In the natural order of the universe our greatest weakness is the very thing we believe to be our greatest strength. It is our blind and ignorant belief in personal sovereignty (or, what modern Christians call, "limited free will", though such a concept appears nowhere in the Bible and in fact is strongly contradicted by it). You don't need to be religious or even philosophical in order to be caught up by this lie. If you think for a moment that you are solely responsible for what you do, then you believe in personal sovereignty; and you are deceived.
There is a difference, of course, between personal sovereignty, and the divine sovereignty that Jesus gave his life attempting to disclose. While personal sovereignty is an impossible delusion that no one can ever have, divine sovereignty is very real, immediately present, and experienced by everyone and everything in the universe. It is our divine birthright that the Christ (and Buddha, and others) often spoke of. It says we are not responsible for just what we do; we are responsible for everything that happens - Everything!
When we realize this beyond intellectual understanding then we find the true meaning and infinite power of unconditional love that all men of Truth throughout history have spoken of. With just an ounce of faith in this Truth, mountains, even stars, will move. I've seen it happen within my own heart, and so will anyone who has the faith to believe.
(J.D. 6-3-13)
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Monday, September 2, 2013
Proof That Smoking Doesn't Cause Cancer
It is only obvious that smoking does not cause cancer, because a lot of people who smoke never get cancer. And, I know this first hand because I used to smoke and I don't have cancer. Also, my father smoked all his life, and he doesn't have cancer either.
So, all the science that associates smoking with cancer is a bunch of hype generated by a bunch of sympathy seeking wackos that don't know what they're talking about. Obviously, there are completely detached from the real world.
And it's not just smoking and cancer that they know nothing about. It's just as obvious that an abusive childhood has nothing to do with adult criminal behavior. Like cancer, crime is the result of sinful thoughts and choices. Smoking is not a sin, so it has nothing to do with cancer. Only people who sin get cancer, and only people who choose a life of sin commit crimes. It's as simple as that. Really.
(J.D. 6-27-13)
So, all the science that associates smoking with cancer is a bunch of hype generated by a bunch of sympathy seeking wackos that don't know what they're talking about. Obviously, there are completely detached from the real world.
And it's not just smoking and cancer that they know nothing about. It's just as obvious that an abusive childhood has nothing to do with adult criminal behavior. Like cancer, crime is the result of sinful thoughts and choices. Smoking is not a sin, so it has nothing to do with cancer. Only people who sin get cancer, and only people who choose a life of sin commit crimes. It's as simple as that. Really.
(J.D. 6-27-13)
Sunday, August 25, 2013
Crime Fantasy Vs. Crime Fiction
There should be a clear distinction between fantasy and fiction. I know that literally they are the same thing, but in spirit I think they are completely different.
Fiction should be something that COULD be real, even if it isn't. And fantasy should be used for anything that completely defies reality as we know it, and could never be real.
If we distinguish between fantasy and fiction in this way, then it would be easier to separate the BS from good fiction in books and on TV.
For example, so-called crime fiction shows on TV, that depict impossibly intuitive cops against ridiculously psychotic criminals, could be readably identified as FANTASY crime shows instead. Then maybe there'd be a lot of fewer people who actually believe that some people are born without emotions, and others with an innate need to "serve and protect".
What I'm saying is that most crime fiction is as close to reality as dragons and unicorns. The "monsters" are no less impossible, and the "heroes" no more likely. Of course there are real monsters in this world, even human monsters (I certainly was one, in a careful sense), and real heroes as well, (I was just as certainly a hero too). But, the only monsters real heroes fight are the ones within themselves. I'll admit that some crime shows, and books, (more books than shows) endeavor to depict this, but few can even be said to approach reality in their attempts. The characters they create invariably end up being as impossible as winged horses, and they are usually constructed in the same way; by imagining various real things, such as wings and horses, then combining them in very unreal and impossible ways.
So, the next time you see some impossibly emotionless "psychopath" on TV being hunted and captured by ridiculously intuitive cops, just try to remember that it is pure fantasy, and in the real world the worst monsters and greatest heroes are the ones inside of all of us.
(J.D. 6-1-13)
Fiction should be something that COULD be real, even if it isn't. And fantasy should be used for anything that completely defies reality as we know it, and could never be real.
If we distinguish between fantasy and fiction in this way, then it would be easier to separate the BS from good fiction in books and on TV.
For example, so-called crime fiction shows on TV, that depict impossibly intuitive cops against ridiculously psychotic criminals, could be readably identified as FANTASY crime shows instead. Then maybe there'd be a lot of fewer people who actually believe that some people are born without emotions, and others with an innate need to "serve and protect".
What I'm saying is that most crime fiction is as close to reality as dragons and unicorns. The "monsters" are no less impossible, and the "heroes" no more likely. Of course there are real monsters in this world, even human monsters (I certainly was one, in a careful sense), and real heroes as well, (I was just as certainly a hero too). But, the only monsters real heroes fight are the ones within themselves. I'll admit that some crime shows, and books, (more books than shows) endeavor to depict this, but few can even be said to approach reality in their attempts. The characters they create invariably end up being as impossible as winged horses, and they are usually constructed in the same way; by imagining various real things, such as wings and horses, then combining them in very unreal and impossible ways.
So, the next time you see some impossibly emotionless "psychopath" on TV being hunted and captured by ridiculously intuitive cops, just try to remember that it is pure fantasy, and in the real world the worst monsters and greatest heroes are the ones inside of all of us.
(J.D. 6-1-13)
Sunday, August 18, 2013
Criminal Mentality
Cops routinely lie to criminal suspects in order to gain their trust and trick them into confessing. Thy system then uses any information thus dishonestly obtained in order to "punish" the "criminal". If you doubt this, or don't realize the routine prevalence of this systematic deception, then all you need to do is watch some reality police show like "COPS" (to see how they lie to criminals on the streets), or "The First 48" (to see how it's done at the police station interviews), or "Jail" (to see how they use deception to manage inmates). And if that's not enough to convince you, then consider the reason behind the Federally required Miranda warning.
The lies are part of a police officers training, so it's not some sort of covert conspiracy that only a select few know about. But what few people do realize is the way this systematic deception ends up instilling a strong sense of betrayal and distrust in the people who are directly and grievously injured by it; the so-called "criminals". To see this you have only to imagine what it must be like, to be a naive and trusting young person, caught stealing, or with drugs, and some cop tells you that "things will be much worse if you're not honest". So you tell him the truth, only to learn later that everything you say is in fact used against you, and things were not "easier" because you were honest at all, but much much worse! Only a completely retarded moron wouldn't learn quickly and painfully not to trust the police. And that is the defining characteristic of the so-called "criminal mentality" that directly leads to and supports all the other sub-characteristics and traits of said same mentality!
It's just one more example of how our so-called "criminal justice system" promotes the very crime it purports to protect us all from. Everyone knows the direct relationship that "criminal mentality" (distrust of authority) has on crime. It is a well publicized and oft quoted relationship that the police themselves use perversely to explain the necessity of their authority in the first place. They claim that because of such "anti-social" people, a "police force" is required to keep order in modern society (though they usually associate said "order" with "law" by calling it "law and order" in order to promote the concept and status of "law" as well, implying that without law there would be only dis-order - i.e. chaos - a claim that natural history belies by the way).
This should all come as no surprize. It is, after all, the exact same mechanism of social control that the Catholic church has used since Rome turned to religion as a means of social control via control of "the Truth" (i.e. deception).
The lies are part of a police officers training, so it's not some sort of covert conspiracy that only a select few know about. But what few people do realize is the way this systematic deception ends up instilling a strong sense of betrayal and distrust in the people who are directly and grievously injured by it; the so-called "criminals". To see this you have only to imagine what it must be like, to be a naive and trusting young person, caught stealing, or with drugs, and some cop tells you that "things will be much worse if you're not honest". So you tell him the truth, only to learn later that everything you say is in fact used against you, and things were not "easier" because you were honest at all, but much much worse! Only a completely retarded moron wouldn't learn quickly and painfully not to trust the police. And that is the defining characteristic of the so-called "criminal mentality" that directly leads to and supports all the other sub-characteristics and traits of said same mentality!
