Category Archives: Old Testament

ALCP, Cannabis, Genesis, Matthew, Voluntary Euthanasia

God’s gift to the terminally ill

Thursday 16 October 2014 Richard 9 Comments

A picture is worth a thousand words.

Here’s a Biblical argument for euthanasing the terminally ill.

The argument relies on a couple of reasonable assumptions which I now make explicit.

And God said, Behold, I have given you every herb bearing seed, which is upon the face of all the earth, and every tree, in the which is the fruit of a tree yielding seed; to you it shall be for meat. …

And God saw every thing that he had made, and, behold, it was very good. (KJV)

I assume that God gave us plants for all sorts of purposes, not just to eat. Creating the known universe, including our solar system, our planet and all life upon it including us was quite a feat. The account given in the Book of Genesis, of the origin of God’s green earth, is necessarily highly abbreviated. It cannot reasonably be argued that God did not intend us to use trees for building material as well as fruit, nor can it reasonably be argued that God did not intend us to use Cyperus papyrus to make the manuscripts that the Books of the Bible were originally written on, notwithstanding that these non-nutritional uses aren’t specifically mentioned in Chapter 1 of the Book of Genesis.

I also assume that we can tell what a plant is for simply by looking at its actual uses. Take any plant. What’s it good for?

Now I’m fond of using Genesis 1:29 (“I have given you every herb bearing seed”) as an argument for legalising cannabis. The Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party exists to legalise cannabis for recreational, spiritual, medicinal and industrial purposes. I think the ALCP’s cause is righteous. And I don’t think it’s eisegetical to suggest that God gave us cannabis for our recreational use among other things but I do acknowledge that it can reasonably be argued that getting high is not among the uses God intended for it. No matter, I don’t think principled exceptions disprove the general rule.

Sometimes I meet the objection, but what about deadly nightshade? Did God give that to us to eat too? But this objection just lends further credence to my view that God gave us plants for more than just food. So what about belladonna? Well, what’s deadly nightshade good for? It turns out that belladonna is a medicine and dispensable to a healthy diet.

Belladonna tinctures, decoctions, and powders, as well as alkaloid salt mixtures, are still produced for pharmaceutical use, and these are often standardised at 1037 parts hyoscyamine to 194 parts atropine and 65 parts scopolamine. The alkaloids are compounded with phenobarbital and/or kaolin and pectin for use in various functional gastrointestinal disorders. The tincture, used for identical purposes, remains in most pharmacopoeias, with a similar tincture of Datura stramonium having been in the US Pharmacopoeia at least until the late 1930s. The combination of belladonna and opium, in powder, tincture, or alkaloid form, is particularly useful by mouth or as a suppository for diarrhoea and some forms of visceral pain

Which brings us to the miracle plant that is the topic of this post, the opium poppy. Surely, God intended us to use this plant for the strongest of strong pain relief! Morphine is the predominant alkaloid found in the opium poppy, and in the 21st century it is still the analgesic of choice for pain management in the terminally ill.

Jesus himself is said to have been offered a drink containing opium (according to one interpretation) on the cross, but declined to accept.

They gave him vinegar to drink mingled with gall: and when he had tasted thereof, he would not drink. (KJV)

Now to the argument. Morphine is not just an analgesic. It is also a respiratory depressant. It slows breathing and, in sufficiently high doses, slows breathing to a stop. Its effects as a respiratory depressant are inseparable from its effects as an analgesic, both brought about by activation of the central nervous system’s μ-opioid receptors. Is it by design that these two remarkable effects of morphine are, as it were, yoked together? I suggest that it is.

I suggest that morphine’s design ensures that when a terminally ill patient is in severe pain, and the dose of morphine administered is increased appropriately, it also tends to kill the patient. That’s euthanasia by any other name.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3FRwnkrolYc

Gospel music, Proverbs, Renascent

Seek me while you can!

Tuesday 30 September 2014 Richard 1 Comment

Wisdom calls aloud in the street
She raises her voice in the public squares
At the noisy streets she cries out
In the gateways of the city she makes her speech

How long will you simple ones
love your simple ways?
How long will mockers boast
and fools hate knowledge?

I would have poured out my heart to you
And made my thoughts known to you

Seek me while you can
Or it will be too late
Then you will call to me
But I will not answer

Since you rejected me when I called
Since you ignored all my advice
And would not accept my rebuke
I in turn will laugh at your disaster

How long will you simple ones
love your simple ways?
How long will mockers boast
and fools hate knowledge?

I would have poured out my heart to you
And made my thoughts known to you

Seek me while you can!

They will call to me
But I will not answer
They will look for me
But they will not find me

They will call to me
But I will not answer
They will look for me
But they will not find me

Since they hated knowledge
And did not choose to fear the Lord
They will eat the fruit of their ways
And be filled with the fruit of their schemes

The waywardness of the simple will kill them
The complacency of fools will destroy them
Whoever listens to me will live in safety
And be at ease without fear of harm

How long will you simple ones
love your simple ways?
How long will mockers boast
and fools hate knowledge?

