Debunking Atheists

Left Agenda

2013-05-17T20:21:00.000-07:00

I just watched a Film called AGENDA (User will not allow me to embed it.)

I will guess complete denial, as a response. Unless maybe the left here are as Ludwig von Mises put it, "confused and misguided sympathizers" or as Lenin labeled as useful idiot.

Atheist Day!

2013-04-01T11:06:00.002-07:00

Answer the Fool.

OK everyone, watch the promo, buy the DVD or download right now, and answer them that says in their heart there is no God.

http://americanvision.com/fool

bit.ly/AtheistDay

We The People

2013-02-28T12:30:00.001-08:00

How ironic the left will not let women choose!

The enemy is the one who is scared of us, We the people. Evil is NOT invincible. You are the resistance, and the power. Evil knows this. As evil and corruption manifests itself more, people are going to remember the seeds we plant. We will take humanity back.

Even if bad things happen, it will be the enemy who is scared. That is why THEY try to intimidate, because they are afraid. Trust in God, He will take us the rest of the way.

I am not afraid of their propaganda, and the new world order. What we need to be afraid of is "we the people" not resisting them and letting them fully take over. That is what is actually frightening, that "We the people" willingly give up those certain unalienable rights endowed by our Creator.

Resist, be kind, but never give your rights up, for anyone.

Joe Biden just received a pay raise. After this video click on the third one at the top that states: "Buy a shotgun Joe Biden lying AR-15"

Update: Molotov chimed in and revealed what Biden said was a criminal action!

My friend, and presidential candidate, Thomas Hoefling just pointed this quote out to us:

“Nil desperandum, — Never Despair. That is a motto for you and me. All are not dead; and where there is a spark of patriotic fire, we will rekindle it.” — Samuel Adams

bit.ly/WethePeople

The Bad Guys

2013-02-20T06:18:00.001-08:00

Last Pope

2013-02-11T14:39:00.000-08:00

Apparently the pope, who claims he was chosen by God decided to quit, and will step down at the end of the month.

Many of the Atheists are all over this news and of course teasing, berating, and chastising ensued with meme submissions and harsh language.

This is very large news actually. Someone said the last time this happened was some 600 years ago. I can only speculate as to why he did this, with all these molestation allegations still flying around the organization, but that is something that may, or may not, finally be revealed.

We're also seeing reports of death threats people are making on Twitter. The fruit of that spirit is obvious to me, and certainly has nothing to do with Christ. We have posted about the RCC in the past about the complete apostasy in that organization. Moving on.

ProofthatGodexists.org

But what is intriguing is this important point that I wish to make. As you know, St. Malacy prophecies states this next Pope with be the last before Christ comes. It sure sparked my interest when I heard the news of this pope stepping down. This is the last prophecy proclaimed for the last pope:

"In the extreme persecution of the Holy Roman Church, there will sit [i.e., as bishop]. Peter the Roman, who will pasture his sheep in many tribulations: and when these things are finished, the city of seven hills will be destroyed, and the terrible judge will judge his people. The End." ~Wiki

Now, of course, this new guy could be the pope for some 10-20 years before anything major happens, or is noticed. But he WILL be the last one, according to St. Malacy. What can we take from this? Only God knows, but we do have some guidelines from scripture to help us.
When a prophet speaks in the Lord’s name, and the message does not come true or is not fulfilled, that is a message the Lord has not spoken. The prophet has spoken it presumptuously. Do not be afraid of him." ~Deuteronomy 18:22

So far, these prophecies from St. Malacy are to give us some pause. I am very excited at the thought that Christ is returning very soon, at least in my lifetime, God willing. I am also frightened for the lost that refuse to acknowledge Christ as Lord, and Savior who died for us that are saved.

His arrival will certainly be happening, it is now just a matter of when?

I would hope the Atheists here will spend these times, before Christ's arrival, to beg and plead with Him to choose them as one of the saved. To seek Him with a broken and contrite heart, like most all of us Christians have. (Psalm 51:17)

”Prayer is not overcoming God's reluctance, but laying hold of His willingness.” ~Martin Luther

bit.ly/LastPope

Gun Control

2013-02-01T17:36:00.001-08:00

Real men, like this, are helping me restore my beliefs in most of us, and makes me very proud to be an American. I cannot stress hard enough for people to wake up, get involved, and to fight for our rights; to defend our Constitution, before these professional politicians take away our RIGHT to defend our own homes. Bill Stevens should run for congress, at the very least.

But do you see what they are trying to propose!!!!??? Any gun, shooting more than ONE ROUND, is to be outlawed!! We understand that any damage that has been done, or will be done, can be reversed with a new group we vote in, but that takes time. We will not allow some 550+ guypeople in the branches of our government to simply take America hostage, and disarm us. But, these gun control proposals should not even be considered by these people, EVER! We have learned from our past that THIS path they are on, is the wrong one.

Just remember that the police are glorified report takers, to a degree. They only can do so much after the fact. How many rapes, murders, break in, or attacks have been stopped by the police? Hardly any, if not zero. That is why the police, themselves, have armed their own family members at their home. I am not actually worried that much, as we have some very sound and logical people anumbers Americans, that I am certain will voice their concerns and voting rights, to vote in better people then some of the failure that is in office now.

"Surely oppression maketh a wise man mad" ~Ecclesiastes 7:7

We owe it to each other as American citizens to protect one another, no matter what ANYONE says.

"To conquer a nation, one must first disarm its citizens" - Adolf Hitler (?)

This is now reminding me of an older post... We can do better than this.

