Here we finish up dissecting Rev. Chris Gordon’s offerings on the reason why the Christian Nationalism/postmillennialism project as failed.  Keep in mind, as I said in part I that the failure of CN/post-mil is very convenient for Gordon and the militant R2K/Amil guys because if were to be the case that CN/post-mill were not true then God would be found to be a liar and more importantly the field would be clear for the militant R2K/Amil guys to continue with their defeatist, sentimentalist, and pietistic surrender theology.

One point to clarify. Someone wrote me and asked how I could conjoin the words “militant” and “R2K Amillennialism” since R2K amillennialism is characterized by their call to not contend for the faith once delivered to the saints. The militancy of the R2K Amillennialism movement is found in the one place that they are resolved to man the ramparts and fight to the death and that one place they are tenaciously and militantly fighting is against all forms of optimistic eschatology. The one thing that will put spine in the R2K surrender monkeys — the one thing that will make them see red — is the presence of optimistic theology anywhere near them. It is their fight against CN/postmillennialism wherein one finds their militancy.

Now on to polishing off Gordon’s “reasoning,” as to why the CN/postmil movement has failed;

CG writes,

4. The current movement is too driven by big name personalities that shape tribal identities. 

Bret responds,

Does Chris here mean names like D. G. Hart, David Van Drunen, R. Scott Clark, Michael Horton, and J. V. Fesko? Ooops… never mind … I got my “current movements as driven by big name personalities” mixed up.

Look, all people have those they look up to and respect and admire. Personally, I learned decades ago that it is best that these people should be the sainted dead and not those still drawing breath since those still living will consistently fall off their pedestals. However, I am not going to over-fault people for having leaders for whom would go to the wall. If anything we need more men to admire, even if that means we have to deal with the problem of tribal identities.

Having said all that, I hate to admit it, but I think Gordon is on to something here. We have too often devolved into arguing about “who’s right,” instead of which expression of CN/post-mill is most consistent with Scripture. Having conceded that though, R2K militants like CG need to realize that there are very real differences between many of these camps that inevitably are going to need hashed out and in that process disagreements are going to rise. I mean, when your messages is just “surrender” such as if found in Gordon’s R2K/militant Amil camp it is easy for the followers of all the various personalities to find sweet concord.

But Chris should be able to sleep better at night knowing that not all of us have pushed our chips in on any one of the individuals in the CN/post-mill camp. There are those of us who are CN/Post-mills who are definitely not groupies.

When it comes to Gordon’s issue of fighting, well, let’s just quote another fighter, J. Gresham Machen;

“The type of religion which rejoices in the pious sound of traditional phrases, regardless of their meanings, or shrinks from “controversial” matters, will never stand amid the shocks of life. In the sphere of religion, as in other spheres, the things about which men are agreed are apt to be the things that are least worth holding; the really important things are the things about which men will fight.”

CG writes,

5. The current movement hasn’t shown us what it means to love our enemy and take the gospel to them in concern for their salvation.

Bret responds,

This is just libel. Pure unadulterated slander.

1.) I may have my disagreements with any number of CN/post-mill types but to suggest that the movement has a whole hasn’t taken the gospel to the enemies of the cross is just balderdash.  Wilson, Wolfe, Isker, Conn, and the Heritage Theonomists may disagree among themselves on important matters but they all stand shoulder to shoulder loving their enemy and having a concern for their enemy’s salvation.

2.) I suspect the problem here is the definition of “love.” When I see Christians protesting an abortion clinic I see them loving their enemies. When i see Christians pointing out the Cultural Marxism found in any number of pulpits I see them loving their enemies. When I spend my time overturning the idiocy that is R2K I am loving my enemies and the enemies of the exhaustive Lordship of Jesus Christ. However, I suspect that for CG loving one’s enemies only means something like working in a soup kitchen, or taking a mission trip to Haiti to dig a well or build a school. Those things need to be done but they do not delimit the definition of “loving one’s enemies,” or “taking salvation” to them.

3.) CG falls into the error of thinking that just as Christ came to die for the sins of the world, his followers are likewise called to die for the sins of the world. It is true that the Lord Christ had no aim to become a political hero but then that wasn’t His mission. To suggest that somehow politics should not be redeemed for God’s glory because Jesus didn’t try to become a political hero is a category mistake of monumental consequence. Jesus didn’t become a husband and father Chris. Does that mean we shouldn’t become a husband and father either so as to follow Jesus?

4.) Finally,  CG’s protestations to the contrary  it can be biblically supported that Christians are to have political power. Why is it that the R2K types automatically assume that Christianity can never exercise power consistent with the authority of their great High King? The biblical support for Christians having political power is the promised success of the missionary effort. Once the nations are evangelized then obviously that evangelized nation is going to rule consistent with the Word of God.

But you see here, this is where the rub comes in. R2K/amil types do not believe that the Holy Spirit will be successful in converting the nations before Christ’s return and therefore balk strongly at the notion of Christian wielding political power.

5.) With this complaint by CG there is a good deal of Jesus Juking going on. By that I mean there is an appeal to emotion in order to try and guilt people into realizing their lack of the requisite sentimentalism and piety in order shame people into agreeing with them. No Jesus Juking allowed on Iron Ink.

CG writes,

6. The current movement has focused our hearts on saving the earthly city, which is promised to be burned (2 Pet. 3).

Bret Responds,

More Jesus Juking. Readers are supposed to feel guilty because our hearts are not focused on the things that the phony Jesus of R2K is focused on.

1.) One pauses to wonder if Christians are not to be about saving the earthly city via evangelism and extending the crown rights of Jesus Christ into every area of life, while at the same time realizing that in this world we have no continuing city then what is the alternative? It seems that the only alternative for R2K is that Christians should focus their hearts on destroying the earthly city. Wait … I guess Christians could also be neutral. But “no”, we all know that neutrality is impossible.

2.) One has to realize that in this whole critique that Gordon offers, Gordon is operating according to his own assumptions of what Christianity is and isn’t. But that’s just the point between R2K/Amil and the CN/Post-mil contest. You see Chris we don’t share your assumptions about what Christianity is and is not and therefore your critiques are so much fiddle faddle. It’s just your opinion Bro. And not a very good one at that.

3.) Our Puritan ancestors certainly were able to focus on the “earthly city” while also keeping an eye toward the heavenly. I don’t know why the R2K crowd feels these are mutually exclusive;

CG writes,

7. The current movement has made us unprepared for the second coming, as it advances that Jesus cannot return until all the nations are all Christianized.

Bret responds,

It is the teaching of Scripture that Jesus does not return until all His enemies are placed under His feet. Any complaint here CG needs to take up with God’s Revelation.

Jesus taught that only the Father knows the day and hour of His return but until then we are to occupy till He comes. Can R2K really argue that they are busy about “occupying till He comes?”

Quite to the contrary of Gordon’s accusation I think it is R2K/militant A-mil that disorients believers and robs them of their hope.  R2K disorients believers by suggesting that there are some areas where Christ does not explicitly rule. It disorients believers by suggesting that, in the words of John MacArthur, “we lose down here.” It disorients believers by muting pulpits from speaking a “thus saith the Lord,” in economics, education, rearing of children, etc. etc. etc. R2K is fire insurance salvation complete with sweet sickly pietism.

R2K robs of Christians of the hope of seeing their magnificent and full of splendor King being glorified in every area of life. The only hope that R2K holds out to the Christian is their death. R2K offers no hope of Kingdom building for the glory of Christ. R2K robs the Christian the hope of a muscular Christianity that makes the influence of Christ known in every area of life.

As I have said countless times in the past, R2K is a different Christianity then the Christianity that one finds between the pages of Holy Writ and a different Christianity then the Christianity found in Reformed Church History.

I sincerely hope, with all my being, that Chris Gordon keeps writing this kind of material because with each article written R2K is exposed for the fraud Christianity it is. I hope with all my might that Chris continues to interview the CN/post-mill types on his ABG podcast because with each interview he is having his R2K head handed to him. The more he talks the more R2K is discredited.

And I thank God in Christ for that.

Over here;

https://www.agradio.org/blog/the–reformed–version-of-christian-nationalism-is-splintering?fbclid=IwY2xjawFZSq9leHRuA2FlbQIxMAABHY1zysOOA4JuIbDu93vAEIEhyY0vVOwhupaEugd7NWtqpXHIv49iSP4FmQ_aem_v4tAR7HN-H87WRcxRU-FkA

Rev. Chris Gordon insists that both postmillennialism and Christian Nationalism is a spent force if indeed it ever was a force. Keep in mind that Chris is infected with the deadly R2K virus and so is writing this from a militant Amillennial perspective. We certainly can’t expect R2K aficionados to be able to correctly analyze non R2K movements. And this is what we find.

The article is outrageously torpid. I thought about just ignoring it but my rage and rend impulse has gotten the better part of me.

We will fisk some of the article below,

Chris Gordon writes,

I’m not sure if people have been following the recent discussions from the key players in the modern Postmillennial movement (yes, I’m making a distinction), often shared with the more recent Christian Nationalist project, but things are not faring well for the movement. The shelf life seems to be expiring on a movement that has no real direction, cohesion, or plan to bring in the Postmillennial vision outside of social media perceptions of grandeur and in house fighting among Christians which now seems to be aimed at each other.

Bret responds,

1.) Postmillennialism believes it is the Holy Spirit who, having brought in the Kingdom in principle, will progressively bring in the Kingdom in history until the Kingdoms of this world become the Kingdoms of our Lord and His Christ. I note this in order to refute Chris’s silly notion that the postmillennialists themselves have to have a plan in see the flowering of the already present Kingdom. God has a plan, and God’s plan can’t be thwarted. This is true even if the postmillennialist themselves are disorganized. Remember, Chris, God is the one who draws straight lines with crooked postmillennial sticks.

2.) Because God has a plan, there is no shelf life on the movement.

3.) The same observation is true for Christian Nationalism as it is for postmillennialism. Since Christian Nationalism is God’s intent it really doesn’t matter if the project fails as from the human side of things. Since Christian Nationalism is God’s project it will come to pass.  The nations will become Christian. Resistance is futile.

4.) Keep in mind that Chris is R2K and being R2K he can’t help but believe that all this is, by definition, impossible. His R2K worldview will never allow him to see any possibility that the Amillennial pessimistic vision could possibly be in error, and it would be seen to be in error if the postmillennial Christian Nationalist intent was unmistakably and indisputably blossoming.

Chrissy writes, 

James White and Stephen Wolfe are now being characterized as being at war with each other, resulting in Jeff Durbin from Apologia “reneging” on his agreement to speak with Wolfe at the upcoming “Right Response Ministries” conference stating, as the reason, “a lack of godly wisdom and interaction displayed by Stephen Wolfe, among other concerns.” Doug Wilson and Stephen Wolfe argued publicly over the “White Boy Summer” video that appeared to many to promote pro-Nazi sentiments. Wilson expressed criticism; Wolfe called for tolerance. It’s clear there are fundamental differences between the two. As one podcast decried, “We have the theonomist crowd, the Moscow crowd, the Ogden Utah crowd, the Apologia Crowd, the Gab crowd, etc. This is an unnecessary war that we don’t need right now.”

Bret responds,

Imagine, if you can, that you’re living in the 16th century and some Roman Catholic apologist writes a internet article on Abounding Dumbarse Radio that it was clear that the Reformation was going nowhere. He could easily write that “Martin Luther is at war with Ulrich Zwingli.” The Roman Catholic providing analysis could note that Knox was at cross purposes with Calvin on female monarchs. Our Roman Catholic prelate could write about all the different views on the sacraments as expressed by all the different Reformers and conclude as Chris has done, “there is a real struggle going on here for power, and precisely which version, that ‘of the coming  Reformation will rise to supremacy, and which figure will rise to the top. And how again does anyone expect them to create a Reformed Europe if they cannot get along among themselves? The movement is clearly divided within itself. As Jesus expressed, such a divided house will be unable to stand together.'”  Clearly, that analysis would have been grossly inaccurate, just as Gordon’s analysis is grossly inaccurate.

From this point Chris gives his reasons for why he thinks that the postmil Christian Nationalism project is failing

Chris writes,

1. The current movement is, inherently, one that has been created on the internet, within social media platforms. 

Bret responds,

If this were true the CREC would not exist. Now, typically, I am not a fan of the CREC because I think that much of it (not all of it) really isn’t pushing the Overton window hard enough. I think they are compromisers. However, all because that is my conviction that doesn’t mean that they aren’t seen by many to have made real impact beyond “social media platforms.”

Then there is the Ogden, Utah group who are likewise making impact with books and conferences where real people show up to be encouraged with the burgeoning Christian Nationalist post-mill movement.

Even here in little Charlotte, Michigan we have moved beyond internet presence with a real Church community plus being taken so seriously beyond the internet that National organizations in the real world have had to arise in order to denounce this very real threat to them.

So, while the internet may have been instrumental in getting the word out, it is not the case that this movement has remained an internet movement.

Chrissy writes,

The current movement has no unified vision.

Bret responds,

I do not think this is true. In point of fact the one thing we all share is the vision. Our differences are not over vision but over strategy and tactics on how to implement the vision. The unified vision is a Christian Nation, being ruled by Christian law (whether Natural or Revelational) to the end of glorifying God. This is something that the Ogden folks desire. This is something the Moscow folks salute… this is something that we Theonomists long for. We all hold on to this unified vision. We merely differ on the tactics and strategy used in order to implement this unified vision, as well as what this unified vision might exactly looks like.

However, as stated above this is not uncommon in history with these kinds of grand movements. If one studies the Marxist/Communist movement in the 19th and early 20th centuries one sees the same kind of splinters in the movement. One had the Bolsheviks, the Mensheviks, the Syndcalists, the Anarchists, the Fabians, and others and yet when the time came they all found a common enemy and came to apex, even though before coming to their apex they were at each other’s throats.  Now, naturally, I hate all expressions of Marxism but it still is illustrative of the fact that at some point various splinter factions can come together. How much more true could this be of Christian splinter groups that all have Christ in common even though there is a great deal of infighting going on?

Chrissy writes,

3. It’s unclear how the current movement is demonstrating faith that “Jesus is Lord” in the face of opposition.

Bret responds,

Any trained historian will tell you that “history is messy.” That includes Church history. Crissy complains about how people in different factions of the CN/postmil movement argue and yet certainly Chris has to know how much arguing was going on between the Reformers during the Reformation. If Chris had been alive in 1525 I can just envision him writing, “it’s hard for us to see how spending the day arguing and complaining about the wicked (church) is doing any good for society in general.”

Sometimes, I think these kind of complaints are driven by a jealousy that the R2K movement can’t manage to “gather masses of young men” who talk theology all day long. Keep in mind, dear reader, that R2K has its own hero worship. This looks a great deal like the pot calling the kettle black. For example Chris complains about these masses of young men sitting front of a screen all day all the while missing the irony that he is sitting in front of a screen complaining about young men who will be reading off a screen all that he is writing. Et tu Brutus? Doesn’t Chris know that “productive people are not doing this?”

Finally, Chris complains about a lack of foot soldiers among the CN/postmil types. I would bet the farm that the people I know who are being thrown in jail for protesting abortion clinics (as one example) are definitely NOT R2K. Another friend of mine is facing a huge court imposed fine because he was out protesting the wickedness in our society. I would guess though this kind of being a servant to our enemies doesn’t count in Gordon’s world.

However, resisting our enemies is definitely an act of love towards our Liege Lord and towards our enemies.