Monday, August 23, 2021

The Inept Band of those who are “Wise” in their Own Eyes

 And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God gave them up to a base mind and improper conduct” – Romans 1:28 

Every human being is by definition finite (as opposed to limitless) and consequently has NOT the capacity to infallibly know the answers to complex clusters of concerns that actually exist (as opposed to being abstractions).  Consequently, every governmental leader who orders citizens to take actions based on the leader’s private certitude, is, on its face, an intellectual fool.  While tyrants may claim “scientific consensus” for their views, they fail understand one primary purpose behind the scientific method is to insist both on assembling every relevant body of evidence and deliberating on all relevant hypotheses.

Anyone who rejects the concept of morality as an obligatory code which both specifies right and wrong and has as its source a transcendent personal being (God), undermines on rational grounds their self-acclaimed “moral” authority to forbid viewpoints and courses of action that disagree with them.  By rejecting morality, “leaders” have only their gut from which to rule.  For this reason they have no right to impose their imperatives onto others.  Chinese Communist Party Chairman, Mao Zedong stated what logically follows from his views, that, “Political power grows from out of the barrel of a gun.”

Thursday, August 12, 2021

Exposing the Intellectual Fraud of Marxist Dogma

               The largest stars that scientists observe are so much bigger than our Sun that if one of them, say, Stephenson 2-18 (S-2-18), replaced our Sun, Saturn’s orbit would track inside it (8:52, 9:43).[1]  In comparison, our Sun is as small as “a grain of dust.” (9:22).  So the enormity of S-2-18 could easily wow us! Yet only our much smaller star can provide the conditions we earthlings need in order to exist and even thrive.[2]  By contrast, supergiant star S-2-18 is on its “death-bed.”  Having burned up most all of its gas, it lacks the gravity needed to keep holding its’ huge yet nearly empty shell together.  It is about to collapse into an explosion that will dissipate its’ remains out into space.  Size isn’t necessarily superiority!

               Similarly, Marxist Socialism (MS) today in America is posturing itself as an ominous force for cultural overthrow that is accelerating with apparently unstoppable momentum.  Despite the 20th Century’s track record of failure across Asia and Eastern Europe (a fact “academics” today suppress),[3] socialism is capturing the hearts of 40% of Americans aged 20 to 40.  Nevertheless, the alleged gravitas behind such boasting is illusory.  MS dogma is as unstable as a house of cards because it is NOT premised on a body of facts, but only on assumptions of flawed “dead white men” (Rousseau, Hegel, Marx…)[4] that were based on now-discredited science.  To give three examples: its flaws include firstly its dogmatic commitment to philosophical materialism.  This faith position insists that reality is limited to only physical entities.  That is, there is no God or gods; no angels, demons, or even souls.[5]  Yet this worldview is refuted in part by the scientific discovery that the cosmos came into being out of nothingness at the Big Bang (BB).[6]  Only a God who exists outside of nature can bring this about!  Secondly, MS names Darwinian evolution (DE) as the very means by which nature moves toward completion.  Yet, among other matters, two transitional chasms in the path of biological development unknown to Darwin (from rocks to organisms and the existence of information in the cell), are so vast as to be conceptually impossible to cross in the absence an overseeing intelligent Creator (God).[7]  Thirdly, MS assumes that humans too will ultimately be perfected whenever utopia is reached.  Yet historical evidence from the last hundred years utterly discredits these naïve beliefs that humans are progressing toward perfection.[8] 

Such clashes between MS and demonstrable facts, indicate concrete errors in the MS dogma.  And it even further discredits itself by its determination to hide its designs from the masses.  In order to further its own purposes as opposed to the peoples, MS demands imposition of these governing ploys:


·        Control media and news content

·        Censor both “unacceptable” points of view and events that damage its cause

·        Insulate State leaders from scrutiny

·        Refuse dialogue over opposing views

·        The State is the only moral authority

·        Pack schools with socialist “teachers” 

·        Force propagandistic ideas and rhetoric  

·        Resist scrutiny of government schemes

·        Severely punish dissidents


If the MS Agenda was persuasive and true, it would refuse to employ such thuggish and cowardly ploys!



[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3mnSDifDSxQ

[2] Hugh Ross. The Creator and the Cosmos. (RTB, 2018), pp. 207-8.

[3] Mark Levin. American Marxism. (Threshold Editions, 2021), pp. 10, 260.

[4] Mark K. Levin cites these three, Ibid., pp., 18f.

[5] See my paper, “The Case for the Soul,” at my website, www.christianityontheoffense.com/articles.

[6] See my papers, “Was the Big Bang the Big Beginning?,” “What Atheism Cannot Explain,” and “God’s Prints are Everywhere,” Ibid.

