The Enlightenment that Never Happened

The Enlightenment that Never Happened

(Excerpt from Textbook Propaganda)

 

Forget Luther, forget Cromwell, forget Isaac Newton and a hundred other devout scientists and forget Comenius; forget the thousand years of scientific advance in the Catholic Scholastic colleges and the Papal bulls against slavery: the Enlightenment did it all, or so imply the textbooks

 

 

The scientific ideas of the Enlightenment…As literacy grew in conjunction with the Enlightenment…the new technologies and Enlightenment ideas changed society…”

World Regional Geography, p.74

“In the 1730s colonist it British North America began to participate in new ways in transatlantic intellectual, commercial, and religious networks. The most educated of them embraced and practiced science, while thousands flocked to sermons preached by the people who brought evangelical Christianity to both sides of the Atlantic…”

American Horizons: US History in a Global Context, Vol. 1, Schaller and Schulzinger, 2013

Science, Literacy, ideas of individual freedoms, you name it; according to the texts they all came from the atheistic Enlightenment period with a capital “E”. And even in far off British America the educated people practiced “science” while the lesser educated folks continued going to churches.There are two major problems with the above scenarios: first, no enlightenment period as portrayed in the textbooks ever existed with its implied influence on science, literacy or human rights. Second; the subtle idea in the second paragraph that (though not said explicitly) the people who practiced science in early America were not church going Christians like the rest of Americans, but somehow enlightened, is a blatant falsehood.

Let me be clear and not subtle like the authors of the textbooks; there was arguably not one atheist founder in any area of science until well after the 19th century, certainly not more than two or three out of the hundred plus giants of science from the Medieval Ages to the 1900s. Almost to a man they were all avid devotees of the Scripture and gave their faith in the rational Judeo/Christian God as their reason for pursuing science.

Secondly; there is no history of an atheist leader or society or government or individual who ever passed any decree for public schools for the commoners or education for the women. The Catholic scholastic university system had been in use for centuries (in England Oxford became a home for the Reformation) and it was Christian leaders like Oliver Cromwell and John Amos Comenius who supported learning for the commoners and women alike. The first book off the Gutenberg press was the Holy Bible, and it was Luther’s Bible that set the standard for the German language in Germany and the King James Bible in England that standardized the confused dialects of the people into one national language; there was no atheist influence on these languages from enlightened sources. If there was such a person or influence of the atheist enlightenment, please send the proof of their existence to the textbook writers, because they name no scientific leader or educational leader at all; atheist or Christian.

You might think that they left out specific names and movements because their sweeping view of history wouldn’t allow the space. Let me assure you, they left out the specifics because there are not any. The desire to read the bible in their own languages when it became suddenly available and to read the debates between Luther and Erasmus or Zwingli was the primary cause of the major explosion in literacy among the common people in Europe. It would be hundreds of years before the handful of atheist scholars would name their own period the enlightenment.

And the idea of individual freedoms and such coming from enlightened sources is quite a stretch also. Most of the famous men portrayed as enlightened were pro-slavery, while the church had been pursuing ideas of individual freedom long before the days of Augustine; Hobbes was still a long way off. By the time of the bloody French revolution, atheism was certainly aflame in France and the period was a foreshadowing of other atheist revolutions that would take place in Marxist Russia and beyond where hundreds of millions were slaughtered. In France, they not only killed the king, they wiped out the entire nobility. The streets literally ran red with human blood. How enlightened is that?

In England it was Cromwell and the Puritans who overthrew (though they did not want to kill the king) the Monarchy; and who brought an end to the ban on Jews and ordered public schooling for the commoners and brought about a period of scientific discovery; but they were not atheists. But I am doing what the textbooks do; long rants and generalizations without much actual data though I have already named more historical figures in these first paragraphs than you will find in the entire textbook discussion on the development of individual freedom, science and technology and literacy in Europe. Why bother with such details? They can be so messy.

The idea of individual freedoms started in Europe because the Europeans had the bible and the bible made it quite clear that God, the God of the Jews, was if anything the God of the poor, the down trodden and the weak. The bible made it clear that “all men were made of one blood” and that your status or gender or age had nothing to do with your standing before God. It took a while for these concepts to sink in and develop and even longer for them to take shape in the political arena, but they did.

As late as 1797 the Enlightenment scholar Edwin Burke was saying, “The cause of humanity would be far more benefitted by the continuance of the (slave) trade and servitude…as by the total destruction of both or either.” (Davis, the Problem of Slavery in the Western Culture, Cornell University Press, 1966) Other so called Enlightenment heroes such as Voltaire, Locke, Hume and Hobbes all supported the slave trade and Voltaire viewed the Africans as an inferior race. (Stark, Rodney, For the Glory of God, 2003, Princeton University Press, p. 359) A few of the men identified with the Enlightenment were against slavery, but no sharp outcry, no abolition movement or group ever sprang from the files of the Enlightenment atheists.

Plato and Aristotle argued in favor of slavery. They maintained that certain races are inferior and are born to be slaves and their use gave the superior races the time and leisure to become, well, enlightened. The Church began to baptize slaves and recognize them as equals and buying them out of slavery, as early as the third century and even Pope Callistus had been a slave. But as Rodney Stark points out in “The Victory of Reason” (Random House, 2005), it wasn’t until the fall of the Roman Empire that the Church really began to move against slavery with a will.

In 657 A.D. Saint Bathilda, who was the wife of King Clovis, began efforts to abolish slavery and buy slaves from out of their bondage. In the 700s Charlemagne opposed slavery with the help of many bishops and the Pope. By 1200 A.D. slavery was abolished in Europe everywhere but in southern Spain where a trade was kept going with the Muslim slave traders. When the New World slave trade opened up again centuries later, several Papal bulls were issued against it; none of which are ever mentioned by any of the three textbooks we have been reviewing. This essential act of recognizing the individual rights of men was not a product of the Enlightenment or any other movement anywhere. No other movement against slavery is found in any other culture or religion, with the exception of certain Jewish sects. And Moses was the first to recognize the rights of slaves.

Now, but what about science? Surely the Enlightenment brought us science, right? Please name me one founder of modern empirical science that was an atheist and I will name you a hundred dedicated Christians. Let me list a few for you here;

Isaac Newton, who discovered of law of gravity and three laws of motion, an accomplished mathematician who made the first reflecting telescope and so much more, clearly stated his faith not only in a God, but in the Bible. He said that god,” governs all things and knows all things” and that, “The true God is a living, intelligent, powerful being…”, “He endures forever, and is everywhere present…” and on and on. He wrote literally millions of words on theology and the study of Scripture.

Robert Boyle, founder of modern Chemistry who helped to debunk the beliefs in alchemy so prevalent all over the globe. He was a devout biblical Christian who started a missionary enterprise, and established a will to help support the defense of biblical Christianity. And he wrote a book whose main thesis was that it was a religious duty of man to study and observe nature.

Johannes Kepler, one of the main founders of modern astronomy, who claimed that as a scientist he was thinking God’s thoughts after Him. He had intended to become a theologian but instead decided to pursue astronomy because he said, “The Heavens declare the Glory of God.” quoting the Bible.

Christopher Columbus, who said in his journals;

“It was the Lord who put into my mind ( I could feel his hand upon me) that it would be possible to sail from here to the Indies (India)…There is no question that the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit because He comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures…” (Libro de Profecias)

More modern examples would be Lord Kelvin, the leading founder of modern physics, who was devout in his biblical faith in a creator and who said, “…the atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into words…”

Or Louis Pasteur, who discovered and founded the science of microbiology, and who called Darwin’s idea of spontaneous generation, “Dumb, dumb, dumb.”, and said that the study of nature brought him closer to God.

Francesco Redi, the scientist who falsified spontaneous generation experimentally years before Darwin inspired Pasteur to again disprove it with his experiments. Redi said;

“I shall express my belief that the earth, after having brought forth the first plants and animals at the beginning by order of the Supreme and Omnipotent Creator, has never produced any kinds of plants or animals, either perfect or imperfect; and everything which we know in past or present times that she has produced, came solely from the true seeds of the plants and animals themselves, which thus, through means of their own, preserve their species”

Redi, F. [1688], Experiments on the generation of insects, translated by Mab Bigelow. Reprint, Millwood, New York, Kraus

Or Joseph Lister, who helped save millions of people through his development of antiseptics and their use in medicine. The son of devout Quakers he said, “…In my opinion there is no antagonism between the Religion of Jesus Christ and any fact scientifically established…”

And as for the technological advances, As Lynn White points out, by “the late thirteenth century, Europe had seized global scientific leadership.” “…so much technical progress took place during this era (the middle ages) that by no later than the thirteenth century, European technology surpassed anything to be found elsewhere in the world”…  (Stark, For the Glory of God, p.134)

Eyeglasses, extensive use of wind and waterwheels, the fire place and chimney, cannon and muskets, the iron horse shoe and horse harness, the manufacture of paper, the list is too long to put into this chapter. Suffice to say the technological advance of Europe had nothing to do with the 18th century enlightenment.

I have no idea who “The most educated of them embraced and practiced science” were in the textbook quote in our heading about early America. Whoever they were I can assure you they were not atheists or even Deists. Of course once again, they don’t bother to give us any names or discoveries so one can only wonder. Not that many Americans were actually working on experimental science projects at the time, though Benjamin Franklin comes to mind. He never confessed to the teaching of the Church on salvation by the merits of Christ through faith, and was the member of no sect¸ but was he an atheist? He said this is what he believed;

“There is one God who made all things, and he governs the world by his providence, that he ought to be worshipped by adoration, prayer and thanksgiving, the most acceptable service of god is doing good to men, the soul is immortal and God will certainly reward virtue and punish vice either here or hereafter.” Benjamin Franklin, Autobiography

Not an atheist creed.

So, no, I guess he wasn’t one of the textbook’s enlightened “embracers of science” either. I’m sure they must have existed somewhere. Or maybe, like the secular myth of the Enlightenment, they didn’t. At least, not outside of our modern college textbooks.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , , , | Leave a comment

Slavery was a Curse, not a boon to American Prosperity

It is popular among many to claim that American prosperity was built off the institution of slavery, as Rome in fact was. The historical reality is, as Abigail Adams and many others proclaimed that slavery was a curse which was turning the south into a wasteland while the north prospered. Beware of ideologies and political platforms that have to “retell” history in order to manipulate your vote.

Henry Seward, who became a leading cabinet member in Lincoln’s administration, and his wife Francis took a journey to the south in the summer of 1835 and describe the conditions of the south to those in the north;

“At the time of their journey, three decades of immigration, commercial enterprise, and industrial production had invigorated Northern society, creating thriving cities and towns. The historian Kenneth Stamp well describes how the North of this period “teemed with bustling, restless men and women who believed passionately in ‘progress’ and equated it with growth and change; the air was filled with the excitement of intellectual ferment and with the schemes of entrepreneurs; and the land was honeycombed with societies aiming at nothing less than the total reform of mankind.” Yet, crossing into Virginia, the Sewards entered a world virtually unchanged since 1800. “We no longer passed frequent farm-houses , taverns, and shops,” Henry wrote as the family carriage wound its way through Virginia’s Allegheny Mountains, “but our rough road conducted us … [past] low log-huts, the habitations of slaves.” They rarely encountered other travelers, finding instead “a waste, broken tract of land, with here and there an old, decaying habitation.” Seward lamented: “How deeply the curse of slavery is set upon this venerated and storied region of the old dominion. Of all the countries I have seen France only whose energies have for forty years been expended in war and whose population has been more decimated by the sword is as much decayed as Virginia.” The poverty, neglect, and stagnation Seward surveyed seemed to pervade both the landscape and its inhabitants. Slavery trapped a large portion of the Southern population , preventing upward mobility. Illiteracy rates were high, access to education difficult. While a small planter aristocracy grew rich from holdings in land and slaves, the static Southern economy did not support the creation of a sizable middle class.”Goodwin, Doris Kearns (2005-10-25). Team of Rivals (p. 77). Simon & Schuster, Inc.. Kindle Edition.

