Est.2007

Barbados Underground

Bringing News and Opinions to the People

Banner promoting anonymous crime reporting with a phone and contact number 1 800 TIPS (8477), featuring the Crime Stoppers logo and a QR code for submitting tips.

Is This The Start Of World War III?

← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

CONTACT THE BLOGMASTER ONLY

Submitted by Bush Tea on January 1, 2009

Bush Tea has noted the ominous silence of the BU family on the most recent events in the mid east, where the brilliantly logical Israelis are again employing their often tried tactic of bombing and killing their neighbours into co-operation. Clearly their strategists are banking on the hope that this approach MUST work eventually –especially after decades of failure. (Submitted on January 1, 2009 but was not picked-up by BU, sorry about that Bush Tea – David)

Clearly this is a situation, which has been refined by the US republican party, where in the lead-up to a national election, unpopular governments seek to rally national support for a ‘war’ against some unfortunate common foe –preferably someone who can be labelled a ‘terrorist’.

The Israeli plan is obviously to build up the usual hype, kill a few Hamas ‘terrorist’ – and their collateral family members behind whom they are hiding (in their homes) and wait for the USA to protect them in the UN while a face saving ‘truce’ is negotiated.

The ruling party now confirmed at home and by the USA as ‘strong on terror’ and ‘able to protect the country’ would then be re-elected.

That is the plan. Here is the reality.

The current operation by Israel is going to finally bring the militant Palestinian forces together. (This happened 2 years ago in Lebanon for Hezbollah – but that seem to have been forgotten by Israel – or maybe the incumbent party is REALLY desperate).

This will result in the overthrow –this year- of ALL of the pro-western governments in the region –Egypt, Saudi Arabia…. ALL….

A VERY powerful strongman will then emerge, powered by the unifying force generated by this current (and previous) Israeli action, by the USA’s Iraq debacle, by control of huge oil reserves, access to very sophisticated weapons and an ideology fuelled by revenge and war.

The next New Year will be a very bleak one…. And Israel will pay a HUGE price for this approach to neighbour relations. Where is George Washington when he is needed? Is it not he who said that the best way to destroy your enemies is to make them into your friends????

Related Link

Palestinians Continue To Pay A Penalty For The World’s Misdeeds

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

474 responses to “Is This The Start Of World War III?”

  1. Chris Halsall Avatar
    Chris Halsall

    @anon: “The formula P1 V1 = P2 V2 is Boyle’s Law

    Very good.

    Now, perhaps you might explain to us all why you referenced this in your posted dated 2009.02.05.1659.

    You used “big thinkers” language. (Without, I might note, explaining why…)

    Perhaps you might show you are worthy of using same….

  2. Observer Avatar
    Observer

    Tech, I hope you have been reading these posts carefully

    you sure it is christian(s) posting?

  3. anon Avatar
    anon

    Chris this is what I wrote

    You cant divide the Word correctly by your teaching or someone else’s teaching, or my teaching. One and one is two always; irregardless to who teaches you. P1 V1 = P2 V2 irregardless to who teaches you. The Lord is my Shepherd means exactly what it says. There is rightly dividing the word of truth, and wrongly dividing the word of truth! You cant be right and wrong simultaneously!

    The point I was making with reference to Basic Arithmetic and Basic Physical Chemistry is that it does not matter who teaches you a particular concept once they have taught the concept correctly. I cited examples to prove my assertion.

    I dont really think this is using “big thinkers” language. The concepts I used are well known to most of us who attended secondary school. Common knowledge really, I think.

  4. Observer Avatar
    Observer

    a theologian who knows boyle’s law, chris I wonder who that could be

  5. Observer Avatar
    Observer

    I see anon accepts some basic chemistry, I wonder if he accepts some basic biology, what do you think chris?

  6. Chris Halsall Avatar
    Chris Halsall

    @anon… You are so full of bovine excrement that it isn’t even funny.

    It is sad, in fact…

    In relation to your post of 2009.02.05.1659, you pulled an equation out of your ass, and in the very second paragraph, tried to impress us all.

    Wow. Cool. He knows (or at least claims to) that the pressure and volume in a system must remain constant.

    Wow. Deep. Who would have thought?

    And then you try to map this to some deep spiritual truth…

    Care to pull any other truths out of your ass? Like, say that 1 + 1 == 2?

    Or that the cube root of 27 is 3?

    Care to offer anything new?

    Or is that beyond your simple abilities?

    And, therefore, that we should look beyond you for answers to the questions we currently face?

  7. anon Avatar
    anon

    Technician
    No hits for you, cause you are fair and rational, and give and take.

    I agree with you that … Gone are the days when the Church could scare us into their belief, gone are the uneducated fore parents who knew nothing and had to depend on church elders for spiritual guidance. What we see now is the Church losing its power to control of the minds of the people

    All that is true Technician. But what is also true is that Jesus predicted that he would not find the faith when he returned. Paul also predicted that there would be apostasy or falling away from the truth.

    I will agree with you that ALL should learn humility and listen to others.

    I said that “The various denominations is a work of the devil and the placing of DOGMA over DOCTRINE. This is very unfortunate.” And it is true. It cannot be denied. It is not for me to determine or explain who are the ones doing the Devil’s work from the ones doing Christ’s work. But I can tell you that in all denominations, there is the tendency to place of DOGMA over DOCTRINE. I have seen it over and over even among my denomination.

