From the very beginning of human language, sacrifice is one of the oldest words. In stark reality the meaning of this word comes from the Hebrew “minchah.” Synonyms of sacrifice can include: contribution, offering, apportion, bestow, and share. As religious connotations affords, it is those in offices of religious authority which asks, and at times, require members of religious organizations to contribute and sacrifice ones worth into a common pool to better the general good of the parental organization, be it religious or secular. The religious usually fall into private spheres where the secular can also be private in its structure, but most understand these spheres as governmental institutions.
To sacrifice is not a matter of a human impulse. Instead what lies underneath this understanding, yet being unsaid, is the fact that sacrifice is directly related to rational calculation, and cunning manipulation. From the religious the aspects of sacrifice is more to an acute rendering of contribution, or a tithe, for the benefit of a god. From the secular sacrifice is more of a thought of delivering benefits to a king. The killing of human adults or children to false gods was mainly for the receiving of possible benefits from these gods, or to withhold harms; i.e., natural disasters.
In modern times these contributions and sacrifices are redefined into governmental issuances of taxes. The modern liberal progressive politician has the gall to be asking, as would a false god, thier constituents primarily, and secondary the citizenry, to sacrifice their hard earned wealth to appease the governmental gods. The truth of the matter is this rational calculation, the cunning manipulation, is the seeking to give governmental gods, and also to bribe the government gods, into delivering benefits, and withholding harms, is much the same rhetoric that spewed from ancient witch doctors that danced around bond fires and sacrificing adults and children.
Nothing changes, and everything changes. It's the very personal individual who sees through this rhetoric.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Pontius Pilot and Truth
When mentally wrestling with the notion truth, some individuals cannot understand the inability of others not understanding truth. Jesus was confronted with it in His time from the man of Pontius Pilot saying, "What is truth?" Modern thought looks upon history with both tendencies of righteousness. One individual may have the correct judgment, where another may have their own judgment, but from having the wrong attitude. So what, then, is truth?
With God having made humans, man and woman, the devil usurps this truth with something entirely different, subverting creation as God had made it. Truth simply is what God did, and said, through creation. As history evolved from creation to the time of Jesus, the Jewish authority in His time branded Jesus as being a false authority. Not believing Jesus as being the Son of God is false; the opposite of truth. Humans, through the time of history, perverted and diluted truth. The first humans new what truth was until the devil said "You CAN eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil," but as time moved on into the future with information being past along as history, false became truth, wrong became right, incorrect became correct.
The idea of truth has the same connotations when discussing the notion of truth in the cultures of America and Europe. Through history truth maintains being the same, but moves through human cultures and is diluted and changed into being false. Truth was in the cultures of the first humans, then time moved into the Roman empire era, then evolved into the 15th century. Truth has now moved into the cultures of main continent of Europe; France, Germany, and England. When history evolved to the 18th century and beyond, truth moved with evolved cultures and now is found in the American culture. Yet when Europeans are confronted with truth, they act in the same manner as the Jews acted in Jesus’ time. The same goes for Muslims as well as modern liberals. Although these entities, and similar ideologies, never had truth, even though they believe through violent efforts, they insisted they are the ones holding truth.
With God having made humans, man and woman, the devil usurps this truth with something entirely different, subverting creation as God had made it. Truth simply is what God did, and said, through creation. As history evolved from creation to the time of Jesus, the Jewish authority in His time branded Jesus as being a false authority. Not believing Jesus as being the Son of God is false; the opposite of truth. Humans, through the time of history, perverted and diluted truth. The first humans new what truth was until the devil said "You CAN eat the fruit of the tree of knowledge of good and evil," but as time moved on into the future with information being past along as history, false became truth, wrong became right, incorrect became correct.
The idea of truth has the same connotations when discussing the notion of truth in the cultures of America and Europe. Through history truth maintains being the same, but moves through human cultures and is diluted and changed into being false. Truth was in the cultures of the first humans, then time moved into the Roman empire era, then evolved into the 15th century. Truth has now moved into the cultures of main continent of Europe; France, Germany, and England. When history evolved to the 18th century and beyond, truth moved with evolved cultures and now is found in the American culture. Yet when Europeans are confronted with truth, they act in the same manner as the Jews acted in Jesus’ time. The same goes for Muslims as well as modern liberals. Although these entities, and similar ideologies, never had truth, even though they believe through violent efforts, they insisted they are the ones holding truth.
