Musings on Loury and McWhorter and the Moral Lsae snf oyhrt dyugg.

jOHN mCwHORTER ON THE gLENN lOURY SHOW ABOUT THE TIME OF THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS OR JUST AFTERWARD i SUPPOSE, WAS GOING ON AND ON ABOURT HOW BLATANTLY rEPUBLICANS WERE WORKING TO DISENFRANCHISE BLACK VOTERS.   wHUT?   i REALLY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT HE WAS TALKING ABOUT BUT IT WAS DRIVING ME BATTY HOW HE WENT ON LIKE THAT AS IF IT WERE OBVIOUS.   hE DIDN'T DESCRIBE WHAT THESE "REPUBLICANS" WERE DOING, JUST KEPT SAYING HOW DISGUSTINGLY OBVIOUS IT WAS THAT THEY WERE TRYING TO PREVENT BLACKS FROM VOTING.

f

fIBNALLY  lOURY HAD HIS TURN AND i THEN UNDERSTOOD THAT mCwHORTER WAS TALKING ABOUT THE CAMPAIGN FOR VOTER id.  i ALSO REMEMBERED THAT i'D SEEN THIS PODCAST BEFORE AND HAD FORGOTTEN IT.  yIKES, mCwHORTER ACTUALLY THINKS THAT VOTER id WOULD DISENFRANCHISE BLACK VOTERS?  yIKES!  aFTER lOURY MADE HIS CASE mCwHORTER CAME BACK AND SAID THIS WAS ONE OF THOSE RARE TIMES WHEN HE AND lOURY WERE TRULY AT ODDS AND THAT HE DIDN'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT lOURY WAS TALKING AOUT.  oUCH.  hE REALLY DIDN'T UNDERSTAND THAT THE PUSH FOR VOTER id HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH RACISM BUT WITH AN URGENT DESICRE TO PROTECT EL

hE REALLY REALLY REALLY HADN'T ENTERTAINED FOR A MOMENT THAT THE PUSH FOR VOTER id WAS ANYTHIJG BUT RACIST.   qwHEREAS i AND MILLIONS i UNDERSTOOD THOUGHT AS i DID HAD NO OTHER IDEA THAN THAT IT WAS IMPERATIVE TO DO SOMETHING TO STOP THE FRAUD.  fRAJUD WE SAW HAPPENING IN THAT ELECTION AND PREVIOUS ELECTIONS THAT APPARENTLY NOBODY ON THE OTHER SIDE WAS SEEING, THOUGH THAT WOULDN'T HAVE OCCURRED TO ME UNTIL i JUST HEARD mCwHORTER \'S BAFFLEMENT .   jUST A LITTLE SLICE OF THE ONGOING POLARIZATION IN THE COUNTRY BUT IT DEPRESSED ME MORE THAN MOST EXAMPLES OF IT.  jOHN mCwHORTER?:  wELL YEAH HE'S GOT A LOT OF LEFTIST VIEWS WHICH IS DEPRESSING ENOUGH BUT HE'S A THINKER AND IN A POSITION TO HEAR THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ISSUE IN A WAY THE AVERAGE CITIZEN DOESN'T THESE DAYS WHAT WITH CANCEL CULTURE AND CENSORSHIP BY THE TOTALITARIAN LEFT.

iT MADE ME CRY BUT THEN A LOT OF THINGS MAKE ME CRY THESE DAYS.  aND i WON'T GO FORTHER INTO THIS ONE FOR NOW.  eXCEPT TO SAY THAT OF COURSE mCwHORTER HAS NO CLUE THAT THERE WAS ANY FRAUD WORTHY OF NOTE.  oUCH.    mAYBE lOURY DOESN'T EITHEi'VE BEEN \\\\\\\\\R, i'M NOT SURE.

\\

\ REALLY 

sORRY, TYPING IS GETTING OUT OF CONTROL

i THOUGHT i WAS GOING TO GO ON TO A COUPLE OTHER THEMES i'VE LITENED TO RECENTLY ON lOURY AND mCwHORTER'S DISCUSSIONS BUT i CAN'T REMEMBER WHY i WANTED TO DISCUSS THEM SO i GUESS i WON'T.  eXCEPT TO SAY THAT ONE OF THEIR GUESTS WAS IRRITATINGLY WOKEISH AND CONSDERED HIMSELF A THEOLOGIAN, AND ANOTHER WAS A SOCIALIST WITH THE USUAL UTOPIAN IRRTATIONALISTY THAT IN MY OPINION SHOULD NEVER EVER HAVE GOTTEN AFOTTING IN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT FOUNDATIONAL PRINCIPLES IN aMERICA.  tHIS IS INDEED A FALLEN WORLD BUT THE REASON FOR ACKNOWLEGING THAT ISN'T TO WEEP AND MOURN OVER IT BUT  TO DO AS THE aMERICNA fOUNDERS DID AND TRY TO PROVIDE FOR CECK AND BALANCES TO THWART THE HUMAN TENDENCY TO TAKE OVER AND DOMINATE WHEN GIVEN A CHANCE.  wHAT'S HAPPENING NOW IS THAT RTHE Lefdt has figured out how to get around all those checks and is pushing hard against them and may succeed in establishing their own craziness as tyrants over all the rest of ius.