    Technician I stand by my statement that “It is certainly untrue to say that most of the evils and sins in the world to day is the fault of the church. If that is your experience, it seems that your experience is either limited or biased, or both.”

    Although, like you, I grew up in the church and have seen and experienced most of the evils and sin, that one can find in the world today, including . adultery, envy, stealing, greed, pride……etc. it is not deception to say that these errors are the FAULT OF THE CHURCH. There is sin everywhere, because MEN ARE SINNERS.

  8. anon Avatar
    anon

    Chris
    Why are you trying to be a naughty boy? I would have thought that was beyond you man. LOL I am surprised that you seem surprised that I know simple things like Boyle’s law, and that 1 + 1 == 2 or that the cube root of 27 is 3? I went school too—just like you.

    I am no longer full of bovine excrement . I went on a course of these berries that are being touted about online. LOL

    Since we agree that my abilities are simple, I confess that it wont be wise for you or others to look to me for answers to the questions we currently face.

    But you haven’t said whether you had studied Methods of Bible Study or Hermenetics? But then again you don’t pontificate on the Bible.

  9. Chris Halsall Avatar
    Chris Halsall

    @anon: “But you haven’t said whether you had studied Methods of Bible Study or Hermenetics?

    Nor have you said whether you’ve read Penrose, Stephenson, Heisenberg, Einstein, Newton or Gödel.

    I find myself very comfortable standing where I am….

  10. anon Avatar
    anon

    OK so be it.

    No I am a simple man who loves Bible study so whereas I needed to study Methods of Bible Study or Hermenetics to do so I have no need to read Penrose, Stephenson, Heisenberg, Einstein, Newton or Gödel.

    I guess you didnt have to to study Methods of Bible Study or Hermenetics and so you havent. Thats OK too.

  11. Rev Dr.Dick Hertz Avatar
    Rev Dr.Dick Hertz

    ROK

    How did I get on Carlos, Dictionary etc “side”? I’m on nobody’s and everybody’s side. Just asking some questions, looking for some answers.

    Also I am not Carlos, GP, Dictionary, Scout or whoever! I am a guy with a $49.99 degree from the Peabrain Theological School and Massage Parlour (motto “Laying of hands our specialty”)

  12. Observer Avatar
    Observer

    dont worry, rev dick we know you are unique

    i suspect though you went to ‘school’ with some of the theologians quoted here

  13. Rev Dr.Dick Hertz Avatar
    Rev Dr.Dick Hertz

    Carlos,
    after you wrote ” applying it to your daily life, as you make ‘choices’ through your ‘will’ versus your intellect, which is essentially knowledge based, I feel you’ll eventually grasp the concept” ….whew!! I’ll stick with esoteric as the correct word! No occult connotations implied though.

  14. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    anon

    I can safely tell you that I choose to forget a lot about the approach to Bible Study because in my opinion it is flawed. I would agree that there are some basics, but these by no stretch of the imagination represent a single approach to Bible Study.

    Words have been interpreted in so many ways and had so many other meanings. The problem starts with the translation and the quest to make translation modern is to further lose the original meaning.

    You can fool the rest that there is a strict law like Boyle’s Law that you can apply to scriptures and like 1 + 1 = 2. Joke. Not that straightforward at all.

    The true study of the Bible begins with the study of the culture and an examination of historical records, simply to understand the gist of the story. There is a whole heap of extraneous material which must be considered and applied.

    A study of the Parables for example, involves comparisons to discover threads and trends in order to gain understanding of what was said within time frames and use of language.

    I remember that for years this statement baffled me: “It is easier for a camel to get through a needle’s eye than for a rich man to enter into the Kingdom of heaven.”

    This is what I mean by understanding the culture and the meaning of the words because needle carried different meanings in those days to what we know now. Given what we know as a needle today, which even a baby camel can’t get through, one may come to the conclusion that it is impossible for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of heaven, when that is not true.

    But note the use of the words, “it is easier”, suggesting a really tight fit, notwithstanding that even a baby camel could get through a needle’s eye of those days.

    So, yes, if you don’t know what you are doing you will hardly get it, but it not rocket science and to tell the truth, a lot may be retained but what cannot be denied is that a lot was lost too.

    This Hermenetics that you keep talking about is nothing more than categorisations and groupings of words and meaning and ways of discovering meanings. More like the use of the language, or a basis for construction in order to interpret.

    This is fraught with all types of problems. It was/is used to complete sentences which got lost, either by decay or damage. Whole texts got lost and were replaced by what some scholars believed was there. Trying to reconstruct entire chapters, etc.

    The problem with most Bible readers is that they take as Gospel what they read, but there are some critical texts which are not the original text. The inserted texts are not identified to the average reader and therefore many are not aware of the texts that are not good to rely on as apposed to the original text; especially in the old testament.

    So the first problem with the Bible is that a lot of the original stories are missing and people run the risk of using the inserted text to override the authentic text.

    If therefore you do not start with the original story, how can you speak of truth? It is not a scientific study in this sense. I wish I could remember some of the inserted text, but these are things I have put out of my mind. Genesis, Deuteronomy, Exodus, etc., all have inserted texts. I think Exodus was the worst hit.

    When found, the scrolls were in very bad condition and even in opening and moving them further damage occurred because of the rotting and crumbling dry state of the material.

    Next was the translation. For a long time the Hebrew scrolls were a puzzle. Then scholars could not agree on the translation and use of the words and language, because of the time span. Languages changed and were lost.

    This is the document these fellas are relying on. I must admit that the new testament was in much better condition… but you guys playing a guessing game in the name of faith and you cannot foist that on me because you do not have the full story.

  15. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    Sorry Doc. with the $49.99 degree. I did not mean to identify you by association… sorry, the dialogue you keep. Carlos sounds like your professor. I saw him correcting you in class.

    My Humble Apologies, Sir. I like the idea of the probing electric stick. You must have the ladies heads turning.

  16. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    Did you guys not get the memo back in 1873? P1.V1 is only APPROXIMATELY equal to P2.V2 for most gases, and the relationship breaks down completely at high pressures or low temperatures. Even at normal pressures and temperatures, there are some gases, for example biogas, that notably break Boyle’s ‘law’.

    A better approximation would be:
    [P1 + a(n/V1)^2][V1 – nb] = [P2 + a(n/V2)^2][V2 – nb]

    ROFL

  17. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @ ROK

    I like your cynicism. I also agree to some extent with your analysis of the complexity and confusion associated with religion generally, and with the study of the bible specifically.

    You are obviously a thinker. How about we forget about the bible for a while and use our natural intelligence to analyse where we are in this world and what is likely to be the ‘truth’…

    Don’t you think that collectively we have the intellect to come to a logical conclusion here on BU?

    I would start by suggesting that the beauty, complexity and brilliance of our world clearly points to a master design and therefore a designer.

    I would further suggest that this ‘designer’ must of necessity be at least as intelligent as our best human minds.

    The point here being that the whole concept MUST make logical, rational sense and the true role and purpose of the bible, Koran and the ‘church’ etc should fall out logically from the analysis….

    You game…?

  18. Chris Halsall Avatar
    Chris Halsall

    @Bush Tea: “I would start by suggesting that the beauty, complexity and brilliance of our world clearly points to a master design and therefore a designer.

    To paraphrase “Cheech and Chong”…

    Smells like a presupposition…

    Tastes like a presupposition…

    Good thing we didn’t step in it….

  19. Chris Halsall Avatar
    Chris Halsall

    @MME: “A better approximation would be: [P1 + a(n/V1)^2][V1 – nb] = [P2 + a(n/V2)^2][V2 – nb]

    Thanks. I needed that….

  20. Bush Tea Avatar
    Bush Tea

    @Mr Halsall

    You may have noted that I was addressing ROK.

    It is clear that your brilliant mind is miles above my lowly plain of existence. I would not be so forward as to try to foist such nonsense on your superior intellect.

    Please forgive me if it appears that I was trying to do so….

  21. Chris Halsall Avatar
    Chris Halsall

    @Bush Tea…

    Gosh… My mistake….

    Please accept my apologies for daring to call bullshit when said bullshit was not directly directed towards me.

  22. Georgie Porgie Avatar
    Georgie Porgie

    @ Micro Mock Engineer

    Indeed a better approximation would,might very well be:
    [P1 + a(n/V1)^2][V1 – nb] = [P2 + a(n/V2)^2][V2 – nb]

    But for lesser mortals like me who found it hard enough to do the computations with a simple P1V1 =P2 V2, is why you want to complicate things man?

  23. Carlos Avatar
    Carlos

    Dr. Dick: You said, “I’ll stay with ‘esoteric’ as the correct word! No occult connotation implied though.”

    I still have to strongly disagree with you, as ‘esoteric’ in its true and correct meaning has absolutely NO connection whatsoever with God’s Word, or for that matter, the principles of Biblical Hermeneutics, Contextual Analysis, and Linguistic Exegesis; all of which are essential in being able to ‘correctly’ divide the Word, properly ‘interpret’ which are NOT subject to the whim-wham fancy of the individual, as many have done, corrupting, maligning, and twisting the ‘Truth’ therein.

    Esotericism is therefore strickly speaking, associated with the world of the ‘Occult’ the antithesis to the Word of God, and historic, orthodox theology, in every which way, period!

    I know what I am speaking to, as prior to being ‘Saved’ I was innocently and deceptively ‘hood-winked’ into one of the many ‘occult’ oriented societies, whose subtle dogmas, were cloaked in ‘esoteric’ gibberish, ever learning, but never, ever, coming to know the ‘Truth.’

    There is a reality in the occultic experience which attracks many people to it. All of us desire some sort of ultimate answer for life’s basic questions, and the world of the ‘occult’ gladly, and seemingly, supplies the answers. The astrologist will chart your future. The Ouija board promises you direction, and the medium talking to the spirit of your dead relative informs you that things are fine in the next world.

    Since these occultic practices do reveal some amazing things, the practitioner is lulled into thinking that he has experienced ultimate reality and no longer needs to continue his search for truth. The spiritual vacuum is filled by means of a spiritual experience, NOT with God, but invariably from the pit of hell; with all of its ‘Esoteric’ lies.

    The Bible, categorically denounces any and all ‘occultic’ practices in both the Old and New Testament. (See Deut. 18: 9-14), and in the NT, (cf Gal. 5:20; Acts. 13:6-12; 19:19).

    “Many also of those who practiced magic brought their books together and began burning them in the sight of all…” (Acts. 19:19).

    “You who are full of all deceit and fraud, you son of the devil, you enemy of righteousness, will you not cease to make crooked the straight ways of the Lord?” (Acts. 13: 10).

    No lie or deception, whether it be political, economic, philosophical, or spiritual, is more dangerous than when it is ‘couched’ ‘veneered’ convoluted and presented in some degree of plausibility, (seeming reasonable or probable), for this is in effect the very art of the world of occultisim, and its ‘esoteric’ lies!

  24. Observer Avatar
    Observer

    somehow I am not surprised carlos got “hoodwinked” into an “occult oriented society”

  25. Micro Mock Engineer Avatar
    Micro Mock Engineer

    LOL Georgie,

    Just keeping it real for any impressionable science students that happen across this blog. 🙂

    … but GP, you very quiet throughout this debate.

  26. Carlos Avatar
    Carlos

    Bush Tea: Yes, absolutely Yes!

    “I would start by suggesting that the BEAUTY, COMPLEXITY, and BRILLIANCE of our world clearly point to a master DESIGN, (without doubt), and therefore a DESIGNER, (Almighty God!).

    Some other commenter, scoffed at the unspeakable beauty, complexity, and brilliance of ‘design’ by ignorantly referring to it as ‘BS’ as my father use to say, ‘BS’ BAFFLES ‘brains’ especially those of the scientific intelligentsia.

    Not to worry BT, as their utter folly is appropriately described by their Creator whom they vehemently deny.

    Folly of the Godless, and God’s Final Triumph.

    “The FOOL has said in his heart, ‘There is no God.” They are corrupt, they have done abominable works. Have all the workers of iniquity no knowldge…”
    (Psa. 14: 1, 4). emphasis added.

  27. Observer Avatar
    Observer

    Carlos,

    would you say “Almighty God” has “beauty, complexity and brilliance”?

  28. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    BT

    I take a different approach. I don’t like to separate myself from God. I start with the premise that God is all and therefore God is in me and every living person. All things are the manifestation of God including the earth and the trees.

    I can take my reference from the Bible. Omniscience, omnipresence, etc. of God. It makes sense that in order to be omniscient one would have to know everything that every living creature knows, and in order to be omni-present one would have to be in every living creature and thing everywhere.

    Then you get a different perspective of God. It is then that one realises the respect and responsibility for life that is required. It should not be abused because then you are destroying God’s work and there is always a penalty to pay for destruction.

    It is then that the concept of sin becomes much clearer. It is one thing to have guidelines such as the ten commandments, but these are only guidelines. Sin is a much wider topic that goes beyond crime.

    We also get to understand that sin has a lot to do with how you treat your body and your relationships with people around you; your spiritual health, so to speak. You get to understand also that sin is about excesses too; “The wages of Sin is Death” becomes clearer. We also say, too much of anything is bad.

    There is great wisdom in a lot of these little sayings. More of the message is in these little things than the commentary. They send deep messages, great wisdom and contain principles of living and clues for recognising and quantifying certain things.

    Ye shall know them by their fruit;
    He who is not against me is for me;
    “It is your faith that healed you”;
    “Why do ye stare into the skies?”
    Look within;
    Why do you call unclean what the Lord has made clean;
    Wives obey your husbands, husbands obey your wives;
    The idea of avoiding idolatry and not worshiping images;

    Great wisdom and lessons of life for practical application.

    Of course there are some discrepancies to be resolved between who is the God of the Bible and who the Bible say God is. These things require deep thought but they are not without answers that lie in the text of the very book.

    I remember reading the “Forgotten Books of Eden” and it was there that I got a good glimpse of the relationship between God and Satan. This is one of the first clues about who is the God of the Bible.

    I must admit that this question of who or what is truly God, if it can be correctly ascertained, is the key to a righteous and fulfilling life. One approach is to identify what it is not and probably what is left is who or what God is.

    I am finding it difficult to believe that God is either man or woman, it has to be both, just as male and female propagate life. If God made us all, then it would be proper to assume that God is male as well as female.

    There is much to be reconciled in terms of the existence of negative and positive, if everything is God… but then this discrepancy may also be an indication of the vastness of God to comprehend or the infinite nature of God.

    If god is infinite, who is this God of the Bible that had definite form? And what about the physical nature of the so-called angels.

    More questions arise. What is the spirit and what is this great affinity between the physical and the spiritual? What is the difference between a live person and one that gave up the ghost?

    What is the Ghost? What is the Holy Ghost? The word ghost is now being replaced everywhere by spirit. Why?

    Lot’s of questions and the answers are there right before our noses. I am not sure I want to go any further right now.

  29. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    @anon

    “You cant divide the Word correctly by your teaching or someone else’s teaching, or my teaching.”

    For you to say this means you really don’t understand or you trying to scrape the barrel to trivialise the issue. I think you playing that you don’t understand because you trying to get an upperhand by baring out that I talking foolishness based on a technicality?

    In contrast, you better believe that I know where I am and that I really can’t go along with the fairy tale story because I know better. It doesn’t take history or even intellect to tap the raw power and force of God, even as Christ tapped it. Sometimes the bare innocence of a child is God at work in a significant way.

    The kind of Bible analysis that you feel so passionate about, don’t even matter. It has to do with how you live. This is not a book thing. You can’t find it in a book. This is tacit knowledge which can only be described to you but will only be truly felt by you. It cannot be known unless you experience it and you cannot see it if you have not experienced it.

    I leave you with that.

  30. Carlos Avatar
    Carlos

    ROK: Says, “I start with the premise that God is in all and therefore God is in me and every living person. All things are the manifestation of God including the earth and the trees….and in order to be omi-present one would have to be in every creature and thing every where.”

    Unfortunately, this view of God, is most certainly not founded on sound Biblical theology, or even more specifically, systematic theology.

    This concept of God, is more akin to the Pantheistic view of God; Pantheism is made up of two words: “pan” meaning “all: and “theos” meaning God”. It is the belief that God is ALL and ALL is God. Pantheism is the theory which regards all finite things as merely aspects or parts of one eternal self-existent being. It holds that there is no God apart from nature, and that everything in nature is part or ‘manifestation’ of God. Trees, birds, flowers, animals, reptiles, etc., are all part of God. Nature itself is God.

    Of course, there are a number of different types of Pantheism; i.e., Materalistic Pantheism; Hylozoism or Pantheism; Neutralism; Idealism; which is them broken down into, Impersonalistic Idealism, Personal Idealism, and Philosophical Myticism.

    These theories do reveal man’s intuitive belief in a god, but also illustrate man’s inability to reject God’s revelation of Himself, as divinly inspired and recorded in His Word, the Bible, and come to true knowledge of Him. In trying to find God in creation they have made creation God, and missed the Creator behind it. In attempting to find God in ‘all’ things, they have made ‘all’ things God.

    In Summary:

    Pantheism makes nature god and misses the God of nature.

    Materialistic Pantheism, makes matter eternal and misses the God who made matter.

    Hylozoism, makes a principle of life god, and misses the God who is the source of life.

    Neutralism, makes some neutral substance god, and misses God the creator of all substance.

    Idealism, makes the mind god, and misses the God who is a real person having a perfect mind.

    Philosophical Mysticism, makes man himself god, and misses the God who made all men.

    It is important to understand, that the Omnipresence of Almighty God, DOES not make Him present in ‘all’things, as these different theories purport; but, that while one of His Eternal attributes is ‘Omnipresence’ He nevertheless, IS entirely ‘Transcendent’ as Creator of ‘all’ things, existing apart from them, and therefore not subject to the limitations of, the material universe.

  31. Carlos Avatar
    Carlos

    Man cannot know God or what God is like apart from revelation. If God does not reveal Himself to man, it is ‘impossible’ for him to discover God for himself. Man with all his searching cannot find out God. God Himself, must take the initiative. (Job 11:7; Matthew 11:25-27). This God has done in His Word, the Bible. The Word of God IS the revelation of God. Without it we would have no revelation as to His essence, nature and being. We must turn to the Scriptures to consider what God has revealed about Himself in His own mode of being, realizing that “the secret things belong to the Lord our God; but those things which are revealed belong unto us and to our children for ever, that we may know all the words of this law.” (Deut. 29:29).

  32. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    H’mm:

    I have been asked to look back here and see what is going on.

    Okay . . .

    As we here in M’rat reflect on ol Smoky’s next act after his 12 km high new year celebration . . .

    [Hint to “Observer,” Carlos and I are most definitely distinct persons. And, even if we were not, that has no relevance to the issue of what is there on the merits of fact and logic.]

    Next, I see all sorts of distracting debates over Anon’s:

    >>You cant divide the Word correctly by your teaching or someone else’s teaching, or my teaching. One and one is two always; irregardless to who teaches you. P1 V1 = P2 V2 irregardless to who teaches you. The Lord is my Shepherd means exactly what it says. There is rightly dividing the word of truth, and wrongly dividing the word of truth! You cant be right and wrong simultaneously! >>

    Already this is on a tangent off a tangent off a tangent on the substantial issues we had better attend to as pointed out above.But, we do need to clear up the “Who knows what games.”

    a –> PV = const is indeed a 3 – 4th form Physics or Chemistry thing. So, it is legitimate to cite it as an example of an objective model that is not a mere matter of opinions and speculations.

    b –> Within the zone of validity [dilute relatively simple gases — biogases are complex], it works, as does the extended PV = nRT. Onward in 6th form I expect some kinetic theory and intro to statistical thermodynamics.

    c –> Van Der Waals models are an improvement for some purposes [intermolecular attraction, bulk of molecules become parameters], MME. (Wiki has a useful discussion. For general physics survey I now highly recommend Schiller’s free online textbook, Motion Mountain.)

    d –> VDW models however have the defect that at a certain zone, they show a wiggle where the real gases ate flat — phase transition issues. Modifications allow for averaging off.

    e –> Models are not reality, but can be useful.

    f –> Same BTW for theories across time. Motion Mountain has a very good discussion. (I love its simple intro to General Theory of Relativity.)

    Now, on signs of our times and hermeneutics:

    1 –> Language uses words in structures in contexts, to communicate meaning. If you can converse and read and know truth from error or lie, you know this at some level. So this is a commonplace.

    2 –> That brings up meanings [ambiguous so context is vital] e.g. what does “jack” mean: fish/ car tool/ electronic plug/ man’s name, etc.

    3 –> We need to look at how words work together: subjects, predicates, nouns, verbs, modifiers, genre, context, background knowledge assumed or required etc etc. [Cf on Boyle, Univ Gas law, moles, Univ gas const, implied Boltzmann’s const, concept of molecules and atoms, etc above. BTW, I like Kellogg sentence diagrams — now; hated em in 3rd form — as they help us see what is going on. never mind the more formally correct tree diags beloved of linguists, and parsers in compilers. good enough for govt work. As is Boyle!]

    4 –> So far, general. Hermeneutics, exegesis and at a simpler level inductive Bible study, apply the above in the context of Bible.

    5 –> Multiplying the challenge, we need to realise the Bible books were written in Hebrew, Aramaic and Koine Greek, further influenced by Septuagint’s Gk and text. And, in a very different culture and historical context: e.g. “slavery” in the Bible, by and large was not like the version we remember from school, textbooks and popular media. [Which in turn was not quite the same as the actual reality that our ancestors faced. (Our bounded rationality and limited exposure constrain our ability to access reality.)]

    6 –> These issues have been codified in organised fields of study and bodies of objective knowledge and codes of best practice — e.g. cf Osborne’s The Hermeneutical Spiral.

    7 –> Latterly, I find e-Sword and its many classical resources a useful tool to access a lot of the relevant reference works, free — be careful on copyright issues though. (E.g. since UK Crown copyright is perpetual, per force of int’l treaties, 1769 revision of KJV — the common version we use — is technically actually in copyright! De facto, and on much precedent, it is freely available text.)

    8 –> Anon is right, and indeed, from personal acquaintance, Carlos is indeed qualified to teach these things. While he may be in error on a point [and I have had my share of disagreements with him!], it is much less likely that he is than that one who has not been through the disciplined exposure required to soundly exegete the scriptures will be.

    8 –> That means we are at the level of peer review, folks. No authority is better than his facts, logic and assumptions, but you need to be at the level to address that. So, those of us standing by the Niles Corner/ Ealing Park bus stop next to Roy Smith’s shop down in Ch Ch [as I did for 6th form] should use common sense and seek out the spectrum of informed opinion before drawing our conclusions on controversial points.

    9 –> And since there is a hot philosophical controversy over imposition of materialism as a default assumption, we should be aware that rationalism and associated materialist implications often distort what is so confidently presented as if it were settled by the Jesus Seminar or Bishop Spong or the like. (And that takes in a canon or two down in Barbados too . . . )

    10 –> I hardly need to add that Dan Brown’s Teabing is an ill-informed melange of speculation, in a novel [and then a movie], not a summary of serious scholarship.

    11 –> On Bible prophecy, how you take it hinges on the issues in Ac 17, rom 1:1 – 4, Phil 2:5 – 11 (a C1 creedal hymn) and 1 Cor 15 first: if Jesus died, was buried, rose with 500+ witnesses, according to the scriptures [cf Is 53] and with resurrection power flowing through the church for all its flaws ever since, then we had better heed what he and his spokesmen have to say.

    12 –> For what it is worth, my first level take on many such prophecies [and a fair slice of Bible history] is that the patterns laid out reveal examples and driving forces.

    13 –> In particular, prophecies in the Bible often had an immediate relevance as well as onward relevance to similar situations across the ages, and may have a culminating relevance at the end of days. So if we see a sufficiently similar situation, these cases serve as reality-anchored examples for us today.

    14 –> Which brings us to the stubborn march of folly issue I spoke of above: will we learn form history or are we doomed to repeat it like ignorant, willful fools who will only learn from painful personal loss and harm? [Hint: how many AIDS cases does it take to make us learn that abstinence and/or fidelity, depending on situation, are the only pretty sure preventatives?]

    15 –> So, will we learn or will we suffer from our stubborn sinful folly, yet again?

    ______________

    Enough for now, a PS on the main point for the thread aside.

    GEM of TKI

  33. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PS: See I missed on a point number, Ouch.

    Here is a report that provides some eye-opening balancing reading on what was being paraded across our TV and computer screens and aired so confidently on our radios.

    Whether or not we take it all on board, we need to listen. (I can certainly say that over the years of my working with such, I have seen NGO’s and granting agencies habitually acting like this on a number of topics as they have sought to “mainstream” an agenda. There is also a loss of objectivity, fairness and civility problem with our whole civilisation. Read Rom 1:19 – 2:16, Eph 4:17 – 24 and Deut 8:17 – 20 to see the Biblical analysis on why, and where it predictably leads.)

    Link — read the Exec Summ even if you don’t read the whole:

    http://www.ngo-monitor.org/data/images/File/NGO_Front_Gaza.pdf

  34. Carlos Avatar
    Carlos

    Observer ask; “Would you say ‘Almighty God’ has ‘beauty, complexity, and brilliance?”

    Almighty God, who is Absolute, Eternal, Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Immutable, is also Absolutely Holy, Righteous, and Just, for He created ‘Beauty, complexity, and Brilliance, for our benefit. Really, there are no words to describe Him in all that He IS, for we are just given a glimmer from His revelation to us, as contained in His Word, the Bible, as He utterly transcends our concept of ‘beauty, complexity and brilliance, which will only be revealed to those who have placed their trust in Him, through our only Saviour and Lord; The Lord Jesus Christ, when we go to be with Him in Heaven, for then, we shall behold Him in His Holiness, and absolute majestic, eternal splendor.

  35. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PPS: A link or two:

    1 –> e-Sword, start here:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-Sword

    (Make sure to collect Strong’s coded number Bible versions and original language texts. I also think we need to develop a Caribbean version with a suitable set of resources . . . )

    2 –> A basic Bible Study primer:

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/Leading_Cells/Bible_Study_Skills.htm

    3 –> On a basic 101 level world views issues, phil toolkit:

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/Intro_phil/toolkit.htm

    4 –> On modernist theology etc

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/Intro_phil/Mod_Theol.htm

    5 –> An easy reading response to Mr Brown et al [~ 6 MB download]

    http://joshmcdowellmedia.org/FreeBooks/A%20Quest%20for%20Answers%20The%20Da%20Vinci%20Code.pdf

  36. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    Carlos,

    “Almighty God, who is Absolute, Eternal, Omnipotent, Omniscient, Omnipresent, Immutable, is also Absolutely Holy, Righteous, and Just, for He created ‘Beauty, complexity, and Brilliance, for our benefit…”

    Where did you get all that from?
    Who told you so?
    How you know that it is correct?

  37. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PPS: Motion Mountain:

    http://www.motionmountain.net/

    (Warning: 104+ MB, 1612 pp download. But worth it! Physicists and/or physics teachers out there take time to first read the presentation on the General Theory of Relativity! 6th formers and 1st level university physics or engineering students (i.e. if you are still doing survey of physics courses): this is the book that will fill in the gaps in your textbooks!)

  38. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Fanaticism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Fanaticism is an emotion of being filled with excessive, uncritical zeal, particularly for an extreme religious or political cause or in some cases sports, or with an obsessive enthusiasm for a pastime or hobby. According to philosopher George Santayana, “Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim”; according to Winston Churchill, “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject”.

  39. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    PPPS: Sigh . . .

    ROK, has it ever dawned on you that there may be people out there who *personally know God in a live relationship* of reconciled sonshop or daughterhood, having repented and believed in the once crucified, now risen and Eternally living Christ, our Lord and Saviour?

    That some of us like that, therefore know God in his life-transforming, miracle-working, truth revealing resurrection power? [It’s not a matter of dry tomes and dead dogmas . . . try Pascal’s recorded encounter with the Living God in his Pensees, November 23, 1654 was it!? Yes, THAT Pascal of probability theory, hydrostatics and the unit of pressure; not to mention his famous wager argument!

    [His real point was that one who takes the tentative step of reaching out to God, however doubtful s/he may be, will MEET God, removing doubts as the rising sun dispels darkness and fog.]

    That, we who have met God take his Scriptures and the creeds drawn from then so subtly and richly [cf “Light of Light” and Heb 1:1 – 4 . . . ] seriously because we personally know the author, even as we may know our mothers?

    Or, do I need to point you to Plantinga’s trilogy on Warrant, especially where he — the same Plantinga who so powerfully dispelled the deductive form of the problem of evil — gets around to the warranting power for knowledge of the inner testimony of the Living, indwelling Spirit?

  40. Astrix Avatar
    Astrix

    There are many people who are convinced of aliens , live real aliens in their daily life that come down and take them up to space ships.

    This does not stop them being otherwise sensible and sane people, but I am not about to start believing that aliens are visiting earth on their personal experience.

  41. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    P^4S: Anonymous:

    I cannot but infer between your lines given the context of your suggestive remarks in this thread.

    1 –> So, let me invite you: why not first look at this here on critical thinking [Note the context of its original composition]:

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/Straight_Thinking.pdf

    2 –> And, at this here, on a more specific primer (note the intended audience . . . ):

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/AN_APOLOGETICS_PRIMER.pdf

    3 –>Not to mention, this here on the REAL problem that started much of this thread, uncritical reading, listening to and viewing of today’s media [no prizes for guessing the typical grades nowadays all the way up to — sadly — the BBC (I am now 6+ months into a blood libel complaint with them . . . ) ]:

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/straight_or_spin.htm

    4 –> Also, try this on selective hyperskepticism and a corrective, reasonable approach to evidence in light of Simon Greenleaf on evidence [BTW, founding father of the modern theory of evidence — and a convinced Christian, the onward link to his book is an excellent corrective to C20 – 21 cynicism]:

    http://www.angelfire.com/pro/kairosfocus/resources/Selective_Hyperskepticism.htm

    5 –> Again, this is useful, for those enamoured of the new Atheists and their rants:

    http://irrationalatheist.com/files/TheIrrationalAtheist.pdf

    6 –> Capstone: try this from Canon Dr Michael Green (the same sent by Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, to Barbados in the mid 1990’s):

    http://www.worldinvisible.com/library/green/runworld/runwcont.htm

    I think you may need to rethink on who has been thinking seriously and who has been going along unthinkingly — and often emotionally — with the spirit of the age.

    GEM of TKI

  42. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    P^5S: Astrix: cf forthcoming link on evidence.

    Also, ponder: the existence of the counterfeit is a testimony to the existence and power of the real thing!

  43. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    Carlos,

    I must say, your definitions are staggering:

    “This concept of God, is more akin to the Pantheistic view of God; Pantheism is made up of two words: “pan” meaning “all: and “theos” meaning God”. It is the belief that God is ALL and ALL is God. Pantheism is the theory which regards all finite things as merely aspects or parts of one eternal self-existent being. It holds that there is no God apart from nature, and that everything in nature is part or ‘manifestation’ of God. Trees, birds, flowers, animals, reptiles, etc., are all part of God. Nature itself is God.”

    Where did you get this definition of pantheology from?

    Pan means all and deos means god. Is that not all gods? Where you get this loaded definition from? Pantheology is the study of all religions accomodated into one hypothesis. Now you come with this pantheism and trying to link it with atheism. You people! Fanatic!

    I want to let you know that you are nothing more than a fundamentalist and we all know the folly of that; except you, of course.

    How I know? Well your brand of theology leads to war. You advocating war and only fundamentalists resort to war to settle religious disputes. Look at the billigerent way you put over yourself? As if it must be this way or hell fire and brimstone. Yet the truth is, you really do not (can’t) know nor can you ascertain. Religion is all a matter of belief. What truth what!

  44. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    Dictionary

    Are you a parrot? You only understand things when you write them? Well let me re-quote from one of my above posts:

    “It has to do with how you live. This is not a book thing. You can’t find it in a book. This is tacit knowledge which can only be described to you but will only be truly felt by you. It cannot be known unless you experience it and you cannot see it if you have not experienced it.”

  45. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    No ROK

    YOU need to look at what you wrote:

    >>February 6, 2009 at 9:05 am

    Carlos,

    “Almighty God, who is Absolute, . . . . ”

    ****Where**** did you get all that from?

    **Who ***** told**** you **** so?**

    How you know that it is correct?>>

    See my point?

    It is implicit — even, rather directly hinted at — that Carlos is at best leaning on secondhand info that he has been told and has uncritically accepted.

    I think Carlos will join me in saying that we not only know from traditions and teachings and readings — and that is how we all learned the three Rs and how we who studied sciences learned most of what we know — but we have PERSONALLY met the Author.

    So, my rebuttal above is clearly well merited; ROK.

    And, I ent no “parrot”!

    [Remember who in the end was vindicated when a certain man in Athens was derided as a “spermologos” — a little seed-picking bird hanging around the market. HINT: Look on the plaque at the RHS of Mars Hill, and ask yourself what is the name of the street on which the Acropolis sits, and what is the name of its extension as you pass by the foot of Mars Hill. Then, as who was in the end vindicated after the events of Ac 17: to whom did the future belong, ROK? The mocking philosophers, the cynical pols or the derided Apostle?]

    GEM of TKI

  46. ROK Avatar
    ROK

    Dictionary
    You have not proven a thing? neither have you conhtradicted anything I said. A personal experience is not proof of the intangible. Experiences differ and that is why I use the word tacit. You know what tacit is? It is a personal experience that we cannot even be sure that another person going through similar feelings is experiencing the exact feeling that you did.

    There is no explicit or overriding suggestion of a secondhand experience because I know that a firsthand experience is not necessarily ultimate truth. There is still an element of the unknown and unverified in there. So his answer could well have been, “by tacit experience.” So now you know what my response to that would have been.

    You guys have a warped and subjective mind. One agenda and very fundamentalist. No ability to see objectivity. See anonymous definition of fanatic above.

    Thanks for letting us know that you and Carlos are one.

  47. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Why is Dictionary asking others to go to his web site for reading?
    Kairosfocus and Dictionary is the same person !!

  48. Avatar
    Anonymous

    Fanaticism – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Fanaticism is an emotion of being filled with excessive, uncritical zeal, particularly for an extreme religious or political cause or in some cases sports, or with an obsessive enthusiasm for a pastime or hobby. According to philosopher George Santayana, “Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim”; according to Winston Churchill, “A fanatic is one who can’t change his mind and won’t change the subject”.

  49. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    Anonymous:

    My identity [Cf my initials] is not the issue.

    Nor my you properly dismiss matters of substance by pointing out the author.

    That is called the ad hominem fallacy, genetic form.

    GEM of T**K**I

  50. Dictionary Avatar
    Dictionary

    ROK:

    First, as I have already pointed out, there are no proofs beyond all doubt. However, if one as a settled matter doubts the basic facts of his conscious and sometimes rational experience, s/he is properly dismissed as [half-]mad.

    For to do so lands one in a morass of self-referential inconsistencies and absurdities. That is, conscious, mentally active existence is self-evident.

    Second, in the world of factual lived out experience as intelligent and choosing beings, we know persons through interpersonal encounter.

    Interpersonal encounter with God that issues in positive trasnsformatio0n of life, family and culture — delusions are disintegrative, incoherent and destructive [cf Greenleaf on evidence] — is its own warrant.

    And, kindly note, I am here discussing ***warrant per open-minded, critically aware inference to best explanation of world and life view [cf the link on phil toolkit supra], relative to factual adequacy, coherence and explanatory power***; not some fantasy of absolute proof from universally compelling axioms. indeed, not even in mathematics can we get such.

    For, post Godel we know that no sufficiently rich mathematical system has sets of axioms that are both coherent and complete and that there is no constructive procedure for generating coherent albeit limited sets of axioms.

    So, I have presented adequate warrant for reasonable consideration; only to be met with selectively hyperskeptical dismissals.

    All that that tells me is that you are being incoherent at a deep level; for you must commit to faith points that would at once fall aside if the same criteria you used above were exerted on a fair basis.

    By contrast, I hold to my worldview in a context where I have looked, seriously, at alternatives that were at the time live options — I am not uncritically begging the question at grand metaphysical level.

    In concluding that where I am is well warranted, part of that is that I have come to know and relate to God even as I have come to know and relate to my Mother, my father, my wife and our children. I know God as I know other minds [note, I have not said bodies or brains].

    So, while i am a part of a tradition, it is not merely by report and teachings that I have come to know the reality of God in the face of Christ.

    As with Pascal, I have met the Author for myself, and I trust him to know what he is writing about.

    Have you?

    GEM of TKI

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading