Archive

Posts Tagged ‘proof’

Liberal UK Police Officers, All Liberals, Love Child Porn

‘World’s largest paedophile ring’ uncovered
by Dominic Casciani
3/16/2011/11:27 ET

International police led by a UK team say they shut down the largest internet paedophile ring yet discovered.

The global forum had 70,000 followers at its height, leading to 4,000 intelligence reports being sent to police across 30 countries.

The operation has so far identified 670 suspects and 230 abused children.

Detectives say 184 people have been arrested – 121 of them were in the UK. Some 60 children have been protected in the UK.

The three-year investigation, Operation Rescue, was led by investigators from the UK’s Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre (Ceop).

Speaking at a news conference at The Hague in the Netherlands, investigators said the network hid behind a legal online forum which operated out of the country – but its members came from around the world.

Europol Director Rob Wainright on ‘spectacular international police success’

Along with the Netherlands and the UK, suspects have been identified in Australia, Italy, Canada, New Zealand and Thailand.

The members of the network went into a private channel, boylover.net, and then used its secret systems to share films and images of abused children, said Rob Wainwright, director of European police agency Europol.

However, child abuse investigators, including a team from Ceop, had already infiltrated the network and were posing as paedophiles to gather intelligence.

In the UK, the 240 suspects include police officers, teachers and a karate teacher. One of the suspects in the UK is a woman.

To date, 33 have been convicted, including John McMurdo, a scout leader from Plymouth. Another forum user was Stephen Palmer, 54, of Birkenhead, who shared abuse images with contacts in the US. A third man, 46-year-old Colin Hoey Brown of Bromsgrove, was jailed for making and distributing almost 1,000 images. – More here

Massive Dutch-run child pornography ring revealed
3/16/2011/4:39 PM

184 suspects have already been arrested in a large-scale international child pornography ring centred in the Netherlands.

Speaking from the Hague, Europol Director Rob Wainwright, together with law enforcement representatives from five countries, announced the break-up of the internet ring on Wednesday.

In the largest ever operation of its kind, police in 30 countries have arrested 184 suspects and identified 486 others. Mr Wainwright says more will follow in short order.

Peter Davies, Director of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre, says arrests were being made yesterday and today in the UK and more are planned for tomorrow. Meanwhile, five arrests have been made in the United States and 17 in Spain. The investigation, called Operation Rescue, started three years ago.

Arresting Amir I
An important break in the case came when Dutch authorities arrested Amir I, the brains behind the internet forum Boylover.net, the centre of the ring. At its peak, the forum had more than 70,000 members around the world. No child pornography was distributed on the forum itself, rather, members used the forum to facilitate individual exchanges of photos or videos online. Boylover.net was run out of Amir I’s home in North Holland.

The 37-year-old Israeli-born Dutch citizen was arrested in 2009 for possession of child pornography and has since cooperated fully with investigators. Police have been able to trace 71,000 IP address, in 109 countries, from his computer. On Tuesday, Amir I pled guilty in a Haarlem, North Holland court to possession of child pornography, and to sexually abusing a 14-year-old boy in the Brazilian city of Sao Paolo. He faces up to three and a half years in prison.

Not for the money
Europol has released some of the exchanges between members of the forum. One such text reads, “There is nothing more sexy than a boy in diapers and I thought I was the only one who had this thought.” Most of those arrested so far are suspected of child sexual abuse, not the lesser offence of possessing child pornography.

Europol’s Wainwright says one unusual aspect of this internet ring, and child pornography offences in general, is that very little money changes hands. “Money is clearly not the motivating factor, unlike most other forms of organized crime.” – Source

UK Metro Police IT expert caught with child porn
3/9/2011/8:20 ET

Joseph McCabe was working at the Met Police at the time of his arrest

A computer expert granted clearance to analyse police computers has been jailed for 14 months after being caught with a huge stash of child pornography.

Joseph McCabe, 52, was working as an IT consultant for the Metropolitan Police Service at the time of his arrest.

He admitted possessing 33 films and more than 13,000 images at his former home in Bridge of Earn, Perthshire, which showed child sex abuse.

The force said it had dismissed him when the images were found.

Solicitor John Boyle, defending, said McCabe had “binge downloaded” massive consignments of child porn so he could view the images “at his leisure” later.
Video clips

Mr Boyle told Perth Sheriff Court: “He found himself on a downward spiral. What had started as an interest in adult pornography quickly descended to these offences.” …

Sheriff Michael Fletcher noted that more than 200 of the images and video clips were at the most extreme end of the scale and said he had no option but to jail McCabe. – Source

Mom Julie Carr gets 20 years for sexually abusing own daughter in video chats with British teen
by Michael Sheridan
3/16/2011/8:48 AM

Julie M. Carr sexually abused her young daughter in a video chat with a teenager in the United Kingdom in 2009.

A woman who sexually abused her own baby girl on a webcast with a teenager in England will have at least 20 years to think about her sick crime.

A judge could hardly hide his disgust for Julie Carr during her sentencing this week. The Maine woman received two decades in jail for producing child pornography.

“What you have done, Ms. Carr, is violate the most basic bond of society — the bond between a mother and her child, the bond between a mother and her daughter,” U.S. District Judge John Woodcock said, the Bangor Daily News reported.

“I’ll tell you, unequivocally, that yours is the worst case I’ve ever seen.”

The 33-year-old mother of four molested her youngest daughter while video-chatting with a teen, Nicholas Wilde, across the Atlantic Ocean in 2009. She pleaded guilty in federal court to the pornography charges in 2010 and also is expected to be sentenced on state charges of gross sexual assault and sexual exploitation of a minor.

Carr’s children — three daughters and one son — were removed from her care after her arrest. The videos involved the youngest girl, who was nearly 2 years old at the time.

The mother’s depraved acts were discovered when British authorities arrested Wilde, then 19, two years ago. During the bust, they found a memory stick containing recordings of her video chats, according to the BBC.

Wilde, who has Asperger’s syndrome, pleaded guilty to making and distributing child porn last year and is serving nearly five years in prison.

