The Truth About Noah’s Ark

Dedicated to the one’s I love (Clare and Violet)…

Atheists cite the biblical story of Noah’s Ark and the flood as indisputable proof that God is a cruel, genocidal maniac unworthy of omnipotence. But could this simply be an example of the moral blindness that atheists so vehemently deny possessing?

Let’s take a look.

Noah 2

The source of atheist ire and offense comes from the following verses from the book of Genesis, Chapter 6.  The following are verses that illustrate God’s reasoning and frame of mind.

“5 And now God found that earth was full of men’s iniquities, and that the whole frame of their thought was set continually on evil;”

“11 There lay the world, corrupt in God’s sight, full of oppression;”

Imagine a world where the meanest, most maniacal  bullies ruled and where weaker men, women and children where raped, beaten, murdered and enslaved for the pure joy of it, every hour of the day, every day, every where.

After witnessing the fascist Axis powers at the beginning of the 20th century the biblical description of mankind’s unbridled moral state is undeniably right on the money.

What was the Allied response to the “oppression” and “iniquity” of the Axis powers?

The Allies had no choice but to exterminate them.

Below is a photo of dead German civilians piled up like so much trash after their city, Dresden, was bombed to rubble by the Allies.2WWdresden2

Here are Imperial Japanese soldiers practicing Bushido on a baby:

1 Rape of Nanjing

Were President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill evil genocidal maniacs for exterminating the German Third Reich and Imperial Japan?

Of course not.

Similarly, was God an evil genocidal maniac for exterminating the kind of worldwide evil mankind saw expressed by the NAZI and Imperial Japanese fascists?

Of course not.

Consequently, the atheist insistence on condemning God for the Flood can only be the result of ingrained, willful, moral blindness.

Any questions?

God of the Bible – What’s Not to Love?

Atheists make the case that God is a cruel, malevolent, genocidal maniac. And since that is so, it is up to the a rational, capable, godless mankind to figure out for himself, how to be civilized.

god-is-love

Here are examples of God of the Bible (Leviticus 19, 1-18) laying out the rules of love to  mankind who is lost in hate, bullying, pettiness and greed.

“You shall not bear hatred for your brother in your heart.”

“You shall not curse the deaf, or put a stumbling block in front of the blind…”

“Take no revenge and cherish no grudge against your fellow countrymen.”

“You shall love your neighbor as yourself.”

Atheists deny God who taught mankind these rules of love and the Christian Western Civilization that wove them into their global civil society for the first time in human history.

Plato, Moses and Jesus Speak to the Futility of Atheism

Tags

Most atheists in the West are captains of whatever endeavor they are involved in.  For the most part they are great students, superb artisans, conscious medical professionals and passionate champions of what they think is right and just.

But what is right and just?

For the atheist’s endeavors as a student, right and just is excellent academic performance which yields an A.

For the atheist artisan (guitar maker in this case) an beautiful, sonorous musical instrument is right and just.

For the atheist brain surgeon what is right and just is the daily pyrotechnic display of technique, knowledge and artistry that lead to healing, healthy patients.

And who could not agree?

Universal agreement is possible in these cases because of a shared, common, objective standard of what is right and just.

But what about rightness and justice with regard to non-physical concepts like morality?

Witnessing the rightness and justice of great students, artisans and surgeons in action is easy compared to examining whether economic or political policies are effective (right and just).

This is because with the complex systems that make up civil society so much remains open to personal opinion with regard to what is right and just even with a shared, common, objective standard of what is right and just.

The purpose of this post is to demonstrate that with regard to the moral needs of civil society (what is right and just), atheism is futile. And for that we look back into Antiquity, a time long ago when philosophers worked out the basic moral foundations of civil society in Christian Western Civilization.

god-fresco-hands

First up is Plato, the ancient Greek philosopher whose tour de force, “The Republic,” examines the nature of the soul using the Greek city-state as an analogy of the soul. Plato makes clear that man must reason his way toward the truth through dialog and prodigious contemplation.

