According to the annoying-voiced radio show babbler Mark Davis, “I would kick 9/11 Truthers in the crotch if I could” and that he would only listen to their evidence if “even half of structural engineers come forward” to support the movement. He also said that they had no business using “9/11″ and “truth” in the same sentence.
Well don’t you know Mark the Truth-hater that truth is determined by consensus and is not truth if it after eight years not more than half support the truth it? Common Sense Wrong. Using your anti-Christian logic, Darwinian evolution must be false and anti-9/11 Truthers must be wrong since you’ve still not come up with any evidence, let alone scientific evidence, to refute ours. You’re own evil logic has refuted itself.
And if you and other bigots won’t listen to the less than half of engineers supporting 9/11 Truth, than what is it you are angry about them saying? How can you know the evidence they have is wrong if you won’t listen? And so good science is to reject any hypothesis because it’s not supported “by even half” of whoever is in the field to judge the hypothesis when it’s created? What an anti-scientific moron you are. It’s because of stupid, babbling, narcissist, anti-God, anti-truth idiots like you that the sciences of the world are stagnating.
If it were you idiot then all kinds of lies would have been perpetuated from the beginning of time, like that LYING is good as long as no one is hurt, idiot. And of course liars, being liars, define “hurt” however they want, just like you, liar.
You’re an annoying-voiced hypocrite who insulted kids, female, military service men and women, those who lost their relatives in 9/11, military service men and women and the growing number of structural engineers who support the 9/11 Truth Movement.
And Mr. It’s Wrong to Bully and Obfuscate – or should I call you, Mr. Blacks Are Subhumans Because Most Evolutionary Scientists Agreed They Were – do you really think that threatening to kick people in the crotch encourages free speech, let alone truthful free speech? Could it be that it’s because of violent-mouthed threatening psychos like yourself that chill free speech, that after eight years not half of structural engineers have supposedly not supported the 9/11 Truth Movement?
And what business do you have judging anyone who is religious, like you did Catholics today, when you use weasel phrases like, ‘I oppose indoctrination’ to subliminally bias people against religion? Do you know what indoctrination means?
Your no libertarian and you’re no conservative; you’re sick.
I don’t like the label “Hyper Calvinist”. It’s puke and reminds me of “spaz” atheists. So don’t call me one after reading this.
Who agrees that God destines everything, including who goes to Hell? I believe that it is illogical and unbiblical (and makes Calvinists look stupid) to claim that God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell when it’s claimed that he is the one who is required to save you. Further, think of it this way: does God do anything without knowing the result? Doesn’t God know the result of his action of inaction? Is God the one who decides what will happen or is he not all-knowing? Are there things God is unsure of? Is God only sure of what will happen to a person he intends to save? Further, why wouldn’t God destine someone to Hell when he hardens a person’s heart so that they WON’T do good? Why cut it short at destining someone to Hell if he chooses what sins a person will commit indirectly? Again:
How can anyone say, “God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell,” when he is in control of everything either directly or indirectly and knows the future perfectly and his turning our hearts to him for forgiveness is required for us to be saved from Hell?
I hope that any Calvinists who claim God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell or who says, “Well I don’t know” will stop, and admit the truth so that we aren’t seen as insane idiots anymore by Christians and Arminiests, who use that illogical fudging to turn or keep people away from the only way to eternal peace. It’s not enough to unifiy under the name “Calvinist” anymore than it was enough to unify under the name “Christian”: We must get our gospel straight and stop spreading Hellish confusion and stop pandering and giving Arminiansts room in the Church to spread their deception.
And just what is the problem with saying that God destines anyone to Hell? Everyone knows that false and non-Christians are arbitrary with their condemnation of God anyways, they say, “He’s always angry” and hateful for sending anyone to Hell except Satan and the demons that follow him, or that he’s always allowing the innocent to suffer (and ironically they unkowingly include “Christians” under ‘innocent’, sometimes).
There ar already the “blinded” and “hardened” verses and the punishment verses, so what does it matter if we acknowledge that God does destine people to Hell as well? They already say he is mean when about none of us bring that point up and rarely!
This denying that God destines anyone to Hell allows millions of Arminiests, whether they call themselves or not, to disguise themselves as one of us. How? Because in their confused minds they think that so long as they wet say that God doesn’t destine anyone to Hell that a person can be saved by their own goodness, and if that is true, then God doesn’t need to destine anyone to get eternal life, and if he doesn’t need to, then he doesn’t. If that’s not how they reason then why else would they divide from Calvinists on that point above the others they differ from us on? Why else would they always be babbling about how man has a free will and how God gave us a free will? Their denial that God destines anyone to Hell above destining anyone at all combined with their endless trumping of “free will” and not God’s show how they think. We Calvinists must not give them weasel room anymore and must let the falling away occur, and it will occur when we shut the door to their lies. The longer we allow their foot in the door on this issue, the more people they will deceive and the worse the condemnation of those going to Hell will be. It’s better for the world to revert back to idolatry as Revelation seems to imply will happen, than people continually drawing near to Christ under the false idea that they can earn their way into Heaven or just by saying, “I accept Jesus into my heart,” and ask for forgiveness again and again when they sin and or just doing some good deeds.
Another problem withing denying or hiding that we believe God destines anyone to Hell is that it makes it harder to distinguish a true from a false Christian. The Pentecostal churches are infested with fakes in part, because of true Christians pandering to the fakes and denominations similar to ours, like the Methodists appear to be “as Christian” as us. So, for those Calvinists who keep giving ground to the enemy, stop: draw the line clearly in the sand and stay there.D
According to the KKOB radio show host Jim Villanuci, who said repeatedly today that he doesn’t care [about the truth], there are no Christian scientists who believe in a “young” earth (6500 is old young?), and anyone who believes in a young earth can’t perform science at all and can’t understand anything correctly because they don’t listen to the facts, and merely explain everything with, “Jesus did it,” or “angels did it”. Is that why I’m repeating what you said and refuting it, again?
Where bigot, in this refutation of your ranting, and your ranting anti-Christian callers, have I said anything like that or an earlier one refuting your claim that we must have sex with a person to know if they are gay or straight?
Do you have the patience to read less than a few pages, if not, how can you claim to know what you are talking about when it comes to “young earthers” let alone Christians, science, evolution or the big imaginary bomb no one ever saw from billions and billions of years ago?):
Christians are scientists too, and not merely because I said so. You don’t you know history and don’t care to know it, and don’t know what’s going on around you accurately either, and don’t want to, that is why in large part you are ignorant. Don’t you know that Galileo, Copernicus and Euler were all Christians, and that atheists tried to shut them up using other Christians? No doubt, you being an ignorant mocker, if I hadn’t added that last part you would have said, “Yeah and look what the Christians did to them.” In addition to that Catholics are false Christians, so big surprise they would turn on their own at the request of atheists. Further, there are two recent polls that show about half of all scientists are religious as in believing in the supernatural, and CHEMISTS especially believe in God (gee can you figure out why CHEMISTS would especially believe in God? Could it be because they not only see the macro design in the universe, but also see the micro design which you stupidly ignore?)
