In God’s name many people do horrible things to each other in a way that is not at all different to the horrible things that other people do, who don’t use God’s name. They are no different from each other. The only difference is that some use God’s name whilst others don’t. Essentially, the people who do horrible things to one another behind the authority of words are the same type of people - horrible.
A few of the many authoritative words that people use are ’Allah’, ‘Democracy’, ‘God & Country’ ‘Security’ or just simply ‘God’. Do you think that by using God’s name, it automatically confers God’s blessing, as if God endorses everything we do because we use one of his names? Is this an honest way to conduct our lives? Is it therefore honest to argue that God must be horrible because many people do horrible things in his name? Its like describing the Aston Villa Football Club a band of psychos because of the mindless violence of a few of its supporters. Likewise, do you think that by using the name of a country, it automatically confers the country’s blessing?
So, as the evil young men flew the Airbuses into the Twin Towers crying ‘Allah!’ ‘Allah!’ we must assume that Allah was complicit in the evil they had planned, must we? Is it not a fact that God’s name is used like a cleaning utensil to wash the conscience clean and give the impression that its OK to be horrible, as long as you use a respectable sounding word like God or Country. The Old Testament people did this.
Unfortunately such acts, together with the vain words that precede them, have nothing to do with God. In fact, God is somewhat ashamed of people who constantly use his name in vain. They have been doing it for thousands of years. Likewise, the evil people who drop bombs on men, women and children in Iraq, or anywhere else, are as horrible as the evil young men who knocked down the Twin Towers. By dipping their tongues into a lexicon taught by their respective teachers and then wagging them in the air as if the name of God or some other word or phrase has the power to absolve them from their evil deeds, they show clearly they have not fully understood the truth yet. And how can they be expected to understand when the people who control what is taught in our schools and our churches vehemently oppose the teaching of the truth? Broad is the pathway that leads many to the fire of hell.
“You have heard that it was said to the people long ago, ‘Do not murder, and anyone who murders will be subject to judgement.’ But I tell you that anyone who is angry with his brother will be subject to judgement. Again, anyone who says, ‘Raca,’ is answerable to the Sanhedrin. But anyone who says, ‘You fool!’ will be in danger of the fire of hell” (Matthew5v21-22)
The practice of using God’s name or any other high sounding word as a kind of justification for doing horrible things to each other is not new on this planet. It is this fervent religiousness with which teachers and leaders of his day committed themselves to plan murder and then to get others to carry out their plans that caused the Son of God to rebuke them so often. What the enemies of Christ did in his day are no different from what the enemies do today who sit as leaders in their war cabinets to devise hideous ways of killing innocent people by mass destruction and who then get others to do the killing for them.
“Why is my language not clear to you? Because you are unable to hear what I say. You belong to your father, the devil, and you carry out your father’s desire. He was a murderer from the beginning, not holding to the truth, for there is no truth in him. When he lies, he speak his native language, for he is a liar and the father of lies.” (John8v43-44)
This business of plotting to kill people is deeply distressing, especially when the people who do the plotting today are the same respectable pillars of society who tried to silence Jesus. The very same teachers and leaders. Moreover, the entire edifice of today’s Government has been built over the centuries on ideas that give authority to men to plot the destruction of innocent people who live in distant lands, who pose no threat to us whatsoever. These ideas are embedded in our educational system that teaches our children to regard war as heroic and to respect those who kill for our sakes. We think we can justify these ideas by using some kind of holy mantra like, ‘For God and Country’, ‘Regime Change’, ‘Holy War’ or ‘Defenders of the Faith’ or ‘War on Terror’ ad infinitum. The fact of the matter is, horrible acts of violence are horrible acts of violence and they are not actions that can easily be whitewashed by a language that relies on some higher ethical authority whether as a direct reference to God or to a collection of words enshrined in our statute books. Verbal whitewash, like sanitary towels that keep clean the outer parts, may give the appearance of respectability but cannot absolve the menstrual violence within.
If the holy mantra brings death to innocent people then it is the mantra that is evil as well as the people who speak and teach it. Using a higher authority like God’s name, or the name of a King or General or Country or President, as a justification for violence is all in vain and gross hypocrisy. The mantra is evil.
“Woe to you because you build tombs for the prophets, and it was your forefathers who killed them. So you testify that you approve of what your forefathers did; they killed the prophets, and you build their tombs. (Luke11v47-48)
Predatory institutions that inscribe the cult hero worship of mass destruction on the tombstones and war memorials of our national consciousness are no different from those that murder the innocent in war. The hero worship of mass destruction is most horrible. Doing horrible things to one another is not sanctioned by our hero worship nor is it officially justified by the ethics committee of the State who maintain our tombs and shrines of war.
The light of mankind is so darkened by shadows cast by the totem poles, sacred cows and marble altars that give tribute to people who have killed and maimed through the ages that it is not surprising the language of our art, education and politics has become so encrusted with the idea of killing each other that even Church leaders have succumbed to it. Within these shadows we imbibe each generation with a view of history that glorifies the deeds of men of war. The glory of violence is the testimony of our history books, the same testimony of men from the Old Testament. These same men stared at Jesus with the very same violent eyes of murder as they planned his death because he exposed their murderous hearts with a new language of truth to which they were not accustomed. They had become so accustomed to drinking the old wine of the testimonies of men that the testimony of God Himself, spoken from His own lips, was a new wine that could not be contained in their crusty old wineskins.
What Jesus began he will finish. Whoever you are, whether Oxford atheist, academic historian, theologian, BBC journalist, comedian, don, cardinal, commander, scientist, plasterer, king, whether you can’t or won’t understand the truth that Jesus has revealed, it is going to accomplish what he has promised at Cana. The truth is not negotiable.
“Do not be amazed at this, for a time is coming when all who are in their graves will hear his voice and come out – those who have done good will rise to live, and those who have done evil will rise to be condemned.” (John 5 v 28-29)
By his own death and resurrection God has clearly demonstrated his management of life and death as Son of Man has nothing to do with the testimony of men. He came with great humility to show us our evil ways by letting the teachers and leaders of his society murder him on the cross. This perfect example set by God himself is the way for all creation and there is no excuse for those who carry on taking the law into their own hands as a means of bringing about peace and order by human force. Murderers who take the law into their own hands and kill others with force will be judged at the end of time for their rejection of the One who showed us very clearly the way to trust his management of life and death.
Acts of mass murder come from a very old collection of ideas to do with using physical force to control each other rather then trusting God to control us from within. If God cannot control us from within ourselves we will never be set free from this degenerating loop of destruction. It is an immutable fact of life that the forces of human nature occur within the human spirit not without. The without is just a manifestation of the dark and evil forces within. And it is a cop out to whitewash ourselves with a holy mantra to justify the practice of killing and hating each other. It is a sham & disgrace to educate our children with the idea that the free reign of violence is glorious and noble. It is evil.
The use of human force is completely and utterly repudiated by God himself in the way he dealt with the teachers and leaders who always came accusing him of this and that, always trying to justify their own violence within. For example, when they tried to stop him from healing people he attacked them with words of truth and they responded with acts of violence. Words v. Violence. Truth v. Lies. The teachers and leaders of his day who plotted his violent end are no different from the teachers and leaders today who plot acts of violence against innocent people at home and abroad. Many today are complicit in promoting acts of violence. Whether by teaching children nice things about our forefathers who mass murdered innocent souls or by leading parliament into making decisions that bring mass destruction to innocent lives, everyone it would seem is complicit in promoting violence. The promotion is the mantra, the ideology of self-reliance is the cause, and the destruction of one another is the inevitable and inexorable outcome.
“This is the verdict: Light has come into the world, but men loved the darkness instead of the light because their deeds were evil.” (John 3v19)
In God’s name people do horrible things to one another because they have not met Jesus yet but when they do it will be too late to say sorry.
Monday, August 07, 2006
Sunday, August 06, 2006
Theorists are internalists
When people talk about the future they often refer to it as something that exists in reality, as if it has substance, shape, form and meaning. But the future has no existence other than what we imagine it to be in our minds.
During a period in European history generously named as ‘The Age of Enlightenment” philosophers were always mouthing off about the meaning of life using abstract words like 'beauty', ‘nature’ and 'future' to give gravity and purpose to their arguments. Such arguments had all the appearance of using empirical evidence, of refusing to accept anything as true unless it could be observed to be true, but their use of references to many abstract ideas betrayed their writings as, at best, wish fulfillment, the root of wobbly theory. Their writings have been given canonical status in universities to ensure the world is taught from the perspective of an imagined authority or ‘rule of measurement’ based on a rag bag of scruffy ideas, wild speculations and wobbly theories. In a world that has no specific canon other than relativism in which the mysterious spectacle of an utopian future devoid of black and white, right and wrong, good and evil, is repeatedly referred to as concrete reality, the future could not be more grim. The legacy of their writings form the basis of today’s teaching establishments training children to believe in half-baked truths about a new world order controlled by people who believe they have emanated from chimpanzees.
In order to prove the existence of your future you will need to give it substance, shape, form and meaning by predicting what or where you imagine yourself to be tomorrow. Whatever you come up with will consist of nothing but ideas and you will not have a single shred of evidence to prove these ideas exist as substance in reality. Imagination that relies on abstract things to support an argument has no grounds at all for contending with those whose arguments about the existence of God is grounded in the reality of historical evidence.
If the history of civilisations is anything to go by, the historical evidence for canons being wrong about the future is overwhelmingly stacked against those numerous societies whose collectivised imagination of the future never materialised. Their dusty remains tell us about missions unaccomplished big time. They built their towers, which all fell through moral decay from within. One exception to this is the history of Israel whose future was prophesied by those who believed. God proved himself to be true by telling them about their future, which often happened exactly as he forewarned. He even prepared them for the coming of Jesus Christ centuries beforehand. The historical evidence for God keeping his promise about the future is undeniably more certain and reliable than any number of ideas or theories put together by star-gazing philosophers.
God reveals himself to the world and he does this by telling us about the future so that when it arrives, hopefully, we would recognise his reality, turn from our unbelief and trust his somewhat greater oversight of our time.
Jesus is the only one person in history who claimed to be the sum total of the future and who came back to tell us about it. He suffered for the evidence of eternity knowing that the proof would cause men to defend their cherished beliefs in their own strength, which they thought they did rather well by killing him. When ignorance and fear take over, human reason descends to the depths of brutality as it did in the Dark Ages and the Age of Enlightenment when messengers of Jesus’ gospel got burnt at the stake and their entrails yanked out by barbarous priests of death. He proved himself to be the Truth by 'letting things' happen to him the way he had predicted so that we would recognise him coming to us. God did this to teach us about himself so that we can see the flesh and blood of his substance, shape, form and meaning which is expressed as love for us. Unlike the dubious future, which the whole world continually and mistakenly believes in as a reality, God has substance, shape, form and meaning. He is the future. God is the ultimate absolute reality who has told us everything we need to know about our future and he came as a Son to reveal everything so that we would be left in no doubt.
So, why the contention? Do you contend with the ideas you have about your future by trying desperately to prove to others that the way you have imagined your future has no basis in reality? Do you? Of course not, even though you should, because its true. You're whole life is based on making preparations for the future that you've imagined for yourself and it would therefore be inconceivable to question the reality of 'imagined things' that form the substance and meaning of your life! Yet you contend with God who has made himself known beyond all doubt that he exists in reality. The contention is this: You think you are in control of the environment in which you have been given a wee experience of life and therefore the idea of a higher authority is repugnant to you. This is the way human psychology works and it all sounds perfectly reasonable, except for the glaring stark reality of the condition in which you find yourself. The reality is that people imagine the future and then build social structures by colonising other people into these structures and then build armies to fight each other with arrows and spears, in order to preserve and bring into existence what they have imagined collectively. Kings, laws, mullahs, ceremonies, flags, bishops, graves, shrines, statues and monuments are all expressions of this imagination about possessing the future. Futile phrases like, 'planning for a better future' daub the literature of our collectivised community of academic dreamers and fantasists. Yet you cannot prove that a single hair on your head will be there tomorrow where it is today. When the future does eventually arrive and it turns out to be different from what you imagined, you are disappointed because you realise you have built your life on the quicksand of your Government’s imagination where there is no reality but lies and half baked truths.
