Category Archives: Faith
Reward! $100 000.00 for the capture of Scum who Shot Malala Yousafzai
A Reward of 100 thousand dollars is being Offered for the capture of the Taliban scum whom treid to murder this little girl.
Read more Here:
Pakistan has observed a National Day of Prayer for her Recovery.
I too pray for Her Recovery, for the safety of her Family, and that this event stimulates a mighty storm against the Taliban and Extremism. That Religious Liberty and Tollerance wins the day.
Chill Pill.
“If I don’t speak, who will?” Malala Yousafzai, 14
Humbling courage of teenage girl who took on the Taliban: The inspirational story of 14-year-old who has shown breathtaking defiance in the face of deathMalala Yousafzai, 14, publicly condemned the Taliban’s brutal atrocities and campaigned like mad for girls’ education
She is now fighting for her life after being shot in the neck and head at close range
The Tehreek-iTaliban Pakistan (TTP) accepted responsibility and promised that if Malala survives their bullets, they will target her again
Read story Here:
One of the most sickening spectacles in recent years has been the growing Islam-a-phobia amongst so called Libertarian thinkers.
The terrorists have won when they have succeeded in infecting the world with the notion that either the west must outlaw and annihilate the Islamic world, or be consumed by it… they have succeeded in generating ‘intolerance’ and Jihad’… on both sides.
“Death to Islam!”… the Objectivists chant.
“Where are all the Moderates protesting against extremism?…” the Islamiphobes cry.
“There is no such thing as a Moderate Muslim!” They exclaim.
I have been appalled by such Mob phobia… How is it that even the most intelligent and enlightened people are so easily manipulated into a bigotry and hatred?
Don’t they understand what terrorism is?… How it operates… why there are so few voices of protest against Extremism?
This is rich indeed coming from ‘Armchair’ revolutionaries and Intellectuals sitting Cozily by their fires… Meanwhile … thousands of miles away… in Taliban country… a little 14 year old Muslim girl teaches these fear ridden Master minds the price of standing up for Liberty beyond the frontiers of their living rooms!
Yes Little Malala Yousafzai and her brave family show the world what it takes to stand up in resistance to this insidious Evil… religious extremism… religious intolerance… Religious tyranny… under such circumstances… It takes an absolute commitment to truth and justice… to the degree that it is more precious than life itself!
It takes a religious Faith that to do what is right is more important than life itself… and that though there are many Muslims whom know that The Taliban and the extremists are evil, and would rejoice the day they are swallowed up by the Earth… They have been terrified into silence… and only a handful dare step forward under Terror.
What say ye Islamiphobes to this?
Can you honestly tell me you would be as brave as this little girl and her Kin?
Taliban Terrorist Scum! Satanic. Tyranical over their own people, Intollerant, Savage, Brutal, Murdeous, Self Righteous, Killers of Children.
How can the pretend to be the servants of God?
I despise them, yet am not so foolish as to believe they ar representive of all Muslims!
Such a conclusion is a terrorist induced Phobia.
Malala and her family have done the whole world a great service!
They have proven that not all Muslims are Fanatics… not all terrorists.
Their bravery gives the world hope that Freedom and justice can indeed prevail in a world in which Islam is the chosen faith of a large percentage of the population.
In respect to speaking out against tyranny…they possess Christ like character, and I pray The Good Lord watches over them and has mercy upon their souls…!
I pray their sacrifice is the catalyst for a major reaction against the Extremists.
I pray all moderate/ peaceful and tolerant Muslims are pricked in their hearts for their scilence… that they become outraged!
If there ever was an appropriate time for outrage, the shooting of this little hero is it!
May the moderates be emboldened by this shinning example of courage and virtue displayed by a little Muslim girl and her family.
Of course the purpose of shooting this Angel of justice was to further terrify the population into remaining silent.
Will Terror continue to prevail over Moral courage?
Tim Wikiriwhi. Christian Libertarian.
