Tag Archives: Sociology

Final Project is on the ERA movement of the 1960’s

My Final Project is on the ERA movement Better Known as Evil Right Away, because that is what it was. Someone lied to you in telling you Religion was only a personal responsible (not binding on any other person) and its Authority was not universal neither was its application to the entirety of mankind and this was a lie as well so I speak only to the Christian here my words are wasted on the non-believers.
Someone told you that God changes His mind and his laws just for you and yes this is a lie too, Rom.2:11 for God is not a man that he should Lie, Num. 23:19. Some of you hold the view that the Biblical Text is the work of men and has changed over the Centuries as is the teaching of the Tubingen School of Thought that holds the position that the scribes changed the word of God over time to fit the Coming of Christ and Christianity and this too is a lie and is provable. They stated that when we research Texts from the past that it will show the gradual changes that were made from the Text we have today and their sugar stick was Isaiah 53 (note that word past tense). An extant copy of Isa. 53 was found in the in the Dead Sea Scrolls and the scholars one of which was my Professor at ACU and a graduate of Pepperdine University in Old Testament Studies who I studied Greek under, these men found after they examined the 2 Texts, one from the Dead Sea called The Great Isaiah Scroll dating back to 100 BCE against the oldest know until that time which our Biblical Text is based on Dated at 1000 AD and reading them side by side and read they are the same. You ask what does that prove?, it proves the evolutionary progression did not exist in the Biblical Text as the Tubingen School theorized and their scholarship and the modernism they declare is a lie. Why don’t you hear about this, because people do not want the truth told, it affirms God is real and mans lies toward God are somehow being hidden. This is not the only evidence there is much, much more such as the “Aveeroo” (transliteration) being found not as a modern understanding of the Word as the Tubingen school’s used it and as they told us but found a thousand years before the Hebrews were known to exist and proving their existence, as the Biblical Text has told us, contrary to Liberal teaching even though the enemies of the Hebrews sought to eradicate them and Gods Word throughout their existence in History. God Word never changers only the lies of men toward God. You won’t hear the import of this understanding because modern scholarship (Rational Religion) rejects the Truth and prefers the good story telling like that of our Ms. GxxxE and others appreciate where truth and its implications are turned into a lie, no difference that the original lie for women who had a movement, which started with “ye shall be as gods knowing the difference between good and evil’ like then and now not recognizing the implications of their actions or accepting the responsibility like men do. You cannot return (It’s how sin entered the world), its documented, its provable and its Authority unquestionable. Notice I did not say that it could not be disobeyed or lied about, or questioned by infidels who keep the party line told till people get tired enough of hearing it and accept the false teachings trading the Truth for a lie and there are many false teachers, just compare what God says (not what I tell you, no debate tricks with and attack on man to discredit me), compare what they teach and what God says “Study” , there are many false teachers just look around you at those who teach things contrary to the teaching of God. Don’t be angry with me be angry with God he is the one you go against, so be honest like men of God you wish to be equal with and accept responsibility for the lies (with God there is no compromise) when you hold the positions of men not God. Mankind has never changed in History in its gossip, backbiting, and its lewdness like when Moses returned for the mountain with God’s Law only to find Aaron a priest of God acquiescing to the demands of the people to take them back to Egypt and committing Idolatry and lewdness not recognizing their utter disregard for what God had given them or the like the Answer to Chxxxxxxe Sxxxxr who claims that because it was allowed means it was approved by God in Biblical times with female Judges and Prophetess has failed to study 1 Sam. 8:4-20 and learn that it was a rejection of God with the Kings (it was an evil time with a stiffnecked people) and a disgrace and for the hardness of their heart God allowed it and taught the lessons which needed to be learned (be careful what you ask God for he may just give it to you). 1Sam 8:7 Notice what God said to Samuel, “And the LORD said unto Samuel, Hearken unto the voice of the people in all that they say unto thee: for they have not rejected thee, but they have rejected me, that I should not reign over them.” Or did you forget the Kings were not a blessing but a curse of the taskmaster and then use that to justify that it was approved by God, you wrest the scriptures to you own destruction and this is where false teaching begins applying Scripture where it does not apply with a meaning you can apply, not recognizing the influence to a cause that is contrary to the Word of God or Plan of God. This is not about what I believe your problems are with God but what He tells you if you listen. This movement is concerned with how equal you are to the men of sin, glory and the lust for power not just being able to survive but wanting it your way rather than what God actually teaches. Wanting to be of the world and more like the world than Godly and lying to yourselves to justify this fact only shows you misunderstanding of the Biblical Text and its application. No Christian has the right to go against Scripture, read the Book for women doing these things proves you are not a Christian for by definition a Christian is one who belongs to Christ and follows Christ and yes we as Christian can hold each other accountable 1 Peter 3:15 this is the Law of Christ (not referencing the misquote “ we are not under the Law referring “The Old Law of Sin and Death” different impetus there) and are held to Biblical Authority not men’s but Gods we as Christians are demanded to unlike the world of Sin and Death who have no hope.
To the rest of the class who laugh and scorn at these words as one man’s opinion, “you do greatly err not knowing the scriptures neither the power of God”. We have the right in this country, God given, not instituted by men neither given by man nor can it be infringed that is Constitutional and so is the right to speak, before you say a word study what I tell you, before you ridicule without knowledge or wisdom. Until you are familiar enough with the Text don’t citizen unless you just want to incite and show ignorance. To the Christian it is a matter of Service to God but to you and enslavement of mankind steeped in the Raw Base Animalistic and heathen understanding of non- belief, Biblical religion is not you make it up as you go that’s a fairy tale Ms. Gemme I’m sure can teach you many fairy tale if you ask her she seems pretty good at it but that doen’t solve the issues of mankind. When you misapply and reject the Biblical Authority as a fairytale and as story telling you commit the Unpardonable Sin which cannot be forgiven, so beware in denying the Holy Spirit, His Word has come. When you deny that there is no hope and you are left to your own devices. Don’t ever say you were never told or I didn’t know, all you can say is I didn’t care see Mark 3:22-30, Matt. 12 31-32 and its understanding applies see: Mark 3:22-27 and Luke 11:14-23 and for the Scholarly who know who the Respected Christian theologian Dr. F.F. Bruce is he writes, “…Speaking against the Son of man might be due to a failure to recognize Him for what He is. So Paul recalls how in his pre-Christian days he thought it his duty to oppose the name of Jesus of Nazareth. But if, having seen the light on the Damascus road, he had deliberately closed his eyes to it and kicked out against the goad which was directing him into the true path, that would have been the sin against the Holy Spirit.
The Holy Spirit persuades and enables men to accept Christ and enjoy the saving benefits of the gospel [John 16:8; 1 Corinthians 2:12-14; Acts 7:51], but if anyone refuses to submit to the Spirit’s gracious constraint, preferring to call good evil and evil good, how can the gospel avail for him? The deliberate refusal of the grace of God is the one sin which by its very nature is irremediable” [F.F. Bruce, Answers to Questions (Grand Rapids, Michigan: Zondervan Publishing House, 1973), pp. 46-47.].
“Anyone who rejects the Holy Spirit’s convicting influence and does not repent will not be forgiven, ‘neither in this world, neither in the world to come’ (Matthew 12:32)” [Ray Comfort, “The Unpardonable Sin,” The Evidence Bible (Gainesville, Florida: Bridge-Logo Publishers, 2001).].

Taken from for those who wish to research this further:
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/unpardonablesin.html

I tell this day not everyone goes to Heaven and not all religions are the same and not all gods are true, universalism is the tool of the False Teacher against the one true God and on this I Stand. This is not my pulpit, it is not my word, your problem is with God not me so if you have that problem you will meet him shortly, your life is short and I urge everyone to do what is written in 2 Tim. 2:15. In some ways I see Hope in Others I see what caused Jesus to weep in the garden and His statement before he died his prayer “Father forgive them for they know not what they do.” , but now you have no excuse you know what you do and the only excuse you can have is Laxness, backbiting, false teaching and a blatant disregard for what God teaches ( by the way its called mocking God for those who don’t get it). I leave you with this understanding for those who still wish to laugh mock and scorn it is you choice to obey to you glory or disobey to you own destruction as for me my responsibility with God for you is done, I’m command to speak not my word but his, personally I would rather choose to be silent rather than go through the mockery and ridicule, it is not easy to have to obey his commands but I have no choice. Lastly for those who do this (Ridicule, Mock and Doubt) I leave you with this what will you say to the Judge of the earth and Universe when he says as he did to Thomas, “Bring forth thy finger… Bring forth thy hand…. See: John 20:27, you were told and this is why I wrote on the ERA amendment. If the professor wishes he may share it with you, I care not, it is up to him, it is the reason I am what I am. As always.
Skip Pallo (Semper Fi)

Advertisements

Leave a comment

Filed under Biblical Witness, Constitution, Philosophy, Political Correctness, Religion, Right Relationships, The 1960's, Universalism

Who were the Hippies and how did they influence the culture of the 1960s?

Our Universities beg another question of it’s students:Who were the Hippies and how did they influence the culture of the 1960s?
Proper perspective in analyzing the sixties is the most important concept to remember, children who grew up with the threat of the nuclear holocaust drills, where the home was not perfect, and the collapse of Classical liberal idealism was immanent, but the ease of material gain was on the horizon and the influx of philosophies foreign to the traditions of American values presented an experiment in social culture which would eventually go terribly wrong. Colleges provided the impetus for this experiment because children being unwise are easily lead astray no matter how book smart they are, and where the movement gave rise to a culture of young people disenchanted with traditional values, seeking enlightenment in the drug culture of the day (The Age of Aquarius) and sought to make there mark and tried to undo the sins of their fathers, but as reality set in this would fail terrible. Groups were trying to get back to the garden (The garden of Eden) where life was simple, harmonious, and they could commune with God on a higher plane, a return to nature which made the ideals of Locke extremely palatable and would undo the christen ethic that built a great nation. Locke’s philosophy centers around man and man being the ultimate authority whose failures had already been seen for a hundred years in England, now enter the mix in American culture and ultimately would rip the fabric of our social culture which could never be repaired (Pandora’s Box). Hippies we call them armed with a philosophy of returning to nature created communes reflected in the Communist ideals taught by Marx and Engel’s and added to that drugs of Pot, LSD, Shrumes (Mescaline), and many others drugs while seeking enlightenment from the songs of the leaders of the day. The parties that ensued included, for those who are ignorant of the time period and its nature which would influence the children as well, orgies (sex at any cost) and the children were included in a lot of those instances. Many children died either by over dosing or by neglect, most were dirty, and hence we refer to them in society as those dirty old hippies. Sex with young children was common place and gave rise to such off shoots as The Children of God better known as The Little Whores for Jesus following a man named Moses (David Brandt Berg), see http://www.rickross.com/groups/family.html. The effects of this philosophy which convoluted the real truths which were about show their effects in our American culture and law system. Hippies accepted the amoral aspect of Atheism which presented itself from the Scientism of the day, books like “ I’m OK, Your OK.” by Thomas Anthony Harris and the influx of Transactional Analysis which is responsible for many tragedies, for instance after the United States Government adopted this philosophy and it caused such great harm in the U. S. Postal Dept. we remember it when we say “Someone’s gone Postal”, T.A. was responsible for it and was another experiment gone wrong in the sixties and caused many to commit suicide, and as a Christian counselor I remember it was discussed there, I work for the United States Treasure Department in the early 1970’s. The Hippie movement sought an alternative life style based on human invention and wisdom, human philosophy, and believed all authority including Government was “The Man” and he was responsible for suppressing everyone, he was evil. The social Scientist would see this as a natural struggle of humans for freedom and change and equality, the Christian see’s it as an apostasy (for there is no sin that is not common unto man and there is not new thing under the sun), the social scientist, the psychologist, and all other amoral disciplines offers a 12 step program and pill to ease the conscience and denies any responsibility in the experiments which ravages our nation to this very day. The only thing this type of understanding “Amoralism” accomplishes is the denial of God on the basis, science has already killed Him and forces society to accept the fact that only they the purveyors of the modern social science and medicine have the knowledge to fix the social evil of mankind. Deviant behavior viewed not from the aspect of Religious Morality but from the social amoral aspect which means nothing. If there is no God then all things are permissible (rape, incest, bestiality, homosexuality) all become a digression to the base nature of the liberating of mankind as an animal and as the Hippies of that day practiced and the creed of the amoral idealism which stretches to today are stated in the words of the high priest of Atheism “For me there are no rules none at all. The echoes of the hippie movement were upon the tongue of Madalyn Murray O’ Hair in one of my debates with her and the ORAL Majority where she stated in reference to the Gay movement of that day, “Well it’s natural the doggies do it.” To which I replied “They also do it with their young and kill them, do you espouse that as well”, she had no answer and to this good day they no longer use that argument in public. The sterile amoral aspects leave behind from the hippie movement all of the crying children chided by others with statements like “Who’s your Daddy”, “and Those bastard children”. The women who’s struggle for the freedom of their sexual prowess and equality to men left destitute and consigned the marriage contract as a mere witness of prostitution, and the men devoid of there position as heads of the household abandon relationships for the lack of care and trust in women from life in the commune and infused the after effects which left women and society wondered Why? and blamed men, and as we know ”A house divided against it self cannot stand”. Now is the War of the Sexes and adage as the articles of the sixties reflects “You’ve come a long way baby”. These are the men and women and children once called hippies who have sat at my desk in tears because the amoral never satisfies the Soul or reconciles the relationship with God, No 12 step program or pill does that, just ask Rep. Anthony Weiner. I will stop here the list is endless. No offense intended only the truth just as the children who asked me before, “Did mommy and daddy want me or was I an accident”, are they the Children of God or as Carl Sagan envisions from the amoral aspect “ You are an accident in Universe which didn’t have you in mind in the first place.”, protecting the immoral as a minority and under the banner of equal rights of the sixties as a constitutional right not recognizing it for what it is as a humanistic right and if you disagree just read the book I challenged you with, it right under the professors first statement in this discussion board as to what we truly are suppose to protect in our constitution provided by it laws and precepts which have been mislead over the years. Reactionism will come but Pandora ’s Box has already been opened and like the Nuclear Age we can never return without great upheaval and loss of life and sacrifice or we are doomed to becoming nothing more than the deviant animals the Amoralist believes we are, with government adding Law after Law to restrict and bind society and makes us a part of the system which was suppose to have Liberty and Freedom and there will be no more God Bless America.
Skip (Semper FI)
For your reference:
See: The Christian Life and Character of the Civil Institutions of the United States, Developed the Official and Historical Annals of the Republic by B. F. Morris (Benjamin Franklin Morris) 1864 documentation on the constitutions of most of the states of the union from the inception of this nation.
http://books.google.com/books?id=H92keUU_Xy8C&pg=PA23&lpg=PA23&dq=%22Christian+Life+and+Character+of+the+Civil+Institutions+of+the+United+States,%22+%22B.F.+Morris%22+OR+1864+-reprinted&source=bl&ots=VhZsqK9JcV&sig=xK4_EltMMCM0kp0QSKkgKKZQ3t4&hl=en&ei=DFD6TYjnHeqy0AGb5tG1Aw&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=3&ved=0CCMQ6AEwAg#v=onepage&q&f=false

The original book is now in reprint again after 100 years of silence.

Leave a comment

Filed under Philosophy, Religion, The 1960's

There is a principle in Sociology called the Thomas Theorem.

This blog is a response to a professor on:
Thanks for getting us started Axxxx. There is a principle in Sociology called the Thomas Theorem. The basic premise of this theorem is that what is perceived as reality by people becomes real in its consequences. That is, something can become real just because people perceive that it is real. I wonder if that theorem comes into play when we discuss this threat. Communism, as a political ideology, was certainly on the rise in some countries and it happened that it also rose up in countries where totalitarian rulers had gained control. Couple those factors with the increasing globalized economy in which all countries were striving to become major players and you have a competitive cauldron beginning to boil. I am not proposing that the threat was contrived as much as I am playing devil’s advocate to spark further discussion by suggesting that the environment existed in which an evil threat could be identified to focus the country on a threat.
I think my answer was relevant:
Prof
If you are fishing I might as well go down the hole since your going down that vein and expose the intent.
We will start with Jeremy Bentham and the pleasure principal which was not congruent with the frame work of the Constitution in its Ideology nor was it for English Law or the Common law which he set out to undo. Believing he could devise a better system based on his knowledge of Law as attested in the Pannomion and yes he was by some a prodigy and even tried to get our founding father’s to accept his Ideals for setting the foundations in this country and they were completely Rejected by Samuel Adams and the Committee on Constitutional Reform and many others in the 1800’s, they knew then that the ideologies he proposed based on human reasoning and not on a Supreme Law of the Creator were nothing more that theory and not practice as attested to in John Adam’s three volumes:
John Adams
Vol. I-III especially in
Vol III History of the Principal Republics in the World.
London
1794