Saturday, December 08, 2007
Kings, Queens, Emperors, and Democrats
Modern America is experiencing an escalating negative political environment. The words “king”, “queen”, and “emperor” causes the mind to conjure a picture of superiority and sovereignty. The title of this article communicates the connection and correlating of these words to the political party of the Democrats. Their collective rhetoric eludes to this idea. After reading the book by Kenneth R. Timmerman entitled "Shadow Warriors," he documents with factual liberal behavior the mindset they are superior with their intellect and sovereign in their insistence that it is their natural action to use government power to install their sense of social justice.
As the book documents, it seems their belief system is evidence of a commitment level far beyond nationalism and loyalty to America as a country in need of defense against an abstract enemy. On the surface it looks as though they are carefree concerning the safety of American citizens. Their quick, almost defensive, response to accusations of traitorous actions some make against their adversaries, the Republicans and the person of President Bush, is rationalized as patriotic. Their continued efforts to redefine patriotism to cover their abhorrent rhetoric is growing old and needs to stop. The democratic party, and the members themselves, have to come clean with their corrosive and destructive actions and activities and accept the fact that they are anti-American, anti-freedom, and anti-individualists.
As the book documents, it seems their belief system is evidence of a commitment level far beyond nationalism and loyalty to America as a country in need of defense against an abstract enemy. On the surface it looks as though they are carefree concerning the safety of American citizens. Their quick, almost defensive, response to accusations of traitorous actions some make against their adversaries, the Republicans and the person of President Bush, is rationalized as patriotic. Their continued efforts to redefine patriotism to cover their abhorrent rhetoric is growing old and needs to stop. The democratic party, and the members themselves, have to come clean with their corrosive and destructive actions and activities and accept the fact that they are anti-American, anti-freedom, and anti-individualists.
Saturday, November 03, 2007
Humans and Dogs
One of my important desires is the correct treatment of dogs; the family pet. The dog is the closest thing to my heart. The maltreatment of these special animals can be very emotional to me. The next thing would be music, and one cannot mistreat music; sort of, but that's another story.
A correct behaving dog is a happy and contented animal. Being this way is also a loved animal.
I want those who are reading this move over to the Dog Whisperer site to help these many thrown away animals.
A correct behaving dog is a happy and contented animal. Being this way is also a loved animal.
I want those who are reading this move over to the Dog Whisperer site to help these many thrown away animals.
Monday, October 22, 2007
Why the Democratic Ideology has the Wrong Idea
When one who may be investigating the beliefs of both the Democrat and Republican parties can ascertain them by the words and actions of those who hold offices in the Senate and House of Representatives, or they can also visit either official web sites.
From my end of this installment was by going to this link which was helpful due to many different places it listed to actually determine what the Democratic “statement of faith” is, but then my investigation went down hill from there. Specifically by going to the Democrat party web site to find out what their beliefs are this investigation evolved into a difficult process to summarize in just a few sentences. If one can take, at face value, "What We are About" link on the official Democrat web site is less than informal. In other words if one can determine what is communicated by “feeling” then the Democratic party is yours.
For those that need logical rhetoric, reason, to determine beliefs then the following may help.
The Democratic Stand:
The Democratic Party is committed to keeping our nation safe and expanding opportunity for every American. That commitment is reflected in an agenda that emphasizes the security of our nation, strong economic growth, affordable health care for all Americans, retirement security, honest government, and civil rights.
The first sentence: The Democratic Party is committed to keeping our nation safe and expanding opportunity for every American.
How can anyone be against this statement. The question is “how” does a political party take upon the enormous responsibility to protect the citizens of a nation; this nation, the American people. The rhetoric that comes from the collective Democratic mouth is establishing a “stronger” communication within the world community. The House of Representative Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to Syria to “talk” and got nowhere towards the stated agenda of the Democratic political party.
