Monthly Archives: July 2023

Is atheism destroying the moral fabric of society? – Big Think

Posted: July 21, 2023 at 5:07 pm

In the time of Elizabeth I of England and Ireland the statesman Francis Bacon published a short essay On Atheism. It is true, he says, that a little philosophy inclineth mans mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy bringeth mens minds about to religion.

But atheism is not just intellectually shallow, he thinks; its morally pernicious. They that deny a God destroy mans nobility. Atheism destroys magnanimity and deprives human nature of the means to exalt itself above human frailty.

That was in 1597 when atheists were pretty much outliers. But now, we live in an increasingly secular, post-metaphysical age, and significant parts of our populations dont reject religion it just isnt part of their mental landscape. This alarms those believers who think that the moral fabric of society is being destroyed by this loss of religion. Secular humanists, on the other hand, assert that moral standards dont depend on religious belief, and many secularists think that religion itself is pernicious fundamentalist, obscurantist, patriarchal, repressive. This mutual antagonism isnt the only possibility, of course, and fruitful conversation does take place, partners in conversation, listening rather than assuming, seeking common ground.

And there is an intriguing recent phenomenon that has become almost commonplace: Im secular rather than religious but Im also spiritual.' But what could this talk of spirituality mean if it is no longer grounded in religion? Maybe, though, theres something to explore here, possible common ground between (some) believers and (some) non-believers.

The German philosopher Jrgen Habermas once talked of an awareness of what is missing in our post-metaphysical age.Perhaps it is this uneasy awareness that leads to the appeal of spirituality.Well, one of the things that has been missing is fairly straightforward: the solidarity and regular gathering of a community.And human beings are ceremonial animals, as Ludwig Wittgenstein said. Humanist ministers are starting to preside at naming ceremonies, weddings, and funerals.

Surely something else is missing, though. Recall the words of King Lears daughter, Regan, about her father: He hath ever but slenderly known himself. Although secular humanism asserts that we can live well without religious belief, we still need to embrace a language of interiority, inwardness, self-awareness, and self-knowledge. This language is diagnostic, but it is also expressive. There is a poetic of the inner life and its relation to demeanor and conduct; it is agonized, despairing, hopeful, and struggling to overcome delusion, double-mindedness, and self-deception.

This language of spirituality has a history and continues to grow. It is anchored in ancient traditions that made theistic sense of the phenomena, but the phenomena survive the demise of the theistic sense. Moral life does not require religious belief, but it can be informed by the religious traditions. As the British philosopher Mary Midgley once said, Genesis is more nourishing than Dawkins, and she wasnt giving voice to a faith position. One thinks here of Sren Kierkegaards talk of the necessity for what he called subjective thinking, the existing individual, a dimension missed by sticking merely to the facts.

But secular humanism is still associated with Bacons picture of atheism, perhaps because the rejection of belief was thought to entail a rejection of a way of life conformed to Gods commandments that is, the rejection of belief being a kind of infidelity, a refusal of that way of life. But perhaps our deepest human impulses themselves inform this conception of God, human impulses that are not always available to us unless we search them out and break through our collective self-enclosure.

Francis Bacon went on in 1613 to serve as Attorney General under King James I, and just over 400 years later, and on another continent, another Attorney General, William Barr, took up a similar cause. In his book Hatchet Man, the legal commentator Elie Honig said somewhat sourly of Barr that he had railed:

about the evils of secularism, opining that the countrys founders believed that to control willful human beings, with an infinite capacity to rationalize, these moral values must rest on authority independent of mens will they must flow from a transcendent Supreme Being.

William Barr is hardly alone in making this kind of assessment and in making this kind of assumption about the role of human will. But I think it is an important error: It abstracts the will from the sensibility that informs it. It is intriguing that Jean-Paul Sartres atheistic existentialism made moral values a product of the human will because they could no longer be thought of as a product of Gods. This proposition lies at the heart of religious criticism of secular humanism, but the issue is also a deeply political aspect of the so-called culture wars.

Barr is obviously right to say that human beings are willful, and it is surely right that we have a prodigious (if not an infinite) capacity to rationalize. But the unreliability of the human will is common ground. The ancients, after all, saw our weakened capacity for virtue along a trajectory from moral turpitude to slow moral improvement, from wanton indifference (akolasia) through weakness of will (akrasia), to self-control (enkrateia), and to the ideal of temperance (sphrosun), in which moral action flows from a person without inner resistance.

But something else is going on here, which is why I mentioned Sartres popular thought that we choose our values.Barrs conservative position seems to be that it must be the case that if moral values dont rest on a transcendent authority independent of the human will, then they must be thought to rest upon this human will with its infinite capacity to rationalize, and the inevitable outcome is precisely systematic rationalization, permissiveness, promiscuity, relativism, and moral instability. Even in the case of apparently shared values, their authority for a secularist must lie in the human will. For the believer, on the other hand, their authority lies in the divine will, the will of the transcendent Supreme Being. If the human will is so wayward, fickle, and unstable, then thats not much of an authority; at least religious people know when they are sinning, whereas the secularist has, allegedly, lost any secure sense of their own sinfulness.

But why are we talking about authority here at all? And why, specifically, of the (weak) authority of the wayward human will? Talk of authority belongs to a language of commandments, imperatives, prohibitions, and requirements. But they relate more readily to what we do rather than to our dispositions. As to our dispositions, human beings are frequently cruel, vindictive, and ruthless in the pursuit of their interests, and these dispositions are only sometimes tempered by quite different dispositions of solidarity, sympathy, compassion, benevolence, cooperativeness, and, to recall Bacon, magnanimity. Autocrats and their admirers tend to treat the latter as weaknesses. The rest of us, however, are merely conflicted, and if we feel remorse, it is not because we have broken a rule but because we have done someone harm.

One possible theology conceives a good God as creating human beings with an innate capacity for goodness, their constant and willful straying from which is represented by the myth of the Fall. Believers will not be happy with the idea that this conception of the Supreme Being is a projection of our own liberated impulses and dispositions, nor that imperatives about behavior are attempts to recall us to our own stifled dispositions. But whether we are believers or non-believers, the phenomena remain roughly the same, and spirituality includes a methodology of moral renewal. Moral values naturally dissolve into patterns of disposition, demeanor, and conduct. We are so formed that we are motivated by considerations we might summarize as a natural ethic of care. As the American poet Stephen Crane wrote:

The voice of God whispers in the heart So softly That the soul pauses, Making no noise, And strives for these melodies, Distant, sighing, like faintest breath, And all the being is still to hear.

There is a Buddhist echo in these final lines. We have to still the clamor of greed, hatred, and delusion if we are to hear and then see the world as it were for the first time. Perhaps Cranes stillness is precisely the grace of nature that is a condition of hearing our own inner voice protesting against our own hardness of heart. Francis Bacon said that atheism depriveth human nature of the means to exalt itself above human frailty. But maybe it has nothing to do with whether you are a believer or not: The long discipline of learning to listen, both to oneself and to others,may release a passion for justice and a care for our suffocating planet. This is ground, beyond the fray of the culture wars, on which believers and non-believers can stand together.

View original post here:
Is atheism destroying the moral fabric of society? - Big Think

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off

The Logic of Faith – Adventist Review

Posted: at 5:07 pm

The just shall live by faith (Rom. 1:27). Of course. How else shall the just live? From mathematics (including simple arithmetic), to the existence of the charm quark, to belief that whales with feet had strolled on land (before they sauntered back into the ocean), to the Second Coming (the first, too) of Jesus, we all need faithintellectual assent to what we cannot provefor what we believe, know, or believe that we know.

Because we are temporary and subjective beings whose sole knowledge and experience of God's creation are electro-chemically piped through our temporary and subjective senses and then translated into images, emotions, and thoughts by our temporary and subjective brainsyes, some nuance, contingency, and error are going to taint whatever we believe, even whatever happens to be true.

Nevertheless, the notion, the canonized notionconcocted, fomented, and nurtured by them who knowand carried through the three and four previous centuries like litter on ocean waves, is that logic and reason are the bitter enemies of, even the archetypical rivals to, the Christian faith. And worse (the notion goes) they are in a Homeric battle forLebensraumin the human mind over whether logic, reason, and science, or ignorance, superstition, or bigoty will prevail.

It's such a farce, another intellectual myth of the modern era that through dogmatic and constant repetition hardens, like petrified wood, into something deemed firm and solid. Having been kindled by the fresh oxygen pumped into a Europe divided by the Reformation, sure, the Enlightenment and Scientific Revolution helped purge away centuries of Roman and Medieval superstition and ignorance (though in Italy, at the Basilica of Saint Anthony, the faithful can still venerate the incorrupt tongue [yes, the tongue] of Saint Anthony of Padua, the patron saint of lost things). But this change wasn't instantaneous, as if the world had to wait for Francis Bacon (1561-1626), Rene Descartes (1596-1650), John Locke (1632-1704), and Isaac Newton (1612-1727) before it learned logic and reason. And, besides, who is going to accuse Abelard of Bath (1080-1142), William of Ockham (1287-1347), Duns Scotus (1265-1308), and Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274) of not knowing logic or reason?

In fact, despite beatified rumors to the contrary, Christianity from the start has been baked through and through with logic and reason, in contrast to atheistic materialism, which is neither logical nor reasonable.

The Logic of Creation

Take creation. Something that once did not exist, and then did, like our universe, could not have created itself, right? Whatever created the universe, it wasn't the universe itself, obviously. Logic and reason demand that something elseseparate from the universe, prior to the universe, transcendent to and greater than it (think of the relationship between a sculptor and a sculpture)had to have created it to begin with.

Something separate from, prior to, transcendent to, and greater than the universe. Hmmm . . . like God, perhaps?

However, ruling out God from the start, the atheist has another option: nothing. That is, in opposition to God creating the universe, nothing, as in not-a-thing, did instead. InConjuring the Universe, Peter Atkins claims that the universe arose from nothing, and by nothing, he means absolutely nothing. I shall mean less than empty space . . . This Nothing has no space and no time. This Nothing is absolutely nothing. A void devoid of space and time. Utter emptiness. Emptiness beyond emptiness. All that it has, is a name.1Putting aside the obvious ideology driving the claim, let's judge it, and its rival, God as Creator, from logic and reason alone.

Either this Nothing created the universe and all that's in it, or, instead, an eternally existing God, such asYahweh,created the universe and all thats in it. One option is logical and reasonable; the other is not so much illogical and unreasonable as anti-logic and anti-reason.

Next, we have been assured, over and over, decade after decade, by peer-reviewed article after peer-reviewed article inveryprestigious science journals, that though everything from the structure and function of the human frontal lobe, to the pomegranate seed, to the incredibly complex enzyme cascade central in blood clotting, to dolphin echolocation, though they all sure look as if designed and, yes, sure function as if designed with specific purposes in mind (such as blood clotting to heal torn flesh)nope. Its all an illusion, the belief of people who dont understand the power of atomic and subatomic particles to mindlessly create life, often with beauty, and always with astonishingly precise functions.

Though common fare in the academy is that philosopher David Hume (1711-1776) had decimated the argument from designhe did no such thing; not even close (and that probably wasnt his intention, either). All he showed is that just because a watch is, obviously, designedthis doesnt prove that God, Yahweh, created the universe. Who said it did? What a watch points to is something designed, just as every living thing, from a single cell to the human brain, points to something obviously designed as welleven more obviously designed than a watch because any living thing is much more complicated than a watch.

Hume no more did what they proclaim he did than did Darwin (do what they proclaim he did), which was to demonstrate that random forceswith no forethought or intention but only with blind mechanisms, working on the principle of survival created everything from butterflies, to rhinoceroses, to oranges. (Though one might humbly ask,How did the wonderful taste of oranges aid in their survival?).

Indeed, where did this universal drive for survival that supposedly suffuses all life originate from? It's one thing for a human to try and survivebut a petunia, or an amoeba? Why should what Richard Dawkins calls nonrandom survival2exist, anyway? Does not seeking survival, nonrandom survival, mean an end, a goal, a purposeprecisely what evolutionary theory rejects? Why natural selection; that is, why does natureselect (sounds like a goal) for survival as opposed to non-survival?Survival of the fittest implies two purposes: fitness and survival. In short, the process of evolution sure seems to contradict the premise that it's built on.

If you look at the natural world, from a blue whale to a blueberry, from the human nervous system to the wings of an eaglethe most logical and reasonable conclusion is that they have all been purposely designed, and with an artistry and craftsmanship that defies our knowledge and imagination, especially as we learn more about them. Its kind of ironic that the more science reveals about the complexity of nature, the more farfetched sciences theory of natures origins becomes. The dogmatic denial of purposeful design anywhere in nature, especially when purposeful design is found everywhere in nature, shows how ideology can trump the most basic logic and reason.

The Logic of Daniel 2

Next, Daniel 2. By dating Daniel in the second century BC (even though Daniel dates itself hundreds of years earlier), scholars have long tried to denude the chapter of its prophetic reach. Yet the chapters prophetic reach extends way past the second century BC into not only the rise of the Roman empire but to its breakup into the nations of modern Europe, describing them perfectly, even as they are today.

Some of the nations shall be partly strong and partly fragile and they will mingle with the seed of men; but they will not adhere to one another, just as iron does not mix with clay (Daniel 2:42, 43). Partly strong, partly fragile? Germany remains a behemoth while Luxembourgwell, God bless em. Mingle themselves with the seed of men? Europeans, from peasants to princesses, have been intermarrying for centuries, and though not killing each other en mass (at least for now)the continent remains composed of distinctly separate entities, no more adhering one to another now than in the pastjust as the prophecy predicted.

Not bad for a book written, supposedly, in the second century BC. Western intelligence agencies didnt foresee, even one year before, the collapse of the Soviet Union; in contrast, Daniel foresaw the state of Europe thousands of years in advance. And if Daniel could so accurately depict Europe two millennia into the future from himself, then certainly we can trust him to have dated his own book correctly, tooright?

Daniel 2, grounded in something as broad, as wide, and as verifiable as world history itself, gives us logical and rational reasons to trust in the Bible and the God who inspired it.

The Logic of Jesus Resurrection

Despite attempts for millennia to debunk it, the resurrection of Jesus is the most logical and reasonable explanation for events that even atheist historians believe.

First, they believe that Jesus of Nazareth was crucified by the Romans; next, that many people, particularly His early followers, claiming to have seen Him resurrected, started what became Christianity; and, finally, that a few years after Christs death, a Pharisee named Saul of Tarsus, claiming to have seen the risen Christ, became the apostle Paul. Though believing these things, how do the atheists explain them?

Mass hallucinations, for instance. Hundreds of people, the argument goes, from different backgrounds, all had the same hallucination: that of Jesus Christ risen from the grave, even though no one expected the Messiah to die and rise from the grave to begin with. Masses of people hallucinating the same event that nobody anticipated or saw coming? Hardly the most reasonable of explanations, is it?

Others assert that they just flat-out lied about having seen Jesus risen. Liedeven though they knew that their lie would lead them, and others, including loved ones, to ostracism, persecution, even death. You might willingly suffer and die for what you believe true. But for what youknowis a lie? As illogical and irrational as lying about seeing Jesus risen would be, thats as illogical and irrational as the argument that they had lied about seeing Him risen.

Or, as the Swoon Theory claims, He never died on the cross but only fainted and, then, after escaping the tomb and slipping past the Roman guards, JesusHis body battered, torn, and bleedingappeared before His disciples as their resurrection hope.

Some have said that Jesus had a twin brother who duped everyone into thinking that he was the resurrected Messiah, and that was how Christianity got started: a case of mistaken identity.

What about Saul of Tarsus? As he was heading to Damascus, a meteorite crashed into the ground before him, and the trauma of that event gave him an epileptic seizure in which he envisioned the risen Christ speaking to him.

In contrast to these moves, all one has to do is believe in God, a Creator God who at times temporarily works outside the natural laws that He made and sustains. A miracle is analogous to a musician who, though usually playing music based on a written score, temporarily departs from that score and plays something else. Logic and reason dont demand that miracles happen, only that, in a universe created by God, they could.

The Unreasonableness of Atheism

Or, instead, you could believe that the universe, and all thats in it, arose from itself or from absolutely nothing. Or that all the obvious design in the natural world merely looks obviously designed but isnt. Or that Daniels accurately depicting the future thousands of years in advance was luck. Or that Jesus didnt rise from the dead, but, wounded, escaped the tomb and appeared to His followers, who mistook His bloodied appearance as the resurrected and glorified Lord, and whom Paul, amid an epileptic seizure brought on by a meteorite, imagined he saw on the road to Damascus.

Or, instead, using logic and reason, you can believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and . . . be saved (Acts 16:31).

Clifford Goldsteinis the editor of theAdult Bible Study Guide.

1Peter Atkins,Conjuring the Universe: The Origins of the Laws of Nature(p. 28). OUP Oxford. Kindle Edition.

2Richard Dawkins,The Blind Watchmaker(W. W. Norton; New York, 1996), p. 61.

Link:
The Logic of Faith - Adventist Review

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off

Change of plans – USC News & Events – University of South Carolina

Posted: at 5:07 pm

Posted on: July 21, 2023; Updated on: July 21, 2023 By Hannah Cambre, hcambre@maibox.sc.edu

One week before political science and Russian major Josh Hughes was scheduled to fly to Ukraine for a study abroad program, he found out that his trip was canceled because of the escalating conflict with Russia.

I was really upset, says Hughes. I thought, nothing bad is going to happen. Theres not going to be a war!

That was in February 2022. A couple months later, headquartered in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, Hughes livestreamed virtual politics classes from a classroom in Kiev late at night, listening as bombs fell in the city outside of his professors window. Though Hughes may not have been in Ukraine, his study abroad plans had been salvagedand he couldnt have been happier with where he ended up.

Im really glad that I was able to go because it gave me a new perspective on everything.

Embracing the initial discomfort of disrupted plans, Hughes threw himself into his coursework, language immersion and cultural experiences. Five days a week, he spent time in political science, Central Asian studies and Russian language classes. The most valuable learning, however, happened outside of the formal classroom, from interacting with strangers to piecing together the vocabulary to tell his host family about a weekend camel-riding excursion with a friend.

I got so much out of living with a host, he explains. My Russian really improved from living with the host family, but also my connection to the city I was living in. Theres nothing more valuable than living with people that have lived in the city youre in for their whole lives. I was able to become much better acquainted with the city, with Kyrgyz culture, and with Russian culture.

Hughes left Kyrgyzstan still feeling deeply connected to the country and eager to return. He knew hed be back someday. He didnt know how soon.

After a conversation with his professor and now thesis advisor, associate professor of Russian Judith Kalb, Hughes decided to apply for the Russian critical language scholarship in Kyrgyzstan. He didnt know what to expect, but his plans certainly hadnt included returning to his sophomore year host country the summer after his junior year. This time, hed begin learning the Kyrgyz language in addition to his Russian studies and start work on his senior thesis research for the Honors College.

After his semester in Kyrgyzstan, a former Soviet state in Central Asia, Hughes was able to narrow his research down to the impact of militant Soviet atheism in the region. He had observed that though over 80% of the population considers itself Muslim, the country itself is secular and the practice of Islam is often the result of cultural heritage rather than deep religious conviction.

When [the Soviet Union] existed, it was the second-largest Muslim-population country in the world. We very, very rarely mention the 50 million Muslims in the Soviet Union that gets overlooked, Hughes explains. I wanted to study what peoples interactions with religion really were, how they interacted with it, and if there was a link between the years of atheist propaganda and how religion is practiced today.

Before returning to Kyrgyzstan, Hughes flew to Kazakhstan to search the archives for Soviet documents on the handling of religion. He also decided to supplement his archival and literature research with an anthropologic angle, sitting on park benches and interacting with strangers about their interpretation of religion, how they practiced their faith, and their experiences of either living under the Soviet state or in free Kazakhstan. Since his return to Bishkek, hes been doing the same thing in Kyrgyzstan.

Most people probably thought that I was a little bit unusual, Hughes admits, but they were very happy to share their experiences, their story with me. A lot of them were very happy that I was taking an interest and researching a part of their culture and their lives that they are very passionate about.

Researching abroad has been transformative, igniting Hughes passion for learning more about Central Asia and even redirecting the trajectory of his future. He entered his initial study abroad experience hoping to work for the State Department upon his return, but his goals look different now.

His aspirations include graduate school, where he hopes to study the transition from the Soviet to post-Soviet period, particularly in Central Asia. From there, he is considering pursuing a career in teaching. Hughes expresses nothing but gratitude for the chaotic circumstances leading up to his arrival in Kyrgyzstan, and he is particularly thankful for his decision not to give into frustration and stay in the U.S. rather than taking his chances on an unexpected opportunity.

Its changed everything, he says. But its what makes you grow academically, personally. Handling challenges and being able to adapt to them. I cant promise that every unexpected turn is going to turn out as fortunately as mine did, but you never know. Im really glad that I was able to go because it gave me a new perspective on everything.

More:
Change of plans - USC News & Events - University of South Carolina

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off

71 Years Later, The Weirdest Religion in Sci-Fi History Is Back – Inverse

Posted: at 5:07 pm

Science fiction legend Arthur C. Clarke was famous for the axiom that any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic, but what his fellow golden-age sci-fi writer Isaac Asimov postulated was a little more complicated. In the Foundation novels, Asimov suggests that a science-based religion may actually take hold in the distant future. And, in the second episode of Season 2 of Apple TVs Foundation, we actually see what that might look like on a massive scale.

With the episode A Glimpse of Darkness, the ambitious sci-fi show has given us a much bigger look at a scientific religion, with perhaps more nuance and heart than Asimov pulled off his second Foundation novel, over seven decades ago, in 1952.

Spoilers ahead.

While the majority of the TV series Foundation is a liberal remix of all of the Asimov-penned stories and novels, huge arcs of this season loosely adapt big swings from the second book, Foundation and Empire. This novel was published in single-volume book form in 1952 (one year after the first novel), but it is actually a composite of several novellas and short stories, which go all the way back to 1942, and were (mostly) published in the pages of the legendary SF magazine Astounding (later known as Analog). This means that all Foundation canon was retroactive while Asimov was writing the original stories, which makes David Goyers approach to crafting the TV series smart. In other words, theres no such thing as a faithful adaptation of Foundation, because Foundation was barely faithful and consistent to itself.

So, with that in mind, in the second episode of Foundation Season 2, A Glimpse of Darkness, the series seems to make a major departure by suggesting that the Foundation itself an institution devoted to science and truth is now peddling mysticism. Shouldnt this run contrary to Asimovs staunch atheism and disbelief in pseudo-science? Nope! As we meet two of Foundations most compelling new Season 2 characters Cleric Constant (Isabella Laughland) and Cleric Poly Verisof (Kulvinder Ghir) were introduced to the concept of the Church of the Galactic Spirit. And this notion is perfectly in line with the opening pages of Foundation and Empire.

Kulvinder Ghir and Isabella Laughland as Poly and Constant in Foundation Season 2.

In the opening pages of Foundation and Empire, General Bel Riose is sent by the Empire to determine whisperings of so-called magicians on the outer fringes of the galaxy. The reader quickly learns that these magicians are scientific practitioners of the Foundation. But, as Riose grills a guy named Ducem Barr, he is told, An uninformed public tends to conflate scholarship with magicianry. Again, this is similar to the Clarke axiom about tech becoming indistinguishable from magic, but the practical implementation of this idea in the book Foundation and Empire is pure Asimov.

So, when we meet Poly and Constant in A Glimpse of Darkness, and theyre putting on tech-fueled magic shows for the uninformed populace, theyre essentially preaching the gospel of Asimov, and within the universe of the show, the science-based faith of the Foundation. This takes concepts that Asimov touched upon in the books, to a much more grounded place. Poly, the older, often drunken cleric, is a firm believer in the Seldon Plan, not just because he believes in the science, but because Seldon, at this point, has become a saint. But unlike saints in actual religions, Poly actually saw Hari Seldon when he was a child back in Season 1. This gives his science-based faith some groundedness but also sets up some very interesting conflicts in the episodes to come.

Lee Pace as Brother Day, the reigning Emperor Cleon. Hes not pumped about the Church of the Galactic Spirit.

So, while the Clerics seem a little bit catch-as-catch-can in this episode, the reality is, they have been successfully converting tons of planets on the edges of Empire to the cult of science! At this point in the show, the character of Bel Riose hasnt appeared. But, without spoiling too much about everything that happens in episode 3, and beyond, rest assured, Bel Riose is coming. And just like the magicians from Asimovs second novel, he too has been remixed into a more realistic and grounded character.

On a larger scale though, what the Church of the Galactic Spirit does for Foundation is making the conflict of this Season 2 crystal-clear. The clone dynasty of the Cleons governs over a shrinking empire that is amoral, with people who seemingly believe in nothing. Meanwhile, their rival, the Foundation, is empowering people to believe in a mathematical prophet and the promise of science. Asimov based some of the arcs of Foundation on the falls of real historic empires. But, in this case, the emerging religion that is helping to create a rebellion isnt one that espouses the worship of one true God. Instead, these missionaries just want you to get down with math.

See original here:
71 Years Later, The Weirdest Religion in Sci-Fi History Is Back - Inverse

Posted in Atheism | Comments Off

Manzi: Ducati teams wanted me to be disqualified, mistakes … – Crash

Posted: at 5:06 pm

Manzi completed his first WorldSSP double of the season to reduce the championship deficit to Nicolo Bulega, however, his Race 1 win wasnt without controversy.

Fighting for the lead, Manzi made a move into turn six but clipped Federico Caricasulo on the way into the corner, which resulted in the Ducati rider crashing out.

Manzi then won the race after a red flag came out during the closing stages. But Ducati were unhappy and felt as though the Italian should have been disqualified, according to Manzi.

"I dont know if its true but, according to what I heard, all the Ducati teams went to Race Direction to complain, because they wanted me to be disqualified,"Manzi told GPOne. "It was gnawing at them, since I won.

"On Saturday night, many defended me after what happened in Race 1. But some of them were against me.

"They have to shut up and not mess with me. In the end, I still won, like I did on Saturday.

"In racing mistakes happen, but then you apologise, as it should be. And thats what I did."

Manzi dominated Race 1 before the red flags were deployed before going on to the same in Race 2.

Championship leader Bulega, who has so often been the rider to beat in 2023, had no answers to the pace shown by the Ten Kate Yamaha rider.

Able to express himself more than his days in Moto2, Manzi also admitted hes politically incorrect which can lead to some viewing him negatively.

"Im just politically incorrect. I dont have to hide behind a character Im not. If they like me, fine. Otherwise I dont care."

Posted in Politically Incorrect | Comments Off

Today in History: July 24, Apollo 11 returns home from the moon – Plainview Daily Herald

Posted: at 5:06 pm

Today is Monday, July 24, the 205th day of 2023. There are 160 days left in the year.

Todays Highlight in History:

On July 24, 1915, the SS Eastland, a passenger ship carrying more than 2,500 people, rolled onto its side while docked at the Clark Street Bridge on the Chicago River. An estimated 844 people died in the disaster.

On this date:

In 1847, Mormon leader Brigham Young and his followers arrived in the Salt Lake Valley in present-day Utah.

In 1866, Tennessee became the first state to be readmitted to the Union after the Civil War.

In 1911, Yale University history professor Hiram Bingham III found the Lost City of the Incas, Machu Picchu, in Peru.

In 1937, the state of Alabama dropped charges against four of the nine young Black men accused of raping two white women in the Scottsboro Case.

In 1959, during a visit to Moscow, Vice President Richard Nixon engaged in his famous Kitchen Debate with Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev.

In 1969, the Apollo 11 astronauts two of whom had been the first men to set foot on the moon splashed down safely in the Pacific.

In 1974, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously ruled that President Richard Nixon had to turn over subpoenaed White House tape recordings to the Watergate special prosecutor.

In 1975, an Apollo spacecraft splashed down in the Pacific, completing a mission which included the first docking with a Soyuz capsule from the Soviet Union.

In 1998, the movie Saving Private Ryan, starring Tom Hanks and directed by Steven Spielberg, was released.

In 2010, a stampede inside a tunnel crowded with techno music fans left 21 people dead and more than 500 injured at the famed Love Parade festival in western Germany.

In 2016, Ken Griffey Jr. and Mike Piazza were inducted into the Baseball Hall of Fame.

In 2019, in a day of congressional testimony, Robert Mueller dismissed President Donald Trumps claim of total exoneration in Muellers probe of Russias 2016 election interference.

Ten years ago: The House narrowly rejected a challenge to the National Security Agencys secret collection of hundreds of millions of Americans phone records. A high-speed train crash outside Santiago de Compostela in northwest Spain killed 79 people. Pope Francis made an emotional plea in Aparecida, Brazil, for Roman Catholics to shun materialism in the first public Mass of his initial international trip as pontiff. It was announced that the newborn son of Prince William and Kate, the Duchess of Cambridge, would be named George Alexander Louis. Virginia Johnson, half of the renowned Masters and Johnson team of sex researchers, died in St. Louis at age 88.

Five years ago: The Trump administration said it would provide $12 billion in emergency relief to farmers hurt by trade disputes with China and other countries. Brian Kemp, a self-described politically incorrect conservative carrying the endorsement of President Donald Trump, won Georgias GOP gubernatorial runoff; he would go on to defeat Democrat Stacey Abrams in the general election. A federal judge in New York ordered the release of an Ecuadorean immigrant, Pablo Villavicencio, whod been held for deportation after delivering pizza to a U.S. Army installation in Brooklyn; the immigrant had applied to stay in the country after marrying a U.S. citizen with whom he had two young girls. Ivanka Trump announced the shutdown of her fashion line, which had been targeted by boycotts and prompted concerns about conflicts of interest.

One year ago: Pope Francis began a visit to Canada to apologize to Indigenous peoples for abuses by missionaries at residential schools, a key step in the Catholic Churchs efforts to reconcile with Native communities and help them heal from generations of trauma. Francis flew from Rome to Edmonton, Alberta, where his welcoming party included Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mary May Simon, an Inuk who was Canadas first Indigenous governor general. The top American military officer said the Chinese military had become significantly more aggressive and dangerous over the previous five years as he began a trip to the Indo-Pacific, where the United States aimed to strengthen ties as a counterbalance to Beijing.

Todays Birthdays: Political cartoonist Pat Oliphant is 88. Comedian Ruth Buzzi is 87. Actor Mark Goddard is 87. Actor Dan Hedaya is 83. Actor Chris Sarandon is 81. Comedian Gallagher is 77. Actor Robert Hays is 76. Former Republican national chairman Marc Racicot (RAWS-koh) is 75. Actor Michael Richards is 74. Actor Lynda Carter is 72. Movie director Gus Van Sant is 71. Former Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo., is 70. Country singer Pam Tillis is 66. Actor Paul Ben-Victor is 61. Basketball Hall of Famer Karl Malone is 60. Retired MLB All-Star Barry Bonds is 59. Actor Kadeem Hardison is 58. Actor-singer Kristin Chenoweth is 55. Actor Laura Leighton is 55. Actor John P. Navin Jr. is 55. Actor-singer Jennifer Lopez is 54. Basketball player-turned-actor Rick Fox is 54. Director Patty Jenkins (Wonder Woman) is 52. Actor Jamie Denbo (TV: Orange is the New Black) is 50. Actor Eric Szmanda is 48. Actor Rose Byrne is 44. Country singer Jerrod Niemann is 44. Actor Summer Glau is 42. Actor Sheaun McKinney is 42. Actor Elisabeth Moss is 41. Actor Anna Paquin is 41. Actor Sarah Greene is 39. NHL center Patrice Bergeron is 38. Actor Megan Park is 37. Actor Mara Wilson is 36. Actor Sarah Steele is 35. Rock singer Jay McGuiness (The Wanted) is 33. Actor Emily Bett Rickards is 32. Actor Lucas Adams is 30. TV personality Bindi Irwin is 25.

Go here to read the rest:
Today in History: July 24, Apollo 11 returns home from the moon - Plainview Daily Herald

Posted in Politically Incorrect | Comments Off

McClellan: A trip to Scotland reveals a family motto that is just right – St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Posted: at 5:06 pm

I did not go to Scotland to seek my roots. In fact, I was only there because one of my wifes sisters and her husband had rented a place in rural northern England and we decided to visit.

As long as we were in northern England, we might as well hop the train north to Edinburgh. And as long as we were in Edinburgh, we might as well hop the train north to Inverness. Thats where Loch Ness is. I booked us a hotel next to the Loch.

If I get a photo of Nessie, we pay for the trip and then some, I said to Mary.

But back to Edinburgh and my roots. We were strolling along in the tourist section when we came across a Clan store. The different Scottish clans families have their own tartan patterns and family crests. These crests include the family motto and are displayed on brooch pins, which are meant to be worn on kilts.

The Clan store did not have any tartan stuff in the MacLellan pattern no scarves for the women in my life but it did have a brooch pin. I took a quick look at it. Think On was the family motto. I do not want to embarrass any Scotsperson by singling out a particular clan, but most of the mottos were fierce. These were people who glorified violence.

Then there was us. Think On.

Maybe these guys wouldnt be scornful of a descendant who enjoys a good latte on weekend mornings. Vanilla with whole milk. Think On.

In addition to the brooch, I bought a booklet of our clan history. On the back of the booklet, it said, Recipients of high honors, they nevertheless often paid dearly for their allegiances and beliefs.

Bad choices. Its a family thing. Im going to start asking for skim milk with those lattes.

Back in the hotel room, I read the booklet. It explained that Think On came from a 15th-century incident. The king had put out a reward for the head of a notorious bandit called Black Morrow. Apparently, he was a Moor from North Africa. Sir William MacLellan had the good fortune to come upon the bandit as he lay in a drunken stupor. Sir William dispatched him.

I remember my dad saying, If you cant kick a man when hes down, when can you kick him?

Too bad that wouldnt fit on a brooch pin.

Sir William got an immediate audience with the king, and because those were literal times, he showed the head of Black Morrow to the king. The king seemed to hedge a bit about the reward. Sir William drew the kings attention back to the severed head. Think on this, he said.

A threat to the king in the kings own castle? Who would dare do such a thing? I read it to Mary and said that it had the sound of a story a guy might make up after a few glasses of malt. So then I said to the King, Think on this!

Mary nodded. That does sounds like something a McClellan might do.

Think on, I replied.

The king relented. Sir William got the reward and the family got a motto. All for the good luck of stumbling upon a bandit who had passed out.

The good luck did not last. There was always a lot of fighting going on and far too often we found ourselves on the losing side. We won an occasional battle. Using a huge cannon, we battered down Threave Castle. We gave ourselves a second family motto. Destroyers of Proud Things.

But our destroyer days were short-lived. One bad choice too many, and we were banished to Northern Ireland. In return for signing a pledge to remain protestant, we were given land.

I had always imagined that a forefather had distinguished himself while serving for a protestant king and had been rewarded for that service with land in Ulster. Yes, I know. No matter how we got the land, it didnt belong to us. We were usurpers. The displaced owners would never accept our ownership. Welcome to The Troubles.

I took a closer look at the brooch. The design features a head impaled on a sword. The Black Morrows head, no doubt.

I wondered if our clan could be any more politically incorrect. Why couldnt we have stumbled upon a drunken white renegade? Why did our bandit have to be Black and a Muslim?

That is the thing about life, though. You have to play the cards youre dealt. Had Sir William stumbled upon a passed-out white Christian with a price on his head, hed have dispatched him. This was not a hate crime. No bigotry involved. Just circumstance.

Still, would any of the women in my life want to wear the the brooch? You have to look pretty closely to see the impaled head, but once you see it, it is unsettling. Why are you wearing a pin with an impaled head and who did the head belong to?

Too much explaining required. The brooch will end up in a drawer.

So, yes it is a strange history I discovered in the tourist section of Edinburgh, but Im glad I learned about the clan. Im proud of my ancestors. They kept on keeping on. I have always maintained that you cannot judge a person of the past by todays standards. Wise people predict that people of the future will be appalled that we ate meat. So I cut the old-timers some slack. Besides, I really like the family motto.

These adorable endangered kittens were born in Scotland. The mother, Talla, gave birth to five kittens at the Wildcat Wood in Highland Wildlife Park in Scotland. Keith Gilchrist of the Highland Wildlife Park said, Wildcats are Scotland's most iconic animal but sadly also one of our most endangered.Buzz60s Keri Lumm has more.

Get local news delivered to your inbox!

Follow this link:
McClellan: A trip to Scotland reveals a family motto that is just right - St. Louis Post-Dispatch

Posted in Politically Incorrect | Comments Off

AMD CEO will consider other foundries besides Taiwan … – Seeking Alpha

Posted: at 5:06 pm

David Becker

Amid a broader visit to Asia, AMD (NASDAQ:AMD) CEO Dr. Lisa Su said the semiconductor giant will consider other companies besides Taiwan Semiconductor (NYSE:TSM) to produce its chips in an effort to improve its supply chain.

Upon a visit to Tokyo, Su said AMD (AMD) is "considering other manufacturing capabilities" aside from Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM) as the company, in a heated battle with Nvidia (NVDA) and others, looks to make sure it has " the most resilient supply chain," in an interview with Nikkei Asia.

53-year-old Su added that AMD (AMD) does not have "anything [planned] currently" for advanced chip development and that replacing Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), the world's largest foundry, will be difficult.

She also said that she would consider using Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM) plants around the world outside of Taiwan, adding the fact that foundries being built in the U.S. and Japan is a "good thing."

"We would like to use manufacturing [sites] across different geographies to give us some flexibility," she added.

Earlier this week, Su visited Taiwan to meet with suppliers, including Taiwan Semiconductor.

Intel (NASDAQ:INTC), which has long competed with AMD (AMD) in the CPU space, is transitioning itself into a foundry to compete with companies such as Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), Samsung (OTCPK:SSNLF) and GlobalFoundries (NASDAQ:GFS).

Santa Clara, California-based Intel is building manufacturing plants all over the world, including in Germany and is considering Italy.

Earlier this week, Taiwan Semiconductor (TSM), which produces chips for AMD (AMD), Nvidia (NVDA) and others, said it was delaying the start of production at its Arizona plant to 2025, citing an insufficient amount of skilled workers required for equipment installation.

AMD (AMD) shares rose 1% in pre-market trading on Friday.

Excerpt from:
AMD CEO will consider other foundries besides Taiwan ... - Seeking Alpha

Posted in Politically Incorrect | Comments Off

The Religion of Sexual Humanism – Answers In Genesis

Posted: at 5:06 pm

A Fall from Grace

These types of headlines have caused many Christians to scratch their heads, wondering how the United States, which was blessed by God in the past, has bowed to such madness of morality and ethics in such a relatively short time.

The United States (USA) was born out of a Christian nation (technically an Anglican nationa protestant denomination that came out of the Reformation of the sixteenth century). The King or Queen of England is still the head of the Anglican Church to this day (the official Church of England).

A USA history textbook from the late 1800s and early 1900s said that the colonists were mostly protestant with a small percentage of Roman Catholics.1 In 1892, US Supreme Court Justice David Brewer ruled that the USA was a Christian nation.2 In 1931, the supreme court again ruled that we are a Christian people.3

Mid-twentieth-century presidents like Harry Truman4 and Dwight D. Eisenhower (who led the military defeat of the evolutionary Nazis in Europe) openly discussed the Christian God and his blessings on America. But today, precious few politicians would dare say such a thing!

Dont get me wrong, there have been plenty of non-Christiansincluding leaders and early American fathers who were not fully on board with the Christian faith and its stated moral code.5 Notwithstanding, the point is that Christian morality held a strong sway in hearts and minds of many peoplenot just in the United States, but across the Western worldfor a long time. Yet the elderly in every Western nation today have seen Christian morality fall like a tree that was suddenly cut off at its roots.

Its no surprise that many liberal (non-conservative) cities in the USA have been repeatedly compared to Sodom and Gomorrah (Genesis 19)!6 But again, this is not just a problem in the United States. Sexual immorality, including homosexual actions and gender dysphoria, has now infected much ground in the Western worldEngland, France, Canada, Germany, Norway, Sweden, Australia, Spain, New Zealand, Portugal, and the list goes on!

If people are no longer standing on Christian moralitywhich gives us the standard for sexualitythen the obvious question to ask is What religious standard are they now embracing? This brings me to the religion of sexual humanism.

Sexual humanism is a sub-branch of the secular forms of humanism (i.e., secular humanism or its various manifestations). Before we get lost in terminology, allow me to explain humanism first so that you can better understand the religion of secular humanism and thus its daughter, sexual humanism.

The religion of humanism views man as the highest authority, not God. In other words, in this religious framework, mans ideas/opinions/beliefs are elevated to supersede God and his Word (the Bible) as the supreme authority. If you have ever heard the famous mantra Man is the measure of all things, then youve heard humanism preached.

Put another wayhumanism is preached anytime mans ideas are elevated to allegedly be greater than our omniscient (all-knowing), omnipotent (all-powerful), and omnipresent (everywhere present) holy God of truth. Even if you were to take all the people who have ever lived and combine them together, we have an infinitely small amount of knowledge and power compared to the infinite God of the Bible who created and sustains our very being and existence.

And yet, people have the audacity to think manand hence mans ideas about religion, history, morality, science, and so onis somehow greater than God! Foundationally, there are only two religions in the world: Gods religion and not Gods religion (otherwise known as mans religion, or humanism). Thus, in its broadest aspects, the battle is really just Christianity vs. humanism.

All other religions (which are technically sub-religions of humanism) that do not come from God and his Word (all 66 books of the Bible) have elevated mans ideas one way or another to ultimately take people away from God and his Word. Even if a religion is satanic or demonic, it still comes through the mind of man and is, therefore, humanistic. So, humanism consists of many sub-religions.

In addition to elevating pagan or secular ideas as the ultimate standard, some of these religions are based on various beliefs and ideas of ancient sages. Still other religions come from distortions of Gods Word, such as from alleged prophets (outside the Bible), adding books to the Bible, taking books away from the Bible, trying to change the Bible, and so forth. But regardless, in each case, they take mans variant ideas and neglect what God has to say on the subjectwhether its about origins, God, salvation, the afterlife, morality, etc.

All false religions are humanistic because in every one of these religious systems, mans ideaseither directly or indirectlyhave been used to deceive people into false beliefs. Some of these humanistically influenced religions deviate only slightly from the Bible, whereas others deviate a lot. In general, there are four philosophical categories of humanism.7

In some cases, some of these religions try mixing or syncretizing their view with another sub-religion or even with the Bible (called syncretism or compromise). But the man-made beliefs tend to supersede the plain reading of Scripture in these examples. Simply put, in each instance of humanism intermixing, Gods Word is not the absolute truth/standard in one or more areas.

Chart Notes:

* Many younger SDA (Seventh Day Adventists) have moved away from Ellen Whites teachings. Ellen White was the founder of SDA and a claimed prophetess. Her writings were originally viewed as the inerrant word of God equal to the Bible within SDA. This cultic view led many astray, but now many in the SDA churches are moving away from her writings and back to the Bible as the sole authority, which is encouraging.

** Unitarianism has Jesus as a created being, but the religion has moved so far from Christianity that it could easily be classified as merely a moralistic religion.

*** Oriental, Orthodox, and Roman Catholic churches are all distinct from one another in hosts of ways. Each can have the correct Christ and the triune God; however, they often add apocryphal books as equal to Scripture or pronouncements from a Pope or Patriarch as equal to Scripture. In some cases in the Roman church, Mary is worshipped and seen as Co-Redemptrix, which is false.

**** Scientology is a mixture of an Eastern religion and a secular religion; hence, it is denoted in both.

***** Syncretism, whether Latin American-style with paganism or mixed with the modern ideas of big bang, evolution, and millions of years, is convoluted. You can indeed get the correct Christ out of it, but there are so many inconsistencies when you mix opposing religionsespecially at a foundational level.

****** Secular Humanism is obviously a secular religion, but with its manifestos (like many other secular religions), it could also be lumped as moralistic religion. These religions are not denoted under moralistic because of their obviously strong ties to other secular religions.

Sexual humanism comes out of the secular forms of humanism (being another subset of this secular religiona denomination if you will). Sexual humanists not only devote themselves to living sexually immoral lives but also to promoting these sexual sins in the culture. In many instances, they try to force others to hold to their religious views of sex and immorality in every area of culture, ranging from politics to classrooms to public company support. This is a very aggressive religion that pushes their sexually deviant agenda on all ages (including young kids and teens), governments, media, businesses, and even Christian churches.

All forms of sexual immorality (also called unchastity) are lumped under the religion of sexual humanism. This religious system can be further broken down into the following various tenets. As a caveat, not all sexual humanists will adhere to all of these tenetsnevertheless, any form of sexual deviancy is part of sexual humanism. In other words, different sexual humanists will often pick and choose among these various tenets of the list below and to various degrees as wellsome are actively involved and others are merely allies (i.e., giving approval). The Bible condemns both positions equally in Romans 1:2432.

Sexual humanism is nothing new, but it has often been associated with ancient religions that began after sin entered the world in Genesis 3. Prior to sin, sex was perfect (Genesis 1:31) within marriage between Adam and Eve. After sin, sexual immorality began. As a point of note, marriage between close relatives was originally acceptable as Cain, Abel, and Seth (three of Adam and Eves many children) could intermarry with their female siblings (Genesis 5:4).8

Noahs grandchildren could intermarry as well after the flood. At the time of Moses (about 14001500 BC), God forbade close intermarriage (now called incest) in Leviticus 18.

Even so, we also see the following examples of sexual immorality in Scripture:

As you can see, sexual humanism is often mixed with many other false religions, and even the religious can be enticed into its practices. Though sexual humanism is not unified into a single organized body, there are many clubs and organizations that propagate this religion today.

Historically, pagans often had rampant sexual sin in various forms. Islam has child brides (pedophilia/cross-generational sex), wife for a night (prostitution), and so on. Modern LaVeyan satanism (the atheistic form) is loaded with sexual sin and pornography.

The modern movement of deviant sexuality has increased, pushing the religion of sexual humanism to the forefront in our culture. Following the progression outlined in Romans 1 of being turned over to immoral lusts, the Western world has gone through the following stages in history:

This brings us to today where we see the rampant worship of deviant sexual practices, transgenderism, and attacks on biblical marriage and family. God says,

In our culture, not only do we see cross-dressing, but we see the futility of sinners minds going so far as to have surgeries to try to alter their own bodies by mutilations to appear as the opposite sex! Such things are a sign of judgment on unbelievers who have rejected their Creator and his design for humanity and biblical sexuality and who thus have been given over to a debased mind that cannot think properly (Romans 1:1828; 2 Corinthians 4:4; Ephesians 4:1719; Titus 1:1516; 2 Timothy 2:2326).

Mankind was created to be fruitful and multiply, within marriage, and fill the earth (Genesis 1:28). But because we are in a sin-cursed and broken world (Genesis 3), mankind throughout history has been enticed to sexual sin. And this has had profound effects even in many local church congregations, ranging all the way from pastors to laymen.

We have seen many pastors and Christian leaders fall from grace into sexual sinand in some cases, weve seen whole congregations promote sexual humanism in their local churches.

Sadly, many local churches and denominations toss aside Gods Word on the subject (usually by heavily reinterpreting the plain meaning of various passages of Scripture) to support sexual sin like homosexuality, fornication, and transgender ideologies. Some pastors or reverends even go so far as to outright deny Scripture (reject Gods authority) in order to justify deviant sexual lifestyles!10 In doing so, Gods Word is demoted, thus allowing certain tenets of sexual humanism to be proclaimed from the pulpit.

When Christianity is mixed with any other religion, Gods clear teachings are mocked. Fundamentally, it is no different than when the Israelites began mixing their godly worship of the one true God with worship of false gods like Baal and Molech. Even Solomon began offering sacrifices to pagan gods due to his sexual deviancy with many pagan women who then influenced him to deny Gods Word. God was not happy with him (Nehemiah 13:26).

For clarification, the terms pagan and paganism are overview terms. They encompass many types of religions, such as mythological and polytheistic religions (e.g., Baal worship, Roman mythology, Germanic/Norse mythology, etc.) as well as pantheistic religions (where the universe or cosmos is all that supposedly exists). Secular religions, like naturalism or materialism, are pantheistic, and so, by definition, they are pagan too. Famous secular atheist Carl Sagan used to open his show Cosmos with the mantra, The universe is all that is, ever was, and ever will be. This statement is outright pantheism, hence paganism.

In fact, when a local church or denomination accepts any form of secular religious views into their church (again, called syncretism) like the big bang, millions of years, evolution, sexual immorality, etc., they are defending paganism and false secular beliefs associated with paganism. Why would a church do this? Consider what God said in Hosea.

Like the ancient pagan religions of the past, the modern secular religious movements commonly deviate regarding sexuality. It is a sad indictment on the church when secular humanistic sexuality (e.g., sexual humanism) is promoted in the church in defiance of God and his Word. And the repercussions of rampant promiscuity, such as abortion and the devaluing of marriage and family, heap further condemnation on those who are involved in false teaching (2 Peter 2).

Jesus Christ is absolutely clear in his Wordrecall that Jesus Christ is the Creator God (John 1; Hebrews 1; Colossians 1) and his Wordthe 66 books of the Biblewas written by the power of the Holy Spirit (2 Timothy 3:16; 2 Peter 1:21).

Some critics call these clobber passages. But note that this nicknaming is only done in an attempt to deceive Christians into tossing these biblical passages aside, thus viewing the arbitrary and fallible opinions of sinful man as superior to God and his Word (again, note the religious aspect of humanism). In other words, it is a subtle method to convince people, especially Christians, to deny God in this particular instance and instead follow the religion of sexual humanism.

But actually, if we look at this claim logically, the term clobber passages is just an epithet/emotive language fallacy.11 There is no logical reason to toss the Bible aside or even reject just these passages. These passages, which are essential to understanding what God is saying on the subject, are not to be tossed aside. And to do so places the rest of Scripture in submission to mans opinion, including other important tenets such as the virgin birth and resurrection of Jesus. It is better to clobber with the truth in a gentle and humble effort to help someone come to repentance by the power of the Holy Spirit (e.g., 2 Timothy 2:2426) than for that person to spend an eternity in hell.

From another biblical perspective, God commands purity, and as a result there will be blessing (yes, blessing and encouraging) within sexuality in only one context. We are to keep sexual activity within marriage between a naturally born man and a naturally born woman.12

Today, were seeing the religion of sexual humanism being promoted with little restriction at state schools (schools that are funded by the state and public tax dollars). A dead giveawaythe LGBT flagis waving in grade schools and grammar schools! And with the increasing number of LGBT clubs, homosexuality and transgenderism are not only being encouraged, but now are also being imposed as standard beliefs at many state schools.

Stop and ponder this: adults are talking to children about sex and encouraging deviancyusually without the parents knowledge. Sometimes it is done to help keep it a secret from parents. Normally, such people are called sexual predators. But if it is done under the label of teacher and its backed by administration, then its (somehow) called being loving or compassionate to the student.

Look at a parallel of thiswhat if an intermediary manager at a company was talking about and encouraging pornography use and pushing their employeesoften privatelyto consider new sexual activities and partners . . . and then that manager told them not to inform their supervisor? This is called sexual harassment, which normally results in people getting fired and companies getting sued.

Yet state schools do it openly with young children, and many times principals and school boards encourage imposing this on children, who really should not have to deal with these concepts until they are much older and more mature physically and emotionally. Its no wonder that sexual abuse is rampant in state schools. Research done in 2015 in the US revealed some shocking statistics.

Note, these stats do not include senior year, when many of the kids are turning 18. But surely this abuse doesnt suddenly just stop then, and any sexual contact, regardless of whether the student is supposedly an adult, between a student and a teacher is (as it should be!) a criminal act of sexual predation because the teacher is in a position of power! So as a conservative number, 1 out of every 10 children in state schools in the United States were sexually abusedbear in mind that these were the students that werent too afraid to speak up! If you include the proclamation and encouragement of sexual deviancy, like premarital sex, homosexual behavior, or transgenderism, then this number would likely shoot up drastically. This statistic also doesnt include peer-to-peer issues.

When looking at sexual harassment in state schools, statistics conducted by the American Association of University Women published in 2022 state,

Unfortunately, sexual harassment and violence continue to be prevalent in elementary, middle, and high schools across the United States. According to AAUWs own research, nearly half of students in grades 7-12 experience sexual harassment. . . .

Sexual harassment and assault are also shockingly prevalent on college and university campuses. AAUWs own research revealed that two-thirds of college students experience sexual harassment. Studies have also found that approximately 26% of all female undergraduate students and 6.8% of all male undergraduate students have experienced sexual assault.15

It doesnt take a genius (its not rocket science!) to figure out that teachers talking to kids about all sorts of sexual activity can easily lead to sexual harassment and abuse from both teachers and their peers who are now thinking sexually about those surrounding them. The fact that state-funded government schools are encouraging sexuality at younger and younger ages and LGBT beliefs on children of all ages is a recipe for sexual predation. Parents, beware what you are sending your children into at a government-funded elementary, middle, high school, and college/university level. Parents who dont want their children sexually abused and taught homosexuality and transgenderismbut who send them to state schools where such wicked things are rampantneed to carefully consider how and where their children spend much of their time!16 17

Law is a biblical concept. God is the ultimate Lawgiver, and he has imposed certain laws for man for our good.

It has been like this from the beginning. Even deeper to ponder is that God upholds the laws of nature and the laws of logic for existence to be possible (Hebrews 1:3). As we are made in the image of a law-giving God, he also gave us dominion over the world (Genesis 1:2627).

When man sinned in Genesis 3 and committed high treason against God, we became corrupt in every part of our being. Mans unrighteousness led to judgment with the global flood (Genesis 68). After this, mans heart was still hard (Genesis 8:21). God gave the law through MosesGenesis through Deuteronomy. The law is defined in detail with judges, executives, inheritance laws, marriage laws, laws against sexual immorality, and so on. The Law of Moses is often summed up in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:317, NKJV):

You shall have no other gods before Me. You shall not make for yourself a carved imageany likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth; you shall not bow down to them nor serve them. For I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children to the third and fourth generations of those who hate Me, but showing mercy to thousands, to those who love Me and keep My commandments.

You shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, for the Lord will not hold him guiltless who takes His name in vain.

Remember the Sabbath day, to keep it holy. Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is the Sabbath of the Lord your God. In it you shall do no work: you, nor your son, nor your daughter, nor your male servant, nor your female servant, nor your cattle, nor your stranger who is within your gates. For in six days the Lord made the heavens and the earth, the sea, and all that is in them, and rested the seventh day. Therefore the Lord blessed the Sabbath day and hallowed it.

Honor your father and your mother, that your days may be long upon the land which the Lord your God is giving you.

You shall not murder.

You shall not commit adultery.

You shall not steal.

You shall not bear false witness against your neighbor.

You shall not covet your neighbors house; you shall not covet your neighbors wife, nor his male servant, nor his female servant, nor his ox, nor his donkey, nor anything that is your neighbors.

However, the law can be further summed up as Matthew 22:3540 (NKJV) says:

Then one of them, a lawyer, asked Him a question, testing Him, and saying, Teacher, which is the great commandment in the law?

Jesus said to him, You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind. This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets.

Romans 13:910 reiterates this passage of Scripture. With that being said, nations all over the world have laws. The problem is that many of these laws are not the best. When they mimic Gods law, they are good (do not murder, do not steal, and so on). When they have not been modeled around the law of an all-knowing God, they fall short. Simply put, a nation with laws based on mans word will always fall short compared to a nation with laws based on Gods Word.

This brings me to US laws that have deviated from Gods standard over the years. For instance, in the most powerful show of sexual humanistic power, our government has now demoted marriage (between a man and woman) and reinterpreted it to include homosexual relationships, which is sexual immorality!

The government, in an obvious abuse of its power, is trying to force this new view of pseudo marriage on Bible-believing Christiansdemanding they acknowledge this new definition over what God says marriage iswhich is a violation of the civil rights of Christians. This is an obvious case of the religion of humanism being imposed in the US at the highest level. This decision was defended by the US supreme court in Obergefell v. Hodges on June 26, 2015.

In other words, the government is demanding that Christians must bow down and worship their humanistic view of pseudo marriage and deny what God clearly says on this subject. If not, they can be sued and attacked in many ways. This is a clear example of Christians being denied their right to the free exercise of their religion.

My dear Christian brethren, this is no different from bowing down to the golden statue and the threat of the fiery furnace in Nebuchadnezzars day in Daniel 3. Even in the New Testament, Christians in the early church who didnt bow to government-imposed religion were often attacked, beaten, arrested, and tortured, even to the point of death. (And sadly, this type of persecution is still happening to Christians around the world in countries that are very hostile to the Christian faithsuch as Afghanistan, Iran, Somalia, North Koreaand even Canada, Poland, and the UK to a certain degree!)

Consider the plundering of the property of Christians and their early struggles and sufferings in Hebrews 10:3234 (NKJV).

To Christians reading this, the secular world is attacking our faith in an effort to impose secular religions on ussuch as with sexual humanisms tenet of pseudo marriage. We must stand firm and keep our eyes on the prize of heaven because this temporary world will one day be destroyed, and sinners will be judged for all eternity if they do not repent and turn to Jesus for their salvation. Consider these verses from Acts 5.

God created and defined marriage, which meansregardless of what fallible/sinful mankind saysany other definition is not marriage. (Rather, its merely a mirage!) The supreme court has made errors in their decisions in the past, like the Dred Scott v. Sanford decision on March 6, 1857 (regarding slavery), or the Roe v. Wade decision on January 22, 1973 (regarding the killing of innocent children).

Thankfully, by Gods grace, these horrible decisions were finally reversed. Pray that God will reverse these attacks on marriage by those who unwittingly (or intentionally) impose the religion of sexual humanism from the highest positions in the US government on Christians (and in other Western nations too)! Oh, how our once-Christianized nations have fallen indeed.

Every king, president, supreme court justice, governor, dictator, and government leader of any nation that disobeys the Lords standards will still stand before our holy God in judgment and give an account for their actions.

But for Christians, those who put their trust in the Lord, be still and know that God is God. For we know that God, who is above these rulings, hates these iniquitous decrees (Isaiah 10:14). And remember, God still sits on his throne with all authority in heaven and on earth (Matthew 28:18). It should be a reminder that we should be crying out to God for help in all matters and continuing to pray for our leaders to do good and repent of their sin and turn to Christ (Philippians 4:67; 1 Timothy 2:12).

Ultimately, it doesnt matter what the government says; we must continue to share the gospel and the commands of Jesus Christ, the King of kingsand Christ is in the position of having all authority on heaven and on earth, above any government official who comes and goes. The fact is that we may face persecution for it. But we can pray for boldness to do what honors God, especially as we see these freedoms eroding. As godliness is eroded in our culture, so are our freedoms (as freedom is a Christian concept emanating from the freedom given to us by our Creator).

If this sexual humanistic religion has influenced you, I encourage you to repent of your sin (this means to turn from it in a humble way and sorrowfully return to Jesus Christ who is the Creator and the Savior). Then find a local Bible-believing church that can help you grow in your faith.

The religion of sexual humanism is permeating our Western culture. We have now had entire generations of kids trained in this religionand yet many of them have no idea this religion was imposed upon them.

Any time mans deviant ideas about sex are elevated to supersede what God says in the Bible, a red flag should immediately go up in your mind as you recognize this as sexual humanism. It is time to get back to Gods Word in every area of life, especially when it comes to sex, marriage, gender, and family, as these have profound impact on society.

Excerpt from:

The Religion of Sexual Humanism - Answers In Genesis

Posted in Modern Satanism | Comments Off

The rise of the French Intifada – The Spectator

Posted: at 5:06 pm

Seven years ago on Friday, a 31-year-old man got behind the wheel of a 19-tonne lorry and purposefully drove it down Nices Promenade des Anglais at speed as crowds celebrated Frances Bastille Day. Eighty-six people were killed, including 14 children, the image of an infants corpse wrapped in foil beside a toy shocking a country that had grown wearily used to violence.

The previous November, 130 people had been murdered across Paris in a series of attacks which reached their most intense savagery at the Bataclan. This followed earlier atrocities that year at the Charlie Hebdo office and a Jewish supermarket in the French capital. In all cases the attackers were of North African origin, although often born and raised in France.

Visiting the country that summer felt quite strange, with soldiers stationed at every conceivable public place amid a sense of acute tension. Even in a small villageftein Provence, four soldiers and four armed police walked around guarding all entrances. It brought backchildhood memories of Northern Ireland, and of visiting Israel during the Second Intifada. Indeed, this was the phrase that had started to be used to describe the state of emergency:the French Intifada.

Frances refusal to recognise immigrants as anything but French has often been blamed for the widespread sense of alienation

The recent violence in Paris and elsewhere,which saw attempts to ram the home of a mayor, once again highlighted the trouble the country has with integration. But the French police uniondescribing themselves as being at war with vermin illustrated a different mindset to the English-speaking world, and a far more belligerent approach to the problems of diversity.

Like Britain, the Netherlands, Germany and Sweden, France has had difficulties assimilating the children of immigrants from beyond Europe, yet its recent history has proved especially violent and troubled. Britain has jihadi terrorism 2017 was especially grim but it has never reached such intensity.Last week, as over 130,000 police officersstood guard to protect the Republic on the day of its celebration, it is worth considering the journey that brought it to such a state.

Analysts have often compared Britains state multiculturalism with Frances system oflacit, which tends to downplay the existence of communities even to the point of not taking demographic statistics. Although neither countrys approach has entirely been a success, Frances refusal to recognise immigrants as anything but French has often been blamed for the widespread sense of alienation. Others point to the housing system, which tends towards concentrations of North and West Africans in suburbanbanlieues, or the less laissez-faire economic policy which results in higher unemployment (in exchange for better social security).

While they no doubt play a part, the biggest single difference is history, asAndrew Hussey recounted back in 2014 inThe French Intifada, in particular Frances history with North Africa. To put it in British terms, imagine that Britains rule in Pakistan had involved not a small number of administrators and soldiers but instead hundreds of thousands of British settlers arriving in the country, many with the intention of making it a new America (i.e. driving the natives out).

That Britain had declared Pakistan an integral part of the country, and that, rather than scarpering in indecent haste when the empire began to disintegrate, Britain had dug in to preserve its rule in a sadistic war of independence, one in which natives and white settlers committed countless atrocities against each other. And that this violence had spilled into Britain with assassination attempts and terrorism, by both sides, destabilising the country to the point where there was talk of a coup. And that this was happening just as large-scale immigration to the colonial power was taking place.

Britain experienced nothing like as much violence in the dying days of empire, and indeed the only real comparison with our history was the moment when there was almost all-out conflictbetween Britains Protestant and Irish Catholic populations before the first world war.

If French politicians so casually talk of civil war between its right wing and the Algerian-descended population, it is because it has already played out this conflict before one that was never healed, and so invites a sequel.

Hussey describes first arriving in Lyon in the 1980s with the typical left-wing worldview of a Manchester University graduate. This was a period when youth politics in Britain was moving firmly to the Left and antiracism was becoming the norm. He was taken aback by the attitudes in his new home.

Lyon, despite being Frances second city, is somewhat insular, having less of an international profile than smaller centres like Marseilles or Bordeaux. It also has a long-standing link with the occult, including necromancy and satanism in 1993Le Pointcalled it Lyon, capitale de letrange. It also has a sense of itself as being in opposition to Paris, representingLa France profondeand with a strong conservative tradition. Indeed, it is home to a university that, by British standards, is very right wing and still has a nationalist strain within its student body (the Anglophone presumption that students are left wingdoes not always hold on the continent).

It was in this city that rioting erupted in the summer of 1981, soon after the election of Franois Mitterrand, the countrys first left-wing president since the war, and a moment that had inspired hope for the countrys progressives. This was the first taste of unrest involving the countrys North African population. More was to come three years later in Vnissieux, a suburb of the city, which led to a week-long occupation and the involvement of more than 4,000 armed police officers. Even then, people talked of a new French civil war.

The earlier generation of French Arab youth were secular and leftist. They also believed in the right to smoke dope, drink alcohol, chase girls of all ethnic extractions, and form rock bands, Hussey writes. This was quite similar to the experience in Britain with the politicised young Asians of the 1980s, as outlined inKenan MaliksFrom Fatwa to Jihad. In particular, they modelled themselves on black Americans who, with their outsized cultural power and charisma, had since the 1960s become role models for non-white minorities across Europe.

Black French youth today still have a strange sort of Anglophilia, influenced by rap music and Premier League football, which explains why so many kids in the banlieues are called Steeve, Marky, Jenyfer, Britney or even Kevin. He writes that They dont always get the spelling right, but the sentiment is straightforward: we are not like other French people; we refuse to be like them. (Kevin is also popularwith working-class whites inFrance).

The housing situation plays a major part in creating a sense of separation. In all French towns and cities with a significant immigrant population, there has been a singular failure of vision and imagination around the issue of the banlieues. The problem is both simple and complex. It is simple in that the people who live there are angry and unhappy. It is complex in the sense that these people do not necessarily live in tangible, material poverty but rather in a kind of spiritual poverty. This is because they do not belong here. No one does. This is the secret truth of the banlieues of Lyons and its replicas across France.

Living in the soulless housing projects, North African communities rely on traditional structures to help social solidarity, withcads(chiefs) andgrands frres(big brothers) who ensure safety and order. As with elsewhere in Europe, much of the tension comes from the clash between a clannish population and aWEIRD (western, educated, industrialised, rich, democratic) one.

Algeria, despite the war with Islamic fundamentalists, is not an especially religious country way less so than Pakistan and French Muslims are not that observant. But belief and identity are separate things, and as Islamism rose in strength across the wider Middle East, so the Faith of the Other proved to be the most powerful force among people often made to feel ashamed of their ancestry.

The result is a population living in a state of acute alienation. Hussey witnesses a crowd of angry youths at the Gare du Nord, the borderland between these two worlds, in a stand-off with police, an event he describes as thrilling and frightening. This was anti-civilisation in action a transgression of every code of behaviour that holds a society together. They shouted Nik les schmitts (Fuck the cops), or Fuck the police in English, but on occasion he noticed that they were also shouting Naal abouk la France! Fuck France!

It was during the OctoberNovember 2005 riots in Clichy-sous-Bois, on the eastern outskirts of Paris, that the media first talked of the French Intifada. As with recent events, it was sparked by abavure, or blunder, the word given to the kind of police cock-up that regularly ends with an innocent person dying or being injured.

The violence subsided after two weeks, although it helped the career of Nicolas Sarkozy, then Minister of the Interior, who called the rioters racaille (which Hussey translates as scum, though others compare it to the milder riff-raff or rabble).

The riots then, as now, attracted a great deal of coverage in the Anglophone world, and it was generally agreed that the severity of the crisis had been exaggerated by the English-speaking media, who knew little of France and used the news of the French riots as a distraction from their own problems with immigration and immigrants in their own countries.

Indeed, in France it is very easy to not know these riots are going on. My mother visited Paris during the recent disturbances and said that you wouldnt have any idea there was anything up. But that, of course, is part of the problem. Its not uncommon for contemporary Parisians to talk aboutla banlieuein terms that make it seem as unknowable and terrifying as the forests that surrounded Paris in the Middle Ages, Hussey writes.

Modern France works under a system oflacit, which guarantees the moral unity of the French nation, the Republique indivisible. The principle of hard secularism dates to the early 20th century and the bitter culture wars over the role of the Catholic Church. But for the children of migrants, he writes,lacitcan seem to resemble the civilising mission of French colonialism. Unlike the British, who were not interested in turning colonial subjects into little Englishmen, Frances empire was motivated inpart by a desire to make colonial subjects French.

For some, the current violence is merely the continuation of a long war between France and its Arabs

In the 19th century, France began to describe itself as une puissance musulmane (a Muslim power), and this system famously reached its most absurd with Berber children in Algeria learning about their Gaulish ancestors. In contrast, the British had an attitude to empire that was effectively more racist, believing that colonial subjects couldnt be like us, but it also carried a certain amount of standoffish respect because, even if inferior, theyre fine as they are.

This approach would continue to some extent as the empires followed Britain and France home. British-style multiculturalism has its downsides: in particular, it helped to promote religious identity through often dubious community leaders but neither has Frances civilising mission created a common sense of nationhood between thegris those children of empire considered neither white nor black and thefils de Clovis, as they call the white French.

The housing system certainly plays a part. Unlike London, where government housing tends to be heaviest in the most central (and expensive) boroughs, France reserves the land insidePariss Priphriqueand its projects are kept outside, especially concentrated to the north-east. These used to be white indeed they had a significant Jewish presence but they have since fled, often complaining of intimidation.

Many British cinema viewers were introduced to thebanlieuesby the 1995 filmLa Haine, which starred Vincent Cassell as Vinz, a young Jewish man in a multiracial gang. But Hussey finds the film unconvincing, because I suspect that a Jew could never be friends with blacks and Arabs in this way. Also, although I know plenty of Jews in Paris, I dont know a single Jew who lives in the banlieues, even though at one time the Jewish community flourished in the suburbs there are still synagogues in Bagnolet and Montreuil which date from the 1930s.

Indeed, Frances Jews, whose numbers were hugely depleted by the Holocaust, have probably suffered most in this conflict. In January 2006, Ilan Halimi, a 23-year-old mobile phone salesman, was invited out on a date with a French-Iranian woman called Yalda; he was seized by men in balaclavas and found, three weeks later, naked and tied to a tree. He died on the way to hospital. She later crowed that, when their victim was seized, he screamed for two minutes with a high-pitched voice like a girl.

Halimi had been tortured for three weeks, and residents of the block had heard his screams and the laughter of those torturing him, but had done nothing. No one called the police.

Fifteen youths from the Bagneux district of southern Paris were arrested, a group calling themselves the Gang of Barbarians who expressed a hatred of rich Jews. The leader, an Ivorian who had doused his victim in petrol and set fire to him, said he was proud of what he did.

What gave this horrific story an extra chill was how few came to the Jewish communitys defence. In a country where historical guilt about wartime trains to the east hangs in the air, perhaps most memorably related inAu revoir, les enfants, they just went quiet all the way to the top.

After Ilans murder the Chirac government disassembled about social problems in the banlieues, and only Sarkozy, of partly Sephardic heritage, called it an anti-Semitic crime. One Tunisian-French Jew told Hussey of the historic echoes of the Nazi period, when Jews died and everybody pretended everything was all right.

then subscribe from as little as 1 a week after that

Hussey finds anti-Semitism widespread in the banlieue, residents bandying around phrases such assale juif,sale yid,sale feuj,youpin,youtre this latter term dates from the 1940s and so, with its echoes of the Nazi deportations, contains a special poison. All of these racist epithets were widely used. I heard all about the crimes of the Jews, yet it was hard to find anyone who had met a Jewish person.

Husseys book title was prescient, published just as the violence began to intensify into something much more serious, fuelled by the chaos of the Syrian war and the rise of Isis. The first victims were Jews.

In March 2012, Rabbi Jonathan Sandler was dropping off two boys, aged 5 and 3, at the Ozar HaTorah school in Toulouse, when a gunman approached and shot all three dead. Nearby, teachers and pupils thought the shots were fireworks. The killer then grabbed an 8-year-old girl, Myriam Monsongo, and blasted a bullet through her temple.

The media at first believed the killer to be a neo-Nazi, as the previous week two soldiers of North African origin had been killed in a similar way.But then a journalist took a phone call from a man claiming full responsibility for the attacks, saying it was revenge for Afghanistan and the treatment of the Palestinians. The killer, Mohammed Merah, was soon confronted by police while heavily armed and shot dead by a sniper.

Toulouse was followed, after the publication of Husseys book, by a series of horrors that led the President to declare a state of emergency. This was not just the Hebdo massacre, Bataclan and Nice, but numerousstreet rammings, church attacksand other acts of terror both by organised groups and lone wolves.

The Intifada has died down since, but the rage at its heart remains an anger that runs deep to the first arrival of the French in Algiers in 1830. And if many young French of North African descent see their revolt as revenge for colonialism, it is an idea not lost on the countrys Right, either. Indeed, for some, the current violence is merely the continuation of a long war between France and its Arabs.

This article first appeared on Ed Wests substack, the Wrong Side of History.

Read the rest here:

The rise of the French Intifada - The Spectator

Posted in Modern Satanism | Comments Off

Monthly Archives: July 2023

Is atheism destroying the moral fabric of society? – Big Think

The Logic of Faith – Adventist Review

Change of plans – USC News & Events – University of South Carolina

71 Years Later, The Weirdest Religion in Sci-Fi History Is Back – Inverse

Manzi: Ducati teams wanted me to be disqualified, mistakes … – Crash

Today in History: July 24, Apollo 11 returns home from the moon – Plainview Daily Herald

McClellan: A trip to Scotland reveals a family motto that is just right – St. Louis Post-Dispatch

AMD CEO will consider other foundries besides Taiwan … – Seeking Alpha

The Religion of Sexual Humanism – Answers In Genesis

The rise of the French Intifada – The Spectator

The Prometheus League

Breaking News and Updates

Prometheism

Forbidden Fruit

The Evolutionary Perspective

Transtopia Menu

Library Updates

Library Books

Future Euvolution

Lucid Dreams from Childhood

Genetic Revolution

Speciation + Self-Directed Evolution