Yet you pretend their are no young earth Christian scientists let alone religious ones, and that we all say, “Jesus did it,” or “It looks young” or stupid things like that, which idiots like you actually say with, “But Darwin said so,” “It evolved,” “Oil is old,” “Fission wouldn’t work.” You google “Evidence against young earth” or “creationism” and believe whatever so called scientific evidence there is against it. What a simpleton. Study Jim, don’t just have faith.
Ironically, it’s by your bigoted sarcastic statements like, “Jesus did it,” or “The Grand Canyon looks young to me,” and, “Evolution did it,”, “The Big Bang did it”, “Dinosaurs died a long time ago and did it”, “The Hubble saw it,” which shows that you are the one who reasons be feelings. It’s you who don’t believe in science and you who don’t know what science is. Science is not, “It looks old to me so it must be old,” or “Darwin did it” (to use your stupid bigoted sarcasm) or “evolution did it.” Further, how in the Hell genius, would you figure out the Grand Canyon is very old let alone old from just looking at it? What the Hell? Can you explain that bizarre reasoning? No, you were brainwashed with endless propaganda that you in your gullibility bought into. You were repeatedly taught “this is clearly old” and so you think that way. Further, what the Hell scientist even says you can judge that a rock is old just be looking at it? Stupid. And can you show that any young earth CALVINIST (not some idiot Christian, a false one) doesn’t believe in science? The father of microbiology was a Calvinist “young earther” you parrot.
You clearly don’t understand what Young Earth geology is about, it’s not simply, “The Earth is about 6000 years old” (it’s a little older than that actually) and it’s not about “Jesus lived with the dinosaurs”.
You also don’t understand nuclear power. Also the two caller that said it’s a matter of faith and non-reason made no sense, unless he meant that old earth geology is non-reason, which would only be figurative. Regardless it was poorly worded and sounded stupid. The woman who mentioned the Christian that said it’s just a faith issue was talking about a stupid Christian then, further she herself was ignorant and stupid since she said that young earther’s explanation about why carbon dating isn’t accurate is complicated, because IT’S NOT complicated, it this simple: Carbon dating has been repeatedly shown to be inaccurate. It’s also got nothing to do with nuclear power, you obviously don’t know physics very well. Carbon dating is only accurate to about 5000 years, when it’s used to measure things beyond that it’s wildy inaccurate and what Darwinists / evolutionist SCIENTISTS do is arbitrarily choose the dates that match their dating theories. If it doesn’t fit, they dismiss it or won’t even mention it.
Also the Hubble has not revealed the universe to be billions of years old, again it has to do with how the data is interpreted, and Darwinist / evolutionist scientist interpret in such a way that it fits evolutionary theory, it’s circular reasoning.
Further, you clearly don’t know much about evolution even, since you would have known that every informed “young earther” knows to reject carbon dating for the reasons I stated, if you were knowledgeable, you would have referred to other radiometric dating methods (which have also been shown to be inaccurate).
As for Wikipedia being good, no it’s not at all, you think it’s good because it says things that match your uniformed beliefs. What they do is repeatedly and instantly ban “young earthers” not listening to their arguments and merely stating that websites like answersingenesis.org and other young earth sites are not reliable. They also are against TRUTH. Yes, you heard it right, THEY ARE NOT FOR TRUTH. They will literally tell people like me, when I use a logical argument that Wikipedia is NOT ABOUT TRUTH but rather references. And they will ban you for trying to speak the truths IF it cuts the foundation of atheism or doubt of Christianity. They don’t just ban anyone for speaking a religious truth obviously, but that which would leave atheism and anti-Christian skepticism hanging in the wind with nothing to support it. They also obviously wouldn’t want themselves to have been shown to have been gullible for over 100 years, as that would be a devastating blow to their own faith, and then where would they turn? They’d have to be agnostic or witches.
Further, no true Christian simply says, “God said it so I believe it” as anti-Christians love to say. We don’t think that way, in fact the Bible commands us to have evidence for our beliefs, and says not to be a simpleton, there is a verse that literally says not to be that way, and not to simply believe whatever you hear. It also says to test those who claim to be Christians to see if they are telling the truth about being a Christian.
On top of that, there are many non-Christian physicists who are opposed to the teaching of the Big Bang AND ASTRONOMERS, and some are nominal Christians, simply believing the Bible to be true to a degree. There is not a consensus, and even if there was, you can’t vote something to be true or feel it into being true, so your comment “you can believe whatever you want to make yourself feel good” and about you living in reality and not us, is something which applies to you. Further, I study issues regarding truth and reality as do all Christians, but I spend my life doing so, so if anyone is going to know what is real or not and what truth is it would be me, not you, who merely talks about politics all day and avoids getting deep into philosophical and religious matters. Sure you mention religion now and then and how people should be free to have their own religion, but you don’t go much further than that, you don’t get into critical analysis for the basis of religion beyond you belief that Christians merely feel he exists (no that’s not all there is to it).
As for how oiled formed, all you did was read a statement claiming how oil was made, you didn’t give any scientific evidence for it. Also, it’s been a long time that that theory has been shown to be BASELESS. So you just read a statement that is based on a theory that was shown to be in dispute for many years. That shows how out of touch you are with modern scientific findings let alone old ones, including old ones that are still true which you are clueless about.
Now, if you want data, scientific data backing up what I said, and about their being no evidence for the Big Bang and no consensus:
No consensus, Darwinists ban and libel young earth creationists AND Intelligent Design OLD earth creationists (showing how intolerant they are and arbitrary and that it’s about their hate for God, not “pseudoscience” as they pretend)
1) Ben Stein’s: Expelled (which shows that Darwinists ban scientists to make it look like there is a consensus against Darwinism)
5) http://sn.im/archeology (don’t you love how this book shows your “scientists” cover up geological and archeological findings in the name of science and for prestige and more money?)
6) Further, there were many “young earth” scientists
and there still are, and the first ones were the human basis
for modern science (now twisted by evolutionists):
Clearly these are not scientists/Christians who say, “Jesus made the oil the end.”
Oil wasn’t made millions of years ago or by dinosaurs:
Starlight doesn’t show the universe is billions or millions of years old:
The distance of objects in space has been in dispute for many years Jim. But you Jim, were gullible, you were deliberately ignorant even though you KNEW there is mass propaganda of all kinds. You imply “young earth” creationism is mass propaganda (why else would you say it scares you?) yet it never occurred to you that Darwinists were lying in any way, not even for money? So who’s the stupid gullible simpleton? Hint for you skeptic Jim: Don’t skeptics (who are nearly all Darwinists) always whine about how there can’t be aliens here from other planets because the distance they would have to travel requires an “insane” amount of energy? Hint hint Jim, aliens are clearly still coming and are sighted all the time. Can you take the hint? MAYBE THE STARS AND GALAXIES AREN’T BILLIONS AND BILLIONS OF LIGHT YEARS AWAY AS DARWINISTS CLAIM? Super duh? Ultra duh? Massive duh? Big circular reasoning duh? Circular reasoning check Jim: “The stars must be billions of years old because they are billions of light years away, and they are billions of lights away, and they are billions of light years away because scientists said so, and there are no ‘young earthers’ scientists who say the opposite because I Jim said so, and I’m right because scientists said so, and scientists are right because I said so.” Is that science Jim? That’s your science Jim, not the science of true Christians.
