TGhe Charlie Kirk Effect

 A lefty recently described to me the Charlie Kirk reactoion on the right as "hayateria."  What is it about the left that theyu think they know why people o the right do what we do?  they think they can read trump's mind, and of course it's always something sleazy like he's just looking for some kind of political advantage.  None of us are sincere at all according to them, based on nothing whatever, just their own ideologically cramped definitions of everything.   

The Charlie Kirk phenomenon is something truly unusual and unexpected, no hysteria.  A lot of us have been amazed to find out how deeply it afected us, all of us from those who hardly knew him or much about him to thosre who knew him well,  all have been surprised at the depth of the feeling that followed his death.   And the changes in people, the great numbers who started reassing differently because of hi, who started going to church, who made resolutions to live a better life, or even just some of us who realized we can't let thie politilcal situation continue unchallenged as we so often do,, we have to do SOMETHING, maybe even start a fight with a enightbor, not that a fight is what we have in mind at first, we just don't want to keep covering up our politilcal opinions for the ssake of peace and qujiet because all that means is that the left goes on acting on their violent murderous slanderous delusions without resistance.

Political Mayhem

 The pundit ith the phd offers her opinion that the conditions do not apply for applying the insurrection act as Trump wants to do, since she of course knows SO much better than Trump or anybody else whether they apply or not, he and all his advosors just a bunch of fools.    We aren't going to hear anything different from this from the left on this subject and since just about all anyone hears comes from the left on any subject whatever, thanks to the media blackout against all conservative voices, her opinion, utterly illegitimate as it is, is going to prevail in the public mind.

Looks to me like the conditios are right for it, and surely y opinion counts too in this weird  atmosphere.

According to Mark Levin the Insurrection Act has been used by quite a few Presidents starting with Thomas Jerrfrson, and Trump's use of it would be in the same kind of situation, riotoing that is not being handled by the local authorities.  Handled effectively.  So that mobs are running wild beating people up and burning things down and notghing is stopping them.  LOokis like a situation calling for federal intervention to me.  If the lady above mentioned prevails, the city will just burn to the ground while the governors and majors sayin  say no it's all just a protest within bounds and they are handling just fine thank you ver much.   We can see from our own news sources that's a lie, but of focoudlre the Left only sees thwhat the dominant media tell them, all leftiwing propaganda.   Rachel Maddow had on the Govetrnor of Ordgon reently who said there is no need for any help from the governmetn while we on the right had been hearing for some time about how it was out of control, wven hearing it from Portland residents who want Trump to intervenee.  But nowo, Maddow just let the governor's lies prevail.   Of course.  Why is sometimes hard to fathom.  They WNT  the city to burn to the ground?  Sure seems that way.

For a long time I've believed it should be possible to talk through the differences between right and left, even though it  comes to rancoorous shouting matches and loss of freidships if necessary, because I'm so aware of how little the let knows about all the things we know.  They think it's equal on bitoth sides but it isn't.  They are in the dark about just about all of it because they are fed lies they don't bother to investigate.  even when they are pointed out to them they sometimes just blow them off, somethig i discovered recently which rather flummoxed me.  

For instance, although the poit was made that the image of Trump peurveyed b the media that he had mocked a man for  his disability was disproved by the display of many other situation sin which he'd mocked others in eaxactlyu the same way who weren't disabled, the facct that this exposed the media manipulation to create a false impession of trump mattered not at all to some people.  It proves beyond a doubt that Trump was not mocking a man for his disabilitry, whioch is what the whole thing was about but golly gosh, they don't care because they don't like the meway Trup did th emocking, no matter who was the target of it.  So the main point is just buried under a pile of  stupid irrelevancies.  It matters not what what Maryl Streep said at the Acadmy aards a few years ago was false, matters not one whit, matters not at all that the media lie to create a false impression of Trump, matters not at all, because  they can glaean a nasty inpresion of him anyway from the truth just as well as the faslehood.   

This sort of mental muddling could drive me to ...  I dunno, a heart attack maybe.  I don't know how anyoe can uncritically think this way.  I don't.    

Oh and  it's supposed to be the definitive answer to those of us who have reason to think sone of the protests we hear about  have been organized and paid for, by point ing out that ordinary people join in such protests and THEY don't get paid.  Again, what is the matter with people's minds these days?  WHAT IS THE MATTER?  

I keep feeling I need to explain the truth about the above two examples for the benefit of those whose minds are so muddled but I just can't  get myself to do it.

Golly gosh, Trump is just a dictator and a fascist and a Nazi and a white supremacist and and and and  so are all we who voted for him, tnhat that's all there is to that I guess.  That in fact he is acting as President according to the Constittuional definition of his responsibilities is buried under a mountsinan of Trump Derangement Syndrome,  all emotion, not reasonableness anywhere.

Oh, and I was also assured that although it may not be clear whether I would fight for the right of a leftist to speak his mind, certainly they on the left would fight for my right.  About my defending the leftist, I guess I'd have to be in the situatio because soe of that jthey say is nothing short of treasonalous in my mind.  But anyway, as for their assurance that they would defend my right, given the experience we on the right have had over the last ten years and more of being cancelled on social media I'm not so sure they know what they are talkintg about.  For one thing they don't even know we hav been experiencing such a thing as that rampant cancellation.  I guesss we're all just folo.s again, just wrought up hallucinators or whatever to think such things are happening to us.  I was salogythmically cut off from an audience years ago but that must be my imagination, you know ho w things can get all confused on the iterenet and so on, and my two first posts were unceremoniously delectted from Facebook overniight and that too was just not believed.   I'd put up those posts as a test and my suspicion was correct that Facebook wasn't going to tolerate my view of whatever it was, maybe the COVID treatment wars or somethig ike that?   One lefty did inform tme that I shoudl understand that misinformation could hurt people and that's why some posts are delected.  Golly godsh ya don't say.  Some unknnown uninformed lefty social media employee has the authority to decide whether scientific information is misinofrmation and that's all it takes.  Golly gosh.  What a world we llive in.

Need to add that although treasonaous is the word that came to mind for somethig a letist might say , I shoould have said something inciting violence or even murder, becauase there is certainly a lo tof that I would have a lot of trouble defending their right to say such things.

Later:   Add slander to the ist of speech issues I expect to hear from the left that I would have trouble defending.  There are, after all, categories of speech the framers neer intended to protect with that smendment and the Left is particularly fond of most of that type.  

I also want to add to the bit about being cancelled for " misinformation" which is a black joke if you ask jme,  that not only are those who do the cancelling utterly unqualified to make such decisions, but on a site where ordinary people gather to offer personal onions the idea that any message short of something inciting violence or the like should be censored by the site is out of bounds by traditional American standards.  Of course since they are a business they can put out warnings to one knows what is allowed and what is't, and anyone with undesirable politial opinions can just stay away.  because it is all political tre is no misinformation invovlmved, they jyust don't want to let certain aideas have an audience because they conflict with their own.  Simple.

And I didn't really get said how I used to think it possible and necessary to try to talk things through becteween left and right, even if it had to lead to hard feelings, because it's the only way we have a chance of getting across the necessary information, which otheriwise is censored by the leftist media and social media gatekeepers.   Even if we have to expect some shouting matchjes from time to time eventually surely the actual facts would emerge and both sie s could take them into account.  Seems riht to me still, in the abstract.   but as I go on to say, it probably isn't going to work out that way in reality, as I recently found out.  Not only do we inhabit different universes because they are deprived of information, but they are dug into their information so ddeply they willl say absurd and crazy things to defend it.  I suppose I still hold to some hope discussion , even shouting matches at times, could lead to the truth, but that hope has been getting smaller.

antichrist system lying sigsn and wonders

 Qhile listening to the book, Dominion, How the Christian revolution RemaDE THE woRLD, BY tOM hOLLAND, A FEW MONTHS AGO, i WAS REMINDED OF THE MIRACLES THAT cATHOLIC SAINTS ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ABLE TO SHOW IN ORDER TO QUALIFY FOR  THAT STATUS.  hOLAND DOESN'T SAY UCH ABOUT THE cATHOLIC cHURCH AS SUCH, SO WHEN HE MENTIONS THESE SO CALLED SAINTS NOW AND THEN HE APPEARS TO BE THINKING OF THEM SIMPLY AS A cHRISTIAN THING, NOT SPECIFICALLY A cATHOLIC THING, IF HE MAKES ANY DISTINCTION AT ALL.

uNFORTUNATELY MY MMEMORY IS PRETTY BAD THESE DAYS AND i DON'T REMEMBER THE SPECFIC IDEA THAT LED KME IN THIS DIRECTION, BUT IT OCURRED TO ME THAT THE MIRALCES PERFORMED BY THESE "SAINTS" ARE PROBABLY WHAT wATCHMAN nEE IN HIS GOOK thE lATENT pOWER OF THE sOUL, IDENTIFIES AS sOUL pOWER, RATER THAN GENUINE MIRACLES THAT COME FROM goD.  iT WAS SOME WAY THEY WERE DESCRIBED IN hOLLAND'S BOOK THAT MADE ME THINK ALONG THESE LINES, AND THAT IS UNFORTUNATELY THE THING i CAN'T REMEMBER. tHIS KIND OF PROBLEM IS PARTICULARLY HARD FOR ME BECAUSE i CAN'T SEE TO JUST GO TO THE BOOK ITSELF AND LOOK UP REMFERENCES TO THE IRACLES OF SAINTS.   

i'VE LISTENED TO nEE'S BOOKS, THE lATENT pOWER OF THE sOUL    drat, the caps lock was on, sorry.    and The Release of the Spirit, at least twice since then.  These are hard lessons to understand, let alone learn to live by, and my memory problems make ammany listenings necessary anyway.    Nee's books, particularly the oe about soul power, evoke the Hindu category of Siddhis, or attainments or powers that some adepts can reach.  Neew says soul powers are cultivated in all the religious practices that aim to suppress the body and liberate the soul, which include asceticisms and medictations and varieties of both.  The siddhis can be released by those who practice these things most energetically I gather.  

I just ow looked up Siddhis on You Tube and found a program called Enlightenment Today where a man explains the siddhis, and they are very much what the Catholic saints could do.

I should have mentionsd before that I just finished another audible book, They FLew, by historian Carlos Eire, which is his rather obsessive puruist of information about the particularly  particular power or siddhi of levittion.  That is one of the siddhis mentioned by the guy in the video I just saw.  For some reason it caught Eire's interest and most of his book focuses on reports of this particular power as practiced by Catholic mystics mostly in the sixteenth ad seventteenth centuries.   Bilocation is another such power they  some of them also exhibited though more rarely.  Levitation was fairly common it turns out, and in fact that one is often used as the miracle that qualifies a mystic for sainthood according to the Catholic system.  

Nee doesn't mention Levitation for some reason, which is rfrustrating at this point, but he oes mention bilocation or the phenomenon of a person's being in two places at the same time, where he or she is able to interact with people in both places, and with the physical environment.  Sometimes the person is in a trance at the original location, but in some accounts is conscious in both places.

Eire's book has some very specific descriptions of levitation events.  The body seems to be utterly insaensate during the event, sometimes cdescribed as light as a feather so that it could be blown around easily by people nearby, but also nearly impossible to pull back to earth, even when many people exerted themselves in the effort.   Eire mentions that often these people who levitated  also had other abilities such as telephaathy or the ability to read the minds of other people, bilocation, already mentioned,  the ability to see hear and feel thihjngs at a distance, the ability to know future events and so aon.  All these things are mentioned by the Enlightenment guy in the previous ly mentioned video.   So it is certainly fair to cal all these things Siddhis though that is a Hindu ter for them, and Nee's term is Soul Powers.