Booker T. Washington described conditions on the plantations from a slaves perspective;

“Ever since I have been old enough to think for myself, I have entertained the idea that, notwithstanding the cruel wrongs inflicted upon us, the black man got nearly as much out of slavery as the white man did. The hurtful influences of the institution were not by any means confined to the Negro. This was fully illustrated by the life upon our own plantation. The whole machinery of slavery was so constructed as to cause labour, as a rule, to be looked upon as a badge of degradation, of inferiority. Hence labour was something that both races on the slave plantation sought to escape. The slave system on our place, in a large measure, took the spirit of self-reliance and self-help out of the white people. My old master had many boys and girls, but not one, so far as I know, ever mastered a single trade or special line of productive industry. The girls were not taught to cook, sew, or to take care of the house. All of this was left to the slaves. The slaves, of course, had little personal interest in the life of the plantation, and their ignorance prevented them from learning how to do things in the most improved and thorough manner. As a result of the system, fences were out of repair, gates were hanging half off the hinges, doors creaked, window-panes were out, plastering had fallen but was not replaced, weeds grew in the yard. As a rule, there was food for whites and blacks, but inside the house, and on the dining-room table, there was wanting that delicacy and refinement of touch and finish which can make a home the most convenient, comfortable, and attractive place in the world. Withal there was a waste of food and other materials which was sad. When freedom came, the slaves were almost as well fitted to begin life anew as the master, except in the matter of book-learning and ownership of property. The slave owner and his sons had mastered no special industry. They unconsciously had imbibed the feeling that manual labour was not the proper thing for them. On the other hand, the slaves, in many cases, had mastered some handicraft, and none were ashamed, and few unwilling, to labour.”

Washington, Booker T. (2012-05-12). Up from Slavery: an autobiography (pp. 6-7).  . Kindle Edition.

Booker also said: “I pity from the bottom of my heart any nation or body of people that is so unfortunate as to get entangled in the net of slavery. I have long since ceased to cherish any spirit of bitterness against the Southern white people on account of the enslavement of my race. No one section of our country was wholly responsible for its introduction, and, besides, it was recognized and protected for years by the General Government. Having once got its tentacles fastened on to the economic and social life of the Republic, it was no easy matter for the country to relieve itself of the institution. Then, when we rid ourselves of prejudice, or racial feeling, and look facts in the face, we must acknowledge that, notwithstanding the cruelty and moral wrong of slavery, the ten million Negroes inhabiting this country, who themselves or whose ancestors went through the school of American slavery, are in a stronger and more hopeful condition, materially, intellectually, morally, and religiously, than is true of an equal number of black people in any other portion of the globe. This is so to such an extent that Negroes in this country, who themselves or whose forefathers went through the school of slavery, are constantly returning to Africa as missionaries to enlighten those who remained in the fatherland. This I say, not to justify slavery—on the other hand, I condemn it as an institution, as we all know that in America it was established for selfish and financial reasons, and not from a missionary motive—but to call attention to a fact, and to show how Providence so often uses men and institutions to accomplish a purpose. When persons ask me in these days how, in the midst of what sometimes seem hopelessly discouraging conditions, I can have such faith in the future of my race in this country, I remind them of the wilderness through which and out of which, a good Providence has already led us.”

Washington, Booker T. (2012-05-12). Up from Slavery: an autobiography (p. 6).  . Kindle Edition.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Nation of Israel; Created by God or an Anomaly of U.N. Mandate?

The Nation of Israel; Created by God or an Anomaly of U.N. Mandate?

“By the rivers of Babylon we sat and we wept, when we remembered Zion. There on the willow we hung our harps, for there our captors asked us for songs…saying ‘Sing us one of the songs of Zion!’ How can we sing the songs of the Lord while in a foreign land? If I forget thee oh, Jerusalem, let my right hand forget its cunning. May my tongue cling to the roof of my mouth if I do not exalt Jerusalem above my highest joy!” Psalm 137, 500 B.C.

“The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is a modern dispute with its roots in post-world war I colonial politics.” (Note: colonialism is a dirty word in modern academic texts) Human Geography, Knox, Marston, p. 336, 2013 A.D.

While our textbooks probably do a better job on this issue than some (At least here they admit that there are two sides to the issue) they come off as far from unbiased and once again resort to storytelling and small blurbs of history instead of giving us the real thing. Our second textbook, World Regional Geography, doesn’t do much better;

“Israel is a major anomaly in Southwestern Asia. (Formally known as the Middle East) It is a unique example of a country created by the United Nations for a particular ethnic group, despite opposition from those living around it.” p. 367

Both books at least make a show of non-partisanship, the second text with a point-counterpoint section between the Arab Palestinians and the Israelis. But they spend most of their time talking of the number of Palestinians killed in Israeli attacks on the West Bank or the Gaza Strip or talking about the horrible crowded conditions of the refugee camps forced on them by the anomaly (out of place) nation of Israel. They don’t mention why Israel was attacking the Palestinians or how the Palestinians first got placed in the refugee situation to start with. The first text book, Human Geography, makes no mention of the previous historical existence of the Jewish people in Israel in its discussion of the conflict here, but does have a section on the history of Jerusalem elsewhere. But the second textbook at least gives the Jewish history in the Fertile Crescent a paragraph, where it majors on the fact that the Jews having escaped slavery in Egypt, “…took the lands from the Canaanites to establish their own country.”