There was no billions of years old big bomb that no one ever saw and never will that they just must believe in to be real scientists, cuz you anti-Christians said so:
7) The Cult of the Big Bang
8) http://spaceandmotion.com/Cosmology.htm (is this physicist “insane” Jim? Can you show us why Mr. Physicist Expert Jim Villanuci?)
9) http://orionfdn.org/papers/predicts-enhanced-galaxy-brightness.htm (is this physicist “insane” too Jim? Can you show us why Mr. Physicist Expert Jim Villanuci?)
10) http://physorg.com/news85310822.html (is physorg.com a creationist website Jim?)
11) http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/26666 (is physicsworld.com a creationist website Jim?)
12) http://sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/04/090422085830.htm (is sciencedaily a creationist website Jim?)
13) http://astronomy.com/asy/default.aspx?c=a&id=8435 (is astronomy.com a creationist website Jim?)
14) And what were you saying about Hubble Jim, as if you understood his scientific teachings or knew them? Was he and Einstein “dumb nuts” and “young earthers” too Jim?
Yet the true “dumb nuts” like you continue to claim INVISIBLE MATTER is everywhere and is evidence of the Big Bang. WHAT DARK MATTER JIM? OUR DARWINIST SCIENTISTS ARE SAYING IT’S NOT THERE, AND BIG SURPRISE SINCE IT’S INVISIBLE. WHY DO YOU BELIEVE IN WHAT IN INVISIBLE MATTER FOR WHICH THERE IS NO INDIRECT EVIDENCE JIM WHILE MOCKING CHRISTIANS FOR BELIEVING IN GOD WHO TO THOSE ON EARTH IS PURPOSELY INVISIBLE AND FOR WHOM THERE IS COUNTLESS EVIDENCE FOR, AS I’VE PARTIALLY SHOWN HERE? What’s wrong with that picture you’ve given us Jim? Isn’t the one who “believe[s] fairies run your engine” you, the guy who believes in invisible matter that no one can detect and in your ignorance keep claiming all scientists say is there?
“Old-earth” radiometric dating is arbitrary and flawed and one form shows the universe is “young” (though 6500 years old is hardly young compared to the age of the oldest humans):
5) Creation’s Tiny Mystery
Man did live and still does live with dinosaurs you idiot.
“Jesus lived with the dinosaurs” you said in sarcasm. MORON: DARWINISTS SAY HUMANS LIVED WITH DINOSAURS AND HAVE BEEN SAYING SO FROM THE BEGINNING YOU IDIOT. IT WAS ONLY RECENTLY THAT NORONS LIKE YOU, IGNORANT OF DARWINIST EVOLUTIONARY THEORY STARTED COMING UP WITH NONSENSE LIKE THAT, WHICH DARWINIST SCIENTISTS STILL DON’T USE YOU IDIOT. What they say moron, is that Noah’s Ark is absurd, and for those who are more clever, they say it’s also a contradictory story. You’re so dumb you can’t even be bothered to learn the precious theory of your heros correctly. That’s how careless you are with the truth. On top of that moron, who in the Hell said dinosaurs were all dead, or that they all magically died when the first “Homo sapien” appeared? Do you know what living fossils are? Now that’s not a big surprise you wouldn’t though still is hardly excusable since Darwinist mention them now and then, and of course not to often SINCE THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH CREATURES REFUTE EVOLUTION. Here Jim, more easy work for you that you could have done for yourself:
1) http://creationwiki.org/Living_fossil. Some are also listed in your precious Wikipedia (is Wikipedia a creationist website Jim?)
And how are you ignorant of dragon sightings and other dinosaur sitings, both ancient and modern? Why are you so unfun that you can’t look into such stories? Why didn’t the Loch Ness Monster sightings get you to start reading about such sightings? Is everyone who lives around the Loch Ness and all the tourists who have been there, who have seen dinosaurs there “nuts” too Jim? Is everyone nuts who sees what you don’t?
And you’re so stupid you can’t figure out that we wiped out most of the dinosaurs by hunting them down for food, sport, or prestige, or that we burned down their habitat, as Aboriginees in Australia and those living in the Amazon still do today, in order to make the land safer for ourselves and to farm? But no, you think, “A comet did it,” “A meteor did it,” or “A volcano did it,” don’t you gullible Jimmy? And of course we just happened to survive while all the dinosaurs magically died or shurnk to the size of birds and mice. Nice stupid simpleton “fairy tale” Jim. Here little Jimmy, here unfun Jimmy, here unimaginative Jimmy, here Magic Meteor Jimmy; more help for your hardly imaginitive, lazy mind, lazy eyes and hands:
And no biased Jim, those aren’t all creationist websites; only three are. And even if they were, what matters is if they are true, not, “But those are all Darwinist sites.” Even your precious Wikipedia lists cryptids Jim, even they declare them to be “noteworthy” Jim. Even “skeptics”, your mentally ill kin, talk about cryptids in Skeptic Magazine, and very often.
And Jim, what happened to mammoths? Don’t they count as dinosaurs? Oh, is it because they weren’t reptiles? So only reptiles are dangerous? Mammoths were nice huh? And who said reptiles can’t be lived near? I think you deluded yourself into thinking that all dinosaurs eat people from all the silly propaganda you were raised on, on those silly dinosaur coloring books, Discovery Channel and Jurassic Park cartoons, and B horror movies. But if only you had paid a little closer attention and put in a little more thought, and realized not all dinosaurs ate flesh you idiot, no dinosaur was said to have eaten humans you idiot, and that Discovery Channel isn’t a nonprofit company that shows cartoons because they are just so concerned about teaching you how the entire planet was covered with man-eating Tyrannosaurs. Oh wait, they don’t teach that. But you’re an idiot who misses the details even when the propaganda is light.
And are Komodo Dragons good enough for you Jim? Do they count as dinosaurs? Duh? Are all the people living near Komodo Dragons dead? No, in fact the Komodo Dragons are the ones who are almost dead, and hardly anyone goes near them except to take a picture.
Your dumb Jim.
Another thing about your Wikipedia, where “the site all you nuts come from”:
The long term editors and administrators deliberately try and make alternative scientists look bad regardless of whether or not their theories have been shown to be true, they try to have articles on breakthrough scientists and inventors deleted or made to look silly. You just are ignorant and don’t care much about the truth Jim, no offense. You obsess on what you feel is true and believe what merely sounds to be true to you, and don’t go further.