It is very clear in Eire's accounts that these powers are released by the extreme ascetic practices engaged in by these Catholic mytics, often extreme fasting or food deprivtion, the wearing of hari shirts, which are garmed made of goat's hair that are veryu  irritating to the skin, metal objects wornsn next to the body where they can cause pain , chains on the body, sleeping on hard surfaces, in some cases on a wooden cross without softening materials.   As Nee says, suppresing the body is one of the ways the soul powers can be released and although that doesn't seem to be at all the aim of these pracitces in the Catholic context, clearly it is the method that does lead to their release.  The mystics are seeking deeper experiences of God, not powers of any kind.  THere are some frauds, which Eire' also reports, but most of them sounds quite legitimate.    They are trying to mortify the flesh and its sins to become worthy to be in God's preence or some such idea.  But in so doing they are inadvertently releasing allthes soul powers that Nee says are hidden in the bodies of all human beoiings ever since the Fall of Adam and Eve.

In the Easetn religions where the term siddhis is used, the aim is toward enlightenment, and ascetic practices are apparently prat of that practice, if I understood him correctly,  Unless the asceticism is for the purpose of liberating siddhis, which are not always desired by a particular discipline but are by some.    In themselves they have no particular alue, not in any of the religious contexts, not towsrd enilightenment, or toward closeness to God.  In a sense they could be said to get in the way of those ultimate aims, but in the Eastern context apparently they are vluled as part of the spiritual journey in some of the religious systems.

My interest has been to try to understand what things are of God and what are not, as Nee makes it very clear that the soul powers are definitely not of God and are to be avoided.   So now that I've become convinced that these miracles of the Catholic saints are indeed the same thing as the soul powers and the siddhis Ihave to at least tentatively say they are not of God.  Which in some cAAE  Qhixh in aomw xAWA IA  painful becuase the people are so clearly trying to daraw near to god whom they appear to love genuinely, or at least they love what they think is God and since they are draw to what we know top be genuinely attributes of God I have to say that to that extent they are genuinely seeking God himself.  At that is painful if I have to realize that they are failing mightily in their  aim and only releasing a power of their own souls that does not come from God.I feel very sorry for them.  They are misled by their religion.  Which is how I think of Catholics in general anyway, but it hurts when you see epopel so isincerely trying to find God on all the wrong paths.

Asceticism is already a clue that they are not on the right path as scripture itself tells us that won't accomplish anything wheer in the CHristian life.  Then when it ceoms clear that the so called Virgin Mary has a big part in all these thigns for most of them I ust want to bury my head in d crayy.  How sad.  Mary is way too big a part of many of these people's experiences.  urely the deil is guiding all these things and leading them all to disaster.   

So the very evidences the Roman church uses to determine if a particular mystic deserves sainthood are  actually evidences that they aren't anywhere near the mos basic level of relationship with God.    I noticed over and over that nowhere is the gospel as Protestants understand it mentioned at all in the accounts of these levitating and bilocating mystics.  Jesus is called the redeemer, all too often co redeemer which his mother, oh unholy fact,  but what exactly one does to get recdeemed is not mentioned anywhere.  

It looks to me like these soul powers are probably the Lying Wonders JwuJesus says will be on display at the very end just before He returns.  It's interest ing to me that al lthe things , or I guess I should't say ALL, but many, of the things we are to expence of the very last days are to be seen in the thoudsand year reign of the Catholid Church through the MIddle Ages, the so called Holy Roman Empire.  The Anitchrist, who is the Pope, was revealed when the Bishop of Rome took on the role of Universal Bishop back in the seventh century, though the futurist end times system of teoday says he won't be relevealsed until afte rthe true Church is raptured.  Not so,   He's been in plain sight for over a thousand years, and recognized in may writings by many true Christians outside the Roan arena down the centuries as the Antichrist.  The Reforemers were belated joiners of that group.   

They've disissed the idea that the Pope is the Antichrist and I'm afraid that is a big big isake.  There are other clues to the end times system that have also been fulfilled in the Medieval Catholic CHurch, such as the making of all those martyrs through the Inquisitions, those martyrs we see in the Book of Revelation, and the Lying Signs and wonders too, it seems to me now, as the supposed miracles claimed by the Romean shucrch have been there all along and are not just something to be brought into play at the very end, though perhaps those and all the rest of it wil be an extra intense version of all of it.

Also I realized thathe Antichrist iais also worshipped.  You'd think maybe that would wait until the end, but if you think about the throng that gatherwed in St Pet'ers square to see the anouncement of the new Pope a couple of moths ago , many praying, using their pagan rosary beands and so on, you have to call that worship.

I cringe when I hear Cathaolis recite the Lord's prayer or the Hail Mary and call those things praying, and I especially cringe when they come to that last line that asks Mary to pray for us sinners, as if she could hear prays by millions of people just as god can, and answer them.  tghe prayer to be prayed for.  It's still a prayer, it's making Mary into God.   I swish I could jolt a few of them out of their delusion.

It's a hard delusion to bereak because so many of them asre such nice people, ice patriotic Americans, kind people etc etc etc.  And they enjoy their community life among their fellow Catholics.  Hard delusion to reak indeed.

But Lord, please save many of them.

Great was the Company of the Preachers

 I wanted to use that as my title for the Kirk memorial but it turned out there were other things I wanted o say.  I use it now just because I like it and it's still more or less true.  That was quite a long line of people who got up that day ad gave some sort of Christian gospel rppresentation, including all the governement people who would normally not say any such thing in public.  Very impressive.  .  

The great company of preachers line is biblical but I always hear it in my ind as sung in the Chorus of Handel's Messiah, referring to the gospel bgoing forth to all the world after His ascension to GOd.    The memorial did give us quite an array of preachers, a great and motley company indeed.  

And that is a sort of revival after all, especially when we take note of the fact that churches allover the country had a surger of attendance, mostly of younger people, in the aftermath of Charlie's murder.  It's fair to call that revival even if it isn't the falling down under the power sort of revival I always hope the Lortd will send us.  The increased churche attendance included increased baptisms too and those don't occur iunless the people make a credible profession of faith in Christ, so let's call it revival and hope it grows.

Neverthleess the country is under seige ore and more too.  We need God to flood the land with revival to give us the needed strength to deal with the corruptions and sheer evil that have been growing for decades now, and not letting up, even intensifying after Charlie's death.   All public people on the right are getting death tghreats and it's pretty scary.   Christians have nothing to fear in death but it's hard not to feel fear anyway even if you are willing to face it knowing it will only take you into the presence of the Lord Jesus.    But the country has been overrun with murderous messages fruom what you would have thought were just ordinary people.  People on the lieberal side who are quite willing to say that anyone they disagree with is a legititmate target for murder.  One study had it fifty person, even more, who think it's just fine to furder Trump or Elon Musk.  I can hardlyu believe the country has come to such a state.

Of course once we'd abandoned all reference to God and the Bible in schools on a bogus reinterpration of the first amendment, and building on that allowed laws to be passed that are in direct violation of God's Moral Law, from granting freedom of speech to pornography, to legitimaizing gay marriage, sancioning the murder of jhyjuman beings in the womb and so on, trearing down the Ten Commandments from public places  what could we expect.  God is judging us for all that.  

You can kind of track how each of the secdon d table of the ten commandments has been officially violated over the last vfew dewcades, atarting with adultery or sexual freedom, and legalizing porn, destroyhing marriage with the ridiculous idea that there's any reason for homosexuals to marry, even to murdewring babies and now political opponents, even more or less legalizing setealing as consequances have been lifted in blue states and the police have been hindered from doing heir jobs.  Lying or course is always in fashiong abut the Left does seem to havea taken it to a new level, even a specialized art form that is fvery effective at deceieving people who aren't paying much attention to the political world.

I do see in Matthew 24 That Jesus described two different kinds of second comings for Jesus, which of course makes the Rapture idea viable, the one that could come at any moment, while the other is clearly described as folling after the great tribultion.  Both descriptions can't be true of the same event, either we won't know at all or we'll expect it after the tribultion.  So I guess it could happen any day and I of course would like it to happen right now.  Excpet for the fact taht I do know a lot of people who aren't believers yet and I hate the idea that they will have to stay behgind and go through the tribultion whehere they will need extraordinary courage to hold onto their salvation in the face of seductive offers to be safe from harm by selling their soulds to the antichrist.

So we're hapving a lot of powerful good going on in the country, and a lot of powerful bad at the same time.

More on the memorial service and hopes for revival

 Many, I haven't heard how many but many, people inspired by Charlie Kirk and moved by his murder, went to church the weeked afer.  It does seem like a revival and I hope it is but it's hard to tell at this point.  They would have been moved by an appreciation of Charlie's life and talks and sadness and anger at hjis death.  That's impressive because there were so many who were touched in that way, nearly a hundred thousand showing up for the memorial and some say a hundred million who tuned in to it in one way or another.  That's a lot of people affected by this one young man.  He had quite a reach.  In death it turns out he was a lot bigger a person than a lot of us had any idea.  A good man, a true Christian and a dedicated worker for the good of America.  

But as I said in my first post on the memorial, that isn't enough for a true revival.  Emotionas and intellectual understanding and appreciation aren't Christian conversion.  

Many may continue anyway.  I hope so.   Eventually they may become converted and be true Christians.  But moved only by iind or emotion they aren't yet that.   Unfortuately I think many who spoke about their friendship with Charlie and they own appreciation of CHristian values as if they themselves were also Christians just aren;t.  So often people think Christian conversion is a merely mental thing, and if you stick with it that is evidence enough that it is real.  But often it's just like belonging to a clugb where you feel at home and no real conversion has taken place.

Revival would make true converts.  Christian conversion is a supernatural thing, it is the new birth by which we become indwelt by the Holy Spirit.  This comes about when we believe what wwe are taught to believe about Jewsus' death for us on the cross, to pay for our sincs so that we don't have to go to Hell for them.  And believe that He rose from the dead.  These must be firmly embraced beliefs.  And while there isn't always a clear sign that someone has been born again a change in the life is the usual way it is recognized.  I instantly lost my foul mouth for instance.  Oh it's coe back now and then much later on under the influence of bad copany, but I've lost it again and it never took hold as it once had hold of me.  And I was enraptured with the things of God, the Bible, Christian books and so on.  Most of my worldly interests just dropped away.   And most of those are still gone and never came back, though I've gone too far into worldly things of a different sort from time to time and had to give those ustp too.  I'm actually regretting all the years I spent pursuing the creation evolution debate.    I think by getting so involved in that I lost a lot of early connectio with God and all those lovely spiritual experiences I had in the early days may never retrun.  It made me terribly sad just last night as I was listening again to Tozer's the Pursuit of God to realize how long it has been since I felt His presence the way I used to.

Speaking of presence,  His presence that is, some said they felt it at the memorial.  Humming like a tuning fok fork someone said.  Harir stood on eand another said.  Could feel the prayers being said, actually feel them.    

It was that sort of remark that reminded me of Watchman Nee's book The Latent Power of the Soul, because I don't think those things are how the HOly SPirit is felt.  I may be srong but I think usually those things are how what Nee calls soul power is felt, how a gigantic crowed of people all vfocusing their attention in one way projejhcts a pwoer not of the Spirit ofbut of the human soul or personality that can actually be fewlt and actually have effects on people at the receievinbg receiving end of it.    Concentrated emotion, repeated musical phrases and so on, are not the Spirit but of the soul and can project a lot of power that can be felt.  