[7] Stephen Meyer. “The Origin of Life and the DNA Enigma.” Return of the God Hypothesis. (Harper One, 2021), ch. 9.

[8] See my paper, “The Inescapable Connection Between Socialism and the Murder of One Hundred Million captives.” Op.cit. (4).




Wednesday, July 14, 2021

The Inescapable Connection of Socialism to the Murder of 100 Million citizens

             Why naïve utopian socialist fantasies will lead us AND our descendants into anguish

            Socialism, by definition, stands in bold contrast to the tenets of Capitalist economics as presumed by the United States Constitution.  Stated plainly, Socialism is a top-downward admi-nistration, while U.S. society, by stark contrast, entails a “We the people…” formulation of a bottom’s-up approach to governance.  Discussing these contrasting programs in solely abstract (as opposed to realized) terms can easily diminish the magnitude of the damning consequences of a vision which portends instead to create fair and equal societies, i.e., “Utopia.”

            In addition to expressing a top-downward relationship between the “governing” and the “governed,” Socialism also imposes strictures on the latter which deprive them of rewards for their labors.  The slogan, “From each according to his ability to each according to their needs,”[1] may, on the one hand please those who seek to avoid work, but on the other hand deprive determined workers of financial benefits of their labor, and also both innovators of their organic successes, and additionally visionaries from seeing their insights unfold into reality.  Less that 100 miles south of the Florida Keys lies a “living” example of such a “failed [socialist] State[2] that began in prosperity (albeit amid moral degeneration) yet quickly plunged into enslaved poverty.[3]

            This set of deprivations obstructs fairness both at individual and societal levels.  Clearly members of the human race are NOT uniformly motivated in similar directions.  Viewed then solely under rational (as opposed to religious) terms, Socialism, as reflected upon with care, brings a death-knell to free self-determination for a vast percentage of any population.  Not only is it statistically[4] clear that socialistic economies do not work, but they cannot possibly work except by means of punishment by the enforcers.  Such indeed are the grounds for the murders of intellectually-driven and financially successful people by Socialist regimes.[5]

            The most objective and so, decisive, indicator of the obvious destructive consequence of Socialism is the testimony that in the 20th Century alone, over one-hundred million people were murdered by their own despotic governments by either  1) torture,  2) planned wide-scale imposition of starvation,  3) traumatization,  4) shootings,  5) gassings,  6) imprisonments,  6) and forced dissolutions of /or severance of individuals from their families or  7) in combination.[6]

For a longer edition of this paper, you may find it at my website, christianityontheoffense.com

 



[1] https://artsandculture.google.com/entity/from-each-according-to-his-ability-to-each-according-to-his-needs/m0cxcxc?hl=en

  [2] President Joe Biden’s depiction in his public comments on  July 15, 2021, of Cuba’s governance.

  [3] https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/americanexperience/features/comandante-pre-castro-cuba/

[5] E.g. https://www.history.com.topics/cold-war/pol-pot

  [6] https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2017/11/07/lessons-from-a-century-of-communism/ 

Thursday, May 20, 2021

The Palpable Insecurity of Leftism

 Beware of false prophets, who come to you in sheep’s clothing. You will recognize them by their fruits…” (Matt. 7:15-16)

 

               I do not deny that Leftists are currently achieving their goals.  Yet they are grounded NOT in competence; but are attained unfairly by the following illegitimate means.  I urge you to survey my postings over recent months, which both expand upon and document the following itemized factors in the Leftist agenda.  They can all be found on my blogsite, www.offensivechristianity.blogspot.com.

1.      Leftists tend* to shield themselves from exposure to their self-contradictions by their records.

 

2.      Leftist distance themselves from videos that expose their culpability in societal catastrophes.

 

3.      In contradiction to their denial of the validity of moral standards, Leftists:

 

A.     impose instead societal demands of their own design (a ploy called “cancel-culture”).

 

B.     usurp the role of judge and, with their ever-shifting standards, condemn the “rebels.”

 

4.      In contradiction to their “Free Speech” movement in the 1960s, Leftists censor views which challenge their agenda, as opposed to promoting honest debate before open audiences.

 

5.      Leftist’ “Alphabet” news media (LAM) fail to confront the silence of their leaders when called upon to account for their controversial policies (massive illegal-border crossing, overthrowing current energy policy and, consequently, eliminating jobs, thereby damaging economies, under-mining traditional moral standards only to replace them with non-moral human demands, etc.).

 

6.      LAM outright censors the views of Conservatives both as individuals and as.  At the same time they suppress the airing of public events which expose their agenda (e.g. refusing to cover the nightly rioting over the Summer of 2020.

 

7.      Leftists chronically vacillate over the authority of scientific truth (e.g. in the “name of science   get rid of fossil fuels!” while allegedly by the same authority, judging it to be a racist ploy to insist that in school classrooms “Blacks must do their mathematics accurately” and declaring that if an anatomical male feels like a female, then such [a one] belongs in the girls showers!”).