During the dialog Socrates reasons is way to “the good” which is the form or idea which is the source of reality.  Nearly a 1000 years later in late Antiquity, Christians would complete Plato’s contemplation of “the good” with the understanding that “the good” is actually God.

God, the source of reality became the universal standard of what is right and just during the first centuries of what became Christian Western Civilization.

Next up is Moses who lived about 1000 years before Plato.

The biblical literature attributed to Moses provides the foundation for Christianity. In the Bible book of Deuteronomy, Chapter 5, Moses transmits to mankind the universal moral standard given by God. This universal moral standard is called The Law and boils down to a list of rules which govern personal conduct.

ten commandments, Jerusalem, Israel

Here we see that what is right and just begins with the individual and that The Law applies to everyone equally. What is right and just begins with the individual which is a thread common to both “The Republic” and the Bible.

In Deuteronomy Chapter 6, Moses exhorts the Jews to ponder or contemplate the meaning and implications of The Law. Moses’ exhortation to the contemplation of what is right and just is in common with Plato’s admonition to his readers to do the same.

In his letter to the Romans (5:13), Saint Paul issues forth with slam dunk Greco-Roman reasoning based on the teachings of Moses:

“Now, it is only where there is a law to transgress that guilt is imputed…”

That is, knowledge of what is right and just is only possible if there exists a common, universal, objective standard (The Law).

Clearly, the Christian understanding of what is right and just is not a product of religious dogma but of much thinking and reflection.

Finally, are the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth.

Upon examining the Gospels in context with the rest of the Bible we come to understand that Jesus was steeped like strong tea in the teachings of Moses and the Wisdom books of the Bible.  That means that Jesus was transmitting moral standards based on The Law given by God to Moses.

And keeping to Hebrew tradition, Jesus taught using the parable. And Jesus used the tool of sound reasoning when conversing with those around him.

The parable requires much thought and contemplation on the part of the listener. This method of teaching used by Jesus along with sound reasoning indicate that comprehension of what is right and just requires rational thought and contemplation.

Jesus also  began each of his miracles with a short dialog with those people involved with the miracle. Also seen centuries later with Plato, the dialog produces literature that lives and breaths and meets the reader exactly where and when he is.

In conclusion, Western Civilization is the result of thousands of years of contemplation of a particular, universal, objective moral standard given to mankind by God, “the good” who is the source of reality.

Atheism is futile simply because it requires the rejection of the existence  of God.

For only from God can come a universal, objective moral standard by which to understand what is right and just.

That means atheism requires the rejection of what is right and just.

Logically then, futile atheism hearkens back to a brutal, uncivilized world where justice was always the advantage of the strong.

 

 

Why Brother Mario of Buenos Aires Is the Worst Pope EVER!

At the end of the Christian Middle Ages, it was papal idolatry, the prolonged and profoundly ingrained love and pursuit of wealth and secular power that disillusioned Catholic scholar and priest, Martin Luther, exploded into a megaton fusion blast called, The Protestant Reformation.

Europe was never the same and the once almost unified religion of Catholic Christianity was forever shattered to bits. The Protestant Reformation was European Christendom’s profound, intractable denial of Jesus’ passionate and poetic divine call for unity among his people.

And today, the Christian world (i.e., Western Civilization) is being torn asunder by another idolater: none other than Pope Francis (nee Mario Bergoglio), Bishop of Rome.

pope-lib-theology-640x480

What makes Pope Francis an idolater?

Pope Francis is a radical leftist.

That means his true religion is radical leftist political philosophy, not the Gospel teachings of Jesus Christ.

And that means that Pope Francis has no regard whatsoever for objective reality and “the Laws of Nature and Nature’s God,” which form the bedrock of the Christian worldview.

Here are a few examples taken from his latest letter that demonstrate the rotten black corruption of Pope Frances:

  1. “I know that you have committed yourselves to fight for social justice, to defend our Sister Mother Earth and to stand alongside migrants.”

“Sister Mother Earth” harkens a return to pagan religions.

And “social justice” is left code for totalitarian state control over every aspect of society.