Justice, Old Testament, Romans

Rulers bear the sword for a reason

Monday 14 July 2014 reed 4 Comments

blind-justice — Roman justice goddess – blindfolded with sword

Romans 13:4
For the one in authority is God’s servant for your good. But if you do wrong, be afraid, for rulers do not bear the sword for no reason. They are God’s servants, agents of wrath to bring punishment on the wrongdoer.

Governments that serve God well should be agents of wrath that bring punishment on wrongdoers.

Christians should be supporting/advocating government punishment of wrongdoers. As I write this I think this doctrine is too obvious to mention and uncontentious… but I have seen that some Christians think justice has been replaced with “not judging”, forgiveness and mercy. And many people think the purpose of a justice system should be to rehabilitate and/or protect citizens.

Mercy and forgiveness have their place but these are, I believe, an individual’s prerogative – in the same way that generosity is an individuals prerogative. It is not virtuous when the state gives away people’s money against their wishes and neither is it virtuous when the state gives lenient punishments against a victim’s wishes. (Mercy, forgiveness and generosity by proxy are counterfeit virtues.)

Significant disagreements amongst Christians occur when we consider which wrongdoings should be punished. Wrongdoings can be classified as against God (e.g. worshipping other gods, disobedience), against self (e.g. drunkenness, greed, laziness, pride) or against others (e.g. murder, theft, assault).

Wrongdoings against God or self are nobody else’s business – those wrongdoings are between that person and God – as Paul said “Who am I to judge another man’s servant?”

The reason rulers bear the sword is to punish wrongdoers – specifically those who do wrongs against others.

(I thought I was finished… but I guess I’d better add that all punishments should be just i.e. they must not be disproportionate to the wrongdoing… eye for an eye, tooth for tooth, yadda yadda.)

Genesis, Justice, S.O.D., Semantics

Harm minimisation vs. harm elimination

Thursday 29 May 2014 Richard 3 Comments

It’s important to say what you mean and mean what you say.

If you don’t say what you mean and mean what you say, you will likely be misunderstood.

The trouble is, even if you do say what you mean and mean what you say, you will still likely be misunderstood!

Sad but true.

It all goes back to the Babel incident recorded in the Book of Genesis.

Then they said, “Come, let us build ourselves a city, with a tower that reaches to the heavens, so that we may make a name for ourselves; otherwise we will be scattered over the face of the whole earth.”

But the Lord came down to see the city and the tower the people were building. The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them. Come, let us go down and confuse their language so they will not understand each other.”

So the Lord scattered them from there over all the earth, and they stopped building the city. That is why it was called Babel—because there the Lord confused the language of the whole world. From there the Lord scattered them over the face of the whole earth. (NIV)

Later, much later … we have modern telecommunications technology. We have the Internet and language translators such as the Babelfish). Microsoft readies real-time language translator for Skype. Is anything we plan now possible for us?

No, it’s not. Our language is still confused! People can’t seem to speak clearly. Ambiguity is ubiquitous. Even if we do say what we mean and mean what we say … it takes two to tango. Communication is as much the listener’s responsibility as the speaker’s. People can’t seem to speak clearly, and they can’t seem to listen clearly either. They’ll hear you say what they thought you meant. Even before you said it.

Even if what you meant is what you said and what you said is what you meant, you will still likely be misunderstood!

Here’s a recent case study. It’s an edited snippet of a conversation I had on Facebook with a libertarian friend. (No prizes for guessing whom!)

Do you agree that a government should minimise the unjust harm the government actively inflicts on its own citizens? Yes or No?

No it must be absolutely eliminated…and it is *we the people* who do this…. not the government itself. *they dont make the rules. We do. They merely enforce the duties we delegate to them…. Government for the People… by the people.
Their Duty is to *uphold our rights*….. whether or not we Harm ourselves to a greater or lesser extent…. via ignorance or choice.
When you say Governments unjust harm should be ‘minimised’ rather than eliminated, you are saying that there is a tolerable level unjust harm that is allowable….

That’s not what I’m saying at all. Or is it?!

verb: minimise
reduce (something, especially something undesirable) to the smallest possible amount or degree.

To minimise harm is to reduce harm to the smallest possible amount or degree.

To eliminate harm is to reduce harm to zero.

To minimise harm or to eliminate harm completely? These come to the exact same thing if it turns out that the smallest possible amount of harm is zero! The question is, consistent with its ongoing role as a properly functioning proper government, what is the smallest possible amount of unjust harm the government can actively inflict on its own citizens? Is it, in fact, zero?

It’s not zero.

What is the proper function of a proper government? My friend says that government’s duty

is to *uphold our rights*

but what the hell does that even mean? Uphold? Wat.

According to my understanding of libertarianism, the government really has only two proper functions, viz., defence of the realm and administration of justice.

For defence of the realm, we have the Ministry of Defence … and (arguably) the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (but not Trade).

For administration of justice, we have the Ministry of Justice … and the subsidiary Ministry of Police and Ministry of Corrections (so-called).

The police are there to apprehend those who infringe our rights. The prison system is there to punish the perpetrators, according to principles of justice. To “uphold” our rights is merely to apprehend those who infringe our rights and bring them to justice … after the fact. Strictly speaking, according to my libertarian philosophy, the police have no business preventing crime. That’s what private security companies are for.

Now, let’s consider the government’s proper function of administering justice. Because of the very nature of earthly justice systems, it turns out that the smallest possible amount of unjust harm a government may inflict on its own citizens is greater than zero.

Sad but true.

In administering justice, earthly justice systems are prone to two basic kinds of error. Punishing the innocent and letting the guilty walk free. These two errors are not independent.

We could eliminate the first kind of error—punishing the innocent—by letting everyone walk free. But that would be a cop-out. It would not be administering justice at all.

We could eliminate the second kind of error—letting the guilty walk free—by locking everyone up. But that would be to unjustly harm the innocent en masse. It would not be administering justice at all.

In practice, our justice system is heavily weighted towards avoiding the second kind of error. As a result, very few innocent people are ever sent to prison. As a result, very many guilty people walk free.

Governments harm people. Even proper libertarian governments. Unfortunately, there is a tolerable level of unjust harm that is allowable. It’s just a harsh fact of life but one that we must accept.

1 Peter, 2 Corinthians, 2 Thessalonians, John, Mark, Matthew, Psalms, Sheeple, Tax

Let them eat worms

Wednesday 7 May 2014 Richard 3 Comments

Behold the ~~fowls of the air~~ beneficiaries of welfare: for they sow not, neither do they reap, nor gather into barns; yet your ~~heavenly Father~~ welfare State feedeth them. Are ye not much better than they? (KJV)

Now, if I meant to sound particularly harsh, I’d add that

if any would not work, neither should he eat. (KJV)

But that was the instruction of the Apostle Paul to his brothers and sisters in Christ in the church of the Thessalonians. Whereas, the bread of life himself explicitly instructed us to give food to the hungry and also remarked that the poor we will always have with us. So, no excuses!

What about welfare state? The welfare state is the biggest excuse around for not giving food to the hungry! “It’s not my job, I pay my taxes, no one starves in New Zealand, we have government welfare handouts to which everyone is entitled in times of need …” No doubt, you’ve heard it all before.

Real Christian charitable giving has nothing to do with paying taxes to fund a welfare state. In his post on Real voluntary private Charity vs the evils of welfare and Political force my co-blogger Tim makes this point exceptionally well. I have little to add.

But I will say this much. It seems to me that the Bible implicitly instructs us not to fund the welfare state. Jesus famously told us to “render to Caesar [i.e., unto the government] the things that are Caesar’s.” (KJV) Does that mean that, to follow our Lord’s instruction, we should gladly pay our taxes? No, not at all! ‘Render’ means to give back. Give back to the government that which already belongs to the government. But what is that which already belongs to the government? Your hard-earned dollars? No, I don’t think so. I think your hard-earned dollars belong to you. And you must not give them under compulsion.

The Apostle Paul wrote

Each one must give as he has decided in his heart, not reluctantly or under compulsion, for God loves a cheerful giver. (ESV)

We are to give generously, not grudgingly. Any gift of ours is to be given

as a willing gift, not as an exaction. (ESV)

Furthermore, the Apostle Peter wrote

I exhort the elders among you, as a fellow elder and a witness of the sufferings of Christ, as well as a partaker in the glory that is going to be revealed: shepherd the flock of God that is among you, exercising oversight, not under compulsion, but willingly, as God would have you; not for shameful gain, but eagerly; not domineering over those in your charge, but being examples to the flock. (ESV)

We are to look after the sheeple not under compulsion, but willingly. And we are not to domineer over those in our charge. This brings me to a further and final point.

We are not to exact. Instead, we are to act. As examples.

Do not treat the poor and needy like trained circus seals! Do not seek to make welfare beneficiaries jump through hoops. Freely scatter your gifts to the poor! Dignity for dignity. (NIV)

Don’t be a Carol Gaither!

Cannabis, Genesis, Live Like It's Legal, Local Government, NORML

Hamilton City Council vs. your basic human rights

Thursday 24 April 2014 Richard Leave a comment

Citizens denied access to public space for Hamilton J Day

NORML NZ Press Statement for Immediate Release: 24/04/2014

Citizens denied access to public space by Hamilton City Council to celebrate Hamilton J Day

The Hamilton branch of the National Organisation for the Reform of Marijuana Laws’ request to use the Hamilton Lake Domain Stage to hold its annual J Day gathering in Hamilton has been denied by the Hamilton City Council. The Council is claiming the event violates the Hamilton City Smoke-Free Environment Policy.

This event is primarily a political protest, involving activists, supporters, musicians, political party candidates and other speakers, but it is also a rare opportunity for the community to come together and discuss evidence based health and justice policies and to connect with others in their community that share their views.

“None of the event information provided to the Council by NORML, or any of NORML’s materials promoting this event, make any mention of an intention to violate a smoking prohibition, and we made it clear that we had offered to help with extra Council signage and include constant announcements to remind attendees that the Council has a smoking prohibition in all City parks to be fully in compliance with their smoke free policy,” said event organiser and Hamilton NORML member Gary Chiles.

NORML has said that it considers the action of the Council to be a direct violation of the organisation and its supporters’ democratic rights to gather and protest against the injustice of New Zealand’s cannabis prohibition, and also an unreasonable assumption on the part of the Council that an event clearly promoted as a law reform protest is promoting behaviour inconsistent with their smoke-free policy.

NORML invites all Hamilton supporters of cannabis law reform to gather peacefully to celebrate J Day at the Lake Domain Stage Saturday 3rd May at 12:00 as planned.

We have a democratic right to protest and a right to freedom of speech under the Bill of Rights Act, and we have every intention of exercising those rights.

ENDS

The power-tripping control freaks at the Hamilton City Council are at it again! Last I heard

A group feeding Hamilton’s needy say the council is forcing them out of Garden Place to stop more homeless people coming to the area.

But the council says while they have received complaints about the group feeding the homeless, their primary concern is the fact that those involved don’t have the appropriate permit to operate in a public.

Now they’re denying people the opportunity to gather in a public space and celebrate a wonder plant that God placed on this green earth explicitly for our use!

Then God said, “I give you every seed-bearing plant on the face of the whole earth and every tree that has fruit with seed in it. They will be yours for food.”

Big ups to Hamilton J Day organiser Gary Chiles for standing fast in the face of the Hamilton City Council’s authoritarian tantrums.

It is not for our elected representatives to lord it over those whom they are supposed to serve.

J Day Cannabis Law Reform Rally

Christian Libertarianism, Corruption, Death of America, Easter, Economic Ruin, Genesis, Hell, Hope, Justice, Liberate your Mind!, Merciful Grace, Miracles, Paul, Revelation, Salvation, Theism, There is a God!, Uncategorized, Zombies

As Biblical as Easter. Russell Crowe’s Noah Movie.

Saturday 19 April 2014 Tim 9 Comments

Russell Crowe as Noah

I went to see the Noah movie last night.
I was not expecting it to be an accurate portrayal of the Biblical Noah, and was fully prepared for Hollywood licence…. why let the truth get in the way of a good story?
Thus I have been sceptical of the bleating s from Christian commentators…. so I did’t bother to read them… and was determined to make up my own mind…. hoping to find something positive… ie that perhaps it may at least get people thinking about the Book of Genesis.

I like Big Budget movies with Special effects.
I think the real Russell Crowe is a Plonker… yet he’s good at his trade and usually enjoyable to watch… yet his portrayal of Noah was disturbing… unpleasant.

I can appreciate that it was a necessary for the script for Crowe to portray Noah as absolutely single minded in his convictions that God intended to absolutely destroy Humanity… though this was a massive departure from what The Bible says… and as a consequence Crowe’s Noah comes across as absolutely heartless…. a religious Fanatic… and this is a great dis-service to the Biblical Noah whom preached to the world about the coming flood… only to be mocked and jeered at.
The Movie makes out Noah flatly refused anyone’s plea to enter the salvation of the Ark… which is Tantamount to Christ refusing to save sinners…. The Genesis Ark being a Type of God’s mercy and Salvation in Christ.

I will mitigate this criticism in that the Magnitude of the situation did call for Steel resolve and monumental… unwavering Faith in the justness of God’s judgement.
Crow’s Noah was that… and later in the movie Mrs Noah articulates the weight that Noah had Borne …esp being a Caring and Humane Man.

cares

The movie Noah heartlessly leaves Ham’s Girlfriend to be crushed to death, just so they could stitch in another unpleasant and Anti-biblical construct… That in the post Deluvian world Ham and Japheth would take wives of their nieces.
No Doubt the producers relished this ‘innovation’ as it is patently designed to make audiences recoil at the idea that the Bible contains incest… re- procreation from the Children of Adam and Eve.

I will mitigate this critisism only for the shear fact that to believe the Book of Genesis is a literal historical account, it is necessary to accept that Adam and Eve’s children *did* pro-create together.
Yet there was no Law against it in that age, nor was there the same level of De-generation as is the case today… People lived 1000 years back then.

I do think that this part of the plot does evidence the producers desire to use this movie to discredit the Bible… not to enhance Faith… yet would you expect anything less from Hollywood these days?
It would be silly to go to a movie like this and yet feel you had been defrauded of your money.
Rabid Non-Christians like Ricard Dawkins would enjoy seeing Christians squirming in their seats!

Considering myself a more open mined, tolerant, and freer thinker than the average Christian I was hoping to find more virtue in this movie… they really did contrive things to such an extent that regretfully I must say that the bleetings of Evangelicals like Ray Comfort are not without substance.

One virtue which cannot be denied is that this movie is stimulating conversation on a very important subject… and no doubt some people will turn to Christ as a result.

Others may loose their faith…

Half way through the movie now, another interesting yet thoroughly contrary part of the plot was that the Fallen Angels of Genesis 6 had become ‘Watchers’…. Stoney Giants who contrary to the scriptures were benevolent beings who despite having to contend with the violence of humanity, still longed to be restored to communion with the Creator, and decided to help Noah build the Ark and protect it from being over-run by the Evil hordes.
They acted like the 300!
Brave warriors willing to face overwhelming odds to protect Noah’s family and the Ark.
The Highlight of the movie for me was when these Watchers began to be overpowered that they realised that God Almighty was merciful towards them and that upon death they were to be restored to Heaven!
Sitting alone amongst the crowd I was moved to silently shed a tear or two.
Heroic self-sacrifice and the hope of God’s mercy are themes which strike deep in my heart….. even though this part of the movie was an absolute fabrication.

I dont think it is necessary to dwell on the contrived storyline that Crowe’s Noah was determined to kill his own grandchildren…. a truly despicable portrayal… attempting to stitch in events of Abraham and Isaac… That Men of Faith are capable of the most inhumane atrocities.
It matters not that Isaac was spared… as were the grand daughters in this tale…. Hollywood’s purpose was served.
It was portrayed that Noah had to defy God, to save the innocent.
A Test?
Did Noah Fail?
No… not according to Emma Watson who played Shem’s wife.
Noah chose mercy and love… over blind obedience.
Maybe…. Ultimately… in the end Hollywood’s Noah learned the greatest Religious lesson of all.
A Straw man argument as far as the Book of Genesis is concerned.

Noah16

Some positive yet grim aspects of the movie was that the Ark looked believably constructed.
They caused the Animals to drop into a Hibernation via the use of drugs…. a common speculation as to the logistics of how 8 people were able to tend to so many beasts…. not to mention inter-species conflicts.
They attempted to portray the depravity of The Godless… the justification for God’s Judgement.
I do not think the movie overstated the horror of the flood itself… it’s probably not possible to do that!… and so It was good to visualise the sort of terrible fate that consumed the lost… even if it makes some folk question the Love of God.

noah-movie-ray-winstone

Ray Winstone’s portrayal of the Pride of Rebellious Humanity was awesome.
The seed of Cain…. ‘Why wont God commune with me?’
Hell bent, He determined to Dominate the world be shear lawless brutality… to spite God.
To kill was the mark of manhood.

Tubal Cain

Ultimately I think This Movie is what you would expect from people who dont believe the flood ever happened… don’t believe the Book of Genesis is anything more than fables… and so there can be no real harm done by bastardising the story.
Indeed the infidel no doubt considers the fact that this movie will work to discourage faith in the scriptures as it’s greatest virtue.

Anthony Hopkins as Methuselah.

I will Finnish my commentary simply by saying that I myself believe the Book of Genesis is Literal history… and that the flood did occur.
It is a well establish artefact of historic tradition… almost universally attested to… even if it is unpleasant to consider such all consuming Divine judgement.
Reality and truth are Objective… not determined by our sentiments, and i am appalled by modern liberal Christians whom attempt to sidestep the uncomfortable truths written in the Bible by simply pretending that they are myths… no flood… no massacres… no hell… etc.

ester

The Story of the Flood is absolutely relevant today… and it is Ironic that I am writing these words on Easter Saturday… a festival which has dubiously … via the tides of history come to be associated with the Death Burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ… events which St Paul preached were God’s Grace in action.
The sinless Christ… the Scape Goat… took on the sins of Humanity and was Judged by God… the wages of sin being Death…. he was Crucified.
Yet after 3 days in the grave he rose victorious over sin and death… God via St Paul’s preaching the Good news that whosoever believes that Christ died for their sins and rose again the third day… calling upon the Name of the Lord… they shall be Saved from the coming judgement of God!
Christ is our Ark.

God’s judgement is again drawing near upon a corrupt and violent Mankind.
To pretend that God does not judge is a great lie… a terrible delusion.
The Story of Noah is a warning to be heeded…
Ignore it at your peril.
People surrounded by evil are looking for salvation…. they need to hear the Gospel of Gods Grace… Come to the Ark!
There is salvation in Christ!
God is not Heartless… yet he will judge the wickedness of humanity.
He has provided a way of salvation via faith.
He has given you the choice.
The power is in your own hands.

noahsnake

There is a terrible time approaching under the Anti-Christ, and God’s judgement will again be upon Humanity as he pours out his wrath upon a world which has rejected Christ.

So my friends Will you put your trust in the Word of God or in the vain imaginations of the infidel?

Tim Wikiriwhi
Protestant Christian, King James Bible believer, Dispensationalist, Libertarian

See FaceBook Page ‘Noah Movie Australia’ >>>Here<<< Jesus warns.... Matt 24vs21-5, 37-38 "For then shall be great tribulation, such as was not since the beginning of the world to this time, no, nor ever shall be. And except those days should be shortened, there should no flesh be saved: but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened. Then if any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there; believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders; insomuch that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold, I have told you before." "But as the days of Noe were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." 2 Timothy 3 King James Version (KJV) 3 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth. 8 Now as Jannes and Jambres withstood Moses, so do these also resist the truth: men of corrupt minds, reprobate concerning the faith. 9 But they shall proceed no further: for their folly shall be manifest unto all men, as their's also was. 10 But thou hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, longsuffering, charity, patience, 11 Persecutions, afflictions, which came unto me at Antioch, at Iconium, at Lystra; what persecutions I endured: but out of them all the Lord delivered me. 12 Yea, and all that will live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution. 13 But evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived. 14 But continue thou in the things which thou hast learned and hast been assured of, knowing of whom thou hast learned them; 15 And that from a child thou hast known the holy scriptures, which are able to make thee wise unto salvation through faith which is in Christ Jesus. 16 All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness: 17 That the man of God may be perfect, thoroughly furnished unto all good works. ****************************** Read more.... Noah’s Ark given the seaworthy seal of approval by physicists. NZ Herald

The Gospel of God’s Grace.

Hell is for the Self Righteous, Heaven is for Sinners.

A High Calling.

Christ’s work of Salvation on the Cross… The Great Equaliser.

The Christian Fellowship is a voluntary private society, not a theocratic political movement.

Do you believe you have the Perfect Word of God? Theism vs Humanistic Rationalism. Seeing The Light! My Testimony.

The hope which is In Christ. Terrible grief shall be turned into great joy!

The Rock of Divine Revelation.

Jimi vs Jesus.

Car Crash.

Leviticus, Propaganda, Psychoactive Substances Act

One lot for the Lord and the other lot for Azazel

Friday 18 April 2014 Richard Leave a comment

Consider this.

Rosenthal predicts: “A sizeable number of our young people will not mature as they should. Instead, we can look forward to a growing population of immature, under-qualified adults, many of whom will be unable to live without economic, social or clinical support.”

The inescapable fact is that marijuana will have drastic long-term effects on young users and, with pot-smoking reaching alarming proportions, on the future of society.

And now consider this.

“We are sitting on a timebomb with these,” said Leo Schep, of the National Poisons Centre.

“It’s not just the acute effects, it’s the long-term psychological effects.”

Even if the Government banned all legal highs tomorrow, users would have ongoing issues, he said.

“They are going to be a huge burden on the state, possibly for the rest of their lives.”

The first passage is from the January 1982 issue of the NZ Reader’s Digest.

The second passage is from Fairfax NZ News earlier this week.

Nearly a third of a century has elapsed. Yet the rhetoric and dire predictions of societal peril are virtually identical. The only apparent difference is the drug(s) in question. What do these similarities and difference signify?

Note that Rosenthal’s prediction has come to pass!

Today we do, indeed, have “a growing population of immature, under-qualified adults, many of whom [are] unable to live without economic, social or clinical support.” But it is surely wrong to blame the rise of the welfare state on the popularity of marijuana! After all, Stoners Are Well Educated and Make a Lot of Money.

No, marijuana was a scapegoat back in the day. A scapegoat for what? A scapegoat for all of society’s ills but especially for society’s drug problem(s), such as they are.

What’s really responsible for society’s so-called drug problem? The answer is simple. It’s a lack of self-responsibility and a lack of parental responsibility that is mainly responsible. But who’s to blame for that?!

Fast forward to today and we’re scapegoating synthetic cannabis instead.

One good thing about fake cannabis (“legal highs” or “legals”) … is that it’s taken the heat off real cannabis!

But there’s something we need to be clear about. Today’s propaganda campaign against synthetic cannabis is not simply a re-run of yesterday’s propaganda campaign against natural cannabis. The drugs are different in more than just name only.

The recently released Noller report finds that synthetic cannabis is significantly more harmful than natural cannabis. (For example, today’s synthetic stoners are broke and unemployed. They aren’t well educated and don’t make a lot of money like natural stoners do.) This unfortunate fact means that we can’t simply write off the current outcry against synthetic cannabis as simply MSM-driven sensationalism and mass hysteria.

Certainly, most of those who protested nationwide earlier this month, calling for a ban on synthetic cannabis, were ignorant peasants with lynch-mob mentalities. Speakers who addressed the witch burners at the Invercargill and Dunedin rallies and who happened to mention that legalising natural cannabis would help to solve the synthetic cannabis problem were met with boos, derision and pitchforks.

Most, but certainly not all. Many of the protesters are former synthacrack addicts themselves or parents of synthacrack addicts. I know some of these people. They’re well meaning and far from stupid. And they’re probably right that an outright ban on synthetic cannabis will fix our problems, at least in the short-term.

So, is a lack of self-responsibility and/or a lack of parental responsibility mainly responsible for the anti-synthetic brigade’s problems? Yes, I insist that it is. But there’s none so blind as many of my libertarian friends and fellow drug law reformers who will not see that government and opportunistic greed are also very much to blame. Because synthetic cannabis is far more dangerous than we were led to believe. The plain fact of the matter is that New Zealand society is not yet ready to accept untested, dangerous, legally available designer drugs. We need a transitional policy to get from where we are now to a safe society where all recreational drugs are legal and the Psychoactive Substances Act is not it, for a multiplicity of very good reasons.

Comparisons are odious. But the synthetic cannabinoid products now available in New Zealand are seemingly so bad that even former prohibitionists are now seeing sense in legalising the real deal. And that, at least, is a good outcome.

http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus%2016&version=KJV

Adultery, Despised Icon, Evolutionism, Genesis

Evidence for Evolutionism #2. The male libido.

Friday 11 April 2014 Richard Leave a comment

Don Brash is in the news again following today’s publication of his autobiography Incredible Luck. True to form, the NZ Herald focuses on the most salacious bits of the book.

In a warts-and-all chapter covering his personal life, Dr Brash tackles head-on his reputation for being a womaniser. But beyond arguing that men have an “extremely powerful biological urge to have sex”, he struggles to explain why he had extra-marital affairs which ultimately took a huge toll on his personal life and plunged him into a deep trough of depression.

Dr Brash writes that adultery was certainly not part of his Christian upbringing, but argues “that the great majority of human males are programmed to find women sexually attractive”.

He realised, of course, that some men were gay. “I have never suspected, even for a single moment, that I might be gay.”

I take it as read(-blooded) that Brash is right. Men do, indeed, have an extremely powerful biological urge to have sex and the great majority of human males are programmed to find women sexually attractive. The question is, what best explains this primal fact? Creationism or evolutionism?

Evolutionism is premised on survival and reproduction. More precisely, evolutionism is premised on survival to reproduce. The DNA of individual organisms that don’t reproduce doesn’t make it into the next or subsequent generations. It’s that simple. Virginity is both anomalous and an evolutionary death-knell. How many of your ancestors were virgins? I bet none.

Evolutionism offers a compelling explanation of the male libido.

We are survival machines—robot vehicles blindly programmed to preserve the selfish molecules known as genes. This is a truth which still fills me with astonishment.

So says Richard Dawkins in his classic The Selfish Gene. And the experience of being male surely bears out the claim. Over the years, my own libido has got me into heaps of trouble, including relationships with women. I even reproduced! But I survived. 🙂 (And I’m older and wiser now, of course.)

It’s not that there aren’t problems with the evolutionist account. Of course, there are, and there’s one big problem in particular, viz., the origin of sex itself. The first forms of life (according to the theory of evolution) were single-celled organisms or simple multi-celled organisms that reproduced by a process of asexual reproduction called budding. It’s a mystery when, why and how the first two such organisms got together and said, “Fuck budding, let’s be fuck buddies.” I expect my evolutionist readers will have some fanciful accounts to share in the comments section below.

So, what’s the best creationist explanation of the male libido? Well, one explanation springs immediately to mind. In Genesis 1, God created mankind in his own image

in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them.

God blessed them and said to them, “Be fruitful and increase in number; fill the earth and subdue it. … (NIV)

But, men being men … did God seriously expect that we were simply going to obey his command to “be fruitful and increase in number” without a great deal of whining and complaining and general disobedience? No! So he made sure that we’d be fruitful and increase in number by giving us sex drives—quite literally—on steroids!

Cannabis, Ecclesiastes, NZ First, Peter Dunne, Prohibition, Psychoactive Substances Act

‘Tis an ill wind that blows no minds

Saturday 5 April 2014 Richard 1 Comment

As you do not know the path of the wind,
or how the body is formed in a mother’s womb,
so you cannot understand the work of God,
the Maker of all things.

The Maker of all things? What about Winston Peters, the Kingmaker of the next New Zealand government, according to the latest One News-Colmar Brunton poll?!

And do we not know the path of the wind? Winston Peters knows the path of the political wind. He’s the ultimate weathervane politician! Where are the votes? Just look to see what the Winston First Party’s latest populist policy is!

So, what’s the mood of the public on the Psychoactive Substances Act? What’s the feeling out there in the heartland about “legal highs”? It’s very far from positive.

“We will ban Legal Highs,” NZ First

Legal highs are out of control and set to kill more New Zealanders unless stronger measures are taken say New Zealand First.

“New Zealanders are among the world’s biggest users of legal highs. This problem is really getting out of hand so we will certainly take action to fix it by banning the whole lot,” Le’aufaamulia Asenati Lole-Taylor, welfare and social policy spokesperson tells Pacific Guardians.

“Our caucus has decided that if New Zealanders vote us back to parliament, we will fight to have the bill repealed and ban all legal highs. And boost resources for the Police to carry out enforcements.”

She says the current law is not “working” and the situation made worse “because the Police minister keeps taking resources out of the Police so there is not enough funds or manpower to effectively respond to the epidemic of cases around the country.”

Is there really an epidemic of cases around the country, or is this just prohibitionist hype? I’d like to believe it’s the latter but, actually, there is an epidemic of serious adverse reactions to legal synthetic cannabinoids around the country. I recently Facebook friended an old acquaintance from Dunedin whom I hadn’t spoken to in 20 years. Here’s what he told me.

The legal highs are destroying so many people down here, I think it’s the best chance for [the Aotearoa Legalise Cannabis Party].

The legal high people I know are too incapacitated to commit crime. Dunedin now has many beggars on the main street for the first time in my experience. They beg until they get their $20 & rush to the shop then home to slip into their comas/seizures.

Legal highs industry shills, a large sector of the drug law reform movement in this country, and even my own co-blogger (God bless him) are in serious denial about the extent of the problem caused by legalising these particular substances.

The situation we now face was, sadly, entirely predictable. Some more from NZ First’s indicates why …

But the government says banning the drugs is not as effective as its new approach which has led to fewer drugs, fewer retailers, and less harm to health.

In July last year New Zealand became the first country in the world to establish a regulated licensed market for new psychoactive drugs also known as legal highs. The government concluded that the “banning of all psychoactive products” model favoured by Australian governments, such as New South Wales, was not keeping pace with the emergence of new drugs.

Associate Minister of Health, Peter Dunne told ABC radio earlier this week “about 95 per cent of the products that were on the shelves prior to the legislation have been removed. We’ve gone from having over 4,000 unregulated retail outlets to now 156 retail outlets, and anecdotally, we’re getting reports from hospital emergency rooms and others about a decrease in the number of people presenting with significant issues.”

Consider this. Products which were allowed to stay on the shelves after the enactment of the Psychoactive Substances Act were restricted to products which had been on sale for three or more months prior to its enactment about which there had been no serious complaints. Only 5% of them (1 in 20) stayed. Well and good. But if the size of the consumer market for synthetic cannabinoid products remained roughly the same size after the passing of the PSA as it was before the passing of the PSA … then the number of people consuming those products allowed to stay on the shelves has increased by a factor of 20.

Please don’t get me wrong. Although I remain a die-hard libertarian, I’m actually in favour of the so-called regulatory model. That is, the regulatory model as applied to specific drugs, e.g., tobacco, alcohol and cannabis. I’m in favour of the regulatory model because, realistically, it’s the most libertarian legislative framework possible. Right now, the sale of alcohol in New Zealand is heavily regulated. But I can pop across the road to my local supermarket any time during regular shop hours and pick up a reasonably priced six-pack of beer or bottle of wine. I’m not hugely inconvenienced. I can live with advertising restrictions and point of sale limitations. (I haven’t even been asked for ID since I turned 40!)

What if I wanted the regulatory model to succeed? How would I implement the regulatory model if it were left up to me? What if I wanted to see a smooth transition from the prohibition model to the regulatory model, with a minimum of bleating from the sheeple? I would transition slowly, cautiously, one drug at a time. To begin with, I would regulate a single drug. A drug that has been the subject of thousands of scientific stuides and which we well know is very low-risk. And, moreover, is a drug that people actually want! Cannabis!

What I wouldn’t do is simultaneously approve fifteen different novel, untested synthetic cannabinoids, about which we know nothing, and which the vast majority of seasoned drug users rate as inferior to natural cannabis. What I wouldn’t do is rig the legislation’s interim implementation in such a way that use of these unknown research chemicals increases by a factor of 20 immediately after the legislation is passed. Unfortunately for the cause of drug law reform, this is what actually happened in New Zealand in July 2013.

The adverse reactions continue to be reported (and massively under-reported) to the National Poisons Centre. The government and the Ministry of Health don’t know what’s happening and they sure as fuck don’t know what they’re doing. The sad truth is that the propaganda being put out at an ever increasing rate by the hysterical prohibitionist mob is based on hard fact. It’s no wonder that there’s an ever-increasing flood of the proverbial in the MSM. To the industry shills and my misguided friends in the drug law reform movement who are trying to counter the ban brigade’s propaganda by shovelling it uphill, I say: good luck with that.

It’s getting worse, and it gets worse. There is real anger out there among the “lynch mob” recovering addicts and their “witch burning” mothers. Sadly, that anger is justified. Even more sadly, some of their understandable actions are not. A week ago, someone posted the following message on the page of a Facebook group dedicated to banning the synthetics, K2 and Other “LEGAL HIGHS” in New Zealand we all need to know the dangers.

i will burn down every sythetic legal high shop in invercargill for 2grand. message me if you are willing to hire me for this job . churr

Nek minnit, Molotov cocktail hits shop.

What if I wanted the regulatory model to fail? I’d enact the Psychoactive Substances Act 2013 and put the Ministry of Health in charge of its implementation. And, if I were the legal highs industry, I’d meekly follow Dunne’s advice, like a lamb to the slaughter, and reiterate it to the hapless end users: “If you must use drugs, use these ones.”

(Also, I’d probably stage a counter-protest at today’s nationwide protests, carrying a banner that treats the protesters as fools, or worse, and tells them what they already know: “Prohibition still doesn’t work”. The protesters are well aware, by now, that the problem with synthetic cannabis in this country is a direct result of cannabis prohibition. I’m heading off shortly to stage a co-protest at my local protest. My placard reads, simply: “Legalise Cannabis”.)

Organiser of today’s protest in Tokoroa, Julie King, says

Other countries are watching us. They’re seeing how it’s working in New Zealand. It’s not working.

I think Julie’s right. We’re not watching New Zealand lead the way to saner drug policy. We’re watching a train wreck in slow motion.

Post by Richard Goode.

Eternal Vigilance