Category: Apologetics

Dr. Mike Horton On Separating Christ From The Propositions That Reveal Christ

 “Although we have plenty of propositions about the person and work of Christ, these MERELY serve to give definition to the person in whom we place our trust. It is trust in Christ, not the number of propositions we hold, that is the empty hand that receives the treasures of the kingdom.”

Mike Horton
Modern Reformation Vol 15. Number 2
March/April 2006

1.) Horton uses propositions to prove that propositions are not necessary to receive a propositional-less Christ.
2.) “The propositions MERELY serve to give definition to the person in whom we place our trust?”

So, is Horton advocating here that we embrace the person of Christ apart from the MERE propositions that serve to give definition to the person in whom we are placing our trust? What kind of madness is this? We are to trust a person apart from the propositions that define the person?

3.) This chap is actually arguing that we are saved by a Christ absent of the propositions that tell us who Christ is. If this isn’t neo-orthodoxy it is a kissing cousin.

4.) It strikes me that propositions (particularly inspired ones) that do the work of defining who Christ is should not be referenced as “Merely.”

5.) If we don’t rely on the propositions of Scripture that give us Christ then who is the empty hand receiving as the treasure of the Kingdom?

6.) This is a subtle attack on inspired Revelation on Horton’s part. Those propositions that Mike casually dismisses are inspired Revelation. There is no trusting Christ apart from the revelation that defines the Christ that one must trust.

7.) Indeed, even the idea that we are to “trust Christ” comes to us as a “mere proposition.”

Wherein The Death Of Irony & Self Awareness Is Witnessed In A 1 Minute Video

I must have laughed out loud for 10 minutes after watching this video. Seriously, the lack of self-awareness combined with the lack of anybody there to see the irony in all this is just off the charts.

“The Republican Party is obsessed with culture war issues. It is weird and it is bizarre… The American people deserve serious legislators, serious elected officials who are focused on bringing people together to deliver real results for the American people — not to play games and not to engage in schoolyard taunts.”

Sarah McBride
Trannie Congress Thing from Delaware

1.) “The Republican party is obsessed with culture war issues.”

Sarah McBride

He says while dressed up as a woman claiming he’s a woman. Obsession thine name is Sarah McBride. This guy is the living embodiment of culture wars and he complains that people might notice his cultural warrior clown suit?

2.)  “The American people deserve serious legislators, serious elected officials who are focused on bringing people together to deliver real results for the American people — not to play games…”

Sarah McBride

Speaking while wearing women’s clothes playing the game of “pretend I’m a woman.”

3.) “The American people deserve serious legislators… serious elected officials.”

Sarah McBride, no doubt thinking of himself as a “serious legislator” but instead is “seriously” saying all this while seriously insane.

What is funny if being one of those real Democrat women in the background  not realizing how you are compromising your avowed feminism by letting a Dude speak on your female behalf?

File Under; “They have no sense of irony.”

That idjit just complained about the Republicans being “weird and bizarre.” Dang it is a strange world; How weird and bizarre is it for this weird and bizarre creature to complain about Republican weird and bizarre behavior?

Exposing Natural Law For the Cheat It Is (I)

John 1:4 In Him was life, and the life was the light of men. 5 And the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness did not comprehend it.

Jesus Himself said;

“I am the light of the world.” (John 9:5)

The Apostle John said that Jesus;

was the true Light which gives light to every man coming into the world.

Of course we know that there was no fault in He who was “the light of the world.” So, the fact that men did not and do not comprehend the light is found in the fact, as John’s Gospel reveals in chapter 3;

19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed.

The practitioners of evil know the darkness and they know the light. They cannot hate the light and refuse to come to the light unless they know yet suppress what they know about the light. The lovers of darkness remain in the dark because they prefer the dark over the light and as they remain in the dark they chant, “there is no light, there is no light.” This is because such men remain dead in their sins and trespasses. Their intellect, will, and affections each and all experience the total effects of the fall. It is because they are sons of darkness that they hate the light.

These Scriptural truths by themselves ought to give the Natural Law fanboys pause before pushing their Aristotelian non-Scriptural position that teaches that fallen man’s intellect is not completely fallen and so can read “Nature” (however that might be defined) aright. But there is more. The Holy Spirit can say in I Corinthians 2:14

14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Yet, despite this testimony of Scripture the Natural Law advocates now blanketing the church in the chemtrail “theology” of both the R2K Escondido crowd and the Dr. Stephen Wolfe Christian Nationalism crowd are poisoning  the Church.

Over and over again the Scripture teaches that man, starting from himself and his own resources, runs from capital T truth. Scripture teaches also in Romans 8;

“… the carnal mind is enmity (warfare) against God; for it is not subject to the law of God, nor indeed can be.”

Fallen man, as Paul says earlier in Romans as the wrath of God upon Him;

18 For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened.

When non-Christians consider anything that can be found in what people call “natural law” they invariably use what they find to further their sinful ends. So, for example, fallen man finds gender realities in Natural law and for a season fallen man may well conform to gender realities when living in a predominantly Christian shaped nation.  But even in the times of  “conforming” one does not find the non-Christian living out their gender to the glory of God. Instead, fallen men prioritize themselves and their needs above their spouses. Then, over the course of time, as we are seeing now in the West, natural man, using natural law and right reason insist that there are no gender realities to conform to. They insist that the idea that one man goes with one woman for life is antiquated and mistaken. They suppress even more overtly than their heathen fathers the idea of gender realities. They suppress the truth in unrighteousness. They prefer the darkness to light. They are at enmity with God. The idea that natural law is going to somehow be the means whereby men are going to give up their suppression, warfare, and preference for the dark is a Aristotelian fairytale – a fairytale that more  and more of the Christian church is taking up.

At one time natural law theory taught that “Nature” was the objective, external, corporeal universe that was objectively out there and could be known by all men. There was no consensus on where these laws of nature came from. They just were … and these eternally existing natural laws which existed autonomously governed both the gods and men.

When the philosophical world was ruled by the empiricists the laws of nature along with the external, material, objective universe were just out there in the cosmos. But as the worldview of men shifted from empiricism to different forms of idealism this “out there-ness” view of natural law was eclipsed and in its place the idea of natural law shifted to being located to the internal, subjective, non-corporeal “mind” of man. Human reason itself became the locus of Natural Law. Autonomous man, starting with and from himself could name what the laws of nature were. In this evolution of natural law man even more clearly became his own god determining good from evil.

This has always been and remains the achilles heel of natural law theory. There is no stable definition of natural law. It varies from man to man depending on what philosophical matrix he is living in. It may be the case that the Romanticists/Transcendentalist, the logical positivist, the Deist, and the Utilitarians (to cite random examples) may all agree that Natural Law exists but given their differing philosophical pre-commitments they will never agree on just exactly what Natural Law is as it is concretely defined, and indeed will offer up contradictory definitions.

In the end there is no objective reality in the subjective construct that is Natural Law theory. To be sure God’s creation declares God’s truths. No one disagrees with that. The disagreement arises when the idea is advanced that men’s will and intellect is not so fallen that residual ability remains so that man can, starting with himself  (as fallen), as his own beginning point, identify true truth. The objection arises that fallen man starting autonomously with himself will always identify as true truth a fallen “true truth.”

In order for Thomistic Natural Law theory to work force must be used to re-create consensus as to what Natural Law “clearly teaches.” In our current situation this will have to be a force that moves Natural Law away from existing as within each individual to a Natural Law that is once again pretended to be objective. Existentialism and postmodernism, as well as variant forms of Idealism will have to be squashed in order for non-Christian Natural Law to work again. I have no opposition to those being squashed but I remain opposed to a Natural Law that pretends to be objective but really remains somebody’s subjective inflated to serve as a pretend societal objective.

Instead, what we as Christians should pray for is for the West to return to its Scriptural foundation for truth. We must once again embrace the idea that “in thy Light we see light.” We must understand that the axioms of Scripture and necessary consequences of those axioms form our epistemological foundation as a people. The God of the Bible once again must be our starting point when it comes to true truth. Only by having God has our starting point will we reason with a God honoring methodology that results in God honoring conclusions.

Away then with all Thomistic notions of Natural Law. It was bad when the Stoics owned it and it was bad when the Muslims Ibn Tufayl and Averroes embraced it and it remained bad when Aquinas pinched it from Averroes and “Christianized” it.



 

 

 

The Urgent Appeal Of Dr. R. Scott Clark For Societal Polytheism

Who in the ancient church, before AD 311, draw the inference from the New Testament teaching about the magistrate that Christianity should have a privileged place in the empire? What do you find in the New Testament teaching about the magistrate that leads you to think that Christianity should have a privileged place in society?

Dr. R. Scott Clark
X Post
Advocating for Anabaptist Pluralism

1.)  When Scott talks about the ancient church he is implying that the Church only begins with the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Remember, the Church extends back to the restoration of Adam and Eve after the fall.  Does Scott believe that the Church is only a New Testament reality? If so that’s a very Baptist way of thinking.

2.) The fact that Scott wants to focus only on the NT here also suggests that Scott thinks that if we want to know what the Church thought we can only consult the Church after the crucifixion and resurrection (and apparently only up to AD 311). The Church’s Scripture prior to the NT apparently doesn’t count. Is Scott, what we call “a New Testament Christian?”

3.) When Scott asks

What do you find in the New Testament teaching about the magistrate that leads you to think that Christianity should have a privileged place in society?

We ought to hear him asking:

What do you find in the New Testament teaching about the magistrate that leads you to think that Christ should have a privileged place in society?

Scott is actually asking the question why Christians today would ever think that Christ should have the preeminence? Scott is suggesting that Jesus Christ who is “King of Kings” and “Lord of Lords,” should NOT have a privileged place in society. According to Scott Jesus Christ should step aside so that other gods can have equal air time. Per. Dr. R. Scott Clark of Westminster Seminary Jesus Christ should not have a privileged place in any given society. Dr. R. Scott Clark is telling God and the world that it is wrong (sinful) for Christians to desire that Jesus Christ should have a privileged place in every society.

THIS IS MADNESS.

Keep in mind dear reader that if Jesus Christ is not privileged in any society that, by default means, that some other God or God concept is going to be privileged in the society where Jesus Christ is not privileged. Since there is no neutrality, it is not possible for a society to not have some God or god concept be privileged. When Dr. R. Scott Clark says these kinds of magnificently stupid things Dr. R. Scott Clark of Westminster Seminary is advocating for IDOLATRY.

However, quite to the contrary of Dr. R. Scott Clark’s expostulations there is a NT text

Act 17:6 “These men who have turned the world upside down have now come here, 7and Jason has welcomed them into his home. They are all defying Caesar’s decrees, saying that there is another king, named Jesus!”

Now unless Dr. Clark wants to suggest that the accusations brought against Paul and his compatriots here in Thessalonica were lies we clearly have a passage where it is taught that the spread of a Christianity which privileged Jesus Christ was a threat to previous pagan social orders.

Folks need to understand what guys like Dr. R. Scott Clark and Dr. Kevin DeYoung are trying to do here. They are trying to rivet upon the Reformed Church in America the idea that it is God’s express will that societies and social orders must be pluralistic/polytheistic. This is societal polytheism is a positive good from God to His Church per these anti-Christs, and to object to them is worthy of being cast out of the Church.

And of course, we don’t hold with Dr. R. Scott Clark that only appeal to the New Testament can be made. Being Biblical Christians we believe that the OT is part of God’s revealed Word and there we find in Psalm 2;

Why do the [a]nations [b]rage,
And the people plot a [c]vain thing?
2 The kings of the earth set themselves,
And the rulers take counsel together,
Against the Lord and against His Anointed,[d] saying,
3 “Let us break Their bonds in pieces
And cast away Their cords from us.”

4 He who sits in the heavens shall laugh;
The Lord shall hold them in derision.
5 Then He shall speak to them in His wrath,
And distress them in His deep displeasure:
6 “Yet I have [e]set My King
[f]On My holy hill of Zion.”

7 “I will declare the [g]decree:
The Lord has said to Me,
‘You are My Son,
Today I have begotten You.
8 Ask of Me, and I will give You
The nations for Your inheritance,
And the ends of the earth for Your possession.
9 You shall [h]break them with a rod of iron;
You shall dash them to pieces like a potter’s vessel.’ ”

10 Now therefore, be wise, O kings;
Be instructed, you judges of the earth.
11 Serve the Lord with fear,
And rejoice with trembling.
12 [i]Kiss the Son, lest [j]He be angry,
And you perish in the way,
When His wrath is kindled but a little.
Blessed are all those who put their trust in Him.

 

 

A Brief Historical & Sociological Look At Trannie-ism

“With their insatiable hunger for loot they ransacked the houses of the wealthy, murdered men and violated women for sport. They guzzled their loot, washed down with blood and from mere satiety they shamefully gave themselves up to effeminate practices, plaiting their hair and putting on women’s clothes, drenching themselves with perfumes and painting their eyelids to make themselves look attractive . They copied not merely the dress but also the passions of women, devising in their excess of licentiousness unlawful pleasures in which they wallowed as in a brothel. Thus they entirely polluted the city with their foul practices, yet, though they wore women’s faces their hands were murderous. They would approach with mincing steps and whipping out their swords from dyed cloaks they would impale passers by.”

Flavius Josephus
“The Jewish War”
Describing trannie-ism taking place in Jerusalem while it is under siege

The phenomena of Trannie-ism is thus seen as ancient. In the context above its presence heralds the end of a social-order. All that Josephus describes here is happening on the cusp of the fall of Jerusalem.

If one considers many third world tribal peoples throughout history one also discovers that there existed among their shamans and witch-doctors this sexuality fluidity that today we call Trannies. The Jewish Talmud likewise has this perversion as part of its history including as many as seven gender designations. This reality helps to make sense of Magnus Hirschfield’s work in Weimar, Germany, (which will be considered below) given that Hirschfield was Jewish.

The Talmud lists the following genders;

  1. Zachar, male.
  2. Nekevah, female.
  3. Androgynos, having both male and female characteristics.
  4. Tumtum, lacking sexual characteristics.
  5. Aylonit, identified female at birth without developing secondary female sexual characteristics at puberty.
  6. Saris hamah, identified male at birth without developing secondary male sexual characteristics at puberty.
  7. Saris adam, identified male at birth without developing secondary male sexual characteristics because of castration.

As mentioned above this Trannie behavior was also seen in the last century in the Weimar Republic in Germany. In Germany, Magnus Hirschfield, himself a sodomite, organized and built what is thought to be the first transgender clinic. The clinic was opened in 1919 as  Institut für Sexualwissenschaft (the Institute for Sexual Research), and at this clinic the genital surgery that included  emasculating men while creating false vaginas was first practiced. In addition to psychiatrists for therapy, Hirschfield hired Ludwig Levy-Lenz, a gynecologist. Levy-Lenz along with surgeon Erwin Gohrbandt, performed male-to-female surgery called Genitalumwandlung—literally, “transformation of genitals.” This occurred in stages: castration, penectomy and vaginoplasty to be followed by a regimen of hormone therapy that would allow these castrated men to grow “natural” breasts while giving them a softer female look. Hirschfield and his merry band of perverts had to flee before female to male phalloplasty surgery would be invented.

In all of this what is obvious is the desire to transform into something that one, by God’s sovereign appointment, is not. Interestingly enough, Isaiah 14 records Lucifer’s intent to transition to be something he could never be;

12 How art thou fallen from heaven, O Lucifer, son of the morning! how art thou cut down to the ground, which didst weaken the nations! 13 For thou hast said in thine heart, I will ascend into heaven, I will exalt my throne above the stars of God: I will sit also upon the mount of the congregation, in the sides of the north: 14 I will ascend above the heights of the clouds; I will be like the most High. 15 Yet thou shalt be brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit.

Lucifer here decides that he is going to transition to be like the most high. He desired to be something that he could never be and in the course of that attempt he destroyed himself being brought down to hell, to the sides of the pit. Now, given that this desire to be as God failed — this desire to be something  quite contrary to his nature — Lucifer takes that same, born of pride trannnie like desire, and uses that desire as the fulcrum for the fall of Adam and Eve. It was the promise of Lucifer that if Eve ate the fruit she would transition to be as God “determining good from evil.” It was Adam and Eve’s desire to ascend to the most high via transitioning that made for their and mankind’s destruction.

We see here then that this insane desire to become something that is contrary to what one was appointed by God to be is closely connected to the original sin. We also see that such aspirations to transform one’s self into what is contrary to nature always leads to destruction. All of this makes perfect sense when one recalls that God’s Word says, “All those who hate me love death.” The desire to transition into something that one is not is testimony of one’s hatred towards God and His authority. This desire to transition from one gender to another gender should also be seen as hatred towards God because it is a full expression of seeking to cast off the image of God in man. Man, being God’s image, has a strong gender component in it and the desire to change that gender component is a testimony of man’s full rage at God for being His image bearer.  In brief, the thinking by the Trannie is; “If I can change my gender, I can also be done with being God’s image bearer. I can create myself and name myself and so am no longer obligated to God.”

Of course such action requires a substantial amount of violence to one’s psyche. It is not only physiological changes that are being undergone with transitioning it is also deep and violent psychological, and emotional changes. We should not be surprised then that the violence that is required in order to put one’s self through the steps that the Trannie puts themselves through will, in turn, lead to violence towards others — especially those who the Trannie takes as being in opposition to their transitioning. This explains why the last two trannie mass murders have occurred at Christian schools. You don’t see Trannies shooting up sodomite bars or nightclubs. There is a reason that they are shooting up Churches and murdering Christian children and that reason has to do with the fact that they are in violent war against the God of the Bible.

Throughout history any social-order that allows for and accepts the sexual deviant as normative, including but not limited to the Trannie, ends up being soon eclipsed. Indeed, one might argue that any social order that turns to this and accepts it is a social order that is being fattened up by God for the day of slaughter.

Repentances is always in order for each and everyone of us.