 

8.      The Leftist’ chronic imposition of a double-standard with respect to social policy:

 

A.     Expectations that all U.S. citizens wear masks due to Covid19, while encouraging multiplied thousands of non-citizens to storm our national borders with no demand that they be guar-anteed Covid-free, as an assurance that our nation’s medical protections be secured.

 

B.     Prior to the latest Presidential Campaign, Democrats declared that protesting is a patriotic act, while following that campaign, they declare protesting against Biden to be treasonous. “

 

9.      Leftists ignore the failure of their colleagues, while holding Conservatives to the same standards.  For example, Barnard College instructor Ben Philippe, fantasized about killing White people by “gassing” and “detonating” them (https://jonathanturley.org/2021-04-28/ barnard-professor-triggers-free-speech-controversy-after-writing-about-detonating-and-gassing-white-people/).

 

* This verb applies to the noun, “Leftist” virtually every time I employ it in this article.

Monday, May 17, 2021

The Absolutely Urgent Necessity to Persuade, Part 1

 We cast down imaginations and every high thing that exalts itself against God and bring every thought captive to the obedience of Christ.     (2 Corinthians 10:5)

                It is an underlying, though implicit, assumption of our time that the foundations which ensured the multitudes of blessings our society has enjoyed up to now, will continue refreshing and refurbishing our civilization’s driving force into the future.  This expectation applies not only to our deliberations over earth-focused governance, but also to the state of our hearts and minds with respect to the Kingdom of God.  These challenges are interconnected.  This faulty view assumes that the successful principles from the past can spring from out of either anywhere or nowhere, when in fact they can only be expected to arise from that kind of source which has both the rational potential (wisdom) and energizing power (the Holy Spirit) to inspire within us the moral, rational, and spiritual principles that are necessary for living together in harmonious community.  The reason is that the human exchanges required to achieve this social goal are highly-complex. 

One of the firmest laws of science in the realm of physics is the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics which holds that all physical entities and the interactions between them are cooling off, wearing out, and/or becoming increasingly random when limited to their own resources.  Yet even so, this propen-sity also applies to civilizations, societies, and individuals.  Note the following social observations:

               We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion…Our nation was made only for a moral and religious people.  It is totally inadequate to the governance of another.”[1]

               What reason do we have to suppose that our civilization, in contrast to civilizations which have preceded it, will endure?  The person who has not faced this question is hardly alive.  That many different ways of life have flourished and have then declined is beyond contradiction.  Consequently, there is no high probability that the fate of our civilization will be different—unless….  The precise character of this unless is of such importance as to attract and to hold our best thinking…It is our most urgent question.[2]

               Civilization is hideously fragile, you know that; and there’s not much between us and the horrors beneath, just about a coat of varnish, wouldn’t you say?”[3]

               Where did the doing without God end but in the undoing of man through the anger of God?”[4]

Our nation in recent decades has been divided politically almost exactly 50/50 percent.  Yet in our day, the means of publicly seeking desired outcomes in social governance is rapidly shifting away from changing people’s minds to fixating on strategic manipulation.  With the exception of just a few commentators on radio and television, I fear that many conservative spokespersons either cannot or will not articulate the intellectual foundations which undergird conservativism.  Others weaken the same message by distancing themselves from any necessary connection to our Maker and Redeemer.[5] 

You may have access to my entire document at my website: www.christianityontheoffense.com/ articles


[1] President John Adams, to the Massachusetts Militia on October 11, 1798, https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Adams/99-02-02-3102

[2] Elton Trueblood. The Company of the Committed. (Harper and Brothers, 1961), p. 2

[3] C.P. Snow. A Coat of Varnish. (Scribner’s, 1979).

[4] Augustine, The City of God. (Image, 1958), p. 543.

[5] Russel Kirk. The Roots of American Order. (Regnery Gateway, 1991), pp. 462,3. Referring to Orestes Brownson, Kirk wrote, “Justice requires…the authority of religious truth…Without authority vested somewhere, without moral principles that may be consulted confidently, justice cannot long endure anywhere. Yet modern liberalism and democracy are contemptuous of the whole concept of moral authority.

Wednesday, May 5, 2021

How Two Parties Witnessing the Exact Same Phenomenon Can draw Opposite Conclusions

 For this judgment I came into the world, that those who do not see may see, and those who see may become blind” (Jesus—John 9:39).

 

               It is not expected in a court of law that separate witnesses who are under official examination will agree exactly as to what they saw or heard.[1]  The reasons for the diversity of perceptions are often entirely innocent due to such factors as imperfect memories, perspectival differences hindering their capacity to witness the event under consideration thoroughly, the level of distraction experienced by the viewer due to competing sensations, and so forth and so on.  Experts in the legal field are trained to evaluate the discrepancies so that they can fruitfully discern the truth of the occasion being examined. 

