(1502) Afternoon all … the cunning plan is to run some jazz if I can find any good ones we’ve not run too many times … at around 1615. Health certainly a bit better, which suggests it is the toxic air after all. (1554)

 

14. The point of running this

… is that not only the parallels striking between the various western nations and the communists who’ve taken over, but it’s not just in capital cities … it’s even reached the provinces and villages/towns.

13. Andy at 1045

… has a link to an item on “intelligent design” which annoys me every time they try that one, as it misses the entire point, as I’ve explained a few times now, and others have explained it over and over and over.

Humanists (perfectability of man by himself on earth) have long tried to draw true Christians (biblical four gospels people) into trying to “prove” the triune God, using the tools available to “science”, which in itself is fraught, especially in the current day.

Which tools? A whole lot of IPCC paid for “scientists” willing to go along with the Mann hockey stick and all the rest of it? The Faucis, Fergusons, Birxes, the high priests and priestesses of PEPFAR as well?

As against empirical science?

Before you even get to the interdenominational issues within Christianity, plus the cherrypicking of bible verses and misinterpretation of texts to suit one’s hobbyhorse (see immediate past, plus present Pope) … before even getting to that, science itself must clean its own house and expose the Royal Society and Smithsonian types, into everything BUT science.

The bottom line for Christians is that it is unprovable by any earthly measure and so it should be … the whole system is predicated on faith. Naturally, secular humanism cannot disprove, any more than it can prove metaphysical matters … the most anyone can do is point to evidence and say it either seems this way … or the other way.

Now we get to this “intelligent design” provability lark. Were the gurus of this attempt on the Christian side sharp minded, able people … that would be one thing … but the ones so far have not been so, they’ve been like Rachel from Accounts has been with economic policy. They’ve been drawn into making claims of “proof” which are nothing more than evidence … in various cases good evidence but still evidence. Archaeology is not the final proof … reviewing the entirety of the literature is. And that takes a lifetime.

In short, it’s a stupid strategy, a stupid debate and not only that … the humanists themselves can be easily taken apart, applying rules of evidence to the “Intelligent Designers” which they’d never apply to themselves … for good reason. Also people wading in to the fray using words like myth … and legends in many cultures.

They use that as a disprover, whereas the very fact it’s in many cultures in the first place should actually tell them something quite different. Ditto with the Christology which developed within twenty years of His Death (see Robinson).

An analogy … DJT walked into those courtrooms where everyone including the judge was allowing no evidence, providing no cross examination from his side etc. etc., was heavily biased, on a mission to convict … it was an obvious hiding to nothing, a kangaroo court in each case.

The Christian faith is worth far more than to stand or fall on shoddy terms of reference by one side only.

12. Same old, same old shoddy procedure

… shoddy rules of evidence.