So I'll skitter on over to an interview by Loury of a guy named Delano Squaires, or something like that.  Yes I think so.  Delano.  A genuine Christian, what a breath of fresh air.  Loury says he went through a Christian phase back in the eighties I thijnjk but I've never heard him explain why he left it except I suppose I can guess as I recognize some trends in his polit8ical views that veer away from a Christian perspetive.      Nevertheless a lot of what he says is congenial o a Christian point of view and I'm sure that's why I like him so much.   It's hard to understand though nhow anyone could have been Born Again and then leave it behind.  Could he really have been Born Again or just assuing it because he'd joined the club as it were?    I mean, to be born again, to be regenerate which is another word of it, is to have the life of God in you, implanted because of your faith in Christ's death on the cross for us.   If you have that life in you how can you give it up?  Well, you an't and if he has it I can only assume he'll eventually come back to it.

Anyway it was interesting to hear the interview with Delano Squires with Loury playing devil's advocate, although I don't know for sure that Loury doen't himself hold some of those opinions he was advocating.    Squires of course advocates for biblcial principles as solutions to problems in the black community and Loury raised questions about how anyone could espounse a religious perspective that is only one religion out of the many that exist in the country.  Dies Kiyrt see ut tgus wqat ir bit>   Does Loury see it this way or not?    

rthe Amerian Founders, at least the Big Five, Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Franklin and Paine, were not Christians.  But they did revere biblical morality and thought the new republic depended on the continuation of biblical morality among the citizenry if it could work.  And we've long since lost that biblical perspective.  We are now in post Christian America and totalitarian tyranny is on the odoorstep.  With their focus so much on the problems of the black community are Louryu and McWhorter even aware of this trend tot totalitarianism?  Globalism?   Or is all that just a feverish concern of the far right in their thinking?

I don't know.  But as Squirees was laying out his view of the necessity of recovering some basic moral principles for the sake of saving the black community and Loury was questionin how that could possibly work in this day and age, it brought me back to my own view that recovering Christianityh is the onlyh solution to the whole mess.

Too late perhaps.  Impossible now perhaps.  But then missionaries have gone to remote bastoions of heathenism and discovered fertile ground for the gospel after they've done some spade work, and maybe it's not beyond possible to do the same in our own heathen societiy.   In many communities, not just the black community.  Yes, missionary type work, that's what I'm thinking of.  there are churches, and Im'm thinking only of the true churches here, not the woke monstroszities and other compromised apostate wrecks of churchs, get out of your pews and go intgo the community and set up some sort of ministry to bring the people to Christ or at least to biblical morality.  That's worth something and if you want to samve a community I don't see an;y other path to it.

Get people saved, get them born again.  the life of god will lead them.  But at least give them the biblical morality that the American Founders consdiered to be so necessary to the preservation of the Repbulic.

Restore the Ten Commadments.  Good grief, such basic stuff of life in those commandements.   Even if you don't grasp that they reflect an actual supernmatural Law that runs the actual universe you should be able to see that they have practical power to gude people awsay from death and desatruction to some kind of orderly existence.  Better of course that they be understood as that supernatural moral law though, because fear of Hell really does have some transforming power.  If you think that stealing is going to take you there you 'll think tweice about stealing, and so on.  And we've lost that fear of course.

pONDERINGS ABOUT FUNJDAMENTALISM AND lOURY AND mCwHORTER

 It's been a while since i listened to glenn Loury with his friend John McWhorter, not sure how I lost track of them, eyesight problems plus computer glitches and so on, probably also memory loss which I'd rather not acknowledge but there it is.  Of course I like them becuse so much of what they have to say is compatible with my conservative mindset, although here and there they say things I find way too liberal or leftist for me, not suco much Loury as McWhorter.  Wnyway I've been enjoying their thoughtful discussions again.  

And of course something came up that triggeredmy Gootta Answer That One reflex, no deep thinking here, just the usual woopsie that's wrong needs to be answered.  Thoughts about the guy who attacked Slman Rushei on stage.  McWhorter compared the mentality behid that act with wokeist irrationality and the right wing conviction that the last election was stolen, and in general any mindset he considers to be set in congrete and impervious to reason.  Loury more or less concurred as far as I could tell, he didn't get into detail in his responses.

