Category: Other Opposing Worldview

Multiculturalism as the New Religion in Town

Religion — Any system of faith and worship. In this sense, religion comprehends the belief and worship of pagans and Mohammedans, as well as of Christians; any religion consisting in the belief of a superior power or powers governing the world, and in the worship of such power or powers. Thus we speak of the religion of the Turks, of the Hindoos, of the Indians, etc. as well as of the Christian religion We speak of false religion as well as of true religion.

1828 Webster’s Dictionary

“The State is the Divine Idea as it exists on earth. . . . We must, therefore, worship the State as the manifestation of the Divine on earth, and consider that if it is difficult to comprehend Nature, it is harder to grasp the Essence of the State. . . .[T]he State is the march of God through the world.”

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

It is my conviction that Religion is an inescapable category. All men organize their social order in subservience to, as Webster tells us, “belief of a superior power or powers governing the world.” Thus, all cultures are naught but the expression of the religion of the people who comprise that culture. Culture then is the religion of a people put into real life social order animation.

One thing we should immediately note is how ridiculous it is to make blanket condemnations as “all religion being bad.” Christians often do this by saying things like, “I don’t have a religion. I have a relationship.” Religion is an inescapable category and so while some religions are worse than others (and all are worse than Biblical Christianity) the reality is that all people and peoples are religious. This is true also of those (usually the atheist crowd) who say “I don’t have a religion.”  That this is true is explained by the fact that it is the religion of people who condemn religion that accounts for their condemnation of religion. The idea of something (in this case “religion”) being “bad” requires a moral foundation upon which to make such a pronouncement and that moral foundation is nothing else but an expression of a religion. In their statement, “I don’t have a religion,” or “Religion is wicked and accounts for all the evil of the world,” they are their own superior power that is governing the world (see Webster’s definition) and so their egoism is their religion. 

For most moderns the State is their god and so provides their religion as the Hegel quote indicates. For those non-Christians who haven’t taken the state as their god, the result usually is that they are their own gods, determining good and evil. As such their individual egos are their own religion. Religion is an inescapable category.

Given all that the above is true we might ask ourselves what is the religion of our culture. Below provides just a bit of a teasing out of the answer to that question.

I.) The Religion of Modernism

Multiculturalist Diversity

The irony here is lodged in the fact that the pursuit of multiculturalism finally arrives in the embrace of a monoculture as everybody is straitjacketed into the singular embrace of a uniform multicultural social order where the equality of all cultures create and reflect the monolithic religion behind multiculturalism.

II.) The Temple / Church of Modernism

US Government outlets (Civic bldgs., Schools, etc.)

All religions have a Temple or gathering place where the worshipers come to worship and be catechized. In the West, the Government facility has replaced the Temple as the Church of Modernism. In Church facilities, we educate our young into the state religion.  We send our tithes and offerings to the Church every year. We place our dead heroes in Temple like structures (think of the Lincoln Memorial). It is all really quite religious as in the State we live and move and have our being.

III.) Priest Class

Bureaucrats / Teachers / Ministers / Professional Class

All religions have a Preistcraft. Modernism as a religion is no different. The Priest class serves to guide the people in how to satisfy the god and how to practice the religion. The Priestcraft have a self-interest in perpetuating the religion since their lifestyle is dependent upon the religion being kept stoked. In the West, the God state is served by a Preistcraft that now includes almost the whole white collar professional class. Because of the totalitarian presence of the State nearly all the white collar professional class is beholden to the religion of multiculturalism and so supports it and inculcates it in all their doings. From Shrinks, to Shysters, to Ministers, to Teachers, to Businessmen, to Medial Doctors, to Academia, they all are tasked with serving multiculturalism as the religion and the State as God.

IV.)  Catechism Motifs

All religions have their catch phrases and pithy motifs that the Preistcraft must teach. In Christianity one might use as just one example, “the chief end of man is to glorify God and fully enjoy Him forever.” In the religion of multiculturalism, we get mindless pithy motifs that all are to embrace such as, “Diversity is our strength,” and, “White people are evil,” and “All people and all cultures are equal.” These and like simple-minded motifs constitute the lubricant that oils the thinking of the whole social order.