And the ideals set forth proven in time for a thousand years of history as the fatal flaw in all governments that man rights are endowed by a Creator. see
The Rights of Man.
for the use and Benefit of all Mankind.
By Thomas Paine
London
1795
Starting pg 4…
Pg. 5 hand of his Maker
Pg. 6 unmake man (we are warned of the Atheistic threat here).
Pg. 7 male and female (natural order of God expressed here)
and the use of Natural Law is within the confines of the
understanding of The laws of the Creator, not in man or like
England’s Law the People as the Supreme Power
or
Rights of Man:
Being an Answer to Mr Burke’s Attack on the French Revolution
Seventh Edition
With a Preface to George Washington
By Thomas Paine
1791
Pg 47-.

Theories are not something you base your law system on, it is fallacious to even conceive of, yes, men can lead people down a road by simply making a continuous statement till it is considered fact or becomes a self full filling Prophesy as in the assumption of evolutionary theory and thought, and yes I understand I would need to clarify for the unlearned in this subject as to the specifics, all Christians believe in a form of evolution we are not talking about changes within the species which are congruent with the “The Law of Biogenesis. This was espoused by Pasteur (who was a Bible believing man) we are talking about ultimate origins as he disproved spontaneous generation by his swan neck experiment and the contents remain sterile in the Institute De Pasteur to this very day, but it is not the issue this is only the smoke screen and conman’s game. This issue of Evolution fails the first three criteria for the Scientific method which are Observation (not in theory), second Repeatable (not in theory) and Universal (not in theory) as I have stated before these are matter of Religion and Philosophy not Science and those who choose to try to prove this Ideology are conmen. The struggles are in Ideology stretching back to the days of the Greeks and the likes of Anaximander who said we came from fishes which prompted Sir Henry Haeckel to altar the original wood cuts (for producing printed copies) of one of his colleges and give us the gill slits of the embryo which are still published to this day and were a lie from the beginning as he was called before a College court and totally discredited in his life time which by the way Wikipedia never mentions (go figure), but the gill slits live on as a easy way to support the issue but it’s a lie. Ontogeny does not recapitulate Phylogeny”(note the American Medical Association no longer holds a list of Vestigial Organs from that theory “ Science triumphs over itself, we found out they are necessary”), the gill slits were folds of skin that become the nasal pharynx region as you learn in Biology (they weren’t gills, they never were gills, did you misunderstand they were never gills), this is the stupidity with which this argumentation exists for props and proofs and muddies the water of the ideology we discuss supported by science. As for the Thomas Theorem and its derivatives are used in science to mask the issue and the secularization of its understanding of our political views as espoused in the textbook Power and Society that we owe our constitutionality to Classical Liberalism and John Locke which is not the truth even Thomas Jefferson a Universalist was wise enough not to bind on the Constitution, even though he desired it in his writings others knew the dangers of and the end results of a Humanist and Atheistic Government which has its basis not on a Creator and a Supreme Law but on man as the sole authority of existing and it leads to Hedonism and the complete dissolution of the law and governments and hence the danger of Jeremy Bentham who kept hidden in his writings on the freeing of the homosexual community he sought to release, fearing the wrath of the English government, and is rearing its ugly head again espousing his writings in our society proposing this type of Philosophy. It was never the intent of the founding fathers to have our government separate from the morals of religion and make it an Atheistic or Humanistic Government and anyone who espouses that effort is blind to history and ideology (in doing so you bind and outlaw Religion) and these type of men needs to tread carefully our Freedoms and Liberty are at stake. The axiomatic principal has always been an understood “Where there is no Law there is no Sin” in other words when you make no law concerning something you do not bind it or cause it to be bound as in the Constitutional statement:”Congress shall make no Law concerning Religion”, not to outlaw it or restrict it but to protect it and its freedoms.
This is not a rant it is a warning from History, I do not seek to offend, only to tell the truth, do your research, and yes I have in my library over a thousand volumes on this subject and if you need references I can supply them for you, or use Google books as a resource and learn.
Skip Pallo (Semper Fi)

Leave a comment

Filed under Uncategorized