No man can serve two masters: for either he will hate the one, and love the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. (KJV)
“I have the right to do anything,” you say—but not everything is beneficial. “I have the right to do anything”—but I will not be mastered by anything. (NIV)
Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: (KJV)
Whoever makes a practice of sinning is of the devil, for the devil has been sinning from the beginning. (ESV)
For I do not understand my own actions. For I do not do what I want, but I do the very thing I hate. (ESV)
So now it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me. For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh. For I have the desire to do what is right, but not the ability to carry it out. For I do not do the good I want, but the evil I do not want is what I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want, it is no longer I who do it, but sin that dwells within me.
So I find it to be a law that when I want to do right, evil lies close at hand. For I delight in the law of God, in my inner being, but I see in my members another law waging war against the law of my mind and making me captive to the law of sin that dwells in my members. (ESV)
Wretched man that I am! Who will deliver me from this body of death? (ESV)
Category Archives: Keep it Metal!
Join the dots
– Calvin Coolidge
‘Love’ for PM spurs $105,000 donation, Stuff, 17 July 2010:
A top Auckland restaurateur has given $105,000 to the National Party, saying although he was too Right-wing for any political party, his “love” for the prime minister prompted him to do it.
[…]
Asked the reason for his largesse, restaurant owner Tony Astle said Mr Key was a customer he had known for several years.
“Well, I just love the prime minister. I’ve never really been a person to give money to parties, but I decided this time I would. We need them back again, we don’t need those other pretenders.”
Campaign donations favour the right, Stuff, 3 November 2011:
Antoine’s Restaurant in Parnell, owned by outspoken John Key supporter Tony Astle, was the other National donor, giving the party $60,000.
It follows another $105,000 donation last June from the Parnell restaurant, where Mr Key and wife Bronagh are regular diners.
New Year Honours: Tony Astle ONZM, New Zealand Herald, 31 December 2012:
“It came out of the blue, really – I wasn’t expecting it at all,” said restaurateur Tony Astle of his award.
The 62-year-old owns the renowned Antoine’s restaurant in Parnell, Auckland, which he opened with his wife, Beth, in 1973.
“I’m very excited about it, because, well, you don’t expect these sorts of things when you’re a chef,” Mr Astle said.
Well spotted, Idiot/Savant.
Out of the blue? Sorry, but this reeks of putrefaction.
The Honours Unit administers the New Zealand Royal Honours System.
The Honours Unit is a small team within the Cabinet Office, which is part of the Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet.
To my mind, there’s nothing inherently wrong with donating money to political parties, and there’s also nothing inherently wrong with accepting a Royal Honour (although my friend Gary, who put me on to this, would beg to differ!) for genuine culinary achievements and services to restaurateuring.
But had I been in Astle’s shoes? I’d not have accepted. At the very least, the timing is waaay inappropriate! Why couldn’t Astle have waited until Labour’s next term in government to accept his award?! One must not only behave honourably, one must be seen to behave honourably. (Perhaps the alternative version of the meme above is better. “There are some things that money can’t buy … like manners, morals and intelligence.”)
I won’t be dining at Antoine’s any time soon.
Stomp vs. squat
For extreme metal fans only.
Suicide Silence are playing Auckland tonight.
Here’s one reason I’m not there.
I don’t think the new vocalist Hernan Hermida is as good a vocalist as Mitch Lucker. But, even if he were, that’s not the point. The point is, he’s not Mitch Lucker.
Did the Doors get a new vocalist when Jim Morrison died? No, they did not. They quit. (After trying to carry on for a little while as a threesome, releasing two “Doors” albums into oblivion.) Some band members are essential to the identity of a band, not mere session musicians.
Mitch Lucker was such an essential. Too bad he had to get drunk, argue with his wife, then jump on his motorcyle only to wrap himself around a utility pole, leaving his wife a widow and his 5-year-old daughter fatherless. š„
What is rationality? (Part 2)
What is rationality? The truth is, it’s something that most of us don’t actually have.
But we sure like to kid ourselves.
Here’s a quote I saw on Facebook from someone called Deidra Mae Ryan.
I’ve been thinking a lot lately that a lot of homosexuals and their supporters consistently state that God made them this way and that it isn’t a biblical or church issue its a human rights issue.
I keep coming back to the fact that if God had intended homosexuality to be natural then he would’ve made it possible for us to procreate without the need of the opposite sex AND then why did God only create 1 woman and 1 man in the beginning. Then there is the fact that God destroyed 2 major cities in part due to homosexuality, Sodom and Gomorrah. If God had intended for homosexuality to be part of our natural being then why destroy those cities?
Personally I believe people get so steeped in their sin that they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth. I see it over and over, not just with sexual sins. They don’t want to see and admit that they are wrong. What’s more, is that it’s our human nature to justify all our wrong choices, even if that means we make up our own truth…case in point – Homosexuals and their supporters coming up with every excuse in the book to justify the choice of homosexuality.
We all do it with our own individual sins.
Please note that this is not a judgement on homosexuals and homosexuality. I’m also not convinced that Ryan’s logic is sound. I post this for her conclusion, “I believe people get so steeped in their sin that they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth …” This is so very true.
And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brotherās eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
Thou hypocrite, first cast out the beam out of thine own eye; and then shalt thou see clearly to cast out the mote out of thy brotherās eye. (KJV)
It’s also very true that people get so steeped in their own particular worldview and its presuppositions that they have blinders on and refuse to see the truth.
For a long time, I accepted the tenets of atheistic materialism. They seemed obviously true. And I rejected the tenets of Christianity. They seemed obviously false. And I had plenty of arguments with which to ably defend my worldview. But then I thought about what I was doing. Doing exactly that. Using rational argument to defend a worldview I already had. As opposed to putting all my presuppositions aside and taking all the arguments, both for and against theism, together and on their own merits, to see where they would lead (if, in fact, they lead anywhere).
[People] don’t want to see and admit that they are wrong. What’s more, is that it’s our human nature to justify all our wrong choices, even if that means we make up our own truth.
Man is not the rational animal. He’s the rationalising animal.
I acknowledge that I am generalising from my own intellectual habits to those of others, but I think that it’s legit to do so. I figure that other people have corrupt minds like mine.
I suggest that for the most part we all believe our own bullshit. Unashamedly.
I strive for intellectual honesty. I’ve recently reviewed many of the arguments for and against God’s existence, and tried to leave my ideological baggage at the door. I used to find the Design Argument unsatisfying inconclusive. Now I find it disconcertingly suggestive! I used to have serious doubts about God’s existence. Now I have serious doubts about his non-existence!
My Humean scepticism has stood me in good stead. I realise that man can truly know nothing based on reasoning from his limited sense data alone, unless he posits the existence of a guarantor, e.g., God. This was Descartes’ way out of radical scepticism. God’s existence is taken to be axiomatic. Yes, it’s a bootstrapping method of escape. But so are all the others, e.g., positing a uniform and self-sufficient Nature, which is one of the methodological axioms of science and a metaphysical axiom of scientism.
From the perspective of an atheistic materialistic worldview, the tenets of the atheistic materialistic worldview make sense. But from the perspective of a Christian worldview, the tenets of the Christian worldview make even more sense. But not, perhaps, until one has adopted that very perspective.
How’s that for a rationalisation of my religious conversion? š
See also What is rationality (Part 1)
What is this that stands before me?
