The Justice of God: The confluence of lies and murder that marks the arising of the Antichrist should be of no surprise.
The confluence of lies and murder that marks the arising of the Antichrist should be of no surprise.
The Justice of God: The Justice of God: As in the days of Noah: Holy Holy Holy Lord God Pantocrator
Jesus Christ blessed Peter when he made confession of the truth in Christ. That confession is the rock of truth upon which the ekklesia of Christ is founded. (The ekkelsia = those called out from the gates of hell.) Neither the human being Peter nor any supposed claimants on earth to any succession from Peter are the rock. What we are called out from is the "gates of hell." Those who obey and stay out of, who come out from the gates of hell, out of the realm of the ruler (the Devil) of this fallen world system are the faithful to Jesus Christ and are His church who the gates of hell will not prevail against. (The fallen world system = all the infidel religions including magic-astrology-sorcery and divination, Hinduism, Voodoo, Zoroastrianism - Parseeism, Buddhism, Jainism, Bahai, Judaism, Pantheism-Atheism-Communism, Secularism, Vatican II-ism [pretend traditionalism as an excuse to have ANYTHING to do with Vatican II], ecumenism, Christian Zionism --- ad nauseaum.)
All the 6 Anti-"Popes" since 1958 (john xviii, paul vi, john paul i, john paul ii, benedict xvi, and now Francis in bowing to the Satanism of his predecessors in their Novus Ordo) have been - are practicing Satanists. Vatican II is Babylon and has fallen - the faithful are commanded to come out of her and those apostates who don't will share in her plagues and be damned eternally at the end of those plagues.
The command to be separate is a COMMAND from God and it is not optional. To NOT obey that command is to make anyone who does not obey and which they are to blame for not obeying it, trapped by Satan within the gates of hell and they with Satan will be damned by God eternally.
Today, Vatican = Gates of Hell = Babylon
_________________________________________________________________________________
The False Religion of the Antichrist is beneath that:
The Justice of God: Khafir kuffār Althod
Khafir kuffār Althod
Israeli Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger Praises Pope Benedict for Outreach to Jews
Says Relations Between Israel and Vatican 'Best Ever'
 |
| ZioVaticaNazi Benediktos with his Isis (see below - The BROAD way to hell - forever) hat of sorcerers magic |
Parousia of Jesus Christ Our Lord: The BROAD way to hell - forever.
The BROAD way to hell - forever.
Isis, the ancient summation and source of all the mother of harlots and Summerian-Assyro/Babylonian-Indian Buddhas and Bodhisattvas and demons and gods and goddesses. All of which are poured down upon humanity through the demon gate of Buddhism (between Jupiter [Zeus] and Saturn [Satan] in the Solar System) and have their original source in the ancient Summerian primeval sea of Nammu ('Nammu' is the first part of the black magic invocation of the demons and devils behind the idols throughout the Far East, especially in the opening of the demon eye ceremonies).
The ancient bloody worship of Gaia has been revived by the forces of Satan and his Antichrist in order to rule the world for the Devil and the Devil's One World Religion
The ancient bloody worship of Gaia has been revived by the forces of Satan and his Antichrist in order to rule the world for the Devil and the Devil's One World Religion and its murderous genocidal population control policies; Thule is foundational to that ancient One World Religion of Gaia, now revived, and the Thule order is one outgrowth of it and from that and the Nazis came the Ratlines that permeated all of the seats of power of the world for their Diabolic plans of Benediktos and the ZioVaticaNazis. Isis is the major root of Satanic sorcery for Gaia.
Scroll back through each of the links with the Older Post link at bottom right hand of each article.
excerpt
Jesus Christ is the Sole Son of the Father in Whom alone there is Salvation.
St. Athanasius Contra Mundum
Sometimes we may be given to say “I wonder what it was like to live many centuries ago” or “we don’t really know what it was like” and other such things as men are wont to say when musing on things. We needn’t wonder. The Church Fathers give us a very clear account. When we read from St. Athanasius [feastday May 2] in his book Against the Heathen, we see the idolatry and depravity from which Jesus Christ redeemed us from to have no part in. St. Athanasius was the defender of the Church against Arianism, the attempt to return on the part of churchmen to a “reasonable” synthesis with paganism. In other words, apostasy. In fact if one looks at false ecumenism and the world wide return to paganism and moral depravity and the horror of the human sacrifice of abortion (according to Human Life International many abortion providers are training their people to offer the murdered babies to mother goddess Gaia via magic) then we are living in the time that St. Anthony of the Desert [feastday Jan. 17], in 335 A.D. foretold would happen when he thundered into Alexandria and denounced the Arians as the forerunner of the Antichrist. The question at hand is what is our duty to God in resisting heresy and sin?
end of excerpt
The Justice of God: Satan's false prophet - Illuminati cult - assassin, HSBC, Svali and mind control and transnational Satanic Crime
Anyone who tries to obfuscate and ameliorate any of the below, including by defaming those who speak out or saying things such as don't really say anything or take any stance, just be middle of the road with "prudent skepticism" and "vigilance" is a Satanic Criminal same as Benny the Ratz and the Illuminati child Murderers.