Update:
Important note: It is a most difficult task to convey what I am attempting to achieve with posts like this. Some people will think I am trying to stifle just criticism… eg The Objectivist Lindsay Perigo is quite right to be outraged against the intolerance of those Muslims whom riot and murder, and commit terrorism because they are incensed about cartoons, or Movies which they believe are disrespectful of Islam.
Some people will think I must have rocks in my head! Surely Tim must be blind to the Threat of Sharia Law… as absolutely incompatible with religious liberty and a free society.
In spite of my argument above… where is the voice of protest from Muslims living in western nations against religious extremism?
My point is that while I agree that these serious problems need to be expressed, that Libertarians must take extreme care not to assume that these Evils are shared by all Muslims, that these evils define Islam, or that they prove Islam is absolutely incompatible with a free society.
To believe this is a massive fail.
It is the lazy mans view.
It is definitively collectivist thinking.
It is an un libertarian excuse to perpetrate bigotry and hate.
It is to sell the world out to Jihad… that no grounds for peaceful coexistence can be found between East and West.
It is to ignore the bravery of such people as Malala and her family
It is to pretend all Muslims support the Talebans and Al Qaeda’s quest to Install tyrannical Islamic theocracies throughout the globe.
I will be writing more on this subject yet for now I will say my chief accusation against the Islamaphobes is that they don’t balance their writing as I attempt to do… ie I attempt to differentiate the good side from the Bad side… and throw support in for the Good and condemn the bad. eg when I am attacking Waitangi apartheid I take care to distinguish the Hateful Racist radicals from the rest of Maoridom whom are as much a victim of the racism as Non-Maori. And i attempt to make it clear that I am not Anti-Maori culture and that in Freedom Maori may embrace their culture as much as they desire… it simply will not be imposed upon others via oppressive laws…. and this is the same message which must be used in educating Muslims into the benefits of a free society. And it is this part of the message with is conspicuously absent from the rantings of the Islamiphobes. It is missing because they dont wish to admit they are extreme in their phobia.
They Rellish the opportunity to vent their Hatred. It may be enjoyable for them yet they fail Libertarianism because of this and do the cause of Liberty and justice a disservice.
I am a Christian. A Christian ought not Hate Islamic people but love them!
Christians ought not be an enemy of Islamic people… but an enemy of tyranny.
The Islamic people need the gospel, and we cannot expect to convert them if we ourselves meter out evil for evil… and act out of hate.
Peace, Liberty, and equality, are the best conditions for propigating the Gospel and showing the Lost the christian message… by compassionate example.
Libertarians are Smokin!
NZ Marriage Equality Debate (MP Louisa Wall v Colin Craig) Att: Dr Matt Flannagan.
Christian Philosopher and Blogger Matthew Flannagan.
I am not Homophobic yet I must say my skin crawled watching the Affirmitive ‘Liberals’ in action .
University is truly a heinous place… full of lefty-ness!
I shudder to think these people will one day be in Parliament as Labour/ Green MPs.
The Opposition clearly won the debate… but…
I do have a few issues with what Dr Matthew Flannagan said.
1. You played the paranoia card… raising the specter that the bill may be used to compel people/ ministers/ churches to perform or make their facilities available for Gay Weddings against their will, even though you know The NZ Human Rights Commission has issued a statement which refutes this possibility.
The Affirmative team clearly stated the bill could not be used in such a way.
I say that an amendment could easily be added to clarify this point.
If this was done it would nullify this portion of your argument.
2. Though it was a clever argument to show that the proposed bill was ‘anti-equality’ in itself, you rely upon ‘populist opinion’ which riles against incest, and Polygamy to carry your point.
That is a very flimsy arguement!
The reality is if we separate your personal religious beliefs, and those of your two team mates whom share the same religion as you… and definition of marriage, then the principle of equality still holds good as an argument not only in favor of the bill, but also in favour of legalizing Incestuous and Polygamous marriages… which incidentally both have historical and cultural histories.
