Popular Ideas, Flat Earth & Mainstreaming The Unnatural

Public sentiment suggests one thing as 'wrong' one day, and 'right' the next day.

Is popular consensus a way to find out if something truly is right or wrong?

If enough people believe something to be true, does that make it true?

No.

This is the idea of truth by consensus, which explains how such methods fail to find the truth...and is a fallacy.

Here are notable statements from the article:

That there is general agreement upon something does not make it actually true: 

a) people are prone to wishful thinking, can believe an assertion and espouse it as truth in the face of overwhelming evidence and facts to the contrary simply because they wish that things were so

b) people are gullible, and easily misled

c) another unreliable method of determining truth is by determining the majority opinion of a popular vote

Looking at "c", majority consensus is the aim of democracy and the theory of how democracy is supposed to 'work' (the will of the People).

If enough people 'vote' for or against something, it will 'be'.

But where is the truth or the effort in finding, defining and realizing the truth?

It seems appeasement of the majority can arguably be more important than the truth of any matter.

Science has demystified and corrected many erroneous ideas that have long been held as 'true'.

So also has ancient writings, namely the Bible, corrected what certain cultures considered 'true' or 'good' and brought dark or obscured understanding to light.

Case in point is the flat-earth myth of today, having been sadly resurrected from centuries ago.

Ages ago mankind was apt to believe the earth was a flat plane, from limited observation.

One fear was if someone traveled far enough to the edge, they may fall off...this fear likely strengthened the argument since most people never travelled the seas.

Ancient Greek astronomers learned through observation that the earth was in fact not flat, but spherical / round.

This observation was not in opposition to one clear description that predated the philosophy (6th century B.C.) and later the astronomy (3rd century B.C.) of the Greeks by over two centuries:

He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth, and its people are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a canopy, and spreads them out like a tent to live in. 

- Isaiah 40: 22 (8th century B.C.)

A key word in these two sentences is like...and notice where that word is absent in describing something.

Where the Bible was used to argue for a flat earth, the religious people arguing for such a concept (both scientist and cleric) realized they were interpreting certain messages from the Bible too literally, for many messages speak figuratively.

The idea that the earth is flat is making its rounds once again.

This is quite an interesting phenomenon for psychologists, sociologists and others who study the humanities and how gullible, and easily misled people can be (from "b" above).

It is being observed how people latch onto a consensus although the issue was long resolved and clarified.

The current flat earth argument is mostly based on suspicion of the government and pseudoscientific arguments, all easily refuted but not for those are gullible and misinformed.

A few more points about the flat earth myth:

Notice over 500 individuals from at least 38 countries have flown into outer space and observed a spherical earth.

These people circumvented the planet and have eye-witness testimony.

There also exists many hours of footage, live and archived, of the earth from near and far distances.

Sea traveling mariners have circumnavigated the earth for centuries, sailing in one heading and arriving from the opposite.

Unfortunately, when the mind is rife with suspicion, or desires not to accept what has been clearly stated, or there is a psychological break due to abuse or allure, or emotions override reason and rationale, anything can be believed...or denied.

Regarding homosexuality (or what is defined as same sex interactions), ancient civilizations had a form of homosexuality called pederasty.

In ancient Greece, physical relations between an older male and a younger male was a common and socially accepted practice (majority consensus), while some Greeks had dissenting opinions regarding the practice for moral and ethical reasons based on philosophy and natural observation.

By contrast, Roman culture had their particular pederast practices and eventually outlawed pederasty prior to Christianity overcoming and influencing Roman culture.

Before the Christ consciousness consumed Rome, the Romans were decrying homosexual interactions as a moral weakness and there is historical evidence the influence was from the Greek practice of pederasty.

Centuries prior to both Greece and Rome forming their opinions, homosexuality was clearly identified as moral depravity in other ancient cultures; one namely being Israel.

 Do not have sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman; that is detestable. 

- Leviticus 18: 22

Leviticus is cited from the Old Testament's law, and we see the continuation of homosexuality being understood as a sin in the New Testament:

Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 

- 1 Corinthians 6: 9-10

Moral depravity as the foundation of homosexuality can be conditionally based on many factors; societal, economic, psychological, pathological, etc., with no full consensus being realized or agreed upon.

Again, consensus doesn't equal truth.

'Natural' and 'normal' are words argued in favor of homosexuality, while 'unnatural' and 'abnormal' being words addressing same sex interactions as deplorable.

In the modern context, there is evidence that many who identify themselves as 'homosexual' are victims of traumatic abuses as children / adolescents (evidence of pederasty).

Although the U.S. classification of homosexuality was removed from the 'pathology' category in 1973, the basic argument has not been much affected because of popular consensus.

The argument of categorizing any activity as 'psychological', or not, doesn't refute the logic regarding the activities presence, frequency, and biological significance.

Here is where "a" and "c" from above comes into play.

About a generation ago, the first "test tube" baby was born into the world.

She was born outside of the typical, normal, historical manner...which is between a man and a woman.

Although the parents were a man and a woman, a third-party was needed to cause the pregnancy.

Looking at biological significance and how life has always been forwarded into subsequent generations, all people identifying as homosexual (or something beyond heterosexual) and being born prior to 1978 (first test tube baby year), were born from heterosexual parents in the usual way (heterosexual interaction leading to procreation).

The advent of a third-party to cause a pregnancy is how homosexual (and other) procreation is possible, and this falls outside the 'normal', 'typical', 'historical' manner of life.

The psychological argument is difficult and quite broad, while the physiological argument quite succinct.

In short, certain venereal disease is borne from anal sex and promiscuity, besides poor hygiene between monogamous heterosexual couples.

The rise of HIV infection was realized and widespread in homosexuals prior to being forwarded in heterosexual couples.

Physically speaking, the anus muscle cavity is made for releasing excrement, not for receiving any particular object (a penis), as the vagina is.

The vagina's muscle cavity is designed to not only accept a penis, but also to expand to grant birth...and then retract and return to its previous shape.

The muscles in the anus are designed for holding and releasing waste, and can be damaged and made irreparable due to receiving objects (such as a penis).

The vagina has a moment of waste discharge during menstruation, and intercourse is typically avoided due to the unclean nature of the discharge.

In contrast, the anal canal is a continual waste pathway.

Would someone have sex with a sewage canal? If not, why do men place their penises in the anus (of either a man or a woman)?

Logic clarifies the physicality of pederasty and sodomy, yet popular sentiment desires something else and argues for various reasons what logic and natural progression simplifies.

When an argument mentions homosexual activity in nature between certain animals, role playing and dominance can be equated to the human factor found in ancient Greece and Rome, with obscure trends on the battle field in both modern and ancient times.

The 'natural' evidence of the few animal species practicing homosexual activity (usually male-male) is an anomaly and not the broad and normal consensus found in all the animal kingdom, rendering the claim weak and refuted.

The argument to mainstream anomalies for the sake of human rights is the wrong argument, similar to the three misnomers shown on the cover to the story in the image of this blog.

It reads “open hearts and closed minds”, “gay pastor” and “LGBT rift”.

In questioning the orientation of non-heterosexuals, a default assumption seems to be that people's hearts or minds are closed to non-heterosexuals, but this isn't my personal view nor that of many people who love God and love their fellow brothers and sisters.

The aim is to further open the heart and mind on both sides of the argument.

The Word of God, and the Church who follows the Word of God, has always held homosexuality as a sin, unnatural and detestable.

The argument in favor of homosexuality being normal or natural is refuted according to logic and the world's natural order, including the anomalies of same sex between few animal species.

It is very possible for a pastor to be 'gay' regarding their internal struggle with temptation, but not possible for a pastor to be gay if living such a detestable lifestyle...such a lifestyle disqualifies the believer from the kingdom promised.

Perhaps this is the rift, one born in confusion.

One is either obedient to God's law while denying oneself, or being complacent in allowing one's desires to override God's definition of holy.

Church doctrine and church sentiment bending to meet popular and secular sentiment is a further rift, but not with the world's opinions of what is right and wrong, but a rift in obeying the Word of God.

The warning stating “do not be deceived” is thus quite prescient when opinion, popular sentiment and voting according to what the majority calls 'truth' is embraced instead of ancient realities.

Here we see a repeat of the already fulfilled prophetic message, witnessed according to the pattern yet different according to the details:

Because of rebellion, the Lord's people and the daily sacrifice were given over to it. It prospered in everything it did, and truth was thrown to the ground. 

- Daniel 8: 12

As shown in the 'truth as consensus' fallacy, the truth of any matter is usually ignored according to at least three factors...and we see how easily this prophecy in Daniel is repeated (and has been repeated) throughout times.

Thus the natural argument shows a human desire in mainstream anomalies, which is illogical and can be argued as a sign of psychological dysphoria, as it was previous to the 1973 change.

In closing, similar to how a religious fervor desires to argue for a flat earth in the face of overwhelming facts for a spherical earth, there also exists a religious fervor of another sort desiring to argue for the normalizing what has always been found abnormal and detestable in the face of the immoral foundation found in pederasty that leads to homosexual mainstreaming.

Here is controversial, yet transparent video testimony, regarding pederasty's connection to homosexuality that is typically ignored...viewer discretion strongly advised due to imagery and confessional testimony.