Saturday, May 2, 2015

Christians discovered a paradox and called it a mystery

Is God able to do anything?

Is anything possible with God?

The answer is basically built into the question. It's surprising to a lot of Christians who have never thought about it before and many invariably think of the rock analogy. "Can God create a rock so big that He could not lift it?" They ridicule my question and compare me to a heathen even though serious theologians like Norman Geisler have also considered this question and came to the same conclusion I did.

The question is a dumb one because it does not compare to the question which I asked which highlights,  namely, the concept of a possible thing versus an impossible thing. For it's no wonder why some things are impossible. The ancients called it a paradox.

 Zeno asked, if we moved from one point on the line to traverse one-half the line, then traversed another half (3/4), then another (7/8), and continued the process ad infinitum, how long would it take to traverse the line? Would it not take us an infinity to move across the line? Zeno explored the concepts of change and infinity and today we remember him for a number of paradoxes which bear his name.

A paradox is a semantic construction which is no more than a conjunction of two dissimilar ideas which are basically opposites and cannot coexist. That's all it is. A paradox doesn't refer to a thing which exists in actuality, but can only be expressed in verbal constructions that can be intuited mentally, in the mind, but do not extend to a physical universe. It is a thing we can abstract and reason over, but which has no comparable thing which exists in actuality to which we can compare it.

Can God do anything? No, He can't, because there is one category of things which He can't do, and that is  the category of impossible things.

What Christians think they're doing when they say "With God, all things are possible," they think they are being particularly pious, righteous, showing what strong faith they have, in believing that their Father has all power in His hands, who they trust in fully. In another sense, they're mocking us by pretentiously demonstrating a false faith, to contrast to ours which by extension they mean to imply we're godless atheists for mentioning paradox.

Of course, with God, all possible things are possible. But not all things are possible. We can think of  hundreds of scenarios that can exist in literature or as a theoretical thing in the mind where nothing  comparable exists physically.

Can God decide to give godness to another person, saying, "I believe you will make an even better God than I, and therefore I believe you should have this crown, for it will be better for the creation for you to take it from me."

This is not what Christians imply, but what they imply is not clear either. Perhaps many Christians don't think much, don't read much, and aren't even sure what it is they mean when they say something so stupid as, "With God, all things are possible." Another trite, meaningless comment only a non-thinker could possibly say. I can think of a lot of things God can't do. He can't lie, one. Neither is He corruptible.

There are a lot of things humans can do that God can't. And in man's severalty comes his deterioration,  death, and destruction. God is one and is simple and Pure, and lacks severalty, and therefore has no parts and is not corruptible. This is also why we can say He's unchanging and will reliably be the same Person, yesterday, today, and forever.


Christians discovered a paradox and they called it a mystery.

Look at this doctrine called Trinity. Talk to them about it. Hear what they say about it.

"There is no way to logically explain it."

"There is no point in trying to understand it."

"It doesn't make human logical sense. It has a divine sort of sense to it."

My friends, what you're talking about is a contradiction. I realize how stupid that will make you feel, when you discover that what you're saying isn't clever and doesn't make heavenly sense, but is really nonsense because you're being evasive and intentionally conjoining contrary words.

Isn't that a thing does not make sense a great inspiration for young minds to try to delve deeper and find an explanation for something? Apparently with Christians it is not. In Christianity, if you ever questioned them about this particular "mystery", they would just kill you.

For Christians, there's a need for a market of contradictions, a market of mysteries. This is a good way to weed out the people who will be a problem for them later on. If you uncritically accept anything a Christian says, even when they know themselves that they are lying and creating logical contradictions, it is very rewarding for sorcerors or hypnotists when they find a subject that can be so mesmerized by their words.

It is rewarding for sorcerors and hypnotists when they find a gullible buyer of their snake oil, whose minds can be scattered with thoughts of paradox, who they can run interference on and scare with threats of hellfire and torment, as if they themselves are the Judge who can decide that, while they themselves do not live according to the code they espouse.

By contrast, if you do not believe every word of the sorceror-Christian, the hypnotist-witch, the Christian witch, their minds turn to all the fires of Inquisition which they cannot use today, but more frightfully, to how best to destroy your entire reputation, position in society, and life, for they think they are doing God a service, Prophet John.

