Feeds:
Posts
Comments

Archive for November, 2012

An individual recently made an assertion in an attempt to frame the argument against Christianity by disallowing distinctions.  The actual phrase was…

And no, you don’t get to decide who’s a “true christian”. You also don’t get to decide who a “true scotsman” is (look it up).  – Name withheld.

The problems with this objection are many.  Who does get to decide?  He implies no one which must further imply that their is a criteria other then what the Bible lays down.  But since the Bible is the only authoritative document that lays out the criteria, the comparison to a Scotsman is hogwash.

  • A Scotsman is born in Scotland.  A “true” Christian is one who decides to become a Christian, that is, he decides to repent and believe.  It is not decided where one is born.   If you are born into a nation that is considered a “Christian” nation because the institutional religion that predominates that country is of a Christian origin is not a criteria laid down in the Bible.  The chances may be higher that you may become a Christian, like being born in Italy may mean you are likely to practice Catholicism but it is not a foregone conclusion.   So a Scotsman’s place of birth is Scotland.  Not so the Christian.
  • A Scotsman cannot stop being a Scotsman.  Nor can a non-Scotsman decide to be one.  This is not true of a Christian.  He can reject Christianity any time.  The non-believer can become a Christian at any time if he meets the conditions of repentance and faith.
  • Biblically (which is the only valid standard) one is not a Christian by being born into a Christian country or family or culture or by claiming to be one or by wearing a cross or stamping Bible quotes on their clothing, any more than wearing a kilt makes one a Scotsman.  These are superficial earmarks.  I can wear a kilt but I am no Scotsman because of it.
  • Repentance and faith are required
    • because each man is a criminal when measured by the external standard of Law (the 10 commandments) and one’s conscience.
    • What Christ offers is Pardon for the guilty.  This is only for those who acknowledge their guilt, regret their deeds and are willing to surrender (that is, give up their life of crime).
    • Saving faith is that faith by which the repentant individual accepts the offer of pardon.

So it is quite easy to see that the claim of being a “Christian” actually has nothing to do with being naturally born in a certain place or culture which is quite different from the Scotsman.  This is a queer attempt at trying to put the argument out of reach so he could make the ridiculous claim that Hitler and the SS were Christians because of mere claims or slogans on belt buckles.  Also the attempt to say that the “church” supported Hitler.  The Church being referred to was the Catholic Church during WWII.

Even so, there were members of the catholic church that hide Jews and members that aided the Nazis by turning them in.  Some obeyed conscience and some gave in to fear and some blindly followed the lead of their particular church institution.  This individual wants so badly to place Hitler into the Christian camp that he made a Scotsman into a straw-man.

He has never read the pre-Augustinian history of the church nor Richard Weikart’s book “From Darwin to Hitler” nor how the German translation of “Mein Kampf” uses “evolved” while the English publishers substituted “developed” nor is he familiar with Hitler’s great hatred of the Churches benevolence towards the poor, weak and needly as it violated the Aryan Superman and survival of the fittest.  Many of his rants are still available today.

As hard as it may be to believe that in the age of such free and vast amounts of information such freedom is often no match for human bias and ignorance in the face of such data.

Advertisements

Read Full Post »

Often people with no definable moral standards will find fault with people who claim to live by some ethical standard.  For example atheists often claim Christians are hypocrites.  Yet in measuring others they measure themselves.

At Dartmouth College for example, the AHA (Atheists Humanists Agnostics) club is putting on a presentation claiming to expose the “truth” about Mother Teresa.  Their assertion: that she was no friend of the poor but a friend of poverty.  From their evolutionary and Marx colored lens, you can be sure they will see lots of questionable events real and imagined.

Were the analytical lens turned back on the AHA and the 5 to 8 people that have signed up to see this thrilling presentation (tickets are still available), one could certainly ask the following questions.

  • How many hospitals and orphanages have Atheists started?

