The Impeachment of Donald Trump

Anyone who cares to follow  context will see that as the Democrat Party of the USA and its far Left allies have hated Donald Trump since the very start, there is no good faith  reason to believe that they are motivated by anything other than this hatred as regards this impeachment. This is therefore a malicious and frivolous prosecution  and shows the lawlessness of those participating in it.

The latest attempt, after the Mueller Report showed that there was no evidence of Russian collusion (that there was no evidence of crime never stopped them in their determination to  seek other excuses to accuse) is an allegation of Trump's illegal interference in another country's politics, and the basis of impeachment proceedings itself,  to wit his alleged  asking  Ukraine's President to find dirt on Joe Biden (a prospective Democrat Presidential Candidate) in return for Aid to  Ukraine.

The White House published the transcript  of the allegedly criminal phone call,  and this  is a video on BitChute which read out the salient  passages and analysed the whole sordid affair in the light of a malicious hit piece by an organ which should know better, namely Christianity Today, a magazine founded by Billy Graham, calling for Trump's removal and endorsing the malice and lies of the democrats.

The video shows that the quid pro quo was done by Joe Biden, not Trump  to protect his own son who was involved in illegal activity in a  company  in Ukraine on the board of which he sat. Biden asked some official to stop an investigation which would indict his son, in return for said aid.

President Trump was merely asking that  this investigation should be resumed. Was there political  motive? Probably, but was a request for an investigation that was illegally shut down to be resumed itself illegal?

But the democrats in their insane rage  have to twist words before their very eyes.

If they do not care about the reputation  of the democratic process or their own country that is on them, but for them to accuse Trump of these attitudes is sheer effrontery. Jung the psychologist called it projection and it is increasingly the Left which do this these days.

Donald Trump is no scholar, no gentleman and no saint. I know this.

but since when did the democrats become such  champions of petit bourgeois sensitivities?

only when it suited them to  invoke such in order to "roll" an office holder they personally hated.

After all Democrat JFK was a notorious womanizer who would so the saying goes, chase anything in a skirt.  Clinton lied to Congress about having sex with an intern - and he was in fact guilty of these charges; and IMO the worst of them all was the smooth talking hypocrite Barak Obama. the promise breaker who never closed down the torture centre at Guantanamo Bay, expanded Americas involvement in wars and after condemning Bush Jr's  use of signing statements fell to making some of his own.

All without a peep from these so moral and righteous Democrats so passionate for the rule of Law

The scandal is not the things Trump is charged with but the fact that the democrats are so convulsed with the  delusions that  spring from hatred as to bring a frivolous prosecution to either remove or influence an upcoming election.

Such corruption of due process and politics will indeed contribute to the growing mountain of iniquity whereby God will punish the US of A.

But this iniquity is not complete, the time of wrath which may have the country split asunder is not  yet

if the embedded link does not work (I am not a tech head and have little patience or confidence with such things) please manually enter this below

https://www.bitchute.com/video/nVNqXOI2Imr7/

Folau's Settlement

I have no interest in sport of any kind.

But i was following with some interest the Israel Folau saga when he was sacked by Rugby Australia for daring to express a religious opinion online.

He sued them and settled out of court. It is clear that Rugby Australia knew they would lose, for there is much support for Mr Folau.

the arrogance of these people for excluding a christian while daring to claim "inclusiveness " shows the rank hypocrisy of the so called Progressive Left

So, the theological opinion I draw from this is that,  well if a christian can sue someone for religious discrimination and actually win the times are not yet at the very end where it is prophesied that we Christians wills be hated by EVERYONE.
i m not one of those haters who looks forward to the end of the Age chiefly as i know we will not be conveniently teleported out (known as the pretribulation rapture) before the trouble starts, but will have to endure it and will be massacred almost to a man. so i will rejoice in small things and be pleased for free speech and for Mr Folau, but know it wont last long. but maybe it wont crumble to dust in my ;lifetime. i am 61. here's hoping

"Filioque" Does It Matter?

