Category: Apologetics

Potterville, Michigan Goes WOKE … Asks Boys Into Girl’s Bathrooms

After reading how Potterville Public Schools (10 miles away) is now allowing, per the recent decision of the Potterville school board, “gender dysphoric” children to use the opposite bathrooms of their biological sex I find myself seeing red.

“On Monday night, the Potterville school board made the decision to allow transgender students at Potterville Public Schools to continue to use the restroom for the gender that they identify with.”
You see how fast stupid can spread into every nook hamlet and corner barrio?

It should be noted that the Potterville School District is doing this to accommodate one male student who insists he’s a girl.

Kristi Tullis, the stepparent of a trans student in the school system said, “She has done nothing to anyone in this community but be kind, generous and polite. She’s not going to be in the locker rooms. She’s a scholar, not an athlete. She is a danger to no one.”

Keep in mind that when the above addlepated “Kristi Tullis” speaks above it may be quite possible that Kristi is either male or female or both or neither. Who knows?

Note what we learn from Krisit’s statement

1.) The child in question is from a broken home. Broken homes, whether characterized by divorce or not create broken children.

2.) Kristi, like most Americans, has this huge “public vs. private” distinction in their heads. It’s acceptable that Kristi’s stepchild use the wrong bathroom because it is not hurting anybody. This child (and more so the parents) has done nothing to anybody except contribute to creating an environment where insanity is acknowledged among us as being perfectly normal. “Oh, you’re a little boy who thinks you’re a little girl. How quaint. Isn’t that precious?”

I ask you who is tetched with more madness…. the boy child wearing a training bra using the girls bathrooms or the “adults” who are sponsoring this absolute clown show?

3.) Kristi’s stepparent insists that  he is being “polite.” Is that politeness on display as he is entering into a girl’s bathrooms? Is he being polite and kind as he ogles the girls in the bathroom?

This is like Tolkien’s Saruman finally successfully taking over the Shire. These are Sarumanic like policies. Alternately, it is George Bailey’s failure to protect Bedford Falls that eventuates in the rise of “Potterville.” I find it difficult in getting my head around that a small rural Michigan farming community of barely 3K residents has actually voted to embrace, eyes wide open, certifiable insanity.

What’s next for the Potterville school board? Offering classes on “Being a successful Lesbian even though you’re a biological male?” I guess they could be like my Michigan home town where I grew up (population 10K)  who, I recently discovered, has a teacher Tranny employee who is male but is a biological woman.

“In A Pilgrim’s Regress,” C.S. Lewis wrote about a man who ordered milk and eggs from a waiter in a restaurant. After tasting the milk he commented to the waiter that it was delicious. The waiter replied, “Milk is only the secretion of a cow, just like urine and feces.” After eating the eggs he commented on the tastiness of the eggs. Again the waiter responded that eggs are only a by-product of a chicken. After thinking about the waiter’s comment for a moment the man responded, “You lie. You don’t know the difference between what nature has meant for nourishment, and what it meant for garbage.”

The citizens of Potterville (and clearly the citizens in this nation who should be Institutionalized) are making the same type of mistake, only in our case, the matter is reversed. We are being served up urine and feces by our elites and cooing in response about how delicious and tasty it all is. We pat ourselves on the back concerning how enlightened and progressive we are all the time missing the fact that we are losing our souls.

On top of all that, as if that wasn’t enough, we are living in a epoch where the “clergy” of the “conservative” Reformed Churches in America are telling me that as a member of the clergy it is sin for me to mention any of the above from the pulpit as being condemned by God. Indeed, per contemporary Reformed Churches I am displeasing to God and unfaithful to the Scriptures if I mention any of this from the pulpit, or speak of it in any capacity in my role as a clergy member. No letters to the Editor. No podcasts. No books on the subject. Per, the insanity of the current clergy, it is wicked of me to talk about any of this in my official capacity as a minister of Word & Sacrament.

How much longer are we going to put up with this ruddy insanity?

We will not find relief from someone in Lansing or Washington DC. We will not find relief in school boards and Mayors.

The Embellishment Surrounding Auschwitz

In order for Auschwitz to rise above the rest of the carnage of WW II so as to be used as the means by which to keep the goyim full of guilt  and shame, it most certainly did need the embellishment of serial lying. Without that serial lying, coming in the way of embellishment and exaggeration Auschwitz is just one more tragic incarnation of evil found so frequently in WW II like Katyn forest, the liquidation of the Christian Kulaks, Operation Keelhaul, or American run death camps where 1 million German “disarmed enemy forces” perished in conditions every bit as horrid as Auschwitz.

There is nothing about Auschwitz that makes it anymore hororfic than many of the other events of WW II except for the lying exaggerations surrounding Auschwitz that embellished it so that it might stand heads and tails above all the other Banalities of evil that so characterized WW II. Honestly, if one wants hororfic apart from the need of embellishment or exaggeration one need only to consider the Quebec, Teheran, or Yalta conferences where post-war enslavement was agreed upon, and where countless millions were left to suffer for nearly 50 years under the bloody thumb of Soviet Communism.

And all that embellishment, with all the diminishing of all the other vile evil that necessarily followed the embellishing of one over the others, had a political advantage of allowing the Bagel to shame the rest of the world into giving way to his later malfeasance at every turn.

McAtee Analyzes Stephen Wolfe Using Theological Categories

Col. 1:16 For by him were all things created, that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers: all things were created by him, and for him:

17 And he is before all things, and by him all things consist.

Romans 11:36 For of Him and through Him and to Him are all things…

“We think that all faithful thinking has to be theological. But most things, to truly understand them, require non-theological analysis. That’s not to say that they are outside God but that the topics of the theological discipline cannot adequately explain/analyze them.”

Dr. Stephen Wolfe

“An Orthodox Jewish friend of mine spotted it immediately in a comment he made to me soon after seeing the movie (Gibson’s ‘The Passion of Christ’) himself and dismissing the charges of antisemitism as preposterous. ‘It’s all a put on, isn’t it?’ he remarked. ‘None of the guys claiming it’s antisemitic really believes that. It’s really just a question of power. That’s all.’

It is indeed a question of power because entirely apart from the theological, historical, and aesthetic merits of the Gibson film is the question of controlling the public culture, the way of life that defines American society and establishes public standards by which behavior, discussion, and thought are regulated. You probably do not have to accept Christopher Dawson’s view that ‘a living religion always aspires to be the center round which the whole culture revolves’ to grasp that religion is invariably a powerful force in defining a culture and that it is no coincidence that the words cult and culture both derive from the Latin cultus. The religion a society accepts—publicly, regardless of what its members privately believe—is what defines its morals and its patterns of what is and is not legitimate.

The angry controversy about (the movie) ‘The Passion’ is about which cultus will define American culture, and the conflict over the movie is a struggle for cultural power, for what Antonio Gramsci called  ‘cultural hegemony.’ Rabbi Jacob Neusner has remarked that Auschwitz has replaced Sinai in the religious sensibilities of many modern secularized Jews, and the bitter and hysterical war against Mel Gibson represents a further attempted displacement—that Auschwitz replace Calvary, that Christianity itself as Americans understand and accept it be defined and regulated by contemporary Jewish standards and those cultural hegemons who enforce them.”

Samuel T. Francis

I run these these three quotes, from Scripture, Wolfe, and Francis, together in order to demonstrate how mind bogglingly jejune Wolfe is to insist. “that to understand most things requires non-theological analysis”, by providing a Samuel Francis quote regarding a film. Francis’ quote, using theological analysis gets to the center of the meaning of Mel Gibson’s film as well as why it was so vehemently resisted.

Secondly, contra Wolfe and R2K, with their agreement on the Natural Law model of the world, there is no understanding of any reality apart from the usage of theological analysis and categories. I promise you any analysis that Wolfe does on anything is riven with theological assumptions and a-prioris. The theological assumption that is incipient in Wolfe’s quote above is that God is not needed in order to understand many aspects of reality. Wolfe is presuming that man can understand many aspects of reality in the context of completely discountenancing the God of the Bible. Autonomous man, can, starting only from his own reality, and as the measure of whatever he is analyzing, come to the truth of whatever he is analyzing.  You cannot understand the depth of the depravity of Wolfe’s quote without using theological categories to analyze his and its depravity.

Thirdly, what is odd about Wolfe’s quote when compared with the Francis quote is that Francis, who was not a Christian at the time he wrote this piece from which the quote comes, was not a Christian while Wolfe professes Christ. Here we have a case where the children of darkness are wiser than the children of the light.

I do accept Dawson’s view on religion and it is only Wolfe’s religion that could force him to not accept Dawson’s view on religion that religion/theology is the center around which all culture orbits. If we don’t do analysis on anything via theological categories then all that is left is doing analysis via humanistic categories, which, ironically enough, ends up being its own theological analysis.

Wolfe went on to describe anybody who disagrees with his quote above as doing the worst of worldview thinking. Keep in mind that Natural Law theory is inimically hostile to worldview thinking. It is only “natural” that a Natural law aficionado like Wolfe would say such a thing.

Dawson is correct. Religion/theology is the center around which all revolves and since that is the center than all is an expression of the religion/theology around which it revolves.

All the denials and vituperations of the Stephen Wolfes and the R. Scott Clarks of the world, who do not agree that everything must be analyzed using theological categories, no matter what else they might disagree on, will not change that.

Van Til & McAtee on Linguistic Deception

“Modernists will usually betray pretty clearly that they use Christian terminology before a pagan background . . . Modernism is the use of Christian terms for the purpose of conveying pagan thought . . . All the words that we daily use and give a Christian meaning must now receive a pagan meaning

Cornelius Van Til
“What Do You Mean?” The Banner, Vol. 67

This is called linguistic deception and we are seeing it all the time now. Linguistic deception treats words like eggs which can be cracked open and emptied of their content and then filled with new content. What these people do is they empty words used by Christians that have traditional meanings and then fill them with other meaning.

We see this w/ R2K for example. All R2K fanboys will affirm that Jesus is Lord, but eventually one learns that the word “Lord” for R2K fanboys means “Lord,” except for where Jesus is only “kind of Lord in a spiritual sense.”

We see this w/ Federal Vision types. They assert “Justification by faith alone,” and then they teach that there are two justifications, initial and final, and not all who are initially justified are finally justified. What’s the difference between the those who are initially justified and also finally justified and those who are who initially justified but not also finally justified? Well, what else can the difference be but the contributory dynamic of our works to that final justification?

We see this in Gary DeMar’s full Preterism. They recite the Apostles Creed but when they get to the part about Jesus returning again for the quick and the dead, suddenly that is reinterpreted to mean “returning for the persons of the quick and the dead but not their corporeal and now glorified bodies.”

Machen complained about this linguistic deception in his “Christianity and Liberalism,” continuously. He complained that Modernists (Liberals) where cracking open the words, emptying out the meaning, and then filling the words with new meaning, while still insisting that they were “Christian,” when in point of fact they were liars, just as the R2K chaps, the FV chaps and the Full Preterist chaps are liars when they do the very same thing.

OK… let me soften that a wee bit. At least some of them are epistemologically self conscious about their lying while the rest who are doing the same may not be epistemologically self conscious about what they are doing but instead are merely useful idiots.

Four Brief Observations Regarding Natural Law

1.) The acceptance of Natural Law (NL) as a epistemology for fallen man not only touches on the issue of epistemology but it also is a demonstration of warped thinking regarding Christian anthropology and Christian hamartiology.

Anthropology and Hamartiology because NL adherents are out of step with the effects of sin on fallen man. For NL adherents man is not quite as fallen as for Reformed folks and neither has sin affected man quite as thoroughly as for Reformed folks.

 

2.) The great unstated premise of advocates of Natural Law is that fallen man can observe the Universe and quite apart from any beginning theological premises can read the law of nature correctly by the usage of naked reason… reason unclothed with any theological a-prioris.

Of course this is a literal impossibility. Reason is never exercised as if naked. Reason always operates upon and with a theological grist. This is why it is irrational to speak of “right reason” in the context of NL because the fallenness of man w/ its noetic effects of sin upon the mind does not allow any fallen man to have this thing called “right reason.”

3.) The mind of man is at enmity with God. (Romans 8:7)

Romans 8 teaches that the mind of man is at enmity w/ God. If the mind of man is at enmity w/ God then certainly this includes being at enmity w/ God’s revelation of NL with the implication that NL is no trustworthy epistemology for ordering society.

I have no understanding how someone can say they are Reformed while at the same time holding to NL.

4.) The basic division between the Thomistic NL types and Presuppositionalists is that the Thomists believe that man reasons from man to God via right reason and natural law, while Presuppositionalists believe that man reasons from God to God via special revelation.

There is no reconciling Thomistic NL and Presuppostionalism. Those in each camp who understand there worldview will NEVER be reconciled.