found that I was not. One woman prisoner, for example, a nurse, told how she was made the gynecologist at Auswitzch. She observed that certain pregnant women were grouped together by the soldiers under the direction of Dr. Mengele, and housed in the same barracks. Some time passed and she noticed that she no longer saw any of these women. She made inquirees: “Where are the pregnant women who were housed in that barracks?” she asked. “Oh, haven’t you heard,” came the reply, “Dr. Mengele used them for vivisection.” Another woman told how Mengele had had her breast bound up so she could no longer suckle her baby. The doctor wanted to learn how long an infant could survive without nourishment. And desperately this poor woman tried to keep her baby alive by giving it bits of bread soaked in coffee. But to no avail. Each day the baby lost weight – a fact which was eagerly monitored by Dr. Mengele. Finally a nurse then came secretly to this woman, and said to her, “I’ve arranged for a way for you to get out of here. But you cannot take your baby with you. I’ve brought a morphine injection which you can give to your child to take its life.” And when this woman protested the nurse said to her, “Look, your baby is going to die anyway. At least save yourself.” And so this poor woman took the life of her own child. Mengele was furious when he learned he had lost his experimental specimen, and he searched among the corpses of the discarded babies until he could find the body to have one last weighing.

My heart was torn by these stories.One rabbi who survived Auswitzch summed it up well when he said “It was as though a world existed in which all of the Ten Commandments had been reversed: Thou shalt kill, thou shalt lie, thou shalt steal, and so forth.Mankind has never seen such a hell.”And yet, if God does not exist, then our world IS Auswitzch.There is no absolute right and wrong.All things are permitted.But no atheist, no agnostic, can live consistently with such a view.Nietzsche himself, who proclaimed the necessity of living beyond good and evil, broke with his mentor, Richard Waugner, precisely over the issue of the composer’s strident German nationalism and anti-Semitism.Similarly, Sarte, writing in the aftermath of the second World War, condemned anti-Semitism.He declared that a doctrine that leads to extermination is not merely an opinion or a matter of personal taste of equal value with its opposite.In his important essay, “Existentialism is a Humanism,” Sarte struggled vainly to elude the contradiction between his denial of divinely pre-established values in his urgent desire to affirm the value of human persons.He could not live with the implications of his own denial of ethical absolutes.

A second problem is that if God does not exist and there is no immortality, then all the evil acts of men go unpunished.And all the sacrifices of good people go unrewarded.But who can live with such a view?Richard Wombrandt, who was tortured for his faith in communist prison, wrote, “The cruelty of atheism is hard to believe when man has no faith in the reward of faith in the reward of good or the punishment of evil.There is no reason to be human.There is no restraint from the depths of evil which is in man.The communist torturers often said, ‘There is no God.There is no hereafter.No punishment for evil.We can do what we wish!’I have even heard one torturer say, ‘I thank God in whom I don’t believe that I have lived to this hour when I can express all of the evil in my heart.’He expressed it in unbelievable brutality and torture inflicted on prisoners.”

The English theologian Cardinal Newman once said that, “If I believed that all of the evils and injustices of life throughout history were not to be made right by God in the afterlife, why, I think I should go mad.”Rightly so.And the same applies to acts of self-sacrifice.A number of years ago a terrible mid-winter air disaster occurred in Washington, D.C.A plane leaving Dulles Airport smashed into a bridge spanning the Potomac River, plunging its passengers into the icy waters.And as the rescue helicopters came attention was focused on one man, who again and again pushed the dangling rope ladder to other passengers rather than be pulled to safety himself.Six times he passed the ladder by, and then when the helicopters came again, he was gone.He had freely given his life so that others might live.The entire nation turned its eyes on this man with respect and admiration for the selfless and good act that he had performed.And yet if the atheist is right, that man was not noble; why he did the stupidest thing possible.He should have gone for the rope ladder first, pushed others out of the way if necessary in order to reach it.But to give his own life for other people for whom he had never even known, all the life he would ever have, what for?For the atheist there can be no reason.And yet the atheist, like the rest of us, instinctively reacts with praise for this man’s selfless action.Indeed I think one will never find an atheist who lives consistently with his system.For a universe without moral accountability and devoid of value is unimaginably terrible.

Finally let’s look at the problem of purpose in life. The only way that most people who deny purpose in life manage to live happily is either by making up some purpose for their lives, which amounts to self-delusion, as we saw with Sarte, or else by not carrying out their view to its logical conclusions. Take the problem of death, for example. According to psychologist Ernst Block, the only way that modern man lives in the face of death is by sub-consciously borrowing the belief in immortality which his forefathers held to. Even though he himself no longer has any basis for this belief, since he does not believe in God. Block states that the belief that life ends in nothing is hardly (in his words) sufficient to keep the head high and to work as if there were no end. The remnants of a belief in immortality, writes Block, modern man does not feel the chasm that unceasingly surrounds him, and will most certainly engulf him at last. Through these remnants he saves his sense of self-identity. Through them the impression arises that man is not perishing, but only that one day the world has the whim no longer to appear to him. Block concludes, “This quite shallow courage feasts on a borrowed credit card; it lives from earlier hopes and the support that they have once provided.” But modern man no longer has any right to that support, since he rejects God. But in order to live purposefully, he makes a leap of faith to affirm a reason for living.

We often find the same inconsistency among those who say that man and the universe came to exist for no reason or purpose but just by chance.Unable to live in an impersonal universe in which everything is the result of blind chance these people begin to ascribe personality and motives to the physical processes themselves.It’s a bizarre way of speaking – and it represents a leap from the lower to the upper story.For example, the brilliant Russian physicist, Zodovitzchen Novakoff, in contemplating the universe, asks, “Why did nature choose to create this universe rather than another?”‘Nature’ here has obviously become a sort of ‘God substitute,’ filling the role and function of the Creator.Similarly, Francis Crick, halfway through his book “The Origin of the Genetic Code” begins to spell ‘nature’ with a capital ‘N’ – and speaks of natural selection as being “clever” and “thinking” of what it will do.similarly Fred Hoyle, the English astronomer, attributes to the universe itself the properties of God.For Carl Sagan, the cosmos, with which he always spelled with a capital letter, obviously fulfills the role of a God-substitute.Though all of these men profess not to believe in God, they smuggle in a God-substitute through the back door because they cannot bear to live in a universe in which everything is the result of impersonal forces.

And it’s interesting to see many thinkers betray their views when they are pushed to the logical conclusions.For example, feminists have raised a storm of protest over Freudian sexual psychology because, they say, its chauvinistic and degrading to women.And, some psychologists have nuckled under and revised their theories.Now this is totally inconsistent.If Freudian psychology is really true then it doesn’t matter if its degrading to women.You can’t change the truth because you don’t like what it leads to.But the problem is that people can’t live consistently and happily in a world where other persons are devalued.And yet, if God does not exist, then nobody has any value.The only way you can consistently support women’s rights is by belief in God.For if God does not exist, women have no more rights than a female goat or a chicken has rights.In nature, whatever is, is right.IfGod does not exist, then natural selection dictates that the male of the species is the dominant and aggressive one.In nature, whatever is, is right.But who can live with such a view?Apparently not even Freudian psychiatrists who betray their theories when pushed to their logical conclusions.

Or take the sociological behaviorism of a man like B.F. Skinner.This view leads to the sort of society envisioned by George Orwell in his novel “1984,” where the government controls and programs the thoughts of everybody.If Pavlov’s dog can be made to salivate when a bell rings, so can a human being.And if Skinner’s theories are right, there can be no objection to treating people like the rats in Skinner’s rat boxes – they run through their mazes coaxed on by food an electric shocks.According to Skinner all our actions are programmed anyway.And if God does not exist, then no moral objection can be raised against treating people like human guinea pigs – because man is not qualitatively different from a rat.For both are the result of matter, plus time, plus chance.But again who can live with such a dehumanizing view.

Or finally take the biological determinism of a man like Francis Crick.The logical conclusion is that man is like any other laboratory specimen.The world was horrified when it learned that in camps like Dachau and Auswitzch the Nazis had used prisoners for medical experiments on living human beings.But why not?If God does not exist there can be no moral objection to using people as human guinie pigs.A memorial at Dachau says, “Nie vida,” never again.But this sort of thing continued to go on.It was recently revealed, for example, that in the United States after the war certain minority group persons where injected unbeknownst to them with a sterilization drug by medical researchers.Must we not protest that this is wrong?That people are more than just electro-chemical machines?The end of this view is population control, in which the weak and the unwanted are killed off to make room for the strong.But the only way that we can protest this consistently is if God exists.Only if God exists can there be purpose in life.

The dilemma of modern man is thus truly terrible. And in so far as postmodern man (so called) denies the existence of God and the objectivity of value and purpose, this dilemma remains unrelieved for postmodern man as well. Indeed it is precisely the awareness that modernism issues inevitably in absurdity and despair that constitutes the anguish of postmodernism. In some respects postmodernism simply is the awareness of the bankruptcy of modernity. The atheistic world is insufficient to sustain a happy and consistent life. Man cannot live consistently and happily as though life were ultimately without meaning, value, and purpose. If we try to live consistently within the framework of the atheistic view, then we shall find ourselves profoundly unhappy. If we manage to live happily, it is only by giving lie to the worldview of atheism. Confronted with this dilemma, man flounders pathetically for some means of escape.

In a remarkable address to the American Academy for the Advancement of Science in 1991, Dr. LD. Rue, confronted with the predicament of modern man, boldly advocated that we deceive ourselves by means of some “noble lie” into thinking that we and the universe still have value.Claiming that the lesson of the last two centuries is that intellectual and moral relativism is profoundly the case, Dr. Rue muses that the consequences of such a realization is that one’s quest for personal wholeness or self fulfillment, and the quest for social coherence, become independent from one another.This is because on the view of relativism the search for self fulfillment becomes radically privatized.If each person chooses his own set of values and meaning, Rue says there is no final objective reading on the world for the self.There is no universal vocabulary for integrating cosmology and morality.If we are to avoid what he calls “the madhouse option,” where self fulfillment is pursued regardless of social coherence, and if we are to avoid what he calls “totalitarian option,” where social coherence is imposed at the expense of personal fulfillment, then, he says, we have no choice but to embrace some “noble lie” that will inspire us to live beyond our selfish interests and so achieve social coherence.A noble lie, he says, is one that deceives us, tricks us, compels us beyond self interests, beyond ego, beyond family, nation, and race.It is a lie because it tells us that the universe is infused with value – which is a great fiction.Because it makes a claim to universal truth when there is none, and because it tells me not to live for self interest – which is evidently false.But, says Rue, without such lies, we cannot live.

This is the dreadful verdict pronounced over modern man.In order to live, he must live in self deception.But even the noble lie option is, in the end, unworkable.For how can one believe in these noble lies while at the same time believing in atheism and relativism?The more convinced you are of the necessity of a noble lie, the less you are able to believe in it.Like a placebo, the noble lie only works on those who believe it is the truth.Once we’ve seen through the deception, the lie has lost its power over us.And thus ironically, the noble lie cannot solve our human predicament for anyone who has come to see that predicament.The noble lie option only leads, therefore, at best, to a society in which an elitest group of Illuminati deceive the masses for their own good by perpetuating the noble lie.But then, why should those of us, who are enlightened, follow the masses in their deception?Why should we sacrifice self interests for a fiction?If the great lesson of the past two centuries is moral and intellectual relativism, then why, if we could, pretend that we do not know this truth and live a lie instead?If one answers, “Well for the sake of social coherence,” one may legitimately respond, “Why should I sacrifice my self interest for the sake of social coherence?The only answer the relativist can give to this question is that social coherence IS in my best interest.But the problem with this answer is that self interest and social coherence do not always coincide.My interest and the interest of the herd are not always the same.Beside, if out of self interest I do care about social coherence, the totalitarian option is always open to me.Forget the noble lie, and simply maintain social coherence, as well as my own self fulfillment, at the expense of the personal wholeness of the masses.Generations of Soviet leaders – who extolled proletarian virtues while they rode in limousines and dined on caviar on their country dachas – found this alternative quite workable.

Now, Dr. Rue would undoubtedly regard such an option as morally repugnant.But therein lies the rub; Rue’s dilemma is that he obviously values – deeply – both social coherence and personal wholeness for their own sakes.In other words, they are objective values – which according to his philosophy do not exist.He has already leaped to the upper story.The noble lie option thus affirms what it denies – and so refutes itself.

But if atheism fails in this regard, what about biblical Christianity? According to the Christian worldview, God does exist, and man’s life does not end at the grave. In the resurrection body man may enjoy eternal life and fellowship with God. And biblical Christianity therefore provides the two conditions necessary for a meaningful, valuable, and purposeful life: namely, God and immortality. Because of this, we can live consistently and happily. The Bible affirms that life is ultimately significant because we have eternal life which is the knowledge of God forever. This is the fulfillment of human existence, it is what we were made for. moreover, moral values are rooted in the nature of God Himself, and God’s moral commandments constitute for us our objective moral duties. Moreover the moral choices that we make in this life have an eternal significance because we will be held accountable for them by the holy God. The purpose of life, as the Westminster Catechism states, is to glorify God, and to enjoy Him forever. And thus biblical Christianity succeeds precisely where atheism breaks down.

Now, I want to be perfectly clear that none of this shows that biblical Christianity is true. But what it does show, I think, is to spell out clearly the alternatives. If God does not exist, then life is futile. If the God of the Bible does exist, then life is meaningful. Only the second of these two alternatives enables us to live consistently and happily.

And therefore it seems to me that even if these two options were absolutely equal, the rational person ought to choose biblical Christianity. That is to say, it seems to me positively irrational to prefer death, futility, and despair to hope, meaningfulness, and happiness. As Pascal said, “we have nothing to lose, and infinity to gain.” The cosmic orphan can come home.

No God means no meaning, no value and no purpose.  Period.  End of story.  DEAL WITH IT.

I simply state it as a categorical fact: if there is no God, there is no “good.”  And we ought to be pursuing the correct understanding of the ONLY kind of “good” we can be by murdering and raping one another as fast as we can until we stand on a mountain of skeletons as the Darwinian “fittest” specimen – having successfully killed off everything else around us.

We are seeing as we speak the toxic effect of Islam: the ONLY way you can have an Islam that is “the religion of peace” is to bow down before Allah and acknowledge your Muslim masters according to the harsh dictates of sharia law.  Because Islam is NOT the religion of “peace”; it is the religion of SUBMISSION.  And “submission” by as much force and violence and terror is necessary to MAKE you submit.  Because ANY legitimate understanding of “Islam” entails living out the religion according to the life and revelation of its Prophet, Muhammad.  And Muhammad was a man of war and violence and conquest and slavery and genocide.

ANY understanding of Islam that does not accurately and honestly reflect the murderous, vicious life of the Prophet Muhammad is a perversion and a lie of history.  And it is refuted by history and by reality no matter how sincere the perverter of history’s motives might be to fabricate a religion that avoids the murderous viciousness of its founder and Prophet.

We are seeing hell on earth unleashed by those who would follow in the example of the Prophet Muhammad and his wicked religion of Islam.  And the people who are carrying out that hell are the most faithful adherents of how Muhammad lived his own life and commanded his followers to live their lives.

And it is the identical same way with atheism and secular humanism.   These worldviews are one thing and one thing only: a boot stamping on a human face forever.

I recall a haunting quote from a man who experienced the direct result of atheism and its ramifications:

If we present man with a concept of man which is not true, we may well corrupt him. When we present him as an automation of reflexes, as a mind-machine, as a bundle of instincts, as a pawn of drives and reactions, as a mere product of instincts, heredity, and environment, we feed the despair to which man is, in any case, already prone. I became acquainted with the last stages of corruption in my second concentration camp in Auschwitz. The gas chambers of Auschwitz were the ultimate consequence of the theory that man is nothing but the product of heredity and environment—or, as the Nazis liked to say, of ‘Blood and Soil.’ I am absolutely convinced that the gas chambers of Auschwitz, Treblinka, and Maidanek were ultimately prepared not in some Ministry or other in Berlin, but rather at the desks and in the lecture halls of nihilistic scientists and philosophers.
—Viktor E. Frankl, Holocaust survivor and Professor of Neurology and Psychiatry, University of Vienna Medical School; from his book, The Doctor and the Soul

Ideas have consequences.  And the consequences of atheism and secular humanism are hell on earth.  FAR more people have died – and died miserably and without any dignity whatsoever – as the result of communism (I.e. official state atheism) than have died as the result of every other worldview COMBINED.

Adolf Hitler, Joseph Stalin, Chairman Mao and the worst mass murderers of history were ALL self-acknowledged atheists and godless evolutionists.  And their atheism entailed genocide on a scale that the human race had never so much as imagined prior to the rise of atheism as a legitimate worldview.  And I simply defy any atheist or secular humanist to explain to me how Hitler, Stalin and Mao were “bad evolutionists” or “bad atheists” the way we would ascribe to someone who fails to live up to the teachings of Jesus (e.g. “the Sermon on the Mount”) as being “bad Christians.”  I defy you to explain to me how evolution Darwinism proscribe the genocide of a competitor for the scarce resources that YOUR people want “in the struggle for life” (as Darwin himself called it in the title of his famous work).

Atheists conveniently forget that fact.  And oh, yes, there is a damn good reason for that.  “Favoured Races .”  You know, just like the Aryan race that Hitler envisioned.   The “Struggle for Life,” because in order to be the “fittest” I have to eat you before you can eat me.

And that is the ONLY “good” and the ONLY way for your life to “make sense” given any genuine acceptance of godless evolution.

I have the Ten Commandments from God; you have your precious atheist-based Darwinism.  One of them produces morality, the other eradicates it and crushes the dignity of the human spirit by “fundamentally transforming” us into creatures who descended from bugs.  I’ll take my God-morality over your bug-morality any day.

Karl Marx’s international socialism and Adolf Hitler’s national socialism were both based on the new modern “science” of evolution.  As I point out in a past article, Nazism was applied Darwinism for the very simple reason that Darwinism entails social Darwinism and if the theory is truly sound, we ought to live our lives by its obvious implications.

Do you want meaning?  Do you want value?  Do you want purpose?  You WON’T find it in evolution unless you’re a pathological hypocrite who perverts the obvious, just as you won’t find “peace” in Islam unless you pervert the obvious truth about Muhammad and the world’s most intolerant religion that he fabricated and which enslaves a billion souls today.

Rather, if you truly do want meaning, value, purpose and peace, you can only find these in the Prince of Peace, who said “I am the Way, the Truth and the Life,” Who said that He came to give “life to the full.”

 

The Full Horror Revealed: We Now Know How America Will Collapse COMPLETELY From Within Due To Obama’s Undermining Of Economy, Security

May 11, 2015

I’m seeing more and more articles popping up from traditionally leftist sources acknowledging the epic, total fail that is, was and has been ObamaCare.  Yesterday, the reliably liberal USA Today front page had an article which I found in the print version titled, “Ky hospitals suffocating under ObamaCare: Facilities facing layoffs – and even shutdowns.”  That article is a living, breathing demonstration that everything the Republican governors who refused ObamaCare and successfully sued to not be forced to implement loudly predicted would happen as the federal government reimbursement rates would ultimately fail to keep up with the exorbitantly expensive costs of implementing ObamaCare.  As merely one example, Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal said back in 2013:

We will not allow President Obama to bully Louisiana into accepting an expansion of Obamacare.

We have rejected Obamacare’s Medicaid expansion in Louisiana because it would cost Louisiana taxpayers up to $1.7 billion over the next ten years and move nearly 250,000 Louisianians from private coverage to Medicaid.

“The disastrous rollout of Obamacare is a case in point that we don’t need top-down, one-size-fits-all federal mandates, and instead should continue to focus on health care solutions that make sense for Louisiana.

“Obamacare needs to be repealed. The dysfunction of the website and the President’s broken promises on being able to keep your health plan are just the tip of the iceberg in regards to the problems with this law.”

A grossly biased CNN Money article still managed to at least say this much about why Republican governors “stood their ideological ground”:

A number of governors, particularly in red states, have stood their ideological ground and chosen not to expand, citing concerns about the additional financial burden. The federal government will pay for 100% of the expansion for the first three years, then gradually reduce its subsidy to 90% by 2020.

Some governors have said that expansion would involve additional costs that they couldn’t afford and enlarge a program that they consider broken. In many states, however, various analyses show that states would stand to gain millions of dollars by expanding the program, at least initially.

The article I cite above detailing the collapse of the health delivery system in Kentucky begins:

LEXINGTON, Ky. — While Kentucky has gained national prominence as the only Southern state to fully embrace Obamacare, its hospitals say the law has left them facing billions of dollars in cuts and forced them to lay off staff, shut down services and worry for their financial health and, in some cases, survival.

The Kentucky Hospital Association outlined its concerns in a report released Friday called “Code Blue,” saying payment cuts to hospitals are expected to reach nearly $7 billion through 2024. “Kentucky hospitals will lose more money under the Affordable Care Act than they gain in revenue from expanded coverage,” it said, experiencing a net loss of $1 billion by 2020.

“This report provides the real picture of what our hospitals are facing,” KHA President Mike Rust said during a press conference at the Lexington Convention Center, where the group was holding its annual convention. The Medicaid expansion has given many residents health coverage that has brought new money into hospitals, but “the rest of the story is the cuts.”

Hospitals are suffering a net loss, officials said, partly because about three-quarters of newly-insured Kentuckians signed up for Medicaid, which reimburses hospitals less than it costs to treat patients. Nationally, the Congressional Budget Office projected half of newly-insured patients would have private insurance. But Kentucky is a poor state, so most people who signed up for Obamacare — officially the Affordable Care Act — have qualified for expanded Medicaid, which covers those earning less than 138 percent of the federal poverty level, or about $33,000 for a family of four.

You just watch how the biased USA Today that wrote off Kentucky’s dilemma as being the result of being “a poor state” fails to understand how EVERY state will ultimately be a “poor state” under ObamaCare.  As an example based on something called a “fact,” consider California.  An article from Covered California – ObamaCare in California – touted that “495,073 people selected health plans during the open-enrollment period ending Feb. 22, 2015.”  It points out the fact that “Nearly nine out of every 10 new enrollees qualified for some level of financial help for 2015,” which means that SOMEBODY ELSE is going to be forced to pay for them.  But here’s the real point: versus those 495,073 people who signed up for ObamaCare by the deadline, “Meanwhile, more than 779,000 consumers enrolled in Medi-Cal from Nov. 15 through Jan. 31. Medi-Cal enrollment continues year-round.”

That means that as of March 5, Medicare accounted for 61% of the total ObamaCare coverage.  And as the article points out, that enrollment continues and therefore continues to expand and grow – all year.  Which means by the end of the year you can damn well bloody BET that the total of Medicare enrollees will be 3/4s of all ObamaCare enrollees.  And nobody is calling California “a poor state.”  Which is another way of saying that the CBO was dreadfully wrong in its horribly flawed analysis.  ObamaCare is a depth charge that will sink and explode right in the bowels of our health care system and ultimately collapse it.

It’s kind of like that line from the movie Unforgiven where a hit man says of his victims, “Yeah, well, I guess they had it coming.”  And Will Munny points out the far grimmer truth – “We all got it coming, kid.”  Under ObamaCare, we’re ALL “poor states” now.  And we’ve ALL got it coming to us.

Another article points out the devastation that ObamaCare has actually been to actual health care:

After What 214,000 Doctors Just Did, Obamacare Could Be In Shambles
“The ‘Affordable’ Care Act is anything but…”
James Beattie October 30, 2014 at 11:25am

More than 214,000 doctors will not participate in new plans under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA).

According to a survey conducted this year by the Medical Group Management Association (MGMA), a trade association comprised of multi-physician medical practices, “as many as 214,524 American physicians will not be participating in any ACA exchange products.” Reasons abound as to why, but, “chief among them is the fact that exchange plans are more likely to offer significantly lower reimbursement rates than private market plans, confusion among consumers about the obligations associated with high deductibles, and fear that patients will stop paying premiums and providers will be unable to recover their losses”

This is a staggering number, considering the Kaiser Family Foundation reported there are 893,851 active physicians working in the United States.

It’s actually WORSE than doctors merely withdrawing from networks and refusing to provide treatment that would bankrupt them to provide as they lose money with every patient until they are out of business.  Doctors are getting out of medicine altogether as the Washington Times documented as early as 2013:

‘Obamacare’ health care reform ALREADY forcing doctors to close practices

We are facing a shortage of 45,000 primary care physicians, which is the choke point to all of the rest of health care.  Just for starters.  And just as conservatives like me were predicting all along as this wicked, demon-possessed monstrosity became law.

Someone has yet to explain to me how getting everybody a piece of paper that says they have “health insurance” but which means forcing hospitals to close and doctors to leave their health practices helps people get actual healthcare.  Doctors are not accepting these patients with their “ObamaCare.”  And as a result they are swamping the emergency rooms at a greater rate than ever before as the Washington Times documented –

Doctors say emergency room visits have increased since the advent of Obamacare, undercutting one of the key selling points of President Obama’s health care law, which was supposed to ensure a healthier population by pushing consumers to rely on their primary physicians rather than emergency trips to the hospital.

Three out of four ER doctors said they have seen a rise in the number of patients since January 2014, when Obamacare fully kicked in, according to a survey conducted by the American College of Emergency Physicians. More than a quarter of the doctors said they have seen a major surge, and 47 percent said the rise has been slight.

The doctors said they fear a spike in visits could overwhelm their resources: Seven out of 10 said their departments aren’t prepared for a significant increase in patient volume.

The biggest cause is a lack of primary care doctors to treat the increased number of patients with health care coverage, so the patients are turning to the emergency room instead — exactly what wasn’t supposed to happen.

– breaking Obama’s promises.  In just ONE dishonest speech for his dishonest ObamaCare takeover of our once-great health care system, Obama said:

And these stories were personal for me, because I remember my mother worrying about how she was going to deal with her finances when she got very sick.  I remember the fear Michelle and I felt when Sasha was a few months old and she got meningitis.  And we raced to the hospital and they had to give her a spinal tap.  And we didn’t know what was wrong and we were terrified, never felt so scared or helpless in all of my life.  But we were fortunate enough to have good health insurance.

And I remember looking around that emergency room and thinking — what about the parents who aren’t that lucky?  What about the parents who get hit with a bill of $20,000 or $30,000 and they’ve got no idea how to pay for it?  What about those parents whose kids have a chronic illness like asthma and have to keep on going back to the emergency room because they don’t have a regular doctor, and the bills never stop coming?  Who is going to stand up for them?

And in that same speech he again said:

All told, since I signed the Affordable Care Act into law, we have seen the slowest growth in health care costs on record.  (Applause.)

[…]

Right?  Now, the reason we do that is, when uninsured people who can afford to get health insurance don’t, and then they get sick or they get hit by a car, and they show up at the emergency room, who do you think pays for that?

AUDIENCE:  We do.

THE PRESIDENT:  You do, in the form of higher premiumsBecause the hospitals, they’ve got to get their money back somehow.  So if they’re treating somebody who doesn’t have health insurance, they jack up premiums for everybody who does have health insurance.  It’s like a hidden tax of $1,000 per family every year who has got health insurance.  So we’re saying that’s not fair.  If you can afford to get health insurance, don’t dump the costs on us.  The law also requires employers with more than 50 employees to either provide health insurance for your workers or pay a penalty.

So let me ask you Obama’s question with this twist: when ObamaCare forces millions of patients into the emergency rooms he falsely sold his ObamaCare as preventing from happening, WHO PAYS FOR IT???  Emergency room care is THE most cost-inefficient system there IS because it is designed to be for EMERGENCIES.  And when you have a surgeon who is trained to deal with traumatic amputations dealing with a kid’s runny nose, you are bankrupting the system.  You are forcing hospitals to close down or get rid of needed staff to stay in business.

And the ONLY people who have fought to keep people from having no other freaking option for health care but to go to the ermgency rooms that massively add to the cost burden of providing health care were REPUBLICANS who pointed out Obama’s lies.

What has ObamaCare done to hospitals?

Obamacare Forcing Rural Hospitals to Close
Sunday, 15 Mar 2015 07:39 PM
By Greg Richter

The Affordable Care act is having a devastating impact on already strapped rural hospitals, playing a role in many of them shutting their doors, The Washington Post reports.

Forty-eight rural hospitals have closed since 2010 and 283 are in danger, the Post quotes the National Rural Health Association as saying. Most of the shuttered hospitals are in the South.

Other factors are contributing to the problem, but Obamacare is cited as the main reason. The law reduced Medicare payments and how much hospitals are paid for uninsured patients.

The law assumed states would increase Medicaid to cover the gap, but many states did not.

Another factor caused by Obamacare: insurance plans with deductibles so high that people opt to skip some care they previously received. Fewer visits mean less revenue.

As goes ObamaCare, so goes the nation.  That is because health care is one-sixth of the U.S. economy.  And we are so economically weakened that you can’t collapse that one-sixth and not have the other five-sixths go into the toilet bowl with it.

Obama lied.  He sold you the lie that having some piece of paper that said you have health insurance means you have health care even though his vile system has forced doctors out of the networks, forced them to leave medicine altogether, forced hospitals to close down, forced hospitals to fire key medical staff to stay open.  He lied like a demon over and over and over again to sell you what he wanted to impose on you and damn the consequences of his lies.  But we live in the last days before the coming of the beast, and these days are marked by deception and an outright hatred of and contempt for the truth.  And so being right is actually a grave political liability these days.

Our economy is a sham.  Our undemployment rate is an outright lie.  Our unemployment rate is going down ONLY because of the dishonest way with which it is measured.  It does NOT count people who are not working; it ONLY counts people who are actively seeking jobs and using state and federal agencies and benefits.  Which is why we have the following state of affairs:

CHRIS WALLACE, FOX NEWS SUNDAY: We could continue this conversation and I’m sure we will, but let’s turn to the economy and some really disappointing numbers on the economy this week. Here they are. Only 126,000 jobs were added in March. That’s the weakest hiring in 15 months. Labor force participation dropped to 62.7 percent, matching the lowest since 1978. And the Federal Reserve Bank in Atlanta estimates first quarter growth at zero, zero percent, flat. George, what’s going on here?

GEORGE WILL, SYNDICATED COLUMNIST: Well, for the second year in a row they’ve blamed poor quarterly growth on insufficient global warming, that is on winter, on an unusually cold winter. Let your mind go back to November last year. There was job creation of 321,000 jobs and the administration said this is a miraculous achievement and a harbinger of things to come. It wasn’t a harbinger and it wasn’t miraculous. During the Reagan recovery there were 23 months of job creation over 300,000. Reagan had a month of job creation of 1 million and this was at a time when there were 75 million fewer Americans. Now, never mind zero growth. We are now being told really that two percent growth may be the new normal. If so, that’s a disaster because every day, today, yesterday, tomorrow, every day between now and 2030, 10,000 more baby boomers become eligible for Social Security and Medicare. If we have two percent growth, the crisis of the welfare state, the crisis of the private sector being able to throw off the revenues, to pay the bills for the promises we’ve made to ourselves becomes impossible.

WALLACE: Just tell again that the labor force participation stat that you have, if it were what it was at the beginning of the Obama administration.

WILL: If the workforce participation rate today were as high as it was on the day Barack Obama was inaugurated, the unemployment rate in this country would be 9.7 percent, we wouldn’t be complaining about the bad recovery because we wouldn’t call it a recovery

The labor participation rate measures the percentage of working-age Americans with jobs.  And I have documented year after year the rapist Obama has been to actual JOB CREATION.

But again, those are simply facts.  And facts are the most useless things in modern America.  Because we have become a bad, toxic, wicked people who prefer lies to the truth and who will not accept the truth.

We don’t have anywhere NEAR enough Americans working to support the massive and increasing-in-size tsunami of people who don’t have jobs and frankly don’t particularly care that much that they don’t have jobs because they’re parasites who demand and who have been trained by Democrats to demand that OTHER people support them even as they have been trained to blame and hate the very people who are supporting them.

Our economy is a shell game.  We face debts that can’t even be compared to a mountain anymore, they are so massive and so high and steep and so staggering and so dangerous.

We hear our debt is $18 trillion now.  Notwithstanding that Barack Obama was a truly demon-possessed hypocrite and slandering liar when he viciously attacked George Bush when it was nine trillion –

“The problem is, is that the way Bush has done it over the last eight years is to take out a credit card from the Bank of China in the name of our children, driving up our national debt from $5 trillion for the first 42 presidents – #43 added $4 trillion by his lonesome, so that we now have over $9 trillion of debt that we are going to have to pay back — $30,000 for every man, woman and child. That’s irresponsible. It’s unpatriotic.” — Barack Obama, 3 July 2008

– our actual debt is so far beyond $18 trillion it’s not even FUNNY.  Try this figure for size: $127 trillion (which is just unfunded liabilities and which doesn’t even bother to COUNT the $18 trillion):

The federal unfunded liabilities are catastrophic for future taxpayers and economic growth. At usdebtclock.org, federal unfunded liabilities are estimated at near $127 trillion, which is roughly $1.1 million per taxpayer and nearly double 2012’s total world output.

I submit that the actual figure is higher than that, northward of $222 trillion.  We are a broken nation with a broken financial system covering up its nakedness with flimsy paper that will blow away on a cold day when the wind is howling and leave us with nothing but poverty and devastation and rioting such as the world has never seen.

Even now, our interest payments on our massive debt are guaranteed to skyrocket and leave us crippled and unable to pay for anywhere NEAR the commitments we have made.  But it gets worse.

One day, soon, the United States’ status as the U.S. dollar being the Reserve Currency of planet earth will be terminated.  And we will be devastated overnight.  We can recklessly, wickedly borrow more and more and more money to finance the Democrat Party’s and Barack Obama’s socialism for only so long.  We can’t pay for it.  It’s insane that we keep doing it.  One day we will go to bed with all the talking heads saying everything will be okay and we will wake up to complete ruin.  As we speak, all the top economic nations below us – and above us, given the fact that China has under Obama topped the United States as the #1 economy are agitating to topple that status won as a result of World War II being yanked away.  One day, soon, it WILL be.

We are a morally collapsed nation that will soon economically collapse and we will then see the true wickedness and greed and bitterness and hate come out that I see already present in this nation that was once based on “In God We Trust” as “one nation, under God” but now exists to glorify and worship homosexual sodomy and the murder by abortion of more than sixty million of our own most innocent Americans in the Holocaust-dwarfing abortion mills of the Democrat Party.

56,125,262 human beings on all sides of the war, both civilian and military, perished in the bloodiest war in the history of the human race, World War II.  And under Obama and 100 percent because of the Democrat Party Holocaust machine America has murdered more of its own most innocent human beings than that godawful, vicious, vile war could.  And God is going to hold us to account for it.  You read Psalm 139 and you tell me I’m wrong.  Because your only logical option if you want to defend abortion is to stick your middle finger up at God and declare that you WELCOME His wrath on your head and on the heads of your children.  And it’s coming.

You read Romans chapter one and you tell me that the Barack Obama betrayal on marriage and the Democrat Party’s depraved homosexual SODOMY of the marriage that was instituted by GOD isn’t the trigger for God’s wrath against a sick society.  If you bother to READ God’s Word, your only logical option if you want to defend the perversion of homosexuality is to stick your middle finger up at God and declare that you WELCOME His wrath on your head and on the heads of your children.

But that collapse isn’t merely going to be economic.  We’re seeing that now, too.

Barack Obama has utterly failed to keep America safe from the threat of Islamic terrorism, even going to the insane extent of denying such a threat even EXISTS.

Now, as Obama’s spiritual mentor and former pastor for 23 years who infamously screamed “No, no, NO!  NOT God bless America!  God DAMN America!” once put it: “our chickens have come home to roost.”

We are FAR more vulnerable to jihadist terrorism than we have ever been thanks to Obama’s lies, thanks to his “JV Team” analogy that dismissed a clearly metastasizing threat to America, thanks to his “Osama bin Laden in dead and al Qaeda is on the run” lies.

I turn to yet another dismaying recent development: the shocking, catastrophic defeat that the United States is now suffering in Iraq and will almost certainly suffer soon in Afghanistan.  Only a couple of years ago, our nation’s leaders were claiming credit for “decimating” al Qaeda and saying that the terrorists were on the run.  Since 2010 there has been a 58% increase in the number of terror groups – and the number of jihadists have DOUBLED.  Al Qaeda is larger, stronger and controls more territory than at any time in history.  And an organization that is universally recognized as being even WORSE than al Qaeda – the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria or ISIS – has now created the caliphate in the heart of the Middle East that Osama bin Laden dreamed of.  Back in 2005, US intelligence captured a letter from the top al Qaeda leadership that put the aims of al Qaeda into four stages: 1) Drive America out of Iraq; 2) create a caliphate; 3) use that as a base to attack the United States and other countries; 4) attack Israel.  And we have watched them succeed beyond all of the worst possible scenarios.  They’re coming right back at us and we’re now far too weary, weak and divided to fight them.

The FBI director’s terrifying warning that yeah, they ARE coming after us in terrifying numbers:

There may be as many as thousands of people inside the United States consuming online “poison” from ISIS alone, and, “I know there are other Elton Simpsons out there,” FBI director James Comey warned today, referring to one of the men who opened fire outside of an event in Texas earlier this week celebrating artists’ portrayals of the Prophet Mohammad.

“We have a very hard task” in trying to identify and stop anyone inspired to launch an attack inside the U.S. homeland, Comey told ABC News’ Pierre Thomas and a small group of reporters.

Such efforts have become particularly challenging because ISIS has reconfigured and redefined terrorist recruitment, according to Comey. In fact, while the FBI is trying to find that so-called needle in a haystack, “increasingly the needles are invisible to us,” he said.

As recently as two years ago, someone in the United States who wanted to consume “radical poisonous propaganda” would have to seek that out on the Internet, most likely on a jihadist web forum. So the FBI focused its investigative efforts on those jihadist web forums, Comey said.

But “that has changed dramatically, especially with [ISIS] and their use of social media,” where on phones in people’s pockets they ask Americans and other foreigners “to travel to the so-called caliphate to fight” but simultaneously say, “If you can’t travel, kill where you are,” according to Comey.

“It’s almost as if there is a devil sitting on the shoulder saying, ‘Kill, kill, kill, kill’ all day long,” he said. “[They are] recruiting and tasking at the same time. … In a way, the old paradigm between ‘inspired’ and ‘directed’ breaks down here.”

And with that distinction “no longer relevant,” is it all the more challenging for the FBI to determine whether someone seeking jihadist propaganda online or even promoting themselves is “a talker or a doer,” as Comey described it.

And their talk is “fundamentally transforming” into ACTION to kill Americans wherever they are.

The sober and despicable fact that our intelligent resources are no so inadequate that a jihadist preparing to launch a violent attack against America can now openly and brazenly boast online about his mission for Allah without our now inadequate system even KNOWING about it:

The official, who would speak about the continuing investigation only on condition of anonymity, said that although Mr. Simpson had long been under F.B.I. scrutiny, he had not appeared to be preparing for violence. “There are so many like him that you have to prioritize your investigations,” the official said.

The Secretary of Homeland Security’s sober warning:

Sunday on ABC’s “This Week,” Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson said America is dealing with a “new environment” in which a lone-wolf terrorist could “strike at any moment.”

Johnson said, “We’re very definitely in a new environment, because of ISIS’s effective use of social media, the Internet, which has the ability to reach into the homeland and possibly inspire others.”

“Because of the use of the Internet, we could have little or no notice in advance of an independent actor attempting to strike.”

He added, “We’re very definitely in a new phase in the global terrorist threat where the so-called lone wolf could strike at any moment. Which is why the FBI, in my judgment, has done an excellent job of getting to those who are attempting to travel to Syria, who commit overt facts in furtherance of material support to terrorism. It is a new environment, but we are not discouraging  Americans from doing the things that they do on a daily basis in our society.”

This is a pretense and a lie.  We’ve had the Internet for quite a long time now, ever since another Democrat liar named Al Gore claimed he’d invented the damn thing about 20 years ago.  This isn’t because of the internet any more than our godawful economy is the result of “inadequate global warming” a.k.a. winter; this is the result of an epic fail of a president who has placed FAR more resources into climate change than he has on the actual war while he literally claimed he’d WON the war that he claimed didn’t even exist in the first place.

The Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security points out that under Obama terrorism has grown viral:

Top U.S. officials and lawmakers on Sunday intensified concerns about the growing threat of jihad-inspired terror attacks against the United States, after last week’s attempt in Texas and the dire FBI warning that followed.

“I think there’s been an uptick in the stream of threats out there,” Texas GOP Rep. Mike McCaul, chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, told “Fox News Sunday.” “We’re seeing these directives on almost a daily basis. It’s very concerning. Terrorism has gone viral.”

Mind you, we’re not even prepared to handle actual viruses anymore as this administration continues to fail its most basic duty to its people.

Do you know what I’ve noticed?  I’ve watched snippets of the Islamic State’s recruiting videos as they’ve been presented on the news.  And I’ve noticed a striking similarity to the violent video games that dominate our culture.  The graininess, the colors, watching these Islamic State videos is like playing a video game.  They’re beaming it into the heads of American kids who otherwise stand for nothing: you can actually LIVE your video game fantasies!  Just picture yourself standing on a tank firing the machine gun, oh yes, guns a’blazing in a hail of glory.  And they don’t give a flying damn if you kill for Allah or to live out your sick, twisted and violent video game fantasies.  They just want blood.

I’ve written about that: liberalism and secular humanism has produced a toxic, nihilistic generation that is characterized by cynicism, pessimism and a profound dislike of reality.  I wrote a nice two-part article that after you read you won’t be one bit surprised at the above popularity of American jihadism.

I’ve pointed out in past articles that our “strategy” for Islam is based on a lie that itself is based on a terrifying reality that if you follow the Qur’an and the actual teachings and life of Muhammad, YOU WILL BE A MURDEROUS TERRORIST just like Muhammad was.  I’ve also pointed out that there’s another terrifying reason why Democrats have been so determined to shelter these violent jihadists: that Democrats and Muslim terrorists alike ultimately want the same thing: a Government-as-God that has all power to decide/dictate who wins and who loses, who pays and who gets the wealth redistributed to them, who lives and who dies, who is good and who is evil.  And Democrats are actually the kind of colossal moral idiots who foolishly believe they can reason with these people, just as Obama is trying to foolishly and wickedly do with Iran over its nuclear program.

And all Obama has been able to do is blame Christianity.  After all, didn’t Christians do something like a thousand years ago?  So why mention what Muslims did last night?  Obama is a true moral coward who is only capable of pumping out moral equivocation to actually JUSTIFY jihadism for the wrongs we did to them notwithstanding the whole thousand-years-ago thing.

I have pointed out that the secular humanism of Barack Hussein Obama and the Democrat Party ultimately stand for NOTHING.  They have no transcendent moral values and no transcendent beliefs worth fighting and dying for.  They will negotiate and compromise and surrender because that’s all they have and all they ever WILL have.

And we’re seeing right now that the only people liberals WILL fight are their fellow Americans as they strive to incite every possible issue into a new reason to riot, to undermine America, to tear this nation apart on the basis of race, of gender, of sexual preference, of income class, of you name it, in their search for a political coalition that they can exploit toward more political power.

We’re going to collapse because God isn’t God if we DON’T collapse.  We’re going to collapse because our vote for Obama, our vote for homosexual marriage, our vote for the murder of sixty million innocent babies, was a VOTE to collapse.  We’re going to collapse because America isn’t IN Bible prophecy and either won’t exist or won’t be relevant in any way, shape or form in the last days.  Because unlike any other nation, we once uniquely made a covenant with God and we broke that covenant and God is going to hold us to account for our betrayal.  We’re going to collapse because the beast is coming.

But mark my words: we are GOING to collapse.  And it will be entirely from within because it was from within and the depravity within our own hearts that we destroyed ourselves.

 

Help, Did I Just Lose My Eternal Security Again???

May 4, 2015

Many Christians aren’t sure whether a saved person can be lost again or whether once saved they are eternally saved.  If a believer is unsettled on this crucial truth, doubts/fears/insecurity are bound to thrive. In place of truth, the devil continually presents wrong teachings, doubts and false reasonings. In the Garden of Eden he pulled those strings suggesting, “Did God really say, ‘You must not eat from any tree in the garden’?” (Gen. 3:1).  And the distortion of the clear Word of God has been with us ever since.  The Holy Spirit calls for simple faith in the Word of God. Joy comes by accepting what God has told us plainly in His Word, rather than by allowing our confidence to be confused/stolen by a verse that is difficult to understand.  The first principle of interpreting Scripture is this: If there are passages that might seem to suggest Christian might lose their salvation, there are many others which with crystal clarity clearly state that we have genuine eternal security in Christ.  A second principle which follows is the always seek to read the Word of God from God’s perspective rather than bringing the fallen wisdom and flawed philosophies and reasonings of sinful man.  So when it comes to salvation, people who are reading the Bible from man’s point of view are coming to God’s Word with the view that salvation is up to us – when the Bible says salvation is up to God.  The Bible says that God predestined us, foreknew us, called us, chose us, elected us, appointed us.  Don’t dismiss the sovereign role of God in salvation.

The question is do we hold on to our salvation?  Or is it eternally held?  If our salvation depends on your “holding on,” then we should MORE than doubt our eternal security.  Because our salvation is up to us.  Rather, God’s Word says, “Being confident of this very thing, that He who has begun a good work in you will complete it until the day of Jesus Christ” (Phil. 1:6).  It asks, “Are you so foolish? Having begun in the Spirit, are you now being made perfect by the flesh?” (Gal. 3:3).  We are told that “Salvation comes from the LORD” (Jonah 2:9) rather than from us or anything we can do.  The New Living Translation for that verse is even clearer on this point: “For my salvation comes from the LORD alone.”  Ephesians 2:8-9 argues, “For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.”  And we’re assured, “if we are faithless, He remains faithful, for he cannot disown himself” (2 Tim 2:13).  If you want to hold on to your salvation and make it all about you and what you can do for yourself, even by making it all about YOUR faith rather than GOD’S work, well, you go ahead.  As for me, I’m counting upon God to hold it for me.

Many want to claim that if we can choose to be saved, well, surely we can choose to be UNsaved.  But without bothering to venture into the debate between Armenians and Calvinists (I am actually a Molinist who upholds both human free will AND God’s absolute sovereignty), let me show how that is a false dilemma.  When a Christian freely confesses Jesus as Christ and Lord, that Christian freely makes Christ the Master of his/her life.  The last sentence in 1 Corinthians 6:19 reads, “You are not your own.”  And the first sentence of 1 Corinthians 6:20 says, “You were bought at a price.”  If you confessed Christ as Lord, you freely chose with your own free will to make yourself what the Bible calls a “bondslave” of Jesus Christ and of God (e.g. Eph 4:12; 1 Pet 2:16).  If you’ve made yourself God’s slave, you can’t decide you get to go free; because that decision is not UP to you, but to your Master.  And Jesus says He doesn’t let anyone out of His hand (John 10:28).  You used your free will to make yourself His, to give your soul to Him.  Which is to say you  ALREADY exercised your free will.  And it is not the kind of decision you can unmake/undecided any more than you can decide to commit suicide by jumping out of a high flying airplane without a parachute and then “undecided” to re-exercise your free will as you are hurtling toward the ground.  In that example, you exercised your free will in a one-time decision to choose death; if you confess Christ as Lord, you used your free will in a one-time decision to choose life.  And you can’t take that choice back.

If we can lose our salvation, there would have to be THREE classes of people: the saved, the unsaved, and the ones who used to be saved but lost their salvation.  There would be the (saved) sheep, the (unsaved) goats, and the sheep-goats.  And those who were elected/appointed/predestined/called to be SAVED by God (e.g. Acts 13:48; Rom 8:27-30; 9:11,16,23-24; Eph 1:4-6, etc.), were thus  subsequently RE-elected/RE-appointed/RE-destined/RE-called to be UNsaved by the God of salvation.  I don’t see that in God’s Word.  I don’t see God appointing someone to eternal life and then re-appointing that same individual to eternal death after He had appointed him/her to eternal life.  Colossians 1:13 says “For He has rescued us from the dominion of darkness and brought us into the kingdom of the Son He loves”; it does NOT say that God does the opposite and transfers believers back into the dominion of darkness.  See John 5:24 (“whoever hears My word and believes Him who sent Me has eternal life and will not be judged but has crossed over from death to life”); see 1 John 3:14 (“We know that we have passed from death to life”).  Show me ONE passage that clearly states that process EVER works the other direction.

Jesus provides a powerful assurance to His sheep: “My sheep listen to my voice; I know them, and they follow Me.  I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; no one will snatch them out of My hand.  My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all; no one can snatch them out of My Father’s hand.  I and the Father are one” (John 10:27-30).  First of all, just how can life be “eternal” if it can be changed to eternal death?   And second, if salvation comes from the LORD alone, and if no one is able to snatch us out of God’s hand, well, what’s the question again about losing your eternal salvation?

Those verses beg one question: how can you have “eternal life” and lose it?  Doesn’t “eternal life” by its very definition mean that you can never die and that you will live forever?  If I can have eternal life today and lose it tomorrow, I don’t have eternal life today and frankly can’t ever have it because “eternal life” becomes like a “square circle” and doesn’t even make any sense.  It is non sequitur to “lose your eternal life.”  If you have “eternal life” it can NEVER be lost or it wouldn’t be very “eternal.”

As sheep, our security is the responsibility of our Shepherd (1 Pet. 2:25) as “the Overseer/Guardian of our souls.”  The Bible repeatedly points out the fact that it is the NATURE of sheep to wander/stray (Isaiah 53:6).  And what does God DO when His sheep wander?  See Matt 18:12.  We “are shielded by God’s power until the coming of the salvation that is ready to be revealed” (1 Peter 1:5).

Are there passages that give us reason to believe that not everyone who says they’re Christians are actually Christians?  Yes.  Jesus taught the parable of the sower (Matt 13:3-8): there was seed that was sowed on the road, and the birds came and ate it up; there was seed that fell on rocky places and seemed to spring up, but having no true root, withered; there was seed sown among the thorns and again the lack of true roots choked out the shoots; and then there was the seed that was sown on good soil that sprang up with real roots and yielded a crop.  But what Jesus does NOT say is that the seed that is sown on good soil with real roots will perish!  Hebrews 6:4-7 is a favorite passage that people who teach “eternal INsecurity” rely upon.  But they are WRONG for TWO reasons: 1) the passage doesn’t merely suggest – on their own reading – that you can lose your salvation; because on that view it flat out states that “it is IMPOSSIBLE to renew them again to repentance” (vs 6).  So if you think you’ve lost your salvation, don’t bother trying to get it back again.  And 2) while there is suggestive language used “enlightened,” “tasted,” “partakers,” the word “saved” or “salvation” is NOT used of them and in fact is CONTRASTED to them in verse 9 (“But, beloved, we are convinced of better things concerning you, and things that accompany salvation”).  I submit to you that this passage is describing an individual who has “tasted” but not “eaten” the Bread of Life.  They have been around it; they have been surrounded by it – but they simply never made that true decision for Jesus.  Franklin Graham was surrounded/immersed with Jesus; he saw all kind of miracles.  But he wasn’t saved until he made his own decision at age 22.  And many others so surrounded by faith never make that decision of faith for themselves.  And so they end up having “fallen away” the same way that the seed in Jesus’ parable lacking the true root ends up dying.

[For the record, many exegetes believe Hebrews 6 refers to Jews who had professed faith in Christ, but when persecution against Christians came, forsook Christ and returned to their Judaism and began offering animal sacrifices again – tantamount to profaning the blood of Christ (Heb 10:2-3)].

I think 1 John 2:19 sums it up best: “They went out from us, but they did not really belong to us. For if they had belonged to us, they would have remained with us; but their going showed that none of them belonged to us.”  There are pseudo-Christians to whom Jesus will say, “I never knew you” (Matt. 7:21-23).  The point here is that they were NEVER known; that is, they were never saved even if they appeared from the human perspective to be saved.  Jesus is most certainly NOT saying, “I used to know you, but you lost your salvation and now I don’t know you any more.”  He’s saying He NEVER knew them at all.  By contrast, Jesus says “I know My sheep” (John 10:27).  And Jesus says that His sheep will “never perish but have eternal life.” (John 10:28).  How can eternal life be eternal if it can be lost, particularly when Jesus said they will never perish?  If they will never perish, then they obviously can’t lose their salvation.  Also, Paul says that nothing will be able to separate us from the love of God (Rom. 8:38-39).  Read the Bible from The Author’s Point of view; you can’t consider the divine perspective and doubt that salvation is eternal and secure.

In terms of eternal life truly being eternal and salvation truly being of the LORD, I love this passage which provides a powerful guarantee that God will keep them despite their tendency to sin/stray: “But Zion said, ‘The LORD has forsaken me, the Lord has forgotten me.’  Can a mother forget the baby at her breast and have no compassion on the child she has borne? Though she may forget, I will not forget you!  See, I have engraved you on the palms of my hands; your walls are ever before me” (Isaiah 49:14-16).  And Christians have a pair of nail-scarred hands – with those nails being driven into His hands WHILE WE WERE YET SINNERS (Rom 5:8) AND ENEMIES OF GOD (Rom 5:10) – that guarantee us that our salvation is secure as long as Jesus bears the nail-engraved scars on His hands (Luke 24:39; John 20:27; Rev 5:6).  We are saved as long as Christ is alive, because Heb 7:25 states: “Therefore He is able to save completely those who come to God through Him, because He always lives to intercede for them.”

Are there passages that suggest to us that we if we are living just like the world, that we might still BE of the world?  Yes.  People want to say if you deny Christ, you can lose your salvation, for example.  But, for all of Peter’s denials of Jesus, Jesus didn’t say to Him, “You lost your salvation.”  Jesus restored Peter.  And as to my relationship, having been born again and indwelt by the Holy Spirit (Eph. 1:13), I am a child of God (Rom 8:16), I have eternal life (John 3:16), I am “in Christ” and a member of His body (1 Cor. 12:13). I am no longer in Adam, but a new creature in Christ (2 Cor. 5:17).  And so are YOU if you EVER truly knew Jesus.

Some of the passages that emphasize eternal security for believers:

  • John 6:39: “And this is the will of Him who sent me, that I shall lose none of all those He has given Me, but raise them up at the last day.”
  • John 6:40: “For My Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day.”
  • 2 Tim. 1:12: “…I know whom I have believed, and am convinced that He is able to guard what I have entrusted to him until that day.”
  • Rom 5:10: “For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to Him through the death of His Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through His life!”
  • Jer 21:23: …“I have loved you with an everlasting love…”
  • Rom 8:30: “And those he predestined, he also called; those he called, he also justified; those he justified, he also glorified.”
  • 2 Tim 1:9: “He has saved us and called us to a holy life–not because of anything we have done but because of His own purpose and grace. This grace was given us in Christ Jesus before the beginning of time.”
  • John 1:12-13: “Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God — children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.”
  • 1 John 3:2: “Dear friends, now we are children of God, and what we will be has not yet been made known. But we know that when Christ appears, we shall be like Him, for we shall see Him as He is.”
  • John 3:16: “For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have eternal life.”
  • 2 Cor 5:17: “Therefore, if anyone is in Christ, the new creation has come: The old has gone, the new is here!”
  • Colossians 3:3: “For you died, and your life is now hidden with Christ in God.”

If you are what is commonly described as “a backslidden Christian,” there is a high price that you will pay in this life until you are truly right with God.  You will suffer hardships in this life that you may not have suffered and you will miss out on rewards in heaven that you could have received while you were backslidden.  But you will NOT pay the ultimate penalty of hell.  Because when you confessed Christ as your Savior and Lord, He took ALL of your sins upon Himself once for all and for all time.  Let me try to explain in my own story.

My testimony: I became a Christian at age 15 on September 25, 1979 at Forest Home, when I went with my high school youth group.  I’d grown up in church, but had never truly experienced God (He was an old man with a big white beard in a bathrobe who saw everything I did – and disapproved) or Jesus (He was a wimpy guy carrying around a wimpy sheep) as something I wanted in my life.  At Forest Home, I first encountered Jesus as someone powerful who I truly wanted to follow.  I prayed to open my heart to Christ that day.

I came home changed.  My two best friends ultimately became Christians because of my transformation.  One is a Wycliffe missionary and the other became a pastor.

I entered the military.  But I ended up like too many young men end up today, wounded and  injured.  And the experience broke me both in body and in faith.  I simply could not understand why God had allowed me to get hurt.  And when I cried out to God, He did not seem to come to my rescue.  I came out of the Army bitter and questioning.  What good is God?  Is He even real?  And I lived for a number of years like a pagan.

Because I truly had been saved, I knew deep down that I wasn’t living rightly.  The backslidden Christian is the most miserable creature on earth, because on the one hand he/she doesn’t have the power to live a joyful and triumphant life pleasing to God and on the other hand as one who has the Holy Spirit within he/she can’t take true pleasure in sin the way unbelievers can.  You can sin, but there is a nagging sense that you are doing wrong.  In my heart, I knew where I needed to be.  I claimed to doubt God, but whenever I was in a tight spot, I prayed.  More than once, I had the realization that God would not let me die like this.

That said, I wasn’t going to church and I sure wasn’t living as a Christian.

I knew already in my heart that if there was no God, then there was no morality.  As Dostoevsky put it, “If God does not exist, everything is permitted.” And that if Mother Teresa and Adolf Hitler had the same end, morality is for fools and everyone should be as wicked and selfish as the slogan “Eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die” entails.  But I knew deep-down that wasn’t true.  I knew right from wrong because the Holy Spirit lived in me.  And it was because the Holy Spirit lived inside me that the entire time I was rebelling against God, I was miserable.  I couldn’t enjoy the immorality that the world could wallow in.  Deep down I always knew that I was on the wrong path.  At the same time, I couldn’t enjoy my experience with God because I constantly knew that I was not pleasing Him.  I was stuck in the middle of the road in a deep rut.

It took years for me to reach the end of myself and finally come to the point where my resistance to God had softened such that I could miss the relationship that I had once truly had.  But I had to know for sure that my faith was in something/Someone REAL.  I began to search.

I first considered evolution, because if evolution was true there was no need for God and frankly no point IN God.  I read Richard Dawkins’ Blind Watchmaker and was actually more convinced of the reality of God when I put it down than I’d been when I’d started reading it.  I was appalled by the foolish reasoning and by the trivial dismissals of arguments that deserved profound exploration.  I read another book called Darwin’s Enigma by Luther Sunderland and was amazed at how bad the arguments for evolution truly are even according to many leading evolutionists.  But it took my examination of the historicity of the Resurrection and the marvel of prophecy to make me realize: it really happened.  On January 30, 1997, I prayed a prayer of re-dedication.  And I had an experience of a Presence just barely within my peripheral vision.  The passage, “And you will hear a voice behind you…” immediately flooded into my mind, and I wept like a baby as I realized that I had turned my back on Jesus, but that He had NEVER turned His back on me.

Did I lose my salvation and find it again?  No.  Like Peter, I had been sifted like wheat.  And I had folded like a cheap suit.  But like Jesus said, I was in His hand, and He wasn’t going to let go of me.  No matter how lost I felt, Jesus knew exactly where I was every second of every day.  And He never gave up on me, never quit working in my mind and in my heart.  Because as God says in His Word, “I will never leave you or forsake you” (Heb 13:5).  And He won’t.  That is a promise from God.

Under The Proto-Antichrist Obama And Democrat Party, We Are Clearly In The Last Days. Jesus Told Us, ‘Race Will Rise Against Race’

April 30, 2015

[Update, May 4, 2015: A just-released poll shows that 96% of Americans expect more racial violence coming this summer.  We are in the last days, and what Jesus and the prophets warned us about is so obvious, it’s like reading the weather just before a bad storm.  But what few understand is that this is a prophetic warning sign from God foretold two millennia ago and if you have eyes to see and ears to hear you had better REPENT].

Don’t think we’re not seeing the same thing in Baltimore that we’ve already seen dozens of times in the first truly racist presidency of modern times.

Jesus told us Himself:

 “Now as He (Jesus-Yeshua) sat on the Mount of Olives (in Israel), the disciples came to Him privately, saying, ‘Tell us, when will these things be?  And ‘What will be the sign of Your coming, and of the end of the Age?’”  (Matthew 24:3)

“Jesus answered and said to them . . .

‘And you will hear of wars and rumors of wars.

See that you are not troubled;

for all these things must come to pass,

   but the end is not yet. 

   (Still before the Rapture and the ‘Apocalypse’)

For nation (ethnic group) will rise against nation (ethnic group),

and kingdom (country) against kingdom (country) . . .

All these are the beginning of sorrows

(Actual translation is “birth pangs”… they will grow closer and closer)

(Matthew 24:6-7)

(Note:  The original Greek word translated “nation” was “ethnos,” from which we get our word “ethnic.”)

So, although the world has always had wars, ethnic violence and strife, earthquakes, false messiahs and prophets, famines, and deadly diseases, Jesus Christ (Yeshua Ha’Mashiach in Hebrew) warns us that as a sign that we are entering into the last days we will see each of these increase in frequency and size. Described as “birth pangs,” these “pains” will continue to grow worse and worse, coming closer and closer together, as signs we are preparing to enter the Apocalypse.

Look at the riots taking place right now in Baltimore:

001

002

003

004

005

006

007

008

009

Call me … oh, I don’t know: call me “not completely BLIND.”

Whitey aint rioting anywhere.  Conservatives aren’t rioting anywhere.  It’s always the other way around, every single time.

THE MOST conservative rallies were marked by their peacefulness and complete absence of violence.

Jesus basically said it all: “in the last days, race shall rise against race.”  And in the US of A, it is ALWAYS one race rising against the other rather than the other way around.

Here we are, under the “race-riot presidency” of our Cancer-in-Chief.  How many of these have we had in the metastatic presidency of Obama?  It seems like DOZENS.  And when there is one in Baltimore, there are copycat race riots in New York, etc.  It’s every BIT as bad now as it EVER was.  We don’t have a Watts riot or a Rodney King verdict riot; we’ve got a new one like every week under this failed presidency.  At the very least, you have to go back FIFTY YEARS to find as much racial unrest as what Obama and his law-thug Eric Holder have degenerated America into.

Obama swore he would be the president who would transcend the racial and political divide.  Oh yes, he did.

He “fundamentally transformed” truth into a wicked lie on BOTH counts.

What does Obama say about all the race riots under his regime and under the regime of his law thug Eric Holder?

Blame Republicans, that’s what he says.  Because Obama “transcended” by sinking to the deepest, darkest muck of the very bottom of the sewer.  I don’t know, maybe the next president will be as savagely right wing as Obama has been left wing and “transcend the starkly red-and-blue politics of the last 15 years and end the partisan and ideological wars” by putting all Democrats in death camps.  And we’re clearly heading toward the opposing party being crushed like that, because things tend to get worse in a completely broken system – and Obama has completely broken the system.  As all the riots document.  And every time Obama demonizes his opponents, he continues to prove what a liar he was from the very beginning when he promised to do the very opposite of what he is in fact doing.

Obama claims it’s a result of “decades of inequality.”

Fine.  But let’s look at the vile DEMOCRATS who have PRODUCED that inequality SINGLEHANDEDLY in the places where the riots are taking place:

The mayor is black. The council is almost two-thirds black. The school superintendent is black. The police chief is black, and a majority of his officers are black.

Race riots inevitably end in contention over what social woes led to the trigger point, with one overarching element: a white power structure ruling a black populace.

Baltimore left behind that vestige of segregation long ago, yet the city nonetheless has been perched on the edge of chaos for much of this week, as African American protesters took to the streets to express grievances over police abuse and urban neglect.

You can add to that the president is black, the Attorney General of the United States is black, the State Attorney for Baltimore (Marilyn Mosby) is black.  And so on.

And while the city council is “almost two-thirds black,” let me tell you what they ENTIRELY are: DEMOnic bureauCRAT.  EVERY SINGLE council member is a Democrat.

So WHO JUST WHO THE HELL IS ACTUALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THOSE DECADES OF INEQULITY???  Hey, you can take your pick; but every single person letting these poor, oppressed black people down to the point where they erupt have two things in common: they are black and they are Democrats.

It’s been almost FIFTY YEARS since a Republican has been elected as mayor in Baltimore.  So what do you say?  Well, it’s clearly still Republicans’ fault for what happened fifty years ago, I suppose.

Baltimore is a one-party town and HAS been a one-party town for decades.  And the party is Democrats.  THEY did this.  NOBODY else had ANYTHING to do with this misery or this miserable city.  And Barack Obama is a wicked liar without a scintilla of shame, honor, decency, integrity, honor, or any other virtue as he demonically lies to blame the one party that is absolutely NOT responsible for this travesty of failed governance and failed justice in Baltimore.

Shameless Democrat LIARS claim that the race crisis in Baltimore is the result of blacks being denied educations.  Okay, fine – AS LONG AS WE STIPULATE THAT IT IS DEMOCRATS WHO ARE STEALING BLACK CHILDREN’S EDUCATIONS FROM THEM.  The FACT is that Baltimore has the SECOND HIGHEST per capital education spending in the nation – and what has happened?  Democrats, corrupt, dishonest thieves and looters all, have STOLEN the money for black kids’ education and sent it into their union- and political-slush funds.  The Democrat Party is a corrupt exploitation machine, pure and simple.

But let’s shift our focus to this decent, innocent young man whose horrible treatment by the police spawned all of this legitimate racial outrage.  Ignoring, that is, that the police themselves, the police chief, the mayor, the lead attorney, etc., etc., are all black.

We’re finding out this latest race riot is just as based on lies and racial agitation and slander and demagoguery as pretty much all the rest of them.  For instance:

So gosh, I run from the police and force them to chase me down and tackle me and subdue me.  Then I’m in the van banging myself against the walls trying to deliberately injure myself.  And holy Moses, I end up with a broken neck.

I cannot for my life understand how someone can claim on the one hand that Gray could not have caused his own injuries but on the other hand his injuries could be caused by a rough ride in the van.  At the very least, how can you claim that he wasn’t trying to cause his own injuries at an inopportune moment when the van came to a stop and his attempt to injure himself was augmented by the stop?

Massively inappropriate response to above: Hey, let’s burn down our city.

This isn’t about “race.”  The cops were mostly black.  To the extent this is about “decades of inequality,” let’s just be clear that if you hate “decades of inequality,” you damn well better be electing every Republican you see.  But what this is mostly about is a career criminal turd who happened to be black.

But the spirit of the black community is the spirit of racial hate and bitterness.  They have been indoctrinated by their masters that they are victims, that they cannot possibly succeed, that the system has been stacked against them (you know, by black Democrats who have been demagoguing them for decades to maintain their own power and influence).

Their black mayor literally gave them carte blanche to riot, saying:

“I worked with the police and instructed them to do everything that they could to make sure that the protesters were able to exercise their right to free speech,” Mayor Rawlings-Blake told reporters. “It’s a very delicate balancing act because while we try to make sure that they were protected from the cars and the other things that were going on, we also gave those who wished to destroy space to do that as well.”

“We gave them space to destroy.”  That sounds just like Obama’s Islamic State policy.  I’m sure it will work out just great.  Oh, wait, they DESTROYED.

She also said – according to a high-level police official – “Let them loot.  It’s only property.”  When I think we all know pretty damn well that if it was HER property, she would have ordered every cop in the city to protect HER “loot” from looters.

Yeah, yeah, yeah.  I heart looters, too.  My favorite looters are the ones who burn everything they can’t steal.  I’m sure Mayor Rawlings-Blake feels the exact same way.

You can’t blame Mayor Rawlings-Blake: she’s only following the Obama Justice Department’s “Never bring a lawsuit against a black” racial bigotry to her city.  I mean, to paraphrase Rawlings-Blake, “Let them loot.  It’s only justice.”

A lot of businesses are out of business because they were burned to the ground because of this disgrace of a mayor who ordered the police to stand down while rioters ran amuck and “fundamentally transformed” law and order into a joke.

And so they’re doing exactly what Jesus said they would do: race is rising against race in the last days as our proto-Antichrist prepares America to accept the real-deal Antichrist.

The Republican governor of Maryland – and by this I mean the ONLY Republican who has anything to do with Baltimore period – did everything he could do: he ensured that the National Guard would be ready the moment the (black Democrat) mayor who made the above incredibly foolish and wicked statement requested the Guard.  But the aforementioned foolish and wicked mayor waited.  And waited.  While her city burned.

We live in the last days.  And the last days are marked by depravity and deception.

An astounding 72% of black births are out-of-wedlock.  And the result is out-of-control ignorance, out-of-control dysfunction, out-of-control poverty and therefore out-of-control chaos and mayhem.

It is exactly as I have pointed out many times in my articles: liberals have ABORTED fatherhood.  At the moment of conception, THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A FATHER ACCORDING TO LIBERALISM.  A man did NOT father a child; THERE IS NO CHILD; THERE IS ONLY A LUMP OF GOOP.  There IS no such thing as a “father” or “fatherhood.”  There is only the mother.

And she therefore ALONE has the right to choose to murder her own baby.  And you watch the wicked Democrat system come holy-hell-unglued to any man who would claim otherwise.

And fathers have responded, “Okay.  Whatever.  I’m out of here.”

And that is precisely what they SHOULD do.  Unless every single Democrat is on his or her way to burning in hell for their role in the murder of sixty million innocent human beings and literally being ten times more murderous and wicked than the damn NAZIS.

The same Democrats who destroyed fatherhood assert, “Hey, you didn’t father ANYTHING, mister.  But we’re going to hold you responsible anyway.”  But I think history kind of proves how well that’s worked out.

How do you define “mass confusion”?  Father’s Day in any black community.  It’s an awful joke that has the sad virtue of being completely true.

Democrats want to cite – INcite is a better word – all kinds of socialist rationales to “explain” why the members of their race-based political coalition are so utterly dysfunction: which somehow always boils down to the explanation that it’s because somebody else isn’t having enough of their wealth seized so that someone else can have a bigger welfare check.  But THE biggest indicator of poverty is the absence of a father and the absence of a marriage – the two institutions that Democrats have utterly destroyed with their various perversions.

You’ve gotta love the protestors who wave signs that say, “Black Lives Matter.”  And judging by the actual FACTS, the only people who don’t believe that black lives matter are BLACK PEOPLE.  Given the rage of the black community in Baltimore, and her actions before and after this event under her mayorship, does Mayor Rawlings-Blake think black lives matter?  Who ELSE do you blame for this???  Does State Attorney for Baltimore Marilyn Mosby – who leads the justice system for the city – think black lives matter???  Whose damn fault is it if the justice system disregards black lives???  You go up the line to our latest black Attorney General or up the line further to our black president, and WHOSE FAULT IS IT THAT BLACK LIVES DON’T MATTER???

If you actually CARE about black people, about the worst thing you can do is put a black liberal in charge: because the statistics are blatantly obvious: NINETY PERCENT of black victims are murdered by black criminals.  While many crimes are intraracial (whites prey on mostly other whites and blacks prey on mostly other blacks), the black victimization rate is SIX TIMES higher than the white victimization rate.  The black offending rate is EIGHT TIMES higher than it is among whites.  Blacks commit murder at a rate EIGHT TIMES that of whites and all crimes at a rate approaching TEN TIMES that of whites.  This in spite of the fact that the FBI statistics conflates “white” crimes by lumping in Hispanics (who have a much higher crime rate than Anglos) as “whites.”

The black community is desperately sick and as long as Al Sharpton gets a say, it will get sicker and sicker.  And if you want to say “black lives matter,” fine.  Just make sure you’re telling black people, because they are clearly the ones who actually need to be aware of this.

“No Justice, No Peace,” the signs carried by stupid people read.  WHO IS ACTUALLY DENYING JUSTICE???  The very people the idiots carrying the damn signs keep voting for, year after year.

The Democrat Party has been the party of abject depravity and wickedness since they literally fought a vicious war to keep oppressed black people as slaves.  The Democrat Party was the party of abject depravity and wickedness since they formed the Ku Klux Klans to oppress and terrorize black people and white Republicans after Republicans defeated them in that war and freed the slaves.  The Democrat Party was the party of abject depravity and wickedness since the first true “liberal progressive” president – Woodrow Wilson – publicly glorified the most racist movie ever made called Birth of a Nation.  You know, after RE-segregating civil service and the military DE-segregated by Republicans.  The Democrat Party was the party of abject depravity and wickedness since the 1924 Democrat National Convention was so dominated by the Ku Klux Klan it was called “Klanbake.”  The Democrat Party has been the party of abject depravity and wickedness since FDR used his executive tyranny to punish black people by crafting policies that allowed unions – which were and remain Democrat power bases – to brutally discriminate against blacks.  The Democrat Party has been the party of abject depravity and wickedness throughout the long career of a celebrated Democrat Senator who was the Grand Kleagle of his Ku Klux Klan chapter.

This is NOT a party that somehow stopped being what it always has been to its ugly core; this is a party that learned how to be pathologically racist a different way.  They turned themselves into a plantation.  And black leaders have been co-opted by the plantation.  Democrats continue to use today the very same mindset that they used to justify their slavery in the 19th century: that black people are inferiors who need their superiors to provide for them.  You have to feed the negro with eternal welfare; it’s not like he’s human himself to feed himself.  While you can argue that the racism of the Democrat Party has “fundamentally transformed” from slavery to Darwinian notion (“On The Origin of Species. by Means of Natural Selection,. or. The Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”) that some races are simply less advanced than others and therefore need Government to take care of them.  In exchange for their guaranteed vote, of course.  Other than Darwin, the Democrat Party embraced the theory of Hegelian socialism – founded of course on the back of racism.

Black people are – under the Democrat Party philosophy – “the white man’s burden.”  And that is why it doesn’t matter if it is black people and only black people who are making all the decisions and actually doing all the oppression of black people in Baltimore or any race-inflamed city you want to name that is dominated by historic Democrat control.  Because on this Democrat-steeped racial theory you can’t hold black people responsible for ANYTHING.  I mean, they’re HELPLESS and INFERIOR.  And so it’s GOT to be “blame whitey” for Baltimore.

At least, according to Barack Obama who did precisely that in his vile remarks.

And what has the Democrat Plantation produced?  What kind of people?

Bill O’Reilly tonight accurately described the young people who have grown up in these broken homes that were molded by failed liberalism:

To somebody who has tattoos all over their body, who is defiant, who is disrespectful and who doesn’t even want to work because they have a sense of entitlement that says they are victims, “You owe me.”

Does that sound like a good job-seeking resume?

And don’t tell me those folks don’t exist. They are legion.

So these politicians out on the street trying to justify riots by saying we don’t provide jobs are dishonest in the extreme.

The night before O’Reilly went after the riot excusers who argue that the government needs to provide jobs to these defiant, disrespectful entitlement thug-punks:

“With all due respect,” O’Reilly said, evincing none, “the government cannot create opportunities for young people who are uneducated, disrespectful, and unmotivated.” If the children in Baltimore have been “marginalized” and “misdirected,” he argued, that’s the fault of their parents, not the country, city, or police.

Which makes his decision to blame city officials immediately thereafter rather perplexing. “The city of Baltimore has been run by black politicians and the Democratic Party for decades,” he said, “so who exactly is marginalizing the children?”

But it was the Holy Bible that described to a “T” who these thug-punks were and what they would be like some 2,000 years ago:

But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days.  People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God–having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with such people. — 2 Timothy 3:1-5

And “such people” have been rioting in Baltimore and New York.  And before that they were rioting in Ferguson, etc.

You listen to Mayor Rawlings-Blake’s “Let them loot” and you can hear the echoes of the elitist Civil War officer in the great movie Glory who said: “They’re little children, for God’s sake. They’re little monkey children.  You just gotta know how to control them.”  And the Democrat Party is trying to do just that on its new plantation.

Margaret Sanger – THE Democrat heroine extraordinaire – sure knew how to control them.  She wrote regarding her “Negro Project” that:

“We do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members.”

That’s “ministers” as in “The Rev. Al Sharpton.”  And the “more rebellious members” are otherwise known today as “black conservatives” who have escaped from the Democrat Plantation and are calling it out for exactly the racist engine that it is and always HAS been.

And Margaret Sanger continues to exterminate the Negro population from the grave.  With the help of the Democrat Party.

And since abortion is by definition the DENIAL of the respect for the dignity and value of human life, is it really any surprise that the same black people who murder their babies at massively higher rates than others would also murder – or let’s call it commit retro-active abortion – those who somehow managed to survive the most dangerous place for a black child to be (his/her mother’s womb)???

It is and has always been DEMOCRATS who believe that black lives don’t matter.  And to those who have eyes to see and ears to hear, they prove it every day and in every way.

And the result is hell.  And it will continue to be hell until black people wake up to their sobering senses and realize that they have been led by the nose and duped by lies and throw off the shackles that the Democrat Party has put on them.

One of the latest forms of bondage that Democrats are trying to ensnare blacks with is drug addiction.  “Drug addiction helps pimps keep prostitutes virtually enslaved,” we find.  And the same thing is true of the Democrat Party and blacks, which is the ultimate predatory form of parasitic relationship par excellence.  Which is why the Democrat Party is using every form of slander and demagoguery imaginable to make it as easy as possible to be a voting drug addict today.  You want your drugs?  Vote Democrat.

We are watching such people rise like cancerous tumors all over the world as what St. Paul described as “the mystery of lawlessness” begins to grow out of control.  And decent people watch hell metastasizing and wonder how no one and nothing can/will do anything to stop it.

I know I’ll be accused of being a “racist” for assembling these facts and for saying what I’ve said.  It doesn’t matter that I would have voted for Herman Cain in 2012 and I’d vote for Ben Carson in 2016 – and what kind of racist would vote for the “I’m white!  I’m entitled” Hillary Clinton???

The black people we are watching burning and looting in riot after riot aren’t rioting and burning and looting because they’re black.  They’re doing it because they have drank too often and too deeply of the race-baiting Kool-Aid by the party of fatherlessness and racial demagoguery and bitterness and entitlement to the fruit produced by other people’s hard work.  They’ve been voting Democrat lock, stock and goose-stepping barrel for forty years and the more they vote Democrat, the more they fall behind.

This isn’t about “race.”  It’s about EVIL.  And too many black people have been captured by empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ (Colossians 2:8).

Race is going to continue to rise against race.  Because the rioters are ignorant and hateful and everything that St. Paul said they were 2,000 years ago and Bill O’Reilly said they were the last couple of nights.  You can call my facts hateful all you want, truth-hater; but that doesn’t change the fact that they are facts and what I’m saying is true.

The problem is that truth is dead in the age of the most documented liar who ever lived.  Truth is dead in the age of Obama.

We are watching Democrat policies literally result in literal hell on earth.  The Democrat Party is the Party of Antichrist, the Party of the Beast.  Period.  And they are doing everything they can to prepare America and prepare the world for the coming of their god.  Because he will first take over human Government which Democrats worship as Savior in place of God and then he will declare himself God.  And when he fulfills every Democrats’ dream by seizing complete power over the entire global economy they will worship him and take his mark on their right hands or on their foreheads.

The Antichrist will be the ultimate Savior to Democrats because he will be the ultimate Provider of what Democrats most want: big Government that will take promise to take care of everyone and everything.

And so we know from God’s Word that someone is coming – someone whom Democrats will WORSHIP – who will finish the job of bringing hell on earth.

 

 

 

Evolution, The Religion Of Fools. In One Picture.

April 28, 2015

For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men who suppress the truth in unrighteousness,, because that which is known about God is evident within them; for God made it evident to them.  For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes, His eternal power and divine nature, have been clearly seen, being understood through what has been made, so that they are without excuse.  For even though they knew God, they did not honor Him as God or give thanks, but they became futile in their speculations, and their foolish heart was darkened.  Professing to be wise, they became fools, and exchanged the glory of the incorruptible God for an image in the form of corruptible man and of birds and four-footed animals and crawling creatures. — Romans 1:18-23

I was on one of my hikes out in the desert when I came upon this scene way out in the middle of nowhere that caused me to marvel (you can click on it to enlarge it in a new window):

P1000062 - Copy

I state for the record that I did not assemble this or see it assembled.  It was there when I walked a route that I walked for the very first time.  It simply stands as a brute fact.  It is what it is.  The only question is how it came to be the way you see it.

Somehow, in some amazing demonstration of the power of evolutionary forces, a strong wind managed to lift one rock atop another.  And then, without knocking that rock over off its new evolutionary perch, the wind managed to stack two rocks side-by-side on top of the second rock.  Amazingly – and the miracle of evolution is clearly on display here – a fifth rock, and then a sixth rock and a seventh rock and then ultimately an eighth rock, were all successively and successfully stacked one atop the other by this marvelous Darwinian breeze.

Now, maybe you believe that.  Or maybe you’re not what the Bible labels “the fool” (Psalm 14:1) and you immediately realize what a total pile – LITERALLY – of abject idiocy the notion  that this rock pile just happened all by itself clearly is.

I truly did marvel when I saw this pile of rocks and contemplated the implications.  Because I was very well immediately aware that SOMEBODY had very clearly put this together from the determination of a mind to create something where without a mind and a decision to create there would have been nothing.  And everybody who isn’t a complete fool clearly knows that somebody assembled this monument; it didn’t just “happen,” it didn’t “evolve” by some random natural process.  And as I shall shortly demonstrate with something called “science,” I don’t care how many billion years you want to wave at this monument to claim that it happened by itself.  The longer you want to think it took, the worse the fool you are.  This is a one-to-one, apples-to-apples, direct comparison: the rock pile did not happen by random, chaotic chance, everyone knows, because it is simply too complex of a structure to have happened all by itself.  And the whole universe is SO much more complex that it is beyond foolish to claim that it happened by itself when we all know that something as simple as this stupid rock pile couldn’t have happened by ITSELF.

Atheists and evolutionists mock religious people for believing that a transcendent, personal, omnipotent God can do all things.  But what do THEY believe in?  The too-idiotic-to-even-qualify-as-“fairy-tale” notion that if something sits around for long enough, a MIRACLE will somehow happen.  And no, boys and girls, time doesn’t possess magic power.  All time does is sit there and do nothing.

If I were to employ the evolutionists’ argument back at them, it would go like this: I promise that I will refute evolution and prove that it is bogus.  In 4.5 billion years.  Because all they do is turn that very same argument upside down and claim that something somehow happened that long ago when no one can even begin to prove that it did.  It’s an assertion, nothing more.

Which invites the question as to the nature of ALL of “nature.”  We don’t just have the problem of explaining how the pile of rocks somehow got assembled into that neat little monument.  We have the problem of the origin of the individual rocks themselves according to the Big Bang theory of cosmology held by nearly all physicists today: all matter, all time, all energy and all space suddenly exploded into existence at some finite point of time in the past very much as if Someone had declared, “Let there be light.”  It’s as Robert Jastrow described it in God and the Astronomers: “For the scientist who has lived by faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”  Those rocks in that picture did not always exist; they came into being because they were caused to exist by something (or of course Someone).  And it happened in a manner that confirms the account of the Book of Genesis chapter one.  Jastrow – one of the great scientific minds of the 20th century – also stated: “Astronomers now find they have painted themselves into a corner because they have proven, by their own methods, that the world began abruptly in an act of creation to which you can trace the seeds of every star, every planet, every living thing in this cosmos and on the earth. And they have found that all this happened as a product of forces they cannot hope to discover. That there are what I or anyone would call supernatural forces at work is now, I think, a scientifically proven fact.”  And after that “Let there be light” declaration that same  Somebody somehow – and we weren’t there to see Who or how any more than we saw who assembled the pile of rocks in the above picture – stacked a pile of rocks on top of one another to assemble our planet, our solar system, our galaxy, all living things.   And the fact that we are here as a result is very properly indeed the result of “supernatural forces” and properly called a MIRACLE.