Itt always rattles me when peopole speak of Islamic jidahist actions as if they were only one kind of Islamism, or in any way a cultural or temporal phenomenon, as in an expression of "modernity" as they characterized it.  or McWhorter did.  Memory bad, not sure it was McWhorter.  Sigh.    But I just don't get how they overlook the screaming fact that such an act as the attempted muirder of Rushdie i8s of the ssessence of Islam and not some specialized faction of Islam.  Maybe you have to be a cHRISTIAN TO HAVE IT IN THE RIGHT PERSPECTIVE.  iF YOU'RE A "SECULAR" TYPE THINKER, EVEN THE BEST, YOU ARE GOING TO PROJECT A MENTALITY ON SUCH AN ACT THAT HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH IT.   

tHEY USE THE TERM "FUNDAMENTALISM" TOO OF COURASE, AND AS USUAL THERE'S A VAGUE SENSE AT LEAST EVEN WITH THESE THOUGHTFUL MEN THAT THERE'S SOMETHING ABOUT FUNDAMENTALISM ITSELF, NO MATTER ITS PHILOSOPHICAL CONTEXT, THAT TENDS TOWARD A SORT OF VIOLENCE.  sO iSLAMIC FUNDAMENTALISM IS BLURRED WITH cHRISTIAN FUNDAMENTALISM.  iT'S MOST ANNOYING.

fUNDAMENTALISM IS THE CORE COCTRINE, OR CALLIT DOGMA, OF ANY RELIGION OR IDEOLOGY.  dOGMA IS THE CODIFICATION OF THE CORE TENETS OF THE DOCTRINE.  tHEY ARE FIXED TRUTHS GIVEN BY AN AUTHORITY CONSIDERED TO BE INERRANT.  GOD HIMSELF IN THE CASE OF iSLAM AND cHRISTIANITY.  oF COURSE SINCE THEY DISAGREE IN THOSE TENETS THEY CAN'T BOTH BE TRUE AND YOU HAVE TO DECISDE BETWEEN THEM OR REJECT BOTH, BUT THESE OUTSIDERS USUALLY DON'T TAKE THAT KIND OF POSITION TOWARD EITHER.  

sURE THERE ARE MODERATE mUSLIMS BUT TO BE MODERATE IN THAT CONTEXT MEANS TO REJE CT THE FUNDAMENTYAL TRUTH TENTS OF THE IDEOLOGY.  THE FUNDAMENTALS ARE IN FACT SET IN CONCRETE BY THEIR ORIGINA IN THE MIND OF AN INFALLIBLE sOURCE, AND ANY mUSLIM, NO MATTER HOW LIBERAL OR MODERATE, CAN ALWAYS REVERT TO THAT PRIMARY DOGMA, AND THAT IN FACT IS HOW MANY VIOLENT JIHADISTS ARE BORN.  tHEY SEE THAT gOD HIMSELF DEMANDED THE KILLING OF THE iNFIDEL AND OVERNIGHT THEY CONVERT TO THE TRUE iSLAM AND BEOMCE ONE OF ITS SOWORDBEARING DEFENDERS.   tHE RELIGION ITSELF DICTATES THE KILLING OF THE iNFIDEL, THIS HAS NOTHING WHATEVER TO DO WITH MODERNITY OR CULTURE OR ECONOMIC CONCETS OR PERSONAL ITY OR ANY OF THAT.  mAHER SEEMS TO ET IT B UT SO MANY OTHERS DON'T.   iT IS iSLAM ITSELF THAT IS THE SOURCE OF JIDHADIST MURDER.  iT IS A SATANIC RELIGION.  cAN YOU KNOW THAT UNLESS YOU ARE A cHRISTIAN?  pROBABLY NOT.

sO THAT TRIGGERED MY BLOGGER REFLEXRT, AND THEN THERE WAS THE COMMENT ABOUT RIGHTWINGERS AS SUPPOSELY SHOWING THTE SAME IRRATIONAL UNREASONING FUNDMANETALIST SORT OF THINKING IN THE CONVICTION THAT THE LAST ELECTION WAS STOLEN    i GUESS THEY SINCERELY BELIEVE THAT IT WASN'T SOTOLEN BUT i HAVE TROUBLE FIGURING OUT HOW.  i STARTED HERARING ABOUT THE INCIDENTS OF FRAUD LONG BEFORE i HEARD tRUMP HIMSELF SAY ANTYHING ABOUT IT.  eVERY DAY i WAS HERARING OF THIS OR THAT WITNESS TO THIS OR THAT SORT OF FRAUD THAT OCCCURRED IN THIS OR THAT PRECINCT, A LOT OF IT VERY SMALL SCALE BUT SOME OF IT AS BIG AS TRUCKLOADS OF FAKE BALLOTS BEHING TRAPORTED FROM OTHER STATES TO BE COUNTED IN THE WEE HOURSE OF THE MORNING AFTER THE WITNESSES HAD GONE HOME.   dID NOBODY ELSE HEAR THIS STUFF?  wAS IT ONLYH THOSE WHO WERE LISTENING TO THE CONSERVATIVE TALK SHOW HOSTS?  