Carr’s lawyer argued the woman was “conned” into performing the acts online, court documents state.

“I am sorry,” she said during her sentencing. “I never meant to hurt anyone in my family. I regret it.” – Source

Massive child abuse at Amsterdam day care centres
12/13/2010/12:42 PM

Dozens of children at two Amsterdam day care centres have become the victims of systematic sexual abuse. At a press conference, Mayor Eberhard van der Laan confirmed that between 40 and 50 toddlers had been systematically abused by the suspect over an 18-month period.

The 27-year-old suspect has been arrested and made a confession. The man, who worked at the day care centres, also offered his services as a child minder via the internet. In a number of cases, he made photographs and video tapes of the abuse.

Emotional wrecks
At a press conference after two closed-doors gatherings with the victims’ parents and the parents of other toddlers who frequented the day care centres, the mayor said:

“First off we went all out to locate and inform the parents as soon as possible, they have top priority in our approach.”

At the press conference, Mayor Van der Laan showed a photograph of the suspect, primarily to reassure parents. It is very unusual for suspects’ portraits to be made public; Mr Van der Laan explained why in this case concerns about the suspect’s privacy were waived:

“Firstly, we want to reassure certain parents that he was not their child minder. At the same time, we want to alert others to the fact that he may have been their child minder. And to inform them – if we have not been able to reach them during our investigation – that they can report to the police, to aid workers, and the like”.

The closed-door gatherings were chaired by the mayor. He says the meetings made a deep impression on everyone who was there. The Amsterdam council health authority deployed additional workers to assist the shocked parents. An emotional person involved in the drama told newspaper De Telegraaf: “The parents in there are emotional wrecks, it is that serious.”

Child pornography
The suspect is a 27-year-old Latvian man who acquired Dutch nationality in 2008 after marrying an Amsterdam man in 2004</*. Chief prosecutor Justitie Herman Bolhaar explains how the child molester finally got caught… – More here

*bolded by me

Spanish priest arrested over ’21,000 child porn images’
11/12/2010/16:32 ET

A Catholic priest in Spain has been arrested over the alleged possession of thousands of images of child sex abuse.

Police said they found 21,000 images on computers inside the 52-year-old’s church in Vilafames, in the east of the country.

The priest, who has not been named, has been bailed and will appear before a judge in a fortnight, media say.

The Segorbe-Castellon diocese said it had suspended the priest and was ready to clarify the facts in court.

“If the accusation is true, this is something that hurts us deeply, that we sincerely regret and that we reject unreservedly,” the El Pais newspaper quoted a statement from the diocese as saying.

It said it would also offer the priest “the necessary means for a fair defence”.

Spain has largely escaped the child sex abuse scandals that have hit the Catholic Church in many European countries and the US.

But formal accusations have been made against a Carmelite monk in eastern Spain and Franciscan brothers in the south.

Police also launched an investigation in May into three members of staff at a care home run by a Catholic order in Cordoba.

Spain has arrested hundreds of people for distributing child pornography in recent years.

In May, police carried out almost 100 raids across the country after uncovering a network sharing abuse images.

The country’s biggest raid was in October 2008, when 121 suspects were detained. – Source WAS THE “CHILD ABUSE” AGAINST GIRLS OR BOYS? AND IF BOTH, HOW MANY GIRLS, AND HOW MANY BOYS. WHY SO VAGUE? I WONDER.

Child abuse ‘big business online’
5/12/2010/21:49 ET

Many of the images depict very young children being abused

There are around 450 criminal gangs around the world making money from images of child sex abuse, the UK’s Internet Watch Foundation has said.

The watchdog’s annual report says that the 10 most prolific of these account for more than 650 web pages.

But despite these gangs being well-established online, the IWF says the the industry is not growing.

Such groups are, however, finding new ways to distribute images, the report adds.

Smaller social networks, image-sharing sites, free website hosting platforms and hacked websites are increasingly being used by content distributors desperate to avoid detection.

To help obscure their movements, they move their distribution networks regularly between different providers and countries.

Most of the gangs operate a pay-per-view system, charging a monthly fee of around £55 for access to images and videos. – More here

Interesting and hypocritical that the LIBERAL New York Daily News calls pedophiles “pervs”, being oh so judgmental about the sexuality of others, yet doesn’t call homosexuality, another deviant sexuality, “perverted”. Liberals perpetuate the very crimes and perverted behavior and speech that they claim to be appalled at. Meanwhile, Britain’s government has banned all fundamentalist Christians from adopting kids. My journal is filled with evil stories like these; when will the sickness end?

For those of you who want to argue that there is no link between homosexuality and child molesters (note that I didn’t say “pedophiles”), you’re wrong:

Homosexuals more likely to molest kids, study reports
by Ken Walker
5/30/2001

LOUISVILLE, Ky. (BP)–A social researcher who has studied sexual behavior for 24 years believes the Boy Scouts of America (BSA) has sound reasons for maintaining its prohibition against gay scoutmasters.

A homosexual cannot automatically be considered a child molester, said Judith Reisman, president of the Institute for Media Education in suburban Louisville, Ky.

But with 17-24 percent of boys being abused by age 18, nearly as many as the 25 percent of girls, there is cause for concern, she said.

Since heterosexuals outnumber the homosexual population about 44 to 1, as a group the incidence of homosexuals molesting children is up to 40 times greater than heterosexuals, she said.

“You’re looking at a much higher rate of abuse,” said Reisman, a former university research professor who recently completed a study titled, “Crafting Gay Children.” “The Department of Justice just released data and the rate of abuse are off the charts.”

BSA’s policy has been the subject of constant attacks from gay activists, who have convinced a number of school boards to oust the Scouts from board property.

In a story that aired Apr. 1 on CBS, “60 Minutes” also questioned its validity. After California congressman Dana Rohrabacher called the prohibition common sense, reporter Lesley Stahl remarked that common sense turns out to be a myth.

According to the FBI and several clinical studies published in reputable journals, gay men aren’t more likely to sexually abuse boys, she said.