Atheists and evolutionists once confidently declared that there were a septillion (that’s a one followed by 24 zeros) planets capable of life.  These arrogant, ostensibly knowledgeable fools were so wrong it is unreal.  Every single time they send taxpayer-funded prayers to the heavens in the form of enormously  powerful radio communications, satellites, unmanned spacecraft like Voyager, etc., it amounts to perennially unanswered prayers to their god or gods.  Just as I contemplated the pile of rocks on the trail and ask the question, ‘How did this get here?  Could it just have happened?’, we must likewise contemplate the brute fact of the universe that we observe: the nature of the fine tuning of the universe is mindboggling when you consider it.  How did the fact of universe and the fact of life get happen?  Did Someone create it – which is the prima facie conclusion of any creature possessing common sense – or did it just assemble itself the way we know that pile of rocks in the picture above could never have assembled itself?  When you realize how many things had to happen in precise sequence and with infinite precision for us to be here at all – rather than residents from those septillion planets visiting us or contacting us the way we’re trying to contact “them” – it should occur to you to question why we are here at all.  How did just the right sort of solar system to contain the planet that contains the rocks that yielded all the necessary building blocks for life get here?  How did just the right sort of moon that orbits the planet in just the right way to result in a planet that contains the rocks get here?  How did just the right sort of star with just the right characteristics to result in just the right sort of solar system and just the right moon result in just the right planet to contain those rocks get here?  And I mean, I can go on and on and on.  Because the level of complexity within the system of the universe is so far beyond mind-boggling that it is obviously the result of supernatural mind determining to create.

Do you see my point here?  When you can’t even so much as glance at a simple pile of what, seven rocks arranged one atop the other, what kind of fool do you have to believe to think that ALL of the many INFINITELY MORE COMPLEX systems and sub-systems that compose the universe all around that rock pile got here by chance without an Intelligent Designer?

When you start to think about the system of the universe and the billions of sub-systems and the trillions of sub-processes within the system, you have to mock the fool who believes that all that we see around us just somehow happened by chance.  Because that fool is in all actuality a far worse fool than the fool who would look at the stack of rocks above and conclude that it happened by chance.

Look at that picture above again and consider the complexity of those seven rocks piled one atop the other and realize that it is far too complex a system to have happened by any act of random nature.  And then go look at yourself in the mirror and ask yourself if you are not vastly more complex than that system which you obviously know was intelligently designed.

And then keep reading to comprehend just how appalling the case for godless evolution truly is and the foolish idiocy you have to believe in order to deny the reality of God.

Allow me to give you the flavor of what actual hard SCIENCE really says about the possibility of life happening by chance:

The Time Problem

To go from a bacterium to people is less of a step than to go from a mixture of amino acids to a bacterium. — Lynn Margulis (21.5)

The only premise that all of the precellular theories share is that it would be an extremely long time before the first bacterial cells evolved. If precellular life somehow got going, it could then conceivably begin to crank out, by some precellular process, random strings of nucleotides and amino acids, trying to luck into a gene or a protein with advantages which would lead to bacterial life. There is no evidence in life today of anything that produces huge quantities of new, random strings of nucleotides or amino acids, some of which are advantageous. But if precellular life did that, it would need lots of time to create any useful genes or proteins. How long would it need? After making some helpful assumptions we can get the ratio of actual, useful proteins to all possible random proteins up to something like one in 10^500 (ten to the 500th power). So it would take, barring incredible luck, something like 10^500 trials to probably find one. Imagine that every cubic quarter-inch of ocean in the world contains ten billion precellular ribosomes. Imagine that each ribosome produces proteins at ten trials per minute (about the speed that a working ribosome in a bacterial cell manufactures proteins). Even then, it would take about 10^450 years to probably make one useful protein. But Earth was formed only about 4.6 x 10^9 years ago. The amount of time available for this hypothetical protein creation process was maybe a few hundred million or ~10^8 years. And now, to make a cell, we need not just one protein, but a minimum of several hundred.

So even if we allow precellular life, there is a problem getting from there to proteins, genes and cells. The random production of proteins does not succeed as an explanation. Other intermediate, unspecified stages must be imagined. We could call these stages post-precellular life. By whatever means, life’s evolution through these stages would have to be time-consuming.

“Time-consuming.”  There’s a rather gigantic understatement for you.  Try to write that number down: 10^450 years, which is 10 with 450 zeroes after it.  That is a number that makes our national debt even after the Obama spendaholic presidency look so infinitesimal that any kid ought to easily be able to solve our national debt crisis with his lunch money by comparison.  And it makes the length of time since our universe exploded into being some 14 billion years ago (1.4×10^10 years) and the earth formed 4.6 billion (4.6×10^9) yeas ago look tiny and insignificant by comparison.

4.6 billion years ago might seem like a long time: 4.6 with nine zeros after it.  That is, unless you compare it to the number “1” followed by a MINIMUM of FOUR HUNDRED AND FIFTY freaking zeroes.  We’re not talking about billions, we’re not talking about trillions, we’re talking about a number so vast only a true mathematician has ever even HEARD of it before: a Novenquadragintacentillion, at least according to our dictionary of Big Ass Numbers.

There’s just not enough time literally in the whole universe.  And that 10^450  years is just for ONE protein when you need to multiply that 10^450 years by several hundred proteins.  That last sentence of the first paragraph is actually staggeringly optimistic, considering that in this case “several hundred” is actually SEVERAL THOUSAND:

“A typical bacterium requires more than 4,000 proteins for growth and reproduction.”

So understand the dilemma: you need random trials requiring 10^450  years to form just ONE protein; but you actually would need at least another 3,999 more proteins that will take just as long to randomly generate after you finally generate that first one.  Each one is going to take you about another 10^450  years’ worth of random trials to generate!  And finally after 10^450  a.k.a. a novenquadragintacentillion years multiplied by “more than 4,000 proteins,” just what are the odds that that first protein that you made would still exist so many trillions times trillions times trillions of years later???  Just what are the odds that you would have all 4,000-plus proteins available at one time and in one place to make the assembly of that simplest cell possible???

How long did it take whoever built that rock pile to complete the job?  I’m guessing a few minutes.  Because our Creator God gave that person a miraculous mind and a fearfully and wonderfully made body to think about creating it and then an amazing body to actually make it happen.  But the simple scientific FACT of the matter is that, no matter how long you want to claim the universe is, it STILL wasn’t anywhere NEAR enough time in the universe even times a million billion trillion to “evolve” the simplest cell there is apart from that Creator.

If you don’t believe that rock pile assembled itself by purely natural processes without any Intelligence, but you believe that everything else – including humanity – got here the very way you deny that that rock pile got here, the Bible is truly right to call you “fool.”

You should begin to understand that “evolution” is the most fanciful fairy tale there IS.  When we talk about evolution, we’re talking about something that not only didn’t happen, but COULDN’T even POSSIBLY have happened.  At least if you accept actual SCIENCE rather than the atheistic philosophical nonsense masquerading as “science.”

You need to comprehend this: legitimate science can’t even begin to explain how just the proteins necessary for the simplest bacteria cell evolved by chance.  And that the fool who postulates that “evolution” created the magnificent human mind that is so much more sophisticated and miraculous than any supercomputer ever designed is someone who seems to lack so much as that bacteria cell for a brain.  Because we’re no longer talking about the simplest bacteria cell the origins of which science can’t begin to explain or even explain away; we’re talking about a brain jam-packed with billions of infinitely more complex cells in infinitely more complex arrays.

And the human brain has an apparently very clear purpose: to allow a soul the ability to freely interact with its body.  But that of course, is denied by evolutionists:

“Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.” [Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker, 1996, p. 1]

There is absolutely no question to even a fool like Richard Dawkins that life very much has “the appearance of having been designed for a purpose.”  But being a fool, he proceeds to simply dismiss the fact that the Bible declares in Romans chapter 1 and verse 18-23: “The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of people, who suppress the truth by their wickedness, since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to themFor 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 people are without excuse.  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.  Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like a mortal human being and birds and animals and reptiles.”

Yes, all complicated things were very self-evidently designed for a purpose.  And that Designer is God.  Don’t be a fool and deny the obvious.  It is OBVIOUS to even Richard Dawkins that the universe was “designed” for “a purpose.”  The prima facie case is obvious and if you want to claim that there is no Creator you must prove beyond any reasonable doubt that there is NOT a Creator, rather than telling a bunch of fanciful atheist fairy tales to describe how things happened the way the most primitive cave men told stories about how we have wind because the trees are moving and swaying and creating the ensuing wind by their actions.  The burden of proof necessarily falls upon the unbeliever; but they have performed a bait-and-switch by the most disingenuous means.

You’ve got your pseudo-scientists who claim that this amounts to some argument about “science” versus religion.  I call them “pseudo-scientists” because if you understand the history of science, these people are very clearly speaking out of complete ignorance – and legitimate scientists never speak out of such ignorance.  The so-called “science” these pseudo-scientist ideologues embrace is every bit as “religious” as any serpent-handling Pentecostal who ever lived.

Please realize what junk “science” becomes when it becomes an ideological tool.  The fact of the matter is – as I have documented before – is that modern science founded upon the scientific method uniquely came from and depended upon the Judeo-Christian worldview.  It is a simple historically verifiable fact that: The first modern scientist and the discoverer of the scientific method upon which modern science is based was a product of Christendom and a publicly avowed Christian who described his faith in Christianity – and its influence on his approach to science – in his writings.  That the discoverer of every single modern branch of science was a publicly confessed Christian.  I say it again, not only was the first true scientist in the modern sense who discovered the scientific method a publicly confessing Christian, but so were the discovers of every single major branch of modern science. And that is because the very presuppositions necessary FOR the rise of science itself uniquely came out of the Christian worldview:

J.P. Moreland (Source: The Creation Hypothesis: Scientific Evidence for an Intelligent Designer, p. 17) listed some of the philosophical presuppositions – based on the Judeo-Christian worldview – that were necessary for the foundation of science:

1. the existence of a theory-independent, external world

2. the orderly nature of the external world

3. the knowability of the external world

4. the existence of truth

5. the laws of logic

6. the reliability of human cognitive and sensory faculties to serve as truth-gatherers and as a source of justified beliefs in our intellectual environment

7. the adequacy of language to describe the world

8. the existence of values used in science (e.g., “test theories fairly and report test results honestly”)

9. the uniformity of nature and induction

10. the existence of numbers

You can’t use physical science to arrive at or derive the laws of logic; they are self-evident only within highly particular worldviews that are uniquely based on the presuppositional and foundational belief in the supernatural and the divine.  We today have the denunciation of “Western logic” by the postmodern movement.  Because Western logic is based upon the reality of “either/or.”  And the moment you allow Western logic profoundly powerful “either/or” arguments such as the Kalam Cosmological Argument begin to pour in and drown the godless fire of atheist thought.  Our Western laws of logic were derived from Greek thought, which was highly DUALISTIC.  There were the gods and there were men.  There were the non-material abstract and yet substantial Forms and there was the material world of change.  You cannot accept the laws of logic and not accept the distinction between the material and immateraial world and the existence of the immaterial world which bequeathed us with the Form of logic that we aspire toward without being a pathologically dishonest hypocrite and an intellectual parasite.  And as you contemplate the existence of “truth,” recognize that either our minds and our brains were created by a Truth-Knowing Being to know truth, or they are the result of a entirely random and unguided process and therefore no reason whatsoever to assert the capacity to possess “truth.”  And in the same way, when it comes to the rise of science, any notion of genuine science pitted against genuine religion is a total fraud and fabrication.  Modern science uniquely arose out of Judeo-Christian presuppositions from a geographical place and a philosophical worldview called Christendom.  It arose out of no other worldview and never could have arisen out of any materialistic worldview.  Science was allowed to rise because Judeo-Christian-worldview inspired men – ALL publicly professing Christians – believed that there was an orderly universe that was created to operate on orderly principles and that we as image-bearers of the Creator possessed the mental faculties to marvel at the work of the Creator and “thinking God’s thoughts after Him” – as Isaac Newton, the greatest scientist who ever lived, declared.

Atheistic evolutionists are frauds and thieves who usurped an entire foundation upon which logic and science originated.  True logic and true science mock these people, because true logic and true science come uniquely from a worldview that they reject.  Their feet are firmly planted in midair.  But these people are such complete fools that they walk like idiots without a foundation toward nothing.

This ideology-masquerading-as-“science” also amounts to a bait-and-switch regarding science as “testable” or “falsifiable” versus “creationism” which is NOT testable.  Charles Darwin gave as the standard of “testable” evolutionary “science” this definition:

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down.  But I can find no such case.” — Charles Darwin, Origin of the Species, p. 158

But a brilliant lawyer exposed that “falsifiability” standard for the total fraud that it is merely by replacing a couple of words in the otherwise exact same definition:

“If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed which could not possibly have been formed by God, my God theory would absolutely break down.”

And she then proceeded to ask, “Would the Darwin believers take that standard as a scientific test for God?”  Would they accept the burden of proving that “God could not possibly have created” us???

Let’s consider the human brain and its implications on the foolish theory of evolution.  Are you a meat puppet mindlessly and soullessly dancing to the tune of random evolutionary forces?  Atheist-ideologue pseudo-science declares yes, you are:

“But it should be pointed out that consistent atheism, which represents itself to be the most rational and logical of all approaches to reality, is in actuality completely self defeating and incapable of logical defense. That is to say, if indeed all matter has combined by mere chance, unguided by any Higher Power of Transcendental Intelligence, then it necessarily follows that the molecules of the human brain are also the product of mere chance. In other words, we think the way we do simply because the atoms and molecules of our brain tissue happen to have combined in the way they have, totally without transcendental guidance or control. So then even the philosophies of men, their system of logic and all their approaches to reality are the result of mere fortuity. There is no absolute validity to any argument advanced by the atheist against the position of theism.

On the basis of his won presuppositions, the atheist completely cancels himself out, for on his own premises his arguments are without any absolute validity. By his own confession he thinks the way he does simply because the atoms in his brain happen to combine the way they do. If this is so, he cannot honestly say that his view is any more valid than the contrary view of his opponent. His basic postulates are self contradictory and self defeating; for when he asserts that there are no absolutes, he thereby is asserting a very dogmatic absolute. Nor can he logically disprove the existence of God without resorting to a logic that depends on the existence of God for its validity. Apart from such a transcendent guarantor of the validity of logic, any attempts at logic or argumentation are simply manifestations of the behavior of the collocation of molecules that make up the thinker’s brain.”  — Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, 1982, pp. 55-56

Is whatever thought that is floating around in your head merely determined by how your random brain atoms randomly arranged themselves?  Or do you think rational thoughts because you are the rational, thinking image of a rational thinking God according to Genesis 1:26-27 who said “Come, let us reason together” (Isaiah 1:18).

Which are you?

I can go on literally all day citing evidence that scientists and atheist/secular humanist philosophers claim that human free will is nothing more than some philosophically useless illusion, and that you are nothing but a meat puppet entirely conditioned by your DNA and your environment.  Both atheistic-ideologue pseudo-science and the atheistic philosophy based on that atheistic-ideologue pseudo-science readily dismiss the notion of anything legitimately called genuine free human will.  It is nothing more than an illusion, so please go back to your pasture, all ye mindless and soulless herd animals, and chew your cud until slaughter-time.

As Richard Dawkins asserted in his atheist tome The Blind Watchmaker, “DNA neither cares nor knows. DNA just is. And we dance to its music.”  And YOU neither know nor care and you dance to the music the way a puppet jerked around by strings uncontrollably dances to whatever random notion randomly enters your randomly-generated skull.

If we are in fact created in the image of an invisible Creator God, then we are NOT meat puppets, for the God who created us in His image is no meat puppet.  If there is no God and we are products of mindless, soulless evolution, then we are and can be nothing else and nothing more than meat puppets.

If it is a fact that you are nothing but a herd-animal meat-puppet with no mind and no soul, there is necessarily another terrifying truth: you have no moral responsibility.  And the worst people in the history of the world by any “moral” standard have no moral responsibility, either.  And this terrifying fact is necessarily true both on an individual level and on a societal level.

On the individual level, if free will is an illusion, as any materialistic system science or philosophy asserts, then how can you hold someone criminally or morally responsible for their actions that result from no free will of the person who is committing them?

Further, if Darwinism is true, then Social Darwinism is necessarily entailed: if natural selection is your process for evolving into better creatures, in which the fittest members of a species survive, and both inferior members of species and inferior species themselves must perish to give way to the stronger, then why should it not be so in how we govern the world?  Why shouldn’t we help evolution by eradicating the unfit so that the more fit can better survive in a world of finite and scarce resources?  Nazi Germany was without any question THE most “scientific” society on earth during the time leading up to World War II, and that was precisely their philosophy: if Darwinism is in fact “science,” then have the damn courage to embrace the crystal clear implications of that science and embrace some form of Nazism or Stalinism which both embraced evolution and thus made horror such as has never before been seen possible.

A guiding philosophy of Nazism was completely and fundamentally compatible with any “science” of Darwinism that had the decency to be consistent: they called it “lebensunwertes leben,” or life unworthy to be lived.  And they killed off all members of society that were not sufficiently fit to be adequate Darwinists.  And if you are an evolutionist and you do not think the precise same way, you are either a coward and a hypocrite for not having the courage to be consistent and live out your view or you are tantamount to a slack-jawed idiot for not having the ability to logically comprehend the ramifications of your own worldview.

You can mock that above link between godless Darwinism and Nazism all you want, evolutionist.  But first I ask you to explain how your teacher Charles Darwin – the full title of whose book was, “On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life” – precludes you from believing yourself to belong to a “favoured” master race and then possessing the justification to wipe out all the other races you compete with “in the struggle for life.”  And I’ll explain how my Teacher Jesus of Nazareth precludes me from doing so.

Adolf Hitler made the mindless German crowds who supported him the victims of his Darwinism, stating, “If the German Volk is not strong enough and is not sufficiently prepared to offer its own blood for its existence, it should cease to exist and be destroyed by a stronger power.”  That is an inherently and implicitly and intrinsically Darwinian argument.  And that fact is not altered now as intellectual frauds like Richard Dawkins go back and rewrite history to expunge the incredibly tragic results of Darwinism being applied to the actual world and society.  Modern Darwinists want to use their hypocritical and self-contradictory system to violently club God to death, then drop that club and say, “Now that Darwinism has killed God and religion, let’s not live as if our system that says life is a struggle for existence in which only the fittest survive and the weak are a threat to the rest of the herd is actually true.”

And Adolf Hitler clearly stated in his Mein Kampf that:

“The objection may very well be raised that such phenomena in world history [the necessity of intolerance] arise for the most part from specifically Jewish modes of thought, in fact, that this type of intolerance and fanaticism positively embodies the Jewish nature” [Hitler, Mein Kampf, p. 454].

Friedrich Nietzsche – a patron saint of Nazism – had prior to Hitler correctly pointed out the fact that:

“Christianity, sprung from Jewish roots and comprehensible only as a growth on this soil, represents the counter-movement to any morality of breeding, of race, of privilege: it is the anti-Aryan religion par excellence” [Nietzsche, “The Twilight of the Idols”].

That same Darwinian theme of Judaism and Christianity thwarting Darwinian supremacy would be echoed more than a century later by the historian who wrote the book on Christian martyr Dietrich Bonhoeffer, who would die in the death camps:

Regarding Hitler’s hatred of Christianity, Metaxas further writes, “Hitler’s attitude toward Christianity was that it was a great heap of mystical out-of-date nonsense. But what annoyed Hitler was not that it was nonsense, but that it was nonsense that did not help him get ahead. According to Hitler, Christianity preached “meekness and flabbiness,” and this was simply not useful to the National Socialist ideology, which preached “ruthlessness and strength.” In time, he felt that the churches would change their ideology. He would see to it.”

And so, a good Nazi was a Gottglaubiger.  Rather than putting “Christian” on personnel forms they wrote down “Gottlaubig” – representing a “vague pseudo-philosophical religiosity” – to indicate that, while they were not “godless communists,” they were most certainly not “Christian.”  And unlike Christians and Jews with their weak and insipid morality, they were Nazis who were willing to grab the Darwinian bull by the horns and do whatever was necessary, no matter how morally heinous.  Just as any true Darwinist would do if he or she had the courage of conviction.

Hitler used the word “Christian” in his some of his speeches before deluded crowds of Germans many of whom had long-since largely abandoned true religion under the profound influence of a generation of profoundly anti-religious and in particular anti-Jewish and anti-Christian German scholars such as the well-known Friedrich Delitzsch who wrote:

“the Old Testament was full of deceptions of all kinds – a veritable hodge-podge of erroneous, incredible, undependable figures, including those of Biblical chronology…. in short, a book full of intentional and unintentional deceptions (in part, self-deceptions), a very dangerous book in the use of which the greatest care is necessary.”