2. “First, the ecological crisis is real. “A very solid scientific consensus indicates that we are presently witnessing a disturbing warming of the climatic system.”

Global warming is a proven hoax and there is no such thing as “scientific consensus.”

Pope Francis is thus, a liar.

And like any leftist who is intelligent enough, patient enough and ruthless enough to acquire a position of power, Pope Francis knows that he is lying.

3. “Christian terrorism does not exist, Jewish terrorism does not exist, and Muslim terrorism does not exist. There are fundamentalist and violent individuals in all peoples and religions.”

In this truly evil statement, Pope Francis not only willfully lies but he uses the time honored leftist tactic called moral equivalence to deny the existence of the Islamic Jihad.

The fact is that the Islamic Jihad is the perennial enemy of Christian Western Civilization and has been trying to destroy it since the Jihad stormed out of Arabia in the 7th century Anno Domini.

But there is one thing Pope Francis said in his latest letter that I can get behind:

“Where there is error, let us sow truth.”

Pope Francis through his in-your-face lying and brazen idolatry, has untethered Western Civilization from reality: the Gospel teachings of Jesus and the exceptional civilization that they spawned.

Nevertheless, I would like to introduce modern humanity to today’s Martin Luther:

president-trump

Donald Trump, long may you run.

 

 

 

Christianity – Modern Civilization’s Critical Ingredient

America is truly God’s Country.

Humble servant of Christ, Silence of Mind, once drew the ire of his Catholic pastor by seriously recommending that the Holy See be moved to Topeka, Kansas, the near geographic center of God’s Country, the United States of America.

topeka

But once Good Pastor Jim took a moment to get over his ingrained and trained Catholic reverence for tradition, he was able to see clearly into the Silence of Mind:

“In giving freedom to the slave, we assure freedom to the free — honorable alike in what we give, and what we preserve. We shall nobly save, or meanly lose, the last best hope of earth.”

Those are the golden words of Abraham Lincoln after the onset of the American Civil War.

In the centuries of late Antiquity, Christianity rose from a gutter Palestinian religious cult to the cultural and religious coin of the realm of the entire Greco-Roman expanse (Europe, North Africa, Middle East, Asia Minor, Britain).

Rome became the capital of the western area of the Christian expanse and Byzantium (Constantinople) became the capital of the eastern area of the new Christian expanse.

Ironically, Christian eastern expanse retained its Greco-Roman imperial government until 1453 when it was finally conquered and wiped out by the Islamic Jihad.

The foundation for modernity, what the world calls Western Civilization, was laid down in the Christian western expanse (Europe and Britain) during the Middle Ages. The Catholic Church became one of the most powerful institutions in the world, having inserted itself into the secular-political machinery of the decaying and doomed Greco-Roman culture.

Of particular note is that with the Church and various secular power centers constantly competing with and checking each other, liberty was able to break out in Europe.

The Reformation, the Italian Renaissance and the Age of Discovery all heralded the advent of modernity.

michelangelos_pieta_st_peters_basilica_1498-99

Such blazing social phenomena (all powered by Christianity) never, ever happened in any other civilizations throughout human history.

And this is precisely why Christian Western Civilization is the only civilization in human history that was able to advance past the slave and the beast of burden.

Christian philosophers gave us modern science, capitalism, authentic human rights and stable republican government.

It is therefore critically necessary for the people of today to relish the resurgence of Christianity in the American Republic.  This is because the common sense, morality and intellectual vitality infused into culture by Christians, makes modern culture possible.

Unlike Good Pastor Jim, the grand multitude of teaming humanity will never have the opportunity and marvelous fortune to gaze into the Silence of Mind for insight into the mechanics of American civilization and culture.

The next best thing is to watch THE Donald as he goes about establishing and running his presidency.

 

Dialoguing of the Transgender and Pro-Abortion Arguments to Find the Truth

The dialogue presented here, between a transgender leftist and a man educated in natural theory and modern science, is as rare as hen’s teeth.

Leftists usually explode into psychotic rage when their ideas and arguments are questioned.

But not in this case.

Both sides of the arguments presented here are prodded and probed and tickled by the respective protagonists.