“In fact, the largest database of child molesters in the country shows that those who molest boys are over three times more likely to be heterosexual in their adult relationships than homosexual,” she said.

But Reisman points to figures from a 1991 population study by the U.S. Department of Commerce.

It showed that 8 million girls were abused by age 18 by heterosexual men, a ratio of 1 victim to 11 adult men. However, 6-8 million boys were abused by age 18 by 1-2 million adult homosexuals, a ratio of 3-5 victims for every gay adult.

Questioned about Reisman’s claims, CBS stuck by its story.

Spokesman Kevin Tedesco said “60 Minutes” staffers spoke with leading sources of information on child molestation, including the FBI, American Psychological Association and several clinical researchers.

The database was assembled by psychologist Dr. Gene Able, director of the Behavioral Sciences Institute in Atlanta, he added.

However, Reisman also cites a past study by Able to bolster her contention that BSA has reason to fear admitting homosexuals to the scoutmaster ranks. It found that 150 boys are abused by one male homosexual offender, compared to 19.8 girls by heterosexual offenders.

In a study published in 1987 in the Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Able said homosexuals sexually molest young boys with an incidence five times greater than the molestation of girls. (Calls to Able seeking further comment were not returned.)

“We looked at the leading gay travel guide,” Reisman said of her research. “Forty-seven percent of the 139 nations they talked about identified places to find boys. The average heterosexual travel guide is not concerned with finding children.”

Crime statistics also pose concerns. Figures released last summer by the Justice Department reveal that adults are not the primary victims of sexual assault, she said.

They showed that 67 percent of all reported sex abuse victims are children and 64 percent of forcible sodomy victims are boys under 12.

Two analysts with Washington-based, pro-family organizations agree that homosexuals pose a greater risk to boys.

Tim Daily of the Family Research Council questioned “60 Minutes” claim that adults who molest boys can even be called heterosexual.

“I guess you determine someone’s sexual orientation by their relationships,” said Dailey, who wrote a paper on pedophilia in the fall of 1999.

“If a man is married and has sexual relations with boys, he’s obviously a combination. To say he’s heterosexual is an outrage. Overall he’s a pedophile. Whether you call it omni-sexual or pan-sexual, he’s indiscriminate…in relationships.”

“Who cares if a guy is married?” echoed Peter LaBarbera, senior policy analyst for the Culture and Policy Institute, a division of Concerned Women of America. “If he’s into molesting boys, that’s homosexual behavior. It’s academic nonsense to talk about these people as heterosexuals.”

Editor of the monthly Lambda Report, LaBarbera has been following the homosexual movement for a decade. He said it is disproportionately involved in pedophilia, as shown by the large number of males among sexual abuse victims.

“The homosexual movement is shameless,” he said. “Gay activists are the ones who are trying to bring down (the Boy Scouts), a venerated institution which has very little to do with sexuality. They’re making it seem those who are against homosexuals are the problem.”

Among the reasons Dailey cited for being concerned about the potential for homosexual molestation of boys:

– Almost all sex crimes against children are committed by men and significant numbers of victims are males. In 1996, the journal Adolescence reported several studies indicate that up to one-third of all sex crimes against children are committed against boys.

– Even homosexual activists don’t try to hide the connection with pedophilia. In The Gay Report — a book published back in 1979 — authors Karla Jay and Allen Young found that 73 percent of those surveyed had had sexual relations with males 16 to 19 or younger.

– A 1999 article in the Journal of Homosexuality by Helmut Graupner argued that same-sex relations with minors should be considered a gay rights issue. The article argued that children wouldn’t necessarily be harmed by sexual contact with adults.

This debate flared up in New Jersey when a column by Toni Meyer, senior research analyst with the New Jersey Family Policy Council, appeared in several newspapers around the state.

Citing Reisman’s research, she wrote, “We must speak up in support of the Boy Scouts to our community leaders and not allow them to be unfairly and unethically pressured to go against their standards.

“To allow them to be denied the support they need or public privileges they are entitled because of that stance would be a total disservice to, and a potentially dangerous decision, for society and our local communities.”

That brought an angry response from New York’s Glennda Testone, northern regional media manager for the Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD).

“The incorrect stereotype of the gay man as a pedophile is one that has been medically and scientifically debunked,” she said. “Heterosexual men were responsible for 74 percent of assaults on male victims and 77 percent of assaults on female victims, according to an American Academy of Pediatrics study (July 1994).”

However, Meyer says those statistics only prove her point — a small number of the population is responsible for 26 percent of the assaults on boys.

“She overlooks there are a lot more heterosexuals than homosexuals,” Meyer told Baptist Press. “People don’t understand. You have to balance these numbers by overall population to see there’s a greater incidence of abuse by gay men.” – Source

More:

Sexual Abuse: A Major Cause Of Homosexuality?

It is a well-documented fact that many many homosexuals were sexually abused when young. (This paper will conclude with a list of some books which support that statement.)

In other words, there is an abundance of evidence that many many homosexuals were born heterosexual but were disoriented by sexual abuse.

Indeed, there are many more cases of sexual abuse than there are cases of homosexuality. As one large study discussed in a 1997 issue of the Journal of the American Medical Association found, on average 12.8% of women and 4.3% of men recall being sexually abused.1 (How many do not recall it?)

According to Dr. James E. Soukup, author of a book which deals with several subjects including sexual abuse: “In one national study in 1985, 27 percent of the females interviewed and 16 percent of the males reported to have been sexually abused as children. Other studies indicate that these figures are too low. It is suggested that eighty percent of all sexual abuse is not reported.”2

The Associated Press noted in late 1998 that, according to an analysis of 166 studies covering the years 1985-97: “As many as one in five boys is sexually abused….It [also] concluded that sexual abuse of boys is underreported and undertreated….Earlier studies have shown that 25 percent to 35 percent of girls are sexually abused.”3

(According to a JAMA review of literature re the sexual abuse of boys, only 10%-33% of male abuse victims ever tell anyone about that abuse.4 The review also found that: “Abused [male] adolescents, particularly those victimized by males, were up to 7 times more likely to self-identify as gay or bisexual than peers who had not been abused.”5 And regarding female abuse victims, one study found that 38% of adult women ages 18-31 who were sexually abused when young [between ages 10 months to 12 years] did not remember that they were sexually abused when young.6)

Whatever the true percentages are of male and female sex abuse victims, considering how high the suggested/reported numbers are compared to the percentage of the population that is homosexual (only 1%-2%), we can see that sexual abuse can theoretically account for every case of homosexuality.