But to his inner circle Hitler said very different things than what he said publicly.

Hitler described to them that “after difficult inner struggles I had freed myself of my remaining childhood religious conceptions. I feel as refreshed now as a foal on a meadow” (Ernst Helmreich, “The German Churches Under Hitler,” p. 285).

Joseph Goebbels was one of Hitler’s inner circle to whom Hitler revealed his true beliefs:

The Fuhrer is a man totally attuned to antiquity. He hates Christianity, because it has crippled all that is noble in humanity. According to Schopenhauer, Christianity and syphilis have made humanity unhappy and unfree. What a difference between the benevolent, smiling Zeus and the pain-wracked, crucified Christ. The ancient peoples’ view of God was also much nobler and more humane than the Christians’. What a difference between a gloomy cathedral and a light, airy ancient temple. He describes life in ancient Rome: clarity, greatness, monumentality. The most wonderful republic in history. We would feel no disappointment, he believes, if we were now suddenly to be transported to this old, eternal city.”

Goebbels also notes in a diary entry in 1939 a conversation in which Hitler had “expressed his revulsion against Christianity. He wished that the time were ripe for him to be able to openly express that. Christianity had corrupted and infected the entire world of antiquity.” [Elke Frölich. 1997-2008. Die Tagebücher von Joseph Goebbels. Munich: K. G. Sauer. Teil I, v. 6, p. 272].

Hitler also said, “Our epoch will certainly see the end of the disease of Christianity.” [Hitler’s Table Talk, Enigma Books; 3rd edition October 1, 2000, p. 343].

Author Konrad Heiden quoted Hitler as stating, “We do not want any other god than Germany itself. It is essential to have fanatical faith and hope and love in and for Germany.” [Heiden, Konrad A History of National Socialism, A.A. Knopf, 1935, p. 100].

Albert Speer – another Nazi who worked extremely closely with Hitler – reports in his memoirs of a similar statement made by Hitler:

You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?” [Albert Speer. 1971. Inside the Third Reich Translated by Richard Winston, Clara Winston, Eugene Davidson. New York: Macmillan. p 143; Reprinted in 1997. Inside the Third Reich: Memoirs. New York: Simon and Schuster. p. 96. ISBN 0-684-82949-5].

Adolf Hitler sounds like an atheist to me.  He certainly rabidly abandoned Judeo-Christianity as few other human beings ever have.  And while the Nazis were cynically willing to exploit Christianity or anything else they could twist to manipulate people into following them, it was put in the form of “Almighty God has created the German people to be a race of supermen” kind of garbage.  But think about that for a second: created by WHO and by WHAT PROCESS?  Certainly NOT created by the “Jewish God” of the Old Testament of the Christian Bible; and certainly NOT created according to the creation account in the “Jewish Bible’s” book of Genesis.  So WHO created and by WHAT process?  By Darwinian evolution, of course.  God threw His random evolutionary dice and His throw came up Nazi snake eyes.  And Hitler would tell you that lie and any other lie he needed to tell you to twist your mind into following him.

Proto-Nazi atheist and secular humanist philosophers such as Friedrich Nietzsche and Friedrich Delitzsch gave way to full-blown Nazis such as Martin Heidegger and Ezra Pound.  And the toxic atheistic and secular humanistic evolutionist ideas of these toxic men had toxic consequences.

Furthermore, the most brutal form of human government that ever existed was communism otherwise known as “state atheism.”  Every single officially state atheist society has been a violent and vicious opponent of human dignity and human freedom.  Every single one.

Political and economic Marxim was based on the following atheist/secular humanist premise:

Religious distress is at the same time the expression of real distress and the protest against real distress. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, just as it is the spirit of a spiritless situation. It is the opium of the people. The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is required for their real happiness. The demand to give up the illusion about its condition is the demand to give up a condition which needs illusions.

And the result of atheism/secular humanism being allowed to dominate was a boot stomping on hundreds of millions of human faces since its rise.  It is the most murderous system of thought ever devised by man, with well over 110 million human beings murdered by their own atheist governments just during peacetime alone.  The continual bait and switch of these purveyors which the Word of God according to Colossians 2:8 warn us about –

“Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual forces of this world, rather than from Christ”

– continue to bear murderous fruit.  They seize upon the imperfect results of imperfect political system that depend upon an imperfect pursuit of a religious worldview, and replace it with a demonic system in which the Government BECOMES God and proceeds to crush everything and every one that gets in its way.

Nazism and Stalinism have one thing in common: godless socialism.  The intent of these movements was to replace God with Government in which Government became the Savior and the people were encouraged if not viciously driven away from embracing any worldview that had a place for a Creator God in it.

And today we have people every bit as wicked and every bit as willing to commit acts of incredible vicious genocide as Hitler or Stalin or Mao (socialists all) – and I’m not talking about insane jihadist Muslims such as fill the ranks of Islamic State.  No, I’m talking about leftist environmentalists who have top access to leftist politicians.  Listen to some of their quotes:

“My three main goals would be to reduce human population to about 100 million worldwide, destroy the industrial infrastructure and see wilderness, with it’s full complement of species, returning throughout the world.” – Dave Foreman, co-founder of Earth First!

Mankind is the most dangerous, destructive, selfish and unethical animal on the earth.”
– Michael Fox, vice-president of The Humane Society

Human beings, as a species, have no more value than slugs.”
– John Davis, editor of Earth First! Journal

Humans on the Earth behave in some ways like a pathogenic micro-organism, or like the cells of a tumor.”
– Sir James Lovelock, Healing Gaia

The Earth has cancer and the cancer is Man.”
– Club of Rome, Mankind at the Turning Point

A reasonable estimate for an industrialized world society at the present North American material standard of living would be 1 billion. At the more frugal European standard of living, 2 to 3 billion would be possible.”
United Nations, Global Biodiversity Assessment

A cancer is an uncontrolled multiplication of cells; the population explosion is an uncontrolled multiplication of people. We must shift our efforts from the treatment of the symptoms to the cutting out of the cancer. The operation will demand many apparently brutal and heartless decisions.”
– Prof Paul Ehrlich, The Population Bomb

A total population of 250-300 million people, a 95% decline from present levels, would be ideal.”
– Ted Turner, founder of CNN and major UN donor [and major DEMOCRAT PARTY DONOR]

Realize the left today would murder people on a scale that would even shock Adolf Hitler, if they could just get the power they wanted.

You don’t even so much as qualify as a cow to these people.  I mean, in their own words, you don’t even make it to the level of a slug.  At least we merit equal status to a cancer tumor.  I don’t think even the Jews under Hitler got that little respect.

These rabid leftists evolutionists believe that earth randomly evolved.  And in order to protect the result of random evolution they believe they must wipe out somewhere between half and 95% of all randomly evolved homo sapiens.  You can bet none of these people are going to volunteer to walk into the gas chambers first, mind you.

Realize “the absurdity of life without God.”  Realize that apart from God, there is and can be no true meaning, purpose or value in your existence.  And that is precisely how the state atheists and the secular humanists treat you the moment they get power over you: like a farm animal that can be slaughtered and should be slaughtered.  And simple factual history proves it.  It’s happened before and it will very likely happen again.  The ideology might change, but the evolutionary/Darwinian worldview that underlies it guarantees the same contempt for the dignity of the human spirit that we’ve seen before.

Whatever you are, what you are not is either morally intelligent or in any way wise.  Rather, as Romans 1:22 puts it, “Professing yourself to be wise, you became a FOOL.”  A fool so captured by empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense, as Colossians 2:8 points out, that you abandoned the real world for an atheist fairy tale in order to childishly ignore the authority of God and thereby ignore His moral commands.

Unbelief does not come from intellectual causes or objective analysis of the data or any form of legitimate science.  In fact science exists BECAUSE of the Judeo-Christian worldview and it arose in Christendom based on the Judeo-Christian worldview and the Judeo-Christian worldview alone.  Rather, unbelief is a moral collapse by which wicked people do not seek God because they refuse to be responsible to Him and acknowledge that He alone is sovereign and He is the Creator and they the creatures.  They resent any limitation on their ability to do as they please, or, according to their meat-puppet, herd-animal doctrine, whatever random string of atoms masquerading as a thought or a desire compels them or stimulates them to mindlessly act out.  They resent any limitations to their mindless DNA-puppet-dangling animalistic autonomy.  They refuse to honor any moral boundaries that they despise and so they therefore refuse to acknowledge the Boundary Maker.

What they do is not wise, it is not intelligent, it is not moral and it is not “science.”

So if you want to think of me as being an idiot for believing in God, that’s just fine; provided you realize that YOU are the idiot of all idiots and frankly THE most idiotic idiot who ever lived in comparison to people like me.

I mean, please don’t sneer condescendingly at me for believing in God given the fact that evolution is a fairy tale for fools.

A theologian, commenting on Romans chapter one, wrote:

“Truth quietly remains what it is amid all the clamor and he shouting against it and in the end judges every man.” [R.C.H. Lenski, St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans, p. 93]

If there is no God, then there is no “truth” anymore than there is a “creation,” because “truth” is however the hell the molecules in our brains randomly arranged themselves to believe.  If the human mind is mrely a randomly-generated product of natural selection, then the ideas in our minds were selected purely for their survival value and NOT for their truth-value.  And so your “truth” – whatever the hell that is – is by definition of evolution no less random than mine.   Evolutionary epistemology commits suicide.  If Darwin’s theory of natural selection is true, “the human mind serves evolutionary success, not truth,” as John Gray expressed it.  But consider the ramification and the ensuing contradiction of Darwinism: if Darwin’s theory is true, then it “serves evolutionary success, not truth.” In other words, if Darwin’s theory is true, then it is not true.  It has been a simple game for philosophers to devise all sorts of scenarios which demonstrate that something might facilitate “evolutionary success” and yet be patently false beliefs.  I can document prominient politicians and even journalists such as Walter Lippmann – who said that “The common interests very largely elude public opinion entirely and can be managed only by a specialized class whose personal interests reach beyond the locality” – to document that people have been inspired to take actions that others deemed the best course based entirely on propaganda or lies.  Lets let smart people deceive stupid people into policies for their won good, they say.  We just saw that that described as being the mindset behind ObamaCare from one of its chief architects.  There is absolutely no connection whatsoever between something that could be an “evolutionary success” and “truth.”  And in fact history is replete with examples demonstrating that “truth” has frequently been done away with to pave the way for something that has been passed off as being for the people’s own good.  This is an epistemological box that evolution simply cannot climb out of no matter how many billions of years of fervent, fanatical faith in random evolutionary processes they want to throw at the abandonment of truth inherent in their theory.

And unless you can patiently exlain to me how Hitler and Stalin were somehow bad atheists, and unless you can establish whatever the hell “evolutionary morality” is, then it stands as a simple FACT that the murderer is no different from the martyr and the rapist is no more praiseworthy or blameworthy than then humanitarian since none of us are truly free to be truly responsible for our actions.  And in fact if evolution is true, then rape is actually PRAISEWORTHY as we “dance to DNA’s music.”

Question: Why do we as individuals rape, murder and sleep around?  Becauserape is (in the vernacular of evolutionary biology) an adaptation, a trait encoded by genes that confers an advantage on anyone who possesses them. Back in the late Pleistocene epoch 100,000 years ago, men who carried rape genes had a reproductive and evolutionary edge over men who did not: they sired children not only with willing mates, but also with unwilling ones, allowing them to leave more offspring (also carrying rape genes) who were similarly more likely to survive and reproduce, unto the nth generation. That would be us. And that is why we carry rape genes today. The family trees of prehistoric men lacking rape genes petered out.”  Darwinism is “a scientific idea that, if true, consigns traditions of self-restraint, loyalty, the very basis of family life, to the shredder.”  Now go ye and do likewise.  Unless something inside of you screams “NO!  I will NOT live in accordance with that terrible, wicked, demonic theory of Darwinian evolution!”

Rape is merely one more horrible, demonic thing that evolution justifies, if not necessitates, in the same vein that it justifies/necessitates social Darwinism, Nazism, Stalinism and every OTHER horrible “-ism.”  And all under the guise of “science.”

If this were anything resembling true science evolution and atheism and secular humanism would have been thrown onto the ash-heap of failed ideas.  But we’re NOT talking about anything resembling legitimate science; we’re talking about a fanatical religious movement masquerading as science.

That was one of the powerful realizations I had years ago as I considered the FACT that if there is no God, then all things are equally possible, and there ARE no boundaries and no morals and that everything I believe is right and everything I believe is wrong are nothing but mere arbitrary constructs of a constantly evolving culture.  And I am NOT the kind of thing that dances to the music of DNA or follows some constantly-shifting morality like some mindless farm animal as Hollywood tells me what is right and wrong this morning; I am a human being created in the image of a rational, moral God Who will one day hold me accountable for what I did in this world that He created and placed me in.

Unlike the animals, who see it get dark when I watch a beautiful sunset, I have eternity in my heart.  Which means I can contemplate my existence after I die and leave this earth.

I am NOT an evolutionary meat-puppet farm animal; I can know the truth.  And the truth can set me free.

I believe in God as the reason we have a universe containing life in it because it’s every bit as obvious and every bit as self-explanatory as it is for me to believe that those rocks in that pile didn’t happen by themselves.  God designed us to be free and to be accountable to the nature that He imbued in us as His image bearers.  And He created a world in which to place us.

I am free because God set me free.  And when I look upon the stars at night and contemplate their wonder, I give praise and honor to the God who is so much bigger than the universe that He created.  I thank Him for giving me a place within His vast and beautiful creation.  And I glorify Him for loving me as I look up in divine awe searching for His face.

‘Snowfalls Are Now Just A Thing Of The Past,’ You Said. ‘Children Just Aren’t Going To Know What Snow Is,’ You Said. You Pseudo-Science Propagandist Frauds.

March 16, 2015

Snowfalls are now just a thing of the past,” we were assured in the year 2000 when the left still called their ideology “global warming.”  “Children just aren’t going to know what snow is,” we were told.

I wonder if liberals are saying that in Boston right now:

Boston breaks seasonal snowfall record with 108.6 inches
William M. Welch, USA TODAY 11:36 a.m. EDT March 16, 2015

More snow fell on Boston on Sunday, enough to make this the snowiest season ever on record there.

The National Weather Service said 2.9 inches fell by 7 p.m., pushing total snowfall for the winter of 2014-2015 to 108.6 inches.

That is a full inch over the previous record set during the winter of 1995-1996, the service’s Boston office tweeted, and the most since record books started in 1872.

The achievement brought cheerful, tongue-in-cheek celebration from many of the snow-weary survivors of winter in Boston.

“Putting the win in winter!” tweeted Christina Pazzanese.

“We got the GOLD!” tweeted WBZ weatherman Barry Burbank.

But Michael Wissell spoke for many when he tweeted: ” Sweet. Can we have spring now?”

I mean, the fact that Boston just had the most snowfall EVER doesn’t mean that they’re not still spouting their gibberish.  Because liberals are stupid enough and immune enough from reality to look you in the eye and actually believe their own bovine feces when they claim that the global warming alarmists of just fifteen years ago were somehow legitimate “scientists” and that their “climate change” hasn’t been refuted by their own previous fraudulent and foolish predictions.

There have been so many bogus predictions that it is beyond a joke from these fools.  But they still have the megaphone over the culture and they’re still making bogus predictions based on their ideology rather than any actual science.

Climates change.  They always have.  They always will.

A “climate change” drought ended the Old Egyptian Kingdom.  There were no mean-spirited Republicans driving their speedboats over the Nile.

A “climate change” drought ended the Mayan Empire.  There were no mean-spirited Republicans driving SUVs over the rain forests.

And just as we’ve had droughts throughout the history of planet earth, we’ve had ice ages.  None of which had a damn thing to do with human activity.

Climate change has nothing to do with human carbon dioxide pollution.  When you learn how “CO2″ became the bogeyman of the left you’ve got to try not to laugh it’s so asinine.  In actual fact “anthropogenic CO2 produces less than 0.1 of one percent of the greenhouse effect.”  Climate change was an environmental reality before there were any factories or cars or whatever.  Climate change was in fact an environmental reality even before there were any humans.  But that’s a fact and that’s reality – and liberals despise both facts and reality.

Liberals are liars and frauds and dishonest fools.  They always have been.  They were liars and frauds and dishonest fools when they claimed that communist socialism was the solution to ending poverty but instead became a boot stomping on a human face for seventy years before collapsing under its economic failure.  They were liars and frauds and dishonest fools when they claimed that fascist socialism was the solution to ending poverty but instead produced the Holocaust and World War II before collapsing under its disastrous failure.  But the “always learning, but never coming to a knowledge of the truth” fool left is still claiming that European socialism is the answer.

Newsflash: no, it isn’t, you dumbasses.  European socialism has produced a stagnated and deflated economy.

Socialism and “climate change” are the same thing with the same means, the same ends and the same justifications.

I learned that something like twenty years ago during the Kyoto Protocols on global warming.  You see, the same people who were screaming Chicken Little-style that we had this godawful crisis and we had to act now, NOW, NOW!!! and gut the U.S. and European economies did a wink-wink and a nod-nod and exempted Russia, China, India and pretty much the entire developing world from having to cut their emissions.  You know, while China and India were building mass-polluting coal plants at gargantuan rates.

At that point in time, I had the same views I have today: which is to say, I believed that we were going into the last days when Jesus and the prophets in the Bible told us that weather would go crazy.  So I was perfectly willing to accept the climate crazy crazies.

But what the climate crazy crazies ended up doing was to say with their actions that “climate change” wasn’t really much a crisis.  Because if it was, the whole WORLD would have to get behind any legitimate effort.  And instead all the countries that were communist or socialist or politically correct were getting their waivers and their exemptions and it was only capitalist countries that were being targeted and attacked to gut their economies in order to “save the planet.”

What they really wanted to do was redistribute the wealth in order to save socialism by undermining capitalist economies and propping up socialism with Other People’s Money.  And if these pseudo-scientific frauds have to tell you that the moon is made out of cheese to sell that load of crap, they will assure you that the overwhelming majority of scientists believe that the moon is made of cheese.

And it’s been empty leftwing philosophies and high-sounding nonsense ever since.

The constancy of the fact that liberals will ALWAYS be liars and frauds and dishonest fools is as true as the fact that we will always have constant climate change cycles.

I already pointed out what you needed to know several years back.  There’s “What the Science REALLY Says About Global Warming,” and there’s “What You Never Hear About Global Warming.”  Meanwhile, the left doesn’t want you to know the truth about legitimate science and what they’ve done to pervert science as they push their socialist agenda on people who ought to have the sense to know better.

 

The Despicable And Pathological Radical Ideological Ignorance Of Barack Obama

February 18, 2015

Franklin Graham nailed it: what if Christians had beheaded 21 Muslims?

If you don’t think the world would have railed at the identity of the attackers vis-à-vis the identity of the victims, you are a true fool and I have nothing to discuss with you because there is no point having any kind of “discussion” with people who clearly have no regard whatsoever for reality or truth.

If Christians murdered Muslims execution-style, do you think the Islamic world would not be up in arms about it and demand that something dramatic and drastic be done to prevent it from ever happening again?  I don’t have to speculate here; we just had an atheist liberal who loved abortion and homosexual marriage murder three young Muslims and “the Islamic world” is out in force decrying it.  The only difference here is that the atheist did not say in advance that he was going to specifically target for murder a bunch of Muslims and then go do it the way the Muslims who just murdered those Christians had done.

In a similar vein, if Christians were murdering homosexuals, do you think that there would be an outcry?  What if Christians started to refuse women an education, the right to drive, the right to not have to literally wear a tent over their bodies because if a man so much as sees a woman’s ankle it’s HER fault he’s lustful?  What if Christians acted in rabid violence every time their faith was insulted?

It is amazing that liberals today are embracing the religion that does all these things, in addition that allows the torture-murder of helpless victims, of Christians, of Jews and of everyone else who doesn’t bend the knee to their warped religion.  And yet embrace it they do on a regular basis as it is easy to document (and see here).

And if what Islamic State is doing has nothing to do with true Islam, where are the one-point-six damned BILLION Muslim voices screaming in anger about what the Islamic State just did in the name of Islam and Muslims and Allah????  Where are the hundreds of thousands of religious leaders of Islam decrying vicious barbarity???  The crickets are chirping, chumps.  It is STUNNING how few Muslims are speaking out against what people who claim their religion are doing.

Pew Research documented that 25% of Muslims support some form of violent jihad.  Recently, in America, a study documented that 80% of mosques recommended “violence-positive texts.”

What if a white people lynched 21 black men and a right wing Republican refused to identify the identity of the victims OR the perpetrators and simply claim that “citizens of Georgia” had been murdered?  Does anyone doubt that the left would savagely criticize the president and claim he was a racist and a bigot and a facilitator of genocide?  And yet:

That’s EXACTLY what our liar-in-chief just did:

WASHINGTON (CBSDC/AP) — The White House is being criticized for its statement over the beheadings of nearly two dozen Egyptian Coptic Christians at the hands of an Islamic State of Iraq and Syria-affiliated group in Libya.