I'm telling you that your life is worth more than your mind could ever imagine, more than all the philosophers can imagine with all their skilful use of words and paradigms. The number of stars in the dimension we lamely call ‘space’ cannot contain what constitutes your life. Your life is worth the suffering of God's own flesh and blood who came to us to bridge the gap between imagination and truth. Today, you have no excuse when it comes to choosing whether to live or die. If you choose to believe in your imagination you will die in your imagination. Choose to believe in Jesus Christ and you will die to your imagination but be raised with him whose words will be used to raise you from the dead. His words are not subject to men's imagination, neither men's imagination that came before his resurrection nor that which has been added since because his words are Spirit and Life - the eternal place not governed by the imagination of men. What God promises as a future for you therefore is what God keeps stored for those who believe in Christ. He cannot show you these things until you repent, not a stitch will be shown until you turn from your own way and follow Christ. The only 'thing' you will see is an imagined picture of yourself in the future based on nothing but fantasy.
For God came to us as a man to show us the way, the truth, the LIFE and if you prefer to put your trust in your imagination about life, death and the 'future world' then please don't be angry when at the end of time he says to you, 'But I came to you and you rejected Me'
"In that day (the day He was to come back to show them the resurrection) you will no longer ask me (about) anything. I tell you the truth, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask, and you will receive, and your joy will be complete." John 16 v23-24
These words, and all the others that Jesus spoke, are the only words that are going to remain when everything else on earth and in heaven has passed away. The words you eat today will be the words that will resurrect you tomorrow. Don't be cheated by the fools who have talked themselves out of an eternal inheritance.
During a period in European history generously named as ‘The Age of Enlightenment” philosophers were always mouthing off about the meaning of life using abstract words like 'beauty', ‘nature’ and 'future' to give gravity and purpose to their arguments. Such arguments had all the appearance of using empirical evidence, of refusing to accept anything as true unless it could be observed to be true, but their use of references to many abstract ideas betrayed their writings as, at best, wish fulfillment, the root of wobbly theory. Their writings have been given canonical status in universities to ensure the world is taught from the perspective of an imagined authority or ‘rule of measurement’ based on a rag bag of scruffy ideas, wild speculations and wobbly theories. In a world that has no specific canon other than relativism in which the mysterious spectacle of an utopian future devoid of black and white, right and wrong, good and evil, is repeatedly referred to as concrete reality, the future could not be more grim. The legacy of their writings form the basis of today’s teaching establishments training children to believe in half-baked truths about a new world order controlled by people who believe they have emanated from chimpanzees.
In order to prove the existence of your future you will need to give it substance, shape, form and meaning by predicting what or where you imagine yourself to be tomorrow. Whatever you come up with will consist of nothing but ideas and you will not have a single shred of evidence to prove these ideas exist as substance in reality. Imagination that relies on abstract things to support an argument has no grounds at all for contending with those whose arguments about the existence of God is grounded in the reality of historical evidence.
If the history of civilisations is anything to go by, the historical evidence for canons being wrong about the future is overwhelmingly stacked against those numerous societies whose collectivised imagination of the future never materialised. Their dusty remains tell us about missions unaccomplished big time. They built their towers, which all fell through moral decay from within. One exception to this is the history of Israel whose future was prophesied by those who believed. God proved himself to be true by telling them about their future, which often happened exactly as he forewarned. He even prepared them for the coming of Jesus Christ centuries beforehand. The historical evidence for God keeping his promise about the future is undeniably more certain and reliable than any number of ideas or theories put together by star-gazing philosophers.