Still falls the rain,
the veils of darkness shroud
the blackened trees, which,
contorted by some unseen
violence, shed their tired
leaves, and bend their boughs
toward a grey earth of severed
bird wings. among the grasses,
poppies bleed before a
gesticulating death, and young
rabbits, born dead in traps,
stand motionless, as though
guarding the silence that
surrounds and threatens to engulf
all those that would listen.Mute birds, tired of repeating
yesterdays terrors, huddle together
in the recesses of dark corners,
heads turned from the dead, black
swan that floats upturned in a
small pool in the hollow.there emerges from this pool
a faint sensual mist, that
traces its way upwards to
caress the chipped feet of
the headless martyr’s statue, whose
only achievement was to die to
soon, and who couldn’t wait to
lose.the cataract of darkness form
fully, the long black night begins,
yet still, by the lake a young girl waits,
unseeing she believes herself unseen,
she smiles, faintly at the distant
tolling bell, and the still falling rain.
On Friday 13 February 1970 Black Sabbath released their eponymous debut album.
Heavy metal is 44 years old today! š
The Gospel of God’s Grace.
The Gospel is that the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins, was buried, and rose from the dead showing his victory over sin and death and guaranteeing our salvation and justification before God.
Whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord *Shall* be saved.
For by grace are ye saved, through faith… it is the gift of God.
Not of works lest any man should boast.
For God commendeth his love toward us in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.
Nothing can separate us from the love of God which is in Christ.
You cannot *add* or take away anything from this…. God’s ordained prescription for salvation in this age.
You cannot deny Christ’s Sacrifice and resurrection and be saved.
You cant say “I’m a good person.. I dont deserve to go to hell”…. for there is none Righteous no not one, For all have sinned and come short of the Glory of God.
If you deny that it was necessary for Christ to shed his blood for you…. you reject the gift of God.
You cannot *Add* to the finished work of Christ as preached to us by the Apostle of the Gospel of Grace St Paul.
False preachers of the Law say that a person must keep the Law to be saved…. ie they add *works* as necessary for salvation.
They prove they dont understand the Gospel of grace at all!
They fail to ‘Rightly divide’ the word of truth and so twist the scriptures to say what they want…. by mis-applying the old testament, the Kingdom preaching of Christ, St Peter, St James, etc…. and corrupt the Gospel of grace into Slavery under the Mosaic Law.
They add things like baptism, like keeping the Sabbath etc as necessary for salvation.
These ‘additions tend to enslave those whom they deceive into obeying *The Church hierarchy*….. ensnare them in tithing etc.
This is to deny the Liberating Power of the Cross, which sets us free from the Law.
If all this seems confusing….. Satan Laughs and spreads his wings…. He created this confusion to keep you from the Simple truth.
That Christ has paid the penalty of our sins and that if we simply ask God to save us in Christ’s name…. we will be saved indeed… no ifs…. no But’s….
Christ came to save us Sinners.
No matter who you are or how evil you have been, or what your personal struggles and vices are.…. Christ s Blood can save you!
Rejoice in the Love and GRACE of God our Heavenly Father.
Tim Wikiriwhi
Protestant King James Bible believer Dispensationalist Libertarian Independent.
Read more from Tim….
Hell is for the Self Righteous, Heaven is for Sinners.
Christās work of Salvation on the Crossā¦ The Great Equaliser.
The Christian Fellowship is a voluntary private society, not a theocratic political movement.
The hope which is In Christ. Terrible grief shall be turned into great joy!
Dunce to Dunne
Today was Peter Dunne’s first day back as Associate Minister of Health. I never thought I’d say it, but welcome back, Peter!
Yesterday was Todd McClay’s last day as interim Associate Minister of Health. Yesterday McClay went full retard.
In his swansong announcement, McClay welcomed the decision by the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority to withdraw five psychoactive products from the market.
The five products were: Anarchy, Voodoo, Karma, AK47, and Northern Lights Primo. Their interim product approval numbers were (respectively): P0002, P0003, P0004, P0008, and P0038. Their licences have now been revoked.
Let’s take a closer look at two of these products, AK47 and Northern Lights Primo. Here are screenshots from the Ministry of Health’s interim product approvals page prior to their revocation. (Google’s latest cached copy of the page is here.)
I included two additional products which have interim product approval, Amsterdam Long Island Tea and Tai High Purple Passion. Note the following facts.
The product Northern Lights Primo, which contains CL-2201 at 50 mg per gram, has been taken off the shelves. Meanwhile, the product Amsterdam Long Island Tea, which contains CL-2201 at 50 mg per gram, stays on the shelves. The active ingredient in both products is exactly the same. The amount of the active ingredient in milligrams per gram is exactly the same. The only difference between the two products is different packaging. One gets to go, the other gets to stay. Wat.
The product AK-47, which contains 5F-PB-22 at 60 mg per gram, has been taken off the shelves. Meanwhile, the product Tai High Purple Passion, which contains 5F-PB-22 at 60 mg per gram, stays on the shelves. (PB-22-F and 5F-PB-22 are the same chemical.) The active ingredient in both products is exactly the same. The amount of the active ingredient in milligrams per gram is exactly the same. The only difference between the two products is different packaging. One gets to go, the other gets to stay. Wut.
Unless people smoke the packaging (I think not) we have two pairs of identical products. Todd McClay says
These withdrawals underscore the effectiveness of the Psychoactive Substances Act in getting harmful products off the shelves
I am satisfied that one of my last acts as Associate Health Minister is to see the removal of yet another suite of products that would have risked the health of young New Zealanders.
He might as well have said
These withdrawals underscore the ineffectiveness of the Psychoactive Substances Act in getting harmful products off the shelves.
I am satisfied that one of my last acts as Associate Health Minister is to see the non-removal of yet another suite of products that risk the health of young New Zealanders.
Is Todd McClay a complete idiot? I think so. (He’s just been made the Associate Minister of Tourism. I think the tourism industry should be very worried.)
But there’s quite possibly something more sinister going on. Industrial sabotage. Apparently
The five brands were previously assessed by the Ministry of Health and in August were judged low risk enough to be sold to the public.
But a spike of calls to the National Poisons Centre will lead to a recall today of the AK47, Anarchy, Karma, Northern Lights Primo and Voodoo brands.
A “spike” of calls. Does this indicate the depths to which some operators in the legal highs industry will stoop? Hoax calls to the National Poisons Centre, advising of “adverse reactions” to competitors’ products? I don’t know. But something doesn’t seem at all right to me.
What I do know is that the Ministry of Health is a serious health risk. The morons who comprise the Psychoactive Substances Regulatory Authority are supposed to assess the scientific evidence of potential harms of these products. Sorry, guys, but self-selected self-reports phoned in to the National Poisons Centre hardly count as science. You might as well consult the Amsterdam Long Island Tea leaves you’ve been smoking!
“Cannabis! Cannabis!” says the Blogger. “Utterly cannabis! Everything is cannabis.”
Regular readers may have noticed that my posts these days are, as often as not, about cannabis law reform. I certainly have.
Cannabis is insanely high in the “intoxicating mix of Christianity, libertarianism and death metal” mentioned under “Contributors” in the right-hand sidebar. Seems there’s more tokin’ going on than “slaggin’ socialists and headbangin’!”
But there is a very good reason for this blog contributor’s unbalanced content.
The Parliamentary term in New Zealand is three years and this year we’re due for a general election. Likely, it will be in November. I intend to stand again as a list candidate and as an electorate candidate for the party of which I am currently the Acting President, viz., the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party. Until then, dear reader, there will be no respite from my drug-induced ramblings!
2014 is election year! The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party is aiming high!
Our goal is to crack the 5% theshold and get MPs in Parliament. Failing that, we intend at least to frighten the Labour and Green horses into legalising cannabis in the next Parliamentary term. I hope that there is a Labour-led coalition in government by 2015. (Politicians are like diapers. They need changing often and for the same reason.) And I hope that the next government does our job for us, with or without our Parliamentary help. So that I can get off my hobby horse.
Why am I even in the cannabis law reform movement?
To begin with, I got involved for much the same reasons that most people do and believe most of the things they do and believe—emotional and psychological reasons. I wanted to justify my own behaviour. The process of justifying my own behaviour led me, after a while, to my libertarian political stance. So, all good!
Today I still believe that there is nothing wrong with drug use provided that it does not interfere with what one is supposed to be doing, viz., leading a good Christian life and, in doing so, leading by example. I won’t be the judge of how much room that leaves for tokin’ up. Not as much as I’d like, probably. š
I read recently that we are fast approaching the day when coming out of the closet as a Bible-believing Christian is harder than coming out as a homosexual. Actually, I think we’re pretty much already there. Coming out of the closet as a cannabis user is also hard. But, these days, even my mum knows I smoke marijuana, and I go to church with her on Sundays. Two out of three ain’t bad. š
But coming out of the closet as a cannabis user remains difficult for many. Mainly because of its illegality. For obvious reasons, this is a major problem for the cannabis law reform movement. An untold number of respected members of society are regular cannabis users, but they won’t come out as regular cannabis users and voice their support for cannabis law reform, because they want to stay respected members of society—and they want to keep their careers.
Which brings me to why I’m still in the cannabis law reform movement.
I no longer feel any need to justify my own behaviour. I live like it’s legal. Even if I didn’t smoke cannabis, today I can legally get stoned out of my tiny mind on any one of eleven different synthetic cannabinoids contained in over thirty products given interim product approval by the Ministry of Health.
My involvement in the cannabis law reform movement isn’t now, and never was solely, about justifying my own behaviour. My involvement is about stopping the massive injustice of cannabis prohibition. Arresting people for smoking a God-given herb that makes them happy is criminally insane. I have next-to-no words for people who support laws (such as we have now) that prevent medical cannabis patients from getting the medicine they need. They’re evil beyond the pale.
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party is the only political party in New Zealand with a sunset clause in its very name. Once cannabis is legalised, the party will deregister. And I can have my life back. š
We’re not Dunne yet!
Prime Minister John Key has confirmed that United Future leader Peter Dunne will be reinstated as a minister.
There’s no doubt that Dunne is a shrewd political operator. When he saw trouble coming, he resigned from his office of his own accord, then patiently waited to be reinstated. (Perhaps that’s exactly what the Vice President of the ALCP is up to, too, only time will tell. š )
The National government is criminally insane.
Is this the arch-fiend returning to the scene of the crime, to make sure the ongoing chemical warfare on our nation’s most vulnerable is waged with all the conscientiousness of an Adolf Eichmann?
Or is this the author of a well-intentioned, albeit flawed, piece of legislation returning to put things to rights and make sure the continuing story, which has totally lost the plot, at least has a happy ending?
Let’s make sure to keep in mind the following two salient facts.
Firstly, here‘s what Peter Dunne said when the National government Cabinet first agreed upon key details of the Psychoactive Substances Act.
As promised, we are reversing the onus of proof. If they cannot prove that a product is safe, then it is not going anywhere near the marketplace
None of these products will come to market if they have not been proven safe.
Secondly, here‘s what Peter Dunne said on his personal blog not so long ago, after he’d stepped down as Associate Minister of Health.
Just over a couple of months ago, the Psychoactive Substances Act of which I was the principal architect was implemented. It provides for the first time for a regulated market for the sale and supply of psychoactive substances, based on the level of risk they pose to the user. It is attracting interest from around the globe, as an innovative solution to an international problem, and, after a few not unanticipated teething problems, seems to be settling down quite well.
Now, here is where I have been thinking. Although the Psychoactive Substances Act was intended to deal with that issue only, and not to have wider application, it does occur to me that, if after a period of time, it is shown to be working effectively, it could well become the model by which narcotic drugs, currently controlled under the Misuse of Drugs Act, are regulated for the future. The yardstick of level of risk ā based on sound pharmacological and toxicological evidence ā would become the determinant of availability, not public sentiment or prejudice.