The line that critics are pointing to is referring to the Christians as only Egyptian citizens.

“The United States condemns the despicable and cowardly murder of twenty-one Egyptian citizens in Libya by ISIL-affiliated terrorists,” the statement reads. “We offer our condolences to the families of the victims and our support to the Egyptian government and people as they grieve for their fellow citizens.”

Fox News contributors George Will and Charles Krauthammer criticized the White House for not referring to the Egyptians as Christians.

“Wouldn’t you love to be a fly on the wall in the room where the White House semanticists meet every morning and figure out how they could probably make this announcement without offending those who did it. I think the phrase they should come up with is non-Islamic randomness,” Will said on Fox News Monday. “That would explain just about everything that they have to deal with, but it does – at this point, it is beyond burlesque, its pathological, it’s clinical their inability and unwillingness to say – to accurately describe things.”

Krauthammer said the Obama administration is refusing to “acknowledge the obvious.”

“It’s sort of deconstructing any resistance with its refusal to acknowledge the obvious and the obvious is this. It’s not just Islamic radicalism anymore or Islamic terrorism, which is only a tactic. This is Islamist supremacy and in that sense, it is akin to Nazism. That was a racial supremacy, here it’s Islamic and the ideology of ISIS is clearly supremacist in the sense that anybody who is not Islamic, in their understanding, is to be either enslaved or eradicated. This is a genocidal movement. You kill Christians, you kill Jews, you kill Yazidis but you may in certain circumstances enslave them. That’s what we’re up against and we have an administration that will not even admit that there’s a religious basis underlying what’s going on,” Krauthammer stated.

Family Research Council President Tony Perkins told Fox News that the White House has a difficult time saying Christian.

“ISIS made very clear in this video that this was an execution of ‘people of the cross.’ ISIS apparently has no difficulty saying ‘Christian,’ while the White House has a very difficult time,” Perkins said.

The killings raise the possibility that ISIS – which controls about a third of Syria and Iraq in a self-declared caliphate – has established a direct affiliate less than 500 miles from the southern tip of Italy. One of the militants in the video makes direct reference to that possibility, saying the group now plans to “conquer Rome.”

The militants had been holding 21 Egyptian Coptic Christians hostage for weeks, all laborers rounded up from the city of Sirte in December and January. It was not clear from the video whether all 21 hostages were killed. It was one of the first such beheading videos from an Islamic State group affiliate to come from outside the group’s core territory in Syria and Iraq.

The only thing you can say here is that Obama didn’t do it merely because Obama didn’t give enough of a damn to interrupt his Palm Springs golf vacation.

Barack Obama is a rabid ideologue.  And he is determined to be as ignorant as his twisted, dishonest ideology requires him to be.

We just had that attack in France where the Obama refused to identity the victims at the JEWISH deli as “Jews.”  Even though the MUSLIMS who murdered them WHILE SCREAMING ALLAHU AKBAR did so specifically because they were Jews and because they were in a Jewish-owned business:

President Obama has raised some eyebrows by suggesting in his interview with VOX.com that the shooting at a Kosher supermarket in Paris last month was “random.” It was a comment the president made in making the case that the media overstates the terrorist threat and that his job fighting terrorism is akin to a big-city mayor fighting crime.

“It is entirely legitimate for the American people to be deeply concerned when you’ve got a bunch of violent, vicious zealots who behead people or randomly shoot a bunch of folks in a deli in Paris,” Obama told Vox’s Matt Yglesias in the interview.

“We devote enormous resources to that, and it is right and appropriate for us to be vigilant and aggressive in trying to deal with that — the same way a big city mayor’s got to cut the crime rate down if he wants that city to thrive. But we also have to attend to a lot of other issues, and we’ve got to make sure we’re right-sizing our approach so that what we do isn’t counterproductive.”

So we now have the pathology, and it IS a pathology of dishonesty and hypocrisy and deceit: Obama WILL NOT refer to the murdering terrorist by their religion and he WILL NOT refer to the victims of the murdering terrorists by their religion.

Krauthammer is completely correct: in the Islamic State, in this never-before-seen-in-all-human-history-until-OBAMA-terrorist-army with wealth and numbers and training unlike anything we have ever seen before, we have something metastasizing that has similar aims to the Nazis.  They have the same “we will either murder you or enslave you” mindset that the Nazis had.  The difference is that as the Nazis fixated on Aryanism, the Islamic State is focusing on Islam.

Factoid: there are 1.6 BILLION Muslims for Islamic State to recruit from.  Versus the Nazis’ German population of 69 million.  If the rise of that small of a recruiting population was able to rise into the “existential threat” that created World War II, how will a recruiting population that utterly dwarfs that number fare keeping in mind that nuclear weapons did not exist in the 1930s???

Obama and his oft-documented lying weasel Susan Rice have stated that Islamic terrorism – well, whatever the hell they’re calling it to avoid calling it what it actually clearly is – is not an “existential threat” like the Nazis.  But to the extent that’s true, it’s only because what we’re seeing happening in the Islamic world is so much bigger and so much more dangerous that it dwarfs the Nazis.

Obama and those secular humanists who think like him rabidly ignore the religious nature of the rising threat.  But here’s the problem, set forth in Robert Spencer’s great work, The Truth About Muhammad: the founder of the world’s most intolerant religion:

Difficulties aside, the texts [the Qu’ran and Ahadith] can be read and understood.  And if peaceful Muslims can mount no comeback when jihadists point to Muhammad’s example to justify violence, their ranks will always remain vulnerable to recruitment from jihadists who present themselves as the exponents of “pure Islam,” faithfully following Muhammad’s example. — Spencer, page 8.

Jesus truly was the Prince of Peace as the Bible calls Him.  But history makes very crystal clear that Muhammad was a man of violence and forced conquest who had fought in over 20 military campaigns and who actually had more than thirty more planned at the time of his death.  In 624 AD Muhammad launched the Nakhla raid and officially began the spread of violence in the name of Islam.  Also in 624 Muhammad began the practice of ethnic cleansing against the Jewish Qaynuqa tribe.  He put that same tactic into practice again the following year in 625 against the Jewish Nadir tribe.  Yes, rather like what we saw Islamic State do in Iraq.  In 627 Muhammad beheaded all the males of the Jewish Qurayzah tribe and enslaved all the women and children.  Yes, rather like what the Islamic State is doing now.  And in 631 Muhammad began his warfare against the Christians.  Yes, rather like what the Islamic State is doing now.

It is simply a FACT of history as well as a FACT of theology that Islam has profoundly violence tendencies from their founder that justify those tendencies that Christianity just as clearly does not have.  Again, Spencer points this fact out:

The difference is that no Christian could credibly argue that Jesus, the prince of peace, taught violence, or anything that contradicted his precepts that those who lived by the sword shall die by the sword, that men should turn the other cheek, and that they should render unto Caesar the things that are Caesar’s.  But if Muhammad taught violence, if Muhammad conflated religion and government it will change mujahidin around the world not one bit to pretend otherwise; they will continue to invoke what they believe to be his authentic teachings to justify their actions.  The fact that truths are difficult is no reason to choose unreality and “polite fictions.” — Spencer, pp. 10-11

I was surprised and pleased to encounter an article written in the reliably liberal Atlantic in which Graeme Wood acknowledged the following:

The reality is that the Islamic State is Islamic. Very Islamic. Yes, it has attracted psychopaths and adventure seekers, drawn largely from the disaffected populations of the Middle East and Europe. But the religion preached by its most ardent followers derives from coherent and even learned interpretations of Islam.

Virtually every major decision and law promulgated by the Islamic State adheres to what it calls, in its press and pronouncements, and on its billboards, license plates, stationery, and coins, “the Prophetic methodology,” which means following the prophecy and example of Muhammad, in punctilious detail. Muslims can reject the Islamic State; nearly all do. But pretending that it isn’t actually a religious, millenarian group, with theology that must be understood to be combatted, has already led the United States to underestimate it and back foolish schemes to counter it. We’ll need to get acquainted with the Islamic State’s intellectual genealogy if we are to react in a way that will not strengthen it, but instead help it self-immolate in its own excessive zeal.

And what we have no in Obama is a man who is rabidly unwilling to deal with the actual reason for the Islamic State doing what they are doing.  Just as he is rabidly unwilling to acknowledge what they are doing even as the Islamic State very clearly tells us what they are doing and why they are doing it.  In the name of Allah these Muslims are rising and growing and in the name of Allah they are murdering Christians and Jews in mindboggling numbers.

Look, I understand the attempt to trivialize radical, jihadist, militant extremist Islam as “not being true Islam.”  Just as I don’t believe that the Mormons or the Jehovah’s Witnesses represent “true Christianity.”  But it is frankly idiotic and asinine of me to merely assert that these religious groups don’t somehow even qualify as being “religious.”  And it is just as intellectually vacuous for me to merely wave my hand and dismiss their claims to be “Christian” without bothering to actually show how in fact they fail to truly be the real Christians they claim to be by arguing with them and refuting them according to the Holy Bible.

But that is precisely where we are at with Islam and the liberal progressives who run interference for this religion.  There is no debate and no provision to ever have any debate.  Thus there is no chance at any possibility of reform within Islam.  But the fact of the matter is that the tens of thousands of Muslims who are flocking to Islamic State aren’t doing so in search of wealth or some end of poverty (which will be with us forever, no Obama’s blathering nonsensical rhetoric aside); rather, they are searching for meaning – religious meaning – and they are flocking to the people who are fighting for a religious cause and who are claiming the historic mantle of founder of Islam, Muhammad.

Osama bin Laden was the multi-multi-millionaire son of a billionaire five times over.  Bin Laden’s successor Ayman Al-Zawahiri is a medical doctor.  Every single one of the terrorists who attacked America on 9/11 were financially well-off.  Today we’ve got men who went to the finest private schools on the planet posing with the corpses of people they just beheaded.  This war has NOTHING to do with poverty.  It is a pure lie to claim otherwise.  And yet the heart of Obama, the heart of the Democrat Party, the heart of progressive liberalism, the heart of secular humanism, the heart of the devil himself, is lies, lies, lies.

We find that between tw0-thirds and eighty percent of terrorists have university degrees and we find that a full 20% have engineering degrees.  The morally idiotic notion that income or poverty or education is a significant force behind terrorism is not only a lie, but a ridiculous lie.  So why is the left continuing to push a thesis that is so very clearly not the case?  And the answer is because they want more government control, which a bigger welfare state necessarily ensures.  That’s the real agenda.

I have been pointing out that liberals actually share a great deal in common with the fascist Muslims in that they BOTH conflate religion and government whenever it suits their purpose to do so.  There is no question that Jesus NEVER called for a large government to carry out the functions that He clearly reserved to His people in His Church.  But liberals falsely and hypocritically cite Jesus all the time to justify their massive welfare state.  Similarly, it was the New Testament ideas behind the Christendom of Western Europe from which arose people who were capable of making their own decisions because:

It is worth noting in passing that the office of priest, so prominent in the Old Testament, is not taken over by the early church. Prophets and elders (cf. Ezekiel 7:26) have their counterparts in the church and these titles are used. But there is no official counterpart to the priest, for, as the New Testament teaches, the whole church is a “holy priesthood” (1 Peter 2:5), or a “royal priesthood (1 Peter 2:9). We who are in Christ have all “been made priests to his God” (Revelation 1:6). Each individual has access to the holy of holies, God’s throne of grace, because of the once-for-all atoning death of Christ. No officer in the church has the function of mediating between the believer and God.

No officer in the church has the function of mediating between the believer and God; but liberals teach that only Obama and bureaucrats should have this power as they seize people’s money and forcibly redistribute it according to what THEY claim is the “common good” and as they pass laws and regulations up the whazoo under the belief that people are stupid and ignorant and can not be trusted to govern themselves.

The common good was realized by the people as they freely bought and sold and lived their lives.  But now we have Obama’s “wisdom” to impose it on us instead.

Classical liberalism, as forged by an understanding of genuine New Testament Christianity, emphasized individual freedom by limiting the power of government, by providing property rights and promoting the rule of law, by promoting laissez-faire free market economics.  Secular humanist and frankly atheist progressive liberalism has turned all of these on their head and they have profoundly perverted democracy and government just as the Muslim fascists have done as a result.  The only difference is the means; the ends are identical.

I’ve pointed out that progressive liberalism is Marxist in orientation and so believes in religion as merely being “the opiate of the masses.”  They arrogantly believe that no one actually believes in God; and therefore all that is left is socialist economics as the legitimate means by which people act.  But the great Christian writer G.K. Chesterton said the truth was the precise opposite:

Lenin said that religion is the opium of the people… [But] it is only by believing in God that we can ever criticize the Government. Once abolish the God, and the Government becomes the God. That fact is written all across human history; but it is written most plainly across that recent history of Russia; which was created by Lenin…Lenin only fell into a slight error: he only got it the wrong way round. The truth is that irreligion is the opium of the people. Wherever the people do not believe in something beyond the world, they will worship the world.

That is exactly what has happened under progressive liberalism: the Government has become the God.  Progressive liberals have driven God out of the government, out of the schools and even out of the offices or the corporate world with their dictates of political correctness according to which if one is offended, the whole must put aside the thing that caused offense (unless that thing be progressive liberal doctrine such as homosexuality or abortion).  Government is our God and our Savior and our Provider and tells us what is right and what is wrong.  Our culture has become depraved and toxic because irreligion has become the opium of the people.  We have no values worth truly fighting for and so we are not fighting.

What is interesting is that when you read the quote by Karl Marx in context, what you find is that the Christian religion of Russia prior to the Communist Revolution was KEEPING PEOPLE FROM VIOLENCE.  It was an “opium” that was preventing them from rising up in violence as Marx wanted them to do.  We find that the worst orgy of violence in the entire history of the world that followed Karl Marx’s hateful beliefs – the same beliefs which Barack Hussein Obama adheres to, for what that’s worth – came as the true religion of Christianity was abolished and a godless religion of atheism was imposed in its place resulting in the murder by the State of more than 100 million human beings during peacetime alone.

We face a terrifying crisis that we cannot possibly prevail against because our leader of the free world will NOT acknowledge the actual problem and instead continues to seek to impose a “solution” that has nothing to do with the actual problem and in fact will guarantee the very opposite result of MORE violence.  Because if you want to talk about the Crusades or the Inquisition – as Obama wants to do every time he points his wicked finger at the ancient past of Christianity to conceal today’s rabidly violent Islam – you should also talk about the violence of secular humanism that makes anything ANY other religious movement ever did pale by comparison.

The number of Christians being murdered is growing exponentially under the cancer of Obama.  Because his way is the way of the devil.

Charles Krauthammer has been brilliant in exposing Obama’s lies, deceit, hypocrisy and his “truly pathological in its inability to actually state what’s going on”:

Asked by substitute host Ed Henry whether the wording matters, Krauthammer argued that it does and compared how Winston Churchill “saved England and civilization” in World War II by using “the English language and he put it to work” while the Obama administration is doing “precisely the opposite.” 

He declared that the White House is doing so by “deconstructing any resistance with its refusal to acknowledge the obvious” that “Islamic supremacy” is at work and “akin to Nazism.”

Later, Krauthammer compared the struggle against ISIS to the Cold War in that “the leadership of the United States” will be the ones having to end the threat but, for now:

We have an administration that is truly pathological in its inability to actually state what’s going on. In the video that was released that showed the savage beheading, it was addressed to the nations of the cross. It pledged itself to the conquest of Rome. When the Pope, who is not exactly a Christian militant, who isn’t exactly a revanchist on, you know, on behalf of a Christ, says these people were killed because they were Christian and the administration says that the ones who were killed were Egyptian citizens, you’ve got a serious problem and it’s in this administration and it is with the President.

And the pope rightly points out that there are more Christian martyrs under Obama today than there were in the time of Nero.  Obama is a tool in Satan’s hand to murder Christians by proxy.

I believe that Obama believes that the notion of an all-powerful government that can impose a totalitarian system on the people is where progressive liberals and radical Muslims can come together.  Obama has already negotiated both with terrorist organizations (the Taliban and see here) and with terrorist regimes (Iran).  There is simply no question that Obama truly believes he can negotiate with the most radical and most evil people on earth.  The only question is why he believes that.

I believe that Barack Obama believes – as a secular humanist – that progressive liberalism can bargain with radical Islam on the basis of Marxist economics and reach some kind of compromise.  Just as Neville Chamberlain believed he could do so with Adolf Hitler to attain “peace in our time.”  The Bible describes moral idiots who cry out for peace when there is no peace:

They offer superficial treatments for My people’s mortal wound. They give assurances of peace when there is no peace. — Jeremiah 6:14

That is precisely where we are at today under the cancer of this presidency.  We have a president who actually believes that he can politicize terrorists the way he can politicize Republicans and win a debate by framing it with rhetoric.  But Islamic State doesn’t want to have a debate; they want to burn people alive.

The fact is that one of the very first things that Barack Obama did as president was to send the bust of a man he clearly despised – Winston Churchill – back to England because he did not want that great man’s wisdom contaminating his White House. And as Winston Churchill clearly saw the threat of Nazism and enlisted the aid of an FDR who came to see the same growing threat and realized that we had to confront evil before evil confronted us after all of our allies were defeated, so history is doomed to repeat itself when fools ignore its lesson.

Which is why the beast is coming.

Why Do Liberals Like Obama Embrace And Defend Islam?

February 9, 2015

We’ve seen it over and over and over again: Barack Obama defending Islam and saying this religion – founded by a man who had fought in over thirty military campaigns of conquest and had another thirty planned at the time of his death, a man who owned slaves, a man who by today’s standards was without any question a pedophile, a man of violence who ordered genocide – has nothing whatsoever to do with terrorism.

It’s CHRISTIANITY – according to our herald to the Antichrist – which is responsible for terrorism.  Oh, and slavery, too.

It doesn’t matter that Islam was responsible for acts of barbaric violence and slavery long before Christianity and never bothered to reform itself of its barbarity unlike Christianity most certainly did.  It doesn’t matter if the acts that Obama condemns by citing the Crusades was itself a Christian RESPONSE to Islamic jihadism and invasion and that the Inquistion he cites was primarily done by tyrant secular kings like he himself wants to be rather than “the Church.”

It’s not just Obama; it is LIBERALISM that is celebrating Islam, the world’s most profoundly and rabidly intolerant religion.  We recently saw it at liberal Duke University where the left tried to “fundamentally transform” and “redistribute” the Christian chapel of the university that was founded and established as a Christian institution into a mosque broadcasting the Muslim call to prayer.  And we’re seeing it in public schools where liberal bureaucrats and liberal school teachers are literally indoctrinating children into Islam in the name of “education.”  And you tell ME how many public school children were forced to say the Lord’s Prayer: ZERO.

There are reasons for this, and they are EVIL.  Liberalism is evil.  Liberals are doing the work of their father, the devil, on a daily basis.

It is frankly stunning how dishonest secular humanism is and always has been in its historical perversions to make Christianity the villain.  This vicious lie has been going since even before Christianity formulated the scientific method and began the Enlightenment that the enemies of Christianity subsequently hijacked and claimed for itself.  The first modern scientist and the discoverer of the scientific method upon which modern science is based was a product of Christendom and a publicly avowed Christian who described his faith in Christianity – and its influence on his approach to science – in his writings.  The discoverer of every single modern branch of science was a publicly confessed Christian.  The presuppositions necessary FOR the rise of science itself uniquely came out of the Christian worldview:

J.P. Moreland (Source: The Creation Hypothesis: Scientific Evidence for an Intelligent Designer, p. 17) listed some of the philosophical presuppositions – based on the Judeo-Christian worldview – that were necessary for the foundation of science:

1. the existence of a theory-independent, external world

2. the orderly nature of the external world

3. the knowability of the external world

4. the existence of truth

5. the laws of logic

6. the reliability of human cognitive and sensory faculties to serve as -truth-gatherers and as a source of justified beliefs in our intellectual environment

7. the adequacy of language to describe the world

8. the existence of values used in science (e.g., “test theories fairly and report test results honestly”)

9. the uniformity of nature and induction

10. the existence of numbers

Good luck in starting science without all of these assumptions – of which the assumption of God according to the Judeo-Christian worldview was necessary to provide.  Science could not verify or validate any of the list above for the reason that they already needed to be accepted in order for science to ever get off the ground in the first place.

To put it crassly, if it were up to secular humanists, we would still be living in caves and afraid of fire.  And if it left up to secular humanists, we will ultimately be living in caves and afraid of fire again.  And all you have to do to realize that society is not advancing under their standard, but degenerating, to know that.

God created the world as a habitation for the capstone of His creation, man.  And then God created man in His own image and therefore able to see and fathom the world which He had created for humanity.  That is the basis for science.