Of course the story of that Conquest is found in the Jewish Torah and in that text the whole context of the conflict is given as to why the God of the Jewish people gave them the Canaanite land. In brief, the ancient Canaanites were behaving then like Americans are today; abortion and infanticide were rampant, and homosexual and heterosexual fornication and adultery were without bounds. According to the Torah the residents of Canaan were living in abject rebellion to the God of Israel.

Neither text does much better in giving an accurate portrayal of the present conflict, making it appear at the very least as if both sides are equally at fault for the ongoing conflict. They do mention, in brief, the fact that the Palestinians were offered land along with the Jewish people in the 1947 UN offer and in the two state partitions offered in 1937, and barely mention that the Arabs turned down both offers. Human Geography suggests that the Arabs turned down the offer because in the 1947 plan the Jews received more land; 57% of the territory. Of course, anyone reading the newspapers at the time or aware of the actual conflict realizes that the reason they declined to accept the offer was that the Muslim Arabs could never tolerate the presence of a Jewish nation in the Muslim mid-east.

As Nasser would repeat 20 years later in the prelude to the famous 6 Day War;

““As of today there no longer exists an international force to protect Israel. We shall exercise patience no more… The sole method we shall apply against Israel is total war, which will result in the total extermination of its Zionist existence.”

This was echoed by virtually all the Arab leaders in the countries surrounding Israel in 1967 and the sentiment was no different in 1947. As the Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said was quoted by the head of Palestinian Youth organization, Hawri, as saying shortly before invading Israel in 1947;

“We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.” (Hawri, The Secret Behind the Disaster, 1952, Nazareth)

Both textbooks do admit that all the Arab countries then invaded the tiny new Jewish territory but talk little about how the original Palestinian refugee situation came into existence. Both textbooks steadfastly avoid giving any quotes by Arab leaders or even quoting British authorities of the time. That would be giving the students a glimpse of real history which is something both texts avoid like the plague. To do so would make the reason for the present Israeli-Palestinian conflict all too plain. By the way, the departing British gave all their gun emplacements and fortified ground to the Palestinian Arabs.

But how did the original refugee situation come to pass? Why did so many Arabs abandon their homes and lands and flee to other Arab countries when the British Mandate ended and the Balfour proclamation claimed the parts of the Palestinian Territory originally to be ceded to Israel?

At the end of the British Mandate, and in defiance of the idea that the Jewish people might actually form a small state in the Islamic mid-east, it was the Arab and Palestinian leaders who ordered all the Arab settlers to flee. They also threatened that all Arabs who remained would be treated as collaborators and killed. They assured the Palestinian settlers that it would only take a few days to annihilate the Jewish people and take a spoil of all the Jewish settlements. Actual newspaper clippings and statements from the Arab authorities, the British military and the surrounding Arab newspapers cast light on the 1948 exodus of arabs from their homes.

In fact, the Jewish settlers pleaded with the Arabs to stay on their land and promised no harm would come to them. But the Arab governments, and the Palestinian High Committee, indeed, every Arab authority, commanded the Palestinian Arabs to flee to other countries. In an article titled, “What we have Learned and What We Should Do”, in the official journal of the PLO called, Falastin eth-thawra, in March 1976, Abu Mazen wrote;

“The Arab armies entered Palestine to protect the Palestinians from the Zionist tyranny but instead, they abandoned them, and forced them to emigrate and leave their homeland…the Arab states succeeded in scattering the Palestinian people.”

Khaled al-Azm, Prime Minister of Syria in 1948 wrote in his memoirs;

“…since 1948 we have been demanding the return of the refugees to their homes. But we ourselves are the ones who encouraged them to leave. We have brought destruction upon a million Arab refugees by calling upon them and pleading with them to leave their land, their homes their work and businesses.” (Khaled as-Azm’s memoirs, Beirut 1973, part one, pp.386-387

Harry Stebbins an official in the British Mandatory Government in Palestine in 1948 wrote;

“Long before the end of the British mandate…all my Arab Palestinian staff of some 200 men and women and all of the 1800 man labor force had left Haifa in spite of every possible effort to assure them of their safety if they stayed. They all left for one or more of the following reasons:;

1) The Arab terrorism engendered by the November, 1947 UN partition resolution frightened them to the death of their imaginative souls and they feared Jewish retaliation.

2) (Arab) Propagandists promised a blood bath as soon as the mandate ended in which the streets of all the cities would run with blood.

3) The promised invasion of the foreign Arab armies (which started on May 14 with the Arab Legion massacre of some 200 Jewish settlers at Kfar Etzion) was preceded by extensive broadcasts from Cairo, Damascus, Ammon and Beirut to the effect that any Arabs who stayed would be hanged as collaborators with the Jews.” (Harry C. Stebbins, London Evening Standard, Jan 10, 1969)

 In September 6, 1949, in the Beirut Telegraph, Emile Ghoury, of the Palestinian Higher Committee said;

“The fact that there are these refugees is the direct consequence of the act of the Arab states in opposing partition and the Jewish State.” Jamal Husseini, of the Palestinian Higher Committee told the Security Council on April 23, 1948;

“…we have never concealed the fact that we began the fighting.”

A British police report to Headquarters in Jerusalem noted that the Jews were making every effort to persuade the Arab settlers to stay and continue on with their lives. In Haifa, the Arab Nat’l Committee refused to sign a treaty with the Jewish representatives despite a passionate plea from the Jewish mayor of Haifa.

Unlike the panic stricken Arab settlers, the Jewish settlers refused to panic and run. In his memoirs, Khalid Azm also said;

“But the massacre at Kfar Etzion, the massacre of the (Jewish) hospital convoy…and the continued blasting and shelling of the Jewish settlements for over 20 years, has not caused one single Israeli to move away.” (Azm, ibid)

Did you catch that? For 20 years BEFORE the formation of the Jewish State, the Jews were being bombed and blasted by Arab armies and terrorists. Some things never change. So the unrest and violence in the mid-east was not caused by the formation of the Jewish Nation. The real reason is the Islamic Arab nations will never rest until, as Nasser said before the 1967 Six Day War, all the “Jews are driven into the sea”.