I am not suggesting a revolution, but simply observing that the regulatory regime introduced for psychoactive substances could well have wider application and that we should not be averse to that possibility. After all, most experts now concede the so-called āwarā on drugs has failed, and new initiatives are required.
NORML likes Peter Dunneās new thinking and so do I.
I think we should do all we can to encourage Peter Dunne’s new thinking about cannabis (which, surely, is the drug he had in mind) and hold him to his earlier promise that other psychoactive products will not come to market if they have not been proven safe.
I think Peter Dunne should take the following Goode advice (and make good his promise).
Herbal cannabis should be given immediate interim product approval under the Psychoactive Substances Act says Dr. Richard Goode, Vice President of the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party.
āLetās legalise cannabis now, so the Ministry of Health can have all the time it needs to get its act sorted, and cannabinoid connoisseurs can continue to get high on the real deal,ā Dr. Goode said.
Some politicians I’ve never much liked. Including Peter Dunne who stalled cannabis law reform for years, and John Banks who knifed his running mate Don Brash in the back over the cannabis law reform issue. But Banksie came good before he took his final bow. Will Peter Dunne yet surprise us all? I sincerely hope so.
R(1)8
This is the video documentary that, in the past 48 hours, has been viewed by 1 in 10 New Zealanders.
Wonāt somebody please think of the children? That’s the question I’m asking. Because somebody needs to do something. But that somebody is not the government, and that something is not making legislative provision for tighter regulations, harsher penalties and harder-hitting advertising campaigns. Not at all.
“Only in fucking Fairfield.”
Not only in the suburbs of Hamilton, unfortunately. As the YouTube uploader says, “Time to reveal one of the BIGGEST issues in New Zealand, under-aged drinking.”
“He’s allowed.”
How did we get to this? For the answer to that, I suggest that readers take a while to follow some of the incisive and insightful social commentary at blogs such as Brendan McNeill‘s and Lindsay Mitchell‘s. Do so, and the root causes of New Zealand’s problems with drinking, drug use and delinquency ought quickly to become all too glaringly apparent.
“Bro, yous got a problem, bro? … He’s Maori, bro, he’s different. … Bro, he’s Maori. He’s a Maori, bro. Bro, we drink at any time, bro.” (“It could kill him.”) “It doesn’t matter, bro. … I been drinking since the age of 9.”
As ever: what is to be done?
Somehow, we need to return to Christian family values (commitment and fidelity—the child is from a broken home) and repair to parental responsibility (neither parent knew where he was, and an aunt, allegedly, had provided the alcohol – “He’s allowed”). Long-term, we need to bring about a cultural sea change.
In the short-term, the NZ Police are trying to have the clip removed from the Internet. Good luck with that.
“Fuck drinking, smoke weed.”
It’s good advice, but not to a 9 year old.
“I do smoke weed.”
This is where I say a few words about our drug laws.
A common objection to cannabis legalisation is that society already has enough problems with alcohol. We don’t want to add another mind-altering drug to the mix. We already have 9 year olds turning up drunk to skate parks. We don’t want them turning up drunk and stoned.
Well, guess what? At the bottom end of society, neither regulation nor prohibition can stop New Zealand’s two favourite drugs, alcohol and cannabis, from falling into the hands of minors. Over the rest of us, regulation can provide government with some measure of control. But to regulate is to legalise.
The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party‘s policy is for the sale and use of cannabis to be strictly R18.
There’s one factual error in the documentary.
“You can’t ride a scooter when you’re drunk and 9 years old.”
The video evidence says otherwise.
To conclude, in the words of the YouTube uploader, “You may think this video is funny, but there’s a point where it becomes serious as alcohol intake can cause serious impalement and damaging to the brain.”