Too, there currently is no definitive proof that anyone is born homosexual. Several studies by homosexual researchers claimed to find some possible biological bases for homosexuality. But other scientists easily pointed out the flaws in those studies, and the results of those studies have yet to be replicated by others. In the words of pro-homosexual Newsweek magazine: “In the early ’90s, three highly publicized studies seemed to suggest that homosexuality’s roots were genetic….More than five years later the data have never been replicated.”7 (This fact has been almost totally ignored by the biased, untrustworthy, dominant liberal media.) And in the May/June 2008 issue of Psychology Today we have this: “No one has yet identified a particular gay gene….There is no all-inclusive explanation for the variation in sexual orientation, at least none supported by actual evidence….[T]here are many different mechanisms [involving both nature and nurture], not a single one, for producing homosexuality.”8

(And even if there ever was a “homosexual gene,” since most if not all homosexuals do not sire offspring, one would think that homosexual genes would disappear or die out.) – More here

Much more information on a clear link between homosexuals and an increased tendency to abuse children.

And some easy reasoning: Who is more likely to molest males: those attracted to males, or those disgusted by it (guess who is disgusted by it)? And who is more likely to commit sexual crimes at all: a minority who must often go through extremely stressful situations with few partners to choose from (partners who are often those who were abused as children or exposed to strong pornography, leading to sexual addiction and sexual deviance), or those who feel shame about their sexuality and have many people to partner with of the opposite sex? Who commits more crimes in general: those whose goal it is to forgive and to treat others as they want to be treated, or those whose goal it is to have a happy sexual life, but are repeatedly disappointed when their lust isn’t satisfied?

Related Post:

 

‘Paedophilia is Hollywood’s biggest problem,’ alleges former child star Corey Feldman

Sick Britain: UK High Court Only Permits Liberals To Adopt Children, Not Fundamentalist Christians

Government Warned 9/11 Commission To Not Cross Line

by Paul Joseph Watson

3/17/2010

Documents recently obtained by the ACLU show that the government warned the 9/11 Commission against getting to the bottom of the September 11 terror attacks in a letter signed by Attorney General John Ashcroft, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and CIA Director George J. Tenet.

In a letter dated January 6, 2004, the Commission was refused permission to question terrorist detainees, with inquiry leaders Hamilton and Kean being told there was “A line that the Commission should not cross,” in the course of its investigation.

A PDF of the letter (page 26) can be read here.

The government urged the Commission, “Not to further pursue the proposed request to participate in the questioning of detainees,” according to the letter, citing the need to “Safeguard the national security, including protection of Americans from future terrorist attacks.”

The warning was just one example of how the Bush administration fiercely struggled to prevent the 9/11 Commission from conducting a deeper probe into the attacks. Bush and Cheney refused to appear before the Commission separately and both refused to testify under oath, instead meeting with panel members informally and in private, with no recordings of the meeting allowed.

“It appears that David Addington took the lead on refusing the 9/11 Commission’s request,” writes the FireDogLake blog. “It appears Addington got the draft of the letter from 9/11 Commission–which was addressed to Rummy and George Tenet. Tenet and Addington clearly had a conversation about how to respond. But it seems that Addington drafted the response, got Condi, Andy Card, and Alberto Gonzales to review it, and then sent it to Tenet (and, presumably, Rummy) to okay and sign the letter.”

As FireDogLake rightly points out, this was part of an attempt to cover-up the systematic torture of detainees which did not fully come to light until the Abu Ghraib scandal was exposed in April 2004.

However, the refusal to allow access to detainees was also undoubtedly so that the Commission members couldn’t later blow the whistle on the fact that the men were nothing more than patsies and goat herders who had nothing whatsoever to do with the 9/11 attacks.

As we have constantly emphasized in the face of establishment media spin that has demonized the mere act of questioning the official 9/11 story, the majority of the 9/11 Commission members themselves have all gone on record to publicly slam the official story as untrue.

The senior counsel to the 9/11 Commission – John Farmer – said that the government agreed not to tell the truth about 9/11, echoing the assertions of fellow 9/11 Commission members who concluded that the Pentagon was engaged in deliberate deception about their response to the attack.

Senator Max Cleland, who resigned from the 9/11 Commission after calling it a “national scandal”, stated in a 2003 PBS interview,

“I’m saying that’s deliberate. I am saying that the delay in relating this information to the American public out of a hearing… series of hearings, that several members of Congress knew eight or ten months ago, including Bob Graham and others, that was deliberately slow walked… the 9/11 Commission was deliberately slow walked, because the Administration’s policy was, and its priority was, we’re gonna take Saddam Hussein out.” – More here.

Related story: Active Thermitic Material Discovered in Dust from the 9/11 World Trade Center

Missing Scripture Found?: Dead Sea Tablet Indicates Christianity Was the Original Religion of the Jews

February 8, 2010 1 comment

Dead Sea tablet suggests Jewish resurrection imagery pre-dates Jesus

by Ofri Ilani, Haaretz Correspondent
7/7/2008

The premise that the Messiah died and was resurrected after three days is considered the foundation of the Christian faith, one which differentiates it from Judaism. Through the generations, this belief stood at the center of the debate between Christians and Jews. But now, a mysterious tablet from the time of the second temple has led researchers to believe that this premise of messianic resurrection is not unique to Christianity, but rather existed in Judaism years before Jesus was born.

The tablet, which has been dubbed “Gabriel’s vision” because much of its text deals with a vision of the apocalypse transmitted by the angel Gabriel, was discovered eight years ago, but a large part of it is illegible and researchers have had difficulty interpreting its meaning.

Israel Knohl, a professor of Bible studies at Hebrew University in Jerusalem, has offered a new interpretation of this text recently, which has sparked interest in the Christian realm. Knohl’s interpretation could shed light on the history of Jesus and the way Christianity grew out of Judaism.
Advertisement

“Gabriel’s vision,” a previously unknown prophetic text written in the first century B.C.E., was written on a large gray limestone tablet. In the center of the text, which includes quotes from the Bible and prophetic verses, there is an image of the angel Gabriel. The tablet was not discovered in an organized archaeological excavation, therefore the location of its discovery is not clear. Some believe it was found in Jordan on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea.

The New York Times reported recently that the tablet was bought from a Jordanian antiquities dealer by an Israeli-Swiss collector who kept it in his Zurich home. When an Israeli scholar examined it closely a few years ago and wrote a paper on it last year, interest began to rise. There is now a spate of scholarly articles on the stone, with several due to be published in the coming months. – Source. More information

Some Things You Should Know To Have a Fully Joyful Life: Proof vs. Evidence

February 5, 2010 Leave a comment

I was wondering if I was the first one to use the phrase, “Proof is relative” which I said in my previous post, and wondering how many people cared enough enough to say it. Using Google I found what seems to be 70 relevant search resultson the first 7 pages (5 were from books.google) and one on the 8th page), the rest of the results seemed to be on other topic. In Google’s record of books I found what are seem to me to be 121 100% relative results, even though some of the content was hidden in some books. It’s good to know I’m not alone in knowing something that is more important to know than most things in this world to think logically, but that only 186 people wrote it down out of many billions both living and dead… I believe it’s a sign of why this world is so “chaotic” and full of strife: people fighting to change another’s views to the point of harm, not realizing that they aren’t necessarily right just because they believe what they do. That doesn’t mean that no one should try to persuade or even harm another person in order to “wake them up”, but that many people try to persuade or harm because they believe they are right merely because they believe it, and not based on any actual evidence they can point to or explain. Many, upon hearing/reading that usually then ask, “And can anyone know that they are absolutely right (that the evidence they believe to be true is absolute evidence?)”. You can know if, 1) you feel the evidence whether in the form of an objec, actiont or statement makes sense and feel no doubt, and not just the feeling alone, but can point out the object, action or statement, and finally, irrefutable evidence comes if God gives you the trust in the evidence himself, also known as “faith”. But how can you know your faith is from God? At the moment, I don’t know, but when if I realize the answer, I’ll edit this entry soon Lord willing.

Here is a fuller truth that I thought of about three minutes ago (while typing out this sentence), that I think everyone must know to live a fully joyful life:

Proof is relative, but truth is absolutely true whether or not a person believes it or not.

And without full logical thinking, I doubt you can have a fully joyful life, so, live logically.

Global Warming Sets Fire To Britain’s Sky!

December 21, 2009 3 comments

Eurostar: cold weather traps 2,000 in Channel Tunnel

Around 2,000 passengers were trapped in the Channel Tunnel overnight as four Eurostar trains broke down amid freezing temperatures that have brought travel chaos to Britain. More here.

Wonk wonk wonk wooooooooooooooooooooonk. So much for global warming, oh no wait, now it’s just “climate change”. LOL! Global Warmers are such gullible dupes and liars.

On Baptism and It’s Alleged Necessity for Salvation: Is Baptism Necessary For Salvation?

November 9, 2009 Leave a comment

This post can also be reached at aboutbaptism.tk or onbaptism.tk

Jesus turned and looked at his disciples, he rebuked Peter. “Get behind me, Satan!” he said. “You do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.” Then he called the crowd to him along with his disciples and said: “If anyone would come after me, he must deny himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will lose it, but whoever loses his life for me and for the gospel will save it. (Mark 8:35)

What is the gospel? Is it, “accept Jesus into your heart and be baptized with water for the forgiveness of sins”?

Many deceivers have gone out into the world to mislead people about salvation, either on purpose or by accident. Here I show all the verses that are used most to teach the heresy that baptism is what saves a person or what is necessary to.

One heretical Lutheran church deceptively says,

“Holy Baptism, water applied in the Name of the Triune God according to Jesus’ institution (Matthew 28:19), truly saves (1 Peter 3:21), causes one to be born again (John 3:5; Titus 3:5)”

Notice they don’t quote the verses? On their page they don’t so so, all you have to do is search for the above quote and see that. If baptism is so important for salvation, why don’t they quote the verses? I will:

“and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge[a] of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Peter 3:21)

Notice it doesn’t say “baptism saves you” as these liars try to make it appear? It says, “this water symbolizes baptism“. How did they “miss” that word? And notice they didn’t reference the verses that came before that? Why not? It’s because it showed that this verse wasn’t talking about being saved by water. The verse, in context clearly shows that:

“For Christ died for sins once for all, the righteous [man died] for the unrighteous, to bring you to God. He was put to death in the body but made alive by the Spirit, through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, and this water symbolizes baptism” (1 Peter 3:18-21).

Notice that this passage, 1 Peter 3:18-21, is talking about Christ’s death to save us,  and his preaching to SPIRITS in Hell? Can spirits be baptized? No, because water is material and water doesn’t atone for sin, Christ taking God’s anger upon himself for the sins of those he came to save is what atoned for it, not having water sprinkled on you or going under it. And how was Noah saved or any of the Christians who lived before John the Baptist of Christ was born? Noah didn’t immerse himself in water nor did any of his family according to Scripture, they avoided the rain and flood by getting in the ark, which symbolized Christ’s body. The ark shielded them from the water and kept them from going into it. So not only does that negate the claim that you must go under water to be saved, it negates the claim that you have to be baptized at all to be saved. Just like Peter said, it’s symbolic. None of those before John the Baptism came needed baptism, so why would it would be needed when Christ was born?