_________________________________________________________________________________
The Justice of God: The ancient bloody worship of Gaia has been revived by the forces of Satan and his Antichrist in order to rule the world for the Devil and the Devil's One World Religion
The Justice of God: Khafir kuffār Althod
________________________________________
In Christ alone there is salvation.
excerpt
Jesus Christ is the Sole Son of the Father in Whom alone there is Salvation._________________________________________________________________________
St. Athanasius Contra Mundum
Sometimes we may be given to say “I wonder what it was like to live many centuries ago” or “we don’t really know what it was like” and other such things as men are wont to say when musing on things. We needn’t wonder. The Church Fathers give us a very clear account. When we read from St. Athanasius [feastday May 2] in his book Against the Heathen, we see the idolatry and depravity from which Jesus Christ redeemed us from to have no part in. St. Athanasius was the defender of the Church against Arianism, the attempt to return on the part of churchmen to a “reasonable” synthesis with paganism. In other words, apostasy. In fact if one looks at false ecumenism and the world wide return to paganism and moral depravity and the horror of the human sacrifice of abortion (according to Human Life International many abortion providers are training their people to offer the murdered babies to mother goddess Gaia via magic) then we are living in the time that St. Anthony of the Desert [feastday Jan. 17], in 335 A.D. foretold would happen when he thundered into Alexandria and denounced the Arians as the forerunner of the Antichrist. The question at hand is what is our duty to God in resisting heresy and sin?end of excerpt
It is Human Life International that documented the fact that Abortion Providers are Offering the murdered infants to Satan-Mother Goddess Gaia as "sacrifices" via Witchcraft. Absolutely Satanic Diabolic and hell bound forever.
See: The Justice of God: John Paul II the Great Deceiver and Bishop Brom of San Diego - John Paul II Millstone
The below condemnation and warning includes those who claim to write about the truth and promote an agenda that supports the Christian revelation of Truth, but in actuality are a variety of New Age Pagans, Communists, Atheists, Anti-God Dialectical Jews etc. - for examples of such Diabolic drivel see "Noor" and Hoffman and so called Pinay.
Along with the onslaught against everyone faithful to Christ and the Diabolic drivel used to cover that up is the neighborhood gangstalking against anyone who speaks out out about this and its concomitant transnational multifarious crime shadow cartel and their death threats and attacks. (in the links use the Older Post link at right hand bottom of the articles to scroll back through the articles)
see: Gangstalking
and
ROTHSCHILDS, JESUITS, YAKUZA
click on picture
The Justice of God: Palestine Cry: The 'Nuen Kulturkampf' and the Judas knife in the back.
Vincent P. Miceli, The gods of atheism : religious atheism
WESTERN
Atheism in contemporary Theology
| Vincent P. Miceli, The gods of atheism (Arlington: New Rochelle, NY 1971)We hope to show that atheism's vigor arises from its heroic will to create mythical gods in place of the true God. We hope to prove that its feebleness is demonstrated by its utter inability to cure the contradictory crisis it creates between man whom it would advance in freedom and its own New God whom it cannot restrain from devouring mankind. Thus, this study will maintain that no atheist chooses merely to deny God. For the atheist's spiritual posture against God is at the same time his posture in preference for some other Being above God. As he dismisses the true God he is welcoming his New God. Why must this be so? Because every personal commitment of man presupposes, deep in the metaphysical core of his being, a hunger for being and goodness. ... xiv We have said that it is terrifying to attempt to live without God. Kirilov, one of the many atheists in The devils [or The possessed by Feodor Dostoevsky] testifies to this truth. "To realize that there is no God and not to realize at the same instant that you have become God yourself--is an absurdity, for else you would certainly kill yourself. I cannot understand how an atheist could know that there is no God and not kill himself at once!" xiv-xv The aim of this work is to indicate that the great sin of contemporary atheism is that it consists, through a sustained act of Supreme Self-Will, in a total preoccupation with the human. This atheism induces man to fall down before himself in narcissistic adoration and love. In one form or another, the systems of thought expounded in this work call man to a religious allegiance solely to Man-God. ... It is hoped that this study may lead readers to reject the paths that run to the temples of the strange Gnostic Gods of humanistic atheism. xvi-xvii |
Jesus Christ said to the Jews and all who reject Him:
John 8:44
You are of your father the devil, and the desires of your father you will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and he stood not in the truth; because truth is not in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father thereof.
The Holy Spirit through St. John warns us!:
John 2:22
Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist, who denieth the Father, and the Son.
The Gods of Atheism
Hardcover, 490 pages
Published June 1st 1971 by Crown Pub
Militant Atheism and the Pathetic God Fallacy
Militant Atheism and the Pathetic God Fallacy
Today’s most aggressive atheists, the "New Atheists," boastfully assume that they have basically taken the field against their opponents, by some sort of intellectual D-Day Invasion, by which the future certainty of defeat appears completely inevitable. But, what, upon a more objective examination, is really going on?
A straw man of a "god" gets itself created in the fetid imaginations of mainly middle-aged and aging men who do have developed their own (idiotic) version of a kind of proverbial old wives tales of a just truly contemptible, worthless, pitiable, wretched, debased, laughable, absurd, pathetic deity of no (genuine) consequence. Why is this critically said?
The Lord God Almighty who, in anthropomorphic terms, holds the entire universe and beyond in one tiny corner of one hand, as if it were a mere speck of microscopic dust, is not really the kind of god that these seemingly clever fellows are protesting against or, rather, simply denying the existence of in its entirety. Deniers of the Great Lord of Hosts, to show their toughness and courage, prefer to do shadow boxing with only a fictional, diminutive pygmy of a reductionistic representation of a god, not the Supreme Being of the Old Testament who did mightily smite all the degenerate inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Moreover, true faith as religion is the direct opposite of superstition and does not participate at all in religiosity; this is concerning the highest understanding and comprehension of religious truth concerning specifically what God is or is not, especially in terms of Christianity and, more in particular, Roman Catholicism.
The diminished and deniable deity of convenience (also aided ironically by what gets called process theology) of these militant atheists is not ever justifiably worthy of any worship, much less the wasted intellectual effort to profitlessly deny its so putrid existence. What gets excessively disparaged, often in hyperbolic terms of thoroughgoing deprecation, is a supposed kind of odd divinity that does not at all possess any axiological, epistemological, or ontological significance whatsoever; it is a projected being that has been comprehensively philosophically emptied of what ought to logically be the true attributes, powers, abilities, etc. of a really and suitably genuine, not ersatz, Supreme Being.
Minimalization of Divinity Becomes Obnoxious
Thus, when the irregularly concocted straw man of a (mental-construct) god does not quickly jump up and, presumably, dance on command of these atheists, they jocularly set about scorning and denying its power, its very existence, moreover. They, perhaps, cannot see that such a proposed spirit entity is not worth the intellectual effort expended for developing excessively elaborate refutations for what is said, by them, to not really exist at all.