Whatever side of the argument you take, do you see any points that were missed or poorly presented by the two men?

Regrettably, the title of the video is a bit aggressive but don’t be discouraged.

For your viewing pleasure, an argument between two diametrically opposing views,  fashioned like an art piece:

 

 

NOAA Scientist Blows Whistle On Global Warming Hoax

“A high-level whistleblower has told this newspaper that America’s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) breached its own rules on scientific integrity when it published the sensational but flawed report, aimed at making the maximum possible impact on world leaders including Barack Obama and David Cameron at the UN climate conference in Paris in 2015.”

climate-change-hoax

The UN and NOAA hoaxers tried to use the UN climate report to make a nearly 20 year period of stable weather disappear.

“The report claimed that the ‘pause’ or ‘slowdown’ in global warming in the period since 1998 – revealed by UN scientists in 2013 – never existed, and that world temperatures had been rising faster than scientists expected.”

What is truly strange and of great concern is how many seemingly intelligent people swallow government hoaxes so easily and so totally.

US Catholic Bishops Publically Shame President Trump Today At Church

A contents of a letter from the US Catholic Bishops was deep throated into the gullets of the Catholic laity today at church.  In the letter, US Catholic Bishops shamed President Trump and his supporters for his executive order which seeks to delay refugee and immigrant admission into the United States.

newman1

Here are the contents of the letter:

“We strongly disagree with the Executive Order’s halting refugee admissions. We believe that now more than ever, welcoming newcomers and refugees is an act of love and hope. We will continue to engage the new administration, as we have all administrations for the duration of the current refugee program, now almost forty years. We will work vigorously to ensure that refugees are humanely welcomed in collaboration with Catholic Charities without sacrificing our security or our core values as Americans, and to ensure that families may be reunified with their loved ones.”

“The United States has long provided leadership in resettling refugees. We believe in assisting all those who are vulnerable and fleeing persecution, regardless of their religion. This includes Christians, as well as Yazidis and Shia Muslims from Syria, Rohingyas from Burma, and other religious minorities. However, we need to protect all our brothers and sisters of all faiths, including Muslims, who have lost family, home, and country. They are children of God and are entitled to be treated with human dignity. We believe that by helping to resettle the most vulnerable, we are living out our Christian faith as Jesus has challenged us to do.”

“Today, more than 65 million people around the world are forcibly displaced from their homes. Given this extraordinary level of suffering, the U.S. Catholic Bishops will redouble their support for, and efforts to protect, all who flee persecution and violence, as just one part of the perennial and global work of the Church in this area of concern.”

President Trump’s executive order is for a delay of 120 days, not a “halting” of refugee admissions.

That Catholic Bishops feel they have to not only interfere with the policies of a duly elected US President, but to outright lie about his intentions is beyond stunning.

Most of the people at my church voted for President Trump and after the letter was read there was nothing but stone cold, bitter silence.

Trump Immigration Ban a Lesson in Divided Government

Today, news headlines read something like, “Federal Court Halts Trump’s Immigration Ban,” or “Judges Block Parts of Trump’s Order of Muslim Immigration.”

Here we have a very public conflict between Trump’s executive branch of government and the unaccountable judicial branch of government which for the last century has been allowed to run hog wild.

President Trump issues an order executing immigration law and a judge jumps in on behalf of those immigrants affected by the executive order, effectively acting as a check on executive power.

trump-immigration-ban

What is THE Donald to do?

First, let’s review a little basic political science brought to American government by its Founding Fathers who, regarding the separation of powers, were the brain children of Enlightenment political philosopher, Charles de Montesquieu (a Frenchie of all things!).

America’s Founding Fathers via the Constitution, designed and built a government whose powers to govern were institutionally separated into their constituent parts:

  1. The power to create rules (legislative branch)
  2. The power to enforce the rules (executive branch)
  3. The power to interpret the rules (judicial branch)

The powers of government were separated to allow people to be free of government tyranny so that The People could govern themselves and become masters of their own lives.