V.) Mission’s Agency

United Nations,  Evangelical Church Sending Agencies, US Military

Every religion has an agency whereby the religion is spread to others who are deprived of the great religion. In the social order of the West that Missions agency ranges from the United Nations publishing arm to the most Missionary agencies of most of the Denominations that constitute modern Christianity. Christianity has been reinterpreted through the grid of multiculturalism so that much of what is pushed as Christianity by missionaries (both home and abroad) is just another expression of multiculturalism. When nations are particularly resistant to being convinced of the truth of multiculturalism then we turn to the US Military to convert by the sword.

VI.) Criminal Code

Hate Crimes / homophobia / Sexist / Racist

Every religion develops a criminal code as to what is allowed and what is not allowed. Multiculturalism, as a religion, seeks to criminalize behavior that does not support the zeitgeist. As such multiculturalism creates hate crimes that punish with extra zeal those guilty of hating beyond the normal hate that comes with every crime. Further, homophobia, sexism, racism, while not yet criminal, are so deeply taboo that to violate them puts one outside the company of “civilized” people.

VII.) Propaganda Wing

Hollywood / Top 40 / Government schools / Media Outlets

Every religion has a propaganda wing. The propaganda wing of multiculturalism is Hollywood, Top 40 music of almost all genres, and Government schools, and newspapers, magazines, radio talk show, etc. All of these are not concerned with teaching people to think critically. All are concerned with teaching people what to think. All teach people the virtues of multiculturalism. We are bombarded with messaging that informs us that all relationships are equal. That all sexuality is equal. Christian white people are evil. Patriarchy is despicable. Heirarchy is bias.

VIII.) Main Goal

Overthrow Christianity

Samuel Francis, in his “Leviathan and Its Enemies,” captured this when he wrote,

“The persistence of traditional institutions and systems of belief constrains and impedes the continuing growth of mass organizations and their operations, and it is imperative for the emerging elites to challenge, discredit, and erode the moral, intellectual, and institutional fabric of traditional society that sustains the older elites and the systems of beliefs, or ideologies, on which their rule is based.”

The goal of multiculturalism is to completely destroy Christianity as the religion of the West. It has been largely successful to that end. The emerging multicultural elites are doing all in their powers to overthrow Christ and Christianity in favor of the cultural marxism that drives multiculturalism.

VIII.) Chief method to that end

The use of Critical theory to destroy White people

Critical theory was a means developed to viciously attack any aspect of thinking that had Christianity as its origin. It presupposed that Christian thinking was responsible for social orders that enslaved. It was leveraged as upon the foundation of Cultural Marxism and so all the criticism as run through the prism of Cultural Marxism in order to smash Christianity as evil. The reason that it especially is pointed on White people is that the Cultural Marxist understood that White people have been, historically speaking, the main carriers of Christianity and the builders of Christian civilizations. The Cultural Marxists of the Frankfurt school (the origin of movement multiculturalism) understood that if white people are destroyed the consequence is that Christianity will be destroyed.

This also explains the push for amnesty and the immigration crisis that the West is facing.

IX.) High Holy Days

Martin Luther King Day / 4th of July / Veterans day

Every religion has its own high holy days. Multiculturalism is no different. This explains why multiculturalism so intensely makes “war on Christmas.” Multiculturalism understands that Christmas is a high, holy day in competition with its own high holy days. The high holy days of multiculturalism celebrates egalitarianism and diversity, or the god-state and those who have died for it. (Why anybody can’t see the contradiction in praising, at the same time, both diversity and egalitarianism is quite beyond me.)

X.) Enemy of “The People”

a.) Epistemologically self-conscious Christians
b.) Trustee Family
c.) Property

Multiculturalism understands that it has enemies that it must snuff out. We noted above that Multiculturalism, as a religion, understands that its greatest threat is Christian white people. This category just refines that a wee bit further. Multiculturalism understands that the “enemy of the multiculturalist people” are especially those who are epistemologically self-conscious Christians. Epistemologically self-conscious Christians see through the three-card monte con of multiculturalism and so are understood as a threat and so must be professionally destroyed.

The Trustee family is such a distinct enemy of the adherents of multiculturalism because the Trustee family embraces hierarchy and patriarchy, and so eschews egalitarianism.

