Ashton Gray’s Revolutionary New Book “Created Equal: The Greatest Lie”

Thursday, 30 November 2017 by

 

Chalet Books & Multimedia is proud to announce that Ashton Gray’s revolutionary new book, Created Equal: The Greatest Lie, is on sale now.  Here is an excerpt from Chapter 4, “The Man Behind the Curtain”:

4. The Man Behind the Curtain
In Whose Image

As a matter of sober fact, the truth outs: Locke was an atheist. Even his condescending “tolerance” for all non-Christian “gods” was itself a form of lip-service, because beneath all the preening piety-of- convenience, Locke was a materialist, and it is patently impossible to be a materialist and also believe that man has a soul or spiritual existence. This is the electrified fence dividing materialism and spirituality (note: I did not say “spiritualism,” about which more later), and it is not possible to straddle that fence. A 1913 definition by Constantin Gutberlet in Volume 10 of The Catholic Encyclopedia has it right:

Materialism is a philosophical system which regards matter as the only reality in the world, which undertakes to explain every event in the universe as resulting from the conditions and activity of matter, and which thus denies the existence of God and the soul.

Many “experts” have come along since that time and tried to slice, dice, divide, subdivide, and sub-subdivide that simple and accurate definition, positing a host of different “brands” of materialism, trying to soft-pedal its anti-God, anti-soul component, but this issue is truly “one side or the other.” Either the spiritual aspect of man’s existence is part of the equation of life, or it isn’t. Period. The perspicacious Will Durant, in his extraordinary work, The Story of Philosophy, demonstrated with impeccable logic how and why Locke was a materialist:

[Locke] announced, quietly, that all our knowledge comes from experience and through our senses—that “there is nothing in the mind except what was first in the senses.” The mind [according to Locke] is at birth a clean sheet, a tabula rasa; and sense-experience writes upon it in a thousand ways, until sensation begets memory and memory begets ideas. All of which seemed to lead to the startling conclusion that since only material things can effect our sense, we know nothing but matter, and must accept a materialistic philosophy.

Sir Isaac Newton—one of the two other men besides Locke who Thomas Jefferson considered to be “the three greatest men that have ever lived”—recognized that Locke was a materialist and an atheist, and actually said so, though it’s been buried and wished away by the disciples of Locke. One of Newton’s biographers, Frank E. Manuel, wastes far too much of his book, A Portrait of Isaac Newton, on pitifully amateurish attempts at long-distance time-travel Freudian analysis of Newton, but does document the fact that Newton accused Locke of being “a Hobbist, which meant a materialist and an atheist.” Manuel claims that Newton said it in the fit of a mental breakdown, but even though Newton apologized after the fact, it likely was among his most lucid and astute observations. (It should be noted that the quarrel between Locke and Newton took place in private correspondence, made public only many years after their deaths, and there is no reason to believe that Thomas Jefferson ever learned of it.)

Locke was the Grand High Wizard of materialism. Locke was an atheist in Christian disguise. Locke’s materialism and its disciples have turned the world and mankind to tar. And it’s tar from there on down. Now, in light of this knowledge, let’s briefly revisit that Lockean tar pit quoted at the beginning of this chapter, the one that Jefferson and friends got their feet stuck in, and peer through his pompous piety to what lies beneath:

The law of nature stands as an eternal rule to all men, legislators as well as others. The rules that they make for other men’s actions, must, as well as their own and other men’s actions, be conformable to the laws of nature, i.e. to the will of God … .

The state of nature has a law of nature to govern it, which obliges every one: and reason, which is that law, teaches all mankind … that being all equal and independent, no one ought to harm another in his life, health, liberty, or possessions: for men being all the workmanship of one omnipotent, and infinitely wise Maker … .

There, revealed, is an awe-inspiring example of the man’s worminess with words. Even the most devious lawyer would have to be impressed. Note that he does not directly say the “law of God,” nor does he anywhere in the piece unequivocally declare that the Judeo-Christian god Yahweh was the “God” with the “will,” or was the “omnipotent, and infinitely wise Maker” behind creating this alleged “law of nature.” His ambiguity has you already knee-deep in the tar—and you’re there whether you are Christian or Wiccan or with the Cult of Kek. Then Locke springs the ultimate trap: he claims that man’s ability to reason—the ability to think and draw conclusions—is the sum and totality of this alleged “law of nature”—which he claims is “the will of God.” Some God.

But wait: in his notes quoted earlier, he declared that “truths wrought in the mind extraordinarily by influence coming immediately from God himself” were “ravings,” and “dangerous madness.” So how, then, could Locke possibly know that “reason” was the “will of God” without it being a “truth wrought” in his own mind “by influence coming immediately from God himself ”? But that would mean that Locke was—well, mad.

And now you’re not only hip-deep in the tar, you’re riding the Lockean Merry-Go-Round to Nowhere in the tar. And it’s sinking. Fast. Just one reason it’s such a deadly trap is that it forces every person reading such madness to guess or conclude subjectively—using his own “reason”—what the “law of nature” or “law of God” is, and what “God” ordained it.

But wait: If we go back to Locke’s “Reasonableness of Christianity,” that would have to mean, inescapably, that Adam had been given this ability to reason by his “infinitely wise Maker.” And when Adam used his reason, he reasoned that the best thing he could do was take a bite from the forbidden fruit. And that condemned us all.

But wait: According to Locke, that “reason” that Adam used is the “law of nature,” which also is “the will of God.” Which can only mean, inescapably, that God intentionally rigged Adam’s ability to reason so he would make the most deadly decision possible. And that, according to Locke, is an “eternal rule” to guide “all men.”

And as you bubble down into the black, sticky, no-escape mire of Lockean lunacy, going round and round and round, your last thought is, “Oh: all men are created equal.” And you drown in the tar of materialism. John Locke was not a Christian. He pretended to be, and he used the language of “God” and the Bible—writing primarily for Christians of every description in his era—the way a carnival barker uses “We have a winna’!”

Be among the first to buy and own this landmark work! Order now for only $4.99 at Amazon.com.

Available as Kindle and  trade paperback; coming soon in other formats to other vendors.

It makes the ultimate Christmas “red pill” for your friends and family!

 

And also order Ashton Gray’s groundbreaking exposé of CIA crimes:

 

 

Watergate: The Hoax is available now
at Amazon, iBooks and 
Barnes & Noble.
Order it today!

Rewrite history with the truth!