That the bill only seeks to legalise Gay Marriage, and not the others is not a valid reason to reject it, *and you know this*… and I argue that this understanding is why you are so desperate to insist the Law upholds *your narrow religious definitions* of marriage (and what constitutes a Family), because if these are overturned by the Gays, then you realise this opens the door for further challenge to legalize polygamy, etc.
The reality is any reform bill which introduces more justice/equality before the Law is worth supporting even if it does not go the whole hog. (eg a bill to legalise Pot still ought to be supported even if it leaves Ecstasy Illegal)
In relation to this, I think your teams argument regarding Civil unions was clever too… only because civil unions do ‘seem’ to cover the same legal/ contractual aspects as marriage and appears to negate the claims by gays that they have less legal rights.
Yet again I see through this as nothing more than a ruse to protect your religious restrictions upon the definition of marriage.
If we are to accept the line of reasoning of the opposition then of course any future activism for legal recognition by the polygamists, etc could also be directed down the same path … Legal polygamous civil unions.
Is all this merely semantics?
Is that all that is at stake here?
Are the Gays being ‘gay’ about this?
Ought they to be satisfied with ‘Civil Unions?
Ought we to put much weight on international conventions and rulings… UN declarations etc????
I think not!
If this issue was merely semantic there would be no opposition to the bill!
This Opposition is a struggle by a particular religious sector of the community… conservative Christians… to maintain a religious law.
That some gays may oppose the bill may indeed logically remove the legitimacy of calling opposition to the bill ‘homophobic’, yet this does little more than that.
This ‘convenience’ in reality cannot negate the truth that Homophobia and religious bigotry does indeed have a lot to do with opposition to the Bill.
I say the Opposition won because they were more sophisticated debaters and managed to deflect the focus away from their personal religious definition of marriage and family…. Yet pure Religious bias it remains.
And it is upon this basis that I… though I am a Christian, cast my vote *for the Bill*, and am happy for the term ‘Marriage’ to be legally broadened.
Why?
Because how the State defines the legal contract of marriage to include homosexuals, does not in any way affect my personal religious belief about ‘marriage.’
Allowing Gay people to legally call themselves ‘married’ does not impinge upon my rights in any way, nor does it mean I must teach my kids that Gays are ‘really married’ in the eyes of God.
I see no valid reason why the Bill ought to be opposed.
Passing the Bill will improve equality before the Law *by removing a religious prejudice.*
This is about principles! And principles Matter! Even of the Opposition thinks it’s trivial.
I despise any Law which imposes the religious values of others upon me, and so to avoid hypocrisy I must defend the Liberty of others to live free of religious values they reject… even if those values are dear to me. By protecting the Liberty of others from State oppression and favouritism, I am protecting my own religious liberty, and defending my values from being devalued and corrupted via compusion.
Real Christianity is not about forcing others to conform.
Eternal Vigilance… In Da House.
Communion. Christian Libertarians / Eternal Vigilance bloggers Reed, Richard, and Twikiriwhi. Liberty Conference. Crowne Hotel. Auckland. 6-10-12.
It was great to meet you Reed, and to catch up again with you Richard.
HAHAHA! Check out our Halo’s!
“…And there appeared on their heads Cloven tounges… as of Fire…”
(Acts2vs3) 🙂
God is the Font of Morality. Why Objectivists Hate Ron Paul. (updated)
Some surfers may wonder at the title of this blogpost.
Does it reflect malice on the part of the Author?
I would say it does! Some malice can be justified, and there are so many reasons to dislike the irrationality of the bulk of Objectivists… those whom emulate their Icon to the greatest degree.
I must take care not to collectivize all Objectivists into one lump, as this type of oversimplification is a great error to be avoided … way too mechanistic… and thankfully humans are not machines…and thus there are always exceptions which must be given the credit they deserve… Such Mechanistic irrationalism is endemic to Objectivism… most believing such Ideas that “All Muslims are Evil”… “All Christians hate Gays”… Etc, yet there is a moderate minority who avoid this error, and I give these Libertarians their due.
I am angry about the amount of effort the Objectivists put into undermining the Campaign of Ron Paul, whom was by Far the best hope for saving America from Economic ruin and for implementing Libertarian reforms across the board.
The source of this Irrational hatred has been hidden to a large degree and has left many people wondering why Objectivists hate Ron Paul..
Read what ‘Cornell’ has written on this subject on the Lindsay Perigo Objectivist Blog Solo….
Quote:
“It’s odd to me that so many Objectivists dislike Ron Paul. Of all the mainstream presidential candidates out there, his platform is by far the most consistent with Objectivist principles. The only points of major disagreement that I can think of between his politics and Rand’s and Peikoff’s politics are:
1. Abortion — he doesn’t see abortion as a right to be protected by the Federal government; although he does not stand for banning it outright (he takes the “leave it up to the states” stance), and
2. Foreign Policy — Rand and Peikoff take a much more hawkish stance.
However, (1) most states are not going to ban abortions, so I don’t see his stance on abortion changing much of anything, except that he will take away federal subsidies for abortion, which Objectivists would be for anyway, and (2) the truth is that we need to take a less agressive stance towards foreign policy, if for no other reason than that we simply can’t afford to be fighting all these wars accross the globe — we just don’t have the revenue to support it anymore; and I think that Rand would agree with Paul on his strategy, if not on his premises, with the possible exception of Iran.
So am I missing something, or does the Objectivists’ objection to Paul really just boil down to Iran?
If so, then I’m not that worried about Iran. If America leaves Iran alone, you can believe the Israelis will pick up the slack. And you can’t tell me that the American private security firms won’t help out the Israelis with weapons and man-power should all hell break loose; there’s too much to gain by Israel winning another war in the Middle East unhinged from American intrusion. “ End Quote.
Let me tell you Cornell what is Ron Paul’s anathema in the eyes of the Bulk of Objectivists…
He Breaks the First Commandment of Objectivism… “Thou shalt not love the Lord God in any way shape or form..”
This is the unpardonable sin in the eyes of Objectivism.
Objectivism is a Religion.
Atheism is it’s First principle.
And Objectivists willingly sacrifice the principles of Freedom for the sake of halting any Theistic champion of Liberty or justice taking the limelight… thus in spite of all their claims to reason.. they prove them selves to be irrational religious zealots/fanatics.
In their minds It is unthinkable for them to accept the Idea that a theist could be the champion of Liberty and justice.
To accept this they would have to abandon Objectivism because Objectivism is based upon Anti-theism… and it is this which attracted most of them to the faith.
Peter Creswell clearly indicates this *Here* when he says Ron Paul cant be a Libertarian because he’s a Creationist… who will not draw a line between his religion and the State.
Comming from a Randoid this is shear hypocracy… and not true, ie Ron Paul maintains a separation between his Religion and the state, and the fact that He is a Creationist whom rejects the theory of evolution does not render him irrational at all!
PC speaks from his own Bigoted Anti-reason superstition.
Thus The Title of my Blogpost and the Meme explains everything… why Objectivists helped the Powers of Evil in undermining the Greatest champion of Liberty in America today.
Many Libertarian minded Kiwi will be gathering next Saturday to discuss the formation of a New Libertarian orintated Party to gather together the remnants of the Act Party, The Libertarianz, and others like the legalize cannabis party into an Electoral fighting force. It will not be an easy thing to achieve, esp if Objectivists hope to contaminate the constitution with their personal religion, and to put out Anti-theistic blogs and press releases in the name of the New organization. The only hope this New Paty has is that it establishes a true separation between personal beliefs and the constitution, and operates via a libertarian spirit of toleration… for mutual benefit.
I have my own view about how such a party ought to be constituted and I hope to produce a blogpost in this subject before Next Saturday.
The World By Wisdom Knew Not God.
“For after that in the wisdom of God the world by wisdom knew not God, it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.
For the Jews require a sign, and the Greeks seek after wisdom:
But we preach Christ crucified, unto the Jews a stumblingblock, and unto the Greeks foolishness;
But unto them which are called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God, and the wisdom of God.
Because the foolishness of God is wiser than men; and the weakness of God is stronger than men.
For ye see your calling, brethren, how that not many wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are called:
But God hath chosen the foolish things of the world to confound the wise; and God hath chosen the weak things of the world to confound the things which are mighty;”
St Paul 1cor1vs21-27.
This is why Believing the Divine Revelation is a Higher Reason than mere human Rekoning… which has been darkened… and cannot know God.
While it is true that Reason does reveal the invisible truths of The Deity…The scripture admits that By The creation of the World God is clearly seen…so that Atheists are without Excuse (Rom1vs20)…and also Man’s sin nature…our fallen condition… and the cursed nature of our world are also self evident…via common experience, yet there is no way Man can descover via reason…without faith in the scriptures… that God would send his son Jesus Christ …to die a criminals death…as substitutional attonement for our salvation! This fact cannot be descovered independently via human logic/ etc from experience or from studying Nature.
And this is Why Interlectual vanity Blinds many people whom refuse to simply humbly believe the scriptures… like common fools… Thats right! Salvation is availible to the simple minded! It is not the preserve of the highly educated or superior interlects!
“…it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe.” (1Cor1vs21)
Satan loves Interlectual vanity because it tends to hinder faith in the trustworthyness of the scriptures. The Highly Educated prefer Clever arguements and rationalism… sophistry, etc… putting schooling ahead of simple minded faith.
Tim Wikiriwhi. King James Bible believer.
St Paul Preached to the Greek Philosophers at Mars Hill regarding their Alter to the Unknown God.
Merely an Attunement? Life after Death.
Oh really? This is a pessimistic assumption, not a concrete fact. It is just as possible to have faith that we all get out of here alive… that We are not absolutely annihilated at death.
Though our bodies are merely the remnants of what we have consumed over the last 7 years… though we have assimilated Big Macs and Council Water into our physical being… we are so much more than that! The Real *You* is not your arms, legs, not even your brain… the real You is your Non-physical free willed/ thinking / Spiritual being/moral agency/ and personality… and these things are not properties of, nor derivable from Matter. Thus it is self evident that we are more than our bodies, and that it is very possible that our spirits could survive Physical Death.
“To fear death, my friends, is only to think ourselves wise, without being wise: for it is to think that we know what we do not know. For anything that men can tell, death may be the greatest good that can happen to them: but they fear it as if they knew quite well that it was the greatest of evils. And what is this but that shameful ignorance of thinking that we know what we do not know?”
Socrates
Socrates was a Greek who lived before the time of Christ.
He did not get to hear the preaching Of Christ’s Resurection from the Dead by St Paul At Mars Hill.
Thus Socrates only had limited human reason to go by.