Jim, you’re being hypocritical: many Darwinist Scientists and non-scientist Darwinists, often simply as you do, say the equivalent of, “It’s so,” “That’s the way it is,” “There’s [scientific evidence]“, and some even say, “Atheist” as their source/reference, referring to themselves. They might as well say, “Me,”. You also merely make empty claims backed by mere emotion. You merely claim that oil is formed in such and such way and that’s it’s millions of years old. That’s not evidence let alone scientific evidence. It’s no better than your sarcastic stereotypes like,”Jesus made the oil” or “angels make radio waves”.
As for your magical scientific evidence, “They all come from the same website” as in “Young Earth Creationists all come from the same website”, says who? And what does that even mean? So all “young earthers” contact you via answersingenesis.com? Really? So now it’s, “AIG did it!” Jim? That’s your new scientific evidence against young earthers? Lame. AIG is staffed by people born from humans raised in many different ways, some who were former atheists or agnostics, not people who were born by a website. “Young Earthers” no more all or mostly come from AIG anymore than Gullibles like yourself all come from Wikipedia (Mr. Wikipedia Referring Jim). AIG refers to scientific evidence from multiple sources, they don’t just invent things from a vacuum or say, “The Bible did it,” and unlike Wikipedia – which you love and seem to think is evidence in and of itself – does not reject truth in favor of keeping the appearance of truth to suit their feelings.
Further, if we “all c[a]me from the same [web]site,” whatever that means, how is that evidence, let alone scientific evidence that “young earth” creationism is wrong? So if “you all” Billions of Years Old Big Bombers came from Wikipedia, TalkOrigins or KKOB that would make you wrong? Well then you must be wrong too; you’ve contradicted your own arbitrary logic. And oooo, how bad: “They all have an organization, they’re all organized,” is basically what you said: yeah what a horrible thing Jim, what a sin, gotta really hate ORGANIZATION, cuz ORGANIZATION is so bad, right Mr. Chaos? Why do you chaos believers hate DESIGN, and ORGANIZATION so much? See how illogical your DISORGANIZED CHAOTIC mind is? Your hang ups say some powerful things about your false logic. It’s just so bad to make things convenient for you anti-Christians isn’t it Jim? If the information was chaotically spread out all over the Internet no doubt your hateful self would then say something like, “They’re scatter brained and disorganized.” Sorry to make things convenient for you Jim, so sorry to help you out by putting the info all in one place. So evil and unscientific of us. Wait, if that’s a sin, why do you love Wikipedia?; yet again your insults backfire. Can’t you stop contradicting yourself?
Further, you really don’t know Christians or young earth scientists: you said 60+ million Calvinists come from ansswersingenesis. Really? Yes Jim, that’s how many “young earth” believers there are. You’re truly ignorant. But no, we don’t all simply use that website, there are many “young earth” science sites, some of which are linked to the side of my journal and two others I have:
So what was that about us all coming from one site Jim? Is what matters is, “Nanny nanny boo boo you only have one site we have more,” or, “It’s just a few people,” “They’re all from one house,” “They’re all from one apartment complex,” “They’re all from one block,” “They’re all from one town,” “They’re all from one city,” “They’re all from one state,” “They’re all from one country,” “They’re all from one side of the planet,” “They’re all from one planet,” “They’re all from one solar system,” “They’re all from one galaxy,” “They’re all from one galaxy cluster”, “They’re all human,” “They’re all from one universe”? No, what matters is: IS WHAT “THEY” SAY TRUE.”
Ironically I met a moron even dumber than you who made fun of Christians for being “lazy” she said, because,”notice” she said, “You have more sites”, “MORE” Jim, not “They’re all from one site.” So which nut arbitrary nut should the world, including us “young earthers” believe Jim? Oh God of Science and Religion Jim, which stupid insult defeats us? They can’t be both right since they contradict. Hence, why we don’t believe your ranting, because that’s all you anti-true Christians do. You anti-true Christians show every hour that you are arbitrary, paranoid, racked with bitterness, and that your morality and logic is backwards. Yes “conservative” Jim, you’re better than liberals in that you say Christians should have the right to home-school their children under Christianity, but you err when you discriminate against “young earthers”, claiming that we’re teaching children “to answer wrong on tests” you said. As you would notice if you bothered to READ FIRST OUR TEACHINGS, rather than putting childish words in our mouth, you bully, you would see WE TEACH YOUR STUPIDITY NECESSARILY, since you idiots won’t shut up about it. You moron.
If you or others think I’ve not read the rebuttals to the sites and specific arguments I showed, you’re wrong:
1) There isn’t a rebuttal for many arguments against your arguments against the Bible. Can you guess the reason why besides some cheap lie you’d first think like, “We’ll because you Christians are just nuts, and you say things that don’t make sense”? Hints: THEY ARE TRUE AND CLEARLY TRUE, AND WHO IS GOING TO CHALLENGE ANTI-CHRISTIANS WHEN THEY SAY THE SAME THING AS “YOUNG EARTHERS”. Were those hints clear enough?
2) I refuted the rebuttals, for example on Yahoo Answers and on Amazon.com. On Amazon.com I refuted a ranting nut like you, only more clever and who actually bothered to at least read what the opposition said, whole books even. I documented it early in my journal here. But what did two Amazon moderators do when I complained about this nut deliberately skewing the ratings of creationist books by repeatedly voting them down, and by repeatedly voting down my replies to him so that they would be hidden, and stalking me?: They deleted not only some of my reviews but dozens of my replies in the comment field to the ranting nut who was clearly stalking me. And what were your Amazon moderator buddies’ reason for doing so? The one who bothered to email said it was because what I said was all hateful. Sure. Isn’t that just such a good reason to censor replies to a ranting stalker Mr. “Christians Just Say Jesus Did It” Loving Non-Hateful Jim? You hypocrites. Ooops, I shouldn’t have said that that’s hateful because it hurts your feelings, your loving scientific “Christians are hypocrites for judging right from wrong and have no right to judge others who call themselves Christians or not,” feelings. No you didn’t literally say that, but you said the equivalent in your ranting one day against a congregation that was judging a former member who was still calling herself a Christian, the same day you said we can only know if someone is gay or straight if we have sex with them. No, ur not nuts and evil at all, not.
And Mr. Jim Pro Science Villanuci, how can there be scientific progress if you slander “young earthers” and misrepresent them and try and block them from being heard? So that’s science, to block opposing view points that you can’t even be bothered to listen to? So we should just believe whatever you and your Darwinists say is true and ask no questions and never point out any errors we see? It’s because of morons like you, Darwinist morons like you, afraid of facing God, that there is gross scientific stagnation and fraud in Darwinist Mainstreamer dominated organizations like Wikipedia, the Smithsonian, NASA, and the U.S. Government in general, the same government you constantly rail against forgetting that it’s mostly composed of Darwinists like you.
As usual, you anti-Christians accuse us of what you are guilty of doing, while pretending to be for Christ or neutral, while we really are for Christ, and believe the truth, rather than being neutral.