As these atheists wish to talk big, they continue to do nothing for the poorest of the poor throughout the world. Unless whining about those who believe in God does something for the less fortunate. Just how many hospitals and orphanages have been started by atheists? I know of none – Ruben Israel

  • Almost all top colleges were originally Christian institutions.  How many have Atheists started?  Considerably less.  Perhaps Cornell.
  • Why aren’t the AHA angry that their own school?  It was establish to train Native Americans as missionaries!

But Atheists are not logical creatures.  After all, the core beliefs of Atheism are…

  1. There is no God
  2. I hate Him

This may seem like an amusing straw man to some, but it is all too often true regarding practice.

The Dartmouth AHA criticizes Mother Teresa, and by extension all “Christians”, attempting to impinge their motives as against the poor and destitute of the world while never lifting a finger to help them.  If, however, one would apply the same standard they use to criticize and slander “the religious” in a demonstration of tolerance, at the end of their lives they may find themselves tossed into an inferno by a God who doesn’t exist.

But regardless of the destiny they choose for themselves, some advice is timeless.

Don’t find fault, find a remedy.   Henry Ford

Kudos to Ruben Israel for bring this to my attention.

Read Full Post »

The “left” claims the “right” is engaged in propaganda. The pot continues to call the kettle back.  The left always thinks they are the thinkers.  After all, that is what they were told to think.

Two percent of the people think; three percent of the people think they think; and ninety-five percent of the people would rather die than think.  George Bernard Shaw

  • The rants you find on most anti-Christian or anti-Biblical blogs and internet sites are almost always against a sub-section of cultish Christianity which they confuse with Christianity itself.  They commonly think that Catholicism, Calvinism (TULIP), Puritanism (Calvinistic variant) or even neo-cons, evangelicals and fundamentalists as representing the entire spectrum of Christianity.   They think that a criticism against a catholic is a criticism against all “right wing” morality and Christianity in general.  They have over generalized Christianity into a monolithic right wing morality play.  In effect, they have set up a straw man.  They seem unaware that other forms, including suppressed minority views, exist.
  • They do the same thing when they blend neo-cons, the Republican Party, the tea party, evangelicals, fundamentalists, and even libertarians into one big political pot so that a criticism against a neo-con is a criticism against all.  This, of course is also a straw man.

Strawmen – they seem to be everywhere.

  • Tea Party, conservatives, neo-cons (claiming to be conservatives by use of constitution rhetoric or Jesus Speak), Republicans, Nazis, Fascists, Evangelicals, Fundamentalists, NRA members are all lumped into one pot.  It makes for an easier target composed of everything one hates.  It is easier to make fun of and insult the members of such a monolith in an effort to silence them.  This is “left wing” progressive tolerance at work.
  • They blend them all together.  Never mind that Tea Party conservatives, Libertarians and many evangelicals are for small limited government and that neo-cons and establishment republicans are not.  These anti-Christian and anti-Bible pundits throw NRA members in with Nazis, even though the Nazis, like all collectivist were for gun control.
  • These sites seem to follow the same formula by hunting for examples of their imagined offensives and then they list them out (like finding examples of polygamy).  After this they make claims that God condones it.
    • Unaware of the theme of redemption and overarching historical purpose God drives man towards, the Bible simply regards things as they appeared to the observer.
    • If Lamech had two wives and Abraham had slaves, it is recorded as such.  If they made bone-headed mistakes they are recorded too, yet one would hard say because the bible recorded such mistakes, God approves of them or is prescribing a course of conduct.

The times of ignorance therefore God overlooked; but now he commandeth men that they should all everywhere repent  Acts 17:30

  • They are ignorant that, in fact, most of their objections have been answered, in some cases hundreds of years ago.  Like Jodie Foster (borrowing a tactic from Clarence Darrow) in the movie “Contact” when she was sitting in a Sunday school class and asks “Where did Cain get his wife?”  Since the teaching could not answer her question, there must not be an answer.  A Terrible demonstration of stupidity if ever there was one.  Many of the objections on the internet fall into this category.

Where did Cain get his wife?  Perhaps K-Mart.  Stupid question, Stupid answer.