More obviously symbolic language concerning baptism:

“for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.” (Galatians 3:27)

When a person is baptized do they suddenly have the body of Jesus on them like clothing?

That Lutheran church also quotes Matthew 28:19, which says,

“Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”

Does that say baptism saves? No. If it did and was required, then God, speaking through the apostle Paul would not have said,

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” (1 Corinthians 1:17).

Another verse they used is,

“I tell you the truth, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit.” (John 3:5)

Would this church like to explain how you can be “born of water”? If they can’t, why do they claim it’s talking about baptism? Again they fail to accept that Jesus didn’t always speak literally. Water symbolizes God’s word:

Just three chapters later after John 3:5, Jesus said,

“The Spirit gives life; the flesh counts for nothing. The words I have spoken to you are spirit and they are life.” (John 6:63)

And what came before John 3:5?:

“For the one whom God has sent speaks the words of God, for God gives the Spirit without limit.” (John 3:34)

So, the Lutherans took God’s WORD out of context again. And here is where God make it clear that water represents his word:

“He sends his word and melts them; he stirs up his breezes, and the waters flow.” (Psalm 147:18)

The words of a man’s mouth are deep waters, but the fountain of wisdom is a bubbling brook.” (Proverbs 18:4)

“Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless.” (Ephesians 5:25-27)

Does God literally want husbands to take pages from the Bible or pieces of paper with verses on it and to rub them against their wives? Obviously not. The Bible also symbolizes Christ as the future husband of the of church, and once as the husband of Israel, which represent the true church.

“Go into all the world and preach the good news to all creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.” (Mark 16:15-16)

Ironically this verse is used by those who believe in baptism as one of two key verses that are evidence that we must be baptized to be saved. But notice that the second half of what Jesus said leaves out baptism as being a requirement. I imagine however that it could be argued that Jesus was merely emphasizing the importance of faith, and that it’s more important that baptism, because baptism alone is useless, however that’s not the only verse on baptism as I’ve shown here. Furthermore, Jesus did not say even in this passage that baptism is necessary to be saved, anymore than Jesus said, “Unless you obey God’s Law you cannot be saved” which many false Christians of all types teach, except Calvinists types (which is twisted from the verse, “Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven.” (Matthew 7:21). Ironically, many Lutherans realize that that verse isn’t teaching that you can be saved by obeying God’s laws or doing good deeds, and realize that Jesus was saying that obedience is evidence that you have been saved, why then do they fail to see that baptism is also evidence, especially when they quote 1 Peter 3:21, which again, says, “…symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body, but the pledge of a good conscience toward God.” For the person who goes through baptism it is evidence to them that they are saved especially, since they know their own heart, but those judges on the outside, only have their words and behavior to go through, and can’t feel what another person feels.

“Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.”, said by Peter.

Notice that neither Jesus nor Peter did not say “with water”? Notice that Jesus didn’t say, “but whoever is not baptized” let alone, “ but whoever is not baptized with water“? No, the emphasis instead was on faith. For, “without faith it is impossible to please God, because anyone who comes to him must believe that he exists and that he rewards those who earnestly seek him.” (Hebrews 11:6).

The Lutheran liars also reference Titus 3:5, which ironically refutes that baptism is necessary, it says,

“he saved us, not because of righteous things we have done, but because of his mercy. He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit”

First,  where does that verse say, “water” anywhere? And how is “rebirth” a word for “water”? Rebirth is an action, a verb, not an object or a noun. Second: He is talking about the action of the Spirit entirely: it says that the rebirth and renewal is by the Holy Spirit, not, “rebirth by water baptism and renewal by the Holy Spirit“. Third: How in the world did they miss the first part of that verse!?: “he saved us, NOT BECAUSE OF THE RIGHTEOUS THINGS WE HAVE DONE, BUT BECAUSE OF HIS MERCY”. How hard is it to understand “things we have done” unless you are severely spiritually blind to the truth, so blind you can’t figure out how to be saved? Or are there any Lutherans or anyone else who would like to argue that baptism isn’t a “righteous act”? Putting words in God’s mouth is a sin, it’s like adding to his word words which aren’t there.

Another key passage used by those who believe that baptism is necessary is the first verse of this passage:

“Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, ‘I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?’ Jesus replied, ‘Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness.” Then John consented.” (Matthew 3:13-15)

The problem is that Jesus didn’t need to be saved, and that is what baptism is for according to baptism-for-salvation-believers (b.s.b.’s). So then why did Jesus get baptized?: Jesus said, “for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness”; in order for us to be saved someone perfect had to obey all of God’s laws perfectly. If God had commanded God-followers to be baptized, and that seems to be the case since John the Baptism was baptizing many, and even Jesus went to be baptized, then it would make sense that Jesus was fulfilling this law in order to cover any Christians who had failed to be baptized or perhaps, Christians who when being baptized, weren’t having pure thoughts at the time. So, Jesus was fulfilling a law in the place of those he came to save, just as he fulfilled the law of a thanksgiving sacrifice or sacrifices, observing the Passover, and other obsolete Old Testament laws.

Also, it seems as if John the Baptism was saying he wasn’t baptized, if this is the case, how could an unsaved man be baptizing others? And if he had been baptized, and was already saved, why would he need Jesus to baptize him? So it makes no sense that baptism is a requirement for forgiveness/salvation.

If that still doesn’t convince you, here is one verse that should at least make you seriously doubt it:

“For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with words of human wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.” – 1 Corinthians 1:17

In context, Paul was saying that it was wrong for the Corinthians to boast about who baptized them or seek I suppose, to be baptized by a certain person. Someone might argue that that is why Paul said what he did, not because baptism wasn’t necessary to be saved, but, notice Paul did not say, “For Christ did not send me to baptize in my name or anyone elses name…”, he simply implied that it was the gospel that saves unlike baptism. And suppose someone argues that it was “understood” that Paul meant “not baptize in my name or some other mere human”, I believe they would be wrong, because, “God is not the author of confusion”, and I think he would be, if that is what he meant, but did not say it. I believe God is the author of simple, medium, and hard to understand things, but not confusion.