i DON'T KNOW IF IN THE END THE ELECTION WAS WON BY bIDEN OR NOT BUT i CERTAINLY HAD THE STRONG IMPRESSION THAT I WASN'T AN COULDN'T HAVE BEEN FOR MANY REAOSNS.  i STILL HAVE THAT IMPRESSION.  aND IT WASN'T tRUMP WHO CONVINCED ME OF IT, IT WAS ALL THOSE AFFADAVITS SIGNED BY ALL THOSE WITNESSES IN ALL THOSE PRECINCTIS.    AND IT HURTS EVER Y TIME i HEAR SOME NEWSCAST TALK ABOUIT TRUMP'S SUPPOSED ATTEMPT TO OVERTHROW THE ELECTION.  wHAT A FOUL LIE.  eVEN IF HE IS WRONG, AND THE ELECTION WAS WON FAIRLY BY bIDEN, IT WAS STILL NO ATTEMPT TO OVERTHROW THE ELECTION, IT WAS AN EXPRESSION OF HIS BELIEF THAT HE LOST BECAUSE OF ELECTION FRAUD.  iT MAKES MY STOMACH LURCH WHEN i HEAR THAT PHRASE REPEATED OVER AND OVER ON SUPPOSEDLY OBJECTIVE NEWSCASTS, OH FORGET THAT WE ALL KNOW THEY AREN'T OBJECTIVE, ANYWAY, REPEATED OVER AND OVER THATHE ATTEMPTED TO OVERTHROW THE ELECTION.  tHE FRAUD GOES SO DEEP THESE DAYS IT HURTS.  i MEAN ALL LEVELS OF FRAUD SINCE i STILL SUSPECT THE ELECTION WAS LOST DIUE TO FRAUD, BUT i ALSO MEAN THE FRAUD OF THE DAILY LIES WE HEAR ON THE NEWS BROADCASTS.    tO CALL THOSE WHO BELIEVE THE ELECTOIN WAS RIGGED IRRATIONAL AND IMPERVIOUS TO REASON IS DEEP SLANDER.

aT LEAST THEY GOT IT RIGHT ABOUT THE IRRATIONALITY OF THE WOKEISTS.

Demonic ubterfuges

Jan Markell's latest Understanding the Times radio show included the story of the landing of a UFO in a Las Vegas backyard which even the police confiremed to be believable, not a hoax and not delusionsl, and that there were two beings of some sort that were seen near the craft.  Eightfeet tall with huge eyes.  

Sp O kist wamt tp sau agaom . wjat pf cpirse Kam amd jer giest a;sp saod. tjese are de,pms/  De,pms are s[orotia; beomgs. pr 
omterdo,emsopma;
" gbeomgs tjat jate tje ji,am race amd create a;; lomds pf dece[topms tp emsmareis amd tru tp [revemt is frp, seelloomg sa;vatopm/  tjeu [retemd tp be pir savoprs om pme set pf sceomarops wjocj omc;ie IFP [jemp,ema amd mear deatj ex[eroemces wjocj are bptj pm tje omcrease recdemt;ui. tjeu wamt tp dostract is frp, Gpd amd re[;ace Gpd amd ,ale tje,se;ve somtp tpir froemds amd savoprs/  tjeu arem

t/  Tjeu are evo; beomgs. fa;;em amge;s pr [erja[s tje s[orots pf tje Me[jo;o,. s[orotia; beomgs om amu cas amd tjere ,au be ,amu varoeotes pf tje,. O dpm

Some of these "interdimenasional beings: possess human beings, and some of those human beings welcome it, having bought the lie that they need humans to allow them to speak their messages to us or some such.  the channelers who let themselve be such conduits for their idiotic messages need to wake up and seek Christ who is the only protection from them.     

they may manifest in many different ways, or materialize as it were.  This is not advanced technology in these UFOs, theis is just the way spiritual beings behave and it defies normal behaviin the physical world.  

As Jan and her guest surmise, they are probably gearing up to provide a Likely Sotry to explain away the Rapture of the Christian Church when it occurs.  It wasn'[t God who beamed us up, it was aliens on spacecraftg.  They'll probably get away with such a depeption with wayh too many people

t lmpw. bit amu wau tjeor omtemtopms tpward is are MPT froemd;u/

Climate Chate , Gun control etc

 Just a couple of thoughts on the subject

Heard recently that solar flares can cause heat waves and that we recently had a solar flare, preceding our current heat wave.  reasonable cause and effet scenario perhaps?

Some time ago haeard that seagoing trafifce, tanger ships, which are now more numberous as we eliminate pipeline delive3ry and that sort of thing, also increas ein rail delivery of oil for the same reason but that's a digression.  Anyway seagoing traffic, allthose big ships, container ships and all that, trekking across the oceans from one part of the glob to another all the time, put out TWELVE TIMES the air polution of all the terrestrial traffic on earth.  The sort of statistic that for some reason never gets taken into account by the climate change hysterics.  Just a thought.  

I have my own thought that I've mentioned efore here, that yes there is some global warming going on  but that the natural causes are likely far more causal than anytihjg we are doing as human beings running our lives with various forms of fuel.  I think if we all took the Bible seriously we would reaslize that the Flood brought on a huge ice age through the rapid evaculation of heat after the collapse of the moisuture layer, that there was only one ice age in the forty five hundred or so years since the Flood, yes I'm talking about the worldswide Flood fo Noah, and that what is interpreted as many ice ages is no doubt better explained as a series of advance and repereat episodes of the same ice age, gradulallyt over the millennia warming up.  The warming up accounts for gloval climate change in the dxirection of overall greater heat, and it's a natural and inevitable causal factor.

This whole climatge change hysteria is political and scientifically bogus.  There are way more variables involved thatn they wever bother to consider and that is unscientific.  The phenomena are complex beyond any of the glib ways these hysterical ones or politically motivated ones rely on.

Seems to me there is global warming to some extent, the glaciaers do seem to have retreated back greatly over the last hundred yearsa or so, but this blaming it on human activities has no serious enough scientific basis to justify any of the draconian solutions they are trying to push on us.

Later:  Another thing that I never hear about is the fact that oil isn't used only for fuel, let alone only for the family vehicles that are the main target of the climate demonizers, but most of it is used to make plastics.  A statistic I heard was thrity percent for fuel and seventy for plastics.  We're awash in plastics.  Wre couldh't do without them, or are they going to make us do without them?  In any case it's not our family cars that should be targeted as the main culprits.  You might even say they are the least of the problem when you consder that both air and sea traffic use prodigiously more fuel than our cars.  AND that more than twice the amount of oil pumped out of the ground doesn't even go to vehicluilar fuel but to plastics.  

SO many things the climate fanatics aren't taking into account as they go after a pet target whose elimination would wreck life for all of us.

Gun control is another cultural arena that is plagued by the same kind of irrationality.  they'll give statistic on the use of firearms in homicides without bothering to take into account who is committing the majority of the homicides, such as criminals and gang members in violence prone parts of the big citiies, and that the guns are often illegal anyway so that doubling down on makeing more aspects of their ownership illegal isn't going to accomplish anything toward reducing gun violence.    All it is going to do is penalize the ordinary citizen who needs a gun for legitimate purposes includinmg self defense.  It's hard to avoid the thought that this is exactly the popular ion they WANT to punishesh.  it's political and they want us unarmed so tehy can control us.  If it isn't that then it's just plain stuipidity and irrationalikty.

Biw U;n tgubjubg ifother ways we are being ruled by crazy people these days.  their economic policies for instance, guaranteed to destroy civilization.  The whole racist nightmare they've concocted, first calling incidents racially motivated that can be shown not to be but that showing is suppressed because they want to keep everybody stirred up and at each other's throats.   

wHAT iS a uNIVERSITY fOR?

 wATCHING bRET AND hEATHER'S PODCAST FROM jULYO 5TH, ONLY A SHORT WAY INTO IT AND HAVE A COULLE OF COMMENTS i WANT TO MAKE.  fIRST i'M THRILLED THAT THEY AREADVERTISING hILLSDALE cOLLEGE NOW.  i HEAR ITR ADVERTISED ON A LOT OF CONSERVATIVE TALK SHOWS AND i'VE TRIED TO SIGN UP MYSELF BUT FOUND THAT MY BAD EYES MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE.  mAYBE SOMEONE WILL COME ALONG WHO CAN HELP ME WITH THAT  SOME TIME BUT FOR NOW i CAN' LISTEN TO THEM.  bUT i CAN TELL THAT THEIR OFFERINGS ARE STELLAR AND WISH EVERYONE IN THE COUNTRY WOULD TAKE THEIR COURSES, MANY OF WHICH ARE COMPLETELY FREE ONLINE.

mY SECOND COMMENT IS IN RESPONSE TO A QUOTATION hEATHER GAVE BY jUSTICE fRANKFURTER BACK IN 1957 AOUT THE PURPOSE OF THE UNIVERSITY IN WHICH HE GOES ON ABOUT HOW THE WHOLE POINT IS TO STIMULATE INQUIRITY INTO ABSOLUTELY VERYTHING, AND ONE OF THE LINES HE QUOTES IS "dOGMA AND hYPOTHESIS ARE INCOMPATIBLE.   bRET PARTICULARLY PICKED UP ON THAT LINE.  

lET ME START BY SAYING THAT ON MOST TOPICS i WOULD HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT IDEA.  eVERYTHING MUST BE OPEN TO QUESTION TO STIMULATE CRITICIAL AND CREATIVE THINKING.  with one exception.  

wHAT bRET AND hEATHER MAY NOT KNOW, OR HAVE DISMISSED IF THEY DID EVER KNOW IT, IS THAT THE WHOLE IDEA OF THE UNIVERSITY WAS BROUGHT ABOUT BY cHRISTIANITY, AND THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO WAY TO AVOID DOGMA WITH THAT SORT OF FOUNDATION, NOR COULD IT BE JUSTIFIED ON ANY GROUND WHATEVER THAT ITS DOGMA BE CRITICIZED OR OPEN TO QUESTION.  aS LONG AS IT'S THE TRUE DOGMA OF COURSE.  aLL DOGMA MEANS IS THAT THE TEACHINGS OF THE FAITH ARE CODIFIED INTO A SET OF PRINCIPLES.  tHEY ARE TIMELESS TRUTHS THAT CANNOT BE ALTERED BECAUSE THEY ARE TRUTH, AND DOGMA IS SIMPLY THE CODIFIED FORM OF IT, THE COLLECTION AND CONDENSATION OF THOSE TRUTHS INTO EASILY DIGESTIBLE FORM.  dOGMA IS NOT COMPATICBLE WITH HYPOTHESIS, BUT HYPOTHESIS IS NOT THE SUM TOTAL OF EDUCATION.  oR THE PURPOSES OF THE UNIVERSITY.