  • They are selective as to the sources they quote.  This is especially true of public propaganda TV like PBS.  At times they endlessly run “Jesus” specials.  They will array the Jesus as just some nomadic messiah poser with major ego-maniacal issues and a death wish side of the argument with various left leaning atheistic “scholars”.  Then they will stack the pro-Jesus side with Benny Hinn or Kenneth Copeland.  Then they will rain down adjectives on this bogus presentation with words like insightful, honest investigation, candor, thorough, revolutionary, etc.   May they continue to lose market share.

Forcing your moral code on one another.  This is the real cavil.  Often the issue is what slice of the moral equation one wants to adopt and live by.

  • Libertarians believe that everyone has a right to determine their own choice and position regarding moral issues and they should accept the credit for good decisions and bear the consequences for bad ones which is very much like the position in 1 Sam. 8.
  • Conservatives run the spectrum of imposing laws to falling back on the constitution (as do many libertarians and Tea Party members.
  • Neo-Cons and the republican establishment use constitutional rhetoric but act like and spend like progressive democrats.  They will occasional throw a bone out to the party base which tends to be more conservative.  Yet, these people move government towards fascism while the democrats move the government towards communism.  Both are really quite relative in their moral positions.  But the neo-con republican is more pragmatic while the progressive is more unrealistically Utopian   Both are collectivist and socialist.  Both use the iron fist of the state to enforce their version of truth and morality upon free men.  They are as far from true Christianity as possible and much closer to each other then the media pretends.

When Christians use the force of the state instead of moral persuasion they are acting just like their detractors.  They move from the hope of the Gospel and look to the collectivist state for salvation and truth when they already had truth and liberty to boot.  That may not change the detractors of Christianity from demonstrating their rank ignorance of the Bible but Christians should not confuse promoting the Gospel with becoming a political wanker either.  Warn, refute, persuade, move one.  Those who have ears to hear will eventually do so.

Read Full Post »

It seems like most people understand that something is wrong, that things seem to be getting more expensive, that their discretionary income is on the decline, that their paycheck does not go as far as it used to.  But they do not connect the dots.  That is, they do not know why this is happening.  So, in order to help, I produced the following quiz.  (Hint: Each correct answer is easily recognized.)

It seems like prices are going up but the Government says inflation is only at 2% and is not a problem.  This is because…

a) The government is lying and the Main Stream Media helps them do it.

b) The government’s numbers exclude food and energy so they can continue to deceive you

c) The government doesn’t want you to find out they are stealing your wealth

d) The government is colluding with the central banks, the media and the academic community so you won’t realize you are being plundered.

e) all the above are correct

Why are prices going up?

a) The FED’s destructive monetary policy (FED = Federal Reserve System, i.e., The central bank)

b) The FED is printing money like mad men.

c) The FED is run by Neo-Keynesians who’s real job is to keep the banking system afloat.

d) all the above are correct

Why are they doing this?

a) Because the government wants to live beyond it’s means without consequences (except to you).

b) Because the government needs to borrow money because it is bankrupt (broke).

c) Because the government cannot find enough buyers for their bonds in order to borrow more money.

d) Because the government needs money to buy votes via entitlements.

e) all the above are correct

How does FED monetary policy effect me?

a) They will destroy your savings. The FED keeps interest rates low so your savings will not keep up with real inflation.

b) The government will be able to give you Food Stamps when you lose your job because the FED keeps the interest on borrowing money near zero.

c) Because you are not saving (which comes from capital/money derived from surplus production), capital is not formed so new businesses are not created. So once unemployed, you are likely to stay unemployed.

d) The FED’s policy, with the full knowledge of the US Treasury, will transfer the wealth you have created from you to government bureaucrats, politicians, public sector unions, bankers and the financial sector. But you didn’t create that anyway, so who cares.

e) Once you are unemployed you can find a very low paying job in the service sector since the real economy will have been decimated.

f) all the above are correct

Is there anything I can do to protect myself?