It is very Possible that Had Socrates had oppotunity to Discourse with St Paul that he may have had more certainty about Life after death!… I conjecture…
Yet still… though he admitted he could not claim knowledge of life after death… He had a reason baced faith that drinking from the cup of Hemlock would not be the End for him…
He believed life was more than merely the attumement of a physical instrument…
“…Let us reflect in another way, and we shall see that there is great reason
to hope that death is a good; for one of two things–either death is a
state of nothingness and utter unconsciousness, or, as men say, there is a
change and migration of the soul from this world to another. Now if you
suppose that there is no consciousness, but a sleep like the sleep of him
who is undisturbed even by dreams, death will be an unspeakable gain. For
if a person were to select the night in which his sleep was undisturbed
even by dreams, and were to compare with this the other days and nights of
his life, and then were to tell us how many days and nights he had passed
in the course of his life better and more pleasantly than this one, I think
that any man, I will not say a private man, but even the great king will
not find many such days or nights, when compared with the others. Now if
death be of such a nature, I say that to die is gain; for eternity is then
only a single night. But if death is the journey to another place, and
there, as men say, all the dead abide, what good, O my friends and judges,
can be greater than this? If indeed when the pilgrim arrives in the world
below, he is delivered from the professors of justice in this world, and
finds the true judges who are said to give judgment there, Minos and
Rhadamanthus and Aeacus and Triptolemus, and other sons of God who were
righteous in their own life, that pilgrimage will be worth making. What
would not a man give if he might converse with Orpheus and Musaeus and
Hesiod and Homer? Nay, if this be true, let me die again and again. I
myself, too, shall have a wonderful interest in there meeting and
conversing with Palamedes, and Ajax the son of Telamon, and any other
ancient hero who has suffered death through an unjust judgment; and there
will be no small pleasure, as I think, in comparing my own sufferings with
theirs. Above all, I shall then be able to continue my search into true
and false knowledge; as in this world, so also in the next; and I shall
find out who is wise, and who pretends to be wise, and is not. What would
not a man give, O judges, to be able to examine the leader of the great
Trojan expedition; or Odysseus or Sisyphus, or numberless others, men and
women too! What infinite delight would there be in conversing with them
and asking them questions! In another world they do not put a man to death
for asking questions: assuredly not. For besides being happier than we
are, they will be immortal, if what is said is true.
Wherefore, O judges, be of good cheer about death, and know of a certainty,
that no evil can happen to a good man, either in life or after death. He
and his are not neglected by the gods; nor has my own approaching end
happened by mere chance. But I see clearly that the time had arrived when
it was better for me to die and be released from trouble; wherefore the
oracle gave no sign. For which reason, also, I am not angry with my
condemners, or with my accusers; they have done me no harm, although they
did not mean to do me any good; and for this I may gently blame them.
Still I have a favour to ask of them. When my sons are grown up, I would
ask you, O my friends, to punish them; and I would have you trouble them,
as I have troubled you, if they seem to care about riches, or anything,
more than about virtue; or if they pretend to be something when they are
really nothing,–then reprove them, as I have reproved you, for not caring
about that for which they ought to care, and thinking that they are
something when they are really nothing. And if you do this, both I and my
sons will have received justice at your hands.
The hour of departure has arrived, and we go our ways–I to die, and you to
live. Which is better God only knows…”
Plato believed in we survive death…
St Paul says this:
“Behold, I shew you a mystery; We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed,
In a moment, in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump: for the trumpet shall sound, and the dead shall be raised incorruptible, and we shall be changed.
For this corruptible must put on incorruption, and this mortal must put on immortality.
So when this corruptible shall have put on incorruption, and this mortal shall have put on immortality, then shall be brought to pass the saying that is written, Death is swallowed up in victory.
O death, where is thy sting? O grave, where is thy victory?”
(1Cor15vs51-55) KJV
Tim Wikiriwhi.
Libertarian Christian.
Dispensationalist.
King James Bible believer.
More from Tim…..
LIFE AND DEATH. HOPE AND HAPPINESS. A TRIBUTE TO REV JOHN STEELE CLARK. (RE-POST)
Faith, Science, and Reason. The Pomposity of Atheism.
Et tu Brute? What is Scientism: William Lane Craig
Willful Ignorance and the Limits of human reason (without Divine Revelation.)
The Rock of Divine Revelation.
Death of an Atheist. Follow the evidence.
Rapturous Amazement! The Advance of Science Converts The High Priest of Atheism to Deism. A Flew.
Pasteur’s Law, Creation Science vs Nose Bone Atheism.
Russell’s Teapot really refutes Atheism not Theism!
Biomimicry… Plagiarizing God’s designs.
How can a Good God exist when there is so much evil in the world? (part1) Atheist Nihilism.
Materialism renders Man Nought. Meaning-less, Value-less, Right-less
We are not Robots Ayn Rand. We are Moral Agents.
Monism: Evolutionary Psychology and the Death of Morality, Reason and Freewill.