hARVARD WAS FOUNDED ON THE TRUTHS OF SCRIPTURE FOR PURPOSE OF TRAINING PASTORS.  sO WAS yALE, sO WAS pREINCETON, SO WERE A DOZEN OTHER UNIVERSITIES MORE OR LESS ON THE iVY lEAGUE PATTERN.  iT WOULDN'T BE TOO HARD TO MAKE THE CASE THAT IT WAS THE SECULARIZATION AND PERVERSION OF THE ORIGINAL INTENTION OF THESE INSTITUTIONS THAT HAS ALLOWED THE CURRENT DEGENERATION OF THE WHOLE COUNTRY WE ARE NOW LIVING THROUGH.  nONcHRISTIANS WILL OF COURSE BE INDIGNANT AT SUCH AN IDEA.  tHIS IS A FALLEN WORLSL;D AND IT'S THE UNBELIEVERS WHO BEST REPRESENT WHAT THAT MEANS.  tHE GROWTH OF THE cHRISTIAN cHURCH ALLOWED FORTH E CREATION OF wESTERN cIVILIZATIONS AND TO SOME EXTENT EVERN THE CIVILIZING OF LANDS FAR FROM THE wEST.  bUT A STEADY STEP BY STEP ATTACK ON IT BY SATANIC FORCES WELCOMED BY THE FALLEN SIN NATURE OF HUMANITY HAS PRETTY MUCH BROUGHT ALL THAT TO RUIN.    pERHAPS WE CAN PUSH BACK ON IT TO SOME SMALL EXTENT BUT THE POSSIBILITY THAT WE COULD EVER REGAIN ITS FORMER STRENGTH IS NOT EVEN TO BE CONTEMPLATED IN THIS WORLD.  wE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT FOR THE mILLENNIUM FOR A RETURN TO TRUTH.  aLTHOUGH i STILL DO HAVE SOME HOPE THAT WE CAN MAKE SOME PROGRESS TOWARD A RETURN TO FORMER RATIONALITY, AND i HOPE eRIC mETASAS' BOOK lETTER TO THE aMERICNA cHURCH WILL HAVE A BIG IMPACT IN THAT DIRECTION.

wE HAVE SOME GOOD PRINCIPLES THAT COULD TAKE US BACK TO SOME OF THE ORMER GOODNESS WE'VE LOST IF THOSE PRINCIPLES GET RECOGNIZED AND REINTSTATED.  bUT THE HUMAN RACE IS FALLEN, PEOP.E THEMSELVES ARE NOT REASONABLE AND IT'S ONLYH THE MERCY OF gOD THAT WE HAVE SUCH PRINCIPLES AVAILABLE TO US IF WE WOULD STICK TO THEM.  fIRST OF ALL THE bIBLE OF COURSE, THE ROCK BOTTOM FOUNDATION OF ALL TRUTH.  bURT THE aMERICAN DOCUMENTS OF OUR FOUNDING ARE A VERY GOOD BODY OF PRINCIPLES THAT COULD REINSTATE A LOT OF GOODNESS IN THIS WORLD IF WE COULD GET BACK TO THEM AFTER THE DESTRUCTIVE ATTACK ON THEM OVER THE LAST DENTURY OR SO BY mARXISM.  

tHE mISSING pUZZLE pIECE TO THE gREAT rESET IS THE pOPE

Since I can't access much beyond You Tube these days I'm grateful when some of my favorite people show up on You tube.  Jan Markell's Understanding the Times radio program sometimes shows up there although the most "sensitive" prolgramming is only shown on her website.  Anyway, this weekend's program is about the Great Reset and I'm very glad it wasn't too "sensitive" to be shown at You Tube.  Good overview of the globalist agenda, even giving some of Klaus Schwab's background as a member of a family close to the Nazis.   He's really trying to usher in the Fourth Reich, as Markell and her guest Billy Crone clearly identify it, although his term for it is tHE fOURTH iNDUSTRIAL rEVOLUTION.  tHE SCARY PART OF COURSE IS HOW THEY PLAN TO CONTROL US ALL AND DIGITAL CURRENCY IS GOING TO BE THE MAIN TOOL FOR THAT, WHICH THEY SPELL OUT TOWARD THE END OF THE PROGRAM.