Christians tinker and spin their webs of deceit, plotting how to destroy your entire life, every day they live and breathe. Because they hate you and your belief that much and that you will not believe their contradictions.

Because you are better, you are more highly trained. You see no mystery. You see a contradiction.

Christians have discovered a contradiction and have called it a mystery!

Why I must say, the greatest logicians before us are Christians for they have explained for us a contradiction. A mystery is something which is never found in the Bible, which logically contradicts itself, and which is so basic to the Christian faith, more basic than anything found in the entire Bible outright, that it is every Christian's duty to murder anyone who questions it!

Bravo, bravo!

The Sadness of American Christianity

I have observed the following:

a. When Christians share their ideas with each other, some will laugh at another person's views. They are so intellectually smug with their theology, they just laugh at the other person.

b. Christians often don't take too much time to explain their beliefs. They say that's just the way things are. And if you disagree with it, it's because the truth is not in you and you are on your way to hell.

c. Christians often don't know how or don't care to explain their beliefs. They are suspicious of the world and think there is no reason to have a strong argument because people will believe what they want. You should just laugh at everyone, basically.

d. Christians spit out theological terms one after another, but they can barely quote the Bible, or they have a few basic prooftexts that they can reach for whenever asked a good question. Christians have a hard time relation their theology and religious views to the Bible and seem to have a compartmentalized religion over here, Bible over there.

e. They are unable to weather trials. They seem to get very uncomfortable with the basic trials in life and very wishy-washy on the teachings of our faith. They don't inspire you as being people that, if things got really bad, would not sell out if that's what they had to do to survive.

f. Their willingness to pass judgment, or their willingness to cover up for their pastor's sins or their own sins, or a friend's sin. They basically use a crooked measure to make excuses when someone they care for does something wrong, or heinous, but they are always clear to call out what they see wrong about your life. Even when nothing is wrong, they search anything they can sniff out about a person, even if it's as silly as just disagreeing with them on a particular doctrine, for which they will then accuse you of not believing in the "whole Bible", "picking and choosing", or using the Bible for your own purposes.

g. They speak to others with such an air of cockiness, like they are great academics, in an ivory tower  somewhere. Even when they have only a very basic education and are not scientists or very good academics  at all. But the "Bible" gives every one of them a special area of expertise, and instead of acting as good stewards, leading sheep into light, they speak like the cockiest academic from graduate school, who  steamrolled all the students with the superiority of his scholarship.

It's not even that these apply to a small minority. These are basic character traits that you will find in almost any Christian you talk with, any day of the week. Not one person is going to demonstrate all of these traits, but almost every Christian you meet will have at least one on this list. This is a huge problem. If Christians cannot talk respectfully about their beliefs without mocking the person sitting across from them, or mouthing some curse about them going to hell or being a worker of darkness, how will Christianity survive? How will Christians survive when they start seeing prophecy fulfilling itself in front of them, and they have to decide if they are willing to die for their beliefs?

Christians should be learning now while there is still time, to separate themselves from the world, to be not like the world, to not behave like they are of the world, the way the world ridicules, and mocks and scandalizes those who disagree with it. Or else they will have to learn this later, and a lot faster. We still have time now to practice these now and learn from our mistakes.

Corrie ten Boom, witness is perfected under trial. The Church must suffer the tribulation because it is so far from being worthy now to be received into God's kingdom. American Christians are living proof of that.

Who is the white male?

Talking with a black man tonight, I saw first hand the true plantation mentality which exists among many black Americans, who are dyed-in-the-wool democratic voters. It's an American phenomenon that in most  election cycles, black Americans vote 95% in favor of Democratic party candidates and some times, over 97%. They state emphatically, with no indication the thought of error crossed their minds, that the  Republicans are bad for black people, the Democrats good.

But I have observed American politics far too long to gather that assessment. There is no ethnic policy  among Republicans. The national Republican party is a big business enterprise and will make deals with  anyone who will make them a buck. And they harbor no ethnic prejudice but a clear cut view that prides  money and business more than anything.

But neither do the Democrats have a clear ethnic policy. Instead, I think Democrats are willing to cater to whatever ethnic ideology will serve them at that moment.

If one district is served by running Shaka Zulu, the "kill whitey" candidate, then the Democrats will hit hard on the racial platform, reminding blacks of an imminent white conspiracy to take away their liberties. Meanwhile, if facing a black conservative, the Democrats will also cater to black stereotypes to win approval from the white voters.