So is it any wonder that you’re stuck below the top 65 radio show hosts in the US? Being a smug, boring, mocker who makes cheap lazy slanderous insults at Christians who spend their time and money helping the poor and needy only gets you so far.
Your the one teaching kids to answer wrong on man’s tests, and much worse: wrong on God’s tests.
At about 2 AM I made friends with a cute black duck. Unlike the other ducks I found it with by an apartment, it was much less timid and stayed behind. I decided to seize it and got it by the neck and then lifted up from underneath. It barely struggled and I kissed its head as I took it to my apartment. It was calm in my apartment, pecking and biting at my broken laptop, closed on my floor (I think it thought it was a little puddle since it was black and reflective). It tried out other things to, and got a little noise after a while. It sat on my chest for a while and I could feel it was nervous whenever I stroked its neck, and sometimes it would look behind it when I petted it on its wings, and I could tell it was nervous about me doing that too since it would get noisy. Strangely it didn’t want bread, and I remembered a woman by a nearby pond who said she fed them seeds, so I gently got the duck to step off me and got it some seeds to eat. Funnily, when I stopped, and having accidentally dropped some seeds on the floor and near a plastic grocery back, it started pecking at the bag repeatedly and got nothing from it since the seeds fell onto the floor. It was being noisy again so I fed it by hand and after taking some vids of pics of it I let it back outside. I followed it around for a while and it seemed at one point to be sticking around with me. I fed it a little more seeds. Eventually I picked it back up and it seemed to have fun standing on my hands. While walking it back to the pond it turned to lean against my chest and then Simba the black cat saw me and began meowing. Simba hangs around early in the morning near my place and runs to me to be petted on its head. It didn’t like that I had a big black duck on my chest, and after petting it a little bit I kept heading for the pond and I face the duck forward and it preened a little. Simba followed me and I put the duck down by a little outside building with lights on its side so that I could pick up and kiss Simba and see how the duck and him would act around each other. When I put Simba back down and went back to the duck, Simba followed me and meowed, and the duck walked to my knees when Simba came near. Then I picked the duck back up and went to the pond but it didn’t seem to want to go in so I put it down by the pond. A mallard in the pond broke away from the rest of the ducks when it saw the the black duck with me wasn’t running away like the other ducks. Eventually the mallard jumped up onto the ground and darted at the black duck and the black duck came near to me again, and then I ran the mallard back into the pond. I picked up the black duck again and went to an inlet to the pond and sat there with it for a while. The rest of the ducks in the lake, typically cowardly, swam to the other side of the pond nearly, but two parties broke off at two different times, investigating I’m sure as to why the black duck was with me. But eventually both parties joined the rest of the ducks. I was getting pretty depressed because I knew that as soon as I left that the duck would probably forget me, and that it would hardly be good if the duck bonded to me and stayed away from its friends. So, I said goodbye to it and walked away slowly, seeing if it would follow me. It didn’t, but I headed back again and it swam up the side of the lack next to me and after a few minutes I touched its beak, and then left. I came back about two hours later and finally found it near to where I had caught it, and it was with some ducks again to my relief. It stayed behind when I videod it, but after about a minutes of looking at me sideways, walked off with its friends.
Today, Shawn Hannity showed once again how Catholics really feel about God, when he said on his radio show,
“I don’t care what a person says or does, I really don’t.” And this is the same Shawn Hannity who a few days ago entertained being president, saying, “I’ve never made a decision in my life without [God] – whatever destiny God has you’ve got to fulfill it, I’m not sure that’s my destiny.” when another evil Catholic, Phil Cunningham, tried to persuade him, again, to become president. There is even a problem with him saying that, despite it sounding good:
1) You don’t need to know God’s will for your destiny to be carried out by God, so Shawn wrongly implied (like a typical God-hater) is that we share in controlling our destiny by knowing God’s will (and who in the Hell knows God’s will besides what the Bible tells us about it?).
2) For Shawn, as a Catholic, to speak about God destining anything is AGAINST official Catholic doctrine, which teaches that we must earn our forgiveness by good deeds and keep it by obedience to God’s Law.
3) It’s also hypocritical of Shawn to teach that God destines anyone since Catholics vilify “Hyper-”Calvinists (Christians who teach God destines everything) and Calvinists in general for teaching that God destines who will be forgiven (and therefore who won’t be forgiven).
But does this mean Shawn isn’t a Catholic and that I’ve therefore wrongly attacked Catholics? No: Catholics often contradict themselves like this, especially when they are being show-offs for the world, trying to sound and look wise and holy rather than actually say what is wise and actually being holy. They let their mouths babble, being careless about what God’s will really is, ironically. I am reminded of this verse again:
These people come near to me with their mouth
and honor me with their lips, but their hearts are
far from me. Their worship of me is made up only
of rules taught by men.
According to Ian Punnet, who stupidly supported the Coast to Coast AM shows title of their show tonight, which is “Fundamentalism and Cults” (thanks a lot liberals!), the preaching of the family is and isn’t heresy, [and that it isn't because], “[this is] the prosperity gospel [of] Calvinism…”, saying that some were chosen and some weren’t. What HELL? IAN, Calvnists OPPOSE PENTACOSTAL ARMINIANS: THEY ARE THE ONES THAT CAME UP WITH THAT. And what the Hell does the prosperity gospel have to do with “some are chosen”? Ian, Calvinists teach that God chooses everything that happens, and indirectly what living things think, that’s not the prosperity gospel as you call it. The prosperity gospel is taught by Pentecostals, mainly Arminian Pentecostals, and it IS a heresy because it teaches that God will give you 100 times the amount back that you tithed soon, if it was to any Christian congregation (but of course the ones doing the preaching promote their own ministry/ies 99% over other congregations’ ministries), that you’ll be repaid soon, if you tithe with faith, and that if you don’t have faith when you tithe, or not enough faith, that you won’t get your “100 fold” in repayment.
In addition to that, what kind of title is “Fundamentalism and Cults”? Are you Coast to Coast AM employees so stupid you think that a cult of people who preach AGAINST Fundamentalist Christians and would be happy to see them all in dungeons or slaves in their homes, should be called Fundamentalists? THOSE ARE LIBERALS, NOT “FUNDAMENTALISTS”. And though you said “fundamentalism” you are a fundamentalists too by your stupid midefinition of that word. Fundamentalism by your definition means that because you have definite beliefs and follow them, that you are a fundamentalist, therefore you are ones too Coast to Coast AM crew who supported the title of the show. Please use a dictionary and look up the difference between fundamentalism and liberalism, they are not the same, stop bullying fundamentalist Christians and the Muslims you stupidly associate with fundamentalist Christianity in your bigotry.
And how in the Hell can you not know what Calvinism is by now after having me refute you on your blog many days ago? I was the second one to comment and that didn’t catch your attention? Are you so self-centered?
Would you stop preaching in ignorance and further you also spoke carelessly in that you didn’t clarify what you meant by what the heresy is? Yes you said Jesus shouldn’t be likened to Hitler but you said that many minutes ago not everyone may have understood what you meant. Stop speaking carelessly when it comes to Christ and stop casually risking the lives of other Christians!