j

jAN RAISES THE QUESTION AT ONE POINT wHY WOULD THESE GLOBAL MOVERS AND SHAKERS BE WILLING TO SUBJIT TO THE aNTICHRIST, UNDERSTANDING OF COURSE THAT ALL THIS IS LEADING UP TO THE AGENDA SPELLED OUT IN THE bOOK OF rEVELATION KNOWN AS THE gREAT tRIBULATION, THE REIGN OF THE aNTICHRST AND ALL THAT ,  THE gREAT rESET BEING UNDERSTOOD AS THE FORMAT FOR THE WHOLE SHEBANG.    tHE QUEi

sINCE i KEEP ARGUING FOR THE pOPE AS THE aNTICHRIST i DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE QUESTION wHY WOULD THEY SUBMIT TO HIM.  mOST IF NOT ALL OF THEM ARE cATHOLICS, THEY ALREADY REGARD THEMSELVES AS SUBSERVIENT TO THE pOPE.  hE SIMPLY HASN'T YET EMERGED AS THE FINAL WORLD LEADER.   cHRIS pINTO IDENTIFIED IN ONE OF HIS SHOWS A WHILE BACK HOW MANY OF THEM ARE cATHOLICS, INCLUDING gATES AND fAUCI.  cERTAINLY bIDEN IS AND tRUDEAU AND mACRON, BUT ALSO sCHWAB HIMSELF.  pRINCE cHARLES ISN'T AND HE MAY BE THE ONLY ONE, BUT HE'S INTO iSLAM AND DOESN'T IDENTIFY WITH THE TRADITIONAL cHURCH OF eNGLAND ANYWAY.   oNCE THE pOPE IS RECOGNIZED AS THE aNTICHRIST THERE WOULDN'T BE ANY PROBLEM ANSWERING THAT QUESTION, BUT OF COURSE MOST END TIMES PROPHECY DISCUSSIONS CONTINUE TO REGARD THE FINAL aNTICHRIST AS YET A MYSTERY TO BE REVEALED JUST BEFORE HE TAKES POWER.     i CAN'T ACCESS cHRIS pINTO'S SITE ANY MORE EITHER SO i DON'T KNOW WHAT HE'S BEEN SAYING ABOUT ALL THIS BUT i'M SURE HE'S NOT IGNORING THE cATHOLIC AGENDA WHICH HE'S ALWAYS BEEN THE STRONGEST VOICE.  

i OUT THAT hITLER'S THIRD rEIGCH MEANT THE THIRD rOMAN eMPIRE.  tHAT NEVER GETS ACKNOWLEDGED ANYWHERE THAT i KNOW OF.  tHERE WAS rOME, THERE WAS THE REVIVED rOME IN THE hOLY rOMAN eMPIRE LED BY THE pOPE TO WHOM KINGS HAD TO BOW, THEN THERE WAS THE tHIRD rEIGCH THAT DIDN'T FULLY GET OFF THE GROUND, FORTUNATELY, AND NOW WHAT sCHWAB WANTS TO DO IS INAUGUATE THE fOURTH rEIGN CH OR THE fOURTH rOMAN eMPIRE.  hEY IT ALL FITS TOGETHER IF YOU JUST TAKE THE BLINDERS OFF AND REOGNIZE THAT THE rOMAN cATHOLIC cHURCH IS bABYLON THE gREAT THE wHORE OF rEVELATION 17, THE HEIR OF THE RELIGION OF nIMROD. MIGHT ALSO POINT 

cORRECTION:  sORRY, NOT prince cHARLES, HE'S NOW king cHARLES.  

aND i SHOULD PROBABLY MENTION THAT THERE ARE AN AWFUL LOT OF cATHOLICS IN OUR aMERICAN GOVERNMENT NOW TOO.  a FEW YEARS AGO pELOSI AND bAYNOR, MISPELLED IT i'M SURE, HAD THE pOPE VISIT cONGRESS, A HORRIFIC AFFRONT TO OUR pROTESTANT BEGINNINGS.  yES, pROTESTANT.  wHAT WAS THE MAIN TYRANNY THE FIRST aMERICANS FLED FROM ANYWYA?  rELIGIOUSX TYRANNY, AND WHAT WAS THE GLARINGLY PREDOMINANT TYRANNY IN eUROPE BUT THE rOMAN cATHOLIC cHURCH FOR ALMOST A THOUSAND YEARS.  tHEN THE aNGLICANS TOOK ON SOME OF THE DISEASE BUT THE aNTICHRIST RELIGION OFTHE pOPE WAS ITS INSPIRATION, AND THAT CAME FROM PAGAN rOME OF THE cAESARS.     aMERICAN cATHOLICS SEEM TO BE A DIFFERENT KIND OF cATHOLIC FOM THOSE IN eUROPE.  tHEY SOUNDS A LOT MORE LIKE pROTESTANTS.  bUT IF THEY STILL ACKNOLEDGE THE pOPE AS THE hEAD OF THE cHURCH WHICH USURPS THE ROLE OF cHRIST, IT MIGHT NOT TAKE MUCH TO THROW US TO THE gREAT rESET WHEN THE TIME COMES.  wHICH IS NOT VERY FAR OFF AS THINGS APPEAR ALREADY.

The Reality of Demon Possession and the Sad Foolishness of Catholic Exorcism Oh, And Doubts that Keep Growing About the Michael Gagliardi Story

Last night I heard the story of Michael Gagliardo through George Noory's interview of him on his program Coast to Coast AM.  While the story is convincing in some ways I have to confess that I end up with some doubts about its authenticity and ultimately haven't come to a certain conclusion about its realityu.  This is the story of a young boy whose mother became demon possessed when he was very yuoung and how he managed to survive it despite suffering many emotional effecdcts from it that he says are getting worse and won't ever leave him.