“When it gets down to having to use violence, then you’re playing the system’s game. The establishment will irritate you, pull your beard, flick your face to make you fight. Because once they’ve got you violent, then they know how to handle you. The only thing they don't know how to handle is non-violence and humor." ~John Lennon

"No one has greater love than this, that someone would lay down his life for his friends." ~ John 15:13

UPDATE:

bit.ly/Guncontrol

Golden Rule

2013-01-22T00:40:00.000-08:00

"Remember the Golden Rule: He who has the gold makes the rules!"

Apparently, whoever owns the most gold, rules.

Well, that is the sentiment, and mentality, of these governments who are positioning themselves in this current financial war, the real World War III.

Just recently, Germany fired across the bow by proclaiming they will be repatriating their gold, literally tons of it, from the United States and other governments.

Max Keiser reported about it, and as I was watching the program I had a moment of pause as to what was actually happening here. The conversation about gold is everywhere now; we see many shows about mining for gold for our entertainment; many commercials and ads about taking gold off our hands, are all increasing dramatically.

Why all this gold talk?

The term ".999 pure gold" came to mind and an epiphany came quickly, "pure 666." What if this is the actual number of the beast? You certainly will not be able to buy or sell if the "mark of the beast" becomes once again the gold standard globally, and also satisfies the "global currency" criteria.

So, allow me to state the case.

"Now the weight of gold that came to Solomon in one year was six hundred threescore and six talents of gold" ~1 Kings 10:14(KJV)

This powerful verse is what hinted to me as this possibly being a valid point. Didn't they even make a golden calf to worship when Moses left? They worshiped a beast of gold, literally. Is that possibly a shadowy prophecy of these times?

Proverbs 23:4

In Daniel 2:31-34, they made a statue that had a golden head. Later in Daniel 2:37-38 Scripture spoke of the head of gold representing Nebuchadnezzar, and in Daniel 4:15-16 Scripture even states that Nebuchadnezzar was a beast!

Now, gold is the standard for money for the past 6000 years worldwide. Literally, the "gold standard". We tried to bail away from it in 1971, but now look where we are.

Countries are debasing their currency, literally an act of war, against our dollar. We are debasing our dollar too! Other countries are loosing faith in our dollar because of the deficits we are accumulating, in the tens of trillions. Bernanke all but destroyed the dollar by feverishly printing money. I digress.

Now, since we are no longer on the gold standard, what happens? Well, HSBC's fraud, and Libor scandal, and derivative crises surfaces.

"When you have made evil the means of survival, do not expect men to remain good. Do not expect them to stay moral and lose their lives for the purpose of becoming the fodder of the immoral. Do not expect them to produce, when production is punished and looting rewarded. Do not ask, 'Who is destroying the world?' You are." - Atlas Shrugged

Now, since someone determined that these banks are "too big to fail" and the bankers are "too big to prosecute", what happens instead? They get fined a set amount. Guess what happens after that? These central banks turn on the printers, and "PRINT" money, to pay off the fines and continue their corrupt ways. That is it! They are BEYOND the law. THAT is why, I believe, they are going to use this as an excuse to go back to the Gold standard, to save the world (false savior) from corruption. Because, you can't print gold!

The Bible states the love of money is the root of all evil, as we all know. So where does that leave us? Well, governments are scrambling, hoarding, gold to position themselves when the dollar crashes soon.

Will it work? Well...

"Your silver and gold are corroded, and their corrosion will be a witness against you and will eat your flesh like fire. You stored up treasure in the last days!" ~James 5:3

Chapter 7 of Ezekiel is appropriately titled "Announcement of the End", look what it says about gold:

"They will throw their silver into the streets, and their gold will seem like something filthy. Their silver and gold will be unable to save them in the day of the Lord’s wrath. They will not satisfy their appetites or fill their stomachs, for these were the stumbling blocks that brought about their iniquity." ~Ezekiel 7:19

What will I do? Honor God by following His instructions, of course.

"Your life should be free from the love of money. Be satisfied with what you have, for He Himself has said, I will never leave you or forsake you." ~Hebrews 13:5

Amen.

bit.ly/Goldrule

Restating the Positions of his Blog

2013-01-02T13:52:00.000-08:00

Praise God that Stan did such a wonderful post, that I should highlight, and adopt...

"It's time to restate the main positions of this blog:

ATHEIST INTELLECTUAL RESPONSIBILITIES

IF Atheists believe their position is based on logic and/or evidence, and is therefore rational,
THEN they should be compelled to provide the logic or evidence which supports their belief;
ELSE they are not what they claim to be.

ATHEIST DEFINITION AND REDEFINITION

Many Atheists now claim “not to have any god theories”, a claim which is intended to help themselves avoid having to support their own position: they know they cannot. They are, however, subject to the following:

IF creating entity theories exist, THEN either a person has heard of creating entity theories, or has not.

IF a person has not heard of creating entity theories, THEN he likely has no such theories himself. (this is ignorance, not Atheism).

IF a person has heard of God/creating entity theories, THEN one of the following applies:"
(Read More)

Praise the Lord!

2012-12-28T13:07:00.000-08:00

I cannot think of a more fitting post as the last one of the year, simply as a reflection of what has been going on for these years. We have been discussing things with Atheists for a while now, because we love them after all. Perfect love is a constant confronter.

This is Sye Ten Bruggencate discussing things with an Atheist and it reveals, quite eloquently, everything that we are all trying to do here. Praise God.

The Atheists are certainly glorifying God in their defiance, and we're hopeful that they will someday ditch this absurd worldview in repentance, so we all can have great laughs about these times together. For all you Christians out there, please support Sye in his efforts. God willing, we will see more of him in the coming years. We all know how instrumental he has been for me, and this blog.