Yes, you can, but you won’t like the answer because you will have to think. I mean, really think. Not pretend to think like in school. You will have to educate yourself. To do this you can go HERE or
HERE or
HERE or
HERE or
HERE

OR Google the following…

  • Andy Hoffman
  • James Turk
  • David Schectman
  • Jim Willie
  • Jim Sinclair
  • Bill Holter
  • Bill Murphy
  • Ron Hera
  • Doug Casey
  • Michael Krieger
  • John Williams

Read Full Post »

Government intervention in the economy is the cause of and always leads to some form of collectivism like Fascism

Free-market capitalism is a network of free and voluntary exchanges in which producers work, produce, and exchange their products for the products of others through prices voluntarily arrived at.

State capitalism consists of one or more groups making use of the coercive apparatus of the government — the State — to accumulate capital for themselves by expropriating the production of others by force and violence.  Murray Rothbard

In a free market, economic warfare is unknown and is a misnomer like “hostile takeover” and “price wars”.  The free voluntary exchanges of goods/services between buyer and seller has nothing to do with coercive use of force by the state to benefit some and disadvantage others as the Dollar Vigilante explains.

State capitalism is a partnership between business and government where bureaucrats benefit for obvious reasons and “wealthy capitalists” for less obvious reasons.   It is geared towards a controlled economy, which builds castes…where in order to be wealthy you must have license…where competition is restricted so that the existing wealthy capitalists are benefited as barriers to entry are erected against new competition…and where the state facilitates their economic rents (extra-market profits).  Dollar Vigilante

Progressives (or liberals in the modern sense) assert that by possessing too much wealth in a voluntary society, which they equate to “power”, capitalists can still “force” workers to accept sub par wages.   This has long been the argument of Unions.  The believe capitalists exploit the worker when in fact they add value to their work.  Rather, it is the union itself that steals from the worker.  Investment in capital goods allows labor to produce more, which is the true source of the wage earner’s increased living standards (i.e. not the union).

…capitalists do not impoverish wage earners, but make it possible for people to be wage earners.  George Reisman – Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics

And again…

They (capitalists) are responsible for the very existence of wages in the production of products for sale. Without capitalists, the only way in which one could survive would be by means of producing and selling one’s own products, namely, as a profit earner. But to produce and sell one’s own products, one would have to own one’s own land, and produce or have inherited one’s own tools and materials. Relatively few people could survive in this way. The existence of capitalists makes it possible for people to live by selling their labor rather than attempting to sell the products of their labor. Thus, between wage earners and capitalists there is in fact the closest possible harmony of interests, for capitalists create wages and the ability of people to survive and prosper as wage earners. And if wage earners want a larger relative share for wages and a smaller relative share for profits, they should want a higher economic degree of capitalism—they should want more and bigger capitalists.”  George Reisman – Capitalism: A Treatise on Economics

However, the way corporations plunder the worker is by enlisting the apparatus of the state.  The state, that is, government, is vital for the destruction of middle class wealth.  The very state that unions give their alliance in exchange for protection.  Unions are necessary in a state economy as force is needed to combat force.  But because they do not understand the underlying mechanisms of government they are used by government as pawns.

Unions destroy capital and force wages down in sectors of the economy that are not subject to unionized monopoly just like any other monopoly the government protects.  Government and unions are institutions of coercion while government and central banking are institutions of plunder.

By restricting competition, as under state capitalism, or total socialism, the state effectively transfers economic power from the consumer to the “wealthy capitalists” whose status inherently opposes free market competition.  Dollar Vigilante.

The “working class” would not exist in the first place if someone didn’t save and accumulate capital in the first place.  No working class, no unions.  No value added to the labor of the working class by capitalists, no increase in wages or standards of living.  In fact, no wages at all.

Capital, not unions, made possible the middle class.  Only with the backdrop of State meddling in the economy, whereby it protects some and victimizes others, can the unions flourish.  The union needs the state to survive and protect its own interests (for which they give allegiance).  At the same time the state empowers the enemies the union combats.  Government is the open benefactor of the unions but is also the secret enemy of the unions.  They would not exist at all in the free market, but we don’t have a free market any longer.  This has been true for many decades.