The relevant situation is that President Trump has enforced rules created by Congress (the legislative branch); and a judge (a member of the judicial branch) has stepped in on behalf of those affected by the enforcement of those rules. The judge’s objective: to check the enforcement and rule making powers of the executive and legislative branches of government.

But President Trump responded to the judicial branch check by simply ignoring it. This is a rare example of the executive branch turning right around and counter-checking judicial branch power.

customs-agents

So what happens now?

President Trump, the leader of the executive branch was duly elected by The People and is accountable to them.

The judicial branch was established specifically NOT to be subject to the will of The People so as to be a truly independent source of legal judgment.

So that leaves The People as the check on President Trump with his decision to ignore a judge’s order.

So the question is, in this situation, which branch of government is acting in accordance with the rule of law?

The answer may not be obvious.

 

National Unity Lost In Translation

The following is a foreign language dictionary of common terms for Americans visiting or living in, the Clinton Archipelago.*

clinton-archipelago

1) “Peaceful Protest” – No leftists were hurt while throwing bricks through windows, demanding “Death to the pigs” or getting together in large gangs to waylay small, lone counter protesters from behind.

2) “Voter Suppression” — Cutting into Democrat vote totals by taking any steps to prevent voter fraud like requiring a photo ID at the polling place.

3) “The Constitution” – An outdated, irrelevant document that should be ignored unless you are claiming that some liberal agenda item is guaranteed by it despite the fact that no one noticed it for 200 years.

4) “Fascist” — People who want to cut spending, abide by the Constitution and get the government off your back.

5) “We want the government out of our bedrooms” – We want the government out of our bedrooms…right after they force the Pope to buy us birth control and promise to support our children if we decide not to use the IUD suggested by the Pope because, “Who does that guy think he is, right?”

6) “Greedy” — People who want to keep money they’ve earned instead of giving it to people who don’t work as hard, but do vote for Democrats.

7) “Sexism” – Disagreeing with Hillary Clinton, opposing the abortion of female babies or being against mentally ill men being allowed to use the bathroom with women.

8) “Radical position” – Relatively popular non-liberal positions that have been around as long as anyone can remember — that liberals have recently decided to oppose almost entirely to make themselves appear more sensitive. Example: Refusing to change the name of the Redskins or believing you can’t change genders via surgery is a radical position.

9) “Angry, white male” – A white guy who votes Republican.

10) “Anti-intellectual” – Those who refuse to acknowledge that liberal college professors who couldn’t cut it outside of a university or MSNBC are right about everything.

11) “Racist” — Those who believe that people should be judged by the content of their character, not the color of their skin and those who believe in enforcing the immigration laws that are already on the books.

12) “Climate change denier” — Someone who actually judges global warming based on the available scientific evidence instead of coming up with a socialistic agenda first and then passing out grant money to any scientists who are willing to attempt to justify it.

13) “Bipartisanship” – When Republicans cooperate with Democrats to push their radical leftist agenda. Not to be confused with “selling out” which happens when Democrats cooperate with Republicans to push their agenda.

14) “Heartless” – Supporting programs based on whether they work and are good for the country instead of selecting programs to back based on how good they make you feel about yourself.

15) “Open Minded” – Mindlessly agreeing with Nancy Pelosi and Michael Moore 100% on every issue.

16) “A Courageous Speech” — When one leftist gives a self-congratulatory speech to another group of leftists that restates things they all believe.

17) “The American Flag” — A symbol of oppression waved by ignorant, bucktoothed hillbillies dumb enough to think that this is a great place to live.

18) “Guns” — The cause of all crime.

19) “Jesus” — Someone who is completely irrelevant to any and all political matters unless you’re claiming He would definitely support gay marriage or abortion.

20) “Hands up, don’t shoot” –The police shouldn’t be allowed to shoot people with their hands up or people pointing toy guns at them or people trying to kill them or pretty much anybody, for any reason.

*Hawks, John. Liberal Translation Guide: 20 Translations of Things Liberals Say. http://townhall.com/columnists/johnhawkins/2017/01/21/the-liberal-translation-guide-20-translations-of-things-that-liberals-say-n2274756