               What this essay addresses instead are the circumstances specifically described in the title above.  The body of disputes which are paralyzing our society/nation today include such concerns as: 

(1) Did Donald Trump instigate the protest at the U.S. Capitol on January 6, 2010?

(2) Did the nightly protests of the Summer of 2000 include a significant amount of heavily destructive rioting? 

(3) Can the efficacy of these protests be connected with the will of certain party officials?

(4) Was Donald Trump’s policy over the Mexican border effective and also received positively by our southern neighbors during his administration?

(5) Was Donald ineffective, or effective, in facing the Covid19 onslaught?

(6) Is the United States in a position to sever our present energy source and policy and instead set in place the “Green New Deal in the immediate future?”

(7) Do current public social mandates grounded on questions of gender identity fulfill Biden’s stated mandate to “Follow the Science”?

(8) Does the present philosophy and policies of the Biden Administration as a whole further the Constitutional principles of the United States of America?  Or do they abort that vision?  

(9) Were the grounds for Donald Trump’s political foes’ alienation against him during the recent election cycle due to his alleged moral “transgressions?, or instead for his determination to “clear the swamp” of anti-American policies practices being exercised by corporate economic giants against the economic interests of the USA? (Fox News, Tucker Carlson, 04-16-2021). 

(10) Since, as I recently concluded from a statement by Chuck Schumer, dictates by the Demo-crat party indicate the pseudo-moral imperative of our day (Fox News, 04-22-2021), which vision can be predicted to create a free and just society where every people group shares in its benefits? 

There are bodies of evidence relevant to each and every one of the above questions or concerns that have the capacity to decisively adjudicate them all.[2]  For this reason, the answer to the question is starkly simple.  It is a matter of facing facts that can be known coupled with the commitment to follow the evidence wherever it leaves.  Insofar as anyone refuses to either come to terms with the facts or allow them to alter our lives, they have excluded themselves from the possibility of obeying the truth.



[1] Simon Greenleaf (1782-1852), Dean Professor of Law at Harvard University Law school. The Testimony of the Evangelists. http://www. newhumanityinstitute.org/pdf-articles/Simon-Greenleaf-Testimony-of-the-Evangelists.pdf, (public domain), p. 10.

[2] See my articles, “Humanistic ‘Morality’ Never Has Created a Free and Just Society,” “The Self-Contradictory Core of the Cancel-Culture Agenda,” “Fox News Alone Visually Connects the 2020 Summer Rioting to the Guilty Party,” and “The Choice: Flawed Liberators? Or Clueless Thugs?,” and “The Truth About Donald Trump and White Supremacy, ”all of which are found at my website: www.christianityontheoffense.com  ** The video and transcript of Donald Trump’s January 6 speech can be accessed at  https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/donald-trump-speech-save-america-rally-transcript-january-6.  

Thursday, April 15, 2021

Why Just Saying "NO" is So Intellectually Foolish, part 3

 Scientific Methodology[1] and its Bearing on a Dismissive[2] Attitude Against Christianity

To make matters worse for the critic, identifying the phenomena that Christians must reconcile with our faith, at the same time highlights a body of facts that the critic must also explain on the basis of an atheistic world view too: whether that be strong atheism or weak atheism.  For starters, atheists for example are obligated to explain the following:

·        The universe came into existence out of zero-volume singularity (absolutely nothing).[1]

·        Our universe is habitable by humans only because at its inception aspects within the atom, the electro-magnetic force, and the force of gravity were precisely set.[2]

·         Virtually every life-form, including the most primitive, contains DNA whose information-laden genetic code specifies the formation and construction of every single body part.[3]

·        No other hypothesis than that Jesus rose from the dead, fully reconciles with the entire body of twelve historical facts that even skeptical historians acknowledge are trustworthy.[4]

Critics evade their responsibility to account for the above realities for the reason that they have no case.

I received my M.A. with Honors in "Science and Religion" through BIOLA University in 2017. 



[1] W.L. Craig. Reasonable Faith. Third edition (Crossway, 2008), pp. 125-140,  ** my paper, “God’s Prints are Everywhere,” at my website.

[2] Hugh Ross. The Creator and the Cosmos. Fourth edition. (RTB, 2018), chs. 4-6.  Dr. Ross founded Reasons to Believe at www.reasons.org

[3] Stephen Meyer. The Signature in the Cell DNA and the Evidence for Intelligent Design. (Harper One, 2009).

[4] See my two papers, “Twelve Historical Facts Surrounding Jesus’ Resurrection” ** “Hoax? Myth? Or Literally True?” at my website.