Notice anything missing from the new Yahoo! homepage? It’s missing the Yahoo! Answers link. What’s wrong Yahoo stockholders? Finally realizing what a shameful failure your propaganda anti-Christian venture was? You can read more about their sneaky ruse here.
About 4o minutes ago the Area 51-employee-on-the-run hoaxer called into Coast to Coast AM, it was obviously him/her, having the same style of speech and same voice, and George Noory, who was hosting, noticed the caller wasn’t breathing through their nose and called him/her on it. The caller was pretending to have some ghost experience. George didn’t warm up to the caller and it seemed like he recognized his/her voice. To my amazement he took his mind off the caller entirely it seemed and focused fully on the next caller. I was surprised George was able to laugh after hearing that sickening hoaxer lie yet again.
I was just listening to KKOB, where two sports hosts were promoting the legalization of prostitution, and a stupid stupid sicko Christian just called in to give false praise to God while babbling on and on about mankind’s free will (G, let me guess, could you be a Arminian?) and how God will send people to Hell who disobey him, but ended his call with not condemnation of prostitution but saying he wouldn’t judge anyone. HUH? YOU JUST SAID THOSE WHO DISOBEY GOD WILL GO TO HELL. OF COURSE YOU’RE JUDGING. But the hosts then praised the caller basically saying "wow" because he said he wouldn’t judge anyone for doing "whatever" one of the host said. And one of the hosts ludicrously said "the problem with those type of calls…" (as in calls from fundamentalist Christians who try to convince people that their religion is right, not that Arminian one) is that "people have their own beliefs and you can’t change their opinion". UM MORON, MASSIVE MORON, EVER HEARD OF AN X-CHRISTIAN? EVER HEARD OF A CONVERT? Are you so massively stupid that you think people are born religious and that people fall away or become another religion cuz no one was trying to persuade them? God you’re stupid, and so was that sickening man-praise-seeking Arminian. Shut up about free will already, just shut up about it! YES WE HAVE FREE WILL WHAT IS YOUR POINT IF NO ONE IS TO JUDGE ANYONE FOR WHAT THEY DO? God, shut up and stop pretending to be wise noble know-it-alls! Sickening!
On 8/19/2009, George interviewed an atheist guest named Nassim Haramein. According to Nassim, gravity is information moving out and electromagnetism is information moving out, and this is feedback, and it’s this feedback is what generates consciousness and the universe ordered itself into extreme complexity and continues to, and how life was able to be created, survive, live well and evolve and learn, feel and multiply. Nassim doesn’t have any evidence for his theory at all. The end.
Nassim knows that the so called “Big Bang” can’t explain the ordered complexity in the universe, yet promotes this magical theory which is just as baseless as a big explosion creating a complex ordered universe, let alone one with living, replicating, self-aware, feeling beings in it that enjoy things and hate things.
Nassim also said, “I think dark matter was invented because our calculations didn’t work out… we’ve done that many times.” Who is “we”? It’s not the Young Earth Creationist Scientists. Though some might think Nassim said that because he doesn’t consider that group to be valid scientists, he did say early in his interview that creationists had good arguments for their beliefs. So, I believe, he was speaking careless and arrogantly, trumping up atheist scientists above creationist scientists (which would make sense since he is an atheist), otherwise he would not have spoken of young earth creationists as having accepted the dark matter theory or having helped come up with it. Or, by “we”, he meant his type of scientists.
Update (At about 1:23 A.M.) Nassim said, “I fundamentally don’t believe in evil. I believe in confusion. … Our world has a tendency to become quite violent.” Violence is defined as evil, Nassim has then contradicted himself, unless he’d truly like us all to believe that violence is a good thing or isn’t evil. Nassim is definitely confused. At least he believes in that, hopefully he’ll acknowledge that he too is confused.
Afterwards, when asked about Karma, Nassim babbled about how it’s been talked about (no really?), and described it as feedback. Apparently Nassim doesn’t doesn’t believe in good or evil.
Update (12:27 A.M., 8/20/2009):
I just looked at Nassim’s picture, I recognize him: I saw him last year on Youtube promoting his wacky “theory of everything” theory. He’s a very confused person.
George also interviewed guest Jordan Maxwell on his show before Nassim was on. Jordan is a symbologist who denies the obvious teachings of the Bible and replaces them with shallow “hidden” meanings that are not useful for anything. He said that the gospels were all metaphors. I imagine he thinks one of the hidden meanings of the gospels is that God and Jesus are the sun. That is some of the type of stupidity Jordan teaches, and often he won’t say what he believes in and claims that this is because he’s afraid for his life even though he knows men like Alex Jones and millions of others say what he claims would get him killed or tortured in prison. Obviously then he says things like that to try to make himself appear more valuable then others.
He also claimed last night that the swine flu vaccine wasn’t a danger and that there was a secret meaning indicated by the name of the vaccine, but claimed he was warned by the FBI, with the phrase, “You better watch your mouth.” Sure. Really though, he should take that advice, because he speaks with carelessness, as in, he doesn’t care what God thinks, what Jesus thinks or any Christian, despite his repeated claims to hold the Bible in high regard. What he holds in high regard is his own feelings, his own opinions, and that includes his hatred for those who tell the truth.
Jordan, you’re somewhat good at creating an air of mystique around you and duping the gullible, but that doesn’t show high regard for the truth, or the Bible. What you symbolize is sin, and the air around you is sinful and stinks badly. Hear is a threat you should take seriously:
You better watch your mouth: stop being pretentious, stop being arrogant, humble yourself and accept God’s will with love. Stop misdefining love in whatever way suits you, and stop hiding behind the study of symbols. Promote what Christ said is the greatest law: “Love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your mind…” and the second, “Love your neighbor as yourself” and “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” Would you want others to treat you as less valuable then them? Would you want them to lie to you when you wanted to know the truth? No.
This morning on Coast to Coast AM a self-called skeptic (who uses a what I consider to be a misdefinition of the word, by using the misdefinitions in dictionaries), and who is a professional photographer, shared his testimony about his experiences with ghosts. He said that EVPs were the greatest evidence of ghosts (in his opinion) and I think vainly played down photographic evidence, no doubt to appear to be a true skeptic, and so showing that he was denying it’s modern definition or rather true definition (which is a person who doubts anything extraordinary for no logical reason). About the EVPs he recorded, he said to George Noory the host, "They come to us in a tongue in cheek way… almost as if they we’re mocking us." George then asked a few seconds later, something like, "Do you ever get EVPs that try to scare you?" Part of the guest’s reply was that (at least one) EVP he recorded was, "Leave us alone" and he said that "it breaks my heart that they view us as intruders".
