Isaac Asimov’s 1941 short story Nightfall is considered one of the best in the canon of modern science fiction. I have found it to be a useful parable in interpreting the firestorm of hysteria created last week by Tuthmosis’s viral articles. In Asimov’s tale, a planet called Lagash is located in a stellar system in which six suns provide continuous daylight to Lagash’s inhabitants. Night and darkness are unknown concepts. Due to this fact, Lagashians are smug in the knowledge that their stellar system constitutes the entire universe. In their view, nothing outside of them exists. Not being able to experience nightfall and the resulting sight of other stars in the sky, they have no conception that there are other stars, other planets, or other worlds.
However, scientists on Lagash make some disturbing discoveries. Some irregularities in the orbit of Lagash, and archaeological evidence of cyclical civilizational collapse, provide convincing evidence that Lagash’s primary sun experiences a full eclipse every 2050 years. The eternally bright planet is plunged into darkness for a brief period of “night.” Since no one has ever experienced nightfall, it will come as a profound shock to the Lagashians. In an instant, they will become aware that they are only a small speck in a vast universe of planets. It becomes clear to the scientists that another eclipse is approaching soon, and that it will likely trigger civil unrest, chaos, and terror among the population.
Nightfall comes. The horrifying penumbra of darkness creeps across the face of Lagash’s primary sun, and the coddled, sheltered inhabitants in an instant become aware of the vastness of the universe and of their relative insignificance in the immensity of existence. This realization drives them insane. As the story ends, an ominous red glow begins to light up the night, as cities burn and civilization once more undergoes destruction.
To those familiar with last week’s internet drama, the analogy is obvious. Young women in the West have become so sheltered, pampered, and spoiled, that any opinion or spectacle that contradicts their worldview drives them into paroxysms of panic and lunacy. They are unable to cope with any contradiction of their sacred mantras. Sudden exposure to worldviews that mocked their cherished beliefs sent them into a frenzy. The reactions to the articles were truly something to behold: death threats, swooning, fulminating, and irrational feminist goose-stepping to a prescripted program of fake outrage.
The reactions, while disturbing, were not entirely unpredictable. Gustave Le Bon, in his landmark 1895 study The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (required reading for anyone interested in mob psychology) noted the essential feminine nature of crowds. Their fickleness and irrationality lent them to easy manipulation. Le Bon noted three elements that characterized the irrationality of the mob:
1. Anonymity. The individual can submerge her identity in the mass, and join in the actions of the mob without taking any responsibility for her actions.
2. Contagion. The hysterical nature of feminine crowds means that their emotions spread in the same uncontrolled way that a disease pandemic would.
3. Suggestibility. The feminine crowd is suggestible in that the slightest tweak of its sacred mantras can send it into swooning, frothing hysteria.
All of these elements were on display last week. Although Asimov’s story Nightfal is fiction, there are indeed historical analogues for the idea that a sudden onset of darkness can trigger mass hysteria. Columbus, on his final voyage to the New World in 1504, was saved from certain death by hostile Indians on the island of Jamaica by his dramatic prediction of a lunar eclipse, a feat which made him appear godlike to the unlettered Indians. Columbus, stranded in the Caribbean, was in possession of an almanac of the mathematician Regiomontanus which contained astronomical tables. He also had a keen knowledge of human nature and the suggestibility of crowds, and used this to his great advantage. Similar feats of “magic” were recorded in the 19th century by early European explorers in the heart of Africa.
When people are confronted by a spectacle that completely upsets their worldview, the knowledge can drive them mad. Expect bursts of insanity, irrationality, and violence. It is one thing to know this in an abstract sense; but it is another thing entirely to witness it first-hand.
I can only imagine what the pandemonium must have been like when Columbus foretold the lunar eclipse to the Indians back in 1504. It must have been an awe-inspiring scene.
“Look, O cacique!”, cried Columbus. “See how we, the white men from the stars, swallow the sun!”
And slowly, gradually, the dark penumbra played about the edges of the bright disc, and as it did so a shudder of horror, of abject anguish, arose here and there among the gathering crowd on the beach.
“You have asked me provide a sign of my powers,” intoned Columbus solemnly and raising his hands with his palms forward, “and now I will show you how we can engulf your world in shadows.”
“He is a liar,” muttered one of the cacique’s female attendants, “he cannot do what he claims to do.”
But the cacique fidgeted nervously, turning pale beneath his ruddy complexion, rocking back and forth in distress as the lamentations and moans of his handlers grew in frequency and volume. And then a loud wail of terror played across the assembled mass; women threw themselves on the ground, gnashing their teeth in panic, while young warriors bedecked in feathers, pendants, and weapons stamped their feet in hot fury. On and still on, the inky ring of the penumbra drew itself across the surface of the pulsing solar disc, until it became a blood-red orb hanging in the sky; and a great and awful silence fell upon the crowd, with only hushed whispers being heard here and there among the edges of the multitude.
“They have swallowed the sun…the white wizards have killed the sun! What will become of us?,” whispered the cacique in horror.
And now the darkness was nearly complete, and a heavy silence descended over all; and in the sky, the stars began to burst forth in the firmament, now here and now there, until the darkness was consummate and the heavens glistened with starry points of light. Columbus and his party, linking their arms in the darkness, made their way back to the shore and their boats, amidst the terrible spectacle of the mounting hysteria and the haunting shrieks of the Indians.
Last week was Nightfall. The internet primitives, like Columbus’s Indians and the Lagashians in Asimov’s story, could only roll in the sand and gnash their teeth in fury and terror.
And nothing will be quite the same again.
Read More: 3 Reasons To Start A Journal
“Young women in the West have become so sheltered, pampered, and spoiled,
that any opinion or spectacle that contradicts their worldview drives them into paroxysms of panic and lunacy.”
Unfortunately, this does not simply extend to young women, though they are probably the most vocal about it.
“The reactions, while disturbing, were not entirely unpredictable. Gustave Le Bon, in his landmark 1895 study The Crowd: A Study of the Popular Mind (required reading for anyone interested in mob psychology) noted the essential feminine nature of crowds. Their fickleness and irrationality lent them to easy manipulation.”
Sounds like another very strong case against democracy.
And if you wrote that passage at the end yourself, it’s pretty good, if I do say so myself.
Yes, all my stuff is written by me.
Fantastic article. The Asimov reference is brilliant. I would counter with Vonnegut and offer that Feminism is a lot like Bokononism.
Bravo on an excellent article Quintus.
“Sounds like another very strong case against democracy.”
Well, in defence of freedom AND to show off my misogyny, democracy worked fine as a system until women gained influence in it. Less then a hundred years after they got the vote our societies are rotting from the inside out and have arguably passed the point of recovery. Maybe that is just a coincidence, but I’m a real cause and effect type guy so I don’t believe so.
It took longer for the Roman empire fall once they hit their point of decline. And they had hordes of 5th Column barbarians inside the empire and armies of them hammering on the outer defences.
Democracy =/= freedom.
Not that I’m inherently anti-democratic, but the system suffers serious problems because it inevitably caters to the lowest common denominator as time goes on, and this isn’t exclusive to women.
The problem is that democracy is a slippery slope of ever-expanding franchise (and when they can’t expand the franchise any further, they import voters).
That means that when one observes that democracy used to work well, all they’re really saying is “democracy was at the top of its slippery slope back then”.
The tendency of franchises is to expand. So, to avoid the slippery slope you have to avoid democracy altogether.
I can’t fcking believe there are people out there like this. You fcking misogynists make me sick.
Be sick all you want, just also die please. we dont need your kind here
Dance to the eclipse, puppet, dance.
All you pathetic misogynists just keep going on with your bitter lives. Keep posting on your anti-woman hate sites. We feminists don’t need your negativity.
Sounds like a case of projection to me.
If you don’t want negativity, try looking inside your own soul first.
“We feminists don’t need your negativity.”
Which is why you keep showing up to get another dose of it.
Protip: If you don’t need a bicycle, stop hanging out in bicycle shops and complaining that they don’t sell drapes.
“We feminists don’t need your negativity.”
Which is why you keep showing up for another dose of it.
Protip: If you don’t need a bicycle, stop spending your time hanging out in bicycle shops and complaining that they don’t sell drapes.
Clearly you don’t; what with the surplus of negativity you already have.
We certainly don’t need your stupid, but it is very humorous.
So nice to see one of the sisters commenting here. Dear fembot have a look at http://www.hamster.com do a search for “rimming” for examples of how far feminism has come. Oooooohhhhhh my ass feels so clean…..
Make that any porntube!
are we misogynists ? how do we respond to that accusation ?
primarily we are sticking up for men and encouraging them to be better men and not bend to women’s drama and games…
that doesn’t mean we ‘hate’ women, in fact we love many aspects of the feminine, just as a sailor loves the oceans he sails on and his boat which he always named in the female aspect….
all we are really doing is informing our fellow sailors how to avoid the more treacherous waters and safely navigate their way across the feminine ocean….
women saying we are misogynists is like the ocean accusing the sailor of hating it, when all he wants is safe passage….
ps. femfierce can we have sex now ?
I do love a good surf as the storm passes by….
You’re right, you have plenty negativity of your own.
https://twitter.com/expsnghghtsm RoK is soooooo terrible, but the opinions exposed at the link are just girls “venting”. women are such fucking hypocrites.
Fat girls make me sick
Something.
Come on, be honest now, you have that programmed to an F key, don’t you?
Think about us when you are purging
A misogynist is one who hates women. Nothing in the article draws the reader to that conclusion, therefore I surmise that you haven’t read it. Or if you have that you lack the ability to objectively evaluate something put before you.
That’s okay though, it is a skill that, for the most part, is not part of the feminine construct. This is why the study by Gustav Le Bon is as relevant today as it was at the time. You have reinforced the results of the study perfectly.
ur funny
You have to admit even the manginas same out to play demanding the site take down content that they deemed offensive . That shit was nuts, I am going to change.org to demand that Jezebel take down every article that has the word mansplaine in it, it is an demeaning and offensive slur.
As soon as I hear a feminist use the word ‘mansplain’ I know that they couldn’t think of anything better or more intelligent to say.
In effect they are conceding the point and I am certain that on a certain level they are as aware of that reality as I am.
Funny you should mention astronomy. Apart from a few outliers (Hypatia probably could hack the math of the Ptolemaic astronomy of her time), men have far better cognitive strengths to calculate the movements of the celestial bodies than women. If we had to depend on the female mind to make sense of the skies, we would still see the movement of the planets, the paths of comets and the occurrence of eclipses as mysterious random events.
Because men have better spatial reasoning abilities. That’s probably the key factor.
Or as revolving around us!
“Whence will come the sun in that fair heaven, when Fenrir has this devoured?” – The Poetic Edda.
Sun worship is the favorite among the Pagans.
“Then he said to me, “Have you seen this, O son of man? You will see still greater abominations than these.” And he brought me into the inner court of the house of The Lord; and behold, at the door of the Temple of The Lord, between the porch and the altar, were about twenty-five men, with their backs to the temple of The Lord, and their faces toward the east, worshiping the sun toward the east.” (Ezekiel 8:15-16)
“It is he that sitteth upon the circle of the earth, and the inhabitants thereof are as grasshoppers; that stretcheth out the heavens as a curtain, and spreadeth them out as a tent to dwell in:” Isaiah 40:22
Who knew the Torah-bible knew the Earth was circular before the scientists?
Anyone who bothers looking can see that the Earth is a circle covered by a dome.
A couple hundred years or so later scientists proved that it was not a circle, that it was a sphere.
A hundred years or so later a scientist in the largest Jewish city in the world, also the world’s largest academic city, measured its diameter.
200 years or so later Christ is alleged to have been born a skip and a hop away. If he didn’t know that the Earth was a sphere and its diameter he was uneducated. It was only after the fall of Rome that that knowledge became, for a time, lost to European civilization.
It was the fallen angles that taught man science or alchemy.
“1 And Azazel taught men to make swords, and knives, and shields, and breastplates, and made known to them the metals of the earth and the art of working them, and bracelets, and ornaments, and the use of antimony, and the beautifying of the eyelids, and all kinds of costly stones, and all 2 coloring tinctures. And there arose much godlessness, and they committed fornication, and they 3 were led astray, and became corrupt in all their ways. Semjaza taught enchantments, and root-cuttings, ‘Armaros the resolving of enchantments, Baraqijal (taught) astrology, Kokabel the constellations, Ezeqeel the knowledge of the clouds, Araqiel the signs of the earth, Shamsiel the signs of the sun, and Sariel the course of the moon. And as men perished, they cried, and their cry went up to heaven . . .”
Book of Enoch [Chapter 8]
Well if they’d bothered to write any of that shit down in the Bible it would have saved Archimedes, Aristotle, Galileo and Newton a shit ton of work and prevented the Dark Age.
You can thank the Catholic Church for silencing “heretics” and having a monopoly on science/theology aka power “knowledge”
Why do you think the Protestant Reformation and Enlightenment were linked?
The church still opposes including the Book of Enoch as scripture.. even though it would explain The Watchers, science and why God wiped out humanity using the flood.
You DO know the ancient Greeks knew the earth was round… right?
Yes and the Greeks learned it from Mesopotamians, Babylonians, Egyptians and other ancient civilizations that learned it from fallen angels.
Just pointing out the folly of flat earth theory and how science isn’t new at all.
Law 6: Court attention at all cost. It is entirely irrelevant, in the long-term, what the popular response to his article was–because it was still popular. Like moths to a flame, these people shall return to this site, most to try and mock and dismiss, a few because they see the truth. But return they all shall, and the more popular the site becomes, the more its following grows, the more people shall be introduced to the truth. The more people can be saved from the liars that seek to manipulate and exploit their just senses of honor and trust, their web of lies thrust into the sun’s light and illuminated. Him writing that article and the Media picking up on it could not have been better for the site and truth.
Psalm 63-11
But the king shall rejoice in God;
every one that sweareth by him shall glory:
but the mouth of them that speak lies shall be stopped.
Open your minds eye beyond the imprinting.
Psalm 63-10
But those that seek my soul, to destroy it, shall go into the lower parts of the earth.
10 They shall fall by the sword:
they shall be a portion for foxes.
Since you like quotes from esoteric books here is one from The Book of Lucifer…
All religions of a spiritual nature are inventions of man. He has created an entire system of gods with nothing more than his carnal brain. Just because he has an ego and cannot accept it, he has had to eternalize it into some great spiritual device which he calls “God”.
“How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations!
For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north:
I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High.
Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.” Isaiah 14:12
“And no marvel; for Satan himself is transformed into an angel of light.” 2 Corinthians 11:14
The bible is not another esoteric book.
I figured you for an Idol worshiper with a name like Osiris and that imprinting comment; It’s okay bro, you follow your ways, but don’t push your filth on me!
Psalm 52
1 Why boastest thou thyself in mischief, O mighty man?
the goodness of God endureth continually.
2 Thy tongue deviseth mischiefs;
like a sharp razor, working deceitfully.
3 Thou lovest evil more than good;
and lying rather than to speak righteousness. Selah.
4 Thou lovest all devouring words, O thou deceitful tongue.
Only idol I worship is myself. BTW your “God” is an Osiris reboot. You’re the one pushing filth my man…
Great work brother, glory to all those that walk with the Lord.
Proverbs 1-
7 The fear of the Lord is the beginning of knowledge:
but fools despise wisdom and instruction.
Tell me how does the book Exodus fit into your Osiris reboot? Moses beat all of the Pharaohs’ magicians.
The book of Exodus tells how the children of Israel leave slavery in Egypt through the strength of YHWH, the God who has chosen Israel as his people. Led by their prophet Moses they journey through the wilderness to Mount Sinai, where YHWH promises them the land of Canaan (the “Promised Land”) in return for their faithfulness. Israel enters into a covenant with YHWH who gives them their laws and instructions for the Tabernacle, the means by which he will dwell with them and lead them to the land, and give them peace.
“And fear not them which kill the body, but are not able to kill the soul: but rather fear him which is able to destroy both soul and body in hell.” Mathew 10:18
FUCK YOU BITCH!!! That’s the best you can do?
—
And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: Hebrews 9:27
For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ; that every one may receive the things done in his body, according to that he hath done, whether it be good or bad. 2 Corinthians 5:10
Knowing therefore the terror of the Lord, we persuade men; but we are made manifest unto God; and I trust also are made manifest in your consciences. 2 Corinthians 5:11
When I thought to know this, it was too painful for me;
Psalms 73:16
Until I went into the sanctuary of God; then understood I their end. Psalms 73:17
How are they brought into desolation, as in a moment! they are utterly consumed with terrors. Psalms 73:19
Backs away slowly… thread running off topic… understands logic cannot be used here…
Mint Chocolate Chip is starting to look better and better with each passing day Im afraid…
does absolute truth exists?
No it doesn’t and you will damn sure not find it in a book.
So I guess in your world 1 + 1 = 2 isn’t true? And the Earth doesn’t revolve around the sun?
“Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” John 8:44
is that absolutely true?
If God knows everything, then he can not forget because the moment he forgets, he doesn’t know everything. However, if God cant forget, he then doesnt know how to remember or recollect. If he can’t recollect. then there is something he doesn’t know- he doesnt know how it feels to recollect or remember something.
Is that absolutely true sir?
Do you know something to be true?
uhh, ok man…
THEN YOU KNOW JACKSHIT! LIKE I SAID DON’T PEDDLE YOU’RE FILTH WITH ME!
John- 1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.
2 The same was in the beginning with God.
3 All things were made by him; and without him was not any thing made that was made.
4 In him was life; and the life was the light of men.
5 And the light shineth in darkness; and the darkness comprehended it not.
If God is perfect, he can’t forget, can he? But we read in Hebrews 8:12 that God says he “will remember their sins no more.” What does this mean?
A key insight is found in the literary concept of parallelism. In Hebrew poetry, two lines often complement one another in thought. Since this is a quote of an Old Testament poetic passage, we discover the “big idea” in the previous line. The focus is not on forgiving; the focus is on forgiveness.
Hebrews notes, “I will forgive their wickedness.” When God forgives, he forgets in the sense that he no longer holds sin against us. When we are forgiven, God sees us as a new creation with a fresh start.
God can afford to be merciful and forgiving.
“and the devil who had deceived them was thrown into the lake of fire and sulfur where the beast and the false prophet were, and they will be tormented day and night forever and ever.” Revelation 20:10
That’s such a chick answer bitch! Are you a man or a woman?
One more question: Does Logic Exist?
lol, now that is such a chick post… “Are you a man or a woman?”
ALL SANE READERS I APOLOGIZE FOR INSTIGATING THIS TRASH. WILL NOT HAPPEN AGAIN.
Ha, Ha never mind you’re the one that brought up the Devil!
Yes, logic exists. A logic machine allows you to rant your non-logical views.
Logic is the science of deriving truth through the analysis of facts either directly (deductively) or indirectly (inductively). Logic takes given presuppositions, analyzes relationships, compares them with other known factors, and arrives at a conclusion that identifies a previously unknown fact. Logic is math with ideas instead of numbers. It is a way of identifying the relationships between ideas.
Logic appears to be one of the natural laws God put into place at the creation of the universe. Then, God created mankind with a mind and the ability to reason. Being a creation of God, logic is a good thing which, when used properly, can point us toward God. Unfortunately, it is easy to use logic incorrectly.
The science of logic deals with the relational formulae of ideas. Like numbers in math, ideas can be plugged into formulae that show their relationships with other ideas. It is beneficial to understand the basics of these formulae. Modern arguments are often saturated with emotion, which can stymie conversation and preclude a useful resolution. Passion can impede the path to truth. Often, truth is hidden by what is known as fallacy—argumentation based on false logic and erroneous reasoning. Fallacy is a bullying tactic, and it doesn’t lend itself to profitable discussion.
Logic in a practical sense includes both the formulae and the facts. The formulae provide the relationships, but there must be basic ideas available for the formulae to analyze. Although relativism chips away at even the most basic assumptions, most people still rely on empirical evidence—data they accumulate through their senses. Most people are confident making statements such as “I exist” and “the table exists.” Logic takes such data and derives further truth. “Anything that has a beginning must have been made by something else” is a logically deduced statement. Further analysis leads to more complex truths, such as “God exists.”
Unfortunately, many debaters inadvertently fall into fallacy because they do not start at the beginning. That is, they allow a pre-conceived, unproved notion to stand in for a fact. Evolutionists start with naturalistic evolution as the basis for their arguments because they do not accept the possibility of miracles. Many religions reject that Jesus is the God-man because they start with Gnosticism (the physical is evil; the spiritual is good). Secularists who insist that religion is an instinctive response to the fear of death start with the assumption that God does not exist.
The truth is, most people are not going to be significantly influenced by logic to believe something contrary to their convictions. Usually, sentiment trumps logic. And, although neither Jesus nor the apostles were strangers to logic, it was not their primary tool. When Peter says to be “ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you” (1 Peter 3:15), he didn’t mean to start with the ontological argument for the existence of God. He meant to be ready with the story of our own relationship with God and the hope that has come from it. Someone who bases his beliefs on emotion will not be able to track a logical conversation. Logic in the hands of a trained apologist is a powerful tool. But equally convincing is the “empirical evidence” of the Christian life. We are “the light of the world” (Matthew 5:14); the darkness may not like the light, but it cannot deny its existence. “In your teaching show integrity, seriousness and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned, so that those who oppose you may be ashamed because they have nothing bad to say about us” (Titus 2:7-8).
Logic changes?
or
Logic does not change?
I sit day in and day out taking problems and applying perfect logic to complete a solution. If it’s not perfect logic it doesn’t work. Your “logic” doesn’t work.
While quoting the bible how can you say…
“Unfortunately, many debaters inadvertently fall into fallacy because they do not start at the beginning. That is, they allow a pre-conceived, unproved notion to stand in for a fact.”
You nullify every argument you have put forth.
Yet you quote from the Satanic or Luciferian Bible thinking somehow your perfect logic and quoting lies of Satan is truth.
The Bible is divinely inspired word of God. Who as a source of all that is Good cannot lie, hence there is no lie in his words. You can misquote, misrepresent and misinterpret scripture, but that is your doing. Just like a blind man denying the existence of color.
“Thine heart was lifted up because of thy beauty, thou hast corrupted thy wisdom by reason of thy brightness: I will cast thee to the ground, I will lay thee before kings, that they may behold thee.” Ezekiel 28:17
“But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God.”
“And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.”
Again, are you a man or a woman? and do you acknowledged that absolute truth exists, and that you know some things to be true.
or are you just full of shit?
You lost the argument already Dude/Chick! Give it up!
Just move on with your pathetic life! I’ve got better thinks to do tonight; I’m off to pound one of my girls in my soft harem like King David. Sela Bitch!!!! Don’t say I didn’t warn you.
And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, Luke 16:20
And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the richman’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. Luke 16:21
And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man also died, and was buried;
Luke 16:22
And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth
Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom. Luke 16:23
And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this flame. Luke 16:24
But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime
receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. Luke 16:25
And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come from thence. Luke 16:26
Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou wouldestsend him to my father’s house: Luke 16:27
For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest
they also come into this place of torment. Luke 16:28
Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets; let them hear them. Luke 16:29
And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent. Luke 16:30
And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead. Luke 16:31
But he answered and said, It is written, Man shall not live by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God. Matthew 4:4
For I have not shunned to declare unto you all the counsel of God. Acts 20:27
_____
May the Lord forgive me for my words; as every man’s word is his burden. Blessed in the Lord my God.
Psalm 63-
1 Have mercy upon me, O God, according to thy lovingkindness: according unto the multitude of thy tender mercies blot out my transgressions.
2 Wash me throughly from mine iniquity, and cleanse me from my sin.
3 For I acknowledge my transgressions:
and my sin is ever before me.
Old Patriarch, your debate skills are fantastic and have put up the best arguments I’ve heard and not once resort to name calling etc. Our views differ, but I respect your intelligence. Can’t really say the same for Joaquin. Have a great evening guys. Out of here to go enjoy some sinful fun!
Me too lol, at least we can agree on pounding a harem this eve.
Now you’re talking like a man, that’s cool, I’m with that, we do agree on something.
peace be on to you and may the Lord bless your soul.
2 Samuel- 3 Now there was long war between the house of Saul and the house of David: but David waxed stronger and stronger, and the house of Saul waxed weaker and weaker.
2 And unto David were sons born in Hebron: and his firstborn was Amnon, of Ahinoam the Jezreelitess; 3 and his second, Chileab, of Abigail the wife of Nabal the Carmelite; and the third, Absalom the son of Maacah the daughter of Talmai king of Geshur; 4 and the fourth, Adonijah the son of Haggith; and the fifth, Shephatiah the son of Abital; 5 and the sixth, Ithream, by Eglah David’s wife. These were born to David in Hebron.
—————–
Absalom was a badass!!! my own burden, not the Lords.
I am merely a servant of the Lord. The final judgment rests with Jesus and God. Nothing worse for an occultist to go against a former occultist. I know exactly where you’re coming from and know the path you’re walking will lead to eventual spiritual and physical death.
“For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord.” Romans 6:23
“(According as it is written, God hath given them the spirit of slumber, eyes that they should not see, and ears that they should not hear;) unto this day.” Romans 11:8
“Be not deceived; God is not mocked: for whatsoever a man soweth, that shall he also reap.”
I hope you checkout the testimony of former Satanists. God bless.
Beautiful, rightly said, blessed are those who walk with the Lord. I’m also but a servant of the Lord.
Time to add bible-thumpers to the list of those that will be permanently banned.
Of course logic exists. Pagans developed systems of formal logic that christian scholars cribbed from.
Much like the idea of souls and the heaven (Plato’s world of forms) was copied by christian apologists.
“The Bible is divinely inspired word of God.”
Prove it with logic.
Wow?
That’s actually only partially true. Those pagan beliefs were brought into the ‘Christian’ belief system through redressing the pagan beliefs as something else.
Those who have stuck closely to scripture and such don’t subscribe to those concepts of immortal souls, going to heaven when you die etc.
“1 + 1 = 2” is only “true” within the constraints of mathematics, which is an idea conceived by the mental faculties of human beings. It is not an absolute truth, it only exists because it is consistent with our perception of the world. Same thing with Earth revolving around the sun.
nice try strawman
“1 + 1 = 2” is only “true” within the constraints of mathematics, which is an idea conceived by the mental faculties of human beings. It is not an absolute truth, it only exists because it is consistent with our perception of the world. Same thing with Earth revolving around the sun.
nice try strawman
Isn’t Jesus the Osiris reboot? Not God.
“Those who have stuck closely to scripture and such don’t subscribe to those concepts of immortal souls, going to heaven when you die etc.”
What faction(s) of christianity are they? Eastern Orthodox?
Because a lack of belief in an immortal soul and heaven or hell rules out Catholicism and all Protestant offshoots.
Not to mention taking that route gets you drawn into the “no true Scotsman” fallacy of arguing which one of umpteen gazillion offshoots of christianity is the “real” one.
Jesus was a Jew so basically rule out any ‘Christian’ faith that wildly disagrees with Judaism.
Look to groups like Christadelphians, Messianic Jews etc. for similar things to what I outlined above.
So you’re basically talking about fringe groups that count for nothing when it comes to overall christian influence.
Or put another way, non-Jewish wannabe Jews.
The question of which (if any) religious text is the true word of God is of utmost importance. To avoid circular reasoning, the first question we must ask is: how would we know if God communicated in the first place? Well, God would have to communicate in a manner that people could understand, but that also means that people could make up their own messages and simply claim that they came from God. So, it seems reasonable to think that if God wanted to authenticate His communication He would have to verify it in a manner that could not be duplicated by mere humans – in other words, by miracles. This narrows the field considerably.
Beyond the evidence for the Bible’s correctness (manuscript evidence) and its historicity (archeological evidence), the most important evidence is that of its inspiration. The real determination of the Bible’s claim to absolute inspired truth is in its supernatural evidence, including prophecy. God used prophets to speak and write down His Word and God uses miracles like fulfilled prophecy to authenticate His messengers. For example, in Genesis 12:7, God promises that the land of Israel was to be for Abraham and his descendants. In 1948 Israel was returned back to the Jewish people for the second time in history. This may not seem so astonishing until you realize that no nation in the history of the world has been scattered from its homeland and returned! Israel has done it twice. The book of Daniel predicts with accuracy the coming of the four great kingdoms from Babylon, to Medo-Persia, to Greece, to Rome centuries before some of those kingdoms came on the scene (a time span of over 1,000 years!) with details concerning how they would rule and be broken. This includes the reigns of Alexander the Great and Antiochus Epiphanies.
In Ezekiel 26 we can see in astonishing detail how the city of Tyre was to be destroyed, how it would be torn down, and how its debris would be thrown into the sea. When Alexander the Great marched on that area, he encountered a group of people holed up in a tower on an island off the coast near there. He could not cross the sea, so he could not fight those in the tower. Rather than wait them out, the proud conqueror had his army throw stones into the sea to build a land bridge to the tower. It worked. His army crossed the sea and overthrew the occupants of the stronghold. But where did he get so much stone? The rocks that were used for the land bridge were the leftover rubble from the city of Tyre . . . its stones cast into the sea!
There are so many prophecies concerning Christ (over 270) that it would take more than a few screens worth of space to list them all. Further, Jesus would have had no control over many of them such as His birthplace or time of birth. Second, the odds of one man accidentally fulfilling even 16 of these are 1 in 10^45. How many is that? For comparison, there are less than 10^82 atoms in the entire universe! And Jesus, who affirmed the Bible as the Word of God, proved His reliability and deity by His resurrection (an historical fact not easily ignored).
Now consider the Quran – its author, Muhammad, performed no miracles to back up his message (even when he was asked to by his followers – Sura 17:91-95; 29:47-51). Only in much later tradition (the Hadith) do any alleged miracles even show up and these are all quite fanciful (like Muhammad cutting the moon in half) and have zero reliable testimony to back them up. Further, the Quran makes clear historical errors. Muslims believe the Bible is inspired but with some errors from editing (Sura 2:136 as well as Suras 13, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 25). The question they cannot adequately answer is: “When was the Bible corrupted?” If they say before 600 A.D. then how can the Quran admonish believers to read it? If they claim it was after 600 A.D., then they have jumped out of the frying pan and into the fire, for we have absolutely no doubt as to the accuracy of biblical manuscripts from at least the 3rd century forward. Even if Christianity were false, the Quran still has an insurmountable problem because it makes judgments against Christians for believing things that they do not (nor have they ever) believed. For example, the Quran teaches that Christians believe the Trinity is the Father, the Mother (Mary), and the Son (Sura 5:73-75, 116), and the Quran also teaches that Christians believe that God had sex with Mary to have a son (Suras 2:116; 6:100-101; 10:68; 16:57; 19:35; 23:91; 37:149-151; 43:16-19). If the Quran is really from God, then it should at least be able to accurately report what Christians believe.
Joseph Smith, the author of the Book of Mormon, tried to do some miracles such as prophecy (a test for a true prophet in Deuteronomy 18:21-22) but failed several times. He foretold of Christ’s second coming in History of the Church (HC) 2:382. Joseph Smith preached that the coming of the Lord would be in 56 years (about 1891). The second coming did not occur in 1891, and the Mormon Church does not claim that it did. Nor has it occurred since. He also prophesied that several cities would be destroyed in Doctrine and Covenants (D&C) 84:114-115. New York, Albany and Boston were to be destroyed if they rejected the gospel according to Smith. Joseph Smith himself went to New York, Albany, and Boston and preached there. These cities did not accept his gospel, yet they have not been destroyed. Another famous false prophecy of Joseph Smith was his “END OF ALL NATIONS” in D&C 87 concerning the rebellion of South Carolina in the war between the states. The South was supposed to call on Great Britain for aid, and as a result war would be poured out upon all nations; slaves would revolt; the inhabitants of the earth would mourn; famine, plague, earthquake, thunder, lightning, and a full end of all nations would result. The South finally did revolt in 1861, but the slaves did not rise up, war was not poured out upon all nations, there was no worldwide famine, plague, earthquake, etc., and there was no resulting “end of all nations.”
The collection of writings that Protestants call the Apocrypha (hidden writings), Roman Catholics call the deuterocanonical (later or second canon) books. These books were written between 300 B.C. and 100 A.D., the Intertestamental Period between the inspired writings of God’s Prophets in the Old Testament and those of the Apostles and their contemporaries in the New Testament. These were “infallibly” accepted into the Bible by the Roman Catholic Church in 1546 at the Council of Trent. Now the Apocrypha would be covered under the evidence for the Bible if these writings were truly inspired – but evidence seems to indicate that they are not. In the Bible we find prophets of God whose messages are ratified by miracles or prophecy that comes true, and whose message is immediately accepted by the people (Deut 31:26; Josh. 24:26; 1 Samuel 10:25; Daniel 9:2; Col. 4:16; 2 Peter 3:15-16). What we find in the apocrypha is just the opposite – no apocryphal book was written by a prophet. None of these books were included in the Hebrew Scriptures. There is no ratification of the authors of any apocryphal book. No apocryphal book is cited as authoritative by later Biblical writers. There is no fulfilled prophecy in any apocryphal book. Finally, Jesus, who quoted from every section of Old Testament Scripture, never once quoted from the apocrypha. Neither did any of His disciples.
In order to understand absolute or universal truth, we must begin by defining truth. Truth, according to the dictionary, is “conformity to fact or actuality; a statement proven to be or accepted as true.” Some people would say that there is no true reality, only perceptions and opinions. Others would argue that there must be some absolute reality or truth.
One view says that there are no absolutes that define reality. Those who hold this view believe everything is relative to something else, and thus there can be no actual reality. Because of that, there are ultimately no moral absolutes, no authority for deciding if an action is positive or negative, right or wrong. This view leads to “situational ethics,” the belief that what is right or wrong is relative to the situation. There is no right or wrong; therefore, whatever feels or seems right at the time and in that situation is right. Of course, situational ethics leads to a subjective, “whatever feels good” mentality and lifestyle, which has a devastating effect on society and individuals. This is postmodernism, creating a society that regards all values, beliefs, lifestyles, and truth claims as equally valid.
The other view holds that there are indeed absolute realities and standards that define what is true and what is not. Therefore, actions can be determined to be either right or wrong by how they measure up to those absolute standards. If there are no absolutes, no reality, chaos ensues. Take the law of gravity, for instance. If it were not an absolute, we could not be certain we could stand or sit in one place until we decided to move. Or if two plus two did not always equal four, the effects on civilization would be disastrous. Laws of science and physics would be irrelevant, and commerce would be impossible. What a mess that would be! Thankfully, two plus two does equal four. There is absolute truth, and it can be found and understood.
To make the statement that there is no absolute truth is illogical. Yet, today, many people are embracing a cultural relativism that denies any type of absolute truth. A good question to ask people who say, “There is no absolute truth” is this: “Are you absolutely sure of that?” If they say “yes,” they have made an absolute statement—which itself implies the existence of absolutes. They are saying that the very fact there is no absolute truth is the one and only absolute truth.
Beside the problem of self-contradiction, there are several other logical problems one must overcome to believe that there are no absolute or universal truths. One is that all humans have limited knowledge and finite minds and, therefore, cannot logically make absolute negative statements. A person cannot logically say, “There is no God” (even though many do so), because, in order to make such a statement, he would need to have absolute knowledge of the entire universe from beginning to end. Since that is impossible, the most anyone can logically say is “With the limited knowledge I have, I do not believe there is a God.”
Another problem with the denial of absolute truth/universal truth is that it fails to live up to what we know to be true in our own consciences, our own experiences, and what we see in the real world. If there is no such thing as absolute truth, then there is nothing ultimately right or wrong about anything. What might be “right” for you does not mean it is “right” for me. While on the surface this type of relativism seems to be appealing, what it means is that everybody sets his own rules to live by and does what he thinks is right. Inevitably, one person’s sense of right will soon clash with another’s. What happens if it is “right” for me to ignore traffic lights, even when they are red? I put many lives at risk. Or I might think it is right to steal from you, and you might think it is not right. Clearly, our standards of right and wrong are in conflict. If there is no absolute truth, no standard of right and wrong that we are all accountable to, then we can never be sure of anything. People would be free to do whatever they want—murder, rape, steal, lie, cheat, etc., and no one could say those things would be wrong. There could be no government, no laws, and no justice, because one could not even say that the majority of the people have the right to make and enforce standards upon the minority. A world without absolutes would be the most horrible world imaginable.
From a spiritual standpoint, this type of relativism results in religious confusion, with no one true religion and no way of having a right relationship with God. All religions would therefore be false because they all make absolute claims regarding the afterlife. It is not uncommon today for people to believe that two diametrically opposed religions could both be equally “true,” even though both religions claim to have the only way to heaven or teach two totally opposite “truths.” People who do not believe in absolute truth ignore these claims and embrace a more tolerant universalism that teaches all religions are equal and all roads lead to heaven. People who embrace this worldview vehemently oppose evangelical Christians who believe the Bible when it says that Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” and that He is the ultimate manifestation of truth and the only way one can get to heaven (John 14:6).
Tolerance has become the one cardinal virtue of the postmodern society, the one absolute, and, therefore, intolerance is the only evil. Any dogmatic belief—especially a belief in absolute truth—is viewed as intolerance, the ultimate sin. Those who deny absolute truth will often say that it is all right to believe what you want, as long as you do not try to impose your beliefs on others. But this view itself is a belief about what is right and wrong, and those who hold this view most definitely do try to impose it on others. They set up a standard of behavior which they insist others follow, thereby violating the very thing they claim to uphold—another self-contradicting position. Those who hold such a belief simply do not want to be accountable for their actions. If there is absolute truth, then there are absolute standards of right and wrong, and we are accountable to those standards. This accountability is what people are really rejecting when they reject absolute truth.
The denial of absolute truth/universal truth and the cultural relativism that comes with it are the logical result of a society that has embraced the theory of evolution as the explanation for life. If naturalistic evolution is true, then life has no meaning, we have no purpose, and there cannot be any absolute right or wrong. Man is then free to live as he pleases and is accountable to no one for his actions. Yet no matter how much sinful men deny the existence of God and absolute truth, they still will someday stand before Him in judgment. The Bible declares that “…what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:19-22).
Is there any evidence for the existence of absolute truth? Yes. First, there is the human conscience, that certain “something” within us that tells us the world should be a certain way, that some things are right and some are wrong. Our conscience convinces us there is something wrong with suffering, starvation, rape, pain, and evil, and it makes us aware that love, generosity, compassion, and peace are positive things for which we should strive. This is universally true in all cultures in all times. The Bible describes the role of the human conscience in Romans 2:14-16: “Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them. This will take place on the day when God will judge men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.”
The second evidence for the existence of absolute truth is science. Science is simply the pursuit of knowledge, the study of what we know and the quest to know more. Therefore, all scientific study must by necessity be founded upon the belief that there are objective realities existing in the world and these realities can be discovered and proven. Without absolutes, what would there be to study? How could one know that the findings of science are real? In fact, the very laws of science are founded on the existence of absolute truth.
The third evidence for the existence of absolute truth/universal truth is religion. All the religions of the world attempt to give meaning and definition to life. They are born out of mankind’s desire for something more than simple existence. Through religion, humans seek God, hope for the future, forgiveness of sins, peace in the midst of struggle, and answers to our deepest questions. Religion is really evidence that mankind is more than just a highly evolved animal. It is evidence of a higher purpose and of the existence of a personal and purposeful Creator who implanted in man the desire to know Him. And if there is indeed a Creator, then He becomes the standard for absolute truth, and it is His authority that establishes that truth.
Fortunately, there is such a Creator, and He has revealed His truth to us through His Word, the Bible. Knowing absolute truth/universal truth is only possible through a personal relationship with the One who claims to be the Truth—Jesus Christ. Jesus claimed to be the only way, the only truth, the only life and the only path to God (John 14:6). The fact that absolute truth does exist points us to the truth that there is a sovereign God who created the heavens and the earth and who has revealed Himself to us in order that we might know Him personally through His Son Jesus Christ. That is the absolute truth.
In order to understand absolute or universal truth, we must begin by defining truth. Truth, according to the dictionary, is “conformity to fact or actuality; a statement proven to be or accepted as true.” Some people would say that there is no true reality, only perceptions and opinions. Others would argue that there must be some absolute reality or truth.
One view says that there are no absolutes that define reality. Those who hold this view believe everything is relative to something else, and thus there can be no actual reality. Because of that, there are ultimately no moral absolutes, no authority for deciding if an action is positive or negative, right or wrong. This view leads to “situational ethics,” the belief that what is right or wrong is relative to the situation. There is no right or wrong; therefore, whatever feels or seems right at the time and in that situation is right. Of course, situational ethics leads to a subjective, “whatever feels good” mentality and lifestyle, which has a devastating effect on society and individuals. This is postmodernism, creating a society that regards all values, beliefs, lifestyles, and truth claims as equally valid.
The other view holds that there are indeed absolute realities and standards that define what is true and what is not. Therefore, actions can be determined to be either right or wrong by how they measure up to those absolute standards. If there are no absolutes, no reality, chaos ensues. Take the law of gravity, for instance. If it were not an absolute, we could not be certain we could stand or sit in one place until we decided to move. Or if two plus two did not always equal four, the effects on civilization would be disastrous. Laws of science and physics would be irrelevant, and commerce would be impossible. What a mess that would be! Thankfully, two plus two does equal four. There is absolute truth, and it can be found and understood.
To make the statement that there is no absolute truth is illogical. Yet, today, many people are embracing a cultural relativism that denies any type of absolute truth. A good question to ask people who say, “There is no absolute truth” is this: “Are you absolutely sure of that?” If they say “yes,” they have made an absolute statement—which itself implies the existence of absolutes. They are saying that the very fact there is no absolute truth is the one and only absolute truth.
Beside the problem of self-contradiction, there are several other logical problems one must overcome to believe that there are no absolute or universal truths. One is that all humans have limited knowledge and finite minds and, therefore, cannot logically make absolute negative statements. A person cannot logically say, “There is no God” (even though many do so), because, in order to make such a statement, he would need to have absolute knowledge of the entire universe from beginning to end. Since that is impossible, the most anyone can logically say is “With the limited knowledge I have, I do not believe there is a God.”
Another problem with the denial of absolute truth/universal truth is that it fails to live up to what we know to be true in our own consciences, our own experiences, and what we see in the real world. If there is no such thing as absolute truth, then there is nothing ultimately right or wrong about anything. What might be “right” for you does not mean it is “right” for me. While on the surface this type of relativism seems to be appealing, what it means is that everybody sets his own rules to live by and does what he thinks is right. Inevitably, one person’s sense of right will soon clash with another’s. What happens if it is “right” for me to ignore traffic lights, even when they are red? I put many lives at risk. Or I might think it is right to steal from you, and you might think it is not right. Clearly, our standards of right and wrong are in conflict. If there is no absolute truth, no standard of right and wrong that we are all accountable to, then we can never be sure of anything. People would be free to do whatever they want—murder, rape, steal, lie, cheat, etc., and no one could say those things would be wrong. There could be no government, no laws, and no justice, because one could not even say that the majority of the people have the right to make and enforce standards upon the minority. A world without absolutes would be the most horrible world imaginable.
From a spiritual standpoint, this type of relativism results in religious confusion, with no one true religion and no way of having a right relationship with God. All religions would therefore be false because they all make absolute claims regarding the afterlife. It is not uncommon today for people to believe that two diametrically opposed religions could both be equally “true,” even though both religions claim to have the only way to heaven or teach two totally opposite “truths.” People who do not believe in absolute truth ignore these claims and embrace a more tolerant universalism that teaches all religions are equal and all roads lead to heaven. People who embrace this worldview vehemently oppose evangelical Christians who believe the Bible when it says that Jesus is “the way, and the truth, and the life” and that He is the ultimate manifestation of truth and the only way one can get to heaven (John 14:6).
Tolerance has become the one cardinal virtue of the postmodern society, the one absolute, and, therefore, intolerance is the only evil. Any dogmatic belief—especially a belief in absolute truth—is viewed as intolerance, the ultimate sin. Those who deny absolute truth will often say that it is all right to believe what you want, as long as you do not try to impose your beliefs on others. But this view itself is a belief about what is right and wrong, and those who hold this view most definitely do try to impose it on others. They set up a standard of behavior which they insist others follow, thereby violating the very thing they claim to uphold—another self-contradicting position. Those who hold such a belief simply do not want to be accountable for their actions. If there is absolute truth, then there are absolute standards of right and wrong, and we are accountable to those standards. This accountability is what people are really rejecting when they reject absolute truth.
The denial of absolute truth/universal truth and the cultural relativism that comes with it are the logical result of a society that has embraced the theory of evolution as the explanation for life. If naturalistic evolution is true, then life has no meaning, we have no purpose, and there cannot be any absolute right or wrong. Man is then free to live as he pleases and is accountable to no one for his actions. Yet no matter how much sinful men deny the existence of God and absolute truth, they still will someday stand before Him in judgment. The Bible declares that “…what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:19-22).
Is there any evidence for the existence of absolute truth? Yes. First, there is the human conscience, that certain “something” within us that tells us the world should be a certain way, that some things are right and some are wrong. Our conscience convinces us there is something wrong with suffering, starvation, rape, pain, and evil, and it makes us aware that love, generosity, compassion, and peace are positive things for which we should strive. This is universally true in all cultures in all times. The Bible describes the role of the human conscience in Romans 2:14-16: “Indeed, when Gentiles, who do not have the law, do by nature things required by the law, they are a law for themselves, even though they do not have the law, since they show that the requirements of the law are written on their hearts, their consciences also bearing witness, and their thoughts now accusing, now even defending them. This will take place on the day when God will judge men’s secrets through Jesus Christ, as my gospel declares.”
The second evidence for the existence of absolute truth is science. Science is simply the pursuit of knowledge, the study of what we know and the quest to know more. Therefore, all scientific study must by necessity be founded upon the belief that there are objective realities existing in the world and these realities can be discovered and proven. Without absolutes, what would there be to study? How could one know that the findings of science are real? In fact, the very laws of science are founded on the existence of absolute truth.
The third evidence for the existence of absolute truth/universal truth is religion. All the religions of the world attempt to give meaning and definition to life. They are born out of mankind’s desire for something more than simple existence. Through religion, humans seek God, hope for the future, forgiveness of sins, peace in the midst of struggle, and answers to our deepest questions. Religion is really evidence that mankind is more than just a highly evolved animal. It is evidence of a higher purpose and of the existence of a personal and purposeful Creator who implanted in man the desire to know Him. And if there is indeed a Creator, then He becomes the standard for absolute truth, and it is His authority that establishes that truth.
Fortunately, there is such a Creator, and He has revealed His truth to us through His Word, the Bible. Knowing absolute truth/universal truth is only possible through a personal relationship with the One who claims to be the Truth—Jesus Christ. Jesus claimed to be the only way, the only truth, the only life and the only path to God (John 14:6). The fact that absolute truth does exist points us to the truth that there is a sovereign God who created the heavens and the earth and who has revealed Himself to us in order that we might know Him personally through His Son Jesus Christ. That is the absolute truth.
Yes or Osiris/Horus – God/Jesus
God is fake, sorry to break it to you
When this site becomes filled with snake-dancing Bible-thumpers…it loses credibility; which should be found in behavioral-psychology/evolution (Darwin)
1. I agree. 2. I would extend this beyond “snake-dancing Bible-thumpers” to include any of a number of dumb fucks living online. QC is an excellent essayist. It is a shame that the comments section has degenerated into a back-and-forth between a couple of misguided assholes.
I operate within my own ever changing mindset using logic as the construct not faith. If I observe and it logically makes sense within the minds abstract operation, it then becomes my belief. Which can change at anytime with a more sound piece of information. Once you lock into I “know” the answers because of “faith” cognitive dissonance causes you to reject valid information and malformed mental growth. Just my POV, to each their own.
Your entire argument presupposes God.
Logic 101: F
“For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse” Romans 1:20
“The wicked, through the pride of his countenance, will not seek after God: God is not in all his thoughts.” Pslam 10:4
“Because I have called, and ye refused; I have stretched out my hand, and no man regarded;
But ye have set at nought all my counsel, and would none of my reproof:
I also will laugh at your calamity; I will mock when your fear cometh;
When your fear cometh as desolation, and your destruction cometh as a whirlwind; when distress and anguish cometh upon you.
Then shall they call upon me, but I will not answer; they shall seek me early, but they shall not find me:
For that they hated knowledge, and did not choose the fear of the Lord:
They would none of my counsel: they despised all my reproof.
Therefore shall they eat of the fruit of their own way, and be filled with their own devices.” Proverbs 1:24-31
“Yet ye have forsaken me, and served other gods: wherefore I will deliver you no more.
Go and cry unto the gods which ye have chosen; let them deliver you in the time of your tribulation.” Judges 10:13-14
“Then my anger shall be kindled against them in that day, and I will forsake them, and I will hide my face from them, and they shall be devoured, and many evils and troubles shall befall them; so that they will say in that day, Are not these evils come upon us, because our God is not among us?” Deut. 31:17
Religion is blue-pill.
In addition to the biblical arguments for God’s existence, there are logical arguments. First, there is the ontological argument. The most popular form of the ontological argument uses the concept of God to prove God’s existence. It begins with the definition of God as “a being than which no greater can be conceived.” It is then argued that to exist is greater than to not exist, and therefore the greatest conceivable being must exist. If God did not exist, then God would not be the greatest conceivable being, and that would contradict the very definition of God.
A second argument is the teleological argument. The teleological argument states that since the universe displays such an amazing design, there must have been a divine Designer. For example, if the Earth were significantly closer or farther away from the sun, it would not be capable of supporting much of the life it currently does. If the elements in our atmosphere were even a few percentage points different, nearly every living thing on earth would die. The odds of a single protein molecule forming by chance is 1 in 10243 (that is a 1 followed by 243 zeros). A single cell is comprised of millions of protein molecules.
A third logical argument for God’s existence is called the cosmological argument. Every effect must have a cause. This universe and everything in it is an effect. There must be something that caused everything to come into existence. Ultimately, there must be something “un-caused” in order to cause everything else to come into existence. That “un-caused” cause is God.
A fourth argument is known as the moral argument. Every culture throughout history has had some form of law. Everyone has a sense of right and wrong. Murder, lying, stealing, and immorality are almost universally rejected. Where did this sense of right and wrong come from if not from a holy God?
Despite all of this, the Bible tells us that people will reject the clear and undeniable knowledge of God and believe a lie instead. Romans 1:25 declares, “They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator—who is forever praised. Amen.” The Bible also proclaims that people are without excuse for not believing in God: “For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—His eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse” (Romans 1:20).
People claim to reject God’s existence because it is “not scientific” or “because there is no proof.” The true reason is that once they admit that there is a God, they also must realize that they are responsible to God and in need of forgiveness from Him (Romans 3:23, 6:23). If God exists, then we are accountable to Him for our actions. If God does not exist, then we can do whatever we want without having to worry about God judging us. That is why many of those who deny the existence of God cling strongly to the theory of naturalistic evolution—it gives them an alternative to believing in a Creator God. God exists and ultimately everyone knows that He exists. The very fact that some attempt so aggressively to disprove His existence is in fact an argument for His existence.
How do we know God exists? As Christians, we know God exists because we speak to Him every day. We do not audibly hear Him speaking to us, but we sense His presence, we feel His leading, we know His love, we desire His grace. Things have occurred in our lives that have no possible explanation other than God. God has so miraculously saved us and changed our lives that we cannot help but acknowledge and praise His existence. None of these arguments can persuade anyone who refuses to acknowledge what is already obvious. In the end, God’s existence must be accepted by faith (Hebrews 11:6). Faith in God is not a blind leap into the dark; it is safe step into a well-lit room where the vast majority of people are already standing.
The Bible states, “The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of His hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they display knowledge. There is no speech or language where their voice is not heard. Their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world” (Psalm 19:1-4). Looking at the stars, understanding the vastness of the universe, observing the wonders of nature, seeing the beauty of a sunset—all of these things point to a Creator God. If these were not enough, there is also evidence of God in our own hearts. Ecclesiastes 3:11 tells us, “…He has also set eternity in the hearts of men.” Deep within us is the recognition that there is something beyond this life and someone beyond this world. We can deny this knowledge intellectually, but God’s presence in us and all around us is still obvious. Despite this, the Bible warns that some will still deny God’s existence: “The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God’” (Psalm 14:1). Since the vast majority of people throughout history, in all cultures, in all civilizations, and on all continents believe in the existence of some kind of God, there must be something (or someone) causing this belief.
Prove it
Remembering is the opposite of forgeting. If I remember something, then I did not forget it….
Also, the Son of God often claimed that there are knowledge held by the Father that he is not aware of. Also when Jesus became man, he had to limit himself from knowledge previously known. Many people who have had experienced death and came back claim there is knowledge and experience that have that they can no longer grasp in this form of existance as if a filter has been placed on them.
Nice try to reason away a Christian God with conjector that little more than ramblings. It confirms a theory I have had about atheist that they are little more then teenagers angry at their Dad.
I like to cuss as much as the next guy, but try not to do so when debating God. It is hard to convey the agape love he has for humanity when you call anyone who doubts what we believe as Truth a “bitch.” I don’t know scripture by heart, but John said something to the effect that though my speech rich and flowery, if I have not love, it is nothing but a banging symbal. God would rather have you shut up then misrepresent him, don’t believe me, ask Moses if he like watching the promise land from a far.
4 months late my man… I never claimed to be atheist. If I did that would make me no better than (insert religous cult here) as then you claim to have an answer. You’re a fool, I’m a fool… Everyone is a fool haha.
I see. I can agree that we are all fools, however im now curious as to what you believe as true.
Yeah, I saw “Patton” too. Great movie…
Well-written, sir!
This reminds me of when I sometimes observe a woman walking from a distance. You can see they aren’t aware of their surroundings in the same way a man is. You can sense there is something missing.
That’s why they get so taken aback and surprised and angry.
We aren’t supposed to exist. But we do. And we will never go away.
If you follow the same argument and take a look at a photo of any woman, you can see the brain function is not the same…. i’m not saying inferior it is just not the same… like looking at the photo of a dog or dophin… the creature can be intelligent, but its rational mind is not engaged in the same way… women have a different shaped and smaller head, and it gives away what they are (or aren’t) thinking…..
Where a woman’s attention to detail and multitasking can make a man feel totally incapable, especially in the child care department…. the women’s ability for logistics, finding their way about town for example, taking risks, pushing the boundaries and so forth are not there…
As far as I know there is no significant difference between male and female IQ, although females tend to have a narrower IQ peak which means there tends to be more male geniuses (but also more male retards). I think the fact that women tend to lose themselves around town or not take risks have to do more with differences in psychology than differences in intelligence in the strict sense.
As you said, it’s more about differences in the way men and women think. Women like predefined patterns and they like to stay in their comfort zone. They’re good at picking up what other people are thinking and mirroring those thoughts back (thus blending in and conforming with society). Men are more individualistic and actively pursue intellectually challenging things just for the challenge.
The difference is EQ or emotional sophistication and how much locus of control is in the logic part of the brain. The term EQ has been feminized to suggest that women are the standard setting sex in EQ, but they are the standard of no EQ, if any standard at all. Like everything else, our vocabulary has been feminized or otherwise bastardized. Our federal government regulates marriage and health insurance, spreads democracy and civil rights, fights the wars on Terror and Drugs, fights poverty, charters the Fed to keep our economy strong, etc., etc. lmfao
Women are not a different species. They don’t have entirely different biochemistry and physiology. You can’t look at them and say “her smaller head indicates a smaller brain which means she is incapable of logic” That defies any rational train of thought.
Are you basing your claims on stereotypes or facts?
Actually in humans smaller brains, ceteris paribus, do correlate with lower IQs. Of course there is massive variance (lots of smart people with smaller than average brains and vice-versa) but the effect is in the data. Check out Sebastian Seung’s Connectome for an introduction to this.
A largely definitive book on the differences in how men and women think: Simon Baren-Cohen, The Essential Difference.
What’d you say? Sacha Baron-Cohen?
Simon is Borat’s cousin.
Since a post about dating chicks with eating disorders started this flame war, I’d like to tell you about a business idea I had years ago: A pizza delivery service for women with eating disorders. I’d set up the restaurants near sorority rows on college campuses, and I’d call the chain Vominoes.
dude launch a kickstarter this is brilliant
Google (a company founded and innovated by tech-savvy male nerds to this day) chooses to promote female supremacy around the world with their white ribbon, stop violence against women ie. violent bitches, campaign. Check it out
Women are allowed to murder children and husbands, allowed to hit men in public, and they’re allowed to make death threats and harassing threats of genital mutilation and graphic violence online, with ZERO consequences for their actions. Yet, Google bunch of cowards that they are, chooses to promote “end violence against women” ONLY propaganda. We gotta do something about this to let Google know what we think of their decision to tell men to basically “go fuck themselves”
Where’s the ribbon to end worldwide conscription of young men?
Take your dumbass feminist trolling somewhere esle.
Nicely written. I wouldn’t exactly call it nightfall yet, but I would say that the sun has a larger bite in it than the women ever expected.
How vastly uneducated And illiterate can you be to use Asimov’s story about the ignorance of the human race to the infinite universe as a comparison to your petty argument with a public that simply didn’t find your childish article neither amusing nor witty. Go read a book you fool
It’s actually a pretty fitting analogy, and making an argument the the author is illiterate and/or uneducated after having just read his well written essay that, in fact, paraphrased and referenced a great literary work by a prolific 20th century author pretty much makes not a lick of fucking sense. I see debate is not your strong point.
Nor, apparently, is literacy.
You may want to avoid ad-hominem arguments if you fancy yourself a “scholar”.
hmm but Angry feminist, you negate yourself with your own argument….
Where the source seeks to convince an audience of the truth of a premise
by a claim of authority or by personal observation, but observation of
their circumstances may reduce the evidentiary weight of the claims,
sometimes to zero.
ps. aren’t all feminists angry… it’s a bit like calling water wet ?
You might want to avoid inventing argumentative fallacies that do not exist in the target article as an opening volley. Enjoy the bonus points you are awarded for complaining about ad-hominem when your statement is itself an ad-hominem. I think you girls have a much too thin copy/paste library to pull from these days.
Hey you feminist scum. Go shoot yourself in the face, you cunt rag.
You were already banned feminist. Go get a hobby. Like taking long walks. Off short piers.
Hey you feminist scum. Go shoot yourself in the face, you cunt rag.
So you’re telling to read a book because his analogy is based on a book he read?
The majority of opposing view points are like trying to read a 1st graders book report. While the so called un-intelligent people that agree with the sites message offer by ratio the most logical well thought out posts I have ever seen on the internet.
1st Grade is very generous.
It’s like dealing with a roomful of terrible twos. Except for the language skills, of course.
Two year olds can actually hold rudimentary conversations.
Would you like to buy some punctuation for your missive? How about a dictionary so that you can understand the meaning of the words that you use?
Might I suggest that you start with the word Narcissism. The feminist corners that you inhabit are not the wider ‘public’. No amount of self aggrandisement will change the fact that you are part of a screeching cabal composed of narcissists. A paradox if ever there was one where the anonymity of the mob gives power to those with an inflated sense of self-importance.
Love your work… THMS and QC
check out these two i came across yesterday…. this gets into the science and psychology of it big time
http://www.revolucionantifeminista.org/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/lawrence-shannon-the-predatory-female.pdf
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/
Thanks for the links, will give them a read.
I hope Ray doesn’t mind if I give you an alternative link to the Anonymous Conservative that takes you right to his blog as well as additional content and information about this book (the top page doesn’t really go anywhere, not sure why…):
http://www.anonymousconservative.com/blog/
sure… i will try to write an article / review on your information… i found it very interesting…. i hope Roosh will publish it….. pretty please…. check out the other book.. it’s stunning….
I am not the Anonymous Conservative … or Iron Man 😉 I do like the book you linked, downloaded it and checking it out now.
Interesting, did not know that Columbus pulled that shtick, which was routinely used by Meso-American priests to con their constituents into providing more souls for ritualistic human sacrifice. The study of archeoastronomy details the construction of ancient cities as giant calendars and the use of celestial knowledge to control societies.
Hi Elmer…all those guys on spearhead who ignored me these last 4.5 years or so are starting to look pretty foolish now.
Remember how many said I was making up my court case? Remember how many said the transcript must be fake? And when I released the video in October 2010 remember how many said it must be fake?
And remember how many said “well you might not be arrested….yet….but you can not rescind your consent to be governed……they will come after you…”
Well? On 2009-11-26 I video recorded my court meeting and PROVED that rescinding my consent to be governed worked…
And what is today? Oh my…it is 2013-11-26.
FOUR YEARS of naysayers throwing insults from the peanut gallery and not so much as a single email from any “policy enforcement officer” threatening me in any way, let alone a knock at the door.
I am one of the few men coming out of this smelling like roses. I stood up for myself and have told three separate guvments that I do not consent to their jurisdiction…..and none of them have tried to initiate violence against me.
I wonder if the men in the man-o-sphere will take “four more years” to realise that I was telling them the truth 4 years ago. After all? The MRA/ Fathers rights guys have made so much progress NOT listening to me, right? LOL!!
If only 20/20 had interviewed you instead of Paul Elam. The rest of us could only come off as subterraneans.
How many views did Tuthmosis’ article get?
Not sure of the exact number, but it is huge. Roosh has the stats…
Something like 2 million hits. By now, it’s probably gotten 3 or 4 million hits.
Something like 2 million hits. By now, it’s probably gotten 3 or 4 million hits.
It was truly amazing watching it happen from within the feminist strongholds. HP and Jezebel did their hatchetjobs , decrying the inhumanity while simultaneously admitting they hadn’t even read Tuths’ piece. All their squealing belied their recognition that the entire internet is not controlled by feminist groupthink. ” How dare anyone be allowed to post their own thoughts, on their own blog. and not agree with the feminist imperative ??? ”
But the most important part is, despite all the screeching and wailing the piece remains available. The editor, rather than capitulate to the demands of the shaming feminists, chose to wear it as a badge of honor and rightfully so.
You know you’re on a righteous path if the feminist are sending death threats and trying to silence your message.
I didn’t get it
Just read the change.org petition to take down ROK. Gay as fuck, I couldn’t help it, I threw my head back and laughed hahahahaha. 1000 land whales signed it.
And how many women would sign a petition for women to be held equal before the law? That would be none.
Western Women are “swallowing the sun”…and their hatred for men is now so obvious only the most self delusional of men could possibly ignore what they are seeing.
How hateful can women be to ignore men killing themselves?
Indeed? How hateful can MEN be to ignore men killing themselves? Because men DO ignore men killing themselves.
There are actually five different ones going.
The world would be much better if all of those fat ugly bitches would just kill themselves!
The world would be much better if all of those fat ugly bitches would just kill themselves!
great post!
Amusingly enough I see that there are five separate petitions on change.org to try and shut down the site. All these in the wake of the eating disorder article.
A few thousand holes have signed them and attached PC ten-minute-hate drivel that all sounds the same. Again, as Rollo said, we’ve angered The Cube.
The world would be a much better place if all of these feminists and manginas would just drop dead already.
TROLL. If you think your lame attempts to troll on this website, using a half-assed screenname with simplistic name calling, then you are a retarded fat feminist (it’s obvious the way you curse), would you be the same with the screenname ; ALPHA MALE the other day? your attempt to make us all look this simplistic because of comments like this is pathetic. why don’t you concentrate on losing some of your oversized mass (so that the passengers on your next flight don’t have to pay extra for your weight, and healthcare, and….
The world would be a much better place if all of these feminists and manginas would just drop dead already.
Columbus was a dick, genocide’d the people of the Bahamas, child sex slaves, father of the african slave trade to the americas, etc etc. Social studies was liiiiieees.
Apt analogy none the less.
Trivia.
100,000 years from now, the man’s achievements will stand proud. Whether or not he’s a ‘dick’ or a baaaad man is irrelevant.
Correct. Morality, like love, is a narfariously abused concept. Men of accomplishment usually on the whole improve the lives of posterity. Women manufacture posterity but not their living standards.
That’s the thing, he didn’t really achieeeeve anything
Women aren’t some primitive being. We’re human, with feelings and the reason we made a big deal about it is because it is a big deal. Much of what is found on this site is offensive yes, but also dangerous. When we begin to believe a certain people group is less valuable then it allows for people to start thinking that it’s okay to hurt that people group, take advantage of them, take from them. That is why the women want his article taken down.
As a woman who has struggled with an eating disorder that article was terribly distasteful, offensive and incredibly selfish. To want a woman because she is cheaper, more vulnerable and easier to dominate and manipulate sounds to me like the author is someone who can’t see outside of themselves, not the women.
We’re all allowed different worldviews, but since that is true, we have to stand to the criticism of that worldview. How a lot of women reacted to this was inappropriate. They were angry and spoke before they thought. They shouldn’t have threatened anyone.But they were critiquing what the saw as a serious lapse in values.
Dr. Roy Baumester reports that twice as many of our collective ancestors were women than were men. Men are in a more competitive reproductive game. We evolved faster, became logic based (in varying degrees), and created society and then civilization by creating the relationship structures that are society and civilization.
Dr. Roy Baumeister, Is There Anything Good About Men?
Related Article: http://tierneylab.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/09/05/the-missing-men-in-your-family-tree/?_r=0
Unvarnished Answer: Just culture and mere society. Women are ferally social unless put in their places.
Nightfall cometh.
“When we begin to believe a certain people group is less valuable then it
allows for people to start thinking that it’s okay to hurt that people
group, take advantage of them, take from them.”
Welcome to the world women have built for men, cupcake.
“To want a woman because she is cheaper, more vulnerable and easier to dominate and manipulate sounds to me . . .”
. . . very nearly womanly, don’t it? Just change out cheaper for richer and you’re there.
“. . . a lot of women reacted to this was inappropriate. They were angry and spoke before they thought.”
Perhaps they should go to their rooms and not come out until they have calmed down and can behave themselves; either that or grow the fuck up, eh?
“But they were critiquing what the saw as a serious lapse in values.”
Welcome to RoK and the shoe being on the other foot, cupcake. Equality isn’t all fun and games – and the last thing most women want.
I recommend bashing the website on twitter and linking to our horrible website as much as possible. Oh, and talking to your Dad. That will help too.
The Feminists are the only ones here trying to tell everyone else what their values should be. It’s scary I know, to realize than many people the world over feel it it this their right to set their own values for themselves and their families. Most adults, who think in grown up ways, rightly reject being given their values by ignorant children. Matter of fact, many grown ups take it upon themselves to explain to children how the world really works and their place in it. Today, ROK is that grown up and you are that child.
“Much of what is found on this site is offensive yes, but also dangerous.”
What is dangerous is the very point that you are missing. Many feminists, over the last few decades, have gone from a message of ‘we want equality’ to ‘how dare you disagree with us’…that, alone, is the real danger.
That message is: How dare a man open his mouth and give us a different opinion or point of view?
The proof is the reactions to the articles (any article on this site). They are examples of the danger, today…but not from this group.
a pebble causes a ripple that extends long and far.
very good post.
Excellent, as always Q. Please keep up this heroic work. Your writing deserves an audience.
“Young women in the West have become so sheltered, pampered, and spoiled,
that any opinion or spectacle that contradicts their worldview drives
them into paroxysms of panic and lunacy.”
Wonderfully put, Quintus. And it doesn’t need to be anything really ‘controversial’ to get that reaction. I have been on the receiving end of such hysteria from some people for merely pointing out the differences in male and female sexual reality, namely that it takes no talent to be a female slut, whereas it takes much more effort and value for a man to have many sexual partners. What is mere observable fact for us is anathema for those who live in their cherished world of illusions.
Keep fighting the good fight.
Agree. You simply can no longer have an opinion that disagrees with that group or their way of thinking.
To question it, at all, seems like grounds for imprisonment or death. I guess I’ll be going to my death, prison or I’ll be fighting back. I choose the 3rd one.
Excellent connection here feminism – lagashians.
It is amazing, how US females are enraged about these articles.
They are stating simple facts. Facts that are very basic truths for 7 billion people on this earth…minus a few hundred millions priviledged white chicks who got to face no hard lesson all their lives and are living a Neo-like illusionary dream.
Now they get to read a glimpse about the real world out there and they get shocked! Did they really believe all men on this planet are domesticated, brain dead, political correct idiots by now? Did they really believe a fat female has any sexual value for any man in a relationship on this planet if he has other, better options?
Or is it the realization that there is a world outside their corporations, their cubicles or homes; a world full of excitement and fun but also a world that is locked for them because they are the “have-nots”.
Maybe it is that. The rage from seeing the truth.
Tuthmosis stood back and let the girls flagellate themselves and scratch their own eyes out by suddenly and without warning exposing them to the truth: That they are not special, they are not the center of the universe and that not everyone cares deeply about every thought they have or value they hold dear. These are all things these girls should be learning before they leave the 4th or 5th grade – you have to admit something is really wrong in Denmark when there are this high a percentage of people stuck being Lagashians into their mid-late 20s and beyond.
We need to keep exposing them to The Truth. They react like this the first time, but if we keep doing it, it will burn them less and less, and eventually they’ll accept it.
Just like open carry … that effort seems to be working as well. Even though, at first, there was a lot of flagellating and gouging out of own eyes … Texas is getting ready to pass OC on handguns next. Even in the face of all of the anti-gun hysteria. It’s a win for men and a win for truth.
Good points; here is some brain food for denmark and the rest of the world.
Anti-gun movement and socialism are one.
Anti-sahm (stay at home mom) and feminism are one.
Easy-living on debt and big goverment are one.
You can not have one without the other.
And you can not damn one without giving up the other.
Think about it.
Here’s to our continued efforts.
http://media.tumblr.com/95b3d28cceed730aef22e10d10a07eda/tumblr_inline_mtwgmsaZAr1roimhz.gif
That is just precious…bravo.
I think the simpliest way to sum up what is being communicated here is the term cognitive dissonance. The legions of feminist discovered, en masse, that their worldview and reality don’t coincide. We all see what happened.
This guy swallowed the sun for his wife and she reacted in a similarly inappropriate manner as we saw in response to this week’s series of articles on ROK. For anyone who does not believe that the “women” (I always call them “girls” for obvious reasons) who have been here for the past few days are acting like children, watch this video and convince me 1. That the wife was not behaving like a spoiled, ignorant child 2. That the husband’s response should have been to take his wife to the lake and 3. That the girls who have posted here all week are not mirrors of the wife in this video in every way. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2AXf5vjQV-w
And you know it’s all the husband’s fault. The modern American female in one act.
These poor women need a man who loves them. For example, a man who loves them enough to give them a timeout of a week… or a lifetime.
It’s amazing how a woman gets magically healed of crippling anxiety once her man leaves her out in the cold for a week.
I couldn’t agree with you more, have you ever read The Taming of the Shrew? It’s Shakespeare which can be kind of hard to read because the language is tough to get through. But exactly as you say. Righteous.
Of course I have, although it was kind of innate knowledge. As a youngster, once I asked my dad, “How come mommy doesn’t get spankings when she’s bad like we do?”
Looking back years later, I now realise the smirk I got from both my parents meant the next thing out of my dad’s mouth was decidedly untrue.
Yes, this video was an excellent example of what men are dealing with in today’s society. Not all women (or girls) behave this way but it’s a fine example of what many are dealing with as a whole.
But, the guy should have stopped that behavior from the beginning. Too much bending over by this guy to meet her wants and not enough ‘knock that shit off’ or walk.
I understand opposition to the articles in question, but the childishness and absolute mindlessness of many of the replies surprised me. The absolute inability to form a coherent rebuttle told a lot about the opposition.
And while I do understand why many would take offense to Rok, there is no way it’s any more hateful than MANY feminist sites. Yet where are the efforts of these people who claim to love equality so much to protest or have those sites shut down?
I’ve noticed something else about women’s cognitive inadequacies: Men have had to develop both gynecology and veterinary medicine, apparently because women and animals, respectively, couldn’t have done that for themselves.
Does that make gynecology a kind of veterinary medicine for women?
It absolutely is. An ex of mine had major gynecological problems.
It took her a while to find a good gynecologist. Some of them were utterly worthless (surprise: female doctors): “Just take some birth control and see me back in a year.”
But one of ’em was a male who combined a radiant alpha-male personality with a sparking sense of humour, a Ph.D in neuroscience, a passion for the study of pain management, exceptional skill at fingering women’s cervices, and a steady hand on a scalpel.
I never felt as confident as when fixed up my lady’s girl parts and she finally got relief from unending pain “down there”.
This is an epic post. And I beg you to do a review of that book on crowd psychology!
I wonder what different conclusions you’d draw from the book than I.
Wald
Think I’ll do that, Wald. Just for you.
Gustav Le Bon was studied very carefully by both Hitler and Mussolini. And they learned well the lessons of crowd psychology that he explained in his book.
Honestly I read a lot, and this is one of the most well written articles I have seen in a while. It flows very well, uses brilliant analogies and articulate language. I gotta say even if you don’t agree with what’s written on this site, you have to give it up it their writing skills.
Cheers!
A+ for rhetoric, C- for content. Eloquence doesn’t make you right.
D- for the effort.
So… you hate women, but you want to fuck them?
Paddle your little douchcanoe back to Jezebel and talk about the important things in life … like Kate Middleton’s hairdresser , vagina stadiums and Katy Perry’s outfits. Here, we have discussions about petty and insipid
things like the willful destruction of western civilization just to
preserve the entitled, self-righteous egos of spoiled
white chicks.
Paddle your little douchcanoe back to Jezebel and talk about the important things in life … like Kate Middleton’s hairdresser , vagina stadiums and Katy Perry’s outfits. Here, we have discussions about petty and insipid
things like the willful destruction of western civilization just to
preserve the entitled, self-righteous egos of spoiled
white chicks.
Good analogy. I was thinking of myself as more of bucket of cold water or a well-targeted soccer ball to the head, but an eclipse sounds a lot better.
Good analogy. I was thinking of myself as something more akin to bucket of cold water or a well-targeted soccer ball, but an eclipse sounds a lot better.
Keep doing what your doing. If females are up in a roar it means what ever you are doing in this noble enterprise is working. I’m actually glad that they are going to these lengths to try to dampen masculinity because you know what? why would I go after something or someone if they were not a threat to my self centered existence? They’re desperate and they know we know ROK is a huge threat to their “entitlement” lives. Females will try anything to stop their most anticipated DOWNFALL but why even try? Why try to evade the inevitable? The sun is setting on the western female. Alas we will have our revenge!!! LONG LIVE THE RETURN OF KINGS!!!
Good analogy. I was thinking of myself as more of bucket of cold water or a well-targeted soccer ball to the head, but an eclipse sounds a lot better.
Good analogy. I was thinking of myself as something more akin to a bucket of cold water, or a well-targeted soccer ball, but an eclipse sounds a lot better.