God reveals himself to the world and he does this by telling us about the future so that when it arrives, hopefully, we would recognise his reality, turn from our unbelief and trust his somewhat greater oversight of our time.
Jesus is the only one person in history who claimed to be the sum total of the future and who came back to tell us about it. He suffered for the evidence of eternity knowing that the proof would cause men to defend their cherished beliefs in their own strength, which they thought they did rather well by killing him. When ignorance and fear take over, human reason descends to the depths of brutality as it did in the Dark Ages and the Age of Enlightenment when messengers of Jesus’ gospel got burnt at the stake and their entrails yanked out by barbarous priests of death. He proved himself to be the Truth by 'letting things' happen to him the way he had predicted so that we would recognise him coming to us. God did this to teach us about himself so that we can see the flesh and blood of his substance, shape, form and meaning which is expressed as love for us. Unlike the dubious future, which the whole world continually and mistakenly believes in as a reality, God has substance, shape, form and meaning. He is the future. God is the ultimate absolute reality who has told us everything we need to know about our future and he came as a Son to reveal everything so that we would be left in no doubt.
So, why the contention? Do you contend with the ideas you have about your future by trying desperately to prove to others that the way you have imagined your future has no basis in reality? Do you? Of course not, even though you should, because its true. You're whole life is based on making preparations for the future that you've imagined for yourself and it would therefore be inconceivable to question the reality of 'imagined things' that form the substance and meaning of your life! Yet you contend with God who has made himself known beyond all doubt that he exists in reality. The contention is this: You think you are in control of the environment in which you have been given a wee experience of life and therefore the idea of a higher authority is repugnant to you. This is the way human psychology works and it all sounds perfectly reasonable, except for the glaring stark reality of the condition in which you find yourself. The reality is that people imagine the future and then build social structures by colonising other people into these structures and then build armies to fight each other with arrows and spears, in order to preserve and bring into existence what they have imagined collectively. Kings, laws, mullahs, ceremonies, flags, bishops, graves, shrines, statues and monuments are all expressions of this imagination about possessing the future. Futile phrases like, 'planning for a better future' daub the literature of our collectivised community of academic dreamers and fantasists. Yet you cannot prove that a single hair on your head will be there tomorrow where it is today. When the future does eventually arrive and it turns out to be different from what you imagined, you are disappointed because you realise you have built your life on the quicksand of your Government’s imagination where there is no reality but lies and half baked truths.
I'm telling you that your life is worth more than your mind could ever imagine, more than all the philosophers can imagine with all their skilful use of words and paradigms. The number of stars in the dimension we lamely call ‘space’ cannot contain what constitutes your life. Your life is worth the suffering of God's own flesh and blood who came to us to bridge the gap between imagination and truth. Today, you have no excuse when it comes to choosing whether to live or die. If you choose to believe in your imagination you will die in your imagination. Choose to believe in Jesus Christ and you will die to your imagination but be raised with him whose words will be used to raise you from the dead. His words are not subject to men's imagination, neither men's imagination that came before his resurrection nor that which has been added since because his words are Spirit and Life - the eternal place not governed by the imagination of men. What God promises as a future for you therefore is what God keeps stored for those who believe in Christ. He cannot show you these things until you repent, not a stitch will be shown until you turn from your own way and follow Christ. The only 'thing' you will see is an imagined picture of yourself in the future based on nothing but fantasy.
For God came to us as a man to show us the way, the truth, the LIFE and if you prefer to put your trust in your imagination about life, death and the 'future world' then please don't be angry when at the end of time he says to you, 'But I came to you and you rejected Me'
"In that day (the day He was to come back to show them the resurrection) you will no longer ask me (about) anything. I tell you the truth, my Father will give you whatever you ask in my name. Until now you have not asked for anything in my name. Ask, and you will receive, and your joy will be complete." John 16 v23-24
These words, and all the others that Jesus spoke, are the only words that are going to remain when everything else on earth and in heaven has passed away. The words you eat today will be the words that will resurrect you tomorrow. Don't be cheated by the fools who have talked themselves out of an eternal inheritance.
Useless war icons
The human race is incapable of telling the difference between good and evil because in every war the self righteous bigotry on both sides is supported by a corporate sense of identity with being the 'winner'.
After the British dropped one of the largest tonnage of bombs on a single city Dresden Feb 1945 during a two day bomb fest the bodies of innocent men, women and children piled high in the streets in the days that followed were absorbed into the consciousness of British People as 'the casualties of war'. 30,00 people were wiped out as a result of the bombing raids, which today is the moral equivalence to Israel wiping out Beirut.
Kevin hits the nail firmly on the head, suggesting as I believe he does, that the human race is simply not kitted out with sufficient intelligence to know why there should be a clear understanding of the most basic and fundamental difference between good and evil. This frightening ignorance, in spite of the growth of knoweldge, is all the more demonstrated by our teaching establishments that churn out a boring, repetitive dialectic about creating heaven on earth without having a single clue how to equip the body politic with anything practical that resolves the contradiction of 'killing for the common good'.
Take a hard look at the icons we worship in our nation and you won't have to go very far to see how our institutions maintain a worship of war and destruction as a method of preserving our identity as 'British' by reminding us of the blood spilt by our forefathers in their killing fields.
The human race is so hopelessly conditioned by a belief in its own collective righteousness that condones evil that heaven WILL never be within its grasp, not this millenium, nor the ones following.
We have a combination of war memorials, war shrines, war museums, pride marches, war art, war iconography, celebratory war literature, badges, caps, symbols, war institutions, remembrance services, religious and secular indoctrination of the idea that 'war is a necessary evil' - as one Bishop wrote to me recently. All engineered and maintained by so called 'intelligent' 'academics' who take the noble responsibility of protecting our national identity, commonality and culture through education and the arts. All this upholding of our values and standards through the idolatrous use of symbolic icons like the Cenotaph - a memorial to barefaced evil - is where evil seeps into the subconscious of the national psyche from cradle to the grave.
The idea that some priests in Germany were praying for the sons and daughters of a nation fighting a noble cause in the war against Britain and priests in Britain where praying for the sons and daughters of a nation fighting a noble cause against Germany fills the air we breath today with despair and hopelessness. For, each nation condoned the social practices of its various component parts, whether in the role of priest or of local councillor, and each were talking and praying to a 'common good'. If this is rational, then God help the universe if we ever get to colonise the stars!
Kevin went part of the way but I go further and say we must smash all our uselss icons that appraise heroes and irradicate them from our history books and our memorabilia and teach our children to despise the concept of training fellow human beings to become murderers on our behalf.
We should disband all armed services and destroy every single weapon right down to the very last dreg of historic weapon preserved in castlemania.
Until then, stop griping about war. It's here to stay because we preserve it in our culture.
After the British dropped one of the largest tonnage of bombs on a single city Dresden Feb 1945 during a two day bomb fest the bodies of innocent men, women and children piled high in the streets in the days that followed were absorbed into the consciousness of British People as 'the casualties of war'. 30,00 people were wiped out as a result of the bombing raids, which today is the moral equivalence to Israel wiping out Beirut.
Kevin hits the nail firmly on the head, suggesting as I believe he does, that the human race is simply not kitted out with sufficient intelligence to know why there should be a clear understanding of the most basic and fundamental difference between good and evil. This frightening ignorance, in spite of the growth of knoweldge, is all the more demonstrated by our teaching establishments that churn out a boring, repetitive dialectic about creating heaven on earth without having a single clue how to equip the body politic with anything practical that resolves the contradiction of 'killing for the common good'.
Take a hard look at the icons we worship in our nation and you won't have to go very far to see how our institutions maintain a worship of war and destruction as a method of preserving our identity as 'British' by reminding us of the blood spilt by our forefathers in their killing fields.
The human race is so hopelessly conditioned by a belief in its own collective righteousness that condones evil that heaven WILL never be within its grasp, not this millenium, nor the ones following.
We have a combination of war memorials, war shrines, war museums, pride marches, war art, war iconography, celebratory war literature, badges, caps, symbols, war institutions, remembrance services, religious and secular indoctrination of the idea that 'war is a necessary evil' - as one Bishop wrote to me recently. All engineered and maintained by so called 'intelligent' 'academics' who take the noble responsibility of protecting our national identity, commonality and culture through education and the arts. All this upholding of our values and standards through the idolatrous use of symbolic icons like the Cenotaph - a memorial to barefaced evil - is where evil seeps into the subconscious of the national psyche from cradle to the grave.
The idea that some priests in Germany were praying for the sons and daughters of a nation fighting a noble cause in the war against Britain and priests in Britain where praying for the sons and daughters of a nation fighting a noble cause against Germany fills the air we breath today with despair and hopelessness. For, each nation condoned the social practices of its various component parts, whether in the role of priest or of local councillor, and each were talking and praying to a 'common good'. If this is rational, then God help the universe if we ever get to colonise the stars!
Kevin went part of the way but I go further and say we must smash all our uselss icons that appraise heroes and irradicate them from our history books and our memorabilia and teach our children to despise the concept of training fellow human beings to become murderers on our behalf.
We should disband all armed services and destroy every single weapon right down to the very last dreg of historic weapon preserved in castlemania.
Until then, stop griping about war. It's here to stay because we preserve it in our culture.
The blind that lead the blind
When historians take up their pens they hope their interpretation of events will give the reader a balanced view of the past. What they do to dead men is not a great deal different to what academics do to the living, they articulate their prejudices and beliefs through the artifice of 'presentation'. Their canonical authority is based purely on the volume of woffle they can cram into a single piece of work.
If we are to use as our starting block the first law or premise, which is that every spoken or written word is the effect of imagination and the cause is unknown, the phrase 'the blind leading the blind' somehow rings true.
Dialectical materialism belongs to this dimension of blindness, in which dialogue always seems to be sucked along by an undercurrent of an a priori belief in the authority of abstract words that have no visible, verifiable, observable truths to support their rampant use, let alone providing any meaningful definition.
Take the pronoun 'me' for example. Can any brave fellow dare to define what the meaning is of this word when applied to ... well .. me?
I've not met any two people yet who can agree on the absolute definition of the word 'love'. Yet, it is the most heavily used word in arguments about life, death, and the non-existence of God.
Many words like these that defy definition are used authoritativey in arguments supporting social programs all around the world - all in the euphoria of 'academic' research, while other 'programs' run by the same ilk cause social decay and destruction.
The blind cannot see even the most fundamental truths about the sanctity of life because they haven't clue as to what defines a 'life'.
If we are to use as our starting block the first law or premise, which is that every spoken or written word is the effect of imagination and the cause is unknown, the phrase 'the blind leading the blind' somehow rings true.
Dialectical materialism belongs to this dimension of blindness, in which dialogue always seems to be sucked along by an undercurrent of an a priori belief in the authority of abstract words that have no visible, verifiable, observable truths to support their rampant use, let alone providing any meaningful definition.
Take the pronoun 'me' for example. Can any brave fellow dare to define what the meaning is of this word when applied to ... well .. me?
I've not met any two people yet who can agree on the absolute definition of the word 'love'. Yet, it is the most heavily used word in arguments about life, death, and the non-existence of God.
Many words like these that defy definition are used authoritativey in arguments supporting social programs all around the world - all in the euphoria of 'academic' research, while other 'programs' run by the same ilk cause social decay and destruction.
The blind cannot see even the most fundamental truths about the sanctity of life because they haven't clue as to what defines a 'life'.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