I watched a video in which a Greek Orthodox priest looked at Catholicism.

and i was stunned to hear what they regards as the chief heresy of Catholicism,

Filioque

I will explain

The ancient creed of the Church says that the Holy spirit proceeds (ie comes from) from the Father. some time in the mid middle ages someone added the word filioque to make the passage say that the Spirit proceeded from the Father AND the Son.

and this piece of trivial minutia the Greek Orthodox are idolatrously obsessed about to the point of mania and they will not let it go. Even after more than a thousand years.

I wrote the following in reply to the video:


So. we Christians actually know enough about the inner workings of the Holy Trinity such that we can dare pronounce with certainty EITHER WAY whether the Spirit proceeds from the Father alone or from the Father and the Son. Really? This is itself a self willed and daring speculation i would not even dream of making, and i certainly would not require others to hold it on pain of damnation. I know I have the Spirit for I was an atheist; and only by the power of said Spirit could I ever declare that Jesus Christ is Lord. This same spirit testifies to me of the divinity of the Son, the Trinity, faith, redemption and all the rest. And he convicts me of sin that I may repent of it. Do you know any other Spirit who would do this? But the question of filioque has never come up in 35 years of dialogue with the Holy Spirit of Christ. I neither know nor care which it is, though i am adept enough as a thinker to be able to argue both ways, coming up only with an idea not any real knowledge of a mystery we all should deem too sacred to dare interfere with and if i have the spirit what matters is having the spirit, seen by other things, and certainly defying St Paul by wrangling about words to the ruin of the hearers is not one of them

If some church is going to draw a line in the sand over a piece of trivial theological minutiae it shows it s own presumption and arrogance and i for one will not seek them.

it seems to me this arose when someone altered a piece of church tradition, some recitation of doctrine which had become hidebound dead and legalistic; and in their fury at something they thought was time honoured being defaced they declared this alteration a heresy on a matter where the Bible is largely silent or at least ambiguous.

but Greek quibbling over trivia is not new.

you have heard of the Old Believer Schism in 17th century Russia? they quarreled over such mind numbing trivia as to whether to cross themselves with two fingers twice or three fingers three times, and one side savagely persecuted the other side who were too hidebound to give way over a complete trivium.

And we wonder why the world looks at us quarreling over such stuff and blaspheme the name of God because of US (also a scripture quote) and decide that the gospel of Christ is nonsense and the stamping ground of bigots.

Here my post ended.

If I have the Spirit I do not need to know the details save that He came through Jesus Christ and witnesses to Him. , in fact what is more important to all of us is believing him. confessing our unbelief when he makes it clear to us, repenting of our sins, both of thought and life as He leads , and obeying His promptings, which , unlike the impossible Law of God, are the nature of the yoke which is easy and light.

Such violent and arrogant quarreling over Who sent the Holy Spirit is proof of not having Him at all, or of having forsaken Him for self perfection in the flesh.

Speech is violence?

These days the New Left claim that speech is violence - or, more precisely, that it can be.

So, true to form, in typical reaction, the Right claim that as a matter of fact it is not

Speech is not violence? the trouble is the Bible says something quite contrary: Life and death is in the power of the tongue: Proverbs 18:21. As this passage does not mean that the tongue is the conduit for supernatural energies which absurdity is what the positive confession types say, it has to mean something else.

And what? That you can destroy a person with cruel words or build them up with kind words.

Anyone who has felt the agony of cruel verbal rebuke knows this, and it is only indicative of the callousness of the Right that they deny this - unless of course they are so perfect and well beloved as to never have been bawled out, rebuked etc etc or have never been harassed online, or bullied in anyway that stopped short of physical beating

Scripture also adds James chapter 3, all of it - including this So also the tongue is a small part of the body, and yet it boasts of great things. See how great a forest is set aflame by such a small fire!(verse 5) Also the Sermon on the mount - he who calls his brother raca - any term of contempt -   is guilty of (ie worthy of - hellfire Matthew 5:22 IOW speech IS violence. The Bible says so. What then is wrong with the Left when they state this? they define violence only to suit themselves, to excuse and exempt their own violent speech; and they think that legal stricture will correct it when it appears in anyone else other than themselves. But of course they hold their violent speech is righteous and this excuses all things. If those of the Right call themselves christian and profess to believe the Bible to be the word of God then they really have no right to deny this fact here. If some are atheistic and Right Wing - rare perhaps but they do exist - , well that is no business of mine' As for the Left's wanting to legislate hate speech: if Law could solve anything there was no need for a New Covenant. if the Right had any sense at all they will oppose the Left's legalism, not its more or less valid appeal to a true fact, namely that speech is - ie can be - violence. But if they, the Right want to blaspheme the name of the Lord, a Right Wing predilection and this because they confuse Right Wing politics with godliness and the left being mostly atheist, do not , well . . . . .