As the Iraqi Prime Minister Nuri Said was quoted by the head of Palestinian Youth organization, Hawri, as saying;

“We will smash the country with our guns and obliterate every place the Jews seek shelter in. The Arabs should conduct their wives and children to safe areas until the fighting has died down.” (Hawri, The Secret Behind the Disaster, 1952, Nazareth)

Or so they thought. The Jews remain, and even though all the nations of the world come against them, they will prevail. But don’t let the facts confuse you. If you want to practice the new anti-Semitism, which shows itself in anti-Israelism go ahead, go with the flow. But remember, /when things flow, they usually flow downhill.

‘’In those days and at that time, when I restore the fortunes of Judah and Jerusalem, I will gather all nations and bring them down to the Valley of Jehoshaphat.  There I will enter into judgment against them concerning my inheritance, my people Israel, for they scattered my people among the nations and divided up my land.”  Joel 3:1-2

The God of Israel does not back away from his promises, and He is still on the throne, whether textbook anti-supernaturalism is willing to admit it or not.

Posted in Uncategorized | 4 Comments

The Disneyfication of the America Indian

College textbook representation of American Indian religion falls short of the reality

“Before Columbus…the people living there practiced, for the most part, various forms of animism, and related rituals. They viewed themselves holistically, as one part of the wider world of animate and inanimate nature. Shamanism, in which spiritually gifted people are believed to possess the power to control preternatural forces, is one important aspect of the belief system that existed among Native Americans…”Human Geography, Places and Regions in Global Context, p. 158

“When a child my mother taught me the legends of our people; taught me of the sun and sky, the moon and stars, the clouds and storms. She also taught me to kneel and pray to Usen (God, the Great Spirit) for strength, health, wisdom and protection.” Geronimo, his biography as dictated through an Apache interpreter to S.M. Barret

“It would be below the truth (understating) to say that the Indian has one hundred thousand gods. The Hindus worship their multiform gods of the earth, air and sea. The North American Indian only believes in them. He worships the Great Spirit.”

Henry R. Schoolcraft, The American Indians Their History, Condition and Prospects, from Original Notes and Manuscripts, 1851

That the first Americans prayed to the spirits of rocks and trees, is true. So did our pre-Christian German, Celtic and Viking grandparents in Europe. But do you think from the quotes above that maybe there is something about the Native American religious practices that the textbook doesn’t want to share with you?

In this day and age, on secular college campuses and in the media of our post-Christian culture, nature worship is cool- old theistic religions like Christianity or Judaism are out. And despite the fact that “everybody knows” that all religions are equal, and it would be like totally non-diverse and intolerant to say anything else, our secular colleges favor certain religions above others. Asian religions are cool; liberal Christians are tolerated- fundamental (historic) Christianity is decidedly uncool. In fact, any religion is better than biblical Christianity and I’m afraid that this barely hidden bias has a devastating effect on the way they teach on almost every subject.

The other college textbook also goes on and on about animism, in Africa, and makes it sound like the most enlightened culture and religion ever. They don’t mention the common practice of twins being left out in the jungle to die because the animists were sure that one of them was a demon but couldn’t discern which one. I mean there are just a lot of things they don’t tell you. They give you sort of a Disney version of an animistic society and leave any negative aspect out. And the fact that the Native Americans had a wide-spread faith in a Creator God, who was supreme, and flood stories similar to the Noachian flood account, is a negative because it lends credence to the Judeo-Christian Scriptures.

And giving credence to the historic Christian faith is one thing they most definitely don’t want to do. Let’s look at another quote by Schoolcraft;

“There is one particular in which the Indian tribes identify themselves with the general traditions of mankind. It is in relation to a general deluge (flood), by which races of men were destroyed. The event itself is variously related by an Algonquin, an Iroquois, a Cherokee, or a Chickasaw, but all coincide in the statement that there was a general cataclysm and that a few persons were saved.” Schoolcraft, History of the Indian Tribes of the United States, 1857, 571.

Schoolcraft was an Indian agent who spent his life living among the Northeast tribes, learning the languages and studying their cultures and histories. He was driven by his desire to make the Indian people better understood by the Europeans invading their land. He felt that if the new Americans understood the Natives, perhaps they would show them more respect and deal with them more fairly. He also was in constant contact for over a half a century with other anthropologists and Indian agents all over the North American continent who shared his zeal and also exchanged information about other tribes with him. His massive books are well known and corroborated by many others and the Native Americans themselves. A book written about the history of the Cherokees, written by the Cherokees, can be found in the local library which backs up Schoolcraft on all points. When Sequoya created the Cherokee script, the first book ever put into Cherokee was the Holy Bible.

Alexis De Tocqueville came to America in the early 19th century and made an intense study of everything American; religion, politics, slavery, Native Americans, commerce; all aspects of American life. Here is a quote from his resulting book called, Democracy in America published in 1838;

“Like all the other members of the great human family,” he noted, the Indians, “believed in the existence of a better world, and adored, under different names, God, the Creator of the Universe,”

Here is one example of a flood story, by the Pawnee Nation, as told to Buffalo Bill Cody by his chief scout, a Pawnee. Cody was fluent in Pawnee and the scout was fluent in English;

“While we were in the hills scouting the Niobrara country, the Pawnees brought in some very large bones, one of which the surgeon of the expedition (it was a college funded expedition for fossils) said was the thigh bone of a human being. The Indians said the bones were those of a race of people who long ago had lived in that country…These giants, they said, denied the existence of the Great Spirit. When they heard thunder or lightening they laughed and declared themselves to be greater than either.

This so displeased the Great Spirit that he caused a deluge. The water rose higher and higher till it drove these proud giants from the low lands to the hills and thence to the mountains. At last even the mountain tops were submerged and the mammoth men were drowned…This story has been handed down among the Pawnees for generations.” Buffalo Bill Cody, autobiography, public domain

Sitting Bull and Geronimo even used their faith in and knowledge of the Great Spirit to lay out a defense for their lands;

“The cities arose and always the White man’s lands were extended and the Indians pushed farther and farther away from the country The Great Father had given them and that had always been theirs.” Sitting Bull, Buffalo Bill Cody’s autobiography, Ch. 11

Geronimo did the same;

“When Usen created the Apache he also created their homes in the west. He gave to them such grain, fruits and game as they needed to eat. To restore their health when disease attacked, he made many different herbs to grow. He taught them where to find these herbs and how to prepare them for medicine. He gave them a pleasant climate and all they needed for clothing and shelter was at hand. Thus it was in the beginning: the Apaches and their homes were created for each other by Usen Himself. When they are taken from these homes they sicken and die. How long will it be before it is said, ‘There are no Apaches?” Geronimo, S.M. Barret

Compare this to the statement in the book of Acts, New Testament;

“From one man he made every nation of men, that they should inhabit the whole earth; and determined the times set for them and the boundaries where they should live.”

Book of Acts, 17:26

And furthermore, our own Supreme Court eventually agreed with them;

“[I]n decisions of this court, the Indian right of occupancy of tribal lands, whether declared in a treaty or otherwise created, has been stated to be sacred. . . It is to be presumed that in this matter the United States would be governed by such considerations of justice as would control a Christian people . . .”

Lone Wolf v. Hitchcock, 187 U.S. 553, 565 (1903). See also the same language in Yankton Sioux Tribe of Indians v. U. S., 272 US 351 (1926); U. S. v. Choctaw Nation, 179 U.S. 494 (1900)

Note that the Supreme Court ruled Americans to be a Christian People, as late as 1903, and later. Real history just conflicts everywhere with the Academic view; but it really does appear that the State funded colleges and federally funded halls of learning are more interested in  (to use one of their own words}propagandizing than educating.

These kinds of flood stories are found all over the world, in China, Burma, Mexico and elsewhere, as is the knowledge of a supreme creator god, often called “the Sky God”, among the animistic indigenous peoples. When I was a young child in elementary school back in the fifties, our textbooks occasionally mentioned one or more of these stories so common among America’s indigenous people. Not anymore.

If Atheism is such a superior world-view, why are its purveyors so averse to telling the whole story? Why the relentless exclusion of any data that contradicts it?

“…We had no churches, no religious organizations, no Sabbath day, and no holy days, and yet we worshiped. Sometimes the whole tribe would assemble to sing and to pray; sometimes a smaller number, perhaps only two or three…Sometimes we prayed in silence; sometimes each one prayed aloud; sometimes an aged person would pray for all of us. At other times one would rise and speak to us of our duties to each other and to Usen.”

 “Since my life as a prisoner has begun I have heard the teachings of the white man’s religion and in many respects believe it to be better than the religion of my fathers. However, I have always prayed, and I believe the Almighty has always protected me.” Geronimo, Ibid

Geronimo never saw the insides of a modern secular college Geography text. Poor fellow.

But it might be quite lucky for our modern textbook authors that the Apache leader cannot see what they are doing to history and the history of his people; or there might be a few new scalps hanging from the ridge pole of the venerable old warrior’s lodge. And Geronimo is one man I would not have wanted to cross.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

In India they worship Cows; in America, it’s trees and the Planet

Is the tendency towards nature and earth worship a new drift or an old declension?

According to leading scholars on the technological explosion of the “dark ages”, it was the acceptance of Christianity which paved the way for the scientific, technological, literary, medical and economic advances that placed Europe light years ahead of the rest of the world.  Eyeglasses, chimneys, iron horseshoes, stirrups, cannon, round bottom boats capable of deep sea travel, the printing press, mechanized paper and cloth making, massive use of wind and water mills of many types, tidal mills, advanced farming methods, the list is almost endless. The advance continued with the invention of the internal combustion engine, the use of steam, wood, oil and gas, flight, the use of electricity, antibiotics, medical sanitation (though Moses had that first) etc.

Lynn White is quoted by Gies, that in Christianity, “Man shares in great measure God’s transcendence of nature. Christianity, in absolute contrast to ancient paganism and Asian religions…not only established a dualism of man and nature but insisted it was God’s will that man exploit nature for his proper ends.” (Gies, Cathedral, Forge and Waterwheel, p.5)

“As the Christian faith spread…it destroyed the belief of the classical world that there were gods residing in nature. This Christian demythologizing was one of the many factors behind the technical creativity of the period” Gimpel, p. 180, The Medieval Machine.

“…Christianity, by destroying classical animism, brought about a basic change in the attitude towards natural objects and opened the way for their rational and unabashed use for human ends.” Lynn White, Cultural Climates and Technical Advance in the Middle Ages, Viator, vol. II, 1971, p. 187-88

Conversely, when man rejects god, he begins to worship nature and society begins a downward trend into nature worship, which affects his ability to use nature wisely. This really appears to be where we are now.  Paul the apostle chronicled this tendency in Romans ch.1 in the New Testament, almost 2000 years ago;

“For although they knew God, they neither glorified him or gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile…Professing to be wise, they became fools…They exchanged the truth of God for a lie, and worshipped and served created things, rather than the Creator…” Romans 1:21-25

Modern progressive man thinks of a million pragmatic reasons why we need to stop building dams, tear down existing dams, stop oil drilling, close down the coal fired plants, refuse to log the old growth,  etc . But occasionally the truth slips out, as it did about 20 years ago here in Ferry County where a local environmentalist leader went on a long earth worshipping rant in the local newspaper of the day, the News Miner. We’ve gone from conservation to environmentalism.  Many people don’t even recognize the true nature of their thinking and would deny any open worship of created things or nature; but their attitudes and thinking have been controlled by the culture they live in and it has shaped their thinking like water currents and temperatures in a river dictate the activities of the fish.