Property also is seen as an enemy of multiculturalism because property introduces a “mine, not yours” mentality which wages wars on everyone being and having the same.

So, this is a brief description of the new religion of the West. It is a description that seeks at the same time to reinforce that religion is an inescapable category that can’t be avoided. Either we will return to Christ and so have abundant life again or we will embrace some other religion of death.

Biologos On Combining the “Best of Science” with the Scripture

From a Biologos spin on combining Genesis 1 with science.

http://biologos.org/resources/the-big-story/

“Once upon a time in an act of extravagant expansive love overflowing from that divine community there appeared from nothing a pinpoint of probability smaller than a proton and this was the egg of the universe. In this egg God packed all the potential for the universe He planned, all matter, all energy, all life, all being, and the laws by which it would unfold. The egg exploded. Only God knows how. And the universe expanded a trillion trillion times and it gradually cooled into what we call matter.”

Let’s see if we can look at this up close.

1.) Once upon a time? The famous beginning of fairy tales.

2.) How does a pinpoint of probability appear from nothing? ex nihilo nihil fit

3.) Did the “pinpoint of probability” come from nothing or did it come from the an act of extravagant expansive love?

4.) How does a pinpoint of probability “appear”?

5.) God packed all the potential of the universe in a pinpoint of probability? What does that even mean?

6.) How does anybody know the size (smaller than a proton) of this pinpoint of probability? Would all this be undone if this pinpoint of probability was larger than a size of a proton?

7.) How does matter, energy, life, and being, as well as the laws of the universe get packed in a pinpoint of probability? Again, what does that even mean.

8.) The pinpoint of probability exploded? How does a non material, non energy, non life, non thing explode?

9.) Category error probability is not ontic nor a substance. As such it cannot be put into an egg, or explode.

This is supposed to have more clarity than Genesis 1?

This is irrationality on poetic stilts.

Overall this Biologos account of creation sounds not entirely dissimilar to an ancient Phoenician origins myth. If one reads the two back to back one can certainly her continuities between the two accounts.

In the beginning did Darkness, black as Erebus, inhabit an eternal, infinite void. In the growing confusion of colliding elements, an unconscious Desire emerged, which was the origin of all existence.

Though it knew not itself, Desire formed a union with Darkness and brought forth a great shiny cosmic egg, and when it was broken, it spewed forth a slimy, viscous Mot into the void, out of which came forth the stars and sun.

The air, now heated from the glow of land and sea, formed great lightning and winds, and a vast downpour of heavenly waters mixed with Mot, forming the first simple creatures, both visible and invisible, from which came more complex animals—first those without, and then those with sensation.

By the heat of the sun, things were made to split off and clash with one another, causing thunder and lightning, and thus awoke beings endowed with intelligence who began to stir on the earth and took fright on land and sea as males and females—who could now ponder the heavens: the sun, moon, stars, and planets.

Thus arose consciousness.

“The Other Worldview; Exposing Christianity’s Greatest Threat” … A Book Review

Dr. Peter Jones has been a great benefactor to the Christian Church in the West with his work on Gnosticism, Egalitarian Pantheism, and Oneism. Via his various works his has been a prophetic voice warning the Church of a worldview switch that is already upon us. The greatest threat to the Church and the West is what he calls “Oneism,” but could just as easily be called “systematic Cultural Marxism.” He mentions Cultural Marxism but his focus is more on Karl Jung and Jung’s disciples. He locates animistic type religion in Jung’s psychoanalysis and insists that the goal of this religious Cultural Marxism is “thus all men Shamans.”

Dr. Peter Jones relates that the problem of the Jung(ians) is that they live in a Cosmos that is defined by Outsidelessness. This is another way of saying that there is no Transcendent Reference point by which meaning can be determined. Without a Transcendent outsidedness (that is also Trinitarian and so personal) what results is man sinking into himself to find meaning and to discover the divinity within.

This new Monistic Cultural Marxist religion is committed to the New Age goal of combining the opposites. This gives us a “beyond good and evil” morality where each man does what is right in his own eyes. Of course this is just another way of embracing the Hegelian dialectic of Marxism.

What has happened in our lifetimes is that we have moved from a Monistic Humanistic materialism where spiritual realities were folded into material reality to a Monistic Humanistic spiritualsim where material realities are now folded into spiritual reality. Both humanisms are Monistic with the only difference being that during the Enlightenment age that which was genuinely spiritual was reduced to the material whereas now that which is genuinely material is reduced to being categorized as spiritual. When one looks at the modern sciences of Quantum indeterminacy, quantum holism, and quantam non-locality (sub sets of Quantum physics) along with Quantum mechanics one begins to see a “science” that is more friendly to the New Ageist Spirituality of Eastern Mysticism and Western Romanticism.

In this new gnostic Monism the goal is the elimination of not only Modernity but also of Biblical Christianity. All of the distinctions that one finds in Biblical Christianity are eliminated in favor of the merging of the opposites. As a result we can speak of now of a Homocosmology, Homostoricism, Homorality, as well as Homosexuality. Indeed so great is the push for the elimination of distinctions that Jones’ opines that a day is coming when Biblical Christianity will be criminalized. The sodomites are NOT interested in equality folks. They are interested in turning normalcy into the aberrant.

Jones’ goes out of his way to agree with what I’ve been saying since I was 30 and that is psychiatry and psychology are the cutting edge expressions of this new religion that intends to crush Biblical Christianity. My angst at this confirmation is that much of the Church and Church Mission agencies have already redefined themselves in terms of the Monistic psychiatry and psychology that Jones’ warns against. It has been the case for years that in many denominations one cannot enter into the ministry or missionary field without first submitting to a battery of Monistic humanistic psychological exams, as well as- required time spent with the Denominational Shrink – Shaman. What has happened is that instead of these fields being reinterpreted through a biblical grid (if indeed that is even possible) the disciplines of humanistic shamanistic psychology have reinterpreted Christianity through their Monistic – gnostic grids. You can be sure that Christ’s Church has suffered as a result of this.

As a criticism of the book, I’m not convinced that Jones’ himself has extirpated all the Monism from himself that he so clearly sees elsewhere. In point of fact, given some of Jones’ complaint about “Institutional racism,” and “Institutional Sexism” one wonders if Jones’ despite his excellent work here hasn’t himself swallowed a poison pill of Monistic making.

I’ve read most of Jones’ published work now and viewed many many of his lectures. That should tell you that I value his work. In point of fact I think it is indispensable given our time and historical situation. When combined with more thorough works on Cultural Marxism and Postmodernism by other authors I think one has the opportunity to see Christianity’s greatest worldview opponent at this time.

In ending I think it should be said again that Radical Two Kingdom theology works perfectly in tandem with what Dr. Jones calls “Oneism.” R2K, in its most virulent and consistent forms, insists that the public square is, by definition, a-religious. As such Christians have no business in trying to appeal to Christianity in order to set aright the inroads of “Oneism.” R2K aids “Oneism” by not only not resisting to Oneism but by suggesting that it is sin to resist to “Oneism.”

Dr. Peter Jones’ Oneism vs. Twoism

“This Utopian vision (of a kind of egalitarian Pantheism) has a long spiritual history. The ideal of the alchemists of the Middle Ages involved ‘the uniting of the opposites …the fusion of male and female, .good and evil, life and death — whose union, they believed, eventually created the perfected and completed, ideal personality called Self. The Utopian cosmology in question understands how deeply the Christian faith has molded Western culture and intends to destroy the ‘bourgeois’ Judaeo-Christian culture as the first step toward a better world. To accomplish this, its advocates must weaken the culture systematically in its economy, its military, its psychology, and its morals.They also know what it will take to establish a revived pagan cosmology and will not tolerate half measures. They want all or nothing. The goal is the complete remaking of human identity.

We cannot see into the future to know if the agenda will succeed, but we need to face squarely the movement that is attempting to wrest our culture from its tenuous grip on Twoist (i.e. — God Transcendent) principles. At this  point, such a powerful cosmology takes on an unmistakably religious character. One is reminded of the goal of the occult Hermetic Order of the Golden Dawn…. “The Great Work, is, before all things, the creation of man by himself, that is to say, the full and entire conquest of his faculties, and his future; it is especially the prefect emancipation of his will.”