And for whoever believes that water baptism is required for eternal life (including you anti-Trinitarians), even though the Bible never states that it is, why then don’t you believe the Bible when it does state, and emphatically,

“Jesus said to them, ‘I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.’” (John 6:53)?

Why do you accept one part which is not plainly stated, and reject the other that is, and with great emphasis on it being true? If Jesus clearly here is not being literal, why can’t you accept then that neither he nor the his disciples or apostles ever said that you must touch or go under water for eternal life?

And in what verse does it say that Jesus baptized Mary when she cried at the feet of Jesus? Instead he forgave her right after wards, to the anger the Pharisees. And in what verse does it say that Jesus baptized the blind men he healed after they called out to him for sight? What verse says that Jesus while crucified baptized the thief that turned to him who was also crucified? If baptism was necessary for salvation, so much so that even Jesus needed to be baptized, then he condemned to eternal death those he forgave without baptizing them. So then the people who teach that baptism are necessary are not healed of their sins, but still blind and off to the side of the path of life.

The gospel is:

“How beautiful on the mountains are the feet of those who bring good news, who proclaim peace, who bring good tidings, who proclaim salvation, who say to Zion, ‘Your God reigns!’” (Isaiah 52:7)

“Jesus returned to Galilee in the power of the Spirit, and news about him spread through the whole countryside. He taught in their synagogues, and everyone praised him. He went to Nazareth, where he had been brought up, and on the Sabbath day he went into the synagogue, as was his custom. And he stood up to read. The scroll of the prophet Isaiah was handed to him. Unrolling it, he found the place where it is written:

”The Spirit of the Lord is on me,because he has anointed me to preach good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim freedom for the prisoners and recovery of sight for the blind, to release the oppressed, to proclaim the year of the Lord’s favor.’” (Luke 4:14-19/Isaiah 61:1-2)

“Like cold water to a weary soul is good news from a distant land.”
Proverbs 25:25

Does the Bible Teach Predestination Or That Man’s Will Controls His Destiny?

November 9, 2009 Leave a comment

According to the Bible, God controls all things, and indirectly controls our will through our emotions (heart). But since he does not directly control our will, we are still responsible for our emotions. It’s like when you get an animal to move in the direction you want by leading it with food.

“The king’s heart is in the hand of Yahweh; he directs it like a watercourse wherever he pleases.” – Proverbs 21:1

“For the Scripture says to Pharaoh: ‘I raised you up for this very purpose, that I might display my power in you and that my name might be proclaimed in all the earth.’

Therefore God has mercy on whom he wants to have mercy, and he hardens whom he wants to harden. One of you might say to me:

‘Then why does God still blame us? For who [can] resist his will?’

But who are you, O man, to talk back to God? Shall what is formed say to him who formed it, ‘Why did you make me like this?’ Does not the potter have the right to make out of the same lump of clay some pottery for noble purposes and some for common use?” – Romans 9:17-21

When the Pagan Romans began mass murdering the Christians of Rome, and later when these Pagans started becoming Catholic making a pagan Christianity, they began to dominate the world, at what little true Christians were left they tried to kill too. I’m not saying that they knew who the true Christians were, but that because of their ignorance, or misundertanding, and Satan’s influence of their heart (God controls the heart of Satan), they would end up killing Christians who were truly forgiven by God. This went on for hundreds of years, and whether or not there were any true Christians left, I don’t know, or whether over the years there would be some Catholics, who when they read the Bible, become a true Christian, I don’t know, because for hundreds of years there is no record of any Christian who wasn’t a heretic. Even Martin Luther, when he understood the Bible more correctly, even he did not seem to be forgiven, and I say this because he thought that you must be baptized to be forgiven, which is what people who don’t understand the Bible correctly on the subject of salvation tend to believe, or always believe. People who believe you must be baptized to be forgiven also usually believe you must earn your salvation/forgiveness, and according to the Bible, no one can earn salvation, and those who try are only angering God more, because God requires perfect obedience.

“In regard to baptism, [Luther] taught that it brought justification only when conjoined with [faith in God], but that it contained the foundation of salvation even for those who might later fall.” – http://www.tlogical.net/bioluther.htm

In other words he thought that belief in the Bible being God’s word, and that God existed and had the power to save and could save, combined with being baptised, would save you, and that even if you later lost faith in these things, that baptism somehow kept you forgiven of your sins.

Quotes:

“Further, we [Lutherans] say that we are not so much concerned to know whether the person baptized believes or not; for on that account Baptism does not become invalid…

Further, we say that we are not so much concerned to know whether the person baptized believes or not; for on that account Baptism does NOT become invalid…” – The Large Catechism (Infant Baptism), Martin Luther

About John Calvin:

“Calvin taught two sacraments: baptism and the Lord’s supper. He differed from sacramentalists [like Luther] who believed that the sacraments were a means of receiving justifying grace. Rather, they are the badges, or marks, of Christian profession, testifying to God’s grace.” – http://www.theopedia.com/John_Calvin

Another biography of Calvin: http://www.tlogical.net/biocalvin.htm

Calvinism is the teaching that (though we all start out sinless) that we sin and become more sinful from then on, becoming more and more addicted to disobeying God and hardened against the truth, and that we can’t break free from this unless God changes our heart and enables us to understand how to truly be forgiven of our sins (the key being that we must trust that Jesus obeyed God’s laws perfectly in our place, that Jesus suffered and died for all of our past and future sins, including the sin of disbelief in God or rejecting him in anger – and rejecting him is always an act of anger, and trusting that you are forgiven forever and will never end up in Hell or be punished forever in any way then.)

Calvin did not say exactly those things as I said them, but he did in his own way, and it’s because of the Bible, and God’s work through him, that there are many true Christians today.