Professing to be wise, we have become fools and our understanding has been darkened. And the fall into nature worship is just one natural result of willfully choosing to forget about God, there are others. We may not be the enlightened era we think we are.

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Atheism: it is a Religion. But is it the nice Religion?

 

Atheism; the Nice Religion?

This is one of the unspoken myths of modern academia, and yet it is probably the most powerful of them all. Though it’s never directly stated, its subliminal presence underlies everything that is taught in government funded schools from pre-school on up through college. It is taught indirectly in many different ways, sometimes by what the curricula teaches but more often by what is omitted from the curricula. And like most secular myths, it is echoed and supported in the media.

For example, in the area of origins science, how the universe came into being from non-living things like the solar system to the wonders of the biological world, only one theory of creation is taught; the naturalistic, materialistic Darwinian tale of a self-creating universe, which evolved out of nothing through random chance and time alone. By teaching this theory, one that almost all of the giants of early science from Kepler to Boyle to Newton would have rejected, and failing to teach the possibility of a supernatural creation and the evidence for it, the students are sent a message.

What is that message? Atheist theories are the best, most acceptable theories in the sciences, so much so that other theories are not even worth discussing. Students are not taught that modern operational science arose only once; in Christian Europe (see ch.4); they are not taught that all the leading scientists in every major field of science were not only theists (mainly Christians) but that almost to a man they gave God and the bible as the reason they pursued science; nor are they taught that Darwin’s theory has been falsified by the fossil record, by its failure to get around the first law of biology, the law of biogenesis; its failure to satisfy the 2nd law of thermal dynamics, (see ch.7) or any of the other mountainous problems that face the followers of Darwin today.

And this is the pattern that it maintains all through the public school system, no matter what the topic. In history, religious people are often presented in the worst possible light, particularly Christians, while pagans, atheists in particular, are presented in the best possible light, usually by the same pattern of withholding pertinent information. Or, if a person is of such stature that they can’t be denigrated and they were undeniably Christian, then their faith is either played down or ignored entirely. For example, every child in the school system knows at least one fact about the Puritans; they killed witches.

They are rarely told that it was the Puritans who first lifted the ban on the Jews in Britain, or started the first democracy in England, one that shed far less blood then the French Revolution, shed almost no civilian blood, and led to the American experiment; or that Puritan England had the largest numbers of scientific breakthroughs in Europe in that time period, more than any other country, or that it was the Puritans from which the idea of freedom of religious conscience first arose.

Nor are they told that it was Samuel Sewall, one of the judges in the Salem witchcraft trial that wrote the first anti-slavery tract published in America and that the early Puritan communities went for decade after decade without any serious crime; no murder, rape, theft, etc… One Harvard anthropologist, well versed in ancient societies, labeled the Puritan era in America as one of the safest and most humane the world has ever known. But it is very unlikely your child will learn any of this in a secular classroom. This is classic revisionism with a clear bias towards the atheist worldview at the expense of any other.

And it does all this while subtly holding back what is probably the most salient fact of all; Atheism is a religion, albeit a non-theistic one.

The secular media mirrors the same approach as it presents its views of history night after night, often in News Specials, like those seen on CNN. The following is an essay on a certain CNN program dealing with religion, and it followed the same subtle yet powerful method of carefully selected material. Both Jews and Muslims are presented largely as religious warriors, warring for God. Thus, once again, the problem is the God people, not the gentle, caring and enlightened atheists.

The Worlds Bloodiest Religion

Atheism; the World’s Most Dangerous Religion

CNN put on a special a few months back, called something like “Gods Warriors” in which some of the religious motivation behind today’s conflict in the Mid-East was explored. And of course there are without a doubt, religious as well as ethnic ingredients fueling the unrest that typically surrounds the tiny nation of Israel. However, the bias of “all problems are caused by religion” or “religious fanatics” was quite evident. This is the attitude or approach one almost always finds in the media or in modern academia, and usually without much balance. But the biggest problem behind these types of shows or textbook presentations is the insidious way in which they are presented.

And I don’t mean just that only the negative side of the religious contribution to mankind is presented, though that would be undoubtedly true. This is particularly so when the religion being discussed involves Judeo-Christianity. But that is a subject which deserves an entire article to begin to do more than just scratch the surface. The real sneaky and insidious part of these discussions usually lies in the fact that at least one religion is always left out of the conversation; Atheism. This is particularly dishonest when the entire program or article is being written from one certain viewpoint, that of secular humanism, or naturalism, which are just nice words for Atheism. Atheism, ahh, the nice religion. The only neutral religion. And it is the only religion which is usually able to hide its religious identity behind the mask of non-religion or religious neutrality.

But is it really the safe religion? And should we allow it to continue to disguise itself in a cloak of secular non-religion in our public schools and media? Despite the howls of protests by its adherents, atheism certainly is a religion, with its own creation story (Darwinism), and belief system. And far from being the nice, safe religion it claims to be, it is rather the bloodiest of all religions, having killed and maimed more people in its short reign of a little more than a hundred years, then all the other major religions can be accused of killing in the last two millennia. And I make that statement even after generously excluding the huge numbers of abortions that have taken place throughout the world in the last fifty years.

Mao is admitted to have killed over 40 million during his brief stay on earth, and we won’t add the numbers of infants killed in the forced abortion policy. Or the number of inmates killed in the body parts industry. Hitler, a very enthusiastic evolutionist, killed over 6 million in his death camps, but how many more could be added to the death list if his entire war effort fueled in a large part by his strident faith is calculated? Pol Pot in Cambodia slaughtered his millions, including large numbers of doctors and other educated people.

And then there is Mother Russia. I remember when it was considered extremely hip to make fun of Ronald Reagan for labeling Russia as the, “Evil Empire”. That was before we had even a vague idea of the vastness of the human, “Gulag”, system, with its thousands of prison labor camps all across Russia. Of course if you were a promising young scientist, you could go to live in one of the many Secret Cities which enjoyed a much higher standard of living. Remember, all people are equal, but some are more equal than others in a society where the individual can be sacrificed for the improvement of the, um, more equal.

Not that those slave labor camps weren’t a real boon to the Soviet economy. Stalin was able to put 100,000 workers with pick and shovels to work building the canal from the White Sea to the Baltic. Unfortunately one third of those workers died in the process, but there were millions more where they came from. In the Kolyma mines, millions of political prisoners were put to work. One third of them were expected to die their first year. The rest died in their second year. It is estimated that Stalin killed between 85,000,000 to 100,000,000 people in less than 30 years. Again, I won’t more than mention the mass graves still being uncovered, the millions of forced abortions, the incredibly dangerous environmental policies which exposed people to high levels of pollutants and worse. The nice religion?

No Magna Charta here, nothing to appeal to which says that even kings and governments are still under God and accountable to His Laws. Only the law of “survival of the fittest”. Can we really afford to allow “secular humanism” to continue to hide its Dorian Gray like face behind the mask of religious neutrality?”

So, no, atheism, which was the religion that Mao and Stalin built their regimes and policy on, is not the nice religion. The Non-religion not only isn’t the best religion; there is no such thing. Man is religious by nature and is a very limited creature in his knowledge. Whatever values he decides to espouse or follow, even if it’s no values at all, they are moral decisions based on what or where he has placed his assumptions. If he decides there is no god, then he does so by faith, just as the person who decides that, in fact, there is a god.

So atheism, though it presents itself as the angel of light, appears historically to be the religion of death, and this is one of the reasons why this powerful myth of Modern Academia is always taught subliminally and never in a straight forward or honest manner. At least not in America yet. That fact alone should reveal its bankruptcy.

Nor is this the only problem with atheism which often travels under the misnomer of secular humanism. It is the biggest bully of all religions and will eventually tolerate no other. Why did Stalin kill so many people and who were they? A large portion of them were the Russian peasants, the very ones the secularists claimed to be fighting for. For one thing, the peasants just weren’t enlightened enough for Stalin and his intellectual cohorts. The peasants weren’t sold on the idea of a materialist universe and were very stubborn about getting rid of their theistic ideas about god. Because of this, and because Stalin wanted their land to start large agricultural collectives, he had them killed or shipped to the Gulag’s, work camps, where they were almost certain to die.

And things haven’t changed. Just as Stalin and his government drove theism out of the schools, the government and everywhere else and replaced it with atheism, so are we doing the same thing in the U.S. Mao did the same thing in China, he said;

“We will substitute materialism for idealism and atheism for theism.” (1)

And you’re probably thinking, yes, but we won’t kill the theists, we just use law suits and legal apparatus to rid ourselves of Christians. Don’t be too sure. Richard Dawkins, probably the most popular science speaker in the US and Europe, often refers to non-atheists as insane or dangerous. And on college campuses he promotes the books of Sam Harris, a popular atheist writer who has openly suggested that people of a certain persistent religious persuasion (theists) may have to be exterminated, for the good of the country. (2)

Ah, yes. Nothing like an open minded, tolerant atheist, eh? The nice religion.

(1) Zedong, Mao, “Examples of Dialectics”, in, Selected works of Mao Zedong. vol. 8

(2) Harris, Sam, The End of Faith, pp. 52-53, Dawkins in a lecture given at Randolph-Macon Women’s College in Lynchburg Virginia, strongly encouraged the faculty and students to read Harris’s books, which include endorsements to kill those who reject atheism. Of course, Dawkins himself has called all non-atheists insane and dangerous and has suggested taking their children away from them. Can you imagine the outcry if a Creation Scientist went around encouraging taking away the children of atheists and/or killing their parents? But Dawkins does it and the press is silent. Along with everyone else.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment

Supreme Court Victories, yes; but the Erosion of Liberty Continues


 The Hobby Lobby decision and the decision on using sidewalks around abortion clinics do represent victories for civil and religious liberties.  But keep in mind, that in every court case we’re winning, we are also losing. We *win” the right as employers not to have to support contraception or abortion, but lines are drawn which reduce that right. Before the healthcare law that right, completely unfettered, already existed, now it has been challenged and boxed in. We won back some freedom to protest the destruction of the unborn, but as Alito and Scalia have noted, other restrictions of freedom have now been drawn with all the strength of the Supreme Court. We used to have laws against blatant displays of homosexual behavior, then they became rarely enforced, then dismissed. But now the government is passing laws forcing people and states to openly support homosexual behavior. Even a victory for the baker will lead to more laws drawn, less neutrality of government, less freedom. But I thought you couldn’t legislate morality? Ultimately you can’t. But you can legislate law after law after law, and continually suppress dissent against the government’s chosen standards of morality and interpretation of rights.

The old saying that too many laws creates outlaws is often true. They can also backfire and actual produce the kind of behavior they are aimed at controlling. More unwanted behavior, the government reacts by passing more laws still, sanctioning, taxing, regulations, interpretations. Interpretations on enforcement, interpretations of interpretations. It can become endless. Every judicial ruling means a loss of individual freedom of conscience to interpret. And if the laws are passed locally, by county or state, you can leave that state for one more conducive to your own conscience. But when the federal government butts in, that freedom is also lost. The areas where an individual can interpret for themselves, according to conscience and without fear of government interference, are shrinking. We may be winning some cases, but we’re still losing freedom.

Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a comment