We in America are ignorant of economics because our carefully managed state run schooling has made us so. Thus we are more inclined to vote for socialism than liberty.  The large multi-national military industrial corporations, international bankers, statist politicians and their deceived minions (unions, welfare beneficiaries) have chosen debt slavery for themselves and their children’s children.

So now the real war begins…

He said to them, “But now if you have a purse, take it, and also a bag; and if you don’t have a sword, sell your cloak and buy one.
Jesus – Luke 22:36

Read Full Post »

There is hardly an issue about which Germans as so united as their desire to see America on its knees. It unites both the left and the right; as wherever they look, they see decay, a lack of culture, and ignorance.  In other words, a perverse mixture of irresponsibility, greed, and religious zealotry.

-Spiegel, National German Newspaper

There is nothing more religious and more infected with zealotry than those who worship government.

Barnacle Bill

Read Full Post »

…deficits don’t matter…”

Federal Spending is divided into 3 main parts

  1. Discretionary: Almost all government functions such as Military, IRS, Homeland Security, TSA, EPA, FCC, FEMA, FDA, FAA, FBI, CIA, SEC, etc.
  2. Mandatory: Social Security, Medicare, VA benefits, etc., which the government is required by law to pay.
  3. Interest on the debt: this is non-negotiable.

Items 2 and 3 exceed the entire amount of Federal revenue.   In other words, the Federal Government’s entire tax revenue is not enough to cover items 2 and 3.

If the government was shut completely down, the US still does not have enough money to cover mandatory expenses and the interest on the debt.

Observations

  • In 2011, the federal government collected 2.3 trillion in tax revenue.
    • Interest on the debt: 454.4 billion dollars
    • Mandatory spending: 2.025 Trillion dollars
    • Mandatory spending + Interest on debt: 2.479 Trillion
    • Shortfall: $176.4 billion.
  • In 2012
    • Shortfall: 251.8 billion (increased 43% from 2011)

Funding

Government must make up the shortfall to pay for items 2 and 3.  Government must also fund ongoing agency functions (the FBI or courts for instance).  To do this, it sells bonds (such as US Treasury).

  • In order to sell bonds, it must promise a return on investment to induce bond purchases.  This is measured by the interest rate.
  • When the bonds come due, the bond purchaser expects his money back plus the promised interest.
  • The Government must sell more bonds to cover the bonds coming due plus cover the interest due on these same bonds.  Kind of like taking out a bigger credit card and charging it up to pay for the previous credit card bill.  Or taking out a bigger loan to pay for the previous smaller loan plus interest.
  • If no one will buy the bonds, the government runs out of money to operate.  This means that all federal works will not be paid.  Thus federal workers will not be coming into work, so the government shuts down.  Pensions and retirement savings will be wiped out.
  • If the government shuts down; the IRS cannot collect taxes, people will not get their food stamps, the courts will close, the CIA will stop spying on foreign countries, the NSA will stop spying on US citizens, and all people who depend upon government aid will not get their welfare checks.
  • These people will not be able to pay their bills and will go hungry which will cause civil unrest, riots, looting, and assorted violence.  The cities will burn.

Therefore, the FED will have to buy the bonds that others used to buy but are no longer buying.

But where does the FED get the money to buy these bonds?  Answer: they print it out of thin air.

  • This increases the money supply.
  • Increasing the money supply is inflation.
  • The result of inflation is the money becomes less and less valuable, so prices for  real items like food and energy becomes higher and higher.
  • As money is debased (value becomes less) more people sink into poverty, business cannot stay open because they cannot meet expenses and workers demand for more of the increasingly worthless money.  Pensions and retirement savings will be wiped out.
  • This causes mass unemployment and welfare moneys are not adequate to cover expenses.
  • Civil unrest, riots, looting, and assorted violence.  The cities will burn.

United States breaks apart.

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »