Thank you CoinCube -

Appreciate the feedback.   Here are few facts / Questions to ponder

1) How many different versions of the Bible are circulating?
2) What does the word Version suggest
3) The Bible is not just a Book. It is a selection and compilation of many books
4) Its been re-written edited by MAN / WOMAN
5) copies of People's translations / editions -- meanings concepts edited

If you still feel my opinion doesn't meet the facts....I suggest you advise me which Bible you prefer out of the 100 different versions.
I will locate that specific bible - and present you more facts.

Having said all this...by no means do I suggest that Christianity is a false relgion.  What I do suggest is that its core teachings / original founding principals from the original bible - are no more...and the original founding principals have been broken. 

A London Jewish school has been failed three times by government inspectors because it fell short of requirements set out in the Equalities Act to teach LGBT principles in general and homosexuality/gender reassignment issues in particular.

The Vizhnitz girls’ school in north London caters to 212 students and has been visited by the UK’s Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted) to determine if it taught LGBT issues such as “sexual orientation. ” Because it had not, it was gauged to have declined giving its pupils who are aged up to eight years old, a “full understanding of fundamental British values” and therefore the school is in breach of equality laws, according to the Daily Telegraph.

“This restricts pupils’ spiritual, moral, social and cultural development and does not promote equality of opportunity in ways that take account of differing lifestyles,” the Ofsted inspectors reported, pointing out that the students are being “shielded from learning about certain differences between people, such as sexual orientation.” As a result, “pupils have a limited understanding of the different lifestyles and partnerships that individuals may choose in present-day society.”

At the same time, the inspectors also noted that “the school’s culture is, however, clearly focused on teaching pupils to respect everybody, regardless of beliefs and lifestyle.”

Schools that do not come up to Ofsted’s requirements must improve or face closure.

David Kurten AM, the UKIP Education spokesman, said  the state should not be forcing its own ideology on children at the very youngest ages.

“Primary school children are far too young to be exposed to ideas such as the details of non-reproductive sexual acts and gender fluidity. Children deserve a childhood and the guise of ‘inclusion’ and ‘anti-bullying’ is being used to expose them to damaging ideas far too early, and to undermine and close down faith schools in favour of secularism.

“Yet secularism is not a neutral blank canvas of a worldview. Humanist and secularist groups have actively campaigned against faith schools for over a century. 99% of faith schools are Christian schools, and have done an excellent job of education children and young people in the UK since Augustine’s time in the 6th Century.

“Ofsted is now part of the red blob which is pushing cultural Marxism.”

Six other religious schools in the UK have also failed the same inspections in recent weeks.

The problem is the Christian Text has been corrupted...big time.   Does anyone confirm to have original or even a have a "copy of a copy of a copy of a copy of a copy" of anything from the original writings of any of the writers of the Old or the New Testament.

Lot of revisions, edited , mistranslations.    Lot of errors - but this not mean that there isn't good in it....just not much credibility.

The doctrine of inerrancy, as commonly understood, states: “Inerrancy is the view that when all the facts become known, they will demonstrate that the Bible in its original autographs and correctly interpreted is entirely true and never false in all it affirms, whether that relates to doctrines or ethics or to the social, physical, or life sciences.” This statement was articulated in the Chicago Statement on Biblical Inerrancy 1974.

The Dead Sea Scrolls are universally proclaimed as the greatest archaeological find of the 20th century. The first scrolls were discovered quite by accident by a young Bedouin shepherd in the Qumran area near the Dead Sea in 1947. When tossing a rock into an open cave in the cliffs just above the Dead Sea, he heard the sound of a breaking pot.

Upon investigation, he and his fellow Bedouins discovered several clay jars that contained rolled-up scrolls. They took four of these scrolls to Bethlehem for testing. An antiquities dealer by the name of Kando confirmed their authenticity and purchased the original four scrolls for $150. He then sold them to Archbishop Samuel, head of the Syrian Orthodox Monastery of St. Mark in Jerusalem.

The Bedouins did not fully realize the value of their discovery and subsequently sold three additional scrolls to another antiquities dealer for an equivalent amount. This all took place in 1947.

Such a historic find could not be kept quiet for very long. When in 1948 Hebrew University Professor Eliezer Lipa Sukenik heard through an Armenian antiquities dealer of the scrolls’ discovery, he promptly looked into it.

He met secretly with the antiquities dealer in the British military zone near the Jerusalem border. The dealer provided a fragment for the professor to examine. Professor Sukenik realized that he was viewing an authentic ancient writing.

He wrote in his diary: “My hands shook as I started to unwrap one of them. I read a few sentences. It was written in beautiful biblical Hebrew. The language was like that of the Psalms, but the text was unknown to me. I looked and looked, and I suddenly had the feeling that I was privileged by destiny to gaze upon a Hebrew Scroll which had not been read for more than 2,000 years.”
...
The treasure trove, now known as the Dead Sea Scrolls, includes a small number of near-complete scrolls and tens of thousands of fragments, representing more than 900 texts in Hebrew, Aramaic and Greek.

The scrolls consist of two general types: the biblical text (including partial or complete copies of all the books of the Hebrew Scriptures with the exception of the book of Esther) and nonbiblical texts (including letters, hymns, prayers, calendrical texts and legal documents).
...
What is so special about these scrolls, and how do they help us prove the Bible is true? Until the discovery of the scrolls, the oldest manuscripts of the Hebrew Scriptures dated from the 10th century, about 2,500 years after the time of Moses. How can we be assured of the integrity of a document after so much time?

Considering the carefulness of the copyists is one way to be assured of the accuracy of the preservation
...
The Dead Sea Scrolls are generally dated from around 200 B.C. to A.D. 68. This is more than 1,000 years older than any manuscripts of the Hebrew Old Testament that we had before their discovery. Because of their age and close similarity with the Masoretic Text, we now have an objective basis for determining that the biblical text used in our modern copies of the Old Testament is accurate.

Norman Geisler is the author of several books on the subject of inerrancy: Inerrancy, 1978; General Introduction to the Bible, 1986; and From God to Us, 2012. Dr. Geisler says the Dead Sea Scrolls provide the best external evidence showing the validity of the Masoretic Text, proving that this text type was in fact accurately preserved over a period of about 1,000 years from the first century to the 900s A.D.

He concludes that we can be confident that the texts used to copy the Dead Sea Scrolls were of the same tradition or family as used in the Masoretic Text. He provides evidence from comparative studies of the Isaiah scroll revealing that a word-for-word identity exists in 95 percent of the text. That is a very high rate of similarity for documents that were copied 1,000 years apart.

Other scholars have commented on the similarities between the Dead Sea Scrolls and the Masoretic Text. Hebrew scholar Millar Burrows writes, “It is a matter of wonder that through something like one thousand years the text underwent so little alteration. As I said in my first article on the scroll, ‘Herein lies its chief importance, supporting the fidelity of the Masoretic tradition’” (The Dead Sea Scrolls, 1955).

The Dead Sea Scrolls provide an objective confirmation of the authenticity of the Masoretic Text, which is the basis for our modern copies of the Old Testament. Although we live in 2015, we can go back in time 2,000 years and read from the scroll of Isaiah discovered by a shepherd boy in a cave above the Dead Sea.

Abstract

This study examines the role of religious coping in couples’ diabetes management processes. Eighty-seven couples where one spouse had type 2 diabetes were surveyed. The relationships between religious coping (positive and negative), shared glycemic control activities (e.g., planning a healthy diet), and glycemic control were examined using repeated measures ANOVA and SEM. Findings show spousal engagement in shared activities is significantly associated with glycemic control. Furthermore, the use of negative religious coping by the diabetic spouse, and positive religious coping by the nondiabetic spouse, related to lower levels and higher levels of shared glycemic control activities, respectively. Religious coping and shared glycemic control activities appear integral to couples managing type 2 diabetes and, may serve as useful points of intervention.

I dont understand why we have to go back to Christianity to survive.

Look at the east asians. They do fine without Christianity  (japan/korea) or religion (china).

I see no decline in productivity or creativity when i take a look at my atheist friends.

CoinCube

That was a most interesting piece, but perhaps a tad pessimistic.  Maybe not though, ITALIANS over here do not seem happy nor joyous.  We will be seeing more Europeans before long, I'll check them out and report in, smile.
...