A while later, the guest talked about how he was trying to record EVPs at a cemetery, and found that he kept stepping on fire ant mounds. When he said, "Oh great, more fire ant mounts" (hardly a complaint), a "ghost" almost instantly replied, "Be nice." Hmmm: A human lightly shows his annoyance with FIRE ants which scar you and cause you great pain with their stings and possibly kill you if you’re allergic to them or stay to long at a FIRE ant mount, and a "ghost" almost instantly shows it’s annoyance at your annoyance at this? Is that a typical human response? And notice the FIRE ants were in a cemetery, a place associated with death? To me this is obviously a demon that considers the ants it’s pets and loves them for tormenting humans, and loves them more for tormenting them when they try to honor or show their love for those who died; a sadistic demon that is so demented that even a weak slight at it’s vicious pets instantly annoys it.
For those of you who aren’t stupid kids, is it really that hard to figure out?
Update (2:04 A.M.): Just before C2C ended a caller said that while he was listening to the show in his car, he could hear a voice repeatedly asking him to turn something, I forget what, so he did, but then turned it back, and the voice repeatedly started using foul language at him and telling him to turn whatever again. The caller said he told his son and his son said to go back to the area he had heard the voice at and he told his son no. George and the guest then laughed about it.
Astrophysicist and author Dr. Bernard Haisch (whom Ian Punnet called, "one of the smartest men in the world.") discussed last night and this morning, on Coast to Coast AM, his theory that the universe is a product of an intelligence or consciousness, and how this is supported by recent astrophysical findings, and to pitch his book on those topics, called "The God Theory." Ian, seemingly to Bernard’s annoyance, asked him so good questions, revealing Haisch’s heretical book to be near worthless.
Ian asked Haisch what he thought o karma, and Haisch implied that when we do bad things that we judge ourselves and so we determine the negative effects that happen to us and so after we die how we lived determines what we next reincarnate as. How convenient for those who are evil! And how obviously false. Since when do those who do evil in this life time get instantly punished? Even the ancient "obsolete" Bible written by supposedly unobservant ignorants says,
trembling seizes my body.
Why do the wicked live on,
growing old and increasing in power?
They see their children established around them,
their offspring before their eyes.
Their homes are safe and free from fear;
the rod of God is not upon them.
Their bulls never fail to breed;
their cows calve and do not miscarry.
They send forth their children as a flock;
their little ones dance about.
They sing to the music of tambourine and harp;
they make merry to the sound of the flute.
They spend their years in prosperity
and go down to the grave in peace.
Yet they say to God, ‘Leave us alone!
We have no desire to know yourways.
Who is the Almighty, that we should serve him?
What would we gain by praying to him?’
But their prosperity is not in their own hands,
so I stand aloof from the counsel of the wicked.
Yet how often is the lamp of a
wicked [people] snuffed out?
How often does calamity come upon them,
the fate God allots in his anger?"
And how many people are so stupid, so mentally darkened, that they don’t know that this is an unfair world? Who doesn’t think this is an unfair world? Who has never complained about corrupt leaders getting away with doing evil and dying in peace like Job complained about over 3000 thousand years ago? How many people don’t know that humans in general are unjust and don’t judge themselves perfectly but make exceptions for themselves? So how can Haisch say that we judge ourselves, in other words, that we give ourselves just punishment and correct rewards?
Ian also asked Haisch what he thought of a God who planned everything out, and Haisch said, "It doesn’t appeal to me." Yet just now (1:08 A.M.) Ian said Haisch was "coming from a purely scientific view." Though some may tell me Haisch wasn’t talking about his feelings, but had scientific reasons as to why it didn’t appeal to him, I know that’s wrong, since, that response is not an accepted as a scientific standard. For example, imagine a scientist, who is a Darwinist, says, "The scientific experiments we performed show that there is no such thing as randomness and that everything is preplanned, and follows physical laws. But that doesn’t appeal to me. So I don’t believe the results of the experiments."
Haisch also said, "In my view God doesn’t interfere in the world. … He creates boundries initially. … That’s the point of it."
Who cares what your view is? What matters is what is, reality. What matters is the evidence, the truth.
First caller: "Where does evil fit into this? …do you feel there is an evil out there somewhere, that manipulates peoples’ lives"
Haisch’s response: "I really don’t believe in any active evil force" … "I think there is a being without any polarity, a perfect being."
The caller was referring to a being like Satan obviously, and Haisch, without any explanation as to why, said, "no". How insightful.
A little while later Haisch said, "Not because he doesn’t care but because it would destroy his own plan to let things arise of it’s own accord. …to let things develop on their own."
Haisch is contradicting himself and saying things not based on evidence:
1) God is obviously perfectly wise and would know the outcome of anything based on how he set up the first laws and first thing or things in motion. So to say that God set the universe up to continue randomly makes no sense.
2) It makes even less sense since Haisch said God set up laws, and clearly these laws have remained, and according to scientists like Haisch, have, at least after the first explosion, stayed almost exactly the same or have stayed the same, as opposed to disappearing or changing due to randomness (unknowable changes due to lack of control by an intelligent being and it’s inability to know the outcome of that control). So, if things were meant to happen randomly after God made the universe or set it’s creation in motion to occur randomly, then his creating physical laws and making the explosion so precise that it ended up with our solar system and all the molecules in it in exactly the place he wanted would have been futile as as soon as he withdrew his control of the laws of the universe, it would have all started to come undone and returned back into a formless void.
3) Haisch claimed that God doesn’t "interfere" in the universe because it would defeat the point of everything happening randomly. What is his evidence for that? None. Haisch is contradicting himself in two ways, and not making sense in a another way:
a) Haisch defines "interference" as God doing anything in the universe, because it would prevent the universe from being random. Therefore Haisch is (and obviously doesn’t clearly realize it) that God knows the future and the consequences of all his actions, even the smallest action. If that is true, then God knew exactly what would happen by his "interference" in the beginning!
b) Even if Haisch defined interference as only being something God does to affect the universe after the first replicating life appeared on Earth, he still would be contradicting himself since Haisch already implied that God was not interfering with the universe while he controlled it up to the point of life appearing or beginning to replicate. So, Haisch is being arbitrary with his definitions, meaning, changing them so that God appeals to his feelings, what he wishes God to be.
Another caller asked Haisch if he believed in divine intervention (and though Haisch earlier said that he didn’t as I’ve pointed out) Haisch, by saying this, has contradicted himself again:
1) By saying that he did believe God participated in the universe indirectly (because he believes that we share God’s consciousness and manipulate reality with our consciousness – he said, "The universe is based on consciousness." earlier in the show), he is saying that God is participating in the universe. He even just now (at 1:50 A.M. about) said, "We are God."
2) What does it matter whether or not God participates directly or indirectly, it would still be "interference" according to one of Haisch’s definitions (definitions which are not compatible). And using Haisch’s logic, God could happily participate all he wanted by simply doing it indirectly by sending angels to do what he wanted, OR, CONTROLLING US INDIRECTLY WITHOUT USING ANGELS. So, Haisch’s logic is contradictory as he said that God doesn’t participate because it would be interference, yet says God does participate indirectly (at least he had meant that God does not manipulating things directly with his Spirit, like moving objects or energy around).