Please understand that we love you, and are concerned for your railing against the God you know exists.

With that, thanks to everyone on this blog. I have great times here, and I love all of you. I lift a glass of Lemonade to all of you in love. I hope to give all of you here a big hug someday, and hope we all are, or soon will be, repentant in Christ that we all know exists.

Bring 2013 on! Cheers!

bit.ly/PraiseLord

Truth About Christianity

2012-12-27T15:28:00.002-08:00

"So then, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath; for the wrath of man does not produce the righteousness of God." ~James 1:19-20

Slam Debunked?

2012-12-23T12:18:00.000-08:00

Take that Atheists! :7)

(Caution: Has Blasphemy, and profanity, for sensitive viewers)

Pointless Prepping

2012-12-22T09:22:00.000-08:00

About a week ago, an Atheist asked me what I was doing to prepare for the upcoming 12/21/2012. My answer was that I was going to do the dishes preparing for the next day, nothing more.

I am not worried about the solar flares, pole reversals, or asteroids hitting us. What I observe are the criminal enterprises of our times. Namely, the central banks and the governments. THAT is the most horrifying thing that we face in these times, if you are to worry about something. Why? Because evil exists.

So how do you prepare for that? You don't. All you can do is get right with God. Repent and trust in our Lord Jesus Christ with your heart, mind, and soul. He may not make this ride we are on any more comfortable but when the smoke clears we will be with God in an eternal, righteous, world. THAT is the day my family and I are fully prepared for.

So we will go about our lives and watch as our governments destroy the economies and usher in a world currency due to the monetary deflation wars currently going on, as revealed in this video.

Matthew 6:25-34 instructs us not to worry, but to "seek first the kingdom of God and His righteousness, and all these things will be provided for you."

We are prepared because...

"Your life should be free from the love of money. Be satisfied with what you have, for He Himself has said, I will never leave you or forsake you." ~Hebrews 13:5

bit.ly/PointlessPrep

Just...Aching

2012-12-15T01:09:00.002-08:00

Not trying to debate at all, I am just grateful we Unschool our children at home, and that they are now safe, God willing. Our hearts are aching. We mourn for the families losses and just wish to present a bit of hope.

Inconsistent Worldview

2012-12-08T13:37:00.000-08:00

If any of you wonder why we ask, "Are you absolutely certain of that? If so, how?" to the Atheists, here is the explanation behind it all. Dr. Chris Bolt did such a nice job over at Choosing Hats articulating it, that I can only play ode to the post by linking to it. So, I hope you read it.

The Consistently Inconsistent Worldview Objection

by C.L. Bolt on November 29, 2012

Suppose someone posits that his or her worldview is consistently inconsistent. He or she admits that there are many inconsistencies within the worldview. In this case, inconsistency is not something to be shunned. Inconsistency is to be affirmed. Embraced. Granted approval. Are there such worldviews? Yes. There are worldviews that come close to rejecting the need for consistency. Buddhism and postmodernism are two examples. How might the covenantal apologist respond?

First, an inconsistency-affirming worldview is also consistency-affirming. There is nothing more inconsistent with inconsistency than consistency. To be consistent... [Click to read more]

Thankful Indeed Deux

2012-11-20T11:01:00.006-08:00

Re-posting this because I am lazy

Father of Lies

2012-11-02T01:10:00.001-07:00

“Enter through the narrow gate. For the gate is wide and the road is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who go through it." ~Matthew 7:13

Have you seen this picture?

It is from this Source: Romney Campaign Exaggerates Size Of Nevada Event With Altered Image

And also the current Chrysler and GM issue of basically calling Romney a liar and chastising him about the ads he ran. Not to mention his entire history of him flipping back and fourth like the wind on every issue sacred to, and passionate, for most people.

So then, with all this fresh on my mind, I get what I believe to be a message from above. It is in a form of a video style that I really enjoy, and have posted about before. It leaves me with a bit of concern about our immediate future. Really it does. I am actually concerned for all of us. Anyway, please watch this video in light of what I just said above, and you tell me if this is not a very important election.

Even if the message of the Bible declares these events to come to pass, and I am fully accepting of His will, but for it to actually come to fruition on our watch is quite disturbing.

I cannot think of a better, in your face to God moment, there can be then the Father of Lies to win on a platform of a puppet as a blatant liar?

The video is called: "How Do You Kill 11 Million People?"

I hear faint sounds clippity clop of hoofs coming soon.

Now, I would love to be proven wrong. Please do not vote for the two headed one party system they are promoting.

"When you tell me I have no choice but evil in this election, frankly, you're declaring the end of elections, of representative self-government, in America. Because, by definition, the word 'election' means choice." ~Tom Hoefling, October 5, 2012

Tom Hoefling for President 2012

bit.ly/Romneylies

Primacy Of God

2012-10-23T18:13:00.000-07:00

The axiom “existence exists” is metaphysical naturalism.

It seems all threads are getting hijacked, which I do not oppose to as conversations do flow, by one discussion that we end up hacking away all the time at. So, let's address it here, completely.

The deep discussion is all about what is metaphysical primacy with some of the Atheists here. I have just come to a pivoting point that needs to be highlighted to get this out, once and for all.

The Atheists positions here assert this: The Primacy of Existence is the metaphysical primacy because existence exists. You cannot talk about anything before existence, so existence is the Primacy. Primacy of consciousness cannot be primacy because then there could be square circles, just think of the correct lottery numbers, blah, blah, blah. We could just think something into existence and it would appear, that is IF Primacy of consciousness were true.

"Existence is Identity, Consciousness is Identification."~Ayn Rand

One Atheist recently stated "Primacy of Consciousness metaphysics, however, states that objects are subject to consciousness - I could sit back and wish my keyboard to work and that wishing would make it so. Your worldview insists that the PoC holds - it has to so God can poof everything into existence just by thinking it - unfortunately for you the reality we perceive isn't subject to consciousness so we can see that the PoC doesn't hold and, by extension, your worldview is therefore, wrong."

Admittedly, I have not read anything Ayn Rand has written at all, let alone about this subject. This recently has been thrust to me by the many Rand Atheist cronies, but I did find this quote,

"Existence precedes consciousness because, consciousness is consciousness of an object. Nor can consciousness create or suspend the laws governing its objects, because every entity is something and acts accordingly [i.e., according to its identity, not according to the desires of consciousness]. Consciousness, therefore, is only a faculty of awareness. It is the power to grasp, to find out, to discover that which is. It is not a power to alter or control the nature of its objects." ~The Philosophy of Ayn Rand, pg 19

OK. That is the many Atheists position here, specifically the Ayn Rand anti-social 'virtues of selfishness' objectivism cronies, according to all the past discussions thus far in a nut shell. That Existence is Primacy.

THIS is their fallacious argument though.

"Wha, wha, wha?" says the Atheists with their mouths open.

Don't worry little birdies, I will feed ya.

First this is a false dilemma fallacy, by only presenting a choice of two and no more, is fallacious. There are other choices. Strike one.

Second fallacy, this is a strawman when he asserts "Your worldview insists that the PoC holds" He is arguing against a position that Rand made up and demand we defend it. I bought into it and tried to defend it at first, but I am erasing the chalkboard here to reset the argument where it should properly go.

Third fallacy, if you say PoE holds and that PoC cannot be because we would be able to think something to exist and it would appear, THAT is fallacious. It is a relativist fallacy. Let me explain that one. He moved the goal posts when I pseudo addressed this point earlier, but I didn't catch it then. In this post we will not allow it, because it is being highlighted.

They are claiming that PoC would allow them personally to think something into existence and that PoE holds. When I asked who's personal existence? Theirs? They claim 'No, all of existence is primacy' so the fallacy is when he asserts that ALL of existence is the Primacy YET, his personal consciousness would be able to think something into being. Understand?

If PoE is ALL of existence, or non-local, why does PoC have to be local to make their argument? This is why it is a relativist fallacy. Either both must be non-local, or both need to be local. They claim that their personal consciousness is needed to move or create objects, if PoC were true that is, but their own existence is not the primacy, obviously. Fallacious

So where are we? In the very same place we started, and have been all along, the metaphysical primacy is the Primacy of God. It is His, non-local, consciousness and existence that is the Primacy. It starts with God. You cannot have existence or consciousness without Him as the primacy. It always has been, and we all know this. Ayn Rand and her cronies have nothing but fallacious arguments, and trickery, to account for Primacy.

UPDATE: The man I voted for in this election said this, "That's right. To put it bluntly, her Objectivism is godless, self-centered, materialistic, anti-Christian, and anti-American." ~Tom Hoefling

bit.ly/PrimacyOfGod

What is Truth?

2012-10-04T01:01:00.001-07:00

An Atheists said:

>>Lack of A is reason not to believe in B.

My reply was:

OK great, I will work with this. Is that an arbitrary determination of weight to "A"? Who decides what is adequate "A"? You? IF I say I don't believe in gravity does gravity exist? You appear to be the assigner of evidence adequacy. If that is the case, then define truth.

This links well to what Sye was saying while witnessing. He asked, what is truth?

"Those who are able to see beyond the shadows and lies of their culture will never be understood, let alone believed by the masses." ~Plato

bit.ly/WhatisTruth

Scientism

2012-09-26T16:29:00.000-07:00

BTW, vote YES for Prop 37

Scientism: a belief that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth via the scientific method.

Science: The intellectual and practical activity encompassing the systematic study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world.

I wanted to point to this term, and article, for the future, as it will be valuable to point this out. So many Atheists are afflicted with this horrible debilitating belief.

"Unlike the use of the scientific method as only one mode of reaching knowledge, scientism claims that science alone can render truth about the world and reality. Scientism's single-minded adherence to only the empirical, or testable, makes it a strictly scientifc worldview, in much the same way that a Protestant fundamentalism that rejects science can be seen as a strictly religious worldview. Scientism sees it necessary to do away with most, if not all, metaphysical, philosophical, and religious claims, as the truths they proclaim cannot be apprehended by the scientific method. In essence, scientism sees science as the absolute and only justifiable access to the truth." ~PBS.org

"Will Science Disprove God's Existence? No. Written by James Heiser

Over the past few centuries, the purported efforts of scientists to come to a better understanding of the natural world have often led to wild variations in their theories. Attempts to arrive at a naturalistic understanding of the origin of the universe — operating with the presupposition of excluding a divine origin — have led to a profound divergence of opinion, with only one common point among those who have created such theories: However the universe came into existence, God did not create it.

As explained in my recent book, A Time for Every Purpose Under Heaven, the efforts of scientists to disprove the existence of God is not a pursuit of Science, but Scientism. Since Rene Descartes (1596–1650) there have been men and women who have succumbed to Descartes’ egocentric presentation of the scientist as the master of all knowledge; in the words of Michael Gillespie: “The scientist therefore will be the master not of [a] single area of knowledge but of all knowledge. His knowledge will be a mathêsis universalis, a universal science or universal mathematics. He will thus be not merely the wisest human being but also the best technician and the best lawgiver in both political the [sic] theological matters.” This worldview is often called “Scientism” — a materialistic doctrine that (among other tenets of its creed) axiomatically excludes the possibility of a non-naturalistic origin of the universe, and which interprets all observation data regarding the natural realm only in line with its axiomatic assumption that there is no divine origin to creation.