Be my guest

The Thunberg Outburst

if HOW DARE YOU? were a real question instead of an outburst of outrage she should be prepared to listen to the answer,

"we dare because the science you - ie Ms Thunberg - appeal to is junk

"we dare because even if you were right terrorizing people - ie other children - into a panic is criminal

"we dare because questions of science are nuanced, and you are incapable of such, by your own admission of having Asbergers

"we dare because even if you are right - but you are not - if it doesn't get paid for it does NOT GET DONE, so concerns about money are crucial. But you, child, are too young to know that money is what makes the world work, like it or not

"we dare because as regards truth -did your handlers ever teach you such an outlandish notion - your feelings have no relevance whatsoever but you offered nothing but feelings, hence your outburst is utterly irrelevant

"we dare because some of us who actually grew up know that the self righteousness of teenagers is something we all went through, in my case nearly 40 years ago, and that it shows shallowness and narrowness of mind so counts for nothing"

and if she were to ask HOW DARE YOU? to my face

I would answer this poor spoiled child in this aforementioned manner

after all it really would not be kind to ask her some questions about science: namely about outgassing, albedo. photosynthesis, Milankovich cycles, cosmic rays, the geologic record, and also about world history which is relevant to the question. I say this because I know she knows nothing about these and to humiliate a disturbed child would really be cruel

New Liberal and SJW Politics

It has been said that modern liberal thought is a christian construct.  Yes indeed. it never rose in lands that were never nominally christian.

Individual liberty was never a part of non Western cultures, nor human rights

I don't think much of G K Chesterton but he did come up with some real gems.

one of them was "Christianity has not been tried and found wanting because it has never been tried"

This is more true than i suspect even he would admit to.

What has been lost in the West is not christian faith but the hypocrisy of a society which held to some aspects of a christian worldview and thought that justified pretending to believe the Gospel of Christ. But though the gospel requires the christian worldview to make sense it is not the same thing as said world view

That being so all that remains is the heretical remnants of a Christianity gutted by removing the Holy Spirit - and this was done long long ago, long before the so called Age of Reason. Indeed the gutted remnant of the forms of faith is essentially the course of church history.

But some of these remnants have been fetishized - love, kindness, justice. When made idols or fetishes of they become twisted; and because with the reality of the Holy Spirit rejected our attempts to be loving kind and just will come up hard against our own inclinations to the contrary. This hate cruelty and injustice in all of us has to go somewhere so the New Left will vent it on their opponents, thinking it is righteous anger. It is of course nothing of the kind.

this is the liberalism of the new class of SJW fanatics.

someone said the cults were the unpaid bills of the church, that is to say the cults got traction because we the church had only own unbelief and hypocrisy and people had to go somewhere to have their real needs met

so we brought and paid for this latest SJW mania. it is the inevitable outcome of our own history

The Thunberg Phenomenon

Even if Greta Thunberg, child activist, even now likened by some activists to Joan of Arc or Jesus returned Himself, even if she is correct about global warming being man made and ongoing, she is acting in a way that is the height of irresponsibility.

She is on record as saying that we should be panicking as if our house were on fire, because it is

I have been in a few fire drills, but thank God I have never been in any real fires.

What do the fire wardens say?

"Move quickly and quietly to your nearest designated exit. Do not run. DO NOT PANIC."

Panic has people screaming hysterically and running aimlessly, killing each other in the stampede.

If a person shouts "FIRE" in a crowded theatre panic will ensue. People WILL likely die, even if there were no fire. And if there were no fire that person shouting so as to initiate the panic would be criminally liable; and if there were fire a stampede from said panic is still not a rational manner to respond. Otherwise, I might ask, why are fire drills the way they are, if panic is not only necessary but desirable?

Panic is the enemy of rational response to even a real disaster.

I repeat: to spread panic even in the name of the real threat ios the height of irresponsibility.

Greta Thunberg is on record as saying herself that she has severe mental problems : despair, depression   selective mutism  and refusing to eat for long periods.

A mind given to such extremes of despair is not given to balance or nuance.

But she never put her self forward. She  is a pawn of various interests who, in complete cynical disregard for the welfare of a child who is immature for her 16 years - she looks 12 -  think that an argument that has no traction will become credible if put in the mouth of said disabled child.

It is vile child abuse of the most cynical and brutal kind.

Her parents and handlers should be liable to criminal  charges, and the child herself ,  Greta Thunberg should be removed from the public arena before further damage is done to her, for I understand that autistic children of all degrees - and asbergers is a lesser degree of autism - need peace , quiet, regular routine and a controlled environment.

As for the issue itself, that of Catastrophic Man Made Global Warming, that is to be debated soberly with recourse to evidence, fact, logic and free and open  disclosure of all information and data by all scientists involved.

A society so bereft of reason to as to listen to a disabled child whose disability is mental is in a parlous state and will fall if that madness continues.

I have not addressed the issue itself here. That will come later, if I deem it worth the effort

Good Christians, Good Muslims

Good Christians read their Bibles, believe their Bibles and do what it says

Good Muslims read their Korans, believe their Korans and do what it says.

So what is the difference?

It is clearly what the  respective books command

Are murderous people who name Christ good Christians? Absolutely not.

Are murderous people who shout Allahu Akbar while killing what they call unbelievers good Muslims?

Go do some study and find out.

In times like this it is utterly imperative for people to study this matter.

To those who say I might be or am inciting hatred i  say this:

since when is studying a text in a scholarly manner and encouraging the same  an incitement to anything other than eye strain and the attendant ills of a sedentary life?

Don't trust your politicians who are intent on virtue signalling.

If Islam itself permits telling lies in its service you cannot trust Muslims either. So you must go to their text  to see if it does in fact permit telling lies in its service

Any real religion especially if it has a holy Book, is determined by the doctrines in its writings, and not by the lives of those who profess to follow it.

If we are lazy in this matter we could very well pay a terrible price in this matter.

Go and study.

While you can

Teresa Might

on the resignation of  the  British PM and her refusal to  stand for Brexit

Teresa May Teresa Might but what she Will is never fight for to what she Must she claims no right. Teresa's dawn is now DARK NIGHT

A First Post on nationalism and globalism

I regard globalism as a great and terrible evil.

I posted the following on a blog site which applauded nationalism as a virtue,  But . .

 . . . I do not agree that nationalism, touted as the remedy for such  is a virtue. I am well aware that God set up the nations, but he did so as recorded in the Tower of Babel event ; to keep man in separated groups lest his energies be pooled and unspeakable evil come about.

At best nationalism is a pragmatic strategy on the part of the Living God in the face of human sin. It is a lesser evil.

Why? The nations - all of them - rage against God and devise a vain thing (Psalm 2). I have never seen a patriot who was not an idolator; and no they do not love God, not when their love for their nation still has them treat their neighbour - the poor of their nations - with contempt. Besides if the nations are so good why are they in such a state of perpetual war such that some foolish minds hope to abolish war by abolish the nations? War is in our bones, not in our political constitutions

And let us consider that the story of the so called Good Samaritan the Samaritan in question did a good deed to someone his own people loathed and despised; and the feeling between Jews and Samaritans was mutual. Such mercy is not the hallmark of a patriot.

I am not a patriot. I act as a good citizen only because God commands me not to discredit the Gospel by bad behaviour, but my home is not this earth, for I am a citizen of heaven and a sojourner on this earth

Let us also grant that the Globalists are correct on the evils nationalism has spawned. The 20th century is full of the wreckage it produced. But the Globalists, in reaction to this undeniable fact want to go lurching like a drunkard blindly into something infinitely worse.

Globalism is of the devil, but the two evils here are not equal, for globalism is much, much worse.

But as we men are all evil we can only appeal to another idolatry (nationalism) to oppose an idolatry (Globalism).

Certainly Bergoglio - i will not dignify him with the papal name he arrogated to himself - has denied the Christian faith on more than one occasion.