3) Haisch is also contradicting himself in that if we are God as he said, then God is interfering in this universe since we are acting in it and therefore preventing it from being random. Haisch even said that it’s based on our consciousness, so it’s design is based on what we want it to be. Haisch is illogical in his teachings upon God. He even said, after all this:
4) "I certainly haven’t proven anything." Well he has, using false evidence, convinced at least one caller that called late into the show, and so, he couldn’t even define the word "proof" right. Though someone may say, "Well he didn’t think he’d prove anything to anyone," but if that is true, then why is trying to? Why did he write a book and make a website and come on the show to do so? He wasn’t simply giving his opinions as much of what he said shows. If Haisch has said that he isn’t trying to prove, trying to convince anyone of anything, then he’s severely confused because he has shown that he is trying to prove things about God to himself and others.
Haisch’s problem, or dilemma if you want to say, is his not understanding how God can having other beings like himself who are able to choose to do things if God controls everything or anything. Haisch doesn’t understand that God can have self-aware beings who can choose and do choose, that we can be self-aware and choose to do things, and that God can still have his way by having everything turn out the way he wants, by his controlling our emotions, and INDIRECTLY directing our will by doing so. For example, when a donkey or duck is hungry, we humans can imprecisely get either of these animals to go after the food. God, being perfectly wise, is able to get us to go exactly where he wants, both physically, spiritually, and mentally, by precisely controlling whatever we feel, and our bodies and the matter and energy and spiritual things around us (but not our will). Since he can see into the future (or at least is able to calculate the exact outcome of all things by his actions upon them), knows exactly what will happen by any action he takes. If Haisch realizes that the mind of our spiritual head so to speak, is, has thoughts like it’s heart does, but is influenced by the thoughts of it’s heart, he would understand, I think, how God can have a universe with beings that choose, while still getting his way. So, what this all comes down to, his Haisch’s misunderstanding of what the heart and will are, his misdefinitions of those words, including the words God, interference, and control.
What Haisch also doesn’t understand is that the universe can’t exist apart from God’s control of it. The evidence for this, indirectly is what the Bible teaches, but it’s also evidence based on what we can understand apart from the Bible: (I’m working on showing this evidence).
Also during the show, Ian Punnet said, "fundamentalism of any type often leads to violence" which is without evidence and a contradiction: Calvinists are fundamentalists who don’t believe in harming anyone physically unless God commands them too. They believe in obeying Jesus when he said not to curse their enemies but to help them to survive or live well and to get eternal life if they can. They believe in doing that because of what Jesus said was the second greatest law: "Love your neighbor as yourself" and a similar one, "Love one another" which Jesus gave (meaning to show favoritism to other Christians with the same religion, which makes sense since who is closer to you then someone who loves the same God? And everyone instinctively knows to show favoritism to a family member first, (at least if that adult family member is peaceful to their help)).
Ian also contradicted himself by saying that in that fundamentalists "of any type" can also be people who believe that there is no absolute truths to believe and therefore would be against those who believe in truth or certain truths (like Calvinism, whether they believe Calvinism to be true or not; they would be against those claiming it is true). So, Ian was refuting his own statement and own religion, a religion in which the second greatest law, "Love your neighbor as yourself" is unimportant to Ian, and which denies the fact that Jesus called himself, "The Truth" and therefore was saying that everything he said was perfectly true. Ian, during the show, called himself, "an armchair theologian." How true. I hope his schizophrenia towards the Bible leaves him so that he supports it fully and consistently, rather than confusingly and hypocritically, for a show.
Tonight on Coast to Coast AM: Guest who is talking about voices he and others heard on his e.v.p. machine (after talking about a nuclear threat to the U.S.A. via Syria from North Korea "warning" he received on it): "some of the messages are so sinister sounding, almost becoming stereotypical… but it’s undeniable and… they curse at you with the [the foulest of words(?)]"
Though the guest said this, neither George nor the guest mentioned demons at all, not that I remember, though it was obvious. Further, it’s obvious to me that the "warning", especially since it had already come to pass, wasn’t a warning, but the demon or demons boasting about what they hoped would happen.
It’s very sickening and amazing to me that unless a demon says, "Hi, I’m a demon," the people who hear them and learn about the typical behavior of so called ghosts and now "shadow people" (and recently one called on C2C said one attacked her) can’t accept the painfully obvious, that those beings are demons, and not dead humans, and not left over "residual" energy "echoes" of humans. And for you "skeptics" who think that people are just hearing things or making things up, HELLO, why would they always make up in general, that these beings they hear are using foul language and saying hateful things and making malicious faces and acting insane? Yes, people like to be scared and like drama, but they love angelic-like beings too, they love happy stories, they love good news like, "All the Christians will die don’t worry" or "All those fundies will become just like you!" Yet these beings, at least while not possessing anyone, never say anything like that to us. Some might argue, "Well that just shows they are not demons, just humans who are angry about being trapped on Earth, and don’t say anything against Christians because they know it’s not their fault that they are trapped" but that is easily refuted since mediums often say things misleading about Jesus, twisting his teachings, sometimes denying he was God’s Son, and never teaching for example, Calvinist salvation doctrine despite the many varied teachings that come out of their mouths." That is a clear sign that whoever is controlling the body of the medium does not think well of Calvinists, as they keep avoiding talking about their doctrine, never mention them by any of their names, but only refer to Christians as a whole, as if they were all the same (and everyone who knows Christianity well knows they aren’t). And what are the odds that of the millions of lingering spirits that are able to speak through people, that not a single one is able to distinguish a Calvinist from an Arminian type Christian, if they are all former humans and or some super intelligent wise alien? So not a single one can pick up on at least a subtle difference between the two, they can’t pick up on that these are the two main groups of Christians that are at odds with each other? Yeah, right. Demons, demons that don’t want you to know what Calvinists teach, because in their bitterness, these demons want to make as many humans suffer as they can with them in Hell, or rather, if they realize they can’t change anyone’s destiny, want to waste the lives of those who are to be saved as best they can, keeping them from being in a position where they can earn eternal treasure. To put it another way, demons want to keep eternal-Christians-to-be from having the ability to make eternal money.
Please, I’m begging you non-Christians, and atheists, stop denying the obvious. At least be silent instead of making up silly excuses to dismiss what you see and hear. Does a demon have to say, "Hi, I’m a demon, and here’s an amazing miracle to prove it" to get you to admit the obvious? It’s dumb. Enough already. You’re just making yourselves look worse and worse the more you deny the obvious, what’s the point? The true Christians will just ignore you for it, and then how will you pester them accept by forcing yourselves on them (and if you do that, then everyone will know that you’re clearly the ones who are wrong and on your way to Hell).
"I’d rather talk about the swine flu. People are dying from it, it’s getting out of control, did you know that?" – Michael Savage, 8/14/09. Thanks for spreading "Big Pharma’s" propaganda Mike. Here’s the truth: book 1, book 2, a website.