At the root of such delusional attempts to disprove the divine creation of the universe is an inherent contradiction: attempting to prove that God did not create the universe, the Scientistic theorist assumes the truth of that which he purports to attempt to prove. Theorizing based on the assumption there is no God, the “discovery” that one’s theorizing does not lead to the discovery of God is hardly a shocking result..." [Read More]

bit.ly/DAScientism

Sye, Gangnam Style

2012-09-16T17:03:00.000-07:00

About an hour into this video Sye joins the conversation and drives home what is important. The first half might be interesting too though. But to get to Sye, just start the video, hit pause, hit the number 6. This will jump it ahead to about 1:11:43. where Sye starts the conversation. You're welcome.

There is a part two to the conversation HERE, ( again pause and hit 3) but I am not too sure that Atheists will want to hear that argument as it deals with more of a Calvinism / Armenian discussion. It was still interesting, never the less, a great conversation about such matters.

And for those that do not understand the reference:

RNC Fraud!

2012-08-31T15:42:00.002-07:00

A friend of mine, named Chad, said "This is exactly what happened in Germany 1933.

Massive, massive, MASSIVE election fraud.

There are not enough courtrooms or lawyers or judges on the planet to handle the potential caseload.

And I sincerely hope EVERY liberty-minded person, Paul supporter, every liberty-minded Romney supporter, every liberty-minded Obama supporter, and every anybody-supporter...stands up and fights this with every ounce of their energy...or it is curtains for the "free" Republic of the United States of America."

It could not be said any better.

A top comment on the video said "I don't like Obama at all and probably disagree with more of his policies than Romney's. However, for the sake of the future of the GOP, I intend to prove that this GOP cannot survive."

The RNC changed the rules to ensure they do not get any radical Ron Paul people voting again.

"Delegate: RNC Rule Change Would Have Silenced Reagan in ’76"

How, in good conscious, can I vote for a party that does such a sham? I cannot. Here are my choices, write in Ron Paul an essentially opting out of the vote and not vote for any republican elsewhere, vote for Gary Johnson who is pro murder/abortion, so really not an option. Or vote for Obama, also pro abortion, kissing everything I stand for goodbye, and solidifying the collapse of our now unsustainable economy as we know it. Not to even mention all the fraud in the financial sector where NOT ONE PERSON was ever sent to prison, with this congress in charge. I guess I can go find an independent pro-life candidate.

This is the choice the RNC has left us. Ugh!!!!!! I guess I will work on my penmanship.

In a thread that was discussing the RNC Fraud, one person said: "The delegate selection rules (which were put into place by the RNC and known by all the campaigns) were originally put into place to stop a non-establishment candidate from winning however RP was able to game it anyways and now the establishment is in panic. All of there shenanigans at the convention this year, their delegate suppression, their cheating, their magical rules changes, etc. all of that wasn't for this year. Mittens had the most delegates and would have likely survived a floor fight, but it was for the future. They want to eliminate the chance that anyone other than their handpicked do-boy can get selected. It's the suppression of grassroots in the RNC."

Even Michael Steel, former RNC Chairman, said: "What the Republican National Committee did to Ron Paul was the height of rudeness and stupidity for this reason: Why would you alienate an individual who has the ability to attract a new generation of voters, who are already skeptical of your institution but are willing to at least listen through the vehicle of this individual and the words that he is saying? Why would you alienate them, get on the floor and not let them speak? Not have his name go up on the board and see the number of electoral votes that he receives? This is crazy!"

So essentially, Ron Paul Won!! If the other side has to cheat, that is.

Of course, they want a revolution all over AGAIN. I always said that Ron Paul cured my apathy about elections and politics, RNC is now trying to restore it. God help us all!

"Revolution is not what is scary, tyranny is. And tyranny unopposed, is downright terrifying. And that's all I'd like to say at this time. :7)"

Then I watched something that added some clarity as to what I should do:

Yes, I completely agree. I am not going anywhere and no one else should. We will just keep voting for liberty minded Republicans. Period. The RNC will change from within.

bit.ly/RNCFraud

All In The Family Time

2012-08-28T16:13:00.002-07:00

We have been internalizing a bit over at the house, mostly dealing with family things. One big bit of news is that I am a grandfather of a T-minus 1 month old baby boy (due in mid October); Just turned 44 years old; Married 12 years to the most beautiful, talented, and loving wife; And kids are growing up so very fast; Also, the dogs are shredding everything we own. Plus, I read a good book that I might post about later. Good news for the Atheists in it.

I hope you all have the same great successes. I did see that the Atheist's hate messages, for their dogma recruitment, are getting some hate mail. Welcome to the club. "Useless Savior"? Once again the Atheists are confirming the Bible, yet again.

My blog has not been forgotten by me, it's just I have been on other websites discussing things. Some great conversations have been had, and I feel really blessed that God is with me in some of the heated discussions online, and even within my own family. I feel God working with us, strengthening us, helping us get closer to Him. I really feel at peace, and blessed.

Speaking of blogs, my geeky 11 year old daughter's picture just got a nod from the entire brony community by getting her picture, that she made, on the header of 233+ Million visitor Juggernaut blog called Equestria Daily. See what the benefits of Unschooling does? Her creativity is blossoming.

When God moves me to, I will post. Until then, I hope everyone's summer is as nice as ours has been so far.

Edit: They took the header down. When they say 15 minutes of fame, they really mean it.

Quantum Nonlocality

2012-07-10T18:40:00.000-07:00

He is an evolutionist, a believer in reincarnation, and does not believe in Jesus Christ as God. He wrote the textbooks for students of Quantum Mechanics. So, why am I writing about him? He is a scientist, a professor, that shows evidence for downward causation. That is why.

His name is Dr. Amit Goswami and recently I was drawn to his documentary, now on Netflix, called "The Quantum Activist" If you do not have Netflix, own it as a stream online for a mere $3.99.

I saw some video interviews on YouTube where he made some very good points also and I will post them at the end for those that wish to explore his research more. I was very excited, speaking of "Ah ha" moments, to hear him lay out the reason why the materialist fight and resist, tooth and nail, science that reveals the truth about downward causation that he even refuses to call God, but we know better. The paradoxes in science can be eliminated when this one point is realized. More on that later.

OK, let's make the case. Quantum physics states that objects are not determined things. Objects are actually quantum possibilities for consciousness to choose from. Be it material things, thinking, intuit, etc. Waves of possibilities into a conscious choice into an actual event of experience.

Now, in material science, they take the axiom that everything is matter, and that there is only upward causation. Elementary particles make atoms, make molecules, make cells, eventually making brain. Consciousness is an epiphenomenon of the brain. But this does not explain the subtle phenomena of external experience. We have non-sharability experiences also, as an example.

What is the nature of consciousness then?

So possible elementary particles make possible atoms, make possible molecules, make possible cells, eventually making possible brain. Possibility of possible consciousness cannot possibly give you actual objects! This is not a scientific attainable philosophy. A paradox occurs, a Quantum Measurement paradox for wave function collapse.

So consciousness is non-material? No, Same paradox, a tangled hierarchy consciousness. Dualism needs a mediator. 1 Timothy 2:5 comes to mind.

Speaking of Presuppositional apologetics: The entire problem was solved with the consciousness as the ground of ALL being. It is Nonlocal consciousness. Nonlocal is a cosmic communication, it does not require energy producing signals, or energy involving signals, a signal-less communication that stands outside of space and time.

Science does agrees with presuppositional apologetics in that we have to "appeal above and beyond the temporal realm. God’s self-revelation in nature ... informs us of the two-level universe. God is not a fact like other facts in the world. He is the Creator and Establisher of all else. His existence alone makes the universe, and reason, and human experience possible…" ~Bahnsen

Dr. Goswami wishes to avoid the labels we use to avoid materialists attacking a strawman called "God". He wishes to stick to the science, the evidence, of it.

All Quantum Measurement paradoxes were not an issue anymore.

Even in the spring of 2003, the Quantum Mind Conference on "Consciousness, Quantum Physics and The Brain" was held Arizona, USA. Their, now down, web site states, "Recent experimental evidence suggests quantum nonlocality occurring in conscious and subconscious brain function, and functional quantum processes in molecular biology are becoming more and more apparent. Moreover macroscopic quantum processes are being proposed as intrinsic features in cosmology, evolution and social interactions."

The point here being that our brains are receptors to the One consciousness. Brains are different then our minds. We can think independently but cannot will possibilities into actuality. There is downward causation from this nonlocal consciousness that our minds access. We cannot imagine a car in the driveway, or the Euromillions lottery winning numbers for the first lotto drawing in August of this year, for that reason. Christians say, "Thy will be done" and Quantum physics say when the mind lines up with the nonlocal consciousness then we get actuality.

"All things were created through Him, and apart from Him not one thing was created that has been created." ~John 1:3

"For everything was created by Him, in heaven and on earth, the visible and the invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities— all things have been created through Him and for Him." ~Colossians 1:16

The Doctor also pointed that our immune system simply determines what what is me, and not me. Love is our immune system accepting another. "Two flesh become one" Mark 10:7-9 reveals the One consciousness, God, telling the immune system the chosen mate.

Of course, this is resisted by the materialists, naturalists, and Atheists because they would be forced to change their entire atheistic worldview. So, for Atheists to say that God is not scientific is vastly misleading according to Quantum Physics. The evidence for nonlocal consciousness showed in experiments that the Doctor lists, reveals that.

Also discussed is that we, as humans, are not to only do, do, do but to also just Be. Being is more important then doing. It allows for incubation of the consciousness, like a bird to an egg, Christians call it praying.

"So it's a balance, not just do, do, do. Not just be, be, be. But do, be, do, be, do."

I just recommend the videos to the Atheists as critical thinking skills for their worldview. Caution, your worldview cannot withstand the scientific evidence. From this point forward, it will fully be scientifically recognized as what we have been saying all along, merely denial.

"There is scientific empirical evidence for the existence of "God", the question now is, what are you going to do about it?" ~Dr. Amit Goswami

I wanted to point out something in this three-part playlist. At 1:30 to 6:24 of the second video is an explanation of what actually happened with the separation, and struggle, between science and religion. To me, it has never been put so well online, and I thought everyone would enjoy it. OK, maybe not everyone. :7)

"There was a definite struggle that was so lopsided in favor of Christianity, that it was impossible for a scientist to study the physical world without the interference from the Church of that time period."

"Descartes did a very smart thing" and asserted substance dualism, "that mind and matter are fundamentally distinct. Mind is God's realm and matter is the realm of science, without hindrance of the Church. They both, now, have their own domain. Descartes was trying to establish a truce."

Again, listen from 1:30 to 6:24 of the second video what actually happens next. Very interesting.

The reason for the Quantum Activist title is that he feels when we understand that we are all a part of this Non-Locality, or Oneness, we can make strides to improve our society, our nation, and our world that was destroyed and undermined by the naturalists and materialists. Instead of 'doing' something, like trying to strike down and counter my points, try 'being' and absorbing what I am posing here. Just think about it...Be with that information.

UPDATE:

In the post I briefly mentioned something called Quantum Measurement paradox, but I didn't really get into it. First, because it scared me to run down that rabbit hole in the conversation and second, it was not my focus for the post...until now.

So quickly explained is that the paradox, as in Schrödinger's cat, comes in the decision, i.e. when is the trigger point for the actually of quantum possibilities for consciousness to choose from? What is that thing, consciousness, that chooses which reality? Dr. Goswami used the stop light example, which I liked because it is the will of the consciousness that is at play here.

We both arrive at a stop light. Who chooses the stop light to change green in QM language? You or I? It cannot be both. Chaos ensues in the universe if both our consciousnesses makes waves of possibilities become reality of two green lights. Why cannot I will the billions of dollars into my account? It is possible that I can have it, but it is not my consciousness that decides, or wills, that reality. Then who's? Yours? Nope. Anyone? Nope. But the entire QM language is based on a MIND that transfers the possibilities into reality. Yet we do have ego's that allows our souls to have even independent wills and desires.

Again, Quantum Physics is quantum possibilities for consciousness to choose from. So the whole question is which mind. The paradox arrives with the bottom up causation. The materialist believes that the universe is bottom up causation, as you know.

The post says, "possible elementary particles make possible atoms, make possible molecules, make possible cells, eventually making possible brain." So then a possible brain makes a possible consciousness that, in turn, makes the choices from quantum possibilities for consciousness to choose from. To, then once again, make the possible elementary particles make possible atoms, make possible molecules, make possible cells...? Infinite regress abounds. THAT is the paradox. This is NOT a scientific attainable philosophy.

Yet the materialist dogmatically states this is the reality we live in.

Occam's razor even applies here. This consciousness stands outside of space and time and where all brains are tuned in like radio receivers, but not ONLY receivers, relaying the signals. So the entire question, of the entire post and quantum physics, is where is the signal transmitting from? All the paradoxes are a non issue and fade away with Nonlocal consciousness...i.e. God. [More follows]

bit.ly/nonlocal

God Particle, Revisited

2012-07-02T00:15:00.000-07:00

Many years ago, I posted about and discussed, the God particle. Well, maybe we get to revisit the subject this week.

5 sigma for the God particle? (5 means new discovery or highly confident) This is what they are calling the "holy grail of particle physics," over at CERN. They spent 10 billion to build it just to find the Higgs Boson, after all. Find out on the 4th

Update: Well, Papa Giorgio provided us with the explanation of what all this means from Dr. William Lane Craig

Irrational Exuberance

2012-06-18T17:24:00.000-07:00

Ydemoc asked some well thought out questions, in such a kind manner they do warrant a response.

>>the truths identified by Objectivist axioms.

Yes, there are self evident truths. As a mere example, even our founding fathers believed this also as "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights" The rights are axiomatic. There is a Biblical necessity to deny the fundamental point of moral neutrality here. What failed is southern men thinking that slaves are not people, but property. Their axioms were simply wrong. It was also "self evident" that the world was flat at a time in history, true? So how do we get through axioms that are incorrect? More, correct, axioms and that is the purpose of TAG.

These points are not flip answers but my attempt to flesh them out in my very limited philosophical education. But, I do not claim to be a well versed philosopher, but an exegete in Scripture. At least that is my goal and focus.

>>For "axiom of existence". So you presuppose that you exist.
>>For "axiom of identity". You presuppose that you are you.

You're arguing presuppositionally to me here. How can I, or want to, counter that? I guess I could pose that you could be a winged green Spirit in a dream state though, but that is not my argument and just the point that axioms change. Yes, we're creatures. Self-consciousness creatures. How is that accounted for?

"The problem here is that Dr. Copan, like many critics of presuppositionalism, confuses a presupposition of an argument with a premise of an argument." ~~Dr. James N. Anderson

As Anderson pointed out, "the argument identifies a performative inconsistency in the one who doubts his own existence. (In a sense, all transcendental arguments aim to identify a performative inconsistency in the skeptic’s position.) Does it presuppose its conclusion? Yes, in the sense that the argument can be mentally entertained by a person only if that person exists — but that’s precisely the point. This sort of non-trivial ‘presupposing’ is necessarily involved in all transcendental arguments that purport to identify a necessary precondition of rational thought...Once you see that Descartes’ argument doesn’t beg the question in any objectionable fashion, it ought to be clear that neither does the presuppositionalist’s argument."

>>since presupposing is a conscious activity (there’s the axiom of consciousness)

Can you just claim to be consciousness as an axiom without any background, or explanation, (account) behind it? It is the thrust of the point we're trying to make here, after all. One could say that life is an axiom, but that gets us nowhere.

This specific point has been addressed in a past post:

"In such a naturalistic, materialistic conception of the universe, all must be accounted for in terms of the material interaction of atoms. With that worldview, it forces us to view ourselves as simply matter-in-motion. How can matter be self-aware? Are rocks self aware? Trees? Hammers? In fact, what view of the world makes self-awareness intelligible? Slime is certainly not self-aware, which eventually becomes rational, which eventually becomes moral-and all by the evolutionary mechanism of time plus chance?" ~Self Aware

>>This is why they are the preconditions of knowledge (since knowledge is essentially identification of facts.