It's just one more example of how our so-called "criminal justice system" promotes the very crime it purports to protect us all from. Everyone knows the direct relationship that "criminal mentality" (distrust of authority) has on crime. It is a well publicized and oft quoted relationship that the police themselves use perversely to explain the necessity of their authority in the first place. They claim that because of such "anti-social" people, a "police force" is required to keep order in modern society (though they usually associate said "order" with "law" by calling it "law and order" in order to promote the concept and status of "law" as well, implying that without law there would be only dis-order - i.e. chaos - a claim that natural history belies by the way).
This should all come as no surprize. It is, after all, the exact same mechanism of social control that the Catholic church has used since Rome turned to religion as a means of social control via control of "the Truth" (i.e. deception).
Sunday, August 11, 2013
Zimmerman's Justice
People who protest the Zimmerman trial verdict seem to forget that our justice system was never designed to protect citizens from the injustice of other citizens (i.e. crime). It was primarily intended to protect citizens from the injustices of the state.
If a man goes free due to a lack of evidence against him, that does not in any way mean that justice has not been served. In fact, it only epitomizes what American Justice is supposed to be about, and what it should be about; protecting the citizens from the government, not necessarily from each other!
If we rely on the government for protection from each other, the we give it the power and control over our lives that the American Revolutionary War was fought to take back. They called it Freedom in 1776, but the protests we see today, are a clear sign that we have completely forgotten what Freedom means. In fact, the protesters are in essence demanding that the government take over their lives, their responsibility, and their freedom, all in the new name of their so-called justice.
(J.D. 6-15-13)
If a man goes free due to a lack of evidence against him, that does not in any way mean that justice has not been served. In fact, it only epitomizes what American Justice is supposed to be about, and what it should be about; protecting the citizens from the government, not necessarily from each other!
If we rely on the government for protection from each other, the we give it the power and control over our lives that the American Revolutionary War was fought to take back. They called it Freedom in 1776, but the protests we see today, are a clear sign that we have completely forgotten what Freedom means. In fact, the protesters are in essence demanding that the government take over their lives, their responsibility, and their freedom, all in the new name of their so-called justice.
(J.D. 6-15-13)
Sunday, August 4, 2013
Social Amnesia
We forget. And, when we forget it is easy to substitute alternate truths in place of the ones we have forgotten - not just easy, but necessary. Because the one thing we rarely forget is that we once knew. And that leaves the door open for pride to work its twisted logic. We can't bear to admit that we lost control over something so directly and intimately linked to our sense of self; our memory.
Our sense of pride is, of course, derived from our sense of self. Or, at least, it is derived from our FALSE sense of self, the same self we associate with and that depends upon our memories, and other intellectual experiences.
So, when we forget, our ego panics. And before we even consciously realize what has happened, it fills in the memory gap with something false. Numerous published scientific experiments bear this out. But, science barely paints complete pictures. So, let me add some interesting details.
In 19th century America, it was a common practice for entire families to sleep together in one room, and even share the same bed. White Americans, collectively, have not forgotten this, what we have forgotten, and filled in with false perceptions that pass for morality, is what sleeping together as a family means.
It means that is was once common and unquestioned for bodies of all ages and relationships to be snuggled up with each other in extremely intimate proximity under the cover of complete darkness. Do we really suppose then that when fathers, or brothers, or uncles, awoke, in the dark, with a sleep induced erection, and found a warm body pressing against their groin, that they didn't let nature take over?
Of course they did. But, did they talk about it the next day? Of course not. And did little Sussie, or Tommy, or uncle Joe, complain about the wet spot on their jammies the next day? Or that they dreamily half woke in the night to the sensation of someone dry humping their leg? It is more likely that they themselves enjoyed the intimacy and reassurance that such contact naturally engenders, especially between loved ones, not just lovers.
The children would not have understood enough to even realize what was going on, and absent all the "good touch, bad touch" lessons of today, they would have had no reason to question something that would have seemed completely natural to them. And the adults and older children (i.e. young adults) would have either pushed away from the "offender", or snuggled closer, and thought nothing further of it. It would have been something that happened a lot.
If you imagine homosexual behavior to be something that depends on intellectual intentions, then you have no understanding of sex at all. This is what we have forgotten as a culture. They are the kinds of things that don't get routinely conveyed with words, written or otherwise. They become lost to our cultural identity. And our cultural pride compels us to fill in the details with invented ideas of morality and so-called decency that end up being completely detached from reality. And from the truth we have forgotten.
This is just one example of how we substitute memory with distortions of the truth. The result is that today we must battle against a growing tide of violent perversions that are really the result of the truth's attempts to reassert itself. We are sexual beings. Our children are sexual, and our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, aunts, and uncles are sexual too. The only reason we see so many women and children getting violently raped and murdered today is because we have forgotten these truths. And, out of pride, we try to supplant the truths with laws and moral inventions that cannot replace them, and certainly never suppress them. Our children suffer, and we all suffer, because of our pride, and our arrogance. The road to hell should be call Amnesia.
(P.S. I'm not trying to suggest that we should teach our children that they are sexual by nature. That probably wouldn't be any better than telling them that they're not. But, I do think that if we just stopped lying to our children, and ourselves, about our true nature - sexual and otherwise - that nature itself would remind us of everything we need to know when we need to know it.)
(Originally written by Joseph E. Duncan III on May 14, 2013)
P.S. If you doubt that humans naturally enjoy all kinds of sex, homosexual, pedophilia, etc... then study history - not the history they teach in highschool - but the REAL history of sex. And again, I'm not trying to justify anything... the Truth needs no justification, and will speak for itself no matter how much we try to forget it.
Our sense of pride is, of course, derived from our sense of self. Or, at least, it is derived from our FALSE sense of self, the same self we associate with and that depends upon our memories, and other intellectual experiences.
So, when we forget, our ego panics. And before we even consciously realize what has happened, it fills in the memory gap with something false. Numerous published scientific experiments bear this out. But, science barely paints complete pictures. So, let me add some interesting details.
In 19th century America, it was a common practice for entire families to sleep together in one room, and even share the same bed. White Americans, collectively, have not forgotten this, what we have forgotten, and filled in with false perceptions that pass for morality, is what sleeping together as a family means.
It means that is was once common and unquestioned for bodies of all ages and relationships to be snuggled up with each other in extremely intimate proximity under the cover of complete darkness. Do we really suppose then that when fathers, or brothers, or uncles, awoke, in the dark, with a sleep induced erection, and found a warm body pressing against their groin, that they didn't let nature take over?
Of course they did. But, did they talk about it the next day? Of course not. And did little Sussie, or Tommy, or uncle Joe, complain about the wet spot on their jammies the next day? Or that they dreamily half woke in the night to the sensation of someone dry humping their leg? It is more likely that they themselves enjoyed the intimacy and reassurance that such contact naturally engenders, especially between loved ones, not just lovers.
The children would not have understood enough to even realize what was going on, and absent all the "good touch, bad touch" lessons of today, they would have had no reason to question something that would have seemed completely natural to them. And the adults and older children (i.e. young adults) would have either pushed away from the "offender", or snuggled closer, and thought nothing further of it. It would have been something that happened a lot.
If you imagine homosexual behavior to be something that depends on intellectual intentions, then you have no understanding of sex at all. This is what we have forgotten as a culture. They are the kinds of things that don't get routinely conveyed with words, written or otherwise. They become lost to our cultural identity. And our cultural pride compels us to fill in the details with invented ideas of morality and so-called decency that end up being completely detached from reality. And from the truth we have forgotten.
This is just one example of how we substitute memory with distortions of the truth. The result is that today we must battle against a growing tide of violent perversions that are really the result of the truth's attempts to reassert itself. We are sexual beings. Our children are sexual, and our brothers, sisters, mothers, fathers, aunts, and uncles are sexual too. The only reason we see so many women and children getting violently raped and murdered today is because we have forgotten these truths. And, out of pride, we try to supplant the truths with laws and moral inventions that cannot replace them, and certainly never suppress them. Our children suffer, and we all suffer, because of our pride, and our arrogance. The road to hell should be call Amnesia.
(P.S. I'm not trying to suggest that we should teach our children that they are sexual by nature. That probably wouldn't be any better than telling them that they're not. But, I do think that if we just stopped lying to our children, and ourselves, about our true nature - sexual and otherwise - that nature itself would remind us of everything we need to know when we need to know it.)
(Originally written by Joseph E. Duncan III on May 14, 2013)
P.S. If you doubt that humans naturally enjoy all kinds of sex, homosexual, pedophilia, etc... then study history - not the history they teach in highschool - but the REAL history of sex. And again, I'm not trying to justify anything... the Truth needs no justification, and will speak for itself no matter how much we try to forget it.
Saturday, July 27, 2013
Simple Logic
The question of free will can be indisputably answered with direct and simple logic.
Let us agree that if an event (i.e. behavior, thought, speech, etc...) has a cause other than "free will", then said event is determined by said cause, and is hence said to be "predetermined", and not "free willed".
Now let's extend this understand directly to a given sequence of events. If in a given sequence of events each event is directly determined by its predecessor, then the entire sequence is predetermined. Inversely, and more significantly, if any event in the sequence is not determined directly by some preceding event then the entire sequence that follows this "free event" is no longer predetermined, but is in fact determined by the so-called "free event".
This "free event" could easily then be called "free will", but I'm not going to argue nomenclature here. Instead I will simply point out that if an event has no determinable cause, then it is technically a random event.
If you take the time to openly reflect on this simple and irrefutable logic then you will no doubt get yourself quickly tied up in all kinds of logic loops and contradictions. For example, if every event has a cause, then what was the first cause? Or, if a "free event" is really random, then what is "free will"? But, if you reflect long enough the one, and only possible, solution should become apparent.
"Free Will" is neither random, nor predetermined. Instead, it must be determined by an INFINITE sequence of causes. In other words, there is no "first cause", nor will there ever be a "last event". Any other conclusion is not only irrational, but, in my view, completely insane.
I have been contemplating this philosophy of infinite cause for a long time, and a lot of dissallusion and new understanding has resulted, which tells me it's worth hanging onto and contemplating even more. It may very well be the "keystone of understanding that completes my bridge to enlightenment... but, then maybe not.
Methinks, the key to knowing God is simply finding a way of comprehending infinity - and logic will always fail in this quest. But, what you do when it fails is what determines your progress. Do you give up, like most people, or start over, and over, and over again, each time changing one small thing. Like evolution itself, we may fail a thousand, even a billion times, but as long as we are willing to keep failing then we will never be a failure.
(J.D. 6-15-13)
Let us agree that if an event (i.e. behavior, thought, speech, etc...) has a cause other than "free will", then said event is determined by said cause, and is hence said to be "predetermined", and not "free willed".
Now let's extend this understand directly to a given sequence of events. If in a given sequence of events each event is directly determined by its predecessor, then the entire sequence is predetermined. Inversely, and more significantly, if any event in the sequence is not determined directly by some preceding event then the entire sequence that follows this "free event" is no longer predetermined, but is in fact determined by the so-called "free event".
This "free event" could easily then be called "free will", but I'm not going to argue nomenclature here. Instead I will simply point out that if an event has no determinable cause, then it is technically a random event.
If you take the time to openly reflect on this simple and irrefutable logic then you will no doubt get yourself quickly tied up in all kinds of logic loops and contradictions. For example, if every event has a cause, then what was the first cause? Or, if a "free event" is really random, then what is "free will"? But, if you reflect long enough the one, and only possible, solution should become apparent.
"Free Will" is neither random, nor predetermined. Instead, it must be determined by an INFINITE sequence of causes. In other words, there is no "first cause", nor will there ever be a "last event". Any other conclusion is not only irrational, but, in my view, completely insane.
I have been contemplating this philosophy of infinite cause for a long time, and a lot of dissallusion and new understanding has resulted, which tells me it's worth hanging onto and contemplating even more. It may very well be the "keystone of understanding that completes my bridge to enlightenment... but, then maybe not.
Methinks, the key to knowing God is simply finding a way of comprehending infinity - and logic will always fail in this quest. But, what you do when it fails is what determines your progress. Do you give up, like most people, or start over, and over, and over again, each time changing one small thing. Like evolution itself, we may fail a thousand, even a billion times, but as long as we are willing to keep failing then we will never be a failure.
(J.D. 6-15-13)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)