Such is the case when President Bush nominated for the Supreme Court the Honorable Clarence Thomas.  When a known false accuser stepped forward to engage in insidious character assassinations against a respected judge, who merely differed from the prevailing political ideology of the left in Washington, white  Democrats appealed to every demeaning stereotype about African-American men, Clarence Thomas was  sex-crazed, he was a sexual predator. Even when Herman Cain, the pizza guy ran in 2012, the narrative was  still the same. Black men: Are sexually uncontrollable rapists who throw themselves on women every chance  they get.

Even one of the most honorable in Washington and that's saying something, it's the slimiest place on the  planet will escape the wrath of American liberals: Allan West, former Marine, one-term Congressman from  Florida. That's not okay. A black man talking about personal responsibility and strong families and not  inciting class warfare to stir up the masses, per Alinsky? Pssh.

Alan Keyes, he was quite a remarkable fellow. One of the most brilliant individuals who I don't know has  ever served in elected office, which is a great stain on this nation's record, that such able-bodied men are unable to win election. But he doesn't fit it. If you're black AND a conservative, in the United Socialist States of America, you aren't entitled to the same rights as those who pass the ideological test.

Recently, a young black woman learned first hand, the inner racist frustration of the Democratic party, who after announcing her support for Rand Paul was very condescendingly rebuked by a white male liberal,  stating something like, "Didn't you see the party? Republicans are anti-black and anti-woman." (Seems very  Jim Crow like, publicly belittling a black woman by a white man for holding a personal opinion.)

In America, if you are a minority, you don't get to make the same decisions as everyone else. You have to  pass an ideological test to enter the great American debate.

Its moments like these in the political landscape that I'm deeply troubled with the broad generalizations that "Republicans = bad, Democrats = good!" Many black people I'm certain don't have an analysis more than that more white people consider themselves Republican than Democratic and that anything white people support must be bad. I think it's a great example of the extreme racism prevalent in the black community.

Who is the white male?

It seems at this time that there is no one more hated in this country than the white, heterosexual, Christian male. And that is an extremely harmful policy for this nation. Mores aside, family values aside, I want to outline who the white American male is and why he is the backbone in this country.

In the jobs market, the majority worker is the white male. White men make up most of the workers in this  country and they pay most of the taxes. And yet there is no more hated group in America than the white  male.

In America, over ninety million people do not work, AT ALL. The primary reason these people do not work, and don't have to work, is because of the largesse of the American worker, which is primarily a white
male workforce.

This is extraordinary. This is the only nation on earth that I'm aware of where nearly one-third of the  population does not have to work at all, and many are not retirees, they're people who have never worked  or never had constant employment.

In European social democracies, it happens that a young person could take three months paid leave from  work, or the ordinary worker could retire at 45. But the reasons that can be sustained there are as numerous as the reasons that it could not happen here.

In fact, managing a country as big and diverse as America, apparently, reviewing modern empires as well as past empires, appears to be totally impossible. The trend is borne out when one observes that America is reaching a point where it is no longer manageable. But in countries one may look at, China (very equal in size though much greater population), Russia (somewhat equal in population and very unequal in size), to other nations, India, Brazil, Indonesia, Pakistan. These are nations that are not truly functioning participatory democracies. Brazil is for all intents and purposes one of the most impoverished of the nations, India as well. China and Russia, nations which in the 20th century killed an estimated over 100 million combined of their citizens. There just is not a comparable nation that has been managed as well as the United States without either killing a huge number of its own or suffering tens of millions to live on the brink of starvation, which has been historic in India, where millions of its people die from too little to eat. Prevailing caste structure makes it repugnant to even help them and not the nation's responsibility. They are suffering because of the build up of evil in their former lives. Let them starve, the Indians say. (Apologies to all Indians, some in that nation do feel that way.)

So in America, where the prevalent attitude and history has been a strong family, a strong participatory  democracy, a system where despite all its wants and warbles, has been such a remarkable success, because  of the strong family tradition, and the industriousness of the American worker, black, white, male and female, all the workers.

But let's not claim victory. The white male worker, the predominant worker, I'm not being unfair, I'm saying because America is majority white, the majority worker is the white male. It is very substantially based on the taxes they pay and on their productivity, that ninety million people in this country do not have to work!