I can't be absolutely sure there wasn't some of the HOly Spirit there in power , all I can say is it doesn't seem likely to me.  The conditions weren't present for Him to come.  The conditions that were present were for the manifestation of a lot of emotion and that is a completely different thing.

But Christian conversion is supernatural, it is spiritual.  Emotion may cewrtainly be a big part of it but the change itself is spiritualand it wouldn't be expressed by the sort of emotion that was felt for Charlie Kirk, perfectly appropriate in that memorital service, what everyone was there for, God would be the subject of it all and the diifference should have been obvious.

In saying these things I'm not criticizing the memorial serive.  I think it was excellent as a memorial service.  I'm suust saying that if we cwant revival to come out of all this something more needs to happen and it hasn't happened yet.

I would love to see that more come about but I don't see where it is ging to come from yet.  

Later:  When I sais d I thought the memorial service was xcellent as a tribute to Charlie Kirk I left outr y one main complaint, which is that repetitive music phrases, singing chorsuses over and over again, is a tactic used to drum up emotion, which some apparently think is the Holy Spirit or will bring the Holy Spirit and I want to be emphatically clear that that is not the case.  You do not brig the Holy Spiorit that way.  You may bring some kind of effect you take for the Holy spirit but it is either the effect of human personalities all focused on one thing which can actually project a power of its own, or in some cases the evil spirits can mannifest from such huponotizing music.   Humns are one thing, soothing mesmerizing music is quie something else, evn if the words seem to uplift God or Christ.   There was way too much of that at the memorial.   If we cant revival we aren't going to get it that way and it would be a big mistake to let ourselves be deceived into takeing such a counterfeit for the real thing.

Charlie Kirk Memorial: Revival, Promise and Pitfalls

qell, again, same as when I was praying for Charlie right after hearing he'd been shot, I found myslef  listening to the Memorial serice on Sunday and having the "wrong" reaction which distressed me greatly.  Everythibg else seemed to be deeply moved by the worship before the program began, and by the whole event for that matter.  Many said they felt the Holy Spirit there and just wahat a wonderful memorial it was for Charlie and what a wonderful expressio of Christianity for the world to see.   

I agree it was avery impressive event and a great memorial service overall for Charlie, very well put together, well thought out, and the speeches were all inspiring in their own way.  The gospel was preached in almost every speech and that was wonderfl.  The worship usic was high calibre, very progressional, emotionally moving, the voices of the singers beautiful and powerful.  I understood only a few days later that these were the top tirer of Christian performaers in the music culture, hugely talented.  I only knew one name among them.  I'm juist not into pop style worship music, though I admit that some of the songs are very nice.  

But I kept feeling I should be more moved and involved in all this, shoultn' I?  Why isn't this affecting me the way it is affecting everyone else>  I do appreciate the speeches, the preaching of tthe gospel by such a disparate group of people, all that , but it's just not moving me at all.  And I assume that's my afault.  Lord, what's wrong with me.  All these wonderful people are finding YOu there in that huge stadium, what's  wrong with me?  If I wre  actually there would I have a differeing  reaction?  

It was wonderfully organized.  The Turing Point team pulled off a program that seemed to flow just about seamlessly, having had only a short while to accomplish it.  Quite a feat I think.  They are a well organized group of people and hard workers and I'm oimpressed.  And I'm certainly not doubting the importance of the gospel's being so front and cetnter from beginning to eld.  But shouldn't I be happier about all that?  hat is the matter with me?

I'd listening to the Charlie Kirk show every evening since his murder allnd that was very inpspiring.  They had some great conversations with people who knew Charlie well, good stuff.  They are a deply committed Christian group of people, that comes across clearly.  I should have been happy with the memorial service.  I'd been saying how I think Charlie's death could be the impetus for a great revival, and for the most part I haven't lost that idea.  I still think it will be a vrevival to some extent but I'm not sure to what extent.  It seemed to many that the memorial was jut the beginning of something big as far as spreading the gospel through the culture.  I hope it is.  But I wasn't feeling it as I thought I should during the memorial.

Well, nobody wants to be a party pooper.  It took me a few days to consolidate the impressions that put a damper fo r me on the revival claims, that I kept dismissing at the time and for a couple days safterward.  It took a while to begin to take them seriously and think about what they mean.

Not that I didn't think these things at the time, I just kept teling metyslef no, I must be missing somethig.  But for instance, I thought, Oh no, too much trying to drum up ane n emotional reaction in the audience by the worship music, too much repeating of short lines, too much engagihjng the drowed in the repetitive strinas.  Emotion is not the Holy Spirit.  ANd emotion hcan be very powerful in its own right, can move  croweds of people.  But we want the Holy Spirit, we on't want emotion.  Unfortunately Christians are just not able to appreciate the difference.  It is very easy to confuse emotions that center around God and beautiful things of the ChristiaN FAITH FOR THE WORK OF THE sPIRIT.  

i KEPT FEELING, THE sPIRIT IS OT HERE NO MATTER WHAT THEY ALL ARE SAYING, hE JUST IS NOT.  nOT THE WAY hE COMES IN REVIVAL ANYWAY.  i'M SURE hE'S HERE BECAUSE hE'S ALWAYS WITH hIS PEOPLE, BUT h'ES NOT HERE THE WAY hE COMES IN REVIVAL.tHAT'S THE THOUGHT i KEPT THROWING OUT, TELLING MYSELF THERE'S SOEMEHITNG WRONG WITH ME FOR THINKING THIS WAY.  bUT AFTER A FEW DAYS OF WORKING THGROUGH MY THOUGHTS i'M MORE CONVINCED THAT i WAS RIGHT.  i'M VERY CONVINCED THAT THOSE FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS WERE RIGHT, THAT LACK OF FEELING.i DIDN'T WANT TO THINK IT, i WANTED IT TO BE A POWERFUL REVIVAL EVENT.  iT WAS  CERTAINLY A VENUE FOR THE GOSPEL TO BE PREACHED, BUT IF THE GOSPEL WASN'T CARRIED BY THE hOLY sPIRIT, HOW LONG WILL ITS EFFECTS LAST?

lAST NIGHT i FINALLY GOT AROUBND TO LISTENING AGAIN TO THE BOOK BY wATCHMAN nEE, THE lATENT pOWER OF THE sOUL, IN WHICH HE VERY CAREFULLY  DISCRIMINATES BETWEEN SOUL AND SPIRIT TO MAKE THE MAIN POINT THAT SOUL CAN BE MMADE TO COUNTERFEIT THE WORKING OF THE hOLY spiRIT TO THE DETRIMENT OF THE cHURCH AND THE cHRISTIAN'S SPIRITUAL LIFE.  

There is more I want to write bbut I'm going to stop here and come back to it later.

    Oh no, how long as the caps lock kep been on?  Oh no.  self at the 

Later:

Nees little book is a little strange compared to his wother writings and I'm not sure he's right about his picture of the soul power possessed by Adam and Eve before the Fall.  It just sounds odd to me.  I do thionk he's right that they must have had great powers that were lost, cetrtainly at least strengths that have been lost bit by bit over the millennia at least, geneitc protections for instance.  And I don't necessarily doubt Nee's view of their having powers that seem supernatural by our standards, I just don't see clear evidence of it in the scripture.  He's a lot more spiritually advanced than most Christians, however, do I'm not going to argue with him behoyound saying this much.  

Also, since he's writing in the early part of the twentieth century hgis references to the sciences of parapsychologigy and mesmerism sound very sdated.  ARE dated.  We hear little or nothing of these things today and the terminology is just not  something we would use today.  In the fifties when I was in my teens I got interested in the work of J B Rhine on telepathy and clairvoyance and pscyhokenesis and that sort of things but Nee had written this book some years before Rhine, so that although Rhine is certainly dated today, Nee's references are even more dated.   

Nevertheless I think his general point is likely true, that is, that we do have powers that are not availbe to us in our fallen condition, perhaps hidden in our flesh as he describes it, and only occasionally accessibly to individuals here and there over the millennia since the Fall.  I think the general idea must be right and it accounts for things that are otherwise very hard to explain.  Such as the strange powers described by some Hindu adepts, such as Paramahansa Yogananada.  I read his book when I was on my way to becoming a Christian.  I took a lot of strang sdetraous like that.  Yogananda desdcbribes being able to project your consciosness to great distances and see and hear things there, even manifest  in a body gthat looks like us in order to talk to people who knows us at such distances.   And of course telepathy and seeing things without being transported, and being able to move objects with the mind and those Hindou feat of lying on a bed of nails or walking on hot coals and so on.  When I read that book I had no idea what to think aof aoll that.  It doesn't sound very holy, very worshipful, just strange.   Yogananda's organization which he founded in California is called the Self Realization Fellowship and that's very approrpaite in the litght of Nee's presentation.  It is the Self, or Soul, that is produscing all these strange phenomena and can even produce miraculous seeming things that deceive people into accpeting them as the Holy Spirit.  It is ot the Spirit.

Fallen manm sodoes not have he Spirit.  I'beve heard people in the last few weeks who are certainly reliegious people in a way, often Catholics, who clearly have no idea what the Holy Spirit is because they are not born again, so they impute religious feelings of many sorts to the Spirit.  But you do not have the Holy Spirit unless you are born again, and you aren't born again if you sear like a sailor as one person does, and probably ot if you use the rosary which is a pagan instrument having nothing whatever to do with Christianity, ask Mary to pray for us which they all do in one of their repetitituve rosary recitations.  Nohje of that is compatible with being born agaIN.  i SUPPOSE IT'S POSSIBLE TO GET BORN AGAIN AND STILL HOLD ONTO SOME OF THAT BUT i CAN ONLY SAY POSSIBLE BECAUSE IT SEEMS HIGHLY UNLIKLELY TO ME AND i REALLY DON'T KNOW HOW FAR OFF TRACK YOU CAN GO AND STILL BE BORN AGAIN.

jJust noticed I managed to kick on the caps logk again.  I wish the light were brighter so I'd know when it happenes.

My guess is that the church needs a lot of cleaning up and throwing out of such pagan thigs among other problems before we can have a real Holy Spirit revival.  How I yearn for such a revival, but the Church is in bad cshape.  I'm certainly glad that many seem to be coming to the Lord in the last days since Charlie was murderered, and I'm sure some of that will hold, but I'm worried now that becaue the Church is not wary of  the many subtle counterfiets the devil can pull off, thogugh our soul power and other means, that it could unfortunatley fizzle out way too soon.

Need  Nee advises praying that the Lord will keep us alert to such things, protect us against them, that we need to be very serious about the  armor of God, and the main thing is dying to self.  If we are always carefully putting down the self so that the spirit can take charge we will be better prepared for a real Holy Spirit revival.  TWhich would take the Church to a new level of spiritual power.     And oterhwise the devil will have succeeded in keeping us in his control.

All the religious of the world try to release the soul powers according to Nee, and that certainly makes a lot of sense of what they do with their meditations and ascetic practices, which aim to keep the flesh in subjection so that sould can come forth.    There is no HOly Spirit in thoe relgions and the devil can't work with the Holy Pirit anyway, only the human sould.  That makes sense.

But if we get carried away by emotion, which in itself is no fault of course, but I mean if we get carried away and think it is the Holy Spirit instead, we cannot have true revival, which in most cases begins with a powerful convicion of sin that haaas people crying out for God's forgiveness, or at least that's one way it comes about.  The HOly sSpirit convicts of sin first of all and although we supposedly repetn or say we repetn anyway, it's ooften a very superficial thing.  If it's real then we'lll be born again if we believe the right things, but it still usually needs to be a lot sdeeper than the first conversion repentance.  When the Holy Spirit comes in power He bowls us over, He possesses us, He doesn't just make us emotional, in fact we may not get  emotional at all.  Or it will be a for a differnet reason.

I want Charlie's death to bring us a real revival, but there'as a lot we need to learn for that to happen I think.

Charlie Kirk / THE BLOOD OF THE MARTYRS IS THE SEED OF THE CHURCH

 It was one of the early Church Fathers who lsaid that, I always thought Athanasius but someone recently attributed it to Tertullian so now I'm not sure.  Anywauy I'm more and more convinced that the death of Charlie Kirk is God's plan for something very big both for His Church and for the country, and prhaps the world.

Unless a seed fall to the ground and die, it abideth alone, but if it die it will bear much fruit.  

I think I did a better job o quoting that this time than I did a few posts below.  Yes, I was thinking then that this was probably God's plan, that He took Charlie;s life so that soeme great , very great, fruition of Christianity in this country coul;d come about.

And yes, I am more and more sure of that as time goes on.  I've now heard two others mention that this could be revival, oh that wonderful vreivvial that has eleuded us for decades though so many of us have prayed our hearts out for it.   Yes yes yes, oh may it have come.

That it would take a great sacrifice to bring it about would not have occurred to me, and I think it has taken all of us by surprise.  Those who do think  this is God's plan.  

As I say in my previous post about Charlie Kirk I didn't have much of an idea about him except that he was a young conservative who debated college kids and spoke openly of his cChristian faith, a very nice combination to discover in a young guy so I has happy to know we had him working for our causes.  But what I had NO idea about has only been developing since his death, that he was a much bigger personality than I had any idea.  Recognized as a great man even when he was very young, for instance as destined to be President, reocgnized by many as having that kind of greatness hin him.  I had no idea.  And he was not just the acquaintance of but the close friend of many movers and shakers from the President and Vice President to a whole slew of talk show hosts and politicians and pastors, as well as popular with the thousands of young people he talked to on the college campuses, havingconverted quite a few of them to his political views.  And, it turns out his Christianity as well.  I keep hearing that the churches have been packed since his death with young people, annany of whom had never been to church before.  Some spoke to news people of wanting to change their lives for the better in the model of Charlie, to be better men, hysbands and fathers.   

Some described the scene at the Phoenix Arizona headquarters of Charlie's organization, Turning POInt, as reminiscent of the outpouring of love for Princess diana of Britain when she died, a huge array of teeddy bears and balloons and flowers and messages.   I had NO idea Charlie was that big in our world.

ASome of it hs grown up dsince his death as many have been discovering him who never heard of him before, but still those who did know of him and follow him are a much larger crowd  than I had any idea.  This event to honor him that is planned for Sunday is to be held in a stadium that holds  73 thousand people.  

This seed that has fallen to the ground is one huge expensive seed, a truly great human being who had accomplished a prodigious lot in his short life.  A big man in the ture meaning of the word.  And as a big man whe will be a big seed for a giganitic outpouring, that fruitful result of the death of the seed and the blood of the martyrs.  On a great scale.  Because he was big, so much bigger than I had any idea.

A few days ago I got into looking up the meaning of names, since I like all kinds of symbolism, and I found out that the name Charles means Man, or Manly.  I already knew that the name Kirk is sScottish for Church.  Many and Church.  Wowo, how appropriate for Charlie Kirk.  And then I looked up Eric, because his wife ahds the feminine fversion of that name, Erica, and it means Honoirable Ruler.   I'd already had the idea that she was going to become a big part of the organization now, based on her inspiring speech of Friday night, and then this morning she was voted by the Turning POint staff to be their new CEWO.   They all said she would carry the persona of Charlie as well as his mission more recognizably to the public than any of the other memebers of his staff, and besides, he'd told them that it was his wish that shee succeed him if something like this ever happened.

Wonderful things going on.  We've been sliding father and father into the darkness for soi many years it's been hard to beliee that we could ever get out of it.  But God knows how to do the impossible.  We would never have thought of any of this, but God, God knows hw to do things we can't even deream of.  Things we couldn't descire either?  The death of a great man like Charlie?  We couldn't dream that.  We wouldn't.  Bug God knows what He is doing.   All things work together for good to those who love God and are called according to His purposes.

Praise You Lord, praise You and thank You.  I know it is no time for us to get complacent.  It's time to work harder than ever, pray harder than ever, seek Your will in everythig we do.  Help us to stauy on Track, Lord.00000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000Especially watch over Erica and Turning POInt.

The sad story of Tyler Roninson

 And we don't even know that story yet.   I just know it's sad.  What I have heard is that he comes from a nicew quiety patriotic Mormon family in Utah, Rebublicans who no doubt voted for Trump and if they were familiar with Charlie Kirk no doubt supported him.  Tyler was a straight A student, a kid to make his parents proud, with two brothers who were apparently folliwng in his worthy footsteps.

jUntil sometimehthin radicalized him.  As his family tells us, over the last few years Tyler became radicalized, obviously on the Left, as his messages call Chrlie Kirk a fascist and a hater, typical leftist smeark of anything conservative.    Seomething radicalized him onto the Lerft.  We need to know what that was.   It's going to be a very sad story.

Knowing the little I do about his background I'm now feeling very sorry for him and of course for his familay.  I'm ghoing to be praying for him.  I want him to repent and see that he was wrong, and I want him to be saved.     The death penalty is the only right puishement for ssomeone who committed murder, God Himself says that in Genesis Nine right after the Flood, Whoever takes a human life, by man shall his life be taken.   And should be taken, it's obvious justice.

But when it seems the murderrer ight have been manipulated or seduced int to his evil act out of a rightoeoue family it takes on a differenrt coloration and now I'm hoping here will be time for him to repent and udnerstand the reality and the truth of what he did.    It sounds like before he was radicalized he might have been a good addition to the Turning POint mission, is it too mu

h to pray that he ight still be made somehow to suerve such a role?  Tht's ewhat I'm praying nyay.

Eventually the only right thing is execution, but maybe that could be put off.  IF he repents.  I'm praying for that.

Antichrist Five: Pope Leo Addresses Nations As If H'es King of the WQOrld

 My AleWhich the popes used to be, back in the days of the "Holy Roman Empire" which Voltaire said was neither holy , nor Roman, nor an empirse, which still amuses me.  

But anyway..  On the occasion of a big party thrown for him at the Vatican apparently for his seventieth birthday , on Sunday the fourteenth, he accused natyions who object to the growing illegal immigration problem of inhumaity in trying to keep out the great hordes of "migrants" who have been flooding in.  Of course many of them have been invidted and now the original citizens are getting unhappy about it.   A giant protest in Britain this weekend at the very time Leo was chiding them for usch unkindness.    And he referred to the plight of the poor "migrant" who encounters a "jwall" to keep him out.  Which of course must refer to America.   

But of course the Pope is King of the World, isn't he?  Or course.  He certainly will be that  if he turns out to bw the Final Antichrist during the Great Tribultion of the last days before Jesus' return.  

GHe also chiden Elon Musk for daying to make a lot of money, this trillion dollars he's ben promised by his company Tesla if he meedts certain business goals on behalf of the company.  

One thing we can conclude fro these concerns is that Leo, like Francis before him, is a Marxist.  He has no respedt for soverign national identity and no respect for capitalism.   Just another Leftie out tyo destroy the basic greatness of the West, the prospertiy and freedoms, which, ironaically perhaps, orignated in the Christian vision.  Pope Leo's sorta kinda ries to sound Christianish but it' isn't Christian at all, it's Marxist, it's AntiChristian.  

Well, I'm watching for the moment when this King of the World decides to make a deal with Israel for seven years.  Then I'll know the Seventieth Week of Daniel has just begun ticking and that unimaginable horrors are going to be unfolding in about three and a half years.  

According to the popular Pretribulation Prremillennial End Times position, the Chruch is to be raptures d to heaven before all this unfolds.    As I've been studying the Book of Reveltation over the last few years I've been coming closer to the idea that this may not be a correct understanding of the scripture, although I would like it to be.    I've been unable to conclude anything certain about this for a long time so whatever happenbs I guess I'll most likely only understand it at that wpoint.d which is why I'm referrig to 

Thte Murder of Charlie Kirk: Something Miraculous on the Wing?

 Even the young men shall faint.  But they who wait upon the LORDD shall renew their srength;  they shall rise on wings of eagles, they shall run and not walk, they shall walk and not faint.

That's  from Isaiah forty something.  I'm also rememberinga line from Psalms somewerhe I think that says They shall bear fruit even in old age.  

Sinc I'm in old age I'm clinging to that one.  I've wanted to die off and on for years now because I think there's nothing for me to do here as I grow blind and lose more and more options in other ways as well for accomplishing anything, as even writing this blog has become almost impossible.  I'm grateful to the Lord that I can still more or less dothis although since I can't read it I'm tying blind and make an awful lot of mistakes I an only hope dn't too seriously garble up the message.  Usually they don't seem to, when I can listen back on the Read Aloud function to find out.  So that is a lot to be grateful for.

But this is to be bout Charlie Kirk.  I was surprised at how hard it hit me.   I like Charlie Kirdk,  he's on the radio here from nien to eleven at night and I often hear at least some of it.  But I didn't have much of a sense of him as a person or personalitiy.  I saw some of his debates on college campuouses that would come up from time to time on You Tube.  To my mind he was one of many patriotic oivoices on the right to celebrate, but he didn't stand out from the crowd in my mind.   Of course to hear he'd been shot wuld be upsetting, but I was surprised at HOW upsetting it was.  I sank into a very sad mood.  I prayed hard during that first hour for his survival.  

But strange things ere already happening.  I kept having the thought as I prayed that maybe it would be a good thing if he died, maybe that would get some TTENTION FOR THE CAUSE, BUT i FELT ABOUT BAD ABOUT THINKING THAT AND WULD APOLOGIZE TO TEH lORD FOR THINKING IT AND TRY TO REDOUBLE MY EFFORTS TO PRAY.  tHEN HE DIED AND i CRIED.     

bY THE STRANGE STUFF i MEAN EVIDENCE OF THE HAND OF gOD IN IT, EVEN IN MY OWN LITTLE HEARING OF IT AND LITTLE KNOWLEDGE OF HIM AND LITLE APPRECIATION OF HIM.   i HAD BEEN DOING SOMETHING IN ANOTHER WROOM BUT FINISHED UP AND SAT DOWN TO LISTEN TO THE MORNING TALK SHOW ON THE RADIO AND THE MOMENT i TURNED ON THE RADIO OUT CAME THE WORDS "bREAKING NEWS, cHARLIE kIRDK HAS BEEN SHOT."  thAT MAY NOT BE A VERY BIG THING BUT THAT KIND OF PRECISE TIMING USUALLY ONLY  HAPPEN S WHEN SONETHING IS EVERY IMPORTANT TO ME OR ON MY IND, THE SITTING DOWN AND TURNING ON THE RADIO EXACTLY TAT THE MOMENT BEFORE THE WORDS bREAKING nEWS COME ON.  eXACTLY.  tHEN vINCE cOLOGNASE, THE TALK SHOW HOST SPOKE ON THE SUBJECT UNTIL THE ENDING OF HIS SHOW NOW LONG AFTEREWARD, WHILE AS FAR AS WE KNEW cHARLIE WAS STILL ALIBVE AND WE WERE ALL PRAYING FOR HIM.   tHEN i WAS HAVIG ALL THESE THOUGHTS ABOUT HOW MAYBE IT WOULD BE BETTER IF HE DIED AND THINKING i NEEDED TO REPENT FOR SUCH THOUGHTS.  iT WAS OVER AN HOUR AFTER THAT THAT THE NEWS CAME IN THAT HE HAD DIED.   i'D REALLY THOUGHT WE MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER MIRALCCLE LIKE THE ONE THAT SAVED tRUMP.   eVEN THOUGH THE REPORTS WERE THAT BLOOD HAD IMMEDIATELY GUSHED FROM THESIDE OF cHARLIE'S NECK SHEN  HE WAS HIT, WHIH DOES NOT SOUND LIKE SOMETHING ONE SURVIVES EASILY IF AT ALL i'D STILL HOPED, EVEN AGAINST ALL THOUSE OTHER THOUGHTS.  tHEN HE DIED AND i SANK INTO A TEARFUL STATE FOR ANOTHER HOUR OR SO, AND ANGRY, ANGRY AT THE lEFT WHO ARE ALWAYS CALLING cHARLIE AND tRUP AND ALL US CONSERVATIVES FOUL NAMES, FASCIST, HATERS, ALL LIES TO PROVOKE PEOPLE INTO HATING US AND MAYBE WANTING TO KILL US.  tHAT'S WHAT KILLED cHARLIE, i KNEW IT THEN AND i KNOW IT NOW, ALTHOUGHT ALL THESE SUPPOSED REASONABLE VOICES CAME ON SAYING hEY WE DON'T KOW WHAT MOTIVATED THIS SHOOTING, HOLD OFF UNTIL WE KNOW.   yEAH YEAH  YEAH, SURE THERE COULD BE SOMETHIG TOTALLY WEIRD ABOUT THE PERSON'S MOTIVSTION BUT NO, NOT REALLY.  pWEOPEL WHO HAVE BEEN CONDITIONED BY THE lEFT TO HATE cHRALIER AND gRUMP AND ALL OF US ON THE rIGHT ARE THE REASON cHRARLIE WAS SHOT, i KNEW IT THEN ALTHOUGH i REFRAINED FROM WRITING A BLOG POST UNTIL i KNOIEW MORE OFR SURE.  aND NOW THAT i DO i JUST KNOW THE SAME THING ONLY i KNOW IT FOR SURE.

bUT THERE WAS THIS ODD THING THAT gOD HAD LED ME TO HEAR THE FIRST ANNOUNCEMENT OF HIS BEING SHOT AT EXACTLY THE RIGHT MOMENT.  nOW i'M THINKING HAT WAS THE hoLY sPIRIT TELING ME THAT cHARLIE WAS GOING TO DIE AND IT WOULD BE A GOOD THING, THE THOUGHT i KEPT FEELING i NEEDED TO APOLOGIZE FOR.  i DON'T THINK THAT WAS MY OWN THOUGHT NOW, i THINK IT WAS gOD SAYING cHARLIE IS GOING TO DIE AND i WAS TOO OBTUSE TO RECOGNIZE hIS VOICE.  

nOW i'M EVEN THINKIUBG HOW THAT PERFET SHOT TO THE JUGULAR WAS A SORT OF MIRACLE LIKE THE MIRACLE THAT SAVED tRUMP, ONLY IN THIS CASE IT WAS A CLEAN DEADLY SHOT cHARLIE COULD NOT POSSIBLY HAVE SURVIVED.  gOD ENGINEERED THIS ONE TOO THOUGHT.  hE COULD HAVE MADE IT MISS AS HE DID THE SHOT AT tRUMP, OR hE CULD HAVE MADE IT ISS IN SUCH A WAY THAT HIS LIFE WOULD HAVE LINGERED QUITE A BIGT LONGER BEFORE HE DIED, BUT NOW IT WAS A CLEAN DEADLY SHOT, ONE SHOT, TO THE JUGULAR.  eVEN AT CLOSE RANGE THAT IS A PRETTY MIRACLULOUS SHOT.

tHEN OVER THE LAST COUOPLE OF DAYS i'VE HEARD VOICES ON THE RADIO OF PEOPLE WHO KNEW chARLIE, SO MANY OF THEM,  ALMOST PICTURING AN USUNUSUAL GREAT MAN, A GREAT SAINT, A GIANT AMONG MEN.   i THOUGHT BUT WOW IS THIS BECAUSE OF THEIR GRIEF THAT YOU ALWAYS HAVE TO SAY SOMETHING SO OVER THE TOP LAUDATORY OF THE PERSON?  sURELY HE WAS A VERY GOOD GUY WHO WORKED HARD AND HAD A BIG TALEN FOR HIS CALLING TO THE YOUNGER ENERATION, i DON'G DOUBT THAT, BUT THEY WERE MAKING HIM INTO SOMETHING BIGGER THAN THAT.  aND WHEN i HEARD HIS WIFE'S SPEECH YESTERDAY AND THEN THE PROGRAM HE USUALLY HOSTED IN WHICH FOUR OF HIS STAFF REMEMBERED HIM, THE IMPRESSION CONTINUED THAT THEY WERE SAYING HE WAS BIGGER THAN YOUR ORDINARY HARD WORKING cHRISTIAN PATRIOT.  i THINK NOW THEY MEAN IT, THEY SEE HIM THAT WAY, ALTHOUGH HE WAS ONLY THIRTY ONE.  hE WAS SOME KIND OF DYNAMO AND RULY DIRVEN BY HIS FAITH IN THE lORD jESUS TO ACCOMPLISH AN AENORMOUSJ UNDERTAKING TOWARD BRINGING THE YOUNGER GENERATION TO A TRUE UNDERSTANDING OF THE aMERICAN VISION AND TO cHRIST AS WELL.   tURNING poiNT IS WHAT HE NAMED HIS ORGANIZATION, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S BEEN STAFFED WELL BY HUNDREDS OR EVEN THOUGHSANDS OF OTHER HARD WORKERS FOR THE CAUSE AND IT WILL GO ON, AND HIS WIFE SOUNDED  STRONG AND DETERMIEND TO MAKE IT GO ON.  i'M VERUY IMPRESSED AND NOW i'M THINKING THIS IS gOD'S PLAN, gOD IS GOING TO ELEVATE tURNING pOINT AND ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING GRULY MIRACLULOUS BY THE DEATH OF cHARLIE kIRK.

i HAVE MANY HOPEFUL THOUHTS ABOUT WHAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED , MAY MANY MANY.  aND i COULD WRITE A LOT MORE BUT NOWT NOW, MAYBE LATER.

qWLL AT LEAST  A LITTLE MORE NOW.   

i HEARD AN NTERVIEW WITH THE UOING MAN AT THE UNCERSITY IN uTUAL WHO WAS ONE OF THE FIRST TO CHALLENGE cHARLIE AT THE MIRACLE  GOOD GRIEF i WROTE MIRACLE AND MEANT TO WRITE MICROPHONE.  aNYWAY HE WAS TRYING TO CONVINCE cHRARLIE THAT HE WAS WRONG ABOUT THE VIOLENCE ON THE lEFT, ESCPECIALLY AMONG THE TRANSGENDERS i THINK, WHEN THE SHOT RANG OUT AND HE WITNESSED cHARLIE BEING HIT.  aCCORDING TO THE DESCRITPIONS i HEARD THE YOUNG MAN PUT HIS NANDS OVER HIS FACW AND VERWAS VERY SHAKEN UP.  fUNNY THAT MANY HAD SPECULATED THAT MAYBE HIS QUESTION WAS SOME KIND OF SIGN OT THE SHOOTER, MAKING HIM INTO A CONSPIRATOR TO KILL cHARLIE BUT AS HE HIMSLEF DESCRIBED HIS EXPERIENCE IT BECAME VERY CLEAR THAT HE WAS IN NOW WAY INOVLVED.  hE WAS TRULY SHAKEN AT THE DEATH OF cHARLIE AND SPOKE AS IF TO THE SHOOTER, HAVE E LOST TRACK OF THE FACT THAT THIS IS A HUNAN BEING.  hE DIDN'T AGREE WITH cHARLIE ABOUT A LOT OF THINGS BUT HE WAS A HUNAN BEING, A HUSBAND AND A FATHER, AND SO SAID THE YOUNG MAN WAS HE WHO HAD ASKED THE QUESTION.  wqE DON'T KILL THOSE WE DISAGREE WITH.  hE WAS CLEARLY TRULY UPSET AND i'M VERY GLAD TO HEAR A PERSON ON THE lET SAY SOMETHING SO CLEARLY HEARTFELT AGAINST THE OTHERS ON HIS SIDE WHO ARE ALL GLEEFULLY BLAMING cHARLIE FOR HIS OWN DEATH, SAYING HOW HE WAS A DIVISIVE VOICE AND A PROVOCAGEUR WHEN ALL HE WEVER DID WAS QUIETLY AND KINDLE STATE HIS OWN CONSERVATIVE OPINION ON MANY SUBJECTS.  tHEWY ARE THE HATERS, NOT cHARLIE.  tHEY ARE THE FASCISTS, NOT cHARLIE    bUT THIS YOUNG MAN, APPARENTLY ALSO A HUSBAND AND FATHER, ALTHOUGH HE IS ALSO ON THE lEFT, ALSO A dEMOCRATE, aLSO IN OPPOSITION TO cHARLIE ANDTHE REST OF US ON THE rIGHT.  HE DOESN'T SHARE THOSE ALL TOO COMON HATEFUL CALLS TO KILL PEOPLE THEY DON'T AGREE WITH, FIRST DEHUAMNIZING THEM AS EVIL FASCISTS AND HATERS.  sOMEHOME ON ONE OF THE SHOWS LIKENED THIS ATTITTUDE TO THE VOICE ON THE RADIO IN sWANDA THAT CALLED THE tUTSIS "COCKRAOSCHES" AND DEHUMANIZED THEM IN THE SAME WAY, SETTING THEM UP FOR THE GREAT SLAUGHTER OF THEM THAT SOON FOLLOWED.  tHAT'S THE PREDICTABLE CONSEQUENCE OF DEMOMIZING HYOUR OPPOSITION AND THAT IS WHAT GOT cHARLIE KILLED.  aND WHY THEY KEEP TRYING TO KILL tRUMP.  tRUMP IS NOTHING BUT A STRONG PATRIOT AND HARDPOWRKING pRESIDENT WHO WANTS TO RESTORE THE TRUE VALUES OF aMERICA BUT THEWY TRY TO TURN HIM INTO SOME KIND OF MONSTER AND APPARENTLY A SCARY LOT OF THEM BELIEVE THE PROPAGANDA.

i WAS RECENTLY PRAYING ABOUT ALL THIS.  hOW TDO WE FIGHT THE LIES?  sOME LISTEN FROM TIME TO TIME AND ACTAULLY CHANGE THEIR MINDS.  tHAT'S WONDERFUL , BUT IT'S VERY FEW AND THERE ARE EVEN SOME WHO APAPRENTLY CAN SEE THEY'VE BEEN LIED TO AND STILL DON'T CHANGE THEIR VIEWS THAT WERE BASED ON THOSE LIES.  i DON'T GET IT BUT i'VE SEEN IT HAPPEN.  sO THE TAKS OF CHAING MINDS SEEMS INSURMOUNTABLE.  i WAS PRAYING ABOUT THAT.  hOW, lORD, DON'T yOU HAVE TO ACT?  wE CAN'T DO ANYTGNG.  tHEY HAVE US SILENCED.  tHE lEFT HEARDS ONLY THE PROPGANDA MACHINE AND THEY DON'T BOTHER TO GO LOOKIN FOR ANY OTHER POINT OF VIEW.  iT'S ALL OUT HERE BUT THEY WILL; NEVER FIND IT BECAUSE THEY HAE NO REASON TO LOOK FOR IT.  lORD, yOU MUST ACT.

i WAS PRAYING THAT NOWT LONG BEFORE i GOT THE NEWS ABOUT cHARLIE kIRDK.  nOW i'M THINKING HOPEFULLY THAT MAYBE i'M SWEEING THE BEGINNING OF THE ANSWER TO THAT PRAYER.   cHARLIE HAD THE EAR OF MANY IN THE YUYOUNGER GENERATION.  tHAT WAS HIS MISSIO.  i'M HOPING IT WILL ONLY GROW FAST AND FURIOUS FROM NOW ON.

aND i WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH cHRARLIE'S WIFE eRICA AS SHE SPOKE ABOUT HIM, TEARFUL BUT ABLE TO CONTROL HERSELF.  a TRUE cHRISTIAN SPIRIT COMES FRO HER AND FROM cHARLIE.  tHAT'S WHAT WE NEED.  tHE KNOWLEDGE THAT THE lORD IS IN CHARGE OF ALL OF IT EVEN WHEN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT OR WHY hE IS DOING ANY OF IT UNTIL AFTER WE START TO SEE THE RESULTS, SOMETIMES LONG INTO THE FUTURE.   bUGT i THINK WE CAN SEE HIM WORKING ALREADY.  i CAN.   aND eRICA SOUNDED so SRONG IN HER DETERMINATION TO KEEP tRUNING poINT A DRIVING FORCE IN aMERICA.  kNOWING THAT THE lORD IS IN CHARGE, i WAS SAYING, THAT'S THE cHRISTIAN MINDSTET.  eVEN WHEN hE TAKES OUR BELOVED HUSBAND WITH A PROMISING , VERY POROMISING CALLING IN THE WORLD, YOU KNOW hE KNOWS WHAT hE IS DOIG EVEN IF YOU DON'T.  cHARLIE HAD TO DIE.  uNLESS A GRAIN OF WHEAT FALL TO THE GROUND A ND DIE IT BEARS NO FRUIT, OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, jESUS SAID.  iT WAS FALL TOT HE GROUND AND DIEDE AND THEN IT WILL BECOME A GREAT AND FLOURISHING PLANT.    jUST THE FACT THAT SO MANY OF US WERE SO FIRED UP AT HIS DEATH IS A START.  i HAVE NO PARTICULAR REASON TO BE FIRED UP AT THE DEATH OF cHARLIE kIRK, AS i KEEP SAYING.  sAD, SURE, O H THEY GOT ANOTHER ONE OF US BUT WE'LL JUST KEEP GOING ETEC ETC ETC.  nOW THERE'S SOMETHIG MUCH BIGGER AND CSTRANGER TABOUT THIS ONE.  lETT IT BEAR FRUIT, lORD.

eRICA ALSO COMES ACROSS AS A TRUE cHRISTIAN IN HER SOLID BELIEF THAT SHE WILL SEE cHARLIE AGAIN, THAT HE IS OF COURSE ALIV AND WITH THE loRD.  sOMETIMES PEOPLE SAY SUCH THINGS BUT IT DOESN'T CARRY MUCH CONVICTION.  wITH eRICA YOU KOW SHE BELIEVES IT.  sHE KNOWS gOD HAS A PLAN, SHE KNOWS gOD KNOWS WHAT hE IS DOING,  SHE KNOWS HER JOB IS JUT TO KEEP THE PLAN ALIVE AND WORK HARDER THAN EVER, SHE KNOWS THAT aLL THINGS WORK TO THE GOOD FOR WTHOSE WHO LOVE OD AND ARE THE CALLED ACCORDING TO hIS PURPOSES.  sHE QUEOTED THAT AND i THINK i HEARD cHARLIE QUOTE IT RECENTLY SOMEWHERE TOO.  rOMAND EIGHT?  TWENTY EIGHT.    

oH oLORD  oH lORD, IS THIS THE REVIVAL SO MANY OF US HAVE PRAYDED FOR OVER THE YEARS?  fINALLY?  oH ONE MORE THOUGHT.   fUNNY THOUGHT.   aS cHARLIE'S tURNING poINT STAFF WERE TALKING ABOUT HIM ON THE RADIO SHOW LAST NIGHT  ONE OF THEM MENTIONED THAT HE HAD SOME RATHER PECULIAR EATING HABITS, APPARENTLY DUE TO HIS CONCERN TO STAY HEALTHY.  sUCH AS EATING NOTHING UBUT ONE FOOD FOR A WHOLE MEAL, SUCH AS ALL MEAT FOR ONE MEAL FOR INSTANCE.   

oNE OF HIS MEALS MIGHT BE A GIANT BOWL OF NOTHING BUT BROCCOLI.  aND THAT MADE ME LAUGH, BECUASE i'V HAD THAT SAME MEAL MIYSELF TWICE ISN THE LAST WEEK.  i COOK THE BROCCOLI FOR ABOUT TEN MINUTES IN CHICKEN BROTH AND EAT THE WHOLE THING, ABOUT A , NO, ABOUT TWO HEADS OF BROCCOLI CHAPOOED UP ACCORDING TO THE INSTRUCTION FO cHRIS wARTK IN HIS BOOK cHRISTS   cHRIS bEAT cANCER WHICH i'VE BEEN LISTENING TO LATELY.   hE GIVES GENERAL ADVICE FOR A DRASTIC HEALTH PROMOTING DIET IN HIS CHAPTERS EIGHT AND NINE AND i'VEW BEEN LISTENIG OVER AND OVER TO THEM AND TRYING TO ICOROPORATE THE ADVICE INTO MY OWN SITUATION AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.   hE WOULD EAT THE BROCCOLI RAW AS PART OF HIS GIANT DAILY RAW SALAD, BUT i DON'T LIKE IT RAW ALTHOUGH i LIKE ALL THE OTHER VEGETABLES RAW, SO i EAT THEM IN A SALD OR SOMETIMTES JUIST MUNCH THEM WHOLE IF i'M TOO TIRED TO MAKE A SALAD, BUT i COOK THE BROCCOLI AND EAT IT SEAPRATELY.  cHRIS wARD WOULDN'T ADD CHICKEN BROTH BECAUSE HE GENERAL AVOICES MEAT PERODUCTS, NOT EXCLUSIVELY BUT MOTCSTLY AND CHICKEN BROTH GRANULES ARE OF COURSE A PROCESSED FOOD WHICH IS TO BE SHUNNED BY ANYONE TRYING TO GET HEALTHY.   aNYUWAY IT HELPS WE LIKE THE BROCCOLI BETTER.  sO i'LL EAT THIS GIANT BOWL OF CHICKEN BROTH FLAVORED BROCCOLI.   aND THEN i FOUND OUT THAT cHARLIE kIRK MIGHT EAT SOMETHING SIMILAR ONCE INA A WHILE.     

jUST ANOTHER LITTLE WAY THE lORD SEEMS TO BE LINKING ME UP WITH cHARLIE, SAYING HPERHAPS i'M TO WORK TO SUPPORT HIS MISSION SOMEHOW OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WHICH i'D BE QUITE HAPPY TO DO IF THERE IS ANY WAY i CAN DO IT.  wELL, i CAN WRITE ABOUT IT AS i'M DOING HERE, AND THAT MAY BE THE BEST i CAN DO BUT IT'S SOMETHING.  i SUPPOSE THE lORD IS LINKING UP A LOT OF chRISTIANS TO cHARLIE'S WORK THESE DAYS.  i'M STARTING TO THINK tURNING pOINT IS hiS BIG PROJECT RIGHT NOW AND WE'RE ALL BEING DDRAWN INTO IT.

Food for a Fallen World

Even Chrtistians don't always remember that this is a fallen worldm meaing it's under a curse since our first parents disobeyed God and ate the forbidden fruit.,  We fell, we changed, that is, Adam and Eve changed and passed on their new changed and deficient nature to their progeny, us.  We inherit their weakened condition because of the Fall, proneneess to diseases of all sorts, and death of course, which didn'

t exist in the original world.  The world itself was changed, grew up thorns and thistles as ascripture put it, required heavy labor to tame it for gorowing food and  gave us all kinds of pesky creatures that can cause disease and eat all our food to deal with.    Qw were changed initially through the loss of our original ability to commuicate with God.  We lost thje faculty or sense for that, a spiritual sense akin to the physical senses.  We became "but flesh" as God puts it in Genesis Six  As a result we have no innate sense of the existence of Hodf and atheism is an easy state of mind to afall intyo.  We may believe because we are taught to believe, or see things in the world athat suggest that there must be a God, but Adam and Even had a built in sense of God, a direct sense of Him abdnd ability to ommunicate with Him that we olw lack.  

But here i want to talk more about the fallen world and our fallen bodies since we are But  Flesh.  Both our health and the world that supplies the means to keep us healthy are deteriorating due to the Fall.   The foods we eat are treated ijn ways that make them toxic in various ways, and our bodies themselves are  always acquiring new diseases, thought genetic mutation that keeps killing off what must have originally been a very rotective genome.  I don't know how much of what has been called Junk DNA is really junk and how much may have some function or other, but surely since it makes up 98 percent of the genome most of it must be junk rather than regulatory, which is the main fucntion I've heard ascrivbed to it.    That's of courtse my uneducated buess but there are lots of scientists who insist that it really is junk DNA and I uess I'mwit them.

So to my mind junk DNA is one of the results of the FAll, of the ongoing deterioration of our bodies.   We do awfully weell considering thgat.  And then there is the deterioration of the foods, which I just mentioned.   So for these resons we do need to work at dealing with our health, which is why we have these alternative diets that proliferate all the time.  We're always looking for the wmost nutritious and health giving way of deating.  that is, some of us area, some ofth etime.  I guive up easily mself and just eat whatever is easy, but then I geet all fired up to try to be more careful and eat better, which is where I am at the moment.  It's ot easy, that's why I fall away from it. it.  I'm elderly and not in the greatest health, tired all the time for instance, which makes food preparation a chorse that I'm sometimes not up to so I fall back on something easy like opienininhg a can of something.  Cleaning fresh vegeytables is a chorse.  Jucing them ins a HUGE chosre and I'd really like to be able to do that because I believe it would benefit me enormously.  But I did it the other day and it took an hour and a half to clean the begetables, juice them and clean the machine afterward and I was absoluely exhasuseted.    I'm eatierh going to try commercial juices which I know are inferior, or maybe just make a lot less juice.  Or both.  

Years abgo I got into following Chris Wark who cured , well ono, prevented the recurrence of, his colon cancer by changing his diet to  stufing himself with vegetables in many different ofrms, fruits and vegetables that is, juicineg them in huge amounts, making huge salads, and making smoothies.  I'd olike to be up to that.  He had cancer as an incentive and also he was young when he had it and still hjad the energy to do all tit takes to ursuie such a cdiet.  I can't even do my own shopping.     But I love love love carrot juice, esepciallt with beent  bet  beet and celery and green apple, and that's the hardest thinh.  Cleaning and cutting up all the cruciferous vegies for big salads takes work too but not qute as much.  I'm  looking for the right level that I can manage because I've been feeling really worotten lately , even tireder than usual, and really want to do this thing however I can amanage it.d ate the fruit of the forbidden 

Later:  I hope this is the post about the Antichrist but I always have to guess and I'm not sure since I can't see well enough to read anything I write.  Anyway, Just wanted to add to that post that even before the final days when the final Antichrist is to rule the world and be worshipped by all who are not to be saved, the Pope are worshiped.  Think of all the thousands of eope who gathered to hear the announcement of the new Pope, standing in the square praying repetitively with their roasaries and that sort of thing, talking about the Popes in tones of revenerence or awae, calling him "holy fahter" etc.  That's worship.   "If someone comes in his own name, him youi will receive" says Jesus, in the context of saying they won't receive Him.  They'll receive His subsitutte though, whic hch is what the Popes are.  Vicarivs Fiklii Dei which adds up through its Roman numberal s to the infamous uimber of the Antichrist means just that, subsitutte for the Son of God.  The Popes have usurpried His title and His role among the people.  We can alk to Jesus directly, we need no Popes of confessors and we dcertainly don't need the so called Virgin Mary who was ot a virgin after she cagave birth to Jesus but the Catholics dey that obvious fact as scripture presents it.  He is our intercessors, not Mary and not any other stand in for Him.  The Popes usurpr His title as Head of the CHurch.  I remember ewhen God showed me in scripture the two laces where that is stated, that Christ is the head of the Church, when I was disturbed by the claim I'd read in a Catholic book that the Popel is the head of the CHurch.   

Yes  he is worshiped.  So is Mary.  They use different terms for it but it's worship, that belongs to Christ and God the Father and the Holy Spirit and not to any human being.   And the usurpation of God's place among His people really ought to aleret anyone who is thinking scripturally to the fact that the Popes really are the Antichrist.  How the Pre Tribbetrs got seduced off that obvious fact is hard to understand.  

Antichrist FOur

 No real news about Leo Fourteenth lately.  He did write somethig along with others supportive of Ukraine but I forget what that was all about, and that is a reminder that he is one of the top workld leaders.  The popes are that, always at least one of the top world leaders.   Head of an actual nation too, yes the Vatican has that status.  

But at the moment I' responding to something I heard recently, about how people are calling Donald Trump the Antichrist.  The Christian who reported this said it can't be so because the Antichrist comes from the Revised Roman Empire and Trump doesn't.  Well, strictly espeaking neither does Leo fourteenth which I guess ends my own opinion.  But not really.  A popae wherever he is from is a Roman, the head of the only real Roman Empire we have on earth these days.  The European Union is geraing up for a role as part of the Roman ystem but still Rome is Rome and the head of Rome right now is the papacy, which is how it has been for about fifteen centuries.  

The Antichrist depicted in the beast from the sea of Reelation THirteen is not just FROM  the Roman Empire, the way it reads he is practically synonymous with the Roman Empire.  The beast is clearly the empire, with the symbolicmsm of the leopard, the bear and the lion from the visions ofr the book of Daniel which identify the Roman Empire as the fourth to rise after Babylong, Medo Persia and Greece, althouh in those days while the first three were known, the Roman Empire was stil an unknown for the future.  But now we know that is what Daniel was all about.  Rome rose to power before Christ was born and although it died  or at least the Caesars stopped ruling, by6 the sixth cetury the BIshop of Rome of the Christian Church was in a position to delcare himself Universal ope and become over the next few centuries a rule of the west avery much akin to a Caesar.   There is no doubt that the papacy is the Antichrist dsystme and hat the world rule r single Antichrist to come at the very end will be a Opope.  It is frustrating how the Pre Tribbers keep talkinab out some unkonw man who is yet to be revealed who comes from the Roman Empire to rue the world.   Nope.  Pope.

The whole story of the Antichrist is Rome  Rome Rome.  The beast of Revelation THirteen and the Harlot CHurch of Revelation Seventeen are Rme Rome Rme.    Not jus a person FROM Ruome, but the leader of what is the only Roman power bow in the world, the Vatican of the city of Rome.    

Yes I believe in some of the futurist end times scenario, but not the identity of the ANtichrist, who was revealed back in the seventh century.  

Message for President Trump

 Would somone please tell President Trump that working for peace between Russia and Ukraine won't get him to heaven?  He aapparently doesn't undersand that Jesus paid for our sins on the cross and that's how we get to heaven, by believing in Him, that He died for us so that we don't have to pay for our sins ourselves, and tht He rose again from the dead.  If you believe all tghat, then you are saved and going to heaven.    THGEN you should work for peace, because it is the right thing to do and because the Lord would want you to do it.  But it won't earn you heaven.  Either you are already saved by Jesus' death for you, or you need to be saved by believing Him and thank ing Him for it.  Also, while we are to do what we can as Jeus calls us to do it, we are not resposible for the outcome.  You are not responsible for what Putin and Zelensky decide to do, you are only responsble for doing what you can to further the prospects of peace between them.  It is God who is responsible for the outcome.

Sio, relax.  Give yourselve to Christ and relax.  Do what you can and relax.  It's in God's hands.    Scripture i very clear that we are not to try to work our way to heven.  If we could then we'cd get the credit for it, but since God did it for us He gets the credit and our wrole is gratitude and commitment to do His will as best we can, kowing we are fallible creatures and only God can work miracles.

Someone needs to ge this across to Catholics too beause they have been misled to believe they must work for their wsalvation.  

********

Now I have a message for Glenn Loury.  I heard his latest talk with his frequent talking partner John McWhorter on the subjec tof Isareael versus Hamas, what's going on in Gaza.  My message to Mr. Loury is:  You are believing the liars, you are believing Hamas.  All those statistics are made up by Hamas.  It is Hamas who are interfering with the aid getting to their people, it is not Israel's doing.  You need to listen to sme different sources on this one.  I usually like Loury's comments betwtter than I like McWhorter.  This time McWhorter was getting it more right than Loyry.

All for now.

Zygosity and the Camellama

 On the biological side of things, a few weeks ago I hit on somethig I thought was pretty interesting although I may ot fully grasp it yet.   Back in the nineties I read a book I think was titled Creation Science, which I think was authored by Henry Morries and someone named Gary Partker although I may not have his name right.  Whoever he is, and I haven't been able to find out anything about him, or maybe a little but I'm not sure it's hjim,  he presented a model of how Adam and Ever could have carried all the genetic material for all the skin color variations known to humanity, which of course means hey carried all the genetic material offor every kind of variation that ever cooccurs to the human race.  He drew it up in one of those boxes I think is called a punnet square?  I'm not rememberung uch this morning, am I?

But tthat has stuck with me since then and leads me from time to time to think about how variations are built into the genome by simple zygosity, meaning heterosqugosity, meaning the fact that genes that are  capable of variation are made up of two alleles or versions of the trait they code for, such that the offspring in sexual recombination can receive one or the other ersion fo the trait.  If many genes for a trait combine with different versions of each, there can be a huge range of different ways a trait can vary.    This is all based on Mendeian genetics, very simple stuff, bu I've come to realize that it has enormous postential for creating variations.

Some genes no doubt don't produce variations because in the design of the creature they need to be stable, such as gthe body plan or the imune system.  But there are all sorts of characteristics that can vafry, the most common one we always think of being eye color.  Skin color is another.    Hair type and color, and in animals fur tye and so on,  all may variy freely and produce all sorts of interesting traits.  Birtds may have the most ineresting and colorful variation possibilityies with dramatic plumage possibilities and so on.   But it's through variation that you get say, the different herds of wildebeests, that vary in size, hide color and antler shape from herd to herd.  In humans we get the races but there are many more fraces than the few we usually think of.  If you put ten people on a desert isolaned, or no you can't put them there, if they happened to get there a few centuries ago and couldn't leave, by now they would have a very distinctive look to them due to the combination from generation to generation fo whatever genetic material was in the group that fisrst landed on the island.  There could be a huge poulation by now, but they would all have similar characteristics, a generalized look to them, in size for instance as well as facial features and proabably temperament and capabilities of many sorts.    It's how we get all our different kinds of cats and dogs etc etc etc.  The body plan doesn't alter much so you always know a cat is a cat and a dog a dog, but otherwise they may vary eomrously, dogs from the Great Dane to the St Bernard to the Husky to the spaniel to the chihuahua etc etc etc.

It is these vartiation s that evolutionists mistake for evolution and built their whole system o them.  As if the variations could keep changing the creature until it eventually becomes a differentr kind of creature.  Can't happebn.  For one thing, the body plan doesn't change, only the what to call them appearance is pary of it but there's more to it, I'm sure there's a word for it somewhere.   It's variation built into the genome, it's not evolution.  When you get a purebrfed of any kind of animal for inatance, no further variation happens, .  It took me some time to recognize that this is the piont where the genes for the slaient characgteristics are all or mostly all homozygouds for particular traits.   In fact somewhere I foudn that that is a defintiion of a pure breed according to some breeding organization.  Homozygodisity is the same as a fixed trait.    If the whole population is homozygous for particular traits, there is no opportunity for variation of that trait to be expressed in theiur offspring.  YOu have to have heterozygosity for that to be possible, but all the alleles for the trait that do not produce the varsion that belongs to the particular breed ahhave been eliminated from the population over time and unless there's a stray one here or there  thevariations of that btrait juist aren't going to show up again in that breed.  So calle "evlution" has come to an end that that point.    

So I began to appreciate that the mdel of genetic possibilities in Adam and Ever I'd found in that book back in the ineties is a model of heterozygosity in all the genetic matieral that is capable of variation in the genome.  Heterozygosity, or the simple fact that each gene has two different versions of the trait it codes for, is all it takes to produce all possible variations in any creature, including human beings.  as they reproduce generation after generation.  When a particular breed sis being develoeped by domestic breeding, or intentional breeding, or when a small population gets accidentally isolted in the wild from the parrent population and breeds only  with its own members over many generations, that's when you start to get more homoszygosity connected with particualr traits within the new breed or popualtion.  

jI  know this is oversimpliefied and there are other actors to gtake into account, such as epigenetic inflence no doubt, though I don't see how that would inlufnece this particular situation, but generally this simple Mendelian sstem should be able to account for enojrmous variatiey in living things.  A very simple design producing a lot of effects over the generations.

So when the topic came up on the Let's Talk Creation podcast of how the llama came out of the camel, if it did, and that was one of the questions, igt occurred to me that this Mendelian principle could very well explain it.  You wouldn't need both a camel and a llama on the ark if they are related woto each other as they are, and would wouldn't need a generalized "camellama" either that somehow contianed the genrteic material for both animals and didn't look eaxactly like either one of them.   It occured gto me that if the camel type has the dominant allele for most of its genes that produce its salient traits, that would mean that three our of four offspring would get the came type inheritance, which is a Mendelian statistic.  The camel thype would show up in the heterozygous genetic formula, as well as in the homozygous dominant formula, two heterozygous possibilities and one homosyfou, for all the traits that make the camel the camle.  Whih would no doubt be a huge number of traits and genes for those traits.  But if a small portion of the population of camels got separated from it that just happeneed to contain a lot of the recessive forms of those genes, then as that new poup;lation inbred over the gwnerations it could well develop into the llama type or any other varsion of the camel .    All it takes, I was thining, is the common accidnet of isolaution of a small number of animals with a new gset of gene frequencies that favor the recessive version of most of the generaes for tthe salient characteristics that in the camel type are built on the dominant alleles.    I hope I'm getting this said clearly.  

So, no Camellamas needed, just heterozygosity in the genome which is a very flexible design factor we usually don't appreciate as such.

Catastrophic Plate Tectonics

After send around my previous post in an email to a frew friedns and family I started looking up some geological concepts on You Tube.  Just to be doubly sure I did't say anything too wrong but also just wanting to find out about some things I've had on hold for a whie.  Like Catastrophic Plate Tectonics.  WEell, ther's a very long You Tube video that comes up with that as the search term and it's very informative but so packsed with information and so rast moving I can't possibly get much out of it in one sitting.  It's something I'll need to hear many times before it comes together for me.