The West cannot be saved, because it wants to die; but persons can be saved, and their lives transformed into joy

The West cannot be saved, because it is secular.

And because The West has no religion, there is essentially nothing to save.

The West has no essence, is merely contingent - just a time-slice through an always-changing, self-subverting, and continually-inverted aggregation of attitudes, beliefs and practices.

So culturally, the West is purposefully, strategically destroying itself - always, as a continuous process.

And biologically The West is destroying itself: by choice the Western population have long since ceased to replace themselves; by strategy it is replacing its own population - and from existential terror (and deliberate wicked intent) this whole subject is taboo, denied, lied-about.

The West is not even trying to save itself; indeed The West has self-destruction built-in, woven-in, pervasive.

How can you save something which so much wants to kill itself? Something which regards every effort to keep it alive as an aggressive act of torture.

Take your eye off Western Civilization for just a moment and it will be swinging from the rafters with its own belt around its neck...

http://charltonteaching.blogspot.co.uk/2010/12/should-western-civilization-be-saved.html

So long as The West has no religion, it cannot be saved; and there is only one possible religion for The West: Christianity. A Christian revival is the only hope. But there is no sign of this happening - all the large mainstream self-identified Christian denominations are primarily secular, hence are well down the path of killing themselves (where they are not already long-since dead).

Only (real) Christians can perceive this clearly; so what should Christians do?

The choice is either a greater focus on politics and policies, on laws and society, on constitutions and systems... As our numbers and power ever-diminish, to argue harder and harder to reverse the juggernaut of secularism who have near-zero interest and knowledge of Christianity, but ever greater hostility towards what they suppose it to be?...

Or to switch attention away from politics altogether - to ignore the adverse oceanic tides of mass secular movements, and the corruption and dishonesty of most churches leaders, and instead to focus attention on bringing the message to persons, one individual at a time?

To be always fighting-against (and net losing), or to be positive for (and sometimes winning)?    

If we focus on the big picture - then being a Christian in The West is to be a miserable failure; but, if we focus on the person, then to be a Christian is to experience a deep and mostly hidden well-spring of courage, love, hope, meaning, purpose, belonging - secretly to be gloriously happy despite whatever happens on the surface.

It is impossible to exaggerate the difference that this makes to me, and to every Christian; it is an almost exact inversion of what it was not to be a Christian - when every pleasure was potentially available, nothing was forbidden - but never hope, never happiness.

The secular modern is afraid to probe too deeply, because he is sure there is nothing underneath - all is surface. He is afraid to look ahead, because he has decided that will be nothing there. To him, all human lives are failures because they end in decline, suffering, and death - biography is tragedy (either unfulfilled promise or the disappointment of all desire).

His strongest principles are without foundations - and therefore will almost certainly be discarded when they become inexpedient, or even if they are not discarded then this will be an arbitrary gesture. His most profound yearnings can only be fulfilled in imagination - which is to say they will not be fulfilled, and are delusions.

He sees Christians as torturers because they talk of eternal life, and of the disciplined and constrained path which leads to it - and for modern man that means snatching away the pleasures which are all that make life bearable, and the hope of extinction which is all that makes life endurable.

For such a man, life equals 'existence'; eternal life equals eternal torment.

As Christians, we may be able to save someone, or more than one person, from this horrible existence; and the benefits are not deferred, not only after life and in eternity - but immediate, in this life, here and now and straight away.

Our resources are finite, our effort and enthusiasm requires realistic grounds for optimism.

Therefore, let's stop monitoring and trying to turn-back the civilisational tsunami of secular nihilism - but ourselves drowning in pessimism.

And instead adopt the positive, optimistic, realistic goal of saving a few people: saving them into invincible joy.

The idea that religion is the solution is laughable.  If you poll each demographic in America, blacks would probably come out on top as the most religious group while simultaneously being the ones committing heinous, violent crimes at a rate 10x higher than everyone else.  

Research has demonstrated that concentrated disadvantage and other measures are strongly associated with aggregate-level rates of violence, including across racial and ethnic groups. Less studied is the impact of cultural factors, including religious contextual measures... Results suggest that (1) religious contextual measures have significant crime-reducing associations with violence, (2) these associations are race/ethnic-specific, and (3) religious contextual measures moderate the criminogenic association between disadvantage and violence for Blacks.