What in the world makes people want to change that? Imagine what will happen to this country if their  mission is accomplished. The majority of your workforce will one day be recruited out of the third world.  They will have poor command of the English language. Instead of high-paying skilled jobs, you will have  those fields replaced with a third-world labor force, who graduated from third-rate universities in India or Pakistan, who make a third of what the last guy made. Your tax revenues will shore up. Soon, many of that ninety million will find their money stops coming in. They have to look for work. At this stage, it doesn't matter what sort of education they have, they can't find work because an Indian will do it for a third the price.

All white people subsequently blamed and held to account. More demands for justice ensue. Society sinks  further.

Rinse and repeat.

This rhetoric, "for the worker!" The Democrats are not for the worker. The Democrats are for death taxes,  stronger regulation, impediments to business (that's right, if you have 10 workers you're uberrich and should pay the jizziyah!), then they'll also go on endless witchhunts: You don't hire enough blacks, you said something that a paranoid woman thought sounded sexual, etc etc.

I am for the worker. I recognize what this means to the economy that the worker is allowed to work and  produce, and take most of his pay home. Democrats' default position is raise taxes, class warfare, death  taxes, private property is unlawful, redistribution, pensions (where people get paid to not work, and paid even more than if they did work). There's a disjunction between their policy and their expectation: Looting Social Security is okay, even if there's no way to pay it back later, looting Medicare and diverting it to the Affordable Care system, pulling the plug on Grandma. Stalin's system was evil. The Democratic party's system is inventive and evil. How can the worker work and produce, under burden of regulation, and at the end of the day, take home less than 50% of what he's paid? The answer is he can't and the jobs because fodder for immigrant labor.

Why I am suspicious of the American Democratic party and why you should be too: The modern Democratic party is in the political tradition of a movement that climaxed in the October Revolution 1917. It came to a sudden, horrific halt when the factory workers were gunned down under machine gun fire. Their crime? They discovered that Lenin and his henchmen weren't concerned about the worker at all. They discovered they were only useful idiots in bringing about the Soviet revolution, and when they piped up to Stalin, "Hey, what about all that worker stuff?" they were ordered to be gunned down by Stalin. Nothing gets
people's attention faster than heavy machine gun fire into a crowd.

In fact, in Lenin's Russia, he had perfected the most expeditious way of eliminating one's political enemies. No need to get decked out with gas chambers and more expensive modes of dispensing with one's opponents. Machine guns are faster.

It's no wonder on a review of history why progressves opened abortion centers in black neighborhoods.  These were Sanger's "human weeds" who she announced speaking before the Klan in New York State were bad for the country. Sanger wanted black women to be knowledgeable about reproductive choice; she wanted black people to kill themselves, with the help of white and Jewish abortion doctors.

It's still no wonder today that the abortion clinics, the liquor stores, are all found in the black community and conspicuously target the black community.

These are all bread and butter for American Democrats. Anything anti-family, anything pro-drug, pro-abortion they love, and while many have shed themselves of the Jim Crow mentality that was once  shared by all liberals, it seems to me that a few of them still hold to the old way of viewing things. Why else is there the need to keep reliving on Meet the Press, Face the Nation, and elsewhere on the national stage the tried, and proven false, accusations, that black males are raging sexual lovers, drug maniacs, waiting to throw themselves on the first woman they see?

There is nowhere that is more prevalently discussed than in American Democratic circles.

As a Christian, I CANNOT support the American Democratic party. My vote for the Republican party is not an endorsement of their morals and every thing they do. It's because the DNC is a party that advocates for abortion, which takes two million lives per year, homosexual marriage, and caters to racist stereotypes, anti-black, anti-white, whatever it takes to win and they think people will vote for.

Friday, May 1, 2015

Marilyn Mosby is an Emissary of Jesus Christ

On April 12,2015, police publicly arrested, tried and executed twenty-five year old Baltimore resident  Freddie Gray.

The video is, though incomplete,  astonishing. In my estimation, it shows the aftermath of a brutal assault and the carrying away of a suspect who physically cannot stand, cannot hold his head up and probably has already suffered the injuries that would end his life seven days later. And then he is restrained in Medieval sort of metal restraints and loaded with conscious disregard of near fatal injuries and then taken for a bumpy ride through rush hour in a hopping town.