Martin Luther, the German Refonner, was born at Eisleben (23 m w. of Halle) Nov. 10, 1483, and died there Feb. 18, 1546. His father, Hans, was a miner, formerly living at Mohra, while his mother, Margarete (nee Ziegler), came from a family of the middle clans. …

Joh Calvin’s Teachings

Calvin’s teaching’s are:

1) That humanity is totally morally corrupted. Due to the Fall, the original relationship that Adam and Eve enjoyed with God was severed by sin. This affected the entire human race, corrupting the heart, mind, and will of every person born.

In other words he meant that no human whom God has not forgiven and whose heart he has not changed, is considered good by God (no one can feel love for God till God changes their heart, so any attempt to obey God will always fall short of being pure/good). That is a Biblical teaching:

“All have turned aside, they have together become corrupt; there is no one who does good, not even one.” – Psalm 14:3

Now whether or not Calvin needed to say, “Totally” or “Completely” corrupt, I don’t know, since it seems to mean that a person if unforgiven can’t do anything right at all, but the Bible doesn’t teach that. I don’t think most Christians, even Calvinists, believe that a person if not saved/forgiven, can’t do anything right, but we believe that the unsaved/unforgiven will always fail by not loving God when they obey him, like a child who obeys a parent, but hates the parent.

Psalm 53:2-4 (New International Version)

“God looks down from heaven on the sons of men
to see if there are any who understand,
ny who seek God:
Everyone has turned away,
they have together become corrupt;
there is no one who does good,
not even one.
Will the evildoers never learn—
those who devour my people as men eat bread
and who do not call on God?”
Psalm 53:2-4

“Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered.
“No one is good—except God alone.”
Luke 18:18-20

Jesus didn’t mean that he wasn’t good, he was speaking in a riddle, saying that he was God, and that God is the source of moral perfection, and is really the only one who is good because he does not need anyone to keep him good, but is by nature good.

“You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous man, though for a good man someone might possibly dare to die. But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.” – Romans 5:6-8

2) Calvin taught “unconditional election”. That is the teaching that God chose those whom he was pleased to bring to a knowledge of himself, not based upon any merit shown by the object of his grace and not based upon foreseen faith (especially a mere decisional faith). God has elected, based solely upon the counsel of his own will, some for glory and others for damnation. This is based on various verses, including these ones:

[the children of the Jewish Christian Rebekah] had one and the same father, our father Isaac. Yet, before the twins were born or had done anything good or bad—in order that God’s purpose in election might stand: not by works but by him who calls—she was told, “The older will serve the younger.” Just as it is written: “Jacob I loved, but Esau I hated.” What then shall we say? Is God unjust? Not at all! For he says to Moses, “I will have mercy on whom I have mercy, and I will have compassion on whom I have compassion.” It does not, therefore, depend on man’s desire or effort, but on God’s mercy. – Romans 9:10-16

3) Calvin taught “limited atonement” which is the doctrine/teaching that Jesus only died for all the sins of a limited number of people, and not every human ever born.

This is based on the verses which teach that some will go to Hell, and suffer for their sins. If Jesus had died for the sins of all, then then it wouldn’t make sense for anyone to suffer for them, because Jesus already did so God would not get angry again after having already satisfied his justice. For God to punish someone for what Jesus already suffered for, would be unjust and would mean that Jesus suffered for no logical reason, since God knowsthe future and so did Jesus, so then why would Jesus suffer for someone who wouldn’t need it? It’s unbelievable. Here is a verse which shows that Jesus did not obey God/suffer/die for everyone:

“Not everyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ will enter the kingdom of heaven, but only he who does the will of my Father who is in heaven [which are the true Christians whoses hearts God changed]. Many will say to me on that day, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, and in your name drive out demons and perform many miracles?’ Then I will tell them plainly, ‘I never knew you. Away from me, you evildoers!’” – Matthew 7:21-23 and,

“They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’ He will reply, ‘I tell you the truth, whatever you did not do for one of the [most lowly of those in need], you did not do for me.’ Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.” – Matthew 25:44-46 and,

“there were also false prophets among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you. They will secretly introduce destructive heresies, even denying the sovereign Lord who bought them—bringing swift destruction on themselves. Many will follow their shameful ways and will bring the way of truth into disrepute. In their greed these teachers will exploit you with stories they have made up. Their condemnation has long been hanging over them, and their destruction has not been sleeping. For if God did not spare angels when they sinned, but sent them to hell,[a] putting them into gloomy dungeons to be held for judgment; 5if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people… if this is so, then the Lord knows how to rescue godly men from trials and to hold the unrighteous for the day of judgment, while continuing their punishment.” – 2 Peter 2:1-9

4) Calvin taught “irresistible grace” which is the teaching that:

a) God’s love for a person, and

b) the Holy Spirit allowing them to understand the knowledge given to them of how to be forgiven – knowledge given to them by someone preaching to them – and

c) the Spirit changing their heart to be sorrowful and regret disobeying God, and

d) the Spirit causing them to decide to stop disobeying God (which is called repenting of sin), and

e) the Spirit causing that person to call out to God for forgiveness with

d) trust that Jesus suffered and died for all their sins and that they have eternal life.

I don’t know if it also means that a person will from then on obey God throughout their life and forever, but that’s what will happen. It’s also the teaching that a person will be unable to not be able to resist God’s changing their heart and mind to do these things, but can only be saved once God starts and continues to change them.

5) Calvin also taught “perseverance of the saints”, which is teaching that those “called” by God to come to him and be saved, and justified by Christ’s obedience and sacrifice, will be permanently exalted in status above those who are condemned, will be beautified, and that their bodies will be made immortal.

The Bible refers to “saints” as anyone whom God loves, it’s not what Catholics twisted it to mean, which is a “a miracle-worker”.

So these five things are what Calvin taught, and what he considered the most important things to know in order for a person to be saved, not lose faith and to an obedient life to God. Because if we have no belief that God will save us from our addiction to sin, from sinning, from pain and death, if we believe that we can defeat God’s will, and that we will be treated no different from those God does not love, whom he has not forgiven, then how can we behave and think no differently from them, from those going to Hell? Without trust in God’s abiity to save and keep his promises, we will fail.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 54 other followers