I'll have to come back and flesh out the story, I'm really not up to it right now, but I think I'll nust sketch out the bare bones and hope to write more later.

He mentions that after his experience he did a lot of research into demon possession and in particular refers to the case of Annaliese Michel whose symptoms were in many ways similar to those of his mother.

Although Galiardo is Italian and would be expected to have been raised Catholicd  he doesn't refer to any experien ces with church as a child that I've run across.  But annaliese who was raised in Bavaria lived a devoted Catholic life and her demon possession is explained at least by some as her wsillingness to suffer for the sins of the world through that possession.  In one caccount it was the "virgin Maryh" who offered her that means of geing of service.

Annaliese underwent over sixty exporcisms in her short life, none of which freed her from her possession.  Gagliardo on the other hand says that although he himself wasn't possessed he became abeliever in Jesus Christ and found that the name of Jesus is powerful against his emotional symptoms such as PTSD, nightmares and the experiences of demon ic activity in his home, banding on walls and that sort of thing.  So he seems to know the power of Christ.  But Annaliese and her woujldbe rescuers apparently do not.    

The Name of Jesus is powerful against demons.  I've personally experineced the power of His name.  But if you fiddle around with the "virgin Mary" and the Rosary and all that Catholic nonesense you can't possibly ever be freed from the world of demons.

that's all I'm going to be able to write for now.  But other names are on You Tube for anyone who wants to know the detils about the experiences of Gagliardo and Annaliese.

Later:  It was the demon apparition that calls itself The Virgin Mary who suggested to Annaliese that she suffer through demon possession for the sins of the world.  This is blasphemy, as Christ died for the sins of the world and no further suffering is needed to expaiate the sins of believers and keep people from Hell.  This alone would guarantee the continued and probable deepening of Annaliese's possession.  

Thinking of why I doubt the account given by Michael Gagliardi I compare it with that of Annaliese who had multiple witnesses to her condition and even a tape recording of her demonic speesh and screams.  There isn't a shred of evidence of any objective sort for the claims of Gagliardi that I know of.  If it's in his book I'd miss that of course, but if it is there is no good reason not to refer to it in these interviews he has given.  Since there apparently isn't anything at all it casts much doubt on his story.  There are features of it that souns quite a bit like the accounts of Annaliese and it's possible he just put it all together form that sort of description.  His mother is described as sitting all day in a chair and talking to herself as well as screaming and sounding like the gutteral voice of Annaliese.  No he didn't mention Annaliese in that connection, I just mean that the description of her vocalizations fits the recording of Annaliese.   

Is there a photo of his mother anywhere?  Not that I know of.  Why is it that absolutely notoby else seems to know about her condition that will testify to it?  He says all the family are "estranged."  Does that really account for the total silence?  His sister who suffered from the same abuse and supposedly was almost murdered by her mother won't speak up for her brother?  Seems odd.  Over nineteen years no neighbors witnessed enough to come forward with a testimony to her condition?  Well, apparently one called the authorities when she threatened the daughter.  How about that neightbor?  Nother?  Something is wrong here.  No dobtors at the hospital?  No paramedics?  No hostpiral staff?  Sure if this story is real here are witnesses somewhere and it's hard to imagine all of them being totally silent and unavaialble.  

BBut the story also lacks uite a bit of convincing detail.  How did the household function at all when the children were very young if the mother was sitting in a chair all day long?  Who fed the children?  Did the older daughter take a role and why not?  He says she locked herself in her room and he hardly ever saw her.  Really?  If she wouldn't come out how as it that he dared to?  

Perhaps it's true but if it is it needs a lot more evidence.

In any case I have no reason to doubt the story of Annaliese.  And her probablenm appears to be predominantly her Catholicism itself.  

Oh  I forgot a datail whose absense does seem very odd.  The story starts with his supposed memory of his mother pouring scalding soup over his shoulder when he was only three.  She took him to the hosptial where he was treated and released and his focus is completely on her lack of motherly concern for his despite his great pain.  Is it odd or not that he never mentions that if he was badly burnded by scalding soup he would have had deep burns that would have taken a long time to heal and no doubt required many trips to the octror.  If not then the soup wasn't that hot or the story isn't real.  

lATER:  yES THE cATHOLIC PRIESTS DO USE THE NAME OF jESUS IN THEIR EXORCISMS BUT SINCE AT LEAST IN THE CASE OF aNNALIESE mICHEL THEY COULDN'T FREE HER OF HER DEMONS THERE MUST BE SOME WAY THEY USE IT WRONG.  iF YOU MINGLE IT WITH SUCH PAGAN NONSENSE AS HOLY WATER AND CRUCIFIXES AND THE ROSARY AND INCLUDE THE
VIRGIN mARY" IN THE FORMULA, THE NAME OF jESUS BECOMES MEANINGLESS.  hE IS NOT SOVEREIGN GOD IN THAT CONTEXT.