I will let the mad frenzy of the nations continue to rage as scripture says they do. The farce will play itself out even if and when it ends with them achieving their one world dystopia. For dystopia it is, of such horror that Christ Himself must descend to earth with his host of saints in His retinue to destroy it.

But all in due time

Are we the Last Generation

One oft cited proof that we are in the last generation is the passage in Matthew 24:32 about the fig tree. It is taken to be the nation of Israel and so its foundation in 1948, or its flourishing in 1967, are taken as proof that this generation will witness the Second Coming of Christ

The thing about the fig tree is that sometimes a fig tree is only a fig tree and nothing more, and certainly is not the nation of Israel. Why is this? Luke 21:28-30" And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree, and all the trees; When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your own selves that summer is now nigh at hand."

If the fig tree is the nation of Israel then clearly ALL THE TREES would flourish whereby we would know that summer was near and so therefore was His coming. All the nations? Clearly not. So what the mere fact of this plural, all the trees, shows is that the fig tree was not Israel. So what we are left with is that there is no biblical nor rational linking of the restoration of the Nation of Israel with the last generation. The fig tree was only a fig tree and not symbolic of Israel.

So are we in the last generation? given the current upsurge of nationalism in response to globalism my considered opinion is that the climate is not right for a one world government which is a necessary precursor for the Second Coming, for the Beast must be in place and in power before Christ come to overthrow him. And he is not at this time.

Moreover if any say that it must be in this generation end up dying of old age without it happening then they have only discredited the whole notion of the second coming in the eyes of the world. and for that, God assures us, they will pay

Context is an amazing thing. Immediately before Paul spoke of the rapture of the church he told us to live quiet lives, do our own jobs and mind our own business (I Thessalonians 4:11).

So if we are running around like mad things, carnally excited by the prospect of His coming before lunch time next Tuesday we are not in the sabbath rest of the believer spoken of in the letter to the Hebrews and so are not prepared for His coming

Certainly Christ is coming. But i am likely to be among the dead in Christ when it happens, that is to say it will not be in my lifetime.

Next issue, please! something of practical import!

How I live today is of more practical moment that obsessing over times we were not given the authority to know (Acts 1:6-8

The Gillette ad: feminist porn

Anti feminist academic and scholar Dr Janice Fiamengo of the University of Ottawa has responded to that vicious piece of man shaming the Gillette ad.
 
She speaks also of the maker of the this.

Dr Fiamengo  also describes  this obscenity as feminist porn  with perfect aptness

See why  following the  link below





https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qFO4xvnv_DM

A Reply to Gillette Man Shaming

No doubt everyone has seen the new Gillette ad, which is pure sexist man shaming and blaming.

Not only have they bought into the feminist narrative, which is sexist by definition for it ignores the sins of women totally and blames men only  for women's  own evil (ie "men drove us to it") if they do sometimes acknowledge such, but the ad was heavy handed and preachifying

This is the typical method of the ideologue fanatic. Any arrogance  is justified, the think, because of the real or imagined truth of their  cause. This zealotry is as old as time itself. But the feminist and their allies have forgotten that the 17th century Puritans were much the same and as hated, which is why they fled to the Americas in and after 1620 there to exterminate indigenous peoples.

It  is not the business of merchants selling anything  to preach; and only shows the raw cynicism  of that whoring in the market place  which business has descended to.

Indeed to insult their  customer base is imbecility. They make razors mostly for men, and think it a virtue to insult men and blamed them for everything with no peek as to the evil of women also - which is to say have adopted the feminist narrative

But a video in reply to this toxic ad points out that the boot is to be worn on both feet, in other words that  women are sinners too.

And here it is


This is why feminism is nothing but man hating,  the embittered utterances of a female supremacist group seeking nothing but exemptions and privileges - any group out for justice would be even handed in its denunciation of evil.

Unfortunately there is one error in this vid common to the Gillette piece, and this at the end of it, the appeal to the solution. And this is, namely  the belief that we can be better people by resolving to do so . anyone who has tried this has failed. it is easy for virtue signalling hypocrites who have never seriously tried to be better to  demand this. To these I say go and try, and WHEN you have failed, with a spectacular agony commensurate with the effort, then you are ready to talk, or perhaps listen. for nothing but woe will follow this, the woe of another generation of repressed hypocrites , and so the cycle goes round and round again