Even more suspicious is the other suspect who has now come out claiming that Freddie Gray injured himself. There is too much history of police threatening suspects and killing people in custody for me to believe this kid has not been threatened. As tasteless as it is to talebear the story he has brought to us, he likely would have been eliminated if he had not played his part in the operation. And that death would have never been discussed.

And here we have one Marilyn Mosby. She is the youngest prosecutor of a major city in this country. She  has on Friday, May 1, 2015, declared that the city will prosecute and seek the convictions of six officers on charges including second-degree murder ad false imprisonment, among others.

The commissioner of the police union says that the prosecution has rushed to judgment, Mosby should  recuse herself, and a special prosecutor should be appointed. He says at no time have his officers acted  wrongly.

"We are disappointed in the apparent rush to judgement, given the fact the investigation into this matter has not been concluded." 1

“Not one of the officers involved are responsible for the death of Mr. Gray.” 2

Who has rushed to judgment? Gene Ryan has rushed to judgment. He says in his own press conference that Mosby has rushed to judgment and his men did nothing wrong. That very statement is a rush to judgment! Marilyn Mosby is asking for the process that the police union says works when they put away your sons to  also apply to the officers who enforce it. And now the officers say it does not work. They want a just-us system, rather than a justice system. Mosby is asking for a jury of peers to evaluate the officers' conduct and is not rushing to judgment at all.

In fact, the Fraternal Order of Police letter directed to Marilyn Mosby contains veiled threats against her, stating that her and her husband's political career could be threatened if she does not cooperate with the entrench Baltimore political machine.

Marilyn Mosby is indicted saying that she has a connection to the Gray family attorney. And so the police  union is being very transparent: They are asking for a sham investigation seeking no charges on their officers, by a "special prosecutor" who is connected to the city brass.

Marilyn Mosby is an emissary of Jesus Christ.

It is for such a time as this, that this young litigator has been appointed to an office to publicly try the men responsible for the death of Freddie Gray, and to try the system itself.

I am afraid nothing is clearer than the video that Freddie Gray was murdered. And I'm afraid if it does not result in a conviction, the American people will lose faith in the judicial process completely and irrevocably.

The police cannot keep beating these sorts of cases without the ordinary American wondering if the system  is not functioning right. And an acquittal will be just as clear to police: You can kill Americans and the system will keep its own. And to America it will be clear: It is open season on the American people.

Who is Marilyn Mosby?

Marilyn Mosby is a third-generation public servant. Her father served with the Baltimore Police department. She also has other family who have served the public. Marilyn Mosby is a public servant, a jurist, and someone who has a deep understanding of the interrelationship between the public and the law. She understands the challenges of those working to keep the streets safe and as a black woman, the unique  challenges black Americans face, in a country where there is a particularly aggressive prosecution against blacks, that reeks of profiling and discrimination.

In short, she is uniquely qualified to navigate the tricky intersection of the interests of law enforcement and the public.

It makes Gene Ryan's remarks even more remarkable in that Marilyn Mosby is a public servant herself, the  daughter of public servants, and should be received by law enforcement as an ally, as two parties both seeking the judicious outcomes that result in criminal convictions and a fair procedure for all.

But Gene Ryan disagrees. For him, Marilyn Mosby, a sound litigator, really a virtue to our system, with an independent mind and not simply rushing to kowtow to the police association, is someone who has rushed to judgment (a judgment different from his). Marilyn Mosby, to him, is not a public servant. She is an ally to the parties who want to sink Baltimore into vice and destruction and she should recuse herself.

But it is really quite different. Marilyn Mosby is a virtuous prosecutor who believes in the sanctity of our process, and that it applies to the citizen and to those who enforce it alike. Gene Ryan, well, Gene Ryan and who he represents, believes that if they murder your people, a stacked prosecutor's office should refuse to indict, no questions asked. The rules that apply to you do not apply to him and his men. And a special prosecutor should be appointed, as Gene Ryan says, but to investigate the Baltimore Police Department, for a pattern of misconduct, of discrimination, and over 100 deaths of the detained while in police custody. No more of this police bureaus investigating the police. That didn't work.

Like biblical Queen Esther, Marilyn Mosby has been appointed to intervene on behalf of God's people, a people whose leadership has long forgotten them. Marilyn Mosby, your people are my people!