According to the American Heritage Dictionary, monolatry (also called monolatrism) is the worship of only one god without denying the existence of other gods. Henotheism is related in that it recognizes many gods yet chooses to focus exclusively on one—usually considered the god of one’s family or clan. A monolater or a henotheist is committed to one god, but he leaves room for other deities as well. Many cultures in ancient times believed in more than one god, but some of those cultures still paid homage to one god above the others. This would often work itself out in the belief that as one traveled from one geographic area to another one would be leaving the god of the previous geographic area and entering into the domain of a different god over the different geographic area.
The accusation in this entry is that R2K is a twist on monolatry inasmuch as while it worships the one true God in the church realm it advocates the henotheistic idea that when one leaves the church realm for the common realm one leaves the explicit God of the bible and his authority in favor of the implicit god of Natural law and its authority. Now, we are quite aware that R2K would be appalled by this characterization but that does not make the observation and accusation any less true. Usually the lady doth protest too much the closer one gets to the truth about the lady protesting.
If an aspect of henotheism/monolatry is that there are different gods over different geographic areas then how much of a stretch is it to see R2K with its “God rules by His right hand in the grace realm but rules by his left hand in the common realm,” as just a dodgy way of saying, “When we are operating in the realm of grace we deal with God and His word but when we operate in the common realm we are dealing with another god (we could call him ‘Lefty’ since he rules by his left hand) and his unique natural law but in order to cover this up we will argue that the god of this realm (Lefty) is really the same god as God even though he isn’t because if we explicitly said he isn’t then we would be obviously guilty of spatial (as opposed to geographic) henotheism/monolatry.”
Certainly, this observation is not a stretch in the slightest. If God’s character is defined by His law, the changing out of God’s law in the common realm for a Natural law as existing in the common realm that is distinct from God’s law in the realm of grace what other conclusion can we come to that we have a different god and so an example of spatial henotheism/monolatry?
Spatial henotheists/monolatrists would never expressly admit that they affirm the existence of another god but at least it strikes me that in a defacto sense that is precisely what they are doing. If I am restricted while in the grace realm from speaking as a minister from the pulpit the will of the God of the church/grace realm for the common realm because by doing so I would be violating both the law of God of the church/grace realm as well as the natural law of god of the common realm what else can this be except a type of spatial henotheism/monolatry?
One has to wonder if the spatial (as opposed to geographic) henotheists/monolatrists are in violation of the second commandment?
“You shall have no other gods before me” (Exodus 20:3).
Have the spatial henotheists/monolatrists in the Reformed Church created a pantheon of gods that are to be respected depending upon which spatial realm one finds one’s self in?
1.) David Van Drunen, the malevolent genius behind R2K was trained at a Jesuit Educational Institution where he learned the classical Roman Catholic philosophical divide between nature and grace. He then, quite obviously took that Thomist divide learned at his Jesuit Roman Catholic school and created a Reformed expression of it in his creation of R2K.
Personally, I am of the conviction that one cannot be Christian and R2K even if their Reformed soteriology is perfect.
2.) R2K teaches that Education, Law, Politics, Art, etc. are all common realm phenomena that are ruled by Natural law. However, if one pauses to think about this just a moment one realizes that these (Education, Law, Politics, Art, Family, etc.) are abstractions. These things do not exist concretely apart from people as Educators, Lawyers/Judges, Politicians/legislators, Artists. So, R2K, concretely speaking is teaching that men as lawyers/judges, men as Educators, men as Artists, etc. are not to be governed by God’s revealed Word. These flesh and blood people are not to be guided in their respective fields by God’s special revelation but instead are, in agreement and consultation with concrete Hindu Educators, Jew Judges, Atheist Artists, and Satanist Legislators to come to a consensus on natural law ao that they as Christians can be governed by in these respective fields.
Such Princeton Tower Club “thinking” is shocking and yet our pulpits are filled today with morons who are touting this god-forsaken theory as truth.
3.) R2K is a theology perfectly cast to avoid confrontation with Idolatry and false religions. Whereas earlier Missionaries would challenge the false gods in public demonstrations R2K says, “The idols in the common realm are not to be addressed and defied by the Institutional Church since that would be to get clergy out of their lanes.”
R2K is heresy. When is some denomination going to stand up and say “R2K is heresy?”
4.) R2K teaches that the Jurisdiction of King Jesus and His revealed word is limited to the Church realm. Any Jurisdiction that King Jesus has in the common realm is present by a common grace, a common providence, and a common (Natural) law. R2K thus is teaching that in the common realm Jesus has delegated His rule to an abstraction called Natural law.
5.) R2K teaches that there exists a statist orthodoxy as taught in Government schools that the Church Institutional should not raise its voice against even when the statist orthodoxy is contrary to Christian orthodoxy.
6.) R2K loves to talk about a common kingdom where people of all faiths meet and have social intercourse around a common set of shared values as all based on Natural law.
However, the problem here is increasingly clear. As sodomites are now marrying and adopting children, as queers show up for Drag Queen story hour to read to our children, as women have to compete against biological men in women’s sports, where is this so-called common realm where Christians can enter into a common kingdom?
Clearly, the R2K project has never existed in a time where its fruit is seen to be more absent. Natural law as defined by R2K as a governing mechanism upon which law orders for whole peoples has never more gloriously failed than the failure it is undergoing now and yet there is David Van Drunen, Mike Horton, D. G. Hart, and R. Scott Clark still thumping for it like they have concrete examples where R2K has worked as positioned in Christ-hating social orders. There they are all thumping for R2K like adolescents for the first time having a young pretty thing speak pretty things in their ears.
If this is true (and it is) why are R2K churches and ministers still being supported?
Get out, before you experience a Sodom and Gomorrah type of visitation from God.
7.) In the way that R2K treats the Bible, the Bible becomes ecclesiasticized — trapped inside the four walls of the Church — and even there the Bible is not allowed to speak to public square issues outside the Church.
8.) Because R2K insists that the Institutional Church is not allowed to speak to civil Institutions such as education, family, law, arts, international relations, etc. the consequence is that Christians attending R2K churches become bipolar in their thinking. In the Church realm, they are Christian but in the so-called secular realm (a realm created and sustained by R2K type thinking) the Christian can be a humanist in education, a Sharia fan in law, or even a polygamist in family life. If God’s word does not speak to the common realm as stated from the pulpit then the laity may come to any conclusion they like in these realms as long as they can in some creative way attach their positions to Natural law.
9.) When God’s word is ecclesiasticized so that it cannot be applied to all of life (per R2K) the Church immediately becomes politicized as the laity become vectors for various humanist thinking diseases that descend from theologies and gods that are not Christian.
So, R2K’s attempt to cordon God’s special Revelation from every area of life finally leads to a politicized church where each member votes and advocates and does in the public square what is best in his own eyes.
10.) R2K excels at thumping the formal authority of the bible. This is the authority that teaches the infallible, verbal plenary inspiration of the Bible. However, R2K fails in embracing the material authority of the Bible. This is the authority of the Bible wherein its applicability to all of life is embraced. Another way of saying this is that R2K holds the Bible as abstractly authoritative but it is horrid in concrete application.
11.) Whenever R2K starts up with the idea that there is no such thing as “Christian stir-fry,” or “Christian plumbing,” or “Christian diaper-changing,” they are at that point advocating, contrary to Christian thinking, that there is indeed such a thing as neutrality. R2K when it argues this way is saying in essence, “See, all of the common square is neutral and so we should not insist on Christian law, or Christian Education, or Christian family, seeing those matters as just as neutral as stir-fry, diaper changing, and plumbing.
First, we should note that suggesting that Christian law does not exist because Christian diaper changing does not exist is a leap of magnificent proportions that only a very stupid person could make.
Second, we would argue that there is such a thing as a Christian diaper changer. Imagine if non-Christian parents changing out dirty diapers didn’t apply diaper rash medicine with the result that the child in the diaper is miserable having a severely burned bottom. Would that baby complain, if he could, about his parents not practicing Christian diaper changing? Would not failing to apply diaper rash medicine in the context of changing the diaper not be a violation of the 6th commandment?
Neutrality is a myth and that is as true about diaper changing, plumbing, and stir-fry as it is about Law, Education, and Business.
12.) R2K cuts off the story of Redemption with Christ crucified. They fail to see that the resurrection, ascension, and session of the Lord Christ continue the Redemption narrative in terms of absolute Kingship. Jesus Christ is not only our Great High Priest but He is also a Great High Priest who is King of Kings and Lord of Lords over every principality and power. To give a Gospel that so wrongly centers on the Crucifixion so that it only tells the story of a dis-empowered Great High Priest who is not ruling as the Mediatorial King as very God of God is to do a great disservice to both our soteriology and our doctrine of Jesus Mediatorial Kingship.
R2K gives us a Jesus who is a Gnostic King. In R2K thinking Jesus rules over our spiritual lives but Jesus dare not flex His authority in culture, family, education, law, politics, etc. R2K has divorced Jesus’s office of Priest from His office as King. That is a grave sin when pointed out and still continued in.
13.) In our sins we seek to alienate God’s creation from Him. R2K “theology” supports our work of alienating God’s creation from Him as R2K refuses to allow Christians to be Christ’s Kingdom people joining in the work, under Christ’s Kingship, of taking every thought captive to make it obedient to Christ. In R2K every thought is not brought captive because many thoughts are never intended to be brought captive and as such, all of creation remains alienated from God. R2K turns Christ’s Kingship into the Kingship wherein His people don’t live and move and have their being in light of Christ’s ascension and session and as such God’s creation remains alienated from Him except in some Gnostic sense.
“George Kennan, former ambassador to the Soviet Union, wrote in his Memoirs that the penetration of the US government by Communists in the late 1930s ‘was not a figment of the imagination of the hysterical right-wingers of a later decade … it really existed … and it was quite extensive.’ Kennan recognized there was a subversion problem in the US in the 30s and during the wartime alliance with Moscow, and the Roosevelt administration addressed it ineffectively. The British government also experienced massive penetration by Soviet intelligence, especially from Cambridge and Oxford espionage spies.
Even Moscow eventually acknowledged the fact of Soviet infiltration into the US government. The Russians admitted this was the case in a Red Star (Krasnaya Zvezda) article by Vladimir Lota on May 5, 2006. Lota revealed that Soviet intelligence sources during World War II ‘obtained information from nearly 70 American ministries, departments, directorates, committees, and sub-committees in the governmental structure of the USA.’ As just one example, Red Star cited a meeting that the chief of the OSS station in Bern, Switzerland, Allen Dulles, had with a German SS commander in northern Italy that was duly reported back to Moscow.
J. Peters, head of the American Communist Party underground in the US, commented to Whittaker Chambers on the size of party of infiltration: ‘Even in Germany under the Weimar Republic, the Party did not have what we have here.’ The party could recruit agents within the US government by scores because, in the 1930s, the revolutionary mood had become so acute due to the Depression. Chambers maintained that Communists and fellow travelers who ‘staffed this Fifth Column’ were dedicated revolutionists whose primary allegiance was to international Communists, not the US.
Will this solid, well-established, corroborated, multi-sourced record of Soviet intelligence infiltration of the US government in the 1930s and 1940s put to rest the argument that McCarthyism was nothing more than right-wing fantasies about Communists having insinuated themselves into the American Government? Probably not.”
Alger Hiss; Why He Chose Treason — pg. 84-85
Shelton’s observations are not singular to her. It has also been observed by M. Stanton Evans in his book, “Blacklisted By History.” It was testified to back in the day by Major George Racy Jordan and is recorded in his Diaries. It has been confirmed by the Venona papers.
What we have here now, creeping nigh unto 100 years, is deep and sustained Marxist rot in the US government. The case could now be easily made that the US government is a Marxist government ruling against the interest of the American people and have been doing so for nigh unto 100 years. What this means is that anybody who trusts the American government is a dupe.
This means that Joseph McCarthy should have been considered a flawed hero instead of a bumbling rabid political clown. This means that you should probably believe most of the governmental whistle-blowers who expose the Federal Government, politicians, and bureaucrats at all levels. This means you should believe nothing you are told by Governmental apparatchiks or at the very least this means that you realize that if there is any truth in what they are saying it is subsumed in an ocean of lies.
Our government — at all levels — is as corrupt as the fallen men and women who are seated in the halls of power. Do yourself a favor and avoid these people at all costs. Do not associate with them. Do not get caught in the tangle of court proceedings. Do not campaign for them. Do not be fooled that your Congressman “really is one of the good guys.” He isn’t. He could not have got where he has gotten without selling his soul to Mephistopheles.
And what is true about Government officials is doubly true of Churches and clergy.
In the recent past, I’ve seen both Tucker Carlson and Gary DeMar argue that what is going on in America is not about a Racial divide but rather is about class warfare. I view this as a false dichotomy. It can be both a race war and class warfare. Clearly, as the Cultural Marxists advocated long ago, Minorities have been successfully recruited to be the new proletariat in the neo-Marxist scheme of the Gramscian Marxists. However, combined with majority swaths of minorities making up the new proletariat (replacing the worker class of Marx’s classical Marxism) we also find white perverts, white feminists, white academics, and “white” Talmudists. This combination allows enough white people in that it can be argued that our current social upheaval isn’t really about race. However, that is not accurate. The White people in the groups listed above, as part of the new proletariat, have the same interests as the minority element in this new proletariat coalition. Indeed, one could easily argue that the whole cross-section of this new proletariat is merely that which Saul Alinksy said was required to make a revolution. What they each and all have in common is a hatred for Biblical Christianity.
So, the current Revolution does remain a matter of race. but not without at the same time being a matter of class warfare. The mega-Corporatists are using the new proletariat to make war on America’s middle class with the goal of eliminating the middle class so that we have a have and have-not society. The irony of this is found in that many in the Revolutionary new proletariat vanguard will end up remaining among the have nots so that the Revolution they are chanting and rioting for will not advance their economic standing one whit.
We can see all this as existing in the base of each party. The Democrats are appealing to the minority base as well as a base of the victimized (White Feminists, perverts, Academics, etc.) seeking to cobble together a coalition of Saul Alinsky voters while at the same time being bankrolled by the mega-Corporatist of Silicon Valley, Hollywood, and Wall Street.
The Republican Party in the meantime is appealing to white voters and is hearkening to middle-class issues (Payroll Tax cuts, Law & Order, America First, etc.).
Most often, the polite Right says “race war is merely a proxy for class war.” But reading the Marxist architects themselves, it is plainly just the opposite — class war is actually a proxy for race war.
Obviously underneath all of this class warfare and race war reality is the fact that greater fact that all of this is first and foremost a religious war. Race and class are merely tools being used by the Christ haters to pull Christ off His throne. If racial and class harmony could pull Christ off His throne you can be sure the Christ haters would champion for racial and class harmony at every turn. However, in these times the way to imagine that one can dethrone Christ is by ginning up race and class warfare. Only by setting men at each other’s throats is the opportunity afforded to completely rid social orders of any remnant of Christ as King.