Gleason Archer framed an insurmountable intellectual contradiction for the “scientific atheist”:

“But it should be pointed out that consistent atheism, which represents itself to be the most rational and logical of all approaches to reality, is in actuality completely self defeating and incapable of logical defense. That is to say, if indeed all matter has combined by mere chance, unguided by any Higher Power of Transcendental Intelligence, then it necessarily follows that the molecules of the human brain are also the product of mere chance. In other words, we think the way we do simply because the atoms and molecules of our brain tissue happen to have combined in the way they have, totally without transcendental guidance or control. So then even the philosophies of men, their system of logic and all their approaches to reality are the result of mere fortuity. There is no absolute validity to any argument advanced by the atheist against the position of theism.

On the basis of his won presuppositions, the atheist completely cancels himself out, for on his own premises his arguments are without any absolute validity. By his own confession he thinks the way he does simply because the atoms in his brain happen to combine the way they do. If this is so, he cannot honestly say that his view is any more valid than the contrary view of his opponent. His basic postulates are self contradictory and self defeating; for when he asserts that there are no absolutes, he thereby is asserting a very dogmatic absolute. Nor can he logically disprove the existence of God without resorting to a logic that depends on the existence of God for its validity. Apart from such a transcendent guarantor of the validity of logic, any attempts at logic or argumentation are simply manifestations of the behavior of the collocation of molecules that make up the thinker’s brain.”  — Gleason Archer, Encyclopedia of Bible Difficulties, 1982, pp. 55-56

Basically, if the atheist is right, then “human reason” becomes a contradiction in terms and let’s just live like the beasts they say we are and be done pretending we’re something we’re not.

What secular humanists have been trying to do – frankly for generations – is to perpetuate a fraud.  It would be akin to me intercepting a great thinker’s work and trying to pass it off as my own.

But what the hey, we’ve got Obama and we have his “fundamental transformation” of America and of history itself.  And so what if he’s the most thoroughly documented liar – literally ON VIDEO – who ever lived?  So what if his most significant legislative accomplishment was based entirely on a system of deliberate lies on the view that people were Darwinian sheep who needed to be manipulated by their DNA master race superiors for their own good?

Why did the Roman Empire fall?  Christianity, the secular humanists – citing works such as Edward Gibbon’s Rise and Fall of the Roman Empire – have been dishonestly telling us.  It doesn’t matter that the Roman Empire was a massive and vicious persecutor of Christianity and murdered Christians by the hundreds of thousands.  It doesn’t matter if the so-called “global warming” that the same secular humanists are using today to try to redistribute wealth for their socialist expansion of their god the State ended and an ice age began that prompted invasion by wave after migrating wave of barbarian peoples who pressured Rome.  It doesn’t matter that the so-called “climate change” that these socialist redistributionist Government-worshipers are saying is unique to our own time due to modern pollution actually brought about the collapse of the Old Egyptian Kingdom prior to bringing down the Roman Empire.  It doesn’t matter if Rome suffered from its own massive excesses and from generations of poor emperors that culminated in civil wars and ultimately threat of defeat by these barbarian peoples who had fled from their own realm in search of warmer weather.  And it doesn’t matter that when all of this occurred Christianity was in actual fact the only institution left to provide the leadership and the moral framework necessary to keep a system that otherwise would have collapsed centuries before.

All the secular humanists – all the Obamas of this world – needed was the fact that when the Roman Empire finally truly collapsed, Christians were in charge.  And therefore it was all their fault and all of the above facts of history can be forgotten.

Obama is nothing more than one more liar in a long series of liars who have made Christianity their whipping boy.

There are three reasons for this.

The first – the true foundation for liberal and secular humanist hatred of Christianity – is very simple and it comes directly from the mouth of Jesus Himself:

“If the world hates you, you know that it has hated Me before it hated you.   If you were of the world, the world would love its own; but because you are not of the world, but I chose you out of the world, because of this the world hates you.  Remember the word that I said to you, ‘A slave is not greater than his master.’ If they persecuted Me, they will also persecute you; if they kept My word, they will keep yours also.  But all these things they will do to you for My name’s sake, because they do not know the One who sent Me.”  — John 15:18-21

I argued that when a liberal- and secular humanist-hijacked Duke University – once a Christian-founded institution launched to advance the spread of the Christian Gospel of Jesus Christ – called upon the Christian chapel to be used to broadcast the Muslim call to prayer .  You know, the Muslim prayer that Obama claimed was one of the most beautiful sounds on earth.

It’s not very beautiful to me, because after it gets prayed, Christians and Jews tend to get murdered.  It’s kind of like the creepy psychopathic serial killer who sings with a nice voice as he’s preparing to skin you alive.  Pardon me for not appreciating the nice voice.

But it is a simple fact that has been proven over and over and over again for centuries now: Secular humanists and liberals like Obama hate Christianity and demonize the Christians who believe in Christianity in all kinds of ways as a matter of routine because it hated Jesus first.

Secular humanist liberal progressives decry Christianity as “intolerant” because it criticizes homosexuality and radical feminist doctrines such as abortion.  And in embracing Islam as they have, they refute themselves because they have embraced a rival of the Judeo-Christian worldview that is so rabidly and hatefully intolerant to the same homosexuals and women it is beyond UNREAL.

Satan hates Jesus more than anything.  And so do his followers, who like their father the devil are liars.

The second reason is arrogance.

Secular humanism and liberalism arise from atheism, the belief that there is no God – and certainly no God as revealed and described by the Holy Bible – as an a priori.

They ultimately believe that “God” is a big, giant joke.  And it isn’t just that they don’t believe in God; they believe that it is ridiculous for ANYONE to believe in God.  And so ultimately no one really does believe in God and we are all just economic meat puppets as their intellectual master Karl Marx described:

The foundation of irreligious criticism is: Man makes religion, religion does not make man. Religion is, indeed, the self-consciousness and self-esteem of man who has either not yet won through to himself, or has already lost himself again. But man is no abstract being squatting outside the world. Man is the world of man – state, society. This state and this society produce religion, which is an inverted consciousness of the world, because they are an inverted world. Religion is the general theory of this world, its encyclopaedic compendium, its logic in popular form, its spiritual point d’honneur, its enthusiasm, its moral sanction, its solemn complement, and its universal basis of consolation and justification. It is the fantastic realization of the human essence since the human essence has not acquired any true reality. The struggle against religion is, therefore, indirectly the struggle against that world whose spiritual aroma is religion.

Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people.

The abolition of religion as the illusory happiness of the people is the demand for their real happiness. To call on them to give up their illusions about their condition is to call on them to give up a condition that requires illusions. The criticism of religion is, therefore, in embryo, the criticism of that vale of tears of which religion is the halo.

Criticism has plucked the imaginary flowers on the chain not in order that man shall continue to bear that chain without fantasy or consolation, but so that he shall throw off the chain and pluck the living flower. The criticism of religion disillusions man, so that he will think, act, and fashion his reality like a man who has discarded his illusions and regained his senses, so that he will move around himself as his own true Sun. Religion is only the illusory Sun which revolves around man as long as he does not revolve around himself. [2]

Religion cannot possibly be true.  No one can actually truly believe in religion.  And economics and human government, they believe, is the ultimate human reality.

And so liberals and secular humanists believe, in their arrogance, that they can actually ultimately reason with people who put other people in cages and burn them alive.  Or behead them.  Or bury them alive.  Or crucify them.  Or you name the vile thing that they do.

As amazing as it is, it is true: liberals keep believing that if they can just deny reality, deny the real, powerful religious motivation of the terrorists, they can get to the real grounds of the human essence of atheist economics.

The third reason is that radical Islam and secular humanist progressive liberalism both have the same cherished goal: that of human-Government as having divine power.  The Government as God, able to dictate its will by executive order tyranny.  I’ve previously argued that, also.

I’ve pointed out – with examples – that radical Islam and just-as-radical secular humanist progressive liberalism employ the same basic tactics and have the same basic ultimate goal.  And the only difference is the means to that same end and the fact that the latter extremist group are bound by the fact that they have to seize total totalitarian power from within the confines of democracy that they named themselves after but ultimately despise.

Where does government power end?  Where does the power to tax end?  Where does the power of government to say, “No you DON’T have the freedom to practice your religion!’ end?  And both radical Islam and the modern Democrat Party basically say the power of Government NEVER ends and HAS no limits.  We are to do and think and believe and obey as our Ayatollahs or our Obamas dictate that we are to do and think and believe and obey.

I just thought I’d point that out to those of you who can still think.

“Don’t let anyone capture you with empty philosophies and high-sounding nonsense that come from human thinking and from the spiritual powers of this world, rather than from Christ.”  – Colossians 2:8

 

Obama Newsflash: Terrorism Has NOTHING To Do With Islam, Folks. But, Hey, Let’s Blame Christianity For Crusades A THOUSAND Years Ago

February 6, 2015

I have repeatedly pointed out in the past that Barack Obama is no more a Christian and has no more right to claim he’s a Christian than I am a liberal Democrat who has a right to represent the Democrat Party.

The Bible makes it rather clear what it means to be a Christian:

If you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.  For it is by believing in your heart that you are made right with God, and it is by confessing with your mouth that you are saved. — Romans 10:9,10

And:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith–and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God–not by works, so that no one can boast. — Ephesians 2:8,9

The Word of God is crystal clear: Christians are people who are saved by their personal faith in the Person and Work of Jesus Christ, who lived a perfect, sinless life representing sinful humanity and then died an Atoning death in our place.  And then He bodily rose from the dead, conquering death and hell, such that those who put their trust in Him receive His righteousness and His reward.

And of course there is the beloved john 3:16 as revealed by Jesus:

“For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes in Him would not perish, but have eternal life.”

And there are the words of Jesus in Mark 10:45:

“For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many.”

Now let’s examine the pseudo-Christian “testimony” of our Fool-in-Chief:

I worked as a community organizer in Chicago. I was very active in low income neighborhoods, working on issues of crime, education and employment, and seeing that in some ways, certain portions of the African-American community are doing as bad if not worse, and recognizing that my fate remains tied up with their fates, that my individual salvation is not going to come about without a collective salvation for the country. Unfortunately, I think that recognition requires we make sacrifices and this country has not always been willing to make the sacrifices necessary to bring about a new day and a new age.

Now, when I found that quote – with the out-of-Obama’s-own-lying-mouth video – at Weasel Zippers, I also enjoyed the accompanying article that simply documented what a grandiose and narcissistic hypocrite and fraud Barack Obama is on every level under the sun:

In addition to the messianic vision inherent in the “I can only be saved if I save the country”, there’s the insulting, pedantic nature of the second part of the phrase “this country has not always been willing to make the sacrifices”. The people of this country, perhaps in some ways, most exemplified by its veterans(like those Obama stepped on during the shutdown), have been willing to make great sacrifices, some even the ultimate sacrifice, to protect this country, its freedoms and the constitution.

What sacrifices has Obama actually made in his rather privileged life?

The answer, of course, being ZERO POINT ZERO ZERO ZERO:

In 2002, the year before Obama launched his campaign for U.S. Senate, the Obamas reported income of $259,394, ranking them in the top 2 percent of U.S. households, according to Census Bureau statistics. That year the Obamas claimed $1,050 in deductions for gifts to charity, or 0.4 percent of their income. The average U.S. household totaled $1,872 in gifts to charity in 2002, according to the Center on Philanthropy at Indiana University.

The national average for charitable giving has long hovered at 2.2 percent of household income, according to the Glenview-based Giving USA Foundation, which tracks trends in philanthropy. Obama tax returns dating to 1997 show he fell well below that benchmark until 2005, the year he arrived in Washington.

Both Obama and his wife, Michelle, declined to respond to questions about their charitable donations.

For the record, socialism is NOT in the Bible.  The ONLY place IN the Bible where people were taxed to help the poor WAS IN THE THEOCRACY OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.  Now if you want an Old Testament theocracy, Democrat, that’s fine by me.  But the fact is that you are a hypocrite and a liar and your god is Satan and human government.  And realize that even the Old Testament welfare system had nowhere NEAR the redistributionism that the modern engine of Satan that socialism/communism/fascism has.  In the New Testament, Jesus was confronted by the poor.  There is not ONE SINGLE INSTANCE when Jesus EVER called for government to create anything approaching a welfare state.  Rather, He turned to His disciples – who represented the Christian Church – and He said, “YOU feed them” (Mark 6:36-37).  And nowhere did the New Testament writers likewise ever call upon the human government that hated everything Christianity stood for to take care of the poor.

I can further point out the fact that liberals don’t WANT us to give money to the poor; they want to force us to give money to the GOVERNMENT.  Which happens to be a very big difference, given that a) government gives money out of political, rather than charitable, goals and b) government pisses more money away by the billions than any institutions that ever existed.

So you combine the fact that big-government liberals like Obama are selfish uncharitable with their own money, that liberals in GENERAL are not as giving as the conservatives that they routinely demonize as selfish, that liberals are trying to feed government rather than feed the poor and that if you want government to truly help the poor, well then let’s create a theocracy, and let’s rule out liberalism and the liberals who push for it as having any answers.

But my primary point thus far is that either Christianity is wrong and the Bible that reveals Christianity is wrong, or Barack Obama is NOT a Christian.  It was JESUS who served mankind, NOT Barack Obama as a damn community agitator, and it was the work of JESUS that saves, NOT the work of our communist dictator and his “collective salvation.”  And in fact Obama’s “collective salvation” is a doctrine right out of the mouth of the devil and not out of the mouth of Jesus or out of the teachings of the Word of God.

I point this out to underscore the fact that Barack Obama is a deep-seated hater and reviler of Christianity as Christianity actually is.  Like the United States of America, Barack Obama has “fundamentally transformed” Christianity from what it was revealed to be by Jesus and explained by Paul to what Obama has perverted it into.

“Christianity” as Obama has fundamentally transformed it is the worship of homosexual sodomy on an altar of sixty million innocent human babies murdered by a Democrat Party that is ten times more wicked than the Nazis were according to respective holocaust totals.  You read Romans chapter one verses eighteen through thirty-one and try to tell me that the societal embrace of homosexuality isn’t the rock-bottom depth a society can descend to or that it doesn’t bring about the full wrath of a just and holy God.  You read Psalms 139:13-16 or Luke 1:41 and you tell me that the Democrat Party is not the party of mass murder on a scale that matches Stalin.

Barack Obama is no more “Christian” than the devil he serves.

And so, as Muslims have been beheading people and making celebratory movies about their work to murder, and as they now put a human being in a cage and burn him alive, Barack Obama has been saying the following.  Let me contrast Obama defending Islam with his rabid attack on Christianity.

The Washington Post – which is on the liberal side of newspapers – had this to say in an article about Obama’s constant defense of Islam vis-à-vis terrorism:

Obama says the Islamic State ‘is not Islamic.’ Americans disagree.
By Aaron Blake September 11, 2014

Throughout his presidency, President Obama has emphasized one point while talking about Islamist extremists: They are not practicing Islam, he has said, they are perverting it.

He took that a step further Wednesday night. While announcing that he’s expanding the campaign against the Islamic State extremist group into Syria, Obama said flatly that this group, which is trying to install a caliphate in the Middle East, “is not Islamic.” He didn’t say they are perverting their religion; he said they’re not even part of that religion.

“No religion condones the killing of innocents, and the vast majority of [the Islamic State’s] victims have been Muslim,” Obama said. (Obama refers to the group as ISIL; more on that here.)

While the rest of his speech avoided polarizing language, this statement stands out. That’s because it’s very polarizing. And, in fact, Americans are more inclined to disagree with Obama on this point.

[…]

Another word to add to “polarizing” is the word “demonic.”

Over and over and over again, ad nauseam, Barack Obama has claimed that terrorism has nothing whatsoever to do with Islam.

But let’s just ignore the atrocities that are taking place by the tens of thousands today, Obama says.  Because what’s really important to remember is that Christianity is evil:

Obama spotlights ‘terrible deeds in the name of Christ’ during Crusades
By Douglas Ernst  – The Washington Times – Thursday, February 5, 2015

President Obama used the annual National Prayer Breakfast on Thursday to draw those in attendance to the “terrible deeds” committed “in the name of Christ.”

While speaking at the Washington event, Mr. Obama had harsh words for the Islamic State group, but he also put a spotlight on the Crusades.

“Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ,” Mr. Obama said.
 SEE ALSO: Obama equates Islamic terrorism with ‘terrible deeds’ committed by Christians
The president added that members of the Sunni radical terror group are part of  “brutal vicious death cult that in the name of religion carries out unspeakable acts of barbarism.”

The president’s speech came just days after Jordanian pilot Moaz al-Kassasbeh was burned alive by the Islamic State group. The member of the U.S.-led coalition had been held prisoner since December after his F-16 crashed.

This is the moral equivalence of Lucifer.  You have to be demon-possessed to say such a thing, and you have to be demon-possessed to believe it.

This actually, genuinely goes even beyond mere moral equivalence; because Obama implicitly claiming that the reason Islam has nothing to do with terrorism and Christianity is directly responsible for the Crusades also excuses modern Islam in an even deeper, uglier manner – namely, that Christians started the evil during the Crusades and what’s going on today is therefore still Christianity’s fault!

What of course is ignored here is the simple fact that the Crusades themselves began as a Catholic Pope responded to a Christian Emperor’s appeal for aid as his empire was being besieged by Muslim invaders, understand that the same demon-possessed man who has again and again claimed that the murderous and rabid atrocities committed by Muslims in the name of Islam going on AS WE SPEAK have nothing to with Islam, but this same demoniac now argues that we should go back one-thousand years to demonize Christians and identify the Crusades with Christ.

Barack Obama is the worst kind of liar who ever lived in all of history.  Compare and contrast Muhammad with Jesus: Jesus told His disciples to put away their sword – because they only HAD one sword between the twelve of them; He’s the One who said, “Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do” to the people who were crucifying Him.  His disciples were martyred by the thousands if not by the millions by the kind of government that Barack Obama wishes was his.  Muhammad, by contrast, had been in more than thirty military campaigns at the time of his death and actually had another thirty strategically planned that only his death prevented.  He was a pedophile by today’s standards, and he certainly killed people and ordered a great many more people put to death.  Within less than eighty years of his death, Muhammad’s religion was pouring across Christendom armed with the scimitar, killing and looting.  His Muslim forces were finally stopped in France after Islam had viciously crossed the entire continent of Europe, by Charles Martel in 722 AD.  And his Muslim forces had murdered their way across Spain, across Africa, across the Holy land of Israel, across most of the sites holy to Christians and Jews.

Barack Obama is a true demoniac to draw a moral equivalence between Christianity and Islam and any kind of acts committed a thousand years ago with acts that are being committed right now, today.  Jesus was truly the Prince of Peace; Muhammad was a vicious man of violence.  To whatever extent you want to blame Christianity for acts that occurred a thousand years ago as influenced by Medieval societies that were ALL basically barbaric by today’s standards, is there no such thing as “reform”?  Apparently not, as Obama has REPEATEDLY asserted that Islam has nothing to do with terrorism but, let’s not forget what those Christians did in the name of Christ.

I would also point out the simple FACT that slavery was abolished across Christendom BY Christians BECAUSE of their faith in Jesus.  It was CHRISTIANITY that caused Great Britain to abolish slavery through the tireless fight of Christian William Wilburforce.  Barack Obama was a slandering liar to claim otherwise.  There has been no legal slavery in ANY nation that has been Christian since the United States – and its intuition of slavery thanks to Democrats and thanks to secular humanism – finally abolished slavery in 1865.  Compared to the fact that we STILL have a huge institution of slavery – whether “official” or not – across the Islamic world this very day.

So Obama – demon-possessed liar and slanderer that he is – blames Christianity for the terror and the slavery that they actually championed to ABOLISH while the very Muslims Obama wickedly protects are still flying high in the sale of BOTH terrorism AND slavery.

Christians today – under and because of a man who when running for president said “My Muslim faith” and had to be corrected – are being murdered in the greatest numbers in all of human history.

It isn’t any different today in that sense than it was at the beginning of the Crusades.  You look at the many of the great Christian churches of antiquity and they were seized by militant Islam and “fundamentally transformed” (to use Obama’s pet phrase) into mosques.  And so the previous link discusses the “fundamental transformation” of a church that USED to be located in the Christian capital of a Christian empire (Constantinople) in the very region where St. Paul the great Christian apostle was born.  In the same way, St. Augustine’s realm in Africa was “fundamentally transformed” and his converts were commanded to embrace Islam or die.

Nothing has much changed; weakness inspires boldness and forced conversion from Islam just as it always has.

Kayla Jean Mueller – the female hostage Islamic State claims was killed by Jordan’s response to their murdering of a Jordanian pilot by burning him alive – was just one of those innumerable Christian martyrs.  She went to help Muslims because of her faith in the Lord Jesus Christ.

And Barack Obama and every single Democrat who is in any way aligned with him just urinated on the faith that Kayla Mueller gave up her life to reveal.

Barack Obama – and every single future resident of hell who voted for his evil – are aiding and abetting those martyrdoms and those who murder Christians with impunity.

Obama is like his father the devil, who was a liar without shame.  His words mean nothing; they are twisted, dishonest, slanderous, empty, and full of deceit.

 


Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 582 other followers