All facts, or even evidences, are interpreted within a framework of presuppositions though.

"God’s self-revelation in nature and in Scripture informs us of the two-level universe. God is not a fact like other facts in the world. He is the Creator and Establisher of all else. His existence alone makes the universe, and reason, and human experience possible… " ~Greg Bahnsen (Pushing the Antithesis pg.) 124.

What the world views as an "expert authority" is only as good insofar as that "expert" is consistent with what God, the ultimate authority reveals. This is because, as Jesus implicitly taught in Luke 16:31: the facts don't speak for themselves because all facts are interpreted facts.

>>But I find it curious that I don’t often (if at all) come across theists who ask: “How do you know that you are wrong?”

That is because all facts are interpreted facts. So, of course, you believe you're right, but how are you certain you are?

"In fact, that cannot be evidence for God if he is a naturalist, or an atheist. Because according to him its not possible to have evidence for God. If he is in fact an atheist in terms of his views on reality, then all of these things must be reinterpreted so they are regimented, or will conform to, will comport with that man's naturalism, or atheism." ~(bit.ly/stillevidence)

>>We are wrong when we have failed to properly identify a fact of reality. And we have knowledge of being wrong when we take steps that properly identify the error in our thinking. Essentially, we “check our work.” What do we check with? With the same faculty of consciousness we check with reality.

So you reason your reasoning is valid. Got it. So how do you know which reality is the right one?

Sye said a while ago "We find a reality in which God exists, you, on the other hand find a reality where that is not necessarily the case.

You see, in our reality, we can attribute things to God whom we know exists, you cannot. For example, if someone asks if X is "good," we can make this determination by seeing whether or not it comports with God's revealed character according to our reality. You, necessarily have another standard for goodness in your version of reality. Both cannot be "true" at the same time and in the same way.

So when I, for example, say that worshiping idols is bad, and you say that it is not bad, how do you determine which is the correct answer since we appeal to different realities?

How do you know whose reality is the right reality?"

If all facts are interpreted facts, then this type of question makes sense. If you claim there is only one reality, then how do you know you're right about the non-existence of God, or anything, within this reality? You reason that your reality appears to conform to reality. But you have yet to show the avenue to knowledge.

In quoting Peikoff you bring up a good point. "But if they cannot, how did they ever discover that they were wrong? How can one form such concepts as “mistake” or “error” while wholly ignorant of what is correct?"

It reminds me of another quote. "If we are products of mechanistic and impersonal natural forces in a closed system, then our thoughts and rules of reasoning are also parts of that system. Any check against false conclusions would still be a part of the system which produced the false conclusions." ~Henry W. Middle | March 1st, 2010 | The Foundation of Logic in the Nature of God

So that brings us to that, now famous, question. How do you know?

>>"...If man cannot grasp X, then “non-X” stands for nothing. Fallibility does not make knowledge impossible. Knowledge is what makes possible the discovery of fallibility.” (Leonard Peikoff, “‘Maybe You’re Wrong,’” The Objectivist Forum, April 1981, 8)

X being "God" in that quote makes perfect sense. Again, we're back to the same question, what is your avenue to knowledge? Which reality is right? Atheists claim they cannot grasp "God", then as Peikoff points out, then “non-God” stands for nothing. You KNOW God exists as Peikoff points out, and confirms Scripture, that we are without excuse. Romans 1:18-21

>>So when you ask, “How do I know my reasoning is valid?” the answer is very simple: I check -- much the same your kids probably check their math equations.

So you appeal to a STANDARD that your worldview cannot account for. Unless you are admiting to a purposed and uniform, not random, universe. Would you grant this, that your worldview only allows for time and chance acting on matter, that its just the material universe, that its just random, there is no guidance, there is no governance, no sovereign, no purpose or plan over the universe?

You assert that you "check" but against what? Truth? Reality? Again, we're back to the same question. How do you know? Which "truth"? Which reality? If there is one reality then, one would think there would be only one worldview. So, since that is not the case, which reality? BTW, someday soon there WILL be only one worldview. The Christian worldview. God assured that.

>>Consciousness has a relationship with reality, and it is capable of checking the conclusions it comes to against the facts of reality.

Indeed it does, same with consciences also. How is that? That is why your atheistic worldview comes into question. It accounts for things with "It just is" or "it just works", and would that be sufficient for us explaining God? God just is? Of course not.

>> Would you say that your kids, by checking their results against the facts of reality, are “reasoning in a vicious circle,” Dan? I doubt it.

As stated above, "Once you see that Descartes’ argument doesn’t beg the question in any objectionable fashion, it ought to be clear that neither does the presuppositionalist’s argument."

>>..what would justify appealing to something above, beyond, outside (i.e., to something supernatural) in order to account for the simple fact that I have identified these objects in my field of awareness? What justifies appealing to a supernatural source?

Well that is what your worldview tries to do. Account for things without God. What would justify appealing to something above, beyond, outside of God? God being that source of knowledge, all knowledge, attempting to discount and deny said source has no justification. You're literally getting things backwards here. You account for it with "it just is" and end it there without being able to appeal to real questions that worldviews attempt to address. Christianity adequately explains origins, who we are, where we came from, the meaning of life, and where we're going after we die, all these question a worldview attempts to address. Life's questions. Christianity is epistemologically foundational.

>>Now, how do I know all this? Because there are no rational grounds to doubt it. And how do I know there are no rational grounds on which to doubt it? I checked.

By checking something that has, according to you, "no rational grounds to doubt it", makes it irrational to do so?

That is, at least, consistent to that worldview you hold so tightly to. Irrational Exuberance :7)