Claiming that they are righteously energized to morally write up stuff because of the alleged great evil, injustice, corruption, etc. let lose by believers forces them to adopt language of a theological order of exposition, through the making of ethical and/or moral judgments; altruists and humanitarians can exist as such by, e. g., their appropriation, directly or indirectly considered, of religious thinking as to ethics and morality related to human conduct. Furthermore, ethical and moral judgments, as to ultimate reasoning, must be based, premised, upon some sort of philosophical point of view that was, in turn, derivative from theological assumptions or assertions, either directly or indirectly applied.
But, it is pompously claimed, by atheists, that no god really need exist for the proper having of ethical or moral categorical imperatives, while using the language of religion, more or less, to then morally and/or ethically condemn religion. Nonetheless, should it be honestly added, into the mix, that the absurdly proffered kind of “tin god” or deflated divinity, assumed to be the convenient whipping boy/girl/it of the aggressively unbelieving minority, is not worth a bucket of warm spit? Get real here.
What is going on, in a special sense, is the presentation of a kind of magic show, extravagantly put on by the militant atheists, with their amusing and distracting verbal sleight of hand tricks, and vain poses of their being holier-than-thou holders of the high ground of debate. They, ironically, stand in haughty judgment of a (nonexistent) god and, without question, do find he/she/it to be forever found wanting.
All this ribald nonsense, one guesses, is supposed to supremely delight and sagaciously inform advanced intellects suitably inclined to accept, without qualifications, such an inadequate performance by terribly amateur and inept magicians. It is hard, however, to take them seriously. What will be dealt with here, however, is not personal attacks upon such people, whose names will not even be mentioned. The discussion will, instead, concern itself with the epistemological assumptions and fallacies by which an odd conglomeration of contradictory contentions, assumptions, perceptions, and guesswork gets itself transmogrified into supposed sustainable argumentation.
First and foremost, the proposed “god” is circumscribed and dislocated, delimited and displaced, such that it is damned if it does and damned if it does not have the abilities to greatly inspire avid adoration as a Supreme Being of a high order of Being. Elements of the thinking (as certain readers may probably recognize) of G. K. Chesterton, with all its superb irony, and St. Thomas Aquinas, with its indisputable logic, will be called into the debate or discussion as needed.
Consequently, an effeminized and so quite sickly deity or pseudo-divinity, filled with endless love qua universal salvation regardless of how much evil, hatred, perfidy, etc. might be honored by miscreant humans, is thoughtfully postulated, by the atheists, who dare not risk attacking a masculine and healthy Divine Person capable of metaphysical or physical retribution, if grievously offended.
Such a pitiable or pathetic god, meaning the former kind mentioned above, is a rather bad joke in terms of what is supposed to be capable of being known about such a deity, as to then epistemologically valid knowledge. The assumed “god” that gets easily mocked and sarcastically abused as such is yet suitable for bewildered children, crazed feminist militants (who lust for their version of a female divinity), and others who usually prefer, on average, rather unsophisticated and minimalist theological creations, as to their thaumaturgic efforts.
Deists, as is known, have their ghost of a god who may have been involved in Creation (whatever that might have been) but then functionally absconded quickly to leave the mess, the universe, in the hands of temporal creatures who do often—surprise, surprise—think of themselves as being gods.
Going yet one step wildly better, the atheists deny completely any metaphysical order as to its existence and do then assume that the wish can give birth to the thought; but, every cognitive attempt (as an act of will) to metaphysicalize material reality qua materialism (by any euphemism) necessarily results in the reification [Editor's note - that "reification," making 'real' supposedly, by their sophism, of course results in deification of themselves and physical reality; this is only yet another version of the ancient Gnostic heresy] of material order for what can only be correctly understood as metaphysical reality. The physical brain of a man, thus, never reveals the existence of the mind that is totally unseen within all of the gray matter of a brain; yet, it is known that it, the mind, is still there regardless. The complete lack of a visually perceived intellect does not, therefore, meaning axiomatically or otherwise, negate its actual existence, for even empiricism has its limits.
Analogously, the quite laughable inability of an atheist, a limited mortal creature, to perceive the totality of the Lord God Almighty can very well be naturally because Absolute Being, by definition, necessarily surpasses, of course, all of the (mere) universe and beyond it as well. Among others, the truly sagacious Chesterton, therefore, would have easily recognized a quite preposterous solipsism when he saw it.
A number of “presumably” intelligent people are so disproportionately concerned about disproving the nonexistence of nothing in that, e. g., it is being openly said that “god is not great” as an overt rhetorical means of stressing their existential distain, which is absurd. Really now, what is going on here?
As to any needful cognitive reflection upon epistemological certainty, if there is really no order that is, in fact, posited as metaphysical, then how can, by definition, the imperfect intellectual powers of mere mortal creatures apprehend, with requisite supreme certainty, either that assertion or, perhaps, its opposite?
The plain answer is that only atheists, especially the aggressive or militant kinds, are both willingly and winsomely prepared to ever make such massively preposterous quantum leaps, in the rarified realm of advanced epistemology, as if it were as commonly simple as taking a stroll in Piccadilly Circus, according, at least, to Chesterton, and as properly verified by Aquinas. What is actually going on, nonetheless, is not so much an act of intellect as it is rather a bold act of (obstreperous) will, though not supported by systematic and well-founded reason; it is, however, upheld substantially by (petulant) rationalism, the parodying of rational thought, not its confirmation.
What is certainly revealed, upon cogent and intelligent examination, is the pubescent charm of atheism, the false negation of metaphysics, exposed to a candid world. As Ludwig Ott had insightfully contended, “An inculpable and invincible ignorance regarding the existence of God is not possible for a long time in a normal, grown-up person…” And yet, how can this understanding be forcefully demonstrated through sustained argumentation?
Fr. Vincent P. Miceli’s The Gods of Atheism, a brilliant exposition, would appear to be useful reading for exposing the seemingly clever legerdemain going on concerning how rationalism, naturalism, secularism and materialism are just disguised as being merely normal ways of reasoning; but, actually, rationalism, because of its integral devotion to nominalism, inverts reason as in the notably perverse way that Karl Marx had willfully turned the Hegelian dialectic upside down, as has, in fact, often been shown.
Miceli correctly understood, as detailed in his well-argued tome, the four main projections of deities as gods who are presented, by atheism, as adventures of the mind, passions of the heart, myths of the modern mentality, or victims of man.
There are people, however, who were not just simple atheists but, rather, avid antitheists such as were Comte, Feuerbach, Marx, Nietzsche, and Heidegger; as an extension of certain related considerations, furthermore, some commentators contend that thinkers such as Marx, due to their higher intellect, really knew that God exists but preferred, for ideological reasons, to presuppose the counterfactual of atheism; in other words, better minds really do know that it is actually a kind of elaborate intellectual game being played, though lesser intellects can be (easily) fooled, especially militant atheists, of course.
On the other hand, secular humanists or even hard-core materialists do not do without having their own version of a god, be it called Progress, Science, Evolutionism, etc., whatever dramatic form of idolatry may be thought suitable to a supposedly progressive mind that is, actually, atavistic in the final analysis, for the greatest superstition of them all is, therefore, to supinely think that one’s own era is beyond all superstition.
Or, as Miceli, a traditionalist Roman Catholic, rightly phrases the asserted matter, in an expanded context, “the believer In God accepts the vision of science and harmoniously raises it, through free, intellectually creative activity in the science of theology, to the infinite degree of inexhaustible wonderment.”
In contrast, one, thus, correctly sees that “the atheist, terrorized by intellectual insecurity” limits himself deliberately to the new obscurantism of “the space-time-matter horizon.” In the end, one unfortunately perceives, with a forever heightened clarity, that: “Atheism is an idolatry which worships that strange God—absolute Man.”
Miceli, shrewdly, knew that there is always atheism’s “arrogant assumption of divinity and its self-indulgence in egocentric absolutism.” Militant atheism, furthermore, can only successfully exist within a degenerate narcissistic culture dedicated to freely celebrating hedonism, materialism, secularism, rationalism, and what, as Nietzsche knew, must be the logical end destination of it all: Nihilism. With the dis-valuation of divinity does not, therefore, come the too often assumed exaltation of MAN but, rather, the narrowing of the focus of earthly reality toward an intramundane salvation offering the human egalitarian equivalent of a barnyard environment, not the (often promised) New Eden of Utopia; but, what is more urgent to know is that such a matter as Original Sin is factually evidenced, as noted by Ludwig Ott, in the existence of atheism.
So, when all is ultimately said and done, the then tinier and more insignificant the god that the militant atheists, axiomatically, do dismiss from rational(ist) consideration, the more shrunken and meaningless becomes the, thus, fairly ignominious human being not made in the image of the true God. From the greatness of people whose immortal character of their souls can be as mightily tall as their God, there is, on the other hand, the atheist’s nominalist desire to have humanoids revert to being the mere physical (read: materialist) stature, importance, of their ever-shrinking selves.
The egocentric narcissistic humanoid, thus, so fantasized into broad existence, by the aggressive secular humanists qua materialists, becomes as vilely and nauseously pathetic as the pathetic deity that is denied its (then, by definition, meaningless) reality. The purported accurate “knowledge” of such a diminished deity, transmitted by those who axiomatically deny the existence of what they claim cannot exist anyway, creates an epistemological dilemma of vast proportions, though it is not addressed by the militant atheists engaged in their profuse semantic magic.
How can anyone positively affirm, without a doubt, the nonexistence of nothing, the inability of there being any metaphysical order? In other words, by what metaphysical/philosophical knowledge was it obtained, in contradiction, by which a human mind can so deny, with what must be supreme certainty, metaphysical knowledge of a metaphysical order, which is, vigorously, claimed not to be?
Circular Reasoning as Non-Thought Exposed
There is no rational way out of this tautology because the faulty reasoning employed must continually run in circles to try vainly to escape the truth of its cognitive falsity. The atheist must assert knowledge about what cannot be truly known in that such asseverated knowledge is, by definition, logically beyond the assumed capacity of the atheist to actually possess, certainly with any certainty, that is. This conundrum is not, however, ever lessened by the absurd constructing of endless arguments seemingly to convince people about the purported nonexistence of a pointless, meaningless, and senseless god, which, anyway one looks at the matter, does not exist anyway.
Once this is intelligently realized as to the obvious implications and ramifications necessarily involved in such idle speculation, the aggressive atheists qua secular humanists or materials are no longer thought of as assumed mental giants disposing of a false mystery. Tautology set alone is not, repeat, is not any kind of valid argumentation, regardless of any and all added rhetorical flourishes, as the sound and fury signifying nothing.
For atheists, all of their nominalism necessarily reaches just a dead end. First, the modern age qua modernity in thought illegitimately reversed objectivity and subjectivity; postmodernity, as with, e. g., deconstructionism, has gone the step further by denying the existence of both such cited categories, along with any knowledge of anything that used to be called truth. Moved by the (demonic) lusty spirit of everlasting negation, atheists, of course, do fit in well with such a cognitive situation, especially in academia with its various degrees of celebratory nihilism qua mental fornication.
They then quickly become revealed, startlingly, as seemingly unprepossessing minds making what are merely vacuous statements, exposing a tedious reductionism, that metaphysically attempt to deny the metaphysics of any metaphysical order (AKA God). With reductionistic logic, the fundamentally difficult epistemological problem encountered assumes vastly quantum proportions, beyond the propagandistic and rhetorical capacities of the unbelieving affirmer, who looks quite ridiculous; this is, moreover, as a direct result of so pushing the insubstantial assertions of atheism. How might this, however, be easily empirically proven?
Among other (notoriously) famous atheists of the past, Voltaire quite accurately knew just how very insubstantial and inconsequential the entire intellectual position of atheism always is; he, being a true radical-bourgeois intellectual qua Frenchphilosophe, had to go to a Benedictine monastery to read through a good copy of St. Thomas Aquinas’ Summa Theologica to just copy out that saint’s very careful compilation of the presumably “best” arguments assembled in favor of atheism. Exactly, the cognitive ability of this 13th century religious teacher, scholar, and author fully surpassed all of the brains of the philosophes of the entire 18thcentury, which ought to be regarded, at a minimum, as highly significant concerning the true power of reason, as so markedly possessed by a saint of the Roman Catholic Church.
Notably but not unexpectedly, Voltaire, of course, never ever bothered to, also, copy down the quite effective and knowledgeably solid refutations of all those arguments for atheism. He knew better than to rely upon his or any other committed atheist’s meager and limited mental capacity. But, of course, the direct opposite can certainly occur.
In the early 21st century, no less a personage than Anthony Flew, a once prominent nonbeliever, felt intellectually and ethically compelled to finally admit that he was, in fact, totally wrong; there is definitely, he confessed, a God as is so indicatively based upon, e. g., the latest scientific findings in advanced physics, chemistry, etc. of the great realities involved with the immense universe. All his former (supposedly) impressive efforts at philosophical prestidigitation came to naught.
On the other hand, the highest epistemological problem is that of attaining what would need to be, in fact, perfect knowledge on the part of, by definition, imperfect creatures qua human beings who cannot have the requisite perfection of knowledge short of becoming godlike; this to-be-wanted perfection of knowledge would as such totally guarantee that it would be definitely known as to whether or not there was any reality to the metaphysical order, as to its presumed nonexistence; otherwise, it is often too logically difficult to prove a negative, though atheists assume it every time they supposedly pontificate, knowingly, about what they do insist cannot exist; in the categorical absence of mortal persons being gods, there is, thence, no actual godlike knowledge to be obtainable, within such a temporal context of cognizance qua knowledge.
As Aquinas had correctly pointed out, many centuries ago, even any human knowledge of God is only, at best, analogical, not direct in nature, because only God, by definition, can, thus, really understand the Supreme, Absolute or Divine Being Himself. Therefore, atheists, as committed hyper-nominalists, are forever caught in a perpetual epistemological contradiction by claiming it, the actual knowledge, both ways in contradiction at the same time and condition as per asserted knowledge. Why is this true?
Absolute denial of metaphysical order commands that a (superior) metaphysics is intimately possessed that subsumes, moreover, all total cognizance pertaining to having knowledge that surpasses what is denied; but, the last time that anyone noticed, as Chesterton would have agreed, not even George Bernard Shaw (a once past celebrated nonbeliever) had manifested his divinity enough to demonstrate any positive admission of divine afflatus; nor, among other missing (but necessary) attributes, had Shaw ever, e. g., levitated, in public, in any of the quaint streets of London.
In short, any such true epistemological capacity so claimed, at an extremely exalted level of supreme knowledge, would then absolutely entail having other wondrous capacities and stupendous capabilities of a manifestly extraordinary or quite astonishing nature. However, neither situation of a metaphysical epistemology nor an epistemological metaphysics can, adequately, make up for the lack of possessing divine knowledge. To really know definitively, meaning without any rational question whatsoever, that there is, in fact, no God would, in noetic translation, positively require a superior level of truly absolute knowledge; this would, in turn, have to then incredibly encompass a universal cognizance of all levels of possible means of greatly knowing, of astounding omniscience, hitherto denied to all mere mortals.
Conclusion
When (deified) Man is no longer seen reified as (a terrene) God, then (the true) God can be God. And, basic knowledge about the reality and existence of a Supreme Being always ultimately explodes the absurd straw-man divinity put together, haphazardly and childishly, by many severely inferior intellects reaching well beyond their limited capacities and capabilities.
Under the amassed weight of what can epistemologically be known about the key attributes of the Lord God Almighty, the atheist’s attempted pathetic god fallacy of a pseudo-epistemological rendition of such defective quasi-theological nonsense, supposed to be substantial enough for purposes of combative argumentation, fails yet miserably, upon examination, to sufficiently or substantially sustain any rational credibility. To wit, it is the case that what gets vociferously denounced and throw out the front door ends up being surreptitiously smuggled through the back door; thus, the (inverted) religion of atheist humanism seeks to become some sort of perverse substitute faith offered to the world at large, though, in fact, relatively too few people are ever easily attracted to or, moreover, warmly persuaded by this terrene religion.
As Fr. Miceli makes sustainably clear, moreover, in his The Gods of Atheism, the nature of unbelief is truly unsustainable and untenable as to cognitive recognition that metaphysics (of whatever nature, diminished or otherwise) actually presupposes a true metaphysical order that mere human beings qua atheists do baselessly deny at their intellectual and, ultimately, spiritual peril.
Contrary to what the belligerent unbelievers may wish to believe, the true God as God is, therefore, not an inconsequential, negligible proposition qua supposition just conjured up by some oddly effete mental midgets.
Athanasius contra mundum!
Bibliography
St Thomas Aquinas, Compendium Theologiae.
St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologica.
Christopher Dawson, Religion and Culture, 1947.
Christopher Dawson, Religion and the Rise of Western Culture, 1950.
Fr. Vincent P. Miceli, The Gods of Atheism, 1971.
Ludwig Ott, Fundamentals of Catholic Dogma, 1952.
This Hub was last updated on April 13, 2010
Gods of Atheism by Fr. Vincent P Miceli
Gods of Atheism
by Fr. Vincent P Miceli Foreword by John Cardinal Wright
Code: 091214100X
On backorder
"One of the truly outstanding books of our time."-The Wanderer "As complete a study of atheism as exists in any language."-Archbishop Fulton J. Sheen "An invaluable guide to the theological climate of the hour, so baffling to the average Christian. It sets our neo-modernism firmly in its historical context; it reveals the influence of past systems. It disabuses us of the notion that right now we have some dispensation of the Holy Spirit. And Miceli's critical faculties come into full play, establishing him as a considerable defender of orthodoxy." -Christian Order "Remarkable....the Miceli style clearly comes into its own in this major study." -Frederick Wilhelmsen, Triumph "A work in the great tradition of Catholic intellectual life. By providing such a studied and readable analysis...Miceli has given us a valuable tool in the ongoing conversation with the non-believer." -(Bishop) Donald Wuerl, Catholic Currents, 1971 "Shows why atheism today does not and cannot leave in peace those who are not atheists..Explains with dreadful eloquence the causes of modern atheism and the inflamed wound it has left upon the worldƒExplains difficult writers lucidly and makes only too clear the doom that threatens if their ideas win final victory." -Paul Hallet, National Catholic Register "Fr. Miceli is the type of priest we need so much in this crisis of the Church. He is equipped with the intellectual weapons that enable him to be a defensor fidei. And he provides clear answers to this threat, which has even infiltrated the Church!" -Dietrich von Hildebrand Over 40,000 copies sold
Code: 091214100X
On backorder
For eschatology and scriptural teaching on prophecy and the Book of the Revelation go here: The Apocalypse, the Book of the Revelation
This is extracted here for its salient comments on the Devil's incursion into philosophy and the resultant Satanic false light of the Illuminati.
ILLUMINATI PHILOSOPHERS AND PHILOSOPHIES FROM 16TH CENTURY TO TODAY. | Prophecy In The Making.
As you read the following excerpt from the book, 'The Indivisible Light,' keep in mind how the Illuminati have used the philosophies of these well known western philosophers to promote their anti Christian agenda.
Also, keep in mind how all that is happening now in the middle east, with the so called 'Arab Spring,' is the same formula these Illuminati agents have used since the 16th Century! It's the same formula, just a different time in history.
Godliness builds an intelligent moral order in society. Satan desires to tear down this order and its authoritative governing structures because they support godliness in disciplining fallible human nature by setting up as standards of conduct the guides of right reason, thus opposing the chaos of rule by the standards of passion, expediency, popular opinion, etc. In order to tempt godly society to tear down its own righteous order, Satan’s agents, who were incapable of doing so great a feat themselves, brewed a popular philosophy of revolution that would justify and even impel men to tear down their own house. This evil philosophy’s slogans challenged the basic principles supporting the rational and godly order of society, which God had helped Christian people establish through much sacrifice and labor.
The revolutionary philosophy of hell designed to appeal to the rebellious nature of man’s pride in himself and aversion to God’s rule revolved around words like "liberty" and "equality." It asserted that everyone is "destined," by the god-hunger in them to be "free from the rule of others" and "equal to all others", therefore, there can be no ruling government, other than the temporary "government" of Anarchy, which destroys "the rule of others" with the rule of others, the elite revolutionary zealots who are licensed by ideology to destroy in the name of "Freedom." These unqualified "democratic" principles of liberty and equality lead to chaos, moral and civil disintegration, even the disintegration of the mind. But this end result, total destruction (Hell), is never put forward by the enemy, only utopian promises of a better world, advanced civilization, the solution of age-old problems, nirvana, peace, etc. They propose a transfer of power from the few to the many. They propose what will accomplish the destruction of the existing order, whether that be a monarchy, oligarchy, dictatorship, republic, or democracy. When that order is destroyed, they are soon proposing the destruction of that order which took its place, until the principle of chaos or disorder is enshrined in the death of all order, the negation of all evidence of intelligent life, that is, the reign of Satan, which is death and Hell.
The French Revolution celebrated the destruction of monarchy, in order to replace it with an oligarchy of powerful men who were replaced by a popular dictator, who was ruled by their secret government. Many years later, after having acquired near complete control of the medias of information and education, constitutional republics or so-called "democracies" could be controlled by the enemy effectively. Successively, rule appears to go into the hands of common, uneducated or miseducated men, but the reality is that they must actually depend on someone to tell them what their choices are, and these are the real, yet hidden, rulers. These uneducated or, better yet, poorly educated masses are more or less easily led by the manipulators of popular opinion. And who would dare revolt against the apparent majority of their fellow men. The most absolute dictatorship is the dictatorship of the proletariat, the common working man. Speak for him or pretend to speak for all such men, and you will have an insurmountable mandate.
When universal education became mandatory by law in the 20th century and fell, of course, into the hands of the State, the full education of men in the ungodly and anti-traditional principles could begin. Then Christian society could be thoroughly denigrated and misshapen with all manner of error, until the very idea of God’s rule over man could be erased from the minds of a whole generation.
[keep in mind who it was that took charge in the early 19th century of all school book publishing. The Rockerfellers, and the Rothchild families!]
The revolutionary philosophy of hell designed to appeal to the rebellious nature of man’s pride in himself and aversion to God’s rule revolved around words like "liberty" and "equality." It asserted that everyone is "destined," by the god-hunger in them to be "free from the rule of others" and "equal to all others", therefore, there can be no ruling government, other than the temporary "government" of Anarchy, which destroys "the rule of others" with the rule of others, the elite revolutionary zealots who are licensed by ideology to destroy in the name of "Freedom." These unqualified "democratic" principles of liberty and equality lead to chaos, moral and civil disintegration, even the disintegration of the mind. But this end result, total destruction (Hell), is never put forward by the enemy, only utopian promises of a better world, advanced civilization, the solution of age-old problems, nirvana, peace, etc. They propose a transfer of power from the few to the many. They propose what will accomplish the destruction of the existing order, whether that be a monarchy, oligarchy, dictatorship, republic, or democracy. When that order is destroyed, they are soon proposing the destruction of that order which took its place, until the principle of chaos or disorder is enshrined in the death of all order, the negation of all evidence of intelligent life, that is, the reign of Satan, which is death and Hell.
The French Revolution celebrated the destruction of monarchy, in order to replace it with an oligarchy of powerful men who were replaced by a popular dictator, who was ruled by their secret government. Many years later, after having acquired near complete control of the medias of information and education, constitutional republics or so-called "democracies" could be controlled by the enemy effectively. Successively, rule appears to go into the hands of common, uneducated or miseducated men, but the reality is that they must actually depend on someone to tell them what their choices are, and these are the real, yet hidden, rulers. These uneducated or, better yet, poorly educated masses are more or less easily led by the manipulators of popular opinion. And who would dare revolt against the apparent majority of their fellow men. The most absolute dictatorship is the dictatorship of the proletariat, the common working man. Speak for him or pretend to speak for all such men, and you will have an insurmountable mandate.
When universal education became mandatory by law in the 20th century and fell, of course, into the hands of the State, the full education of men in the ungodly and anti-traditional principles could begin. Then Christian society could be thoroughly denigrated and misshapen with all manner of error, until the very idea of God’s rule over man could be erased from the minds of a whole generation.
[keep in mind who it was that took charge in the early 19th century of all school book publishing. The Rockerfellers, and the Rothchild families!]
Suffering the effects of evil in this battle is absolutely necessary for the discipline of weakened human nature, Son, which, if not scourged, will sink into sloth and be ruled by the lower world and die in the eternal misery of sin’s alienation from God.
Now let us look at a history of modern philosophy to see how the most basic thinking of mankind, which is the subject of philosophy, was slowly but radically disrupted and rendered absurd. The evil control achieved over mankind could not have taken place without the perversion of basic ideas upon which our whole viewpoint depends. In the perversion of the philosophical sciences of ontology (the study of being) and epistemology (the study of knowledge) we see the "inspiration" of Satan.
The corruption of Philosophy, "Queen of Sciences", by the enemy began with the nominalism of certain medieval philosophers, like William of Occam, arguing against the moderate realism taught by the Church, especially through St. Thomas Aquinas, who built upon the metaphysics of Aristotle.
The St. Thomas' teaching tells us that "Realism is a doctrine that universals exist outside the mind and that an abstract term names an independent and unitary reality." What could be more natural? But nominalism is "a theory that there are no universal essences in reality and that the mind can frame no single concept or image corresponding to any universal or general term."
Now let us look at a history of modern philosophy to see how the most basic thinking of mankind, which is the subject of philosophy, was slowly but radically disrupted and rendered absurd. The evil control achieved over mankind could not have taken place without the perversion of basic ideas upon which our whole viewpoint depends. In the perversion of the philosophical sciences of ontology (the study of being) and epistemology (the study of knowledge) we see the "inspiration" of Satan.
The corruption of Philosophy, "Queen of Sciences", by the enemy began with the nominalism of certain medieval philosophers, like William of Occam, arguing against the moderate realism taught by the Church, especially through St. Thomas Aquinas, who built upon the metaphysics of Aristotle.
The St. Thomas' teaching tells us that "Realism is a doctrine that universals exist outside the mind and that an abstract term names an independent and unitary reality." What could be more natural? But nominalism is "a theory that there are no universal essences in reality and that the mind can frame no single concept or image corresponding to any universal or general term."
[Since most of the populations are taught through the universal 'free education' system the Illuminati set up in the west, most people do not seek to read books or other texts that preceded the Illuminati educational texts. Since this is the case, most people only read for entertainment purposes. Hence the Illuminati have to teach these philosophical principles through, from these philosophers of the past, through Hollywood movies. One of the most relevant movies that promotes these false philosophies of nominalism are the 'Matrix' movies. If you study these Matrix movies closely, you will see this is the message the Illuminati dissiminate through these blockbuster hits.]
If our mind cannot truly grasp the essential nature of real things, namely universals/absolutes, we cannot truly know anything real. The Church teaches that we can truly know reality, and, by that fact, we are made to be responsible for our actions in correspondence with the truth, which is defined as that which is (reality) in the understanding."
Nominalism claims that our knowledge is just made up of arbitrary terms chosen to represent what we think, and those terms don’t represent a real understanding of reality?
Nominalism never gives answers, it just destroys the truth, leaving the mind free to get lost.
Much later Emmanuel Kant picked up the inference of nominalism and fashioned the theory of idealism, which supposes … "that "the essential nature of reality lies in our consciousness, in the mind or reason," not in the real world outside the mind! Now it’s not only that we cannot know reality, but that it isn’t even out there; "it" is just subjective ideas in our mind. Consider the implications here: If man’s mind is now empowered with the creation of the only reality "knowable," man is one step closer to appearing as God-like. He is not only liberated from God by this notion but also from the reality God made, and principally, the reality of his own created nature as man. This leads to complete amorality and immorality. And, Kant has led us to agnosticism, because we can't know God, only our own arbitrary mental constructs. But this describes the insane mind. [this is where society is today! the lunatics are in charge of the Asylum!!!]
The progression of error from nominalism through rationalism to idealism prepares the stage for atheistic/secular Humanism. For if reality is either a figment of the human mind or only something relevant to that mind, then the individual Mind is what we had formerly called God, and if man is God, there is no God, because the fact is, man is not God. [this is what the Matrix movies teach!]
He doesn't have the attributes or powers that the commonly accepted definition of God contains. So the concept of God is dead, is without meaning, since there is no real reference for it.
The 18th Century Enlightenment popularized the arguments that would lead to dispensing with God. The mass distribution of works by cynical utopians like Voltaire and Rousseau helped accomplish this. The French Revolution was the political result of the Enlightenment – two deliberately coordinated events. And the next step of the World Revolutionary Movement would be the Russian Revolution, and its philosophical accompaniment would be various atheists.
Voltaire specialized in defining the non-churched believer in God who has graduated from organized religion by rejecting the sects of all religions.
When the Spirit of God is taken out of human thinking, that thinking disintegrates progressively like any material substance abandoned by the principle of life, the soul. The philosophical trend we are illustrating,is nothing more or less than a description of the decay of rationality itself.
Let us continue our little history of philosophy. Although not an atheist like his student Fuererbach, the "intellectual forerunner of Communism, atheism and religious modernism is a German professor named Hegel, a Rationalist. In noting that human reason apprehends universal absolutes and the attributes of god, he raised Reason to being these absolutes and attributes. What does this make man to be but a god himself. Let me read from the 'Gods of Atheism' by Fr. Miceli.
"Now Hegel, the progenitor of a famous brood that split into two factions at war with each other, was far from being an atheist himself. Nevertheless, he set the stage for the assault upon god. It was generally agreed that God was the object of both philosophy and theology; of the former by the light of reason, of the latter by the light of revelation. But Hegel questioned whether the philosophers or the theologians had succeeded in attaining the real God. He protested that the God of Christian experience was an inadequate, a premature, not-yet-developed God. Hegel set himself the task of completing the good news of the Gospels; he would go beyond Christianity by demonstrating that the only valid God was dialectically evolving Thought or Spirit Which gradually, inevitably attains and reveals Itself in conceptual clarity and complete self-consciousness through the entire scope of cosmic and human history. Hegel set himself the mission of rescuing the God of Christianity from the vagueness of imagery, the symbolism of myths, the simplistic charm of parables.
Moreover, Hegel had a bill of particulars against the Christian God. The trouble with the Christian God is that He is only experienced and remembered when the human conscience is sick or in trouble. But this Jewish-Christian god, Who is unapproachable and inscrutable in His aloof transcendence and unattainable by the imagination, mind or heart of men, arouses in man resentment against the only choice he is offered by this mysterious God – obedience or revolt. Frustrated by the demoralizing experience of failing futilely to satisfy his hunger for communion with the transcendent god, humbled by the degrading knowledge of his abject powerlessness, man resents the situation that equates God’s glorification with his own depreciation. The transcendent God of the Old and New Testament thus succeeds in enslaving and alienating His worshippers. He sets before them the face-to-face eternal embrace of Himself as a goal that is actually beyond man’s personal achievement. Yet He continually tortures man’s metaphysical hunger as if this human aspiration for complete communion were actually attainable.
… All modern atheism will thus be seen to be rooted in Hegel’s rejection of the God of the master-slave relationship, the God who begets an "unhappy conscience" in man, the God who reduces man from being a hero to being a "beautiful soul."
Freuerbach saw the inevitable outcome of Hegel’s reduction of God from the God of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and Jesus to the God of the philosophers and scientists. He saw that the God of the fifth Gospel – the gospel of reason according to Hegel – was merely a man-made God, sprung full-blown from the Hegelian head. Taking his inspiration, however, from Hegel’s work as a beginning which was going in the right direction, Feuerbach set himself to account psychologically for the illusion of all religion. He realized that Hegel had already demolished God without even suspecting his own great accomplishment. Feuerbach successfully drew the logical conclusions of Hegel’s work in his book The Essence of Christianity. In an heroic manner he continued the process of all theology to anthropology.
… In his Essence of Religion, Feuerbach reached a similar conclusion in his field of endeavor, proclaiming that God is merely a myth which embodies the highest aspirations of the human consciousness. "Those who have no desires," he wrote, "have no Gods … Gods are men’s wishes in corporeal form."
… Feuerbach was acclaimed for having swept the heavens clean of the phantom of God, exorcised this sacred sorcerer from the consciousness of his age, broken forever this theological tyrant’s fatalistic, master-slave domination of men, restored divinity to its rightful owner – liberated Humanity – and rendered the thousands of years’ discussions about God henceforth pointless." [This is what Stephen Hawkings is attempting to do today through his false teachings.]
Thus atheistic humanism was born. Man was offered a new heart and mind, a new hope in Himself. Satan could obviously work great evils with men who accepted such conceits. He could more completely possess them. And so it has happened, the inhuman face of Satan has become more and more visible in the actions of men given into his service. Now we do not just have pretended reformers of the Christian Church and its society, we have those who totally discount Christianity and religion in order to achieve man’s "New Consciousness," which is that "God" is a mere notion, that is, "God" is dead.
They (the Illuminati) both create the problem and provide their chosen solution, through the Hegelian Dialectic.
The only change intended in the Protestant, French and Russian Revolutions was to pass the reins of power into the hands of the Revolutionary Party. Destroy the old order and keep it destroyed. Take over capital and the means of production, and retain it. But use as your excuse this sob story about the poor proletariat rising up to take what is theirs by the supposed right of all to have Equality. Sheer subterfuge! Manipulate the masses to destroy the good order they had; then enslave them in a totalitarian State, which, like Rousseau’s "common will," has the right to control all men in the name of their (dictated) "common good." Naked power Play! Thinly disguised by pure hype. The common man never believed this bologna, but he was told the common man believed it, and those who took over his government pretended to do it on the basis of this mandate. All "classes" and all individuals suffered the consequences of Communist takeovers in the 20th Century, but the same hype about the people claiming their rights was maintained for public relations purposes.
The Communist Revolution in 1917 and the subsequent buildup of Russia as an atheistic slave-state importing revolution to every corner of the globe was the work of the conspirators’ secret governments in the USA, Britain, Germany and elsewhere. All was financed by Zionist bankers milking U.S. taxpayers, through unconstitutional legislation and traitorous agents in our government. Yes, we financed Communist Russia and all its revolutions throughout the world from the very beginning.
The traitors in the Vatican at the 1958 Conclave and Vatican II have fully implemented this, which is the Great Apostasy; the faithful are commanded to come out and have NOTHING to do with this upon pain of eternal damnation by God into the lake of fire forever. Traditional Catholic Prayers: The Justice of God: Parousia of Jesus Christ Our Lord
No comments:
Post a Comment