Sternberg’s analysis of “world purificationists” is right but does not go far enough… It fails to capture the true power of the movement: its possession of a new liberating cosmology, including not just politics and economics but sexuality and spirituality. The sociological analysis, joined to the ideology of revolutionary sexual and spiritual liberation, forms a powerfully influential movement, determined to reinvent the world. Indeed, as politics becomes more all-inclusive, it becomes more religious, claiming to answer all human aspirations, physical and spiritual, and to usher in a better world. ”

Dr. Peter Jones
The Other Worldview; Exposing Christianity’s Greatest Threat — pg. 98

1.) Jones’ conviction (easily sustained) is that the West is moving from its religious and historic foundation wherein a Transcendent God is presupposed to a religious foundation where a extramundane Transcendent personal God is scrubbed.

2.) This new worldview upon which, and by which, the West will operate is “Egalitarian Pantheism.” This is the idea that all is One (Monism) and that any distinction is Maya (illusion). This monist Egalitarian Pantheism posits an “Outsidelessness” to the Cosmos. It is an extension of the “God is Dead” movement started by Old Scratch in Eden, advocated for by Nietzsche in the 20th century, and proclaimed as arrived in the 60’s by process theologians.

This new worldview accounts for much of the degradation of the West since it provides the justification for the whole “social construct” theorizing that we are pummeled with today. Since there is no extramundane transcendent God by which to give meaning and definition to anything, therefore anything that previously had a stable meaning and definition is now open for change since without the Christian God all that is left is social construct. So, if man was really the one that constructed the idea of  gender (as one example) then man can be the one who deconstructs gender. As such, since there is no “Outsidedness” to our Cosmos individual men can construct for themselves all and any meaning they might desire. So, men with penises can still be female in gender due to this Egalitarian Pantheism. In Canada a married man with 7 children decided that he was really a six year old little girl.  In a Egalitarian Pantheistic worldview, where God is dead, who is to say that Stefonknee Wolschtt isn’t a six year old little girl?

3.) This is Existenialism come into its own. Given the philosophical arc that the West has been on for the last 200 years we have arrived at the point that was inevitable from the moment philosophy anchored itself in Descartes “Cogito ergo sum.”

4.) This Pantheistic Egalitarianism insists that it provides a moral construct that is “beyond good and evil.” As such any notion of moral policing is pass’e. However, we must keep in mind that this “beyond good and evil” is a contradiction since what is being advocated is that the morality that is “beyond good and evil” is good, while the morality that is not “beyond good and evil,” is evil.

“Do I contradict myself
Very well, then I contradict myself,
I am large
I contain multitudes.”

Walt Whitman 
Song of Myself

5.) In this Pantheistic Egalitarianism, with its putative “beyond good and evil” morality there is the attempt to fuse the opposites. This is a new age version of the Hegelian dialectic wherein the thesis and antithesis are fused into a synthesis. Because of this attempt at fusion there is the conviction that in order for one to be “self-actualized” one must have within themselves both the virtues of a Chairman Mao and the virtues of a Mother Theresa at the same time.

This idea of “fusion of the opposites,” also underlies much of the perversity in our current sexuality. Homosexuality, Transgenderism, bisexuality, etc. are all, at some level, being driven by Egalitarian Pantheism and the desire to fuse the opposites. To fuse the opposites is the sacrament of Egalitarian Pantheism.

6.) Dr. Jones talks about the necessity to weaken the Christian worldview which supports the current culture that yet retains vestiges of Biblical Christianity. Militarily this was pursued, first, with “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell,” and now with the full blown reception of the perverted into the ranks of the US Military. In the economy it has been pursued by the mega corporations marketing to the perverted clientele. In psychology it has been pursued by the mainstreaming of sodomy back in 1973 by the American Psychiatric Association’s removing “homosexuality” as a mental illness from its DSM. Of course the most recent weakening came in the Obergefell vs. Hodges decision in the Summer of 2015. Hollywood pursues this worldview relentlessly. Movies such as “The Matrix,” “Interstellar,” “Star Wars,” and “Noah,” all send out the message of Egalitarian Pantheism. The “anti-bullying” laws in Government schools is another means by which Egalitarian Pantheism is pursued. Anti-bullying laws are sold as egalitarian but their real purpose is to protect and mainstream sexual perversion in the schools belonging to the State.

7.) Note Jones’ comment about the desire of Pantheistic Egalitarianism to completely remake human identity. The champions of this new worldview will eventually push for the criminalizing of all those who retain a Transcendent God in their thinking and who insist that the reality of God impact the public square.  All will be forced to support this Egalitarian Pantheism. Any churches that remain will be churches that have reinterpreted Biblical Christianity through a Egalitarian Pantheistic grid. It is already the case that the majority of churches in the West already do so, to one degree or another. Like the Hebrews in the Old Testament who dragged in their idols into God’s Temple to worship those idols so the Church in the West today has dragged in the idol of Egalitarian Pantheism into the sanctuary.

8.) Since there is no extramundane God in Egalitarian Pantheism the sovereign Self is absolutized and in essence becomes the god of the system. All is done for the glory of the sovereign self. Any whim is to be embraced, any idea of “self-control,” or any notion of boundaries or limitations is to be eschewed. All is the self and the self is all. This is the sodomite poet Walt Whitman redux,

I CELEBRATE myself, and sing myself,
And what I assume you shall assume,
For every atom belonging to me as good belongs to you.

I loafe and invite my soul,
I lean and loafe at my ease observing a spear of summer grass.

My tongue, every atom of my blood, form’d from this soil,
this air,

Born here of parents born here from parents the same, and
their parents the same,

I, now thirty-seven years old in perfect health begin,
Hoping to cease not till death.

Creeds and schools in abeyance,

Retiring back a while sufficed at what they are, but never
forgotten,

I harbor for good or bad, I permit to speak at every hazard,
Nature without check with original energy.

“Song of Myself”

9.) Note the religious character of all this. As we have already noted the fusing of the opposites is the Egalitarian Pantheism’s sacrament. The Shaman-Priest is found in every man. All is god and god is all. The catechism of Egalitarian Pantheism is provided by Hollywood films. Worship occurs wherever and whenever orgasm takes place. There are Saints such as St. Alfred Kinsey, St. Hugh Hefner, St. Ron Jermy, St. Larry Flynt, St. Traci Lords, St. Janine Lindemulder, St. Jenna Haze and St. Tori Black. Egalitarian Pantheism could have a Saint for every day of the year. Of course, this proves again, that religion is an inescapable concept. Religion never goes away. The renown poet William Blake understood this well,

“Man must & will have Some Religion; if he has not the Religion of Jesus, he will have the Religion of Satan, & will erect the Synagogue of Satan, calling the Prince of this World, God; and destroying all who do not worship Satan under the Name of God.”
10.)  Note the role of politics. Via Political diktat and legislative tyranny men and women will be forced into Egalitarian Pantheism. This was apparent in 2015 as seen in the attempt by the Lesbian Mayor of Houston, Anise Parker, to force public bathrooms to be co-ed.  This is apparent in the Obergefell vs. Hodges decision. You will submit to Egalitarian Pantheism or you will be a non-person.

Dr. Piper and His Insistence that Christians Should Lie Down and Die

In the next few entries I hope to provide rebuttal to the link below as written by Baptist, Dr. John Piper,

http://www.desiringgod.org/articles/should-christians-be-encouraged-to-arm-themselves

In his introduction Dr. Piper writes,

“My main concern in this article is with the appeal to students that stirs them up to have the mindset: Let’s all get guns and teach them a lesson if they come here. The concern is the forging of a disposition in Christians to use lethal force, not as policemen or soldiers, but as ordinary Christians in relation to harmful adversaries.

The issue is not primarily about when and if a Christian may ever use force in self-defense, or the defense of one’s family or friends. There are significant situational ambiguities in the answer to that question. The issue is about the whole tenor and focus and demeanor and heart-attitude of the Christian life. Does it accord with the New Testament to encourage the attitude that says, “I have the power to kill you in my pocket, so don’t mess with me”? My answer is, No.”

Dr. John Piper

___________________

Bret responds,

First, in terms of the quote above, we should note that the Westminster Confession of Faith teaches that the type of pacifism that Dr. Piper is advocating  is forbidden by the 6th commandment. We will see WCF Larger Catechism, Questions 135-136 again as I pick apart Dr. Piper’s Anabaptist convictions.

Q. 135. What are the duties required in the sixth commandment?

A. The duties required in the sixth commandment are all careful studies, and lawful endeavors, to preserve the life of ourselves[721] and others[722] by resisting all thoughts and purposes,[723] subduing all passions,[724] and avoiding all occasions,[725] temptations,[726] and practices, which tend to the unjust taking away the life of any;[727] by just defence thereof against violence,[728] patient bearing of the hand of God,[729] quietness of mind,[730] cheerfulness of spirit;[731] a sober use of meat,[732] drink,[733] physic,[734] sleep,[735] labour,[736] and recreations;[737] by charitable thoughts,[738] love,[739] compassion,[740] meekness, gentleness, kindness;[741] peaceable,[742] mild and courteous speeches and behaviour;[743] forbearance, readiness to be reconciled, patient bearing and forgiving of injuries, and requiting good for evil;[744] comforting and succouring the distressed and protecting and defending the innocent.[745]

Q. 136. What are the sins forbidden in the sixth commandment?

A. The sins forbidden in the sixth commandment are, all taking away the life of ourselves,[746] or of others,[747] except in case of public justice,[748] lawful war,[749] or necessary defence;[750] the neglecting or withdrawing the lawful and necessary means of preservation of life;[751] sinful anger,[752] hatred,[753] envy,[754] desire of revenge;[755] all excessive passions,[756] distracting cares;[757] immoderate use of meat, drink,[758] labor,[759] and recreations;[760] provoking words,[761] oppression,[762] quarreling,[763] striking, wounding,[764] and whatsoever else tends to the destruction of the life of any.[765]

Also we note the Heidleberg catechism

105. Q.

What does God require
in the sixth commandment?

A.

I am not to dishonour, hate, injure,
or kill my neighbour
by thoughts, words, or gestures,
and much less by deeds,
whether personally or through another; 1
rather, I am to put away
all desire of revenge. 2
Moreover, I am not to harm or recklessly endanger myself. 3
Therefore, also, the government bears the sword
to prevent murder. 4

The great Puritan commentator on the Bible, Thomas Ridgeley (1667-1734), in his commentary on the Westminster Larger Catechism quotes the Catechism itself as I have above and then in his commentary on Sixth Commandment duties, Ridgeley says,

“We should use all lawful endeavours to preserve our own life, and the life of others [because]…. man is the subject of the divine image…. We are also to defend those who are in imminent danger of death…. Moreover, in some instances, a person may kill another in his own defence, without being guilty of the breach of this commandment….”

Ridgeley goes on to comment that if we cannot disarm an enemy threatening our life, or flee from him, “we do not incur the least guilt, or break this commandment, if we take away his life to preserve our own; especially if we were not first in the quarrel, nor gave occasion to it by any injurious or unlawful practices.”

The Heidelberg Catechism insists that the keeping of the Sixth commandment means that I am not to harm or recklessly endanger myself. It doesn’t take much to argue that we are living in times when not carrying a weapon on us for self defense and the protection of the judicially innocent most definitely constitutes a reckless endangering of ourselves and others.

Dr. Piper is just flat out in error when he offers that the New Testament (and why are we restricting ourselves to only the New Testament Dr. Piper?) does not encourage an attitude that says that, “I will honor God by esteeming the Sixth commandment and so protect my life and the life of the judicially innocent against harmful intent of people who intend to kill and maim with abandon.”

And, to be perfectly honest, we are doing future would be assassins a kindness by teaching present would be assassins a lesson when their intent is to go on Allah exalting killing sprees. Perhaps, it was the case that Dr. Falwell’s phraseology was a bit John Wayne but that doesn’t diminish the fact that it is a loving thing unto future would be assassins for present would be assassins to have Sixth commandment duties enforced against them by private individuals in harm’s way. There is no sin in using lethal force as a private citizen in defense of life. In point of fact, God is magnificently glorified by ordinary Christians using lethal force as consistent with the Sixth commandment and to the contrary when Dr. Piper’s, non Sixth commandment esteeming position is maintained, the reputation of God is sullied and His Glory is tarnished and diminished.