The second sentence: That commitment is reflected in an agenda that emphasizes the security of our nation, strong economic growth, affordable health care for all Americans, retirement security, honest government, and civil rights.
This does not communicate keeping America “safe” from international factions of terrorists intending on attacking this nation, but “safe” from the “other” political faction keeping Americans unsafe from domestic issues.
To offer Democrats the benefit of the doubt, there is a plethora of believers of the Democrat agenda that form the party’s membership, but the benefit of the doubt stops there. The many different facets of believers fixate, or migrate, to the Democrat Party because it tends to loosely represent their type of government. These collective beliefs culminates into a single “belief statement,” and that is it is people in governmental offices intend to use government power to shape our society in the Democrat ideological eyes. In other words it is those that find themselves in all levels of governmental offices use government power in accordance to their own personal beliefs; what ever they are.
The idea that there are superior people that is endowed with abilities is at the heart of the reason why our founding fathers started a representative type of government. The government in which they were mortally against at the time was the King of England harboring the power of that government pressing upon the colonists as if they were subservient to the King; personally. In other words however the King sees himself as the people are subservient to the whims and wishes of the King.
In this same ideology, the Democrats, without saying explicitly, are insistent that the whole of American people are to be subservient to the Democratic agenda so that all Americans can be equal in the safe and secure idea of America. According to the Democrats then, the collective of Americans as Democrats define it, the American collective is at a higher level of importance than the importance of the individual American. The freedom of the individual from government oppression is chaos to the Democrats.
From my end of this installment was by going to this link which was helpful due to many different places it listed to actually determine what the Democratic “statement of faith” is, but then my investigation went down hill from there. Specifically by going to the Democrat party web site to find out what their beliefs are this investigation evolved into a difficult process to summarize in just a few sentences. If one can take, at face value, "What We are About" link on the official Democrat web site is less than informal. In other words if one can determine what is communicated by “feeling” then the Democratic party is yours.
For those that need logical rhetoric, reason, to determine beliefs then the following may help.
The Democratic Stand:
The Democratic Party is committed to keeping our nation safe and expanding opportunity for every American. That commitment is reflected in an agenda that emphasizes the security of our nation, strong economic growth, affordable health care for all Americans, retirement security, honest government, and civil rights.
The first sentence: The Democratic Party is committed to keeping our nation safe and expanding opportunity for every American.
How can anyone be against this statement. The question is “how” does a political party take upon the enormous responsibility to protect the citizens of a nation; this nation, the American people. The rhetoric that comes from the collective Democratic mouth is establishing a “stronger” communication within the world community. The House of Representative Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to Syria to “talk” and got nowhere towards the stated agenda of the Democratic political party.
The second sentence: That commitment is reflected in an agenda that emphasizes the security of our nation, strong economic growth, affordable health care for all Americans, retirement security, honest government, and civil rights.
This does not communicate keeping America “safe” from international factions of terrorists intending on attacking this nation, but “safe” from the “other” political faction keeping Americans unsafe from domestic issues.
To offer Democrats the benefit of the doubt, there is a plethora of believers of the Democrat agenda that form the party’s membership, but the benefit of the doubt stops there. The many different facets of believers fixate, or migrate, to the Democrat Party because it tends to loosely represent their type of government. These collective beliefs culminates into a single “belief statement,” and that is it is people in governmental offices intend to use government power to shape our society in the Democrat ideological eyes. In other words it is those that find themselves in all levels of governmental offices use government power in accordance to their own personal beliefs; what ever they are.
The idea that there are superior people that is endowed with abilities is at the heart of the reason why our founding fathers started a representative type of government. The government in which they were mortally against at the time was the King of England harboring the power of that government pressing upon the colonists as if they were subservient to the King; personally. In other words however the King sees himself as the people are subservient to the whims and wishes of the King.
In this same ideology, the Democrats, without saying explicitly, are insistent that the whole of American people are to be subservient to the Democratic agenda so that all Americans can be equal in the safe and secure idea of America. According to the Democrats then, the collective of Americans as Democrats define it, the American collective is at a higher level of importance than the importance of the individual American. The freedom of the individual from government oppression is chaos to the Democrats.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