I do keep having a particualr issue with this concept however that hasn't  yet been put to rest.  The catastrophic plate tectonics theory is that the Flood of Noah was begun and continued throughtoyut along with erewextremely violent movements of the continents, up heavals thropugh rapid subduction of the sea floor undre the continents, upheavals on the sea floor sending up hot magma and so on.   What continuies to bother me about these scenario is that I don't see how the Geological Column could have been laid down and remained intact een to the extent it has been with all the violent upheaval going on throughout the period of its laying down.  

Ghere is also evidence that I have been promoting for years that the disruptions brought about by tectonic movvment occurred after all the strata were laid down.  That has been a major arugument of minde and I'm still  convinced by it, even after watching this video that gives this completely different scenario .     I've argued it many times before, on this blog and probably on the one called Fatasy of Evolution, and also at EvC forum.  It's based on a particular cross section of the Grand Canyon/ Grand Staricase area and although I can't see it any more I remember it as being very clear, there is no disruption whatever to be seen during the period of the laying down of the sedimentary layers, but lots of activity afterward.  Something   before too, but I don't and that's part of my oaargument.  

But I'm not going to go into it here.    I do hope my email about the  geological column layers gets some people interested enough to think about it and have some opinions.  Then I can go on to other arguments.

By the way the video I was watching was interrupted every few minutes or so buy on particular ad that coplainted about our Nevada rrepresentative voting for tax cuts for the rich which according to the ad are going to cost us all a lot of money are amount to his seelling us all out, and I get SO tired of this kind of liberal deceit.  Tax cuts for the rishch, which are NOT as big a thing as they claim anyway, since the tacsx cuts extend to all of us, but the tax cuts for the rich are designed to stimulate the economy, which they have always succeeded in doing whever a President has had the foresight to be willing to brave the stupidity of the Left and doin do it anyway.    Tax revenuse themselves double in some cases, jobs increase, etc etc.  That is just one of ma000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000ny lying manipulative prop0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000aganda ads.

Later:  I'm discoveing that this video just moves way too fast for me to follow it, and on this new computer I don't  know how to do the usual things like back it up.  Someone will have to show me that some time, but meanwhile I'm lost to this video.  

IF EVOLUTIONARY THEORY DROPPED DEAD ON A REMOTE ISLAND OF A BLOG, WOULD ANOYONE HEAR THE CRASH AS IT HIT THE GROUND?

 Overy the years rguing Creation versus Evolution I've brought ofup various problems witht e geoligcal column, such as that there isn't any indication on the surface of any of the separate layers of its every having been on the surface of the earth as anormal landscape.  They are mostly all straight and flat as a tabletop, not uneven the way a normal landscape eis, even the flattest.  They don't have gullies or deep erosion, certainly no canyons.  You don't see plant roots growing down into them anywhere.  There's nothing about them to suggest they ever were the surface of the world during a former time period, whichis what is claimed for eah of them.   Some are supposed to have been underwater but there too you wouldn't expect perfectly straight flat surface or such a homogeneous sediment either,    These conversations never went anywehre of course.  They just get ignored somehow, ,but they raise serious questions about the whole idea that the geological column is made up uof successive periods of time mrked by identifiable types of sediment which have become rock over supposed misllions of years since they were deposited.  Some of the time periods are over a hundred million years,, some tens of millions, but huge periods of time in which very particular animal life is found in fossilized form.  Each layer of sedimentary rock has its own collection of fossilized life forms.   These are understood to be creatures that lies in these time periods, which over time evolved into more odern kinds.  They seem to be less complex near the bottom of the stack of layers, getting more complex as you look toward the uppoer layers, ending in modern mammals and so on at the very top which isd considered to be modern time.

Doesn't irt seem odd thhat the history of the earth would be marked off in clearly identifialble time segments defined by specific kinds of sedimentary rocks?  Sometimes I wonder how that idea got so easily accepted in the first place, but it certainly has been accepted and is foundational to the idea of the fossil record which underlies much of evolutionary theroy.   Nobody coments on the actual physical situatio of the rocks that I've run across, they are just taken for granted to represent these time periods in which sepefic creatures lived, each period demonstrating some evolutionary change as they see it.   

It certainly is interesting that there does seem to be such a clear separate collection of fossil life forms characteristic of a particular rock layer which is identified as a pecrticular time period.   And in a rough way they do seem to exhibit some kind of development from something more primitedve to something modern.  It's easy enough to see how the fossil record idea got going on that simple fact.  And it's a strange fact no matter how you look at it, but it is a fact.  

But again, how is it that the earth could have been divided into time periods of millions of eyears so clearly marked by a very particular kind of sedimentary rock, very straight and flat, continaing a fery specici colelction of fossil forms?  When we look at the surface of the earth we live on it certainly doesn't look straight and flat and ceratinly isn't of one kind of sedimentary rock, or..    Should we expect our own time eperiod to somehow or other get reduced down to such a situation as is found in each of the layers beneath us?   How does that make sense?

Of course nobody does, but then nobody is really thinking about any of this from this point of view Fof course nobody is thinkiung about these things from this point of view.  

Sometimes I try to think through how it could ereally have been a time period that produced a particular rock layer and how that could have come aout.  Many of the layers extend across huge geographical areas, some covering whole continents and even can be found in soe form on all the continents or a umber of them anyway.  There are ideas about how the sediments were laid down originally, mounstains eroding and windo blowing the sediment into flat layers among other things, b tu none of that is very convincing.  SOme are explains by an incursion of water over the land, which seems to me to make more sense but even then it's hard to think the result would have been such a flat horizontal layer that eventually got overlaid by other layers and hardedned into rock.   

Whenver I try to figure this out I end up with the recognition that any amount of such esediment existing on the surface of the earth would have makede it impossible for any creature to surfvive there, either in it or on it.  Creatures can't live on a pure sand deposite.  So maybe the sand came layter and the animals lived on a normal surface that was eventualy covered over by the sand or other sediment?  But when it was covered over then the animal life would die, it couldn't go on living, and if it died then it didn't pass on to the next time period where an evolved form went on living, it just died because there was no place for it to go on living.      So maybe it lived on part of the surace that wasn't yet covered over by this sediment.  But since it was eventuqally covered over, as we can see from the rock layers in the column today, then they would have died there too.  Nobothing could live wherever these sedimentary deposits were the surface they had to live on.

So maybe thy formed beneath the surace or something like that, and then the surface was somehow eroded away and left only the sedimentary layer which got covered over by a new kind of sedienyt as the next supposed time period began to develop.   But it's the same problem.  When the livable surface is gone, erotded away or whatever, leaving only the sedimentary deposite we see as rock in the scolumn today, wheaever had been living on that surface would die because it couldn't live on that bare sedimentary surface.  Or in it if we're talking water deposition and sea creatures.

No nmatter how you try to rearrange the possibilityies, you end up with an unlivable environemnty.  For every one of the rock layers we see in the stack of layers we call the geollgical socolumn.   Nothing could have lived in any environmentin which those sedimenyts were actually present as the surface of the earth which for at least some wshort period they had to have been becaue there they are now in that stack of layers.  If nothing could live in that environment then clearly those are not time periods those rocks represent, othing ever lived there, it's all a great delusion.   There is no Geological time scale in which living forms evolved.  There just isn't.   It's all a delusion.     There are plenty of dead things encased within the sedimentary rocks, but they could never have lived in an environment of csuch sediments,  they had to have been carried within the sedimentas and deposited  with them.  Or something like that.  There was never anything living whever those sedimentas lay on the surace of the earth or on the sea floor either.    Nothing could have lived there.  That seems to me to be perfectly clear even if it's hard to thingk all this through and rearrange things in your mind.

Without the fossil record, what happenes to the theory of ewvolution?  Can it keep going on biological and genetic considerations alone without the geoloigcal suport of the fossils?  I don't know.  I'm sure those who believe in evolutio woud try to keep it alive one way or another.  I'm sure if they every thought about what I'm writing here they'd be concvinced I must be wrong one way or another and try to prove me wrong and maybe even manage to convince themselves that I'm wrong.  The theory would just go limping along on the basis of what they think must hve happened rather than on any clear evidence that it did happen.  But then that's the way it has always been.  Evolution has always been  an imaginary construct, building from the real biolgoical fact of the variations we  see all the time in living things m,  each species having a large range of ways it can vary its apparenantce, that's all real enough but they imagine from thant fact that the variation can just keep going from species to species and there's really no way it could.   

That's another line of thought that undoes the etheory of evolution.  I just finished listining to a wbook by Seteven Meyer, Darwin's Doubt , in which he diescusses instance after insnace in which the evolutionary biologicals themselves question the claims of the theory and shows ythat it is never resolved.  tThe same problems remain after every attempt to find a way to solve it or get around it.   Meyer gpoint out many times that variation or change only occurs in existing entitties.  If there is no docode for it it can't happen.  the code is convinced to the genome of each species.  There is no way to get outside of that code, the genome of the species, to form any kind of new thing.  

But that's another whole direction of argument I'm not up to going into right nwo.    I think the faiure of the idea of the geological time scale is enough to kill the ehtthroy of evolution.   There are certainly many ogther ways to kill it.  I think it's really been shown to be  dead for years but  so many people are so committed to the idea they just keep beating the dead horse expectin git to get up and move again.  Oh well.

*******

mAYBE i SHOULD ADD A DEFINITION OF THE gEOLOGICAL cOLUMN FOR THOSE WHO AREN'T SURE WHAT IT REFERS TO.  iF YOU CAN FIND A PICTURE OF A WIDE SECION OF THE gRAND cNYON LOOKING DOWN INTO IT, THE LAYERS YOU SEE IN THE WALLS OF THE CANYON, EACH OF A DIFFERENT SEDIMENTARY ROCK, ARE THE LOCAL VERSION OF THE gEOLOGICAL cOLUMN.  tHE PICTURE PROBABLY SHOWS THE LAYERS FROM THE LOWEST HORIZONTAL LAYER WHICH IS THE cAMBRIAN TIME PERIOD, DATED TO ABOUT FIVE HUNDRED MILLION YEARS AGO, AND THE LAYERS CLIMB UP FROM THERE THROUGH THE oRDOVICIAN, THE sILURIAN, THE dEVONIAN, THE cARBONIFEROUS, TO THE pERMIAN WHICH FORMS THE RUM OF THE CANYON , DATED TO ABOUT TWO HUNDRED FIFTY MILLION YEARS AGO.  oRIGINALLY THE STACK OF LAYERS CLIMBED UP ANOTHER MILE OR SO OR ANOTHER TWO HUNDRED MILION YEARS BUT ALL THT WSHED AWAY IN THE CANYUON AREA.   tHEY CAN BE FOUND INTACT A HUNDRED OR SO MILES TO THE NORTH, HOWEVER, IN uTAH'S gRAND sTARICASE FORMATION.  iT'S IN THAT SECTION OF THE COLUMM THAT THE jURASSIC TIME PERIOD IS FOUND, WHERE ALL THE DINOSAUR FOSSILS COME FROM, THAT AND THE cRETACEOUS LAYER AOVE ITY.      

oOPS,      I see the caps lock was on.  Drat.  Sorry aout that.  

By the way I wrote out other arguments against evolution here and there on this blog, in particular some last Fall around September and Octorber.

---------------

I also keep forgetting to put in my new email addres which is managed by my daughter.   faithswindow@mail.com