The authors explored the relationship between religious involvement and intimate partner violence... They found that: (a) religious involvement is correlated with reduced levels of domestic violence... this protective effect is stronger for African American men and women and for Hispanic men, groups that, for a variety of reasons, experience elevated risk for this type of violence.

Results: Findings indicated that (1) parental alcohol history robustly predicted increased offspring alcohol-dependence symptoms, (2) religious rearing appeared protective (offspring exhibited fewer alcohol-dependence symptoms), (3) religious differentiation accounted for most of the protective effect, (4) other religious variables did not account for the differentiation effect, and (5) black religious adolescents were more frequently raised with differentiating affiliations and exhibited greater protective effects.

...
People have to go their own separate ways to fix the situation for everyone rather than having different factions constantly trying to undermine the other, especially when undermining the majority faction would just cause the country to implode anyway.  

Why would the majority faction let other groups operate right out in the open constantly trying to undermine them or destroy their civilization?  Now that's what I call cuckoldry.  The cucks are all fired and it's Sparta from here on out.

It seems reasonable to regard religion as the proximate method of group selection in humans - in other words, when humans groups compete and evolve group adaptations, these are instantiated by means of religions. Individual humans have adapted to live in a context of religion; and when religion is absent, human behaviour becomes maladaptive - because human instincts are 'designed' to function in a religious environment.

It has long been a consensus among (secular) social theorists that the main (secular) function of religion is social cohesion - that is, religion can enable larger and more complex forms of social functioning; including the stimulation and enforcement of motivation, altruism, long-termism.

Since all humans - until recently in The West - have evolved in the context of religion; therefore religion must, over multiple generations, have had gene-selective consequences that shaped individual instincts and behaviours.

Group selection entails that group behaviour be referenced to something outside the group. This is what groups cohere-around, organize around, cooperate to promote. Throughout history this 'something' has been religion - variously the spirits, the gods, or One God.

Since this has apparently been the case throughout all known history and stretching back into pre-history, individual humans have evolved to be coordinated by religion: religion is a built-in, innate expectation for each individual human; and if religion is absent, then individual behaviour lacks a necessary adaptive context.

Having been under group selection for so long, where each individual functioned as a 'component' part of a religious society; then individual level instincts will relatively have atrophied. So, remove the religion from an individual human being, and the behavioural rules and patterns lack context, and are maladaptive.

Individual humans absent religion are un-equipped to pursue their own reproductive success.

Religion is therefore the medium for, and regulation of, altruism - which is the propensity of individuals to sacrifice their own short-term comfort and pleasure, health, survival, and ultimately their reproductive success, to that of the group.

In sum: Humans just are adapted to serve the group via religious structures which reference individual behaviour to some-thing outside the group.

Clearly, 'the group' in group selection will be bounded - and cannot be scaled up or down, made larger or smaller, indefinitely; since there must be mechanisms for rewarding group-helpful, and suppressing group-harmful, behaviours - and such mechanisms (like status or material rewards, shaming or physically-coercive sanctions) differ between religions, and these do not scale indefinitely in either direction.

Group selection is strong: it must be stronger, in significant respects, than individual selection: group selection must be strong enough to overcome individual preferences.

This means that group selection operates to affect the nature and strength of individual preferences - individual preferences have until recently always operates in the context of religiously-mediated group imperatives; because, over many generations, selection will (overall) tend-to mould individual preferences significantly to serve the needs of the group.

While group selection has been significant on all humans everywhere and at all times; European populations (also probably East Asian populations, perhaps to an even greater extent?) have been strongly group selected for large-scale cohesion over many dozens of generations; so that the effects of group selection are more significant in those of European descent than in most other populations.

This implies that the selection effects of religion on individual behaviour has been more significant in those of European descent than in most other populations.  

European populations had Christianity as the proximate mechanism of group selection for hundreds of years; shaping the instinctual basis of the individuals. And Christianity must have been an extremely powerful mechanism of group selection, because it enabled what are, by world historical standards, very large cooperating groups persisting over multiple generations.

(By contrast, simple animistic religions are able to enforce cooperation of some scores of people; more complex totemistic religions can enable the cohesion of thousands; and the complex and literate Temple religion of Ancient Egypt enabled some millions of people to cohere for three thousand years! Christianity seems to have been similarly powerful to the ancient Egyptian religion, sustaining complex cooperation among millions of people.)

It may therefore be assumed that the people of Western nations inhabited by those of European descent evolved to become extremely dependent on Christianity in order to be adaptive.

These same people, with the same instincts that operated within a strongly Christian context for so many generations, now find themselves in a society from which Christianity has been (all but) deleted.

Individual behaviours now have a very different environment in which to operation - indeed, the environment is in multiple respects and increasingly anti-Christian. Little wonder that grossly maladaptive behaviour is currently rife - indeed mainstream.

Sans religion, Western populations lack the instinctual basis for individual level survival and reproduction, since these instincts long since atrophied - and atrophied to a more extreme degree than in most populations.

Now basic instincts such as reproduction, group survival, defence, long-termism for group goals, self-sacrifice for the group are defective or absent. The interaction between individual instincts and the non-religious environment is producing multiple, population-lethal pathologies. Voluntary subfertility is nearly universal; native population-replacement is advocated and celebrated; maladaptive forms of sexuality are common and actively-promoted; self-mutilation is escalating, normal and admired; the clamour for on-demand, comfortable, 'assisted' suicide grows greater with each year...

Living without religion, but with a genetic makeup that had evolved to assume religion, to expect religion, and to live-within religion; the instinctual basis of Europeans, including their powers of evaluation and judgement, are revealed as both ineffective and inappropriate.

Of course, under current conditions and continuing present trends; eventually and after many generations individual level selection may lead to the evolution of new effective and appropriate instincts that aimed-at individual survival and reproduction - then, presumably, large scale societies would break down into much smaller competing units, since such individuals would have evolved to be resistant to the social cohesion mechanism of religion.

Alternatively, the adaptiveness of European populations may be strengthened by the restoration of Christianity.

Nothing you type matters.  Nothing.  This whole Jews fucking over everyone else's civilizations problem will be settled by force eventually, so better think carefully about which side you're ready to die for because my side is definitely prepared to take you out with the trash with them.  Ethnocentric nationalism is the norm for the past million+ years, and is still that way in most nations like Japan and China.  Fighting against whites on the opposing team I promise will end badly for you.

Non-Orthodox American Jewry is disappearing through record high levels of intermarriage with non-Jews, and through declining birthrates.

Just 27% of non-Orthodox Jews in their prime years of child-rearing – 25 to 34 – are currently married...just 39% of those aged 25-54, married or single, said they had children at home... less than half (48%) of those who had children at home said they were Jewish by religion.

Perhaps most telling, among non-Orthodox Jews in the key child-rearing age cohort (25-39), a whopping 68% said they had no children. An additional 9% said they had non-Jewish children.

Among those who are married, intermarriage with a non-Jewish spouse has become the norm.

While 50% of all non-Orthodox Jews aged 25-54 have no spouse or partner, of the remaining 50% who do, 58% say their partner is not Jewish. Overall, just 21% of non-Orthodox Jews 25-54 have Jewish spouses or partners.

In summing up the marital and parental status of American Jews, non-Orthodox Jews in the 25-54 age group, just 15% were married to a Jewish spouse and had Jewish children.

Pretty obvious what the world is struggling against.  Plenty of people from Henry Ford to Bobby Fischer have described it perfectly
...
Because...fuck you, I will not be plundered.  Funny how a little known Hitler speech from 1940 describes the present day 2017 situation 100% accurately:

Junk science leads to more Junk Science leads to death.

The clearest example of Junk Science turning deadly is Trofim Lysenko.

Lysenko was Stalin’s director of the Soviet Union’s Lenin All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences. He rejected Mendel’s theory of genetics. He also rejected Darwin’s theory of natural selection, not on the grounds of being unsupported by evidence, but instead on the grounds of being “being foreign, impractical, idealistic and a product of “bourgeois capitalism.”

He proposed instead that evolution was based on cooperation and group struggle rather than the “bourgeois” notion of competition between individuals.

He held to Larmarckian that organisms evolved through the acquisition of traits that they needed and used (as when a giraffe, by stretching its neck to get leaves, actually made its neck lengthen and that this longer neck was then somehow passed on to offspring).

On this basis Lysenko boasted of being able to turn wheat into rye in a few years, to turn spring wheat into summer wheat and to be able to use the principles of material dialectic to get organisms to cooperate rather than compete.

Scientists who disagreed or showed insufficient enthusiasm were sent to jail, gulag, or firing squad.

The net result was that Russia, which had been a wheat exporter, went heavily into debt buying wheat from the United States, and went into a famine.

Millions died.

The race science of the National Socialist German Worker’s Party is the most notorious example of Darwinism run amok.

The idea here is that Darwinian competition between breeds of man produces an invariable conflict no peace can solve; that, indeed, such a peace is not desirable, as it will lead to a degeneration of the breeding stock; and that the competition has brought out higher and lower forms of human life, that is, Untermensch and Übermensch the slave races and the master race.

The theory from this concludes that one’s political loyalties and general worthiness as a human being spring from one’s genetic code, not from one’s political beliefs. Your skin color is your uniform. The fact that Cassius Clay (Negro) and Cat Stephens (Caucasian) are both Mohammedans, whereas Saint Kateri Tekakwitha (American Indian), Saint Paul (Jew), Saint Justin Martyr (Greek) and Saint Augustine of Hippo (North African) are all Catholic is a fact this theory cannot explain and cannot brush aside. Apparently the fact that one’s values, virtues, and habits of thought come from one’s genes is taken as a given, and the fact that these things come from one’s religion, or the religious background of one’s upbringing even if one is an atheist, is ignored without being addressed.

Race science is a crass attempt to solve the paradox of nature versus nurture merely by denying that upbringing and education have any effect on the human animal, that free will plays no part in one’s personality and loyalty. Race science merely decrees nature the sole sovereign of destiny.

That led to the extermination not only of appalling and astronomical numbers of Jews and Gypsies, but also of Catholics. Apparently genetics is passed through the Eucharist, according to the wonder science of the Left.

An aside: Those who believe that the Nazis were creatures of the Right rather than the Left are using a deliberately misleading classification. Leftists regard all who oppose Communism as one party, whether they be monarchists, republicans, libertarians, anarchists or totalitarians.  Since the National Socialists of Germany, the Fascists of Italy, and the International Socialists of Russia and China use identical means (propaganda and violence) to pursue identical goals (collectivist secular totalitarianism) and differ only in their uniforms and buzzwords, I suggest the debate about classification is fraudulent.

To be sure, whether one is a race collectivist who seeks the extermination of all lesser races by the master race, or one is a class collectivist who seeks the liquidation of all bourgeoisie and aristocratic classes by the proletarian class, may seem like a big difference to the twin brothers during their murderous struggles with each other. I am sure that a male rhino can tell the difference between a pretty female rhino and a plain one as well.

To the Christian, who believes that God gave the right of life, liberty and property, with the concurrent rights of freedom of conscience and the right to self-defense, to individuals first and foremost, I only care that I have a large bore rifle handy to shoot the rhino as it rampages, pretty or plain.

So it is with the various forms of Leftism. You may debate the Linnaean classifications of the various forms of political insanity involved if you wish. Which side is the Devil’s party is not under debate: merely count the number of piles of innocent dead bodies in mass graves, or cooked in furnaces, or unburied. You may use units of ten thousand per pile for ease of calculation. End of aside.

In America, the most persistent scientific fraud, working far more damage even than the many eco-hoaxes and enviro-scares of the modern Marxist attack on the West, is the Kinsey Report on human sexuality, which was used as the intellectual justification for the disaster known as the Sexual Revolution. Kinsey published two books: Sexual Behavior in the Human Male (1948) and Sexual Behavior in the Human Female (1953). He met all criticism of his methods and findings by pretending that the objections were moral and ethical, hence were mere superstition and prejudice, whereas he was engaging in honest science. The findings were clear. The debate was over.

However, the findings were absurd on their face, claiming that seven out of ten men had slept with prostitutes, that half of all married men were adulterers, four out of ten males were homosexual, and one out of ten exclusively homosexual, and on and on. Of course, it was soon shown that his sample relied disproportionately on prison inmates, including those jailed for sex offenses, college students, and members of homosexual clubs and associations. The whole thing was Junk Science from start to finish, the Kinsey’s so-called research institute was just a swinger’s club where the ‘researchers’ staged orgies and swapped wives.

The junk science was again deadly, for the Sexual Revolution ushered in the abortion cult, which has consumed more innocent blood than ever the Aztecs spilled across the stepped pyramids of Mexico.

The junk science of environmental scaremongering has its death toll as well, when deaths from diseases carried by insects that could be easily and harmlessly killed by DDT continue to mount, when deaths from the poor freezing to death in Northern Europe, allegedly in civilized nations, when energy costs have been driven up by a jihad against coal and petrol. And, of course, the coal miners who die because atomic energy plants are never more erected in America are all preventable deaths due to environmental alarmism. Likewise the automobile injuries and deaths produced by the government mandating the creation of unsafe, lightweight cars to achieve unrealistic and artificial mileage-per-gallon standards.

There are pools, lakes, and oceans of innocent blood on the hands of all these ignoramuses and willfully ignorant cultists who worship science rather than understand science. The question is why we have for so long tolerated this deadly self-imposed blindness, insanity and hysteria?

Please read and support my work on Patreon!
About John C Wright

John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title.

https://hackernoon.com/why-everyone-missed-the-most-important-invention-in-the-last-500-years-c90b0151c169

great read. awesome.

Yep, enjoyed that.

An essay by John C Wright
http://www.scifiwright.com/2017/06/objectivism-and-alt-right/

"A reader asked me my opinion as to why the Alt-Right treated allies and friends (I assume the reader had yours truly in mind) with such slander and contempt.

Interesting question. I think there is a reason and rather clear one. I hope I can be candid without giving cause for offense. I call it as I see it, and am ever open to correction.

A caveat: the question and the answer deal with generalities. In no way do all comments refer to all members of the Alt-Right, or even most. We are dealing with a common thread that runs through their most vocal advocates, that is, their loudest, not necessarily their clearest.

My answer is that I do not expect Alt-Right to talk differently than SJWs. Their avowed method is to adopt enemy tactics, strategy, and methods. So a lot of them (by no means all) have turned, like the pigs at the end of ANIMAL FARM, into the very thing they claim to be revolting against.

They hence fall into the same trap of turning what should be a political movement into a cult.
When a political party becomes a cult, it is substituting groupthink for thinking, substituting hysteria for logic, insult for debate.

Cult thinking is binary and totalitarian. I agree with nine tenths of their policy positions of the average Alt-Righter, but if I say I fear and oppose Mohammedans but not Jews, to a binary thinker, that is insufficient.

A politician makes compromises to gather allies. A cultist pens anathemas to drive heretics away.
Cult thinking is totalitarian because it demands the whole person.

If Alt-Rightery were a political movement and not a cult, one could find mutual cooperation with anyone sharing like goals. There would be no absurd demands for conformity on abstract or trivial issues. Half a loaf would be better than no bread.

I submit that the Alt-Right has fallen into the same trap as Ayn Rand. The Alt-Right has accepted enemy premises and definitions.

Alt-Right philosophy has the same allure as Objectivism: it is simple, it is fresh, it is direct, and it promises to conquer all opposition, and that right soon.

Both Objectivism and Alt-Right claim to be rational and scientific, and both flatter their followers by praising them as supermen, as those who eat the Red Pill of Morpheus and wake to see the unvarnished reality.

Both have the same fatal flaw which will not allow either to grow larger than a mere cult movement.
Ayn Rand’s response to collectivists perverting altruism into a weapon was not to define altruism correctly, but to denounce altruism itself.

She merely had to abandon the entire Western canon of thought to do so, and uphold the vice of selfishness as if it were a virtue.

Likewise, the Alt-Right response to collectivists perverting race equality as a weapon was not to define race equality correctly, but to denounce it.

Alt-Right thinking merely had to abandon the entire Western canon of thought to do so, and uphold the vice of race hatred as if it were a virtue.

This is the method of ridding yourself of wolves in sheep clothing by killing your sheep and inviting the wolf in the door.

Ridding oneself of a major pillar of what Western thought recognizes as universal moral principle can only appeal to person scalded or neurotic or otherwise crippled or undeveloped in that one area.

For Ayn Rand, only antisocial and selfish people, usually young bachelors eager for heroic individualism, are lured like moths to her lamp.

For the Alt-Right, it is those who despise the idea of equality before the law, and the brotherhood of man, and who believe man is material, shaped by genes, not spiritual, shaped by decisions. To them, genes are all; religion, philosophy, national creeds and ideals, all count for nothing.

This also abandons a major pillar of Western thought reaching all the way back to the Greeks, namely, personal responsibility.

Let us not lack sympathy for the Alt-Right.

Having decades of glassy-eyed, shrieking Leftwing sadists shoving perverted and poisonous mockeries of the ideas of equality, brotherhood, justice and liberty down one’s throat would turn even a devout man who favors these ideas into a cynic, if not into an avowed foe.

Having decades of conservatives utter windy promises and then betray every ideal and every principle they allegedly upheld, and cleaving to the enemy the first time in living memory a sharp blow had ever been struck against the enemy, likewise must have a stern price.

I still call myself a conservative, but only in full knowledge that there is a blot on the escutcheon, and many a writer who claims that title is an open traitor to all I in truth uphold and he in word only.

Because, honestly, a conservative who opposes Trump on the grounds of ideals, despite what this administration has already done in deregulating and defanging the bureaucracy, reversing foreign policy mistakes, and appointing originalist judges, falls into the same error of being a cultist and not a political thinker.

The enmity of the Alt-Right against such weasels is merited.

If someone tells you your whole life that “equality” means Black Lives Matter shoot cops, while you, as a white guy, get routinely accused of imaginary crimes, and you are forced always to the back of the line, while the Blacks gather in numbers to burn and riot — well, then, equality is madness, and Jim Crow is a welcome alternative.

But you have to believe the someone to buy the lie. You have to believe the Left to conclude that equality means special privileges for Negros and endless curses for Caucasians. Equality means the opposite.

That is what happened in Russia to Ayn Rand when it came to altruism. She was told that altruism meant communism. Altruism means the opposite.

She believed the someone.

Now, I do not think the Alt-Right is as far gone as Ayn Rand, because most still profession loyalty to the West, and many remain nominally a Christian.

I do notice that, in the same way a Leftist Christian is ever called upon to chose between Leftism and Christ, he never picks Christ, so too whenever an Alt-Right is confronted by contradictions between Christianity and Alt-Right, he rarely puts Christ first.

Instead I hear many an Alt-Right man speaking hellish nonsense about inventing a new form of pagan Christianity compatible with Alt-Right posturing.

May heaven preserve us all from such folly!

Ayn Rand was smart yet bitter enough enough to wedge herself into an airtight corner of circular arguments and rewritten history.

Her philosophical system was able to filter out any evidence or argument that might challenge or correct the system. It reached a halt-state.

There was no way to get her out or reach in to her from the outside: her system is too ironclad.

The Alt-Right does not show this same propensity, at least not that I have seen. Alt-Right philosophy is still mostly political, based on a one-sided reading of history, but the system might still be open to philosophical doubt on tangential questions.

These are not evil people. There is a great darkness troubling them."


"About John C Wright
John C. Wright is a practicing philosopher, a retired attorney, newspaperman, and newspaper editor, and a published author of science fiction. Once a Houyhnhnm, he was expelled from the august ranks of purely rational beings when he fell in love; but retains an honorary title. His work can be supported on Patreon"

re-post for cuckoldcube:

...
So run along and be a cuckold to the jews all you want, but other whites have decided this is Sparta and it's time for them to go rather than us.

Never seen this table before and the relation with religion. It's interesting, but funny at the same time, i don't trust it at all.

A benevolent creator gives his creation away for others to enjoy, not for his own self-gain or empowerment.

Eastern miners are expected to behave like greedy devils, that's what their ancestors did in the past and that's what their offspring will do in the future. That's why god left asia and the middle east many centuries ago.

China on course to become 'world's most Christian nation' within 15 years
http:/e/www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/asia/china/10776023/China-on-course-to-become-worlds-most-Christian-nation-within-15-years.html

Yeah, but what code is going to be run